5 ms·

Have you not been watching? They literally manufactured a Russia collusion story and then spent 4 years beating Trump over the head with it. Then they orchestra

by jtdev 6y ago

Have you not been watching? They literally manufactured a Russia collusion story and then spent 4 years beating Trump over the head with it. Then they orchestrated a hijacking of the Democratic primary to prevent Bernie from being on the ticket. Trump is a despicable human, to a degree only surpassed by the folks running and representing American media.

homero 6y ago
I see russian bots commenting on Facebook all day every day for the last 4 years. Today one glitched and commented on a completely unrelated post under the name "hispanics for Trump" on a post for a car.
- jtdev 6y ago
  Russian bots... the lefts favorite cop out argument of 2020. Please provide an example, otherwise your claims are nothing but rhetoric.
  - sizt 6y ago
    This is HNN.
  - homero 6y ago
    It's everywhere online https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/08/twitter-bots-use-likes-rts-for-intimidation/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/08/twitter-bots-use-likes-r...
  - tunesmith 6y ago
    You seriously believe it hasn't happened?
  - artofgo 6y ago
    Dude, there actually are Twitter bots every where. I see multiple accounts posting the same exact tweet over and over. You look at their profile and its a obvious its manufactured history. Have you even tried looking?
- asxd 6y ago
  Krebs has an article with evidence on this phenomena as well: https://krebsonsecurity.com/tag/twitter-bots/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/tag/twitter-bots/ Edit: Specifically https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/08/twitter-bots-use-likes-rts-for-intimidation/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/08/twitter-bots-use-likes-r...
- objektif 6y ago
  So that is your Russiagate story? That is the collision we spent 4 years talking about?
jtdev 6y ago
Downvotes with zero response... the left is intellectually bankrupt.
zarkov99 6y ago
Hear, hear. Do not forget the blackout on the Hunter Biden laptop story and the irresponsible amplification of any police shootings where a black man was a victim, leading to unrest, fanning of racial hatred and wantom destruction all over the country. It is hard to understate how much harm they have inflicted on the country.
- srj 6y ago
  Trotting out conspiracy theories and insinuations is rightfully not the business of mainstream news. And racial injustice is not something to sweep under the rug.
  - zarkov99 6y ago
    That is rich after 4 years of non-stop Russia colusion coverage. As to racial injustice, no one is arguing it should be swet under the rug, but neither should cherry-picked examples of bad interactions between police and black people be used to build a narrative that justifies looting, murder of police officers and calls to defund the force. The US is a large, violent country, with guns everywhere. You can build a narrative about anything if you simply select, out of the millions of encounters betwen citizens and the police, the ones that go bad and victimize one particular demographic. And that is exactly what the media does. For good measure they also distort the facts to support the narrative. Relentlessly, blatantly, shamelessly. The consequences are dire: a divided country, racial hatred, violence. This isn't going to stop just because Trump is out of office. Its too profitable.
latencyloser 6y ago
You're getting down-voted without anyone else actually providing a rebuttal. But what you're saying matches, roughly, my understanding of what happened. Perhaps their issue is with the way it is phrased, sounding sort of like rhetoric. So I'll add because I'm more or less with you: I'm sincerely confused how we can spend years alleging Russian interference and now that on a really close election, with contention over the way the ballots were counted, it's being called by the media without presenting doubt despite polling being pretty off? The inconsistency is concerning, in my opinion. What am I not understanding? If I'd introduced a new system in at work (my understanding is the mass mail-in ballots are new at this scale, but please correct me if I'm wrong) and was testing it and it gave a weird result, I'd at least double check it.
- csnover 6y ago
  The downvoting could also be because I asked a very basic question and they responded to it with a non sequitur that did not even attempt to answer the question.
- shadowfiend 6y ago
  There is no contention over how the ballots were counted. There are allegations which have been repeatedly thrown out or debunked by judges and press across the country, including those friendly to the parties making said allegations. So I’d say that’s what you’re not understanding, though I’m puzzled as to how you could have missed it if you spent any time looking into it at all, since every reputable source has reported the rebuttals right alongside the allegations. There is no question in this election. The margins are not close. They are not surprising. They were not even terribly unexpected. The only party alleging any of those things is the party that has repeatedly eschewed facts for 4 years and longer. The one that has repeatedly pushed useless investigations that they themselves conclude are baseless. And in fact it’s not even the whole party, it’s mostly the parts of the party working directly for the loser. Does that help clarify your confusion?
  - latencyloser 6y ago
    Yes, that helps, thank you. I'd read of some officials denying it, but the information around judges is new to me and I will explore it further. Who do you consider to be reputable sources? I will include them in my reading. I'm also interested in why it was necessary to refer to the president as a "loser." I thought your point stood without it and all that did was clue me in on the possibility of bias in the rest of the response. Staunch supporters would likely discard your reasoning entirely because of it.
anoonmoose 6y ago
"if it is what you say it is, i love it" is a real thing they admitted to and all the proof you need that the story is in no way "manufactured"
giulianob 6y ago
Manufactured? you should really read the Mueller report and see that there was plenty of wrongdoing. Saying it was manufactured is pretending like all of the evidence, meetings, etc... didn't happen.
tunesmith 6y ago
Comments like these reinforce my conviction that comment threads like these are ultimately useless. I believe that an exchange of views is possible in a way that will be illuminating to both "sides", but it just isn't possible in a forum like this. "They literally manufactured a Russia collusion story" is an assertion presented as fact. It obviously has a very deep argument behind it that has convinced the author. But given the context of the discussion, it's impossible for the author to explain why he thinks that is true, in a way for a counterpart to verify and explore. Similarly, those on the other side who believe the Russia collusion isn't a "manufactured story" also have very deep arguments that can't be included here. It's the same with "orchestrating a hijacking of the Democratic primary". It's an assertion that comes across as completely ridiculous to people who don't believe it, based off of counter arguments that are also very deep having to do with the intricacies of how the primaries work. And so then of course the conclusion is that Trump is bad but the media is worse, based off of those previous two assertions being true. And the discussion goes absolutely nowhere. I am literally highly interested in the thinking behind why the Russia collusion story is manufactured, and how the Democratic primary is hijacked. Yes because I believe those conclusions are false, but I want to respectfully explore where in the argument I think it falls down. But to do it would take a long exchange, probably with time in between to research, that just isn't supported by forums like this.

by jtdev 6y ago

homero 6y ago

I see russian bots commenting on Facebook all day every day for the last 4 years. Today one glitched and commented on a completely unrelated post under the name "hispanics for Trump" on a post for a car.

jtdev 6y ago
Russian bots... the lefts favorite cop out argument of 2020. Please provide an example, otherwise your claims are nothing but rhetoric.
- sizt 6y ago
  This is HNN.
- homero 6y ago
  It's everywhere online https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/08/twitter-bots-use-likes-rts-for-intimidation/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/08/twitter-bots-use-likes-r...
- tunesmith 6y ago
  You seriously believe it hasn't happened?
- artofgo 6y ago
  Dude, there actually are Twitter bots every where. I see multiple accounts posting the same exact tweet over and over. You look at their profile and its a obvious its manufactured history. Have you even tried looking?
asxd 6y ago
Krebs has an article with evidence on this phenomena as well: https://krebsonsecurity.com/tag/twitter-bots/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/tag/twitter-bots/ Edit: Specifically https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/08/twitter-bots-use-likes-rts-for-intimidation/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/08/twitter-bots-use-likes-r...
objektif 6y ago
So that is your Russiagate story? That is the collision we spent 4 years talking about?

jtdev 6y ago

Downvotes with zero response... the left is intellectually bankrupt.

zarkov99 6y ago

Hear, hear. Do not forget the blackout on the Hunter Biden laptop story and the irresponsible amplification of any police shootings where a black man was a victim, leading to unrest, fanning of racial hatred and wantom destruction all over the country. It is hard to understate how much harm they have inflicted on the country.

srj 6y ago
Trotting out conspiracy theories and insinuations is rightfully not the business of mainstream news. And racial injustice is not something to sweep under the rug.
- zarkov99 6y ago
  That is rich after 4 years of non-stop Russia colusion coverage. As to racial injustice, no one is arguing it should be swet under the rug, but neither should cherry-picked examples of bad interactions between police and black people be used to build a narrative that justifies looting, murder of police officers and calls to defund the force. The US is a large, violent country, with guns everywhere. You can build a narrative about anything if you simply select, out of the millions of encounters betwen citizens and the police, the ones that go bad and victimize one particular demographic. And that is exactly what the media does. For good measure they also distort the facts to support the narrative. Relentlessly, blatantly, shamelessly. The consequences are dire: a divided country, racial hatred, violence. This isn't going to stop just because Trump is out of office. Its too profitable.

latencyloser 6y ago

You're getting down-voted without anyone else actually providing a rebuttal. But what you're saying matches, roughly, my understanding of what happened. Perhaps their issue is with the way it is phrased, sounding sort of like rhetoric. So I'll add because I'm more or less with you: I'm sincerely confused how we can spend years alleging Russian interference and now that on a really close election, with contention over the way the ballots were counted, it's being called by the media without presenting doubt despite polling being pretty off? The inconsistency is concerning, in my opinion. What am I not understanding? If I'd introduced a new system in at work (my understanding is the mass mail-in ballots are new at this scale, but please correct me if I'm wrong) and was testing it and it gave a weird result, I'd at least double check it.

csnover 6y ago
The downvoting could also be because I asked a very basic question and they responded to it with a non sequitur that did not even attempt to answer the question.
shadowfiend 6y ago
There is no contention over how the ballots were counted. There are allegations which have been repeatedly thrown out or debunked by judges and press across the country, including those friendly to the parties making said allegations. So I’d say that’s what you’re not understanding, though I’m puzzled as to how you could have missed it if you spent any time looking into it at all, since every reputable source has reported the rebuttals right alongside the allegations. There is no question in this election. The margins are not close. They are not surprising. They were not even terribly unexpected. The only party alleging any of those things is the party that has repeatedly eschewed facts for 4 years and longer. The one that has repeatedly pushed useless investigations that they themselves conclude are baseless. And in fact it’s not even the whole party, it’s mostly the parts of the party working directly for the loser. Does that help clarify your confusion?
- latencyloser 6y ago
  Yes, that helps, thank you. I'd read of some officials denying it, but the information around judges is new to me and I will explore it further. Who do you consider to be reputable sources? I will include them in my reading. I'm also interested in why it was necessary to refer to the president as a "loser." I thought your point stood without it and all that did was clue me in on the possibility of bias in the rest of the response. Staunch supporters would likely discard your reasoning entirely because of it.

anoonmoose 6y ago

"if it is what you say it is, i love it" is a real thing they admitted to and all the proof you need that the story is in no way "manufactured"

giulianob 6y ago

Manufactured? you should really read the Mueller report and see that there was plenty of wrongdoing. Saying it was manufactured is pretending like all of the evidence, meetings, etc... didn't happen.

tunesmith 6y ago

Comments like these reinforce my conviction that comment threads like these are ultimately useless. I believe that an exchange of views is possible in a way that will be illuminating to both "sides", but it just isn't possible in a forum like this. "They literally manufactured a Russia collusion story" is an assertion presented as fact. It obviously has a very deep argument behind it that has convinced the author. But given the context of the discussion, it's impossible for the author to explain why he thinks that is true, in a way for a counterpart to verify and explore. Similarly, those on the other side who believe the Russia collusion isn't a "manufactured story" also have very deep arguments that can't be included here. It's the same with "orchestrating a hijacking of the Democratic primary". It's an assertion that comes across as completely ridiculous to people who don't believe it, based off of counter arguments that are also very deep having to do with the intricacies of how the primaries work. And so then of course the conclusion is that Trump is bad but the media is worse, based off of those previous two assertions being true. And the discussion goes absolutely nowhere. I am literally highly interested in the thinking behind why the Russia collusion story is manufactured, and how the Democratic primary is hijacked. Yes because I believe those conclusions are false, but I want to respectfully explore where in the argument I think it falls down. But to do it would take a long exchange, probably with time in between to research, that just isn't supported by forums like this.