|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
|
|
Your conspiracy theory doesn't exist anyplace but your head.
On November 01 2017 11:23 Slaughter wrote:
I honestly don't know why people engage with RiK anymore.
Sometimes it's fun to be part of the performance art.
|
On November 01 2017 11:23 Slaughter wrote:
I honestly don't know why people engage with RiK anymore.
Political threads are low-hanging fruit for people looking to "actually troll" because its one of the few scenarios where people struggle to resist replying even when they think a point is ridiculous or shitty. All a troll has to do is reply somewhat condescendingly, yet use a weak argument, and that other person is almost guaranteed to reply.
Edit: The other big thing is that even on forums that have a higher standard of posting, such as TL, mods always end up getting super relaxed in political threads. So trolls have a much easier time getting people to reply to them because they don't have to stay composed. People can toss out ridiculous stuff and it always gets by because mods don't want to appear biased etc. It's kind of a checkmate scenario against moderators.
|
On November 01 2017 11:33 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2017 11:23 Slaughter wrote:
I honestly don't know why people engage with RiK anymore. Political threads are low-hanging fruit for people looking to "actually troll" because its one of the few scenarios where people struggle to resist replying even when they think a point is ridiculous or shitty. All a troll has to do is reply somewhat condescendingly, yet use a weak argument, and that other person is almost guaranteed to reply. Edit: The other big thing is that even on forums that have a higher standard of posting, such as TL, mods always end up getting super relaxed in political threads. So trolls have a much easier time getting people to reply to them because they don't have to stay composed. People can toss out ridiculous stuff and it always gets by because mods don't want to appear biased etc. It's kind of a checkmate scenario against moderators.
I've seen a select few posters get away with quite a lot. From argument in absentia, to personal attacks, to simple conspiracy trolling, there's a handful of people who plainly don't get their kicks from genuine discussion. I wouldn't complain if they were banned tomorrow, but I understand the difficulty the mods face here.
|
On November 01 2017 11:24 Plansix wrote:Your conspiracy theory doesn't exist anyplace but your head. Show nested quote +On November 01 2017 11:23 Slaughter wrote:
I honestly don't know why people engage with RiK anymore. Sometimes it's fun to be part of the performance art.
the point he's trying to make:
"Since you don't agree with that made up conspiracy theory I just made up you don't think white people oppress black people (in any possible, imagineable way)". Which obviously is bullshit as well.
Noone agrees with his made up conspiracy theory but noone agrees with his conclusion that therefore no white guy anywhere is opressing people elsewhere "because see, you just said you disagree with the theory I put foreward how/why white people are oppressing black people. Therefore they aren't!"
I'd usually say it's trolling on purpose but I have a hunch that he actually thinks he's smart about it and seriously thinks what he says makes sense
|
This shit is an insult to our country. 10th grade history pretty much shits all over this. But the White House is going to regurgitate this lie for however long they are in office. Dog whistle racism at its finest, coming from the Oval Office.
|
On November 01 2017 12:19 Plansix wrote:https://twitter.com/christinawilkie/status/925436816475516933This shit is an insult to our country. 10th grade history pretty much shits all over this. But the White House is going to regurgitate this lie for however long they are in office. Dog whistle racism at its finest, coming from the Oval Office.
And I mean, it's not like Republicans are losing the South. It makes no sense to say this kind of shit that is so blatantly incorrect and cringey to everyone other than the South. We don't need to pat them on the heads. It was a really long time ago. They don't need to be ashamed and it doesn't need to be a bad thing that someone's great great great grandfather was a shitty guy.
Every other part of the country has a historically accurate textbook. It's not like anyone up North is like "Yeah, this is totally a matter of opinion that isn't verifiable and she's right" lol.
|
On November 01 2017 12:31 Mohdoo wrote:And I mean, it's not like Republicans are losing the South. It makes no sense to say this kind of shit that is so blatantly incorrect and cringey to everyone other than the South. We don't need to pat them on the heads. It was a really long time ago. They don't need to be ashamed and it doesn't need to be a bad thing that someone's great great great grandfather was a shitty guy.
Any part of the south they are at risk of losing they just make sure that blacks can't vote to keep hold of power. See NC for the proving grounds of this classic remake.
|
Looks like the whole Russia/Trump collusion narrative went on life support today:
Top lawyers from Facebook and Twitter said Tuesday that Russian-linked posts and advertisements placed on the social networks after Election Day sought to sow doubt about President Donald Trump's victory.
Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch told a Senate Judiciary panel that content generated by a Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency after Nov. 8 centered on “fomenting discord about the validity of [Trump’s] election.” That's a change from Russia's pre-election activity, which was largely centered on trying to denigrate Hillary Clinton, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in a January report.
“During the election, they were trying to create discord between Americans, most of it directed against Clinton. After the election you saw Russian-tied groups and organizations trying to undermine President Trump’s legitimacy. Is that what you saw on Facebook?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked at the hearing.
Stretch and his Twitter counterpart, Sean Edgett, called that an "accurate" statement.
The disclosure opened a new wrinkle in the continuing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, which has increasingly focused on the role of the biggest internet companies. Tuesday's hearing marks the first time representatives of Facebook, Google and Twitter have testified publicly about what they've learned about Kremlin meddling on their platforms in the presidential campaign. The companies face additional lawmaker scrutiny Wednesday with back-to-back hearings by the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
James Lewis, an international cyber policy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the revelation about Russian anti-Trump activity on social media post-election fits with typical Kremlin information-warfare efforts.
“Their goal is to create confusion and dissent. The target is the U.S. and NATO, not any particular candidate. They just want chaos," Lewis said. "It went from being a grudge match against Clinton to what they thought was a priceless opportunity to inflict harm."
Source.
|
Except for that whole part where a member of the campaign already pleaded guilty
|
The part where Russia isn't actually motivated by the success of anybody in the US doesn't seem to me to have any direct bearing on whether the Trump campaign tried to obtain benefit by colluding with Russia.
|
Er, yes? I swear this same news came out like 2 months ago.
Russians tried everything and everyone, Trump team was stupidest of the bunch.
|
On November 01 2017 13:02 xDaunt wrote:Looks like the whole Russia/Trump collusion narrative went on life support today: Show nested quote +Top lawyers from Facebook and Twitter said Tuesday that Russian-linked posts and advertisements placed on the social networks after Election Day sought to sow doubt about President Donald Trump's victory.
Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch told a Senate Judiciary panel that content generated by a Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency after Nov. 8 centered on “fomenting discord about the validity of [Trump’s] election.” That's a change from Russia's pre-election activity, which was largely centered on trying to denigrate Hillary Clinton, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in a January report.
“During the election, they were trying to create discord between Americans, most of it directed against Clinton. After the election you saw Russian-tied groups and organizations trying to undermine President Trump’s legitimacy. Is that what you saw on Facebook?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked at the hearing.
Stretch and his Twitter counterpart, Sean Edgett, called that an "accurate" statement.
The disclosure opened a new wrinkle in the continuing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, which has increasingly focused on the role of the biggest internet companies. Tuesday's hearing marks the first time representatives of Facebook, Google and Twitter have testified publicly about what they've learned about Kremlin meddling on their platforms in the presidential campaign. The companies face additional lawmaker scrutiny Wednesday with back-to-back hearings by the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
James Lewis, an international cyber policy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the revelation about Russian anti-Trump activity on social media post-election fits with typical Kremlin information-warfare efforts.
“Their goal is to create confusion and dissent. The target is the U.S. and NATO, not any particular candidate. They just want chaos," Lewis said. "It went from being a grudge match against Clinton to what they thought was a priceless opportunity to inflict harm." Source.
I’m reading the article and I don’t see why you’re jumping to the conclusion that Russia/Trump collusion is out the window. Russia can determine Trump winning the election is better for them than Clinton winning, then turn around and undermine the Trump administration months later.
It’s not as though if Russia helped Trump win the presidency, they’re locked into helping Trump for the next four years. Russia can do what it can to influence the US election to nudge it towards the candidate they prefer, then continue to destabilize the US thru any means necessary.
|
On November 01 2017 13:02 xDaunt wrote:Looks like the whole Russia/Trump collusion narrative went on life support today: Show nested quote +Top lawyers from Facebook and Twitter said Tuesday that Russian-linked posts and advertisements placed on the social networks after Election Day sought to sow doubt about President Donald Trump's victory.
Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch told a Senate Judiciary panel that content generated by a Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency after Nov. 8 centered on “fomenting discord about the validity of [Trump’s] election.” That's a change from Russia's pre-election activity, which was largely centered on trying to denigrate Hillary Clinton, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in a January report.
“During the election, they were trying to create discord between Americans, most of it directed against Clinton. After the election you saw Russian-tied groups and organizations trying to undermine President Trump’s legitimacy. Is that what you saw on Facebook?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked at the hearing.
Stretch and his Twitter counterpart, Sean Edgett, called that an "accurate" statement.
The disclosure opened a new wrinkle in the continuing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, which has increasingly focused on the role of the biggest internet companies. Tuesday's hearing marks the first time representatives of Facebook, Google and Twitter have testified publicly about what they've learned about Kremlin meddling on their platforms in the presidential campaign. The companies face additional lawmaker scrutiny Wednesday with back-to-back hearings by the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
James Lewis, an international cyber policy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the revelation about Russian anti-Trump activity on social media post-election fits with typical Kremlin information-warfare efforts.
“Their goal is to create confusion and dissent. The target is the U.S. and NATO, not any particular candidate. They just want chaos," Lewis said. "It went from being a grudge match against Clinton to what they thought was a priceless opportunity to inflict harm." Source.
Welp, that's it. It doesn't get more definitive than that.
|
On November 01 2017 13:02 xDaunt wrote:Looks like the whole Russia/Trump collusion narrative went on life support today: Show nested quote +Top lawyers from Facebook and Twitter said Tuesday that Russian-linked posts and advertisements placed on the social networks after Election Day sought to sow doubt about President Donald Trump's victory.
Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch told a Senate Judiciary panel that content generated by a Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency after Nov. 8 centered on “fomenting discord about the validity of [Trump’s] election.” That's a change from Russia's pre-election activity, which was largely centered on trying to denigrate Hillary Clinton, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in a January report.
“During the election, they were trying to create discord between Americans, most of it directed against Clinton. After the election you saw Russian-tied groups and organizations trying to undermine President Trump’s legitimacy. Is that what you saw on Facebook?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked at the hearing.
Stretch and his Twitter counterpart, Sean Edgett, called that an "accurate" statement.
The disclosure opened a new wrinkle in the continuing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, which has increasingly focused on the role of the biggest internet companies. Tuesday's hearing marks the first time representatives of Facebook, Google and Twitter have testified publicly about what they've learned about Kremlin meddling on their platforms in the presidential campaign. The companies face additional lawmaker scrutiny Wednesday with back-to-back hearings by the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
James Lewis, an international cyber policy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the revelation about Russian anti-Trump activity on social media post-election fits with typical Kremlin information-warfare efforts.
“Their goal is to create confusion and dissent. The target is the U.S. and NATO, not any particular candidate. They just want chaos," Lewis said. "It went from being a grudge match against Clinton to what they thought was a priceless opportunity to inflict harm." Source.
Efforts that paled in comparison to the media establishments adopted narrative.
|
preet bharara did an excellent, fairly brief (~13 minutes) rundown of the indictment. He's a former prosecutor.
podbay.fm
|
On November 01 2017 13:16 NeoIllusions wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2017 13:02 xDaunt wrote:Looks like the whole Russia/Trump collusion narrative went on life support today: Top lawyers from Facebook and Twitter said Tuesday that Russian-linked posts and advertisements placed on the social networks after Election Day sought to sow doubt about President Donald Trump's victory.
Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch told a Senate Judiciary panel that content generated by a Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency after Nov. 8 centered on “fomenting discord about the validity of [Trump’s] election.” That's a change from Russia's pre-election activity, which was largely centered on trying to denigrate Hillary Clinton, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in a January report.
“During the election, they were trying to create discord between Americans, most of it directed against Clinton. After the election you saw Russian-tied groups and organizations trying to undermine President Trump’s legitimacy. Is that what you saw on Facebook?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked at the hearing.
Stretch and his Twitter counterpart, Sean Edgett, called that an "accurate" statement.
The disclosure opened a new wrinkle in the continuing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, which has increasingly focused on the role of the biggest internet companies. Tuesday's hearing marks the first time representatives of Facebook, Google and Twitter have testified publicly about what they've learned about Kremlin meddling on their platforms in the presidential campaign. The companies face additional lawmaker scrutiny Wednesday with back-to-back hearings by the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
James Lewis, an international cyber policy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the revelation about Russian anti-Trump activity on social media post-election fits with typical Kremlin information-warfare efforts.
“Their goal is to create confusion and dissent. The target is the U.S. and NATO, not any particular candidate. They just want chaos," Lewis said. "It went from being a grudge match against Clinton to what they thought was a priceless opportunity to inflict harm." Source. I’m reading the article and I don’t see why you’re jumping to the conclusion that Russia/Trump collusion is out the window. Russia can determine Trump winning the election is better for them than Clinton winning, then turn around and undermine the Trump administration months later. It’s not as though if Russia helped Trump win the presidency, they’re locked into helping Trump for the next four years. Russia can do what it can to influence the US election to nudge it towards the candidate they prefer, then continue to destabilize the US thru any means necessary.
It's a lot harder to accept the premise that Trump is someone that the Russians wanted in office because they knew that he'd be friendly to them and would give them stuff if the Russians are turning around and sabotaging him after the election. Logically, you wouldn't expect them to squander that kind of asset.
|
On November 01 2017 13:25 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2017 13:16 NeoIllusions wrote:On November 01 2017 13:02 xDaunt wrote:Looks like the whole Russia/Trump collusion narrative went on life support today: Top lawyers from Facebook and Twitter said Tuesday that Russian-linked posts and advertisements placed on the social networks after Election Day sought to sow doubt about President Donald Trump's victory.
Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch told a Senate Judiciary panel that content generated by a Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency after Nov. 8 centered on “fomenting discord about the validity of [Trump’s] election.” That's a change from Russia's pre-election activity, which was largely centered on trying to denigrate Hillary Clinton, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in a January report.
“During the election, they were trying to create discord between Americans, most of it directed against Clinton. After the election you saw Russian-tied groups and organizations trying to undermine President Trump’s legitimacy. Is that what you saw on Facebook?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked at the hearing.
Stretch and his Twitter counterpart, Sean Edgett, called that an "accurate" statement.
The disclosure opened a new wrinkle in the continuing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, which has increasingly focused on the role of the biggest internet companies. Tuesday's hearing marks the first time representatives of Facebook, Google and Twitter have testified publicly about what they've learned about Kremlin meddling on their platforms in the presidential campaign. The companies face additional lawmaker scrutiny Wednesday with back-to-back hearings by the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
James Lewis, an international cyber policy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the revelation about Russian anti-Trump activity on social media post-election fits with typical Kremlin information-warfare efforts.
“Their goal is to create confusion and dissent. The target is the U.S. and NATO, not any particular candidate. They just want chaos," Lewis said. "It went from being a grudge match against Clinton to what they thought was a priceless opportunity to inflict harm." Source. I’m reading the article and I don’t see why you’re jumping to the conclusion that Russia/Trump collusion is out the window. Russia can determine Trump winning the election is better for them than Clinton winning, then turn around and undermine the Trump administration months later. It’s not as though if Russia helped Trump win the presidency, they’re locked into helping Trump for the next four years. Russia can do what it can to influence the US election to nudge it towards the candidate they prefer, then continue to destabilize the US thru any means necessary. It's a lot harder to accept the premise that Trump is someone that the Russians wanted in office because they knew that he'd be friendly to them and would give them stuff if the Russians are turning around sabotaging him after the election. Logically, you wouldn't expect them to squander that kind of asset.
You're assuming Russians wanted Trump in office because he's pro Russia, as opposed to wanting him because he's a complete tool.
|
On November 01 2017 13:17 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2017 13:02 xDaunt wrote:Looks like the whole Russia/Trump collusion narrative went on life support today: Top lawyers from Facebook and Twitter said Tuesday that Russian-linked posts and advertisements placed on the social networks after Election Day sought to sow doubt about President Donald Trump's victory.
Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch told a Senate Judiciary panel that content generated by a Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency after Nov. 8 centered on “fomenting discord about the validity of [Trump’s] election.” That's a change from Russia's pre-election activity, which was largely centered on trying to denigrate Hillary Clinton, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in a January report.
“During the election, they were trying to create discord between Americans, most of it directed against Clinton. After the election you saw Russian-tied groups and organizations trying to undermine President Trump’s legitimacy. Is that what you saw on Facebook?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked at the hearing.
Stretch and his Twitter counterpart, Sean Edgett, called that an "accurate" statement.
The disclosure opened a new wrinkle in the continuing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, which has increasingly focused on the role of the biggest internet companies. Tuesday's hearing marks the first time representatives of Facebook, Google and Twitter have testified publicly about what they've learned about Kremlin meddling on their platforms in the presidential campaign. The companies face additional lawmaker scrutiny Wednesday with back-to-back hearings by the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
James Lewis, an international cyber policy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the revelation about Russian anti-Trump activity on social media post-election fits with typical Kremlin information-warfare efforts.
“Their goal is to create confusion and dissent. The target is the U.S. and NATO, not any particular candidate. They just want chaos," Lewis said. "It went from being a grudge match against Clinton to what they thought was a priceless opportunity to inflict harm." Source. Efforts that paled in comparison to the media establishments adopted narrative.
I think that it would be more fun to point out that the entire left wing establishment has been a tool of the Russians. Some heads might actually explode from the cognitive dissonance.
|
On November 01 2017 13:25 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2017 13:16 NeoIllusions wrote:On November 01 2017 13:02 xDaunt wrote:Looks like the whole Russia/Trump collusion narrative went on life support today: Top lawyers from Facebook and Twitter said Tuesday that Russian-linked posts and advertisements placed on the social networks after Election Day sought to sow doubt about President Donald Trump's victory.
Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch told a Senate Judiciary panel that content generated by a Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency after Nov. 8 centered on “fomenting discord about the validity of [Trump’s] election.” That's a change from Russia's pre-election activity, which was largely centered on trying to denigrate Hillary Clinton, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in a January report.
“During the election, they were trying to create discord between Americans, most of it directed against Clinton. After the election you saw Russian-tied groups and organizations trying to undermine President Trump’s legitimacy. Is that what you saw on Facebook?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked at the hearing.
Stretch and his Twitter counterpart, Sean Edgett, called that an "accurate" statement.
The disclosure opened a new wrinkle in the continuing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, which has increasingly focused on the role of the biggest internet companies. Tuesday's hearing marks the first time representatives of Facebook, Google and Twitter have testified publicly about what they've learned about Kremlin meddling on their platforms in the presidential campaign. The companies face additional lawmaker scrutiny Wednesday with back-to-back hearings by the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
James Lewis, an international cyber policy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the revelation about Russian anti-Trump activity on social media post-election fits with typical Kremlin information-warfare efforts.
“Their goal is to create confusion and dissent. The target is the U.S. and NATO, not any particular candidate. They just want chaos," Lewis said. "It went from being a grudge match against Clinton to what they thought was a priceless opportunity to inflict harm." Source. I’m reading the article and I don’t see why you’re jumping to the conclusion that Russia/Trump collusion is out the window. Russia can determine Trump winning the election is better for them than Clinton winning, then turn around and undermine the Trump administration months later. It’s not as though if Russia helped Trump win the presidency, they’re locked into helping Trump for the next four years. Russia can do what it can to influence the US election to nudge it towards the candidate they prefer, then continue to destabilize the US thru any means necessary. It's a lot harder to accept the premise that Trump is someone that the Russians wanted in office because they knew that he'd be friendly to them and would give them stuff if the Russians are turning around and sabotaging him after the election. Logically, you wouldn't expect them to squander that kind of asset.
Why is that a hard premise to accept when the alternative to a President Trump is Clinton, who is fiercely anti-Russia?
I don’t think Russia wanted him as an asset so much that they wouldn’t want someone as antagonistic as Clinton as president.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
