8 ms·

It's funny how $100k of pro-Trump facebook ads by a foreign entity is a crime against humanity. But like Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other co

It's funny how $100k of pro-Trump facebook ads by a foreign entity is a crime against humanity. But like Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other countries [0] or the US getting involved in god knows how many other elections is like totally... meh. [0] http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-us-intervention-foreign-elections-20161213-story.html http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-us-intervention-foreign-...

justboxing 9y ago
> But like Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other countries The source you quoted shows nothing about 'Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other countries'. In fact it exonerates him of your charges. The most recent US interference in a foreign election (quoted in your source) was in 2000, when Dubya was President. You could arguable attribute that to Bill Clinton, since the groundwork would have to have been laid earlier than 2000. > In 2000, the U.S. spent millions of dollars in aid for political parties, campaign costs and independent media. Funding and broadcast equipment provided to the media arms of the opposition were a decisive factor in electing opposition candidate Vojislav Kostunica as Yugoslav president, according to Levin. “If it wouldn’t have been for overt intervention … Milosevic would have been very likely to have won another term,” he said. Obama would come to power a full 2 terms later.
- fortythirteen 9y ago
  Wikileaks showed CIA interference in the 2012 French elections[0] [0] - https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012/ https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012/
- bryananderson 9y ago
  Not that I am one to defend George W. Bush, but he was not President until January 2001. Whatever else he is guilty of (spoiler: a lot), he is entirely innocent of this, as it happened during the Clinton presidency.
- spaceflunky 9y ago
  Here are six examples of Obama outwardly interfering in foreign elections. https://spectator.org/obamas-meddling-in-foreign-elections-six-examples/ https://spectator.org/obamas-meddling-in-foreign-elections-s...
  - nickparker 9y ago
    Man, that website is insane. Some dude's diary is front page news there: https://spectator.org/as-im-being-audited/ https://spectator.org/as-im-being-audited/
  - tim333 9y ago
    Politifact debunks example #1. Can't be bothered to research the others but I'm skeptical http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/aug/20/jerome-corsi/obama-did-not-take-sides-in-kenya/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/aug/...
    - spaceflunky 9y ago
      Yeah because Politifact is a totally unbiased trustworthy source....
      - cholantesh 9y ago
        All sources have some level of bias. can you demonstrate that Politifact's bias compromises them in this context?
    - dogma1138 9y ago
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/07/12/ngo-connected-to-obamas-2008-campaign-used-u-s-tax-dollars-trying-to-oust-netanyahu/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/07/1... http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/12/obama-admin-sent-taxpayer-money-oust-netanyahu/ http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/12/obama-admin-se...
- owebmaster 9y ago
  > The most recent US interference in a foreign election (quoted in your source) was in 2000 You are been naive. The coup in Brazil (2016) was deliberately discussed, supported and planned in events of american "NGOs" in Brazil. Also, a lot of Syrian rebel's like groups were created or supported by american money. Direct interference is one thing, but if you have a machine that mess with the elections of every country in the world it is still a state interference in another one's affair. EDIT: and also direct State interference: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/09/nsa-spying-brazil-oil-petrobras https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/09/nsa-spying-bra... EDIT 2: and support of the media with ludicrous arguments. The corruption version of the WMD: https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2013/09/09/of-course-the-nsa-should-be-spying-on-petrobras/#50f497e3174b https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2013/09/09/of...
Naritai 9y ago
"Whataboutism is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  Yeah, but what's the name of the epistemic fallacy you commit when you single out one instance of a common phenomenon and subject it to extra scrutiny?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - golemotron 9y ago
    That fallacy is called 'journalism.'
  - emsy 9y ago
    Also, as someone who criticized the Obama administration while it was still in charge, it's extra annoying. Because suddenly, every little government action is sharply judged. And when you point out that no one cared while Obama was in charge, you get accused of whataboutery.
    - Naritai 9y ago
      What is your goal for pointing out that nobody cared when Obama was in charge? Showing that you were opposed to it before being opposed to it was cool? If you are objectively opposed to something, and now suddenly everybody else doesn't like it either, go ahead and lock in those gains. Say "you know what, you're right, we should get rid of <insert power here>".
- ta_donk_gt 9y ago
  Call it whatever you want, but you know you are only distracting from the point of comments like these. That point is that you need to be consistent. If you have a problem with some behavior on the other side, then you also need to have a problem when the same behavior happens on your side. If you are ok with one, you must be ok with the other. If you have a problem with one, then you must have a problem with the other. If you want to crucify people on the other side for some behavior, then you must also be okay when that same crucification happens to members of your side. If you write off some behavior when it happens on your side, you must also be willing to write it off when it occurs on the other side. (Sorry to essentially say the same thing multiple times over, but hypocrisy is so engrained in our dna you need to forcefully call attention to it sometimes.)
kareemm 9y ago
> "like Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other countries" The US has a history of campaigning (put politely) or interfering (more accurately) in foreign elections[1]. It's not really a partisan issue. I suspect having other countries interfere in the US election, the bastion of democracy in the western world, has happened before. Just never so visibly. 1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_electoral_intervention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_electoral_intervention
jedmeyers 9y ago
How do you know those were pro-Trump ads? I am just curious about the sources.
- spaceflunky 9y ago
  Well I guess I don't... they could be just plain anti-Hillary/bernie/dems ads. But the point is that the ads supposedly helped Trump.
0xfeba 9y ago
Apples, oranges. Also, red herring. Also, WhatAboutism.
fortythirteen 9y ago
> $100k of pro-Trump facebook ads No details as to the content of the ads have been revealed. One would think that if they were pro-Trump they would have mentioned that in the release.
drzaiusapelord 9y ago
Whataboutism doesn't change anything but derail the conversation, which I imagine is your intention. If I beat up a murderer, I still should be arrested for assault and battery.

justboxing 9y ago

> But like Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other countries The source you quoted shows nothing about 'Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other countries'. In fact it exonerates him of your charges. The most recent US interference in a foreign election (quoted in your source) was in 2000, when Dubya was President. You could arguable attribute that to Bill Clinton, since the groundwork would have to have been laid earlier than 2000. > In 2000, the U.S. spent millions of dollars in aid for political parties, campaign costs and independent media. Funding and broadcast equipment provided to the media arms of the opposition were a decisive factor in electing opposition candidate Vojislav Kostunica as Yugoslav president, according to Levin. “If it wouldn’t have been for overt intervention … Milosevic would have been very likely to have won another term,” he said. Obama would come to power a full 2 terms later.

fortythirteen 9y ago
Wikileaks showed CIA interference in the 2012 French elections[0] [0] - https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012/ https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012/
bryananderson 9y ago
Not that I am one to defend George W. Bush, but he was not President until January 2001. Whatever else he is guilty of (spoiler: a lot), he is entirely innocent of this, as it happened during the Clinton presidency.
spaceflunky 9y ago
Here are six examples of Obama outwardly interfering in foreign elections. https://spectator.org/obamas-meddling-in-foreign-elections-six-examples/ https://spectator.org/obamas-meddling-in-foreign-elections-s...
- nickparker 9y ago
  Man, that website is insane. Some dude's diary is front page news there: https://spectator.org/as-im-being-audited/ https://spectator.org/as-im-being-audited/
- tim333 9y ago
  Politifact debunks example #1. Can't be bothered to research the others but I'm skeptical http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/aug/20/jerome-corsi/obama-did-not-take-sides-in-kenya/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/aug/...
  - spaceflunky 9y ago
    Yeah because Politifact is a totally unbiased trustworthy source....
    - cholantesh 9y ago
      All sources have some level of bias. can you demonstrate that Politifact's bias compromises them in this context?
  - dogma1138 9y ago
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/07/12/ngo-connected-to-obamas-2008-campaign-used-u-s-tax-dollars-trying-to-oust-netanyahu/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/07/1... http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/12/obama-admin-sent-taxpayer-money-oust-netanyahu/ http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/12/obama-admin-se...
owebmaster 9y ago
> The most recent US interference in a foreign election (quoted in your source) was in 2000 You are been naive. The coup in Brazil (2016) was deliberately discussed, supported and planned in events of american "NGOs" in Brazil. Also, a lot of Syrian rebel's like groups were created or supported by american money. Direct interference is one thing, but if you have a machine that mess with the elections of every country in the world it is still a state interference in another one's affair. EDIT: and also direct State interference: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/09/nsa-spying-brazil-oil-petrobras https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/09/nsa-spying-bra... EDIT 2: and support of the media with ludicrous arguments. The corruption version of the WMD: https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2013/09/09/of-course-the-nsa-should-be-spying-on-petrobras/#50f497e3174b https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2013/09/09/of...

Naritai 9y ago

"Whataboutism is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

TeMPOraL 9y ago
Yeah, but what's the name of the epistemic fallacy you commit when you single out one instance of a common phenomenon and subject it to extra scrutiny?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- golemotron 9y ago
  That fallacy is called 'journalism.'
- emsy 9y ago
  Also, as someone who criticized the Obama administration while it was still in charge, it's extra annoying. Because suddenly, every little government action is sharply judged. And when you point out that no one cared while Obama was in charge, you get accused of whataboutery.
  - Naritai 9y ago
    What is your goal for pointing out that nobody cared when Obama was in charge? Showing that you were opposed to it before being opposed to it was cool? If you are objectively opposed to something, and now suddenly everybody else doesn't like it either, go ahead and lock in those gains. Say "you know what, you're right, we should get rid of <insert power here>".
ta_donk_gt 9y ago
Call it whatever you want, but you know you are only distracting from the point of comments like these. That point is that you need to be consistent. If you have a problem with some behavior on the other side, then you also need to have a problem when the same behavior happens on your side. If you are ok with one, you must be ok with the other. If you have a problem with one, then you must have a problem with the other. If you want to crucify people on the other side for some behavior, then you must also be okay when that same crucification happens to members of your side. If you write off some behavior when it happens on your side, you must also be willing to write it off when it occurs on the other side. (Sorry to essentially say the same thing multiple times over, but hypocrisy is so engrained in our dna you need to forcefully call attention to it sometimes.)

kareemm 9y ago

> "like Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other countries" The US has a history of campaigning (put politely) or interfering (more accurately) in foreign elections[1]. It's not really a partisan issue. I suspect having other countries interfere in the US election, the bastion of democracy in the western world, has happened before. Just never so visibly. 1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_electoral_intervention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_electoral_intervention

jedmeyers 9y ago

How do you know those were pro-Trump ads? I am just curious about the sources.

spaceflunky 9y ago
Well I guess I don't... they could be just plain anti-Hillary/bernie/dems ads. But the point is that the ads supposedly helped Trump.

0xfeba 9y ago

Apples, oranges. Also, red herring. Also, WhatAboutism.

fortythirteen 9y ago

> $100k of pro-Trump facebook ads No details as to the content of the ads have been revealed. One would think that if they were pro-Trump they would have mentioned that in the release.

drzaiusapelord 9y ago

Whataboutism doesn't change anything but derail the conversation, which I imagine is your intention. If I beat up a murderer, I still should be arrested for assault and battery.