you're right to hold both the kremlin and the white house with equal amounts of distrust.

I always do, can you say the same?

the part you're missing that the kremlin's propaganda is transparent whereas the white house's propaganda is laundered through ngo's to make it harder detect -- that fact that you have to learn this the hard way using things like the freedom of information act goes to prove that everyone here is putting more effort into it than you are to educate yourself.

Then why can’t I find it?

YES!!! this is the first step to understanding how american propaganda works! ask yourself why it's so hard to access this public record and you'll discover that it's also a pain in the ass to find other public records regarding north korea, china, cuba, etc.

you have to be an american citizen to access it directly or you can use the breadcrumbs from public articles like this one: https://thehill.com/opinion/international/381873-when-we-cant-agree-to-fight-against-neo-nazis-weve-reached-a-new-low/amp/#top#1 to find out who sponsored it and then you can start your search from there, but i would recommend the freedom of information act first because it'll do more to give you an understand of how american propaganda works.

Yes it did make me feel good. I’m not going to bother replying to you when you’re deflecting every single thing someone says to you.

The problem here is that you’re misrepresenting my opinion, not that I have to “accept I’m entrenched”. Liberals have been using that word so much lately I wonder which slop outlet is using it.

Cowbee and another user, eldavi, layed it out clearly for you way better than I could have, with solid and western sources to satisfy you. What happened to agreeing that your propaganda is better than mine?

Regarding claim 1, I both fail to see the relevance of the point nor do I think linking a Ukrainian-state affiliated source drawing on a poll based in Kiev is particularly compelling evidence. Even if the numbers were true and properly sourced, this does not mean that secession was somehow inorganic, and it further does not mean that after the beginning of the Ukrainian Civil War, that these numbers did not dramatically change in favor of secession.

Regarding claim 2, this again does not logically follow. You appear to be erasing Russian as an ethnicity, and instead see this as a problem of language, and not ethnicity. Ethnic Russians form a minority of Eastern Ukraine, despite Russian being more widely spoken even among ethnic Ukrainians. The fact that the fascist forces that had taken over Kiev were popularly and organically opposed by primarily ethnic Russians does not mean Russia forced them into doing so:

As far as Russian volunteers are concerned, nobody is denying that they exist. Rather, what's important is that it has been the Banderites in Kiev that overthrew the democratically elected president at the support of NATO, which threw the entire country into crisis. This sparked the Ukrainian Civil War, which Russia entered after Kiev escalated the massacres of civilians and accelerated buildup of forces along Russia's border, with missiles pointed directly at Moscow.

In all of this, there are two things you have not accounted for:

1. The primacy of NATO and western imperialism in provoking the war

2. The right of self-determination for the Donbass region, which after a decade of war with Kiev wishes to be integrated into Russia.