ANALYSIS: Five distinct disinformation tactics deconstructed
December 2025 showcased an evolution from simple fabrication to interpretative distortion—where real events are reframed through misleading narratives. From Alex Jones claiming "Deep State defeat" (when he still owes $1.5B), to 2018 Trump footage recycled as 2025 diplomacy, each case demonstrates how clickbait headlines enforce epistemic closure rather than inform.
This analysis deconstructs five viral narratives from December 2025, revealing how modern disinformation has evolved beyond simple lies into sophisticated interpretative frameworks. Each case study demonstrates a distinct technique: procedural distortion (Infowars), pre-emptive inoculation (Epstein photos), visual decontextualization (Minnesota daycares), factional weaponization (Kirk assassination), and temporal displacement (Duterte arrest). The common thread: audiences are locked into self-reinforcing realities where legal defeats become victories, evidence becomes hoaxes, and the past is endlessly malleable.
Case I: Infowars Bankruptcy — "Deep State Defeated"
Viral Headline: "Deep State Defeated: Judge Voids The Onion's Fraudulent Takeover of Infowars"
Following the chaotic November 2024 bankruptcy auction where The Onion was named winning bidder for Infowars, the subsequent voiding of that sale by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez in December was framed by Alex Jones not as a procedural reset, but as crushing a "Deep State coup." [1]
The Reality: Judge Lopez voided the sale due to procedural deficiencies in the auction process—not "fraud" or "Deep State" interference. He criticized the auctioneer for not transparently comparing The Onion's complex bid (valued at $7M with Sandy Hook family concessions) against the purely cash bid of $3.5M from a Jones-affiliated company. [2]
Crucially, Jones still owes $1.5 billion to Sandy Hook families. The ruling merely delayed the liquidation process—it was not an exoneration. [3]
| Narrative Claim | Legal Reality |
|---|---|
| "Deep State" attempted to steal the company | Bankruptcy trustee conducted auction to pay creditors |
| Judge ruled takeover was "fraudulent" | Judge ruled auction process was "flawed" |
| Jones has defeated the liquidation | Sale voided; new auction required. Still owes $1.5B |
Complex legal processes are re-narrated as spy thrillers. By labeling a court-appointed trustee as a "Deep State" agent, the entire judicial process is delegitimized. This allows audiences to ignore the moral weight of the Sandy Hook verdicts—if the court is corrupt, the judgment is invalid, and Jones becomes a martyr rather than a debtor.
Case II: Epstein Photos — "Democrat Hoax"
Viral Headline: "Democrat Hoax: White House Decries Release of Exonerating Epstein Photos"
On December 12, 2025, the House Oversight Committee released photos from Jeffrey Epstein's estate showing Trump, Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Steve Bannon, and others in social proximity to Epstein. [4] The White House and right-wing media immediately labeled the release a "Democrat Hoax" while paradoxically claiming the photos were "exonerating." [5]
The Reality: The photos are authentic. Neither the White House nor Breitbart contested their authenticity. The "hoax" framing attempts to categorize the association as the hoax, not the photographs themselves. [6]
The "exoneration" claim is logically incoherent but rhetorically effective: because the photos show Trump in social settings (posing, not committing crimes on camera), they're treated as proof of innocence. This sets an impossible bar—unless a photo depicts an explicit criminal act, it becomes "exonerating." [17]
By framing incriminating evidence as a "hoax" before audiences view it, the media apparatus instructs the base on how to interpret the images. The "hoax" label neutralizes authentic visual evidence. This signifies the death of visual objectivity—a photograph is no longer a record of reality, but raw material for narrative construction.
Case III: Minnesota Daycares — "Vigilante Audit"
Viral Headline: "Viral Video Exposes $100 Million Somali Daycare Fraud Ring in Minnesota"
YouTuber Nick Shirley's December 2025 video claimed to expose a "massive fraud ring" by visiting Somali-owned daycare centers and filming locked doors. The Gateway Pundit amplified the narrative, reaching millions. [7]
The Reality: The investigation collapsed under basic scrutiny. The highlighted "Quality Learning Center" operates from 2:00 PM to 10:00 PM specifically to serve after-school children—Shirley filmed outside these hours. [8] Minnesota's DCYF confirmed their Inspector General had visited every site within six months and found children present and operations normal.
The "$100 million" figure appears to be aggregated from unrelated fraud cases (like Feeding Our Future) rather than evidence specific to the centers shown.
| Viral Claim | Visual "Proof" | Actual Fact |
|---|---|---|
| "Ghost Centers" | Locked doors/empty rooms | Centers operate on after-school schedules |
| "Massive Fraud" | Influencer commentary | State inspections confirmed operations + children present |
| "$100 Million" | Aggregated from past scandals | No evidence linking these specific sites to that sum |
A locked door is visceral; a spreadsheet of operating hours is abstract. In the attention economy, the locked door wins. This forces minority-owned businesses into "Guilty Until Proven Viral" status—they must constantly perform legitimacy for online mobs. The damage is instantaneous; corrections reach a fraction of the audience.
Case IV: Charlie Kirk Assassination — "Betrayal from Within"
Viral Headline: "Betrayal from Within: Eyewitness Places Kirk's Widow at Military Base Before Assassination"
The assassination of Charlie Kirk on September 10, 2025, at Utah Valley University [9] created a power vacuum in conservative media. By December, Candace Owens promoted a conspiracy claiming Kirk's widow and TPUSA security chief were spotted at Fort Huachuca (an Army intelligence base) hours before the shooting. [11]
The Reality: Flight records and geolocation data placed the security chief in Dallas, Texas at the exact time the witness claimed to see him in Arizona—rendering the account physically impossible. The "witness" admitted to being only "95 to 99 percent" sure. [11]
In a remarkable twist, it was Alex Jones who debunked Owens, stating she was accusing "innocent people with ironclad alibis" after consulting with Laura Loomer. [11]
Fake news is no longer just a weapon used by the Right against the Left—it's now the primary weapon of conflict within the Right. The fact that Alex Jones (the archetypal conspiracy theorist) is fact-checking Candace Owens signals a complete realignment. Truth is now purely factional; Jones supports the "alibi" narrative because he's aligned with Loomer against Owens.
Case V: Duterte Arrest — "Zombie Content"
Viral Headline: "Trump Vows Protection: 'ICC Has No Authority' Over Duterte Following Arrest"
Following former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte's ICC arrest in March 2025, video clips circulated showing Trump declaring "The ICC has no jurisdiction, no legitimacy, and no authority." Fake quote cards bearing logos of The Washington Post, Fox News, and BBC accumulated 84,000+ shares. [12]
The Reality: The footage is authentic—but from Trump's 2018 UN General Assembly address about U.S. sovereignty and ICC investigations into American troops in Afghanistan. It was not about Duterte or events of 2025. [13] There is no record of the Trump administration issuing any statement on Duterte's arrest. [14]
Research identified at least 200 Facebook accounts simultaneously posting identical messages framing the ICC warrant as "kidnapping"—with 92% of false claims cross-posted across platforms. [15]
| Attribute | Viral Narrative | Historical Reality |
|---|---|---|
| Speaker | President Trump (2025) | President Trump (2018) |
| Subject | Duterte's ICC Arrest | U.S. Sovereignty / Israel |
| Trigger Event | ICC warrant execution | UN General Assembly Speech |
On platforms like TikTok, time is flattened. A 2018 video looks identical to 2025 footage. Without metadata, content becomes "evergreen"—allowing propagandists to recycle a leader's "greatest hits" to address new situations. Future disinformation may rely less on deepfakes and more on weaponization of archives.
Synthesis: The Architecture of Interpretative Disinformation
These five case studies reveal a distinct evolution from fabrication (making things up) to interpretative distortion. Each headline is not merely a lie—it's a complex cultural artifact serving the economic and political needs of its creators.
The common mechanism is epistemic closure: locking audiences into self-reinforcing realities where legal defeats are victories, visual evidence is dismissed, geographic alibis are ignored, and the past is endlessly recyclable. The challenge for 2026 is no longer just identifying what is "fake," but untangling the web of context, intent, and interpretation that gives these narratives their power.
What's changed: Modern disinformation rarely invents events from nothing. Instead, it reframes real events through misleading interpretive lenses—turning auction procedural rulings into "Deep State defeats," authentic photos into "hoaxes," operating hours into "ghost businesses," and archival footage into diplomatic statements.
The implication: If legal verdicts, video evidence, and flight records are all subject to infinite interpretive flexibility, the shared foundation of reality necessary for political consensus ceases to exist.