The Two-Sided Coin: How They Amplify Rome and Silence Its Critics - A 16-Year Pattern of Coordinated Media Control - By Lisa Weingarten Richards

                                           Artwork by Thomas Richards using Photoshop 7.0

The Pattern Emerges

When major media platforms can artificially amplify content to create the illusion of popularity, the obvious corollary is that they can -- and do -- artificially suppress content that threatens powerful interests.

This is not speculation. It is documented experience spanning 16 years, multiple platforms, and now multiple federal lawsuits that the media refuses to cover.

The Lawsuits No One Will Cover

LWR Law Offices currently represents Thomas Richards (@tlthe5th) in federal litigation against X Corp, Google/YouTube, and entertainment defendants. The cases raise novel constitutional questions that legal commentators acknowledge are legitimate and timely:

Richards v. X Corp (N.D. Tex.) -- Does Elon Musk's simultaneous role as DOGE head, Special Government Employee with Top Secret clearance, and X Corp owner transform the platform into a state actor subject to First Amendment constraints? This is the first case to test this unprecedented situation where government officials literally own and operate major social media platforms.

Richards v. Google/YouTube -- Leveraging the DOJ's monopoly findings against Google, this case documents systematic suppression of biblical scholarship across Google's properties for over 15 years.

Richards v. Kirkman et al. (Walking Dead) -- Identity appropriation claims regarding a character bearing Thomas Richards' exact name depicted as a wife-murdering psychopath in one of the most consumed media franchises of the 21st century.

Media coverage of these cases: Virtually zero.

The Coverage Comparison

Consider the contrast:

Trump v. YouTube: Wall-to-wall coverage. Legal experts initially said the case was "unlikely to go far" because private companies are not state actors and the First Amendment does not apply. Result: $22 million settlement, extensive media attention.

Richards v. X Corp: Novel state actor theory with unprecedented facts -- Musk actually holds government positions while owning the platform. One dismissive article from Techdirt. Otherwise: silence.

Richards v. Google: Builds directly on DOJ monopoly findings, documents 15+ years of suppression. Coverage: None.

Richards v. Walking Dead: The only coverage this case received was a hit piece in The Independent that led with "conspiracy theorist" and "claims to have twice seen Jesus in waking visions" -- framing designed to discredit rather than examine the legal merits of identity appropriation claims.

The 2009 Proof: When They Admitted the Target

On January 23, 2009, The Independent (UK) reported on the Vatican launching its YouTube channel. The article contained this remarkable admission:

"Type 'Vatican' into YouTube's search engine and the first video to appear is entitled 'The Devil in the Vatican' and claims that the modern Church has gone over to the other side. The second argues that 'Nazi Germany was a creation of the Vatican and the Jesuits'. Now the Vatican has the means to fight back."

That second video -- "Nazi Germany: A Creation of the Vatican and Jesuits" -- was Thomas Richards' work.

The facts are undeniable:

-- YouTube formed exactly ONE religious partnership in its entire history

-- That partnership was with the Vatican

-- The Independent explicitly stated the Vatican was "fighting back" against videos like Thomas's

-- Thomas was ranking #2 organically for "Vatican" searches at that time

-- He was in the top 1% on Google Video for his research

This was not coincidence. This was emergency institutional response to effective biblical scholarship that was reaching millions.

The Other Side: Manufactured Popularity

If platforms suppress critics, they also amplify allies. The recent celebration of Pope Leo XIV's Wikipedia "dominance" provides the evidence.

In December 2025, Wikimedia announced Pope Leo XIV ranked 5th among most-viewed English Wikipedia articles. Catholic media outlets immediately trumpeted this as evidence of massive global appeal.

But examine the actual data:

-- The "800,000 hits per second" claim was for ALL Wikimedia projects combined, not just Leo's page

-- Ed Gein (a 1950s serial killer) ranked HIGHER than Leo XIV with 31 million pageviews

-- Charlie Kirk topped the list at 44 million pageviews

-- These rankings measure news cycle visibility, not spiritual authority or genuine popular interest

Yet coordinated media coverage from ACI Prensa, CNA, EWTN, National Catholic Register, Catholic World Report, and Rome Reports all published nearly identical articles within 48 hours celebrating these rankings -- none mentioning the documented abuse record that SNAP filed complaints about before the conclave.

The machinery that inflates papal numbers is the same machinery that buries Vatican critics.

The Pattern Is the Evidence

Across platforms. Across years. Across cases.

-- 2009: Vatican launches YouTube partnership to "fight back" against Thomas's #2-ranked video

-- 2009-2025: Systematic shadowbanning across YouTube, Twitter/X, Facebook, Google

-- 2024-2025: Federal lawsuits filed raising legitimate constitutional questions

-- 2025: Complete media blackout on lawsuits OR hostile coverage designed to discredit

-- 2025: Coordinated celebration of manufactured papal "popularity"

When we see that papal content is intentionally amplified -- and even falsely stated to be more popular than it actually is -- what does that tell us about the treatment of the man whose documented historical research was explicitly identified as the target of Vatican counter-operations?

Why This Matters Beyond One Case

The silencing of Vatican criticism is not separate from the amplification of Vatican messaging. They are two sides of the same coin.

If major platforms will:

-- Form exclusive partnerships with the Vatican (the only religious institution to receive such treatment)

-- Coordinate media pushes celebrating manufactured statistics

-- Blackball coverage of legitimate federal lawsuits

-- Deploy hit pieces against critics when silence fails

Then we are not dealing with neutral platforms exercising editorial judgment. We are dealing with institutional coordination to protect specific interests from accountability.

The question is not whether this suppression occurs. The evidence is overwhelming that it does. The question is why platforms that claim to support "free expression" consistently align their algorithmic thumbs with Vatican interests while systematically burying 25+ years of biblical scholarship that challenges Rome's unscriptural claims.

What Scripture Says

Matthew 10:26 (NASB): "Therefore do not fear them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known."

Luke 8:17 (NASB): "For nothing is concealed that will not become evident, nor anything hidden that will not be known and come to light."

Ephesians 5:11 (NASB): "Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them."

The work continues. The lawsuits proceed. And the pattern of coordinated suppression and amplification becomes more visible with each passing day.

---

For more information:

Thomas Richards' biblical research: SpirituallySmart.com

X Corp lawsuit information: LwrBot.ai

Google lawsuit information: Google-Lawsuit.com

LWR Law Offices: LWRLawOffices.com

Case dockets available at CourtListener.com

Πᾶσα δόξα (pasa doxa) to Θεός (Theos) our Πατήρ (Patēr -- Father) through Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (Iēsous Christos) alone

For αὐτός (autos -- He) is the only way, and all δόξα (doxa -- glory) belongs to αὐτός (autos -- Him)