Mueller Investigation pt5

Status
Not open for further replies.
JoeMorgue said:
Honestly the idea the Russians just launched a massive across the board disinformation campaign and Trump won because his supporters fell for it more is not... completely insane.
Click to expand...
Especially since Trump won by only, what was it, a few tens of thousands of votes across four key states? That is a ridiculously tiny margin, where only a tiny bit of extra weight might be enough to tip the scales.
 
acbytesla said:
Yes, it was recorded. Unless of course you doubt the intelligence agencies and the FBI.
Click to expand...
Of course I doubt the intelligence agencies and the FBI. Not only is it a basic skeptical principle, it's also the intelligence services and the FBI.

But we're not even there yet. Right now I'm just asking you for the recorded "fact", in plain language.

It's super easy to project a high degree of confidence, with pronouncements like "it's a fact that they bought a ticket". But such pronouncements are good for projecting confidence, and not much else. They're rhetorical tools, not real information. I'm asking you for the thing itself: The fact that inspired your confident pronouncement.
 
theprestige said:
My understanding is that the troll farm put out a broad spectrum of divisive stuff on a wide range of issues from a variety of positions.

Was it actually all pro Trump?
Click to expand...

Ahh, I missed this. More specifically, where it was specifically about the candidates, the direction was Anti-Hillary, in general, with virtually nothing that was pro-Hillary. Trump quickly became a definite favorite, though, on the Republican side of things, where Hillary wasn't really one of the choices, so anti-Hillary/pro-Trump fits pretty well as a summation of the general thrust. When it comes to the "broader picture"... for example, the very major focus (1063 out of 1100 youtube videos, among various other things) on trying to make blacks angry enough to just stay home and not vote as a protest would pretty clearly have an intended effect of lowering the vote count for Democrats, and thus is anti-Democrat and pro-GOP, but isn't officially counted as such because the focus is on largely on racial inequality and police brutality, not specifically any candidate or party. It served the dual purpose of promoting divisions and undermining Hillary, in other words.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Yes, it was recorded. Unless of course you doubt the intelligence agencies and the FBI.
Click to expand...

Intelligence and evidence gathered by the "deep state" doesn't count, unless it is about a Democrat. Do you not know the rules?

Also, Trump isn't guilty, he hasn't been charged of conspiracy or any other crimes he's done as president. Remember, Al Capone wasn't guilty either, they only got him on tax evasion because of the "deep state" too.........
 
Bogative said:
1-800-TELL-FBI


That's the number you are looking for to let the FBI know that 40 of their agents, 19 prosecutors and the former head of their bureau missed the key information that you have.

No need to thank me, glad I can help.
Click to expand...

You know they missed this how?
 
smartcooky said:
I'm about an hour in.

It has been fascinating to listen to people who actually know what they are talking about with regard to Russia and Putin, and the dirty business tactics they employ, speak an length and in some detail about it.

It has also been disconcerting to see that the Republican side just do not appear to be much interested in this. Nunes' behaviour was reprhesensible; he and his colleagues are clearly uncomfortable with the subject material...

I wonder why that is?
Click to expand...

I'll answer your rhetorical question, only because I know the Trump loyalists will ignore the point:

They aren't showing interest because they are Trump loyalists.
 
Aridas said:
Ahh, I missed this. More specifically, where it was specifically about the candidates, the direction was Anti-Hillary, in general, with virtually nothing that was pro-Hillary. Trump quickly became a definite favorite, though, on the Republican side of things, where Hillary wasn't really one of the choices, so anti-Hillary/pro-Trump fits pretty well as a summation of the general thrust. When it comes to the "broader picture"... for example, the focus on trying to make blacks angry enough to just stay home and not vote as a protest would pretty clearly have an intended effect of lowering the vote count for Democrats, and thus is anti-Democrat and pro-GOP, but isn't officially counted as such because the focus is on largely on racial inequality, not specifically any candidate or party. It served the dual purpose of promoting divisions and undermining Hillary, in other words.
Click to expand...


I'll post it once again so nobody "misses" it: Mueller Indictment - The "Russian Influence" Is A Commercial Marketing Scheme

If you plan to continue to make public statements or hold strong believes about the "troll factory", please study the article and its sources. What they did was trying to create "influencers" in different filter bubbles, with a rather tiny budget compared to the stuff Cambridge Analytica and associates did directly for Trump. Standard internet marketing stuff. In addition the IRA link to Putin is indirect at best.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Q.E.D.

You use the language of certainty, when the thing is not actually certain.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for whoever originally posted "express purpose" (don't remember and don't feel like looking it up at the moment) and know their intent, but I am certain that I and many others interpret it to mean "single-minded purpose" and is quite distinct from expressed purpose, which you continue to misinterpret it as. It does not and never did imply that the purpose was expressed.

And therefore I agree: QED indeed.

And it's quite pointless to continue this back and forth on the meaning of "express purpose". If you're not swayed by my position can we simply agree to disagree?
 
Childlike Empress said:
I'll post it once again so nobody "misses" it: Mueller Indictment - The "Russian Influence" Is A Commercial Marketing Scheme

If you plan to continue to make public statements or hold strong believes about the "troll factory", please study the article and its sources. What they did was trying to create "influencers" in different filter bubbles, with a rather tiny budget compared to the stuff Cambridge Analytica and associates did directly for Trump. Standard internet marketing stuff. In addition the IRA link to Putin is indirect at best.
Click to expand...

Moonofalabama? You realize no one takes you even slightly seriously when you post this drivel, right?
 
theprestige said:
Of course I doubt the intelligence agencies and the FBI. Not only is it a basic skeptical principle, it's also the intelligence services and the FBI.
Click to expand...

You can always doubt the source. Before anyone tries to provide evidence to convince you of the actions of the troll farm (and it won't be me, I'm in no position to do that) can you provide us with an example of a source you would trust to be reliable on this issue?
 
Childlike Empress said:
Standard fraudulent internet marketing stuff.
Click to expand...
ftfy.
In addition the IRA link to Putin is indirect at best.
Click to expand...
If it was "just a commercial marketing scheme" one has to wonder who paid them. If no one paid them, it wasn't "commercial".
If Putin didn't pay for it, who did? Trump or a Trump associate? That's potentially a bigger scandal than if Putin did it.
 
Earthborn said:
If it was "just a commercial marketing scheme" one has to wonder who paid them. If no one paid them, it wasn't "commercial".
If Putin didn't pay for it, who did? Trump or a Trump associate? That's potentially a bigger scandal than if Putin did it.
Click to expand...


Its owner is a rich man not least thanks to the fact that he once was "Putin's cook" (literally - not a code word for what your mind was just searching for), which is the only connection of this whole blown-up nonsense to Putin. He has more than enough playing money to try himself in internet marketing.
 
Cabbage said:
I can't speak for whoever originally posted "express purpose" (don't remember and don't feel like looking it up at the moment) and know their intent, but I am certain that I and many others interpret it to mean "single-minded purpose" and is quite distinct from expressed purpose, which you continue to misinterpret it as. It does not and never did imply that the purpose was expressed.

And therefore I agree: QED indeed.

And it's quite pointless to continue this back and forth on the meaning of "express purpose". If you're not swayed by my position can we simply agree to disagree?
Click to expand...

Express
1a : directly, firmly, and explicitly stated
//my express orders

b : exact, precise


2a : designed for or adapted to its purpose

b : of a particular sort : specific
//for that express purpose
So you're all right, and all wrong.
 
Cabbage said:
You can always doubt the source. Before anyone tries to provide evidence to convince you of the actions of the troll farm (and it won't be me, I'm in no position to do that) can you provide us with an example of a source you would trust to be reliable on this issue?
Click to expand...

He may not say it, but I suspect the sources to be Breitbart, Fox News and Trump's white house.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Its owner is a rich man not least thanks to the fact that he once was "Putin's cook" (literally - not a code word for what your mind was just searching for), which is the only connection of this whole blown-up nonsense to Putin. He has more than enough playing money to try himself in internet marketing.
Click to expand...

That reminds me: Trumpers are dancing in the streets over one particular sentence fragment Barr took out of context from the Mueller report, disingenuously dropping the beginning of the sentence, saying that they found no evidence of the Trump campaign conspiring with the "Russian government" in any "election interference activities." Barr (disingenuously again?) "summarizes" that as "Russians," but how about collusion with Russians who were acting in their own self-interest rather than the government, and/or schemes other than influencing the election, e.g. Trump Tower Moscow?

Can I assume you agree that we need to know what's actually in the report?
 
Last edited:
WilliamSeger said:
That reminds me: Trumpers are dancing in the streets over one particular sentence fragment Barr took out of context from the Mueller report, disingenuously dropping the beginning of the sentence, saying that they found no evidence of the Trump campaign conspiring with the "Russian government" in any "election interference activities." Barr (disingenuously again?) "summizes" that as "Russians," but how about collusion with Russians who were acting in their own self-interest rather than the government, and/or schemes other than influencing the election, e.g. Trump Tower Moscow?

Can I assume you agree that we need to know what's actually in the report?
Click to expand...

Barr breaks down a 350 page report and boils it down to his own 104 words. Yea...right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom