3 ms·

OK, well I was choosing one of you "movie plot" cases to show you that the CIA does not care if it runs movie plot programmes. The mechanism of anti-trump coor

OK, well I was choosing one of you "movie plot" cases to show you that the CIA does not care if it runs movie plot programmes. The mechanism of anti-trump coordination has yet really to be briefed out, and wikiepedia will be dragged kicking and screaming before there's an article on it. Give it a decade, perhaps. For now, if you want examples here's the atlantic council (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Council https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Council) -- training journalists to treat emerging rightwing politics as disinformation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSAz0agYEeI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSAz0agYEeI

insane_dreamer 2y ago
A lot of rightwing stuff that circulates is disinformation -- there are plenty of examples of it. Trump is an inveterate liar about almost everything (this is easily fact-checked), and his followers have adopted the same strategy (lies are powerful because they are usually more shocking and travel faster than a boring fact-check). Not to say that other politicians don't lie or distort the truth, but Trump has taken this to a whole other level.
- mjburgess 2y ago
  The issue isn't whether that's true or not (personally, I think you're 80-90% correct). If private citizens, or organisations, want to get together and develop political counter-narratives that's fine -- entirely within the constitution, and always a good idea. The issue here is the top-down astroturfing from state-sponsored orgs whose boards are the last x heads of the CIA/etc. At the moment there is no strong firewall between private polticial organisation, and state power, within the USA. You may think that's fine if its being used against trump, but it isnt. Not least, since the example the AC gave in that video was trump tweeting "witch hunt" about the russia investigation -- calling this disinformation. Now, who was right? Trump. There was no Trump-Russia conspiracy, it was a witch hunt. The only thing the muller report found was trump obstructed the investigation, it completely exonerated any supposed connections to russia. Then you might ask: where did all these intelligence dossiers come from? And why is the atlantic council training journalists to label trumps poltical speech about this investigation as disinformation? (HINT: to enable its censorship etc.)
  - insane_dreamer 2y ago
    Sure, it turns out there was no big Trump/Russia conspiracy. But there were a lot of signs of Russian interference in the elections that was certain worth an investigation -- which did its job and then submitted its report, like lots of other special investigations. When you think about it, it's much more of an important topic to investigate than whether Clinton got a blow job in the Oval Office. So I disagree that it was a "witch hunt" and therefore agree that Trump's labeling it as such was disinformation. Basically 90% (pulled that number out of the hat, but feels pretty close) of what Trump said while in office was incorrect, disinformation, or straight out lies. I mean, he's so far outside the normal distribution that there's no other president to compare him with. So yeah, I'd be training journalists to label Trump's speech as disinformation too.
  - MoneyMeMoneyNow 2y ago
    >The only thing the muller report found was trump obstructed the investigation, it completely exonerated any supposed connections to russia. It did not exonerate him, quite explicitly. [1] The report found a lot of evidence of trump team making contact with Russians. You say yourself that the investigation was obstructed. There was also this indictment on co-ordinated Russian funded interference in NA pundit/social media space. [2] Not to mention similar groups (I'm not sure about the status of the investigation in [2] at this point) have already been dismissed [3]. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49100778 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49100778 [2] https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/two-rt-employees-indicted-covertly-funding-and-directing-us-company-published-thousands https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/two-rt-employees-ind... [3] https://www.npr.org/2025/02/11/nx-s1-5293521/foreign-influence-elections-cisa-trump https://www.npr.org/2025/02/11/nx-s1-5293521/foreign-influen...
  - ModernMech 2y ago
    > Trump. There was no Trump-Russia conspiracy, it was a witch hunt. We know today that the 2016 Trump Campaign: - Had over 100 meetings with Russian officials, lied and said they had 0 - Amplified information hacked by Russia, implored for more publicly - Met with Russian spy at Trump's home to discuss relaxed relations in return for dirt on Clinton, later lied about the existence of that meeting - Shared internal campaign polling data with a Russian intel officer. These facts are not in dispute by anyone, and are presented in the Mueller Report, and the Senate Intel Committee Report on Russian Active Measures. From Wikipedia: The Senate Intelligence Committee assessed that Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort's "high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services" was a "grave counterintelligence threat".[50] The foremost individual was Manafort's employee Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian.[50] The committee identified Kilimnik as a "Russian intelligence officer"; describing that Manafort and Kilimnik had a "close and lasting relationship" even through the 2016 election.[53] Manafort repeatedly tried to "secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik", including "sensitive internal polling data or Campaign strategy".[53] I don't know about you, but that sounds like collusion to me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_report_on_Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_... https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/publications/report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/publications/report-sele...

insane_dreamer 2y ago

A lot of rightwing stuff that circulates is disinformation -- there are plenty of examples of it. Trump is an inveterate liar about almost everything (this is easily fact-checked), and his followers have adopted the same strategy (lies are powerful because they are usually more shocking and travel faster than a boring fact-check). Not to say that other politicians don't lie or distort the truth, but Trump has taken this to a whole other level.

mjburgess 2y ago
The issue isn't whether that's true or not (personally, I think you're 80-90% correct). If private citizens, or organisations, want to get together and develop political counter-narratives that's fine -- entirely within the constitution, and always a good idea. The issue here is the top-down astroturfing from state-sponsored orgs whose boards are the last x heads of the CIA/etc. At the moment there is no strong firewall between private polticial organisation, and state power, within the USA. You may think that's fine if its being used against trump, but it isnt. Not least, since the example the AC gave in that video was trump tweeting "witch hunt" about the russia investigation -- calling this disinformation. Now, who was right? Trump. There was no Trump-Russia conspiracy, it was a witch hunt. The only thing the muller report found was trump obstructed the investigation, it completely exonerated any supposed connections to russia. Then you might ask: where did all these intelligence dossiers come from? And why is the atlantic council training journalists to label trumps poltical speech about this investigation as disinformation? (HINT: to enable its censorship etc.)
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  Sure, it turns out there was no big Trump/Russia conspiracy. But there were a lot of signs of Russian interference in the elections that was certain worth an investigation -- which did its job and then submitted its report, like lots of other special investigations. When you think about it, it's much more of an important topic to investigate than whether Clinton got a blow job in the Oval Office. So I disagree that it was a "witch hunt" and therefore agree that Trump's labeling it as such was disinformation. Basically 90% (pulled that number out of the hat, but feels pretty close) of what Trump said while in office was incorrect, disinformation, or straight out lies. I mean, he's so far outside the normal distribution that there's no other president to compare him with. So yeah, I'd be training journalists to label Trump's speech as disinformation too.
- MoneyMeMoneyNow 2y ago
  >The only thing the muller report found was trump obstructed the investigation, it completely exonerated any supposed connections to russia. It did not exonerate him, quite explicitly. [1] The report found a lot of evidence of trump team making contact with Russians. You say yourself that the investigation was obstructed. There was also this indictment on co-ordinated Russian funded interference in NA pundit/social media space. [2] Not to mention similar groups (I'm not sure about the status of the investigation in [2] at this point) have already been dismissed [3]. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49100778 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49100778 [2] https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/two-rt-employees-indicted-covertly-funding-and-directing-us-company-published-thousands https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/two-rt-employees-ind... [3] https://www.npr.org/2025/02/11/nx-s1-5293521/foreign-influence-elections-cisa-trump https://www.npr.org/2025/02/11/nx-s1-5293521/foreign-influen...
- ModernMech 2y ago
  > Trump. There was no Trump-Russia conspiracy, it was a witch hunt. We know today that the 2016 Trump Campaign: - Had over 100 meetings with Russian officials, lied and said they had 0 - Amplified information hacked by Russia, implored for more publicly - Met with Russian spy at Trump's home to discuss relaxed relations in return for dirt on Clinton, later lied about the existence of that meeting - Shared internal campaign polling data with a Russian intel officer. These facts are not in dispute by anyone, and are presented in the Mueller Report, and the Senate Intel Committee Report on Russian Active Measures. From Wikipedia: The Senate Intelligence Committee assessed that Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort's "high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services" was a "grave counterintelligence threat".[50] The foremost individual was Manafort's employee Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian.[50] The committee identified Kilimnik as a "Russian intelligence officer"; describing that Manafort and Kilimnik had a "close and lasting relationship" even through the 2016 election.[53] Manafort repeatedly tried to "secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik", including "sensitive internal polling data or Campaign strategy".[53] I don't know about you, but that sounds like collusion to me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_report_on_Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_... https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/publications/report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/publications/report-sele...