₦airaland Forum

Melezenawii:
None of the people running against President Tinubu can change the country, including Peter Obi.”

— Datti Baba Ahmed

“None of the people running against President Tinubu can change the country, including Peter Obi.”

— Datti Baba Ahmed pic.twitter.com/1l1GToTBg2

— High Chief Lawrence Igbins Okoro (@HighChiefOkoro) September 6, 2026

Peter Obi’s strongest supporters know the packaging. But what about the people who actually worked beside him? Datti, Okupe, Kenneth Okonkwo, Balami, Ozigbo and Abure were all close to the project — and several later walked away, criticised his leadership or declined to recommend him. At what point does that become evidence rather than coincidence?

https://www.nairaland.com/8743104/proximity-test-what-former-close

Kokaine:
Even his former running mate does not stand with him talkless of his cabinet men in anambra. Na only mama p and Peter randy and some few other eedyorts that are his childhood friends. He doesn't have anybody that actually knows him and supports him.

It may be that some of the people who understood him best have concluded that the product does not match the advertisement.

And if the men who campaigned with you, defended you, managed you, travelled with you and actually agreed to become your Vice-President are progressively unwilling to recommend you again, Nigerians are entitled to draw a political conclusion.

Perhaps Peter Obi is not the hidden national treasure his most devoted supporters insist he is. Perhaps the closer you get, the less impressive the packaging becomes.

That is the Proximity Test. And on the evidence of the people who have stood closest to him, Peter Obi is increasingly failing it.
https://www.nairaland.com/8743104/proximity-test-what-former-close

yarimo:
Mr datti don't worry yourself about eze finishing of agulu village, peter obi is after that former presidential candidate title only

Peter obi is the the political equivalent of an overhyped product in an Aba market: beautiful wrapper, aggressive salesman, magnificent claims — but the people who actually opened the carton keep quietly walking away.

And that is the uncomfortable point. Obidients are still advertising the packaging. The people who handled the product are increasingly returning it.

https://www.nairaland.com/8743104/proximity-test-what-former-close

THE PROXIMITY TEST: WHAT DO DATTI, KENNETH OKONKWO , ABURE , OKUPE,BALMI AND OZIGBO KNOW ABOUT PETER OBI THAT OBIDIENTS CANNOT SEE?

Distance creates mythology. Proximity creates information. Most Obidients know Peter Obi through speeches, interviews, rallies and social media.

But some people knew the political project from inside. The late Dr Doyin Okupe was Obi’s original Campaign Director-General. Kenneth Okonkwo defended him publicly. Isaac Balami, from Southern Borno, was Deputy Campaign Manager and helped organise the Obi-Datti campaign in the North. Abure

Valentine Ozigbo was a prominent ally. Datti Baba-Ahmed actually ran beside him as Vice-Presidential candidate. These were not Twitter supporters. They were inside the room.

And today, many of them are no longer where they stood in 2023.

Call it THE PROXIMITY TEST.

Okupe eventually declared: “I cannot support Peter Obi again.” Balami later moved away from the Obi camp and, when asked why, made an extraordinary remark: “If I should speak about it, it would be scandalous.”

Kenneth Okonkwo, once one of Obi’s most aggressive television defenders, later publicly questioned Obi’s leadership and complained that he could no longer speak for a leader whose position on important issues he could not clearly understand.

Valentine Ozigbo’s departure was less hostile, but perhaps just as instructive. Julius Abure, the Labour Party chairman under whose platform Obi contested in 2023, has also publicly blamed Obi for failing to properly manage the party’s internal crisis.

And now comes Datti Baba-Ahmed. Not spokesman. Not volunteer. RUNNING MATE. The man Obi wanted Nigerians to make Vice-President.

In his latest interview, Datti says Tinubu should leave office — but should not hand power to the people currently seeking to replace him because “none of them will improve Nigeria.” The interviewer specifically pressed him about Peter Obi.

Datti included him.

How many people must open the package before Obidients stop blaming everybody who complains about what they found inside?

From a distance, Peter Obi is beautifully packaged: discipline, competence, prudence, integrity, statistics and the promise of a “new Nigeria.”
Proximity appears to be producing a rather different review.

It is the political equivalent of an overhyped product in an Aba market: beautiful wrapper, aggressive salesman, magnificent claims — but the people who actually opened the carton keep quietly walking away.

And that is the uncomfortable point. Obidients are still advertising the packaging. The people who handled the product are increasingly returning it.

At some stage, you stop accusing every customer of sabotage and start inspecting the merchandise. Peter Obi’s problem may no longer be that Nigerians “do not understand him.”

It may be that some of the people who understood him best have concluded that the product does not match the advertisement.

And if the men who campaigned with you, defended you, managed you, travelled with you and actually agreed to become your Vice-President are progressively unwilling to recommend you again, Nigerians are entitled to draw a political conclusion.

Perhaps Peter Obi is not the hidden national treasure his most devoted supporters insist he is. Perhaps the closer you get, the less impressive the packaging becomes.

That is the Proximity Test. And on the evidence of the people who have stood closest to him, Peter Obi is increasingly failing it.

fergie001:
Here, we are like one big wahala family.
Everybody knows everybody.
We will quarrel and fight, it's only but normal. No hard feelings.
I am giving you the best answers I can.

Stay a day or two without posting topics. You post one, wait a while, there are usually limit to these things and are not manually-controlled. No mod can control it.

So, post.....take a breather then post again. Two/three days, take a breather, then fire on! Just take it with some minutes/hours in-between. Once it locks you out, you wait hours or maybe a day....just do with discretion!

I am also a freak for posting topics! Though I am for everybody and for nobody 😂

😂 Fergie001, fair enough. Message received loud and clear.

I actually like the “one big wahala family” description — very Nairaland. We quarrel, drag each other, cool down, then meet again under another thread as if nothing happened.

And thank you for finally explaining the posting limit in practical terms. I will take the advice: post, breathe, allow the system to breathe too, then fire again.

But this your final line made me laugh: “I am for everybody and for nobody.” Please be careful o. President Buhari said something suspiciously similar on May 29, 2015: “I belong to everybody and I belong to nobody.” We all know how that journey went. 😂

Anyway, no hard feelings at all. I appreciate the explanation and the fact that you took time to respond. Wahala family indeed.

AMINDA:
I didn't read all that so congratulations or sorry. But by all means, stop using A.I to augment campaign photos. It is wrong and deceptive. Also, stop involving underage children in your rallies. It is equivalent to child labour.

You are right about one thing: YOU DIDN'T READ IT. Because if you had, you would have discovered that the entire article boils down to one embarrassingly simple question: WHERE ARE ATIKU'S OWN VOTERS?

Instead, you skipped the article and arrived carrying AI photographs, children at rallies and everything except an answer to the question actually asked.

NOW BACK TO ATIKU.

It is campaign season. Please campaign.

SHOW US THE PEOPLE WHO INTEND TO VOTE FOR HIM. Because somebody refusing to vote for Tinubu does not magically become an Atiku voter. “TINUBU MUST GO” is not another spelling of “ATIKU MUST COME.”

Tinubu's crowd is fake? Fine. Tinubu's crowd is rented? Fine. Tinubu is unpopular? Wonderful!

Now show us ATIKU'S popularity. Show us his crowds. Show us his structures. Show us his electoral pathway.

As the Yoruba say, “Tí a bá ń ka ẹrù elérù, ti ẹni la ń kà”—loosely, while you are busy counting another person's load, remember to count your own.

On election day, INEC will count the votes cast FOR ATIKU. There will be no extra column marked: “PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIKE TINUBU.”

Perhaps next time, read the article before rebutting the article you imagined I wrote.

Streetinvestor2:
When we ignore some of your AI generated noise. It may make some ignorant people take it as facts just like you whr posting fake results during osun election. So we have to let people know you represent 30k data job and should not take your topics serious. Good people don't keep quiet when something wrong is happening around them.
That is the moral standard we copy from obi...go and verify. And that is what the guy on arise equally stands for in his program. And since the person paying u 30k is a drug baron with all kind of criminality. Your job is to attack such people and we won't pretend we did not see it
You can only achieve ur request if you go create your own social space. You can't not come to another man business like NL. And trying to destroy it with lies and say we should ignore because u are paid 30k......never

First, I never posted fake results during the Osun election. Thank God the Osun thread is still available on Nairaland. Here are the various posts from SmartElectionGuardPro proving that you are a typical deliberately lying Obidient.
Indeed, on the platform, we projected that Adeleke would win by 52% as early as 6:09pm. No other platform was able to update from IReV as our SmartElectionGuardPro did.

Here are the actual Nairaland links to what was posted:

https://www.nairaland.com/8728879/2026-osun-governorship-election-live/8
https://www.nairaland.com/8728879/2026-osun-governorship-election-live/9
https://www.nairaland.com/8728879/2026-osun-governorship-election-live/10
https://www.nairaland.com/8728879/2026-osun-governorship-election-live/11
https://www.nairaland.com/8728879/2026-osun-governorship-election-live/12

When you obidients say “go and verif[/b]y” what you actually do is “[b]go and invent.”

I am just a user on Nairaland, and the fact that you are trying to make me the subject only shows that you have very little to say about the substance of my articles .

If I publish something false, identify it and correct me with evidence. I will answer.

But “AI noise,” “₦30k data boy,” “drug baron” and imaginary payroll records are not rebuttals. They are what people throw onto the pitch when they have lost the ball.

As for Nairaland, nobody said I own it. The forum exists for competing opinions. You are free to challenge every thread I post. What you are NOT entitled to do is replace argument with invented personal allegations and then baptise the exercise “moral standards.”

[quote author=AMINDA post=140557715]We say no to violence. Has anyone noticed that APC is yet to organise a single campaign for Tinubu in the Southwest? E get why. Man is not as popular in his region as they like to pretend. The last walk they did for Tinubu in Lagos, na dispute over 1500 scatter everything.

Nigerians don’t let APC gaslight you, Tinubu knows it’s just a matter of time before he gets booted out of aso rock..

Listen to what a caller from grassroots in southwest is saying to APC spokesperson who came to preach lies..

EVEN YORUBA PEOPLE ARE FEELING THE POVERTY pic.twitter.com/97XlRdzHjD

— BLESSED 🥷 (@Dee_9889) September 4, 2026

> ATIKU 2027: WHEN YOUR CAMPAIGN STRATEGY BECOMES COUNTING EMPTY CHAIRS AT TINUBU'S RALLIES By CharlesCNG

Is this really how Atiku intends to campaign in 2027? Find an isolated disturbance at a Tinubu event. Capture the video.

Post it triumphantly. Then announce: “YOU SEE! TINUBU IS NOT POPULAR!” Whether Tinubu is popular in the South-West or not, fortunately we don't need Twitter detectives to decide. THERE IS AN ELECTION COMING.

But while Atiku's campaign is busy examining Tinubu's crowds with a microscope, perhaps somebody should turn the camera around.

WHERE ARE ATIKU'S CROWDS? Show us his outings. Show us the spontaneous enthusiasm. Show us the massive South-West mobilisation.

Yet every morning Atiku's online campaign wakes up to measure the number of chairs at somebody else's rally.

My brothers, YOU HAVE YOUR OWN ELECTION TO WIN.

Atiku's campaign increasingly resembles a football team spending training sessions analysing whether the opposing team's supporters paid for their bus tickets. At some point, YOU STILL HAVE TO SCORE.!

Please campaign. It is campaign season—go and start your own campaign. We are waiting.

SHOW US THE PEOPLE WHO INTEND TO VOTE FOR ATIKU. Because this is the elementary arithmetic Atiku's campaign seems determined not to understand: A VOTER WHO WILL NOT VOTE FOR TINUBU IS NOT AUTOMATICALLY AN ATIKU VOTER.

He may vote for somebody else, stay home or change his mind. Finding somebody shouting “Tinubu must go!” is not the same thing as finding somebody shouting “Atiku must come!”

As the Yoruba would say, “Tí a bá ń ka ẹrù elérù, ti ẹni la ń kà”—loosely: while you are busy counting another person's load, you should be counting your own.

Tinubu's crowd is rented. Tinubu's rally is empty. Somebody fought at a Tinubu event. Wonderful!

Now SHOW US ATIKU'S CROWD. Show us his South-West support. Show us his South-East support. Show us the structures. Show us the electoral pathway.
Elections are not won by counting people who dislike your opponent; they are won by counting people willing to vote FOR YOU.

On election day, INEC will count Atiku's votes—it will not add “PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIKE TINUBU” to his total.

fergie001:
You support APC, no need to waiver here or there.
Nobody will beat you.
There are many who support APC here, nobody hounds them and also those who are against, nobody gives them any preferential treatment.

You haven't been here up to a decade, you will have known me.
There are some things I just don't get myself involved in.
Ask APC supporters here.

Creating articles or threads here are not filibusters.
You have a maximum a day, two days and so on and then you wait a while.
That's how it is here.

Fergie001, thank you for clarifying. And yes, I support APC — unapologetically. There is no wavering there and there never has been.

But I must smile at “Nobody will beat you.” Ah, Fergie, I never suggested anybody was waiting behind Nairaland headquarters with koboko because I support APC. 😂
My concern was much simpler: when a MOD makes a politically loaded comment while I am already experiencing unexplained restrictions on opening threads, surely I am entitled to ask whether the two are connected. Your clarification that they are not is useful, and I accept it.

On the thread-creation issue, however, I am still genuinely confused. You say: “You have a maximum a day, two days and so on and then you wait a while.”

Maximum HOW MANY? I have asked this several times because I genuinely want to comply. Is it one thread a day? Two? Three? Does the limit depend on the section? How long is “a while”?

How can there be an automatic system that prevents somebody from posting for days, yet the affected user cannot be told the actual rule that triggered it?

I am not asking for preferential [/b]treatment. I am asking for the [b]rulebook.

And I assume by saying thread creation is “not a filibuster,” you mean users should not flood or dominate the forum with endless threads. Fair enough — I have no problem with that principle.

But a speed limit works because the driver is told whether the limit is 50, 80 or 100 km/h. You cannot erect a camera, issue penalties automatically, and keep the speed limit secret.

So please, if there is a defined maximum, kindly tell me what it is. I will happily work within it.

That is all I have ever been asking.

DatNiggaDaz:


The epistle data boi.

You don't accept an invitation to a Media House and tell them who to relate with or not in the first instance.

The option open to you is to decline invitation since you can also choose any TV station to fly your opinions or views

But since most of the politicians and supporters have their tank removed from the top from inside, they bring that agbero thiggish mentality everywhere they go.

This epistles will not change anything. That woman handed the situation perfectly. And the question asked by Oseni was without insilt or malice. Why did he the Wike wrapper accept the invitation when he has malice inside him

Ah, the Obidient constitutional lawyer has arrived: “Once you accept a media invitation, you surrender all rights and must answer anybody the station puts before you.” Please show us where that rule is written.

Arise had every right to insist that its three anchors participate. Rufai had every right to ask his question. Lere equally had the right to say: “I will not engage this particular journalist.” And Arise then had the right to terminate the interview. Those rights can coexist.

What you are inventing is an obligation on the guest to answer Rufai merely because he entered Arise’s studio. A television invitation is not a police summons, and Rufai’s microphone is not a court subpoena.

You also keep saying Rufai’s particular question contained no insult or malice. That misses the point completely. Lere’s refusal was based on Rufai’s PRIOR conduct and what he regarded as a pattern of reckless, partisan journalism. You may disagree with his assessment, but pretending the dispute began with that single question is TYPICAL OBIDIENT INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY.

Then comes “agbero thuggish mentality” and “Wike wrapper.” Is it actually possible for some Obidients to make an argument without first dipping it in a bucket of insults? It is like watching a man arrive for a mathematics exam carrying only a megaphone: plenty of noise, absolutely no calculation. When the evidence runs out, the abuse begins.

The real issue remains unanswered:

CAN A GUEST HONOUR A MEDIA INSTITUTION WHILE REFUSING A PARTICULAR JOURNALIST WHOSE FAIRNESS HE DISPUTES?

Yes, he can. The station may reject that condition.

But do not confuse the station’s right to end the interview with some imaginary right of Rufai Oseni to compel an answer.

The most revealing thing about this debate is how some Obidients — obviously defending Rufai, a fellow Obidient — have elevated him from journalist to compulsory national examiner: once he asks, everybody must answer. No.

Rufai is a POLITICAL ADVOCATE, not a journalist. You cannot combine the role of referee and player in the same match.

helinues:
Is this the first time Lere will be clashing with Rufai on Arise discussion

What points do Lere think he can prove to Rufai and he will be satisfied. People should start boycotting the station because according to Rufai, as long as you are supporting this government, you can never make sense

That is precisely the question: should people boycott an entire television station because one anchor has, in their view, become shamelessly partisan? I don’t think so.

You do not burn down the courthouse because you distrust one judge. You challenge the judge, insist on the rules and demand that the institution prove it is bigger than the individual wearing the robe.

The same applies here.

If Rufai’s position has effectively become that anybody supporting this government “cannot make sense to him ,” then that is no longer rigorous journalism; it is political advocacy wearing a journalist’s badge. And that is exactly why I question whether what Rufai increasingly practises deserves to be called journalism at all.

But ARISE NEWS is bigger than Rufai Oseni.

It has other journalists, editors, producers and an institutional reputation to protect. The proper response is therefore not necessarily to boycott Arise, but to ask Arise a harder question:

ARE YOU STILL RUNNING A NEWS ORGANISATION, OR HAVE YOU ALLOWED ONE STAR PRESENTER’S POLITICAL temperament TO BECOME THE EDITORIAL PERSONALITY OF THE STATION?

Lere can therefore honour Arise while refusing Rufai. Viewers can continue watching Arise while challenging Rufai. And Arise itself can demonstrate that the institution is bigger than any individual anchor by enforcing accuracy, fairness, restraint and editorial equivalence.

The problem is not that Rufai exists.

Every newsroom can produce a strong personality.

The real danger begins when the personality becomes bigger than the newsroom, the whistle becomes bigger than the rules, and the referee starts believing the match belongs to him.

WHAT WOULD CHANNELS TV HAVE DONE? WHEN INSTITUTIONAL JOURNALISM IS BIGGER THAN THE STAR PRESENTER

WHO IS WATCHING THE WATCHDOG? THE RUFAI OSENI FILES — PART 3 By CharlesCNG

I have never met John Momoh in my life.

Yet I have long been fascinated by the man, his elegant and accomplished wife, Sola, and the formidable media institution they built together.

John and Sola founded Channels Television in 1992. Both were trained broadcasters. John became the unmistakable journalistic compass; Sola became the stabilising force behind the machinery. John once described his wife as the “brains behind the operations”: she handled accounts and non-operational functions while contributing to strategy, content and production.

If John helped steer the ship, Sola helped keep its engine room running.
The awards tell their story better than I can. Channels has won the Nigerian Media Merit Award for Television Station of the Year a record 16 times. In April 2026, it again won Television Station of the Year at the Nigeria Broadcasting Awards while John received a Lifetime Achievement Award.

But something else fascinates me. The Momohs have generally remained smaller than the institution they created.

They did not build Channels around their personalities or daily political combat. Indeed, many Nigerians may more readily recognise Seun Okinbaloye, Chamberlain Usoh or Maupe Ogun-Yusuf than the couple who own the station.

THAT IS INSTITUTIONAL JOURNALISM. Which brings me back to Rufai Oseni and Lere Olayinka.

Could that extraordinary spectacle have happened at Channels? I cannot prove a counterfactual. Channels journalists are human and Channels makes mistakes.

But Channels’ written editorial policy tells us what SHOULD happen: accuracy, fairness, political independence, balance, right of reply, accountability and, importantly, “rigorous editorial review.”

John Momoh himself recently reduced the philosophy to six magnificent words: “Be fearless, but fair.” “Pursue truth, not clicks.” There lies the difference.

A star presenter should resemble an airline pilot: highly visible, highly skilled, perhaps famous — but still subordinate to procedure, the control tower and the institution whose name is painted on the aircraft.

A Rufai Oseni can exist anywhere. The real question is whether a Rufai Oseni can become HIS OWN EDITORIAL SYSTEM.

At Channels, I struggle to imagine the institution allowing a presenter who has himself become part of a dispute to simultaneously become accuser, interrogator and gatekeeper to a guest’s right of reply.

Move the question to another anchor. Continue the interview. Protect the audience’s right to know. Keep the institution bigger than the personality.

That, perhaps, is John and Sola Momoh’s greatest achievement. Channels has produced stars. But the stars have never been permitted to become the constellation.

The station remains the bigger name.

NEXT:

WHEN JOURNALISM BECOMES “INFLUENCISM” — WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE BROADCASTER BECOMES THE PRODUCT?

WHO IS WATCHING THE WATCHDOG? CharlesCNG

Streetinvestor2:
You want him to join data boy like you and be earning 30k a month
You better go learn a skill before 2027 because data boy work won't exist again when obi or Atiku wins

So this is all you have left? “Data boy, ₦30k a month.” No facts, no rebuttal, no engagement with the actual issue: Rufai Oseni’s conduct and whether it meets basic journalistic standards.

And tell me: if I am really just a ₦30k “data boy,” why are you so invested in replying to me? What does it say about you that someone you consider that insignificant keeps dragging you back into the thread?

The real issue remains simple: does Rufai separate fact from opinion, allegation from evidence, and apply the same standard when the politician changes?

That is the argument. Everything else from you is noise.

So since you already “know” I am a data boy, ignore me and move on. Unless, of course, this alleged ₦30k data boy is making points you simply cannot answer.

fergie001:
Charlescng, very funny
You will soon tell me you are for data and not for supporting anybody.

😂, I have been here over a decade, nothing we never see

Fergie001, I am genuinely concerned by this comment, particularly because you are a MOD here.

You know I have repeatedly had difficulty opening new threads on Nairaland and have even sought your help before, so when you say, “You will soon tell me you are for data and not supporting anybody… I have been here over a decade, nothing we never see,” I need to understand exactly what you are insinuating.

For the record, I am an unrepentant and unapologetic BATist. I have never hidden it and I do not pretend otherwise. But political preference does not invalidate evidence.

If you think my Rufai argument is partisan, challenge it. Show me where my facts are wrong, where my evidence fails, or where I apply one standard to Rufai and another to journalists I favour. I welcome that scrutiny.

What I reject is the suggestion that because I support Tinubu, I somehow lose the right to critically examine Rufai Oseni’s journalism. The proper test is whether my argument is supported by evidence and whether I apply the standard consistently.

So, because you are also a moderator, let me ask plainly: are you speaking merely as another Nairaland member disagreeing with me politically, or are you suggesting that there is something about my articles or threads that violates Nairaland rules?

I would genuinely appreciate the clarification.

hegelian:
jounalist are meant to ask the hard question, to make politicians uncomfortable that they spill the truth..its not their job to ponder to those they are interviewing or make them comfortable..that every journalist have been turned to brown envelop doesnt those with integrity wont still exist...oh you prefer the kind of journalist that attend wike monthly town meeting where he will shouting and barking with no one confident to ask the tough questions abi or the TVC hangout where mediocrity is raised to heaven...
An average nigeria intellectuals love Rufai and there is nothing charlatans can do about it...it was the same Dupe started in Channels before she was bullied to cower but we trust rufai not give in to louts shouting everywhere..una go cry blood

You started with one correct point and then drove straight into a ditch. Yes, journalists are supposed to ask hard questions and make politicians uncomfortable. Nobody disputes that.

But HARD QUESTIONS are not the same thing as RECKLESS ASSERTIONS. Journalism also requires accuracy, evidence, fairness, separation of fact from opinion, right of reply and the willingness to apply the SAME scrutiny when the politician changes.

That is precisely what I am auditing. You talk about “brown-envelope journalists.” Fine. How exactly have you established that Rufai Oseni cannot be one? I have no evidence that Rufai collects brown envelopes, so I will not accuse him of doing so. But neither can you manufacture his integrity merely because you enjoy his politics. Popularity is not proof of integrity.

In fact, today’s social-media economy creates another incentive entirely: outrage, confrontation and political combat generate clips, followers, views and subscribers. That does not prove Rufai is motivated by those things. It simply means your argument — “he attacks politicians, therefore he must have integrity” — is childish.

Your comparison of Wike’s conduct with Rufai’s is completely senseless: Wike is a politician, Rufai PURPORTS to be a journalist, and those roles are judged by different standards.

A player is expected to fight for his team, take sides and try to win; a referee is expected to apply the rules fairly to both sides. You cannot excuse a referee for blowing a crooked whistle by saying, “But look at how aggressively the striker is playing.”
If Wike is partisan, that is politics; if Rufai is partisan while presenting himself as an independent journalist, that is precisely the journalism problem under examination.
If you cannot see the difference between the player and the referee, then you are not defending journalism — you are defending your preferred side.

Then comes your funniest assertion: “An average Nigerian intellectual loves Rufai.” Based on WHAT? Which independently conducted survey?

Which sample size? Which methodology? You have simply taken your Obidient social-media caucus, renamed it “average Nigerian intellectuals,” and announced the result. That is not research. That is masturbation by algorithm.

You called people questioning Rufai “charlatans.” Perhaps you should understand the word first. The real charlatan is the person who substitutes fandom for evidence, social-media applause for public opinion and aggression for journalism.

What I am doing is what genuine intellectual scrutiny requires: Take Rufai’s interviews. Take his claims. Take his statistics.

Compare his treatment of Tinubu, Obi, Atiku, Wike, APC, PDP and ADC. Then ask: DOES THE JOURNALISM CHANGE WHEN THE POLITICIAN CHANGES?

Rufai Oseni , as i asserted in my write up, is NOT a Journalist , he is a PARTISAN and opportunisitc POLITICAL ADVOCATE

ogolemati:
once I remember this below I understand what I am about to read won't make sense.so sorry I can't read it

😂😂😂 My brother, DON'T READ IT!

In fact, let us simplify your life permanently: whenever you see “CharlesCNG,” just keep scrolling. No need to announce that you haven't read what you are responding to. 😂

Because repeatedly saying, “I didn't read it, but let me respond,” makes you look like a man standing outside a restaurant every morning to announce that he absolutely refuses to eat there. Nobody asked!

So please, ignore my posts completely. Don't read. Don't respond. Don't even peek. My writing is for people interested in arguments, evidence and intelligent disagreement—not people who review articles they proudly admit they never read.

But before you go... You said you “can't read it.” IS THAT A PROMISE?

Because if it is, I ACCEPT. And I sincerely look forward to you demonstrating your commitment by NOT appearing underneath my next post to tell me once again that you didn't read it. !!

1nice:
Shut up and stop talking nonsense.

You just exposed your tribalism mind and how it works out in an unthinking manner.

Rufai Oseni will not support tinubu and opposition is allowed in journalism. The same way abati of arise news is supporting tinubu because of tribalism but Rufai Oseni is supporting peter obi because he believes in peter obi integrity.

Propagandist.

Notice your own extraordinary logic: Abati allegedly supports Tinubu “because of tribalism,” while Rufai allegedly supports Obi because he recognises Obi’s “integrity.” 😂😂😂

How wonderfully convenient! Your preferred journalist's political preference is PRINCIPLE. The other man's alleged preference is TRIBALISM.

And somehow I am the tribalist!

My friend, that argument has performed a full somersault and landed on its own head.

I am not asking Rufai Oseni to SUPPORT TINUBU. I am asking journalists to SCRUTINISE TINUBU, OBI, ATIKU AND EVERYBODY ELSE BY THE SAME PROFESSIONAL STANDARD.

If you interpret “apply the same journalistic standard to Peter Obi” as “support Tinubu,” then perhaps the propaganda problem you are diagnosing is considerably closer to home than you imagined.

Leboska:
Jargon as usual, somebody wakes up this morning to write this rubbish na waoo!

Another one. 😂

“Jargon as usual.”

Wonderful. Now POINT OUT THE JARGON.

And apparently somebody “woke up this morning to write this rubbish.” Yes, imagine the scandal: somebody woke up, read, researched, organised his thoughts and WROTE SOMETHING. What reckless behaviour in a discussion forum!

Perhaps I should apologise for not restricting myself to “Tinubu bad!”, “Obi good!”, three insults and seventeen laughing emojis.

But understand this: I DON'T WRITE FOR EVERYBODY. I write for people capable of reading an argument, examining the evidence, spotting contradictions and responding to the substance—whether they agree with me or not.

Intelligent disagreement is welcome. In fact, I enjoy it. But “JARGON!”, “RUBBISH!”, “EPISTLE!” from people who cannot identify a single factual or logical error is not rebuttal. It is what happens when an argument arrives and comprehension isn't home.

I have a very simple request for you and your fellow Obidients who believe I am dumb, empty-headed and incapable of saying anything meaningful:

PLEASE IGNORE ME. Don't read my “epistles.” Don't quote them. Don't respond to them. Don't raise your blood pressure over CharlesCNG. Scroll peacefully past.

AustineE1:
I didn't bother to read your epistles because I know you have nothing meaningful to say.You should be grateful that we as a nation is still blessed with a journalist like Useni and not your usual brown envelope journalists whom are easily gagged by the government and report only what pleases your thieving government.

Another intellectual acrobat. You proudly announce, “I didn't bother to read your epistle,” and then—in the very next breath—inform us that it contains “nothing meaningful.”Brilliant! 😂

How exactly did you determine the contents of something YOU ADMIT YOU DIDN'T READ? That is like reviewing a book from the cover and congratulating yourself on the depth of your literary criticism.

And please understand something: MY WRITING IS NOT FOR PEOPLE LIKE YOU. It is for people who can read an argument, interrogate the evidence, identify what they disagree with and respond intelligently.

If your preferred method of debate is “I didn't read it, but I know it is nonsense,” then you are not my target audience—you are practically a demonstration of why I write.

As for Useni, whether he is a great journalist, a terrible journalist or the reincarnation of Walter Cronkite is completely irrelevant to the argument unless you actually READ what I wrote and rebut the specific points.

So I have a very simple request for you and your fellow Obidients who believe I am dumb, empty-headed and incapable of saying anything meaningful:

PLEASE IGNORE ME.

Don't read my “epistles.” Don't quote them. Don't respond to them. Don't raise your blood pressure over CharlesCNG. Scroll peacefully past.

But if you cannot resist replying, at least perform the revolutionary intellectual exercise of READING THE THING FIRST. Because “I didn't read it, but here is my rebuttal” isn't an argument.

It is a public confession of unseriousness.

RUFAI OSENI VS LERE OLAYINKA: CAN YOU HONOUR THE STATION AND BOYCOTT THE JOURNALIST?

WHO IS WATCHING THE WATCHDOG? THE RUFAI OSENI FILES — PART 2 By CharlesCNG

Yesterday, I promised that Part 2 would examine “influencism” — what happens when the broadcaster himself becomes the product. I have had to postpone that article because what happened yesterday on Arise News demands immediate examination.

Lere Olayinka accepted Arise News’ invitation, appeared on The Morning Show and answered questions. Then Rufai Oseni attempted to question him. Lere refused. Not Arise News. RUFAI OSENI.

That distinction matters. A microphone is not a subpoena. Accepting a television station’s invitation does not automatically mean surrendering your right to engage every individual journalist on its panel, particularly one whose fairness and conduct you are openly disputing.

Lere’s position was effectively: “I recognise the institution, but I will not engage this particular interrogator.” Arise took the opposite position. Ayo Mairo-Ese argued that appearing on The Morning Show meant submitting to questions from all three presenters. When Lere maintained his refusal, the interview ended.

Arise had every right to take that position.Rufai had every right to ask his question. And Lere had every right to refuse him.

But rights do not end the journalism discussion. They begin it. WHY MUST A RIGHT OF REPLY BECOME A RIGHT OF CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE VERY JOURNALIST WHO HAS BECOME PART OF THE COMPLAINT?

Only the previous day, Reuben Abati had publicly challenged Rufai over innuendo, integrity and possible legal consequences. Barely 24 hours later, a guest cited Rufai’s conduct as the reason he would no longer engage him. That sequence is extraordinary.

Lere’s refusal can therefore reasonably be understood as protest: I will honour Arise News, but I will not legitimise a journalist whose conduct I consider reckless; I will instead engage journalists on the same station whose professionalism I respect.

You can protest one doctor without boycotting the hospital. You can object to one referee without refusing to play football.

And you can respect Arise News without conferring personal confidence on every journalist sitting behind its desk. But there is another side.

A politician must not be allowed to manufacture a “boycott” merely to escape a difficult question. Rufai’s underlying question deserved an answer, and Lere weakened an otherwise defensible position with unnecessary personal insults.

The solution was simple. Let Abati ask the same question. Let Ayo ask it. A legitimate question does not acquire an exclusive owner merely because Rufai thought of it first. If Lere then refused the QUESTION rather than merely Rufai, viewers could fairly conclude that he was evading accountability.

Instead, Arise terminated the interview — depriving the audience of the answer altogether.

There is a useful American comparison. In 2018, Donald Trump attended a joint press conference, refused to take CNN correspondent Jim Acosta’s question and moved to another journalist. Whatever one thinks of Trump’s hostility toward CNN — and I certainly do not present it as exemplary press relations — the distinction remains: attending a media event does not automatically compel engagement with every individual journalist present.

So the real question is not who “won.” It is: WHEN THE JOURNALIST BECOMES PART OF THE STORY, SHOULD HE STILL CONTROL THE INTERROGATION?

And perhaps an even bigger question: WAS ARISE PROTECTING JOURNALISTIC PRINCIPLE — OR PROTECTING THE PREROGATIVE OF ITS STAR PRESENTER?

NEXT ON WHO IS WATCHING THE WATCHDOG?

“WHAT WOULD CHANNELS TV HAVE DONE? WHEN INSTITUTIONAL JOURNALISM IS BIGGER THAN THE STAR PRESENTER.”

Please stay tuned to CharlesCNG

WHO IS WATCHING THE WATCHDOG? THE RUFAI OSENI FILES — PART 1 By CharlesCNG

I have watched Rufai Oseni for a long time.

I have watched the interruptions, political monologues masquerading as questions, assertions delivered with prosecutorial certainty, and the transformation that sometimes occurs when Rufai begins as interviewer and ends as prosecutor, witness and judge.

Yesterday morning gave me the perfect reason to stop watching and start documenting.

On Arise News’ The Morning Show, Rufai became so carried away during commentary involving Nyesom Wike and other political actors that his own senior colleague, Dr Reuben Abati, intervened LIVE ON AIR. Abati warned him about challenging people’s integrity, creating innuendo and exposing the station to lawsuits. Rufai pushed back. The exchange became heated.

Think about that. This was not a politician complaining about a hostile interview. It was a senior journalist beside Rufai effectively saying: there is a boundary here.

That moment crystallised my concern. I am not going to merely shout “Rufai is biased.” I am going to audit him.

Interview by interview. Claim by claim. Statistic by statistic. Politician by politician.

My thesis:WHAT RUFAI OSENI INCREASINGLY PRACTISES SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSED WITH REPORTORIAL JOURNALISM.

A better description may be: POLITICAL ADVOCACY BROADCASTING. Some describe him as a crass, crude and rude advocacy commentator masquerading as a neutral interrogator; others see him as a misguided, opinionated and intellectually arrogant political prosecutor with a broadcaster’s microphone.

Sean Hannity has openly called himself a talk-show host, an “advocacy journalist” and an “opinion journalist.” Whatever one thinks of Hannity, his audience knows where he stands. That honesty matters.

My problem with Rufai is not that he has opinions. It is what happens when advocacy puts on the clothes of neutral journalism.

Rufai increasingly resembles a referee who enters the pitch with the whistle around his neck — and then starts taking penalties for one team.

He wants the authority of the interviewer, the freedom of the commentator and the aggression of the advocate.

This series will test one question: DOES THE JOURNALISM CHANGE WHEN THE POLITICIAN CHANGES?

Tinubu. Obi. Atiku. Wike. APC. PDP. ADC. Same microphone. Same evidentiary standard?

If Rufai passes, I will say so. If he does not, the evidence will speak. Because an audit incapable of acquitting its subject is propaganda.

Yesterday, the watchdog had to be checked by another watchdog. That is where we begin.

NEXT: WHEN JOURNALISM BECOMES “INFLUENCISM” — WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE BROADCASTER BECOMES THE PRODUCT?

WHO IS WATCHING THE WATCHDOG?

CharlesCNG

ogolemati:
once I remember this below I understand what I am about to read won't make sense.so sorry I can't read it

Joker of the century!

You don't even read what you're responding to. You charge into arguments like a drunk barrister who wandered into the wrong courtroom—loud, indignant, spectacularly confident, and completely unaware that nobody is arguing the case he is furiously trying to win.

Atiku Abubakar says he will reduce the underlying cost of education and forgive the debts of “qualifying” NELFUND beneficiaries.

Wonderful. But debt forgiveness is not magic. SOMEBODY PAYS.

So, Mr Atiku, 15 questions:

1. WHO EXACTLY QUALIFIES?
What makes a student eligible for debt forgiveness — income, employment status, course of study, family circumstances or something else?

2. HOW MUCH WILL YOU FORGIVE?
10%? 25%? 50%? 100%? Without a percentage, “debt forgiveness” is a slogan, not a policy.

3. WHAT IS THE TOTAL ESTIMATED WRITE-OFF?
How many billions of naira are we talking about? Give Nigerians a number.

4. WHO REPLACES THE MONEY YOU FORGIVE?
NELFUND has already disbursed hundreds of billions of naira. When those loans are written off, who replenishes the fund?

5. WILL THE FEDERAL BUDGET RECAPITALISE NELFUND?
Yes or no?

6. IF YES, WHICH EXPENDITURE GIVES WAY?
Roads? Hospitals? Security? Universities? Something else?

7[b]. IF NOTHING GIVES WAY, WILL YOU BORROW?[/b]
Government money must come from somewhere.

8. WHAT HAPPENS TO STUDENTS WHO HAVE ALREADY REPAID?
Do they simply discover that being responsible and repaying early was a financial mistake?

9. WILL THOSE WHO ALREADY REPAID GET REFUNDS?
If not, how is that fair?

10. HOW WILL YOU PREVENT MORAL HAZARD?
If borrowers believe politicians may eventually forgive their debts, why should future beneficiaries take repayment seriously?

11. WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU FORGIVING?
Tuition loans? Upkeep loans? Or both?

12. YOU ALSO PROMISED TO REDUCE THE UNDERLYING COST OF EDUCATION. HOW?
Lower fees by government directive? Higher university subventions? Tuition subsidies? Hostel subsidies? More grants?

13[b]. WILL UNIVERSITIES RECEIVE MORE MONEY TO COMPENSATE FOR LOWER COSTS?[/b]
If yes, how much?

14. WHAT WILL THAT ADDITIONAL EDUCATION INTERVENTION COST ANNUALLY?
Debt forgiveness is one bill.

Reducing the underlying cost of education is another. PRICE BOTH.

15. HOW DOES ALL THIS FIT INSIDE THE SAME FEDERAL BUDGET AS YOUR PETROL-SUBSIDY PROMISE?
That is the question.
Promises don't live in separate universes. Eventually, petrol subsidy, NELFUND forgiveness, cheaper education, security, healthcare, infrastructure, salaries, pensions and debt service all arrive at the SAME BUDGET.

So, Mr Atiku: HOW MUCH? WHO PAYS? WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM?

Those are not attacks. Those are the questions that turn a campaign promise into an actual policy.

SeeWahala:
Mschew this underfeeding dàtá b0i and his love for AgbadoGPT

When arguments are underfed, insults become the emergency food supply. 😂

You came to fight “AgbadoGPT” armed with nothing but MschewGPT — zero data, zero argument, unlimited noise.

Dalohad:
CharlesCNG what do you think?

Come with your usual anti-Obi propaganda..

You’re asking me to respond to someone’s response to what someone wrote, as if once somebody writes or says something, it automatically becomes true.

So let’s test your own standard: suppose I simply announce that Atiku gave those same clerics millions, or that Peter Obi gave Rufai Oseni money, without producing a shred of evidence. Will you condemn Atiku and Obi immediately, or will you suddenly remember that allegations require EVIDENCE?
I don’t respond to rubbish, propaganda and hearsay presented as fact.
Bring evidence for your Tinubu claim first. I debate facts, not rumours manufactured to fit political prejudice.

As for Peter Obi, nobody needs any propaganda. The man is daily DEMARKETING HIMSELF WITH HIS OWN MOUTH!

lildush:
I don't have anything to say to. Since Ur a supporter of evil stay very far away from me.

This is a PUBLIC discussion forum; if you want people to “stay very far away,” perhaps a public forum is a rather ambitious choice of residence. 😂

And about “supporting evil”: when your only evidence of evil is that someone supports a politician you dislike, perhaps the real evil threatening Nigeria is the murder of basic reasoning.

ogolemati:
I don't read epistles from someone that his B was removed. Avoid this twins below for a better Nigeria is still POssible

You don’t read epistles, but somehow you RESPOND to epistles. 😂

If you don’t read my epistles, simply ignore them and move on. They weren’t written for you Obidients in the first place.

I write for people who are willing to READ, THINK, interrogate arguments and engage with evidence. NOT ABUSE.

So if reading is too much work, no problem.

Just don’t announce that you didn’t read something and then proudly proceed to argue against what you didn’t read. 😂

Streetinvestor2:
Atiku has spent 1.2 million which was never a secret as the company most disclose it to tax authorities. How much has the drug baron spent from nigeria money since Obama tenure to protect the files. Or you are among the du..mb data boys who claims on his part it has cost nothing
Pls equally find out how much the baron contributed Against trump re-election to Democrats
Then is the 1.2 million Atiku personal money or nigeria money as he is a private citizen with known businesses in nigeria
Is it the tafa that ended in jail as corrupt criminal after service. Why is it it always the kind of people baron use for his dealing. He never has anyone around him with integrity

impressive deflection: Obama, Trump, Tafa Balogun, “drug baron”—everything except the point I made.

Nobody said Atiku’s $1.2m lobbying contract was secret or that he stole Nigerian money to pay for it.
The question is POLITICAL: what does it say about Atiku’s 2027 strategy that his $1.2m Washington lobbying operation is now pushing Tinubu’s decades-old FBI/DEA controversy?
And your claim that Tinubu has spent Nigerian money “since Obama” suppressing these files is YOUR allegation, genius—so produce the figures, contracts, payments or FARA records. Don’t call somebody a “dumb data boy” and then ask him to find evidence for YOUR accusation.

Your Trump claim is equally confused. The old report concerns Tinubu donating over $5,000 to Obama’s 2012 campaign—Obama versus Romney, years before Trump even became the Republican presidential candidate.
If you have evidence Tinubu later funded Democrats specifically against Trump, PRODUCE IT.

And Tafa Balogun’s later corruption conviction changes absolutely nothing about the point: Balogun did not conduct the FBI/NCIC search. Nigeria requested information; the U.S. Consulate responded that the FBI/NCIC check returned NEGATIVE for criminal arrest records, wants and warrants. If that American response was false, prove it. “Tafa later went to jail” is not evidence that an FBI database search was fabricated.

And for the hundredth time: Tinubu’s 1993 $460,000 civil forfeiture settlement is real; a criminal conviction from that matter is not.

RELEASE EVERY FBI/DEA FILE American law permits—I support that completely.

But after all your Obama-Trump-Tafa gymnastics, my question remains untouched: after spending $1.2m on Washington lobbyists and excavating 34-year-old Tinubu files, WHAT EXACTLY IS ATIKU OFFERING NIGERIANS IN 2027? Insults cannot answer that question.

ATIKU PAID $1.2M FOR “VON BATTEN” — THEN IKE-ME-FU-NA OKEKE ENTERED THE ROOM!

I went looking for the American lobbyist Atiku Abubakar reportedly hired for $1.2 MILLION a year. I found Ikemefuna Okeke. 😂

Atiku hired the magnificently named Washington firm: VON BATTEN-MONTAGUE-YORK.

Sounds like three aristocrats discussing Nigeria over tea at Buckingham Palace. Then I checked U.S. government records. Ladies and gentlemen, “Karl Von Batten” is officially identified as: DR. KARL-MARX EDWARD OKEKE-VON BATTEN III.

And a professional profile reportedly carries the even more spectacular: KARL-MARX EDWARD IKEMEFUNA WILLIAM GEORGE OKEKE-VON BATTEN. Ah! Karl-Marx. Edward. Ikemefuna. William. George. Okeke. Von Batten. One man!

It is as if an Igbo naming ceremony collided with European aristocracy and Karl Marx came to settle the dispute.

But here is the delicious irony: ATIKU HIRED A MAN TO MANAGE HIS REPUTATION... AND NIGERIANS ARE NOW INVESTIGATING THE MAN MANAGING ATIKU'S REPUTATION.

Atiku wanted Nigerians discussing Tinubu's American files. Instead: Open Tinubu — Atiku appears. Open Atiku — Von Batten appears.

Open Von Batten... OKEKE! 😂😂😂

To be clear, different names do NOT prove fraud, and I am not accusing Von Batten of any crime.

But for $1.2 MILLION, Nigerians can surely ask: Atiku, who recommended this firm? What due diligence did you conduct? What exactly are you receiving for $100,000 monthly?

As our elders might say, the man buying a cow in darkness should switch on the light before paying. So I ask purely satirically:

OGA ATIKU... WHILE SEARCHING AMERICA FOR TINUBU'S PAST...
ARE YOU SURE SOMEBODY HASN'T SOLD YOU PREMIUM WASHINGTON PACKAGING? 😂😂😂

What a Cameroonian marabout has wrought upon our national politics. Perhaps only 2027 can finally cure it.

RUFAI OSENI: “ATIKU IS BEGINNING TO SOUND LIKE A PUBLIC SOUND BITE” — THEN RALPH NWOSU CAME TO ARISE TV

Sometimes the defence is more damaging than the accusation.

Days ago, Arise TV’s Rufai Oseni delivered a brutal assessment of Atiku’s promise to restore fuel subsidy: “Atiku Abubakar is beginning to sound like a public sound bite to me.”

Why? Because, Rufai argued, there was “no follow-up and no clear idea of how it’s going to be done.” Note this is NOT CharlesCNG Speaking. This the obidient favourite Broadcaster’s label , not mine. Then Ralph Nwosu came on Arise TV’s The Morning Show to defend Atiku/ADC.

Perfect opportunity. Atiku says he will restore subsidy. So bring the arithmetic: What petrol price? What crude discount? How many barrels? What annual cost? Who pays? What happens to FAAC?

Remember, CharlesCNG asked Atiku 15 detailed questions on precisely these issues almost two weeks ago.
I AM STILL WAITING. Then Nwosu said something remarkable.

He assured Nigerians that ADC’s policy had been “EXHAUSTIVELY DISCUSSED” and subjected to “DIFFERENT TESTS.” Wonderful.
Then the presenters pressed him for the actual financing and details.

Suddenly: WE ARE STILL CONSULTING. 😂 Wait. How does a policy move from “exhaustively discussed” BACKWARDS to “we are still consulting” the moment somebody asks for the numbers?
That is like announcing: “WE HAVE FINISHED BUILDING THE HOUSE!” Then somebody asks where the foundation is. “Oh, we are consulting engineers about that.”

And Nwosu wasn't finished. He spoke of injecting ₦12 TRILLION into the economy and getting the working class to create OVER ₦500 TRILLION. Ah! my calculator requested annual leave. ₦12 trillion enters. ₦500+ trillion emerges.

Please, gentlemen, don't give us another sound bite. SHOW US THE MODEL. Where does the ₦12 trillion come from? Over what period does ₦500 trillion emerge?

What economic multiplier produces it? And while we are waiting, Atiku has already moved on to another promise: NELFUND debt forgiveness.
Exactly Rufai Oseni's point. Headline first. Details later. Promise first.

Arithmetic under consultation. If Atiku believes Tinubu's subsidy policy is wrong, FINE. But replacing a policy requires ANOTHER POLICY, not a sound bite.
Nearly two weeks later, my 15 questions remain unanswered. So I will reduce them to three: HOW MUCH? WHO PAYS? WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM?
Until those are answered, Rufai Oseni's description will continue to sting:
“ATIKU ABUBAKAR IS BEGINNING TO SOUND LIKE A PUBLIC SOUND BITE.”

You really cannot make Nigerian politics up.

Atiku Abubakar reportedly hires a Washington lobbying firm on a $1.2 million, 12-month contract. And among the political ammunition the firm is now pushing? Tinubu's FBI/DEA records arising from events of the early 1990s.

Think about the comedy. We are in 2026, digging furiously through files from an investigation conducted roughly 34 years ago, apparently hoping America will finally reveal something devastating about Tinubu.

There is just one awkward little problem. Nigeria officially asked America about Tinubu TWENTY-THREE YEARS AGO.

In February 2003, Nigeria's Inspector-General of Police wrote to the United States authorities requesting information about Tinubu.

The U.S. Consulate responded after an FBI National Crime Information Center records check:

NEGATIVE for criminal arrest records. NEGATIVE for wants. NEGATIVE for warrants.
Tinubu was never criminally convicted in the 1993 civil-forfeiture matter.
So here we are in 2026.

Atiku's lobbyists are helping resurrect files from the early 1990s while Nigeria waits breathlessly for an answer to a question its Inspector-General of Police formally asked America in 2003. 😂😂😂

This is like spending millions hiring Sherlock Holmes to discover where your car keys are… while they have been hanging on the hook in your sitting room for 23 years.

By all means, release whatever records American law permits to be released.

Let everybody read them. But opposition politicians should perhaps prepare themselves for the terrifying possibility that after excavating 34-year-old files, the political question in 2027 will still be:

ATIKU, WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU OFFERING NIGERIANS TODAY?

Because eventually an opposition has to stop investigating 1992… and start explaining 2027.

lildush:
Forget this long story bro we don't want someone with a criminal record as our president.and that is final. Tinubu is a criminal. Sowere always say this you think he doesn't know wat he is saying? Even the people involved in that FBI case that Time were bought over.. and that is final. Maybe that is what is delaying the release..

WHO exactly are the “WE”?

Speak for yourself. You have not been appointed spokesman for 200 million Nigerians. And please stop converting allegation into conviction by repetition.

The Chicago matter arose from proceedings more than three decades ago. Tinubu was not criminally convicted in that case.

In fact, when Nigeria’s Inspector-General of Police formally asked the U.S. Consulate about Tinubu in 2003, the FBI’s National Crime Information Center check returned NEGATIVE for criminal arrest records, wants or warrants.

Then you invoke Sowore as though: “Sowore said it, therefore it is true.”
Should we now accept EVERYTHING Sowore says?

Because Sowore has also described Peter Obi as a “packaged fraud” and said Obi is part of the same old political system he has fought for years.
So which Sowore are we accepting? Sowore on Tinubu = gospel? Sowore on Obi = suddenly unreliable? 😂