Incorrect. I suggest you work on your reading comprehension.
Case in point you have quoted me incorrectly in your post. I never said anything about “talking points” which suggests there is a discussion being allowed for. I said narrative - because that is what it is. The media labelled this a “sham” referendum before Putin’s speech occurred (source: BBC) and I heave heard this exact word repeated ad nauseam since then - without debate or proof beyond the stereotypical “Russians always lie”. How do we / you know it to be a sham before it has happened?
In any event my post was (I thought) pretty clearly pointing out the hypocrisy of persons such as yourself who would not shut up about the 2020 election being stolen and the media’s repeated use of the phrase “most secure election ever” as being the penultimate lie... and who are now repeating the words “sham, sham, sham” like mindless drones - after hearing it from the exact same media outlets that were oh-so untrustworthy two years (days?) ago.
“The media labelled this a “sham” referendum before Putin’s speech occurred (source: BBC) and I heave heard this exact word repeated ad nauseam since then...”
Well, yeah, because it’s perfectly valid to refer to a “referendum” held by an invading and occupying power during wartime as a “sham”. Nobody with any sense would actually object to that assessment.
And there is no “hypocrisy” to people who point out that the 2020 election had irregularities and that this “referendum” is a sham. Both of those are true. Telling the truth consistently is not “hypocrisy”, no matter how hard you try to spin it.