Wikileaks: good or bad?
@ 6 months ago
Chaska, MN 55318, USA
I have to be honest and say that I have lot quite a bit of respect for Julian Assange and Glenn Greenwald and by extension my support for Edward Snowden has also wavered.
@ 6 months ago
I assume you meant "lost quite a bit".
@ 6 months ago
I never liked Assange, always thought it was dangerous the way he blasted out info with very little attempt to curate it.
@ 6 months ago
Midtown, New York, NY
That being said, this latest stuff is pretty enlightening.
If truth becomes our enemy we are only left defending lies
@ 6 months ago
Villa Park, IL, USA
I think 'truth' is indeed an enemy when you're talking about personal info being exposed.
It's put people working for human rights groups at risk
why, do you have something to hide?
Good points though, the consequences of truth must be weighed.
Which personal info are you talking about, Drew?
I agree that they should make a greater attempt at redacting some of the personal information.
In the Saudi Cables example, the concerns about outing SA citizens was overblown. The cables were leaked from the govt.
Other disclosures of personal information that have been attributed to wikileaks, such as the Turkish women, weren't actually done by wikileaks.
With regards to the Clinton stuff being released right now, I really hope the press departs from their current "Trump must lose at all costs" after the election to actually start to reporting on and holding her feet to
Yeah I'm just concerned about that kinda thing, also Wikileaks needs to highlight stuff better, otherwise everything sorta gets lost in the avalanche of the leak.
The fire on a lot of the stuff in there.
I'm not holding my breath given the close connections with the press that the podesta e-mails have exposed (and most of us assumed existed)
I like the Politico guy, "I'm pretty much a hack....
That's why they've been doing the drip drip drip with the Podesta e-mails. manageable chunks rather than one large dump keeps the story in the news, rather than buried the next day by something stupid Trump said.
Yeah but the manageable chunks have nothing really highlighted
Budowsky has been interesting too.
What's been interesting is cross referencing the leaks with the Project Veritas stuff, such as references to the daily calls with Creamer.
Plus watching Brazile getting all po'd when confronted. I wonder how much longer she'll last at the helm.
True, the manageable chunks have nothing highlighted. Journalists and the internet are digging through them and doing the highlighting.
Crowdsourcing investigative journalism.
Interesting how they've been trying to distract from the content, though. Blame Russia (without any proof) and try to smear Assange as a pedophile with a shady company that appears to have Dem connections.
The "17 intelligence agencies" line from the debate was very misleading. Politifact dutifully rated it "true".
The Joint statement: "only Russia's senior most officials could have authorized these activities."
That's not proof of anything.
These people's internet security practices were horrible. Podesta' iCloud password was Runner4567. Several accounts have appeared in other large database hacks such as LinkedIn.
If their password was common and shared by other users, it was likely very weak and not too difficult to crack the stored hash. Runner4567 is a great example of a low entropy, easily crackable password.
These are the same people who want to make it illegal to use encryption or mandate backdoors that make it useless. SMH
What's funny about the Blame Russia campaign is remembering Obama dismissing Russia as a threat when Romney brought it up. And now it's zomg Russia
Obama dismisses everyone, its how he slights them. The ZOMG Russia is your emphasis added because thats a campaign fake.
And I feel that wikileaks is being used as a tool, because, well it is.
Because of that I'm naturally going to push back on that. Even though some information looks bad none of it is really damning and trump supporters and fox news use it every single day to further their agenda.
Edward Snowden hasnt really been involved but when I read Glenn Greenwald's articles the two have a fair amount of symbiosis in my mind.
So the only problem you have with Wikileaks is that Trump and Fox are using them?
No, that the people who took the information, most likely russia, are using them. so in releasing what they want released wikileaks is being used as a tool.
not for information, not by the people, but acting to carry out an agenda. and that seriously taints the information.
Alright that's fair.
That is if it's truly Russia...
Who is doing it isnt really important, its just most likely Russia. But if it was one of those guys in the guy fawkes masks it would be just as problematic.
So if its only one guy from indiana in his basement but he took all of these emails and wants to use them to slowly reveal information for the express purpose of dragging support from one candidate
my personality will push back on that.
that whoever is doing it will use wikileaks to create a slow drip of information because the american public has a short term memory already. This isnt a public information service, its an agenda.
and wikileaks is the tool.
and if on November 6 rolls around and there is a huge dump of damning information or a recording of hillary clinton tying vince foster to a chair and stuffing pills down his throat not only will i not care
it could push me the other way.
Its the main reason I don't like hillary, if she thinks she can lie and manipulate me to get my vote she is sorely mistaken. I go the other way when I feel I'm being manipulated.
^^^^^^ but he'll still vote for Hillary and the rest of the Clinton mafia
he's worse than bmoron
@ 6 months ago
Spotsylvania Courthouse, VA 22553, USA
So if the leaks describe how team HRC manipulated the media and voters, but you feel the leaks themselves are trying to manipulate you... Then what?
Their manipulation really was masterful
i already said its already the reason i dont like hillary, any effort from another party would only duplicate that effect for them. if you hate hillary for trying to manipulate you then you should logically feel the same
about the slow drip of wikileaks information.
its about consistency.
i dont have to look the other way to a third party trying to deliperately undermine anyone else to elect a fascist just because i dont like hillary.
They aren't quite the same though.
Hillary has tried to manipulate with lies.
Wikileaks is exposing the truth behind those lies.
I'll take truth over lies any day.
wikileaks or no wikileaks, Hillary is going to win by a landslide. Trump is just that bad.
That said, legitimate criticism of her should never be off limits just because she is running against trump.
Now if these leaks were full of lies or fabricated stuff, then I'd agree with you about the manipulation.
The drip drip drip is happening to force the Clinton friendly press (almost all of them...) to discuss
The content rather the sweep it under the rug as a bunch of "nothingburgers".
If you've read any of the leaks, you've seen how the press has colluded with the campaign to avoid damaging stories.
We've already had Chris Cuomo of CNN actually say on air that it is illegal to read any of the leaked e-mails, but CNN was allowed to because journalists have special privileges. Not to mention only seconds of airtime
On the major primetime nightly news shows... I hope you are noticing the manipulation by the press regarding the leaks.
currently Hillary is without since,
A year from now, maybe another issue. Probably depends on access after a donation to a presidential favorite charity..
since = sin
but wikileaks isnt revealing information, theyre dripping information in a controlled manner to further an agenda, not to inform.
doesn't everyone have an agenda though?
A little of both.
By not releasing everything at once, people are paying attention and it's not getting swept under the rug by the Clinton friendly media.
Clearly they want to damage Clinton by exposing the bullshït that has been going essentially unchallenged because zomg Trump
Again, since you don't like feeling manipulated, how does the media's lack of coverage of the leaks make you feel?
How is Wikileaks *not* revealing any information?
Yorkville, New York, NY
ive seen ample coverage of leaks on cnn and fox and politico and google news.
wikileaks isnt revealing information so much as setting an agenda with drip drop tactics that arent really damning. the slow release of information may not even be their choice. Theyre most likely a tool.
On CNN, they spend more time discussing Russia than the leaks themselves. And again, their anchor even claimed it was illegal for the public to read them.
Not revealing information? Depends on what source you listen to. I listen to NPR frequently and have barely heard a peep. If anything, it's usually some of the more trivial stuff.
Nothing to see, move along.
'"Aren't really damning": They
1) got 3 of the GS transcripts, which were pretty much confirmatory.
2) Exposed how close the campaign is with the press (very)
3) Revealed her true stance on TTP (confirmatory)
4) Detailing how the campaign has worked to get around the SuperPAC coordination rules.
5) Got (at least) one town hall question before hand.
6) How she really feels about fracking
7) Met with the king of morocco for a $12M foundation donation.
8) May have selected Kaine for veep in july 2015
9) performed campaign activities prior to declaring candidacy while still giving those speeches
Just a small list, all of which you've undoubtedly heard before.
How are any of those not "information"?
Because anything being used by Trump and Fox News isn't information... It's AGENDA
you guys just cant see this with an even head. drew cant even see that im saying wikileaks is being used by the person who gave them the information, not by the people using the information.
1) we all knew the speeches were bad(not bad just hillary being hillary), thats why she wouldnt release them.
2)Ive been telling people that the press has been preparing for Hillary 2016 since 2014
politico was doing a year of the woman in 2015 for ####s sake.
3)WHO DIDNT ####ING KNOW SHE WAS PRO TPP?!
4) Obama did the same things, Mccain used Potter to help him get around mccain feingold.
5) Questions in a debate dont matter, candidates, especially hillary are prepared for all of them and none really answer them anyway.
6) Position on fracking? what did wikileaks say because everyone knows she has been pro fracking.
When you say everyone knows (knew) , what you really mean is everyone strongly suspected but couldn't confirm. The Wikileaks provided that confirmation. Whereas before there was plausible deniability, with the leaks, there is not.
That's why the campaign is trying to change the discussion to one about Russia. I also think that you wouldn't have problems with any of it had it happened during Democratic primary times or to Trump or RNC etc.
Really, Drew, what makes you say there wouldn't be any problems if it were Trump or the RNC? I can understand why the discussion about Russia: they caused the leaks. Not worthy of discussion Drew?
@ 6 months ago
Lakeland, MN 55043, USA
It's the clear bias of the leaks that bothers me. The intent to sway voters toward one of the two candidates is clear. Why do you feel that the Clinton campaign should not make this a point of discussion?
No, I mean if you were reasonable you knew who hillary clinton was. if you ekpt yourself educated you knew.
In the primaries, during the democrat debates bernie sanders said the american people are tired of hearing about your damn emails, ive been sick of hearing about it every ####ing day and in every ####ing debate.
and every time trump tries quoting sanders it makes me sick that he thinks hes getting real liberals to vote for his fascist policies.
get used to it, Josh. there's enough "information" in them to keep them in there news post election.
1) the content of those three speeches are still information, and notable that she was lying about them.
2) press preparing for hill 2016 is one thing. what was exposed is much worse. rip journalism
3) apparently Hillary didn't, because she keeps saying she's against it in public
4) I don't doubt that.
5) integrity of the debates matter. slipping a question to a candidate, especially on a touchy subject like the death penalty raises big questions
6) her public position on fracking is much more limited than her private position was exposed to be.
Doc, the source of the leaks is indeed a big story, but the information contained in the leaks is *also* a story. Obviously a campaign is a campaign so they'll try to minimize the 2nd bit and focus solely on first. But why are media doing the same?
Also Trump is a fool if he thinks he can get Sanders fans into him by name-dropping Bernie all the time. However, I don't think that's what he's trying to do.
He's just as happy trying to get them disgusted enough with the process and Democratic nominee that they don't vote at all or say vote third-party but in a swing state.
I wonder how much "silent support" Trump has
5% give or take.
And debate questions call into question donna braziles integrity, getting a debate question in a debate system where people dont answer questions is like nixon raiding the watergate hotel.
he was already going to win in a landslide.
and trump trying to get democrats to stay home as a political tactic is an entertaining notion if trump wasnt constantly getting republicans to stay home just by opening his mouth.
trump having any thought to his campaign is a laughable idea.
hillary clinton is hillary clinton, nothing in wikileaks is anything but hillary being hillary, if you thought hillary was different then you were already voting for her, and wouldnt see criticism.
nothing in wikileaks should be new information to anyone who already thought she was a hawkish republican leaning person who lies to voters to get their votes.
hillary is mitt romney. donald trump is mussolini.
so, would we better off not having the confirmatory information in WL?
while it's not new information, it's confirmation of things she and her campaign have adamantly denied.
that makes it worthwhile, whoever you are voting for.
re debate question: yes debates are mostly for show. but they can and do change races.
the appearance of partial moderators is always a problem. leaking questions goes beyond that
you dont need to muddy the waters by bringing up the specter of partial moderators.
hillary clinton lies to her voters because thats what her voters want her to do. donald trump lies to his voters because thats what they want him to do. wikileaks information is not informing us that hillary clinton
is a liar, because we already know. its not informing her voters because its not what they want to hear and its only stating what trump voters want to hear.
if information was the issue it would all be released at once, its a measured dose not for informations sake, but for manipulations sake.
At the heart of all this I agree with the new electronic transparency by, for, and of the people. It's similar to undisclosed video of cops...very powerful stuff. Problem is the source in this particular case. But in general Wikileaks is good.
the only real evidence I've seen so far is from arstechnica re spearphishing.
Clapper's statement was basically it was sophisticated, so it only could've been Russia.
that's not proof of anything.
Monticello, MN, USA
It could've been Russia... We don't like Russia... Trump likes Putin... We don't like Putin... Hence it's gotta be Russia.. QED
I thought there was actual proof, during the debate didn't the moderator cite multiple U.S. intel agencies as pointing to Russia as the source? Was that just speculation?
Hey didn't multiple intelligence agencies declare wmds in iraq?
No, there was not actual proof. Here is the statement.
reposted from earlier in the thread.
First paragraph explains the reasoning behind blaming Russia
Clapper, the DNI, represents 17 agencies of the IC
Here are the agencies: https://www.dni.gov/index.php/intelligence-community/members-of-the-ic
This is the same Clapper that lied about collecting intelligence on American citizens - purportedly the lie that inspired Snowden's whistleblowing in the first place.
Back to those 17 agencies. Look at the list. Only a handful even remotely handle this type of cybercrime.
Yeah but there are 17
That's like a big number
The guy (Yevgeniy Nikulin, caught last week in Czech) who hacked LinkedIn and got over 100M user's info was not a state actor.
For example... In order to hack requires electricity... Department of Energy. Hacking also requires a lot of coffee... Caffeine is a drug...Drug Enforcement Agency
Two british kids hacked the CIA director's AOL account with social engineering.
Guccifer did the same with numerous high profile people, including Blumenthal and GWB's sister.
Podesta sounds like he was caught by a spearphishing attack with a faked google login page and bitly url shortener. Advanced, sure...but not state level stuff by any means.
@Drew - drugs cost money => Treasury.
Drugs and money are smuggled on ships => coast guard
ok well speculation then, though I haven't heard any info or speculation to the contrary. Not proof of course.
speculating about alternatives would make them seem less sure it's the Russians, hurting the blame Russia narrative.
Since it's been popular for Kaine, Brazile, et al to claim the documents are forged:
They're lying there, too
I saw an interview with Hillary's campaign manager. He had no answers aside from deflection and misdirection. It was pathetic.
Downers Grove, IL, USA
A field of ineffective strawmen
Naperville, IL, USA
Was that the one where he couldn't even answer a question about her foreign policy on Syria?
@ 6 months ago
Ames, IA, USA
he didn't answer ANY questions, it was embarrassing
Wheaton, IL, USA
her whole candidacy is embarrassing
hey Hillary, I don't care who stole your "safe" emails. Answer this question; Are they TRUE?
No, it was strategic. When you're winning the race you don't risk going all out.
Strategic, lol, only if the populace if truly that brainwashed and/or apathetic
@H2O - the DKIM signatures confirm that the e-mails are real and not tampered with
Team HRC is playing it smart by not answering a single question on them and running out the clock. Smart politics.
@AMI - the populace is pretty apathetic...
FYI, Hillary's birthday is on Wednesday. Rumor is Assange has a surprise.
then that would be incredibly pathetic.
yeah that would be totally mean
YOU'VE BEEN WHITELASHED!
@ 6 months ago
Strongsville, OH, USA
Whatever Assange has... It certainly won't be 'information' it'll just be AGENDA!
Would that be more or less pathetic than the elaborate scheme of shell companies that was exposed to try to paint JA as a pedophile?
Oh wow, just read about that one. "When they go low, we go high" lmao.
I know why republicans like drew or ami would root for wikileaks after every single drop came from this literal leaky faucet. but skal youre just coming across like a bitter loser about bernie and im concerned.
sure hillary is not a good option, shes a terrible option but youre taking this a little hard and you may end up just like every other republican so full of rage and anger.
So why are you so concerned about the leaks, Trump has already sunk his ship.
Like you said, "it's about consistency"
I'm sick of corruption. That's why I supported Bernie, support Johnson, and can't support Hillary (or Trump).
There's no doubt in my mind Hillary will win by a landslide and claim a mandate.
A mandate by a corrupt politician in cahoots with the media worries me.
Yeah I'm concerned about that too. And it won't really be a mandate for her either (though she'll certainly claim it), it'll really just be a mandate against having a President Trump.
"hillary is not a good option, shes a terrible option"
Then why vote for her?
If we keep voting for terrible options, that what we'll keep getting.
I wonder what Utah will end up doing. That's the reddest state that hates Trump most, it'll be cool if they go for that McMullin, would respect that one.
I wonder what would happen in a scenario where no one made it past the post and the race went to the House.
that would be fun
Yeah I want that one.
@Josh - I also disagree with her positions very strongly on cybersecurity/encryption issues.
I fully expect her to support the AT&T-TW merger and to sweep AT&T's spying revelations under the rug.
"Regulators should scrutinize this closely" (and then allow it) .
I think Bam & Co did a good job preventing some of those attempted mergers that happened on his watch.
I think they also did a good job preventing major terrorist activities inside U.S. borders.
They also prevented the country from going over the brink economically. I believe we were very close to real, old school depression.
We did have some major attacks, Boston bombing for example.
But forget that. More about Wikileaks, that's old stuff. Wikileaks is newww
So what do ya think Hildabeast will do in her first 100 days?
Executive order banning FOIA I'm thinking.
Haven't had a new war in a while, - - thinking she's up for one of those.
How about the Pulse night club?
We did have some attacks.
Really tough to stop lone wolves, though.
With the escalating tensions with Russia and her eagerness to place no fly zone over Syria, that might not be too far off, Drew...
That would be fantastic (sarcasm), I wonder how many would care about safe spaces then
She didn't have a very good answer when asked if she would shoot down a Russian jet violating that zone
Hillary will win in a landslide electorally, maybe even taking Texas...
I kinda wanna see that just for Trump's reaction.
Trump will go full steam ahead with his own TV propaganda network
Wonder what's next for Trump.. All his properties are in very blue areas that absolutely hate him as a politician. It's weird for me to pass by them.
It's kinda funny how the Trump hotel in DC towers over the WJC building next door.
I would say "looms"
Well the WJC name is relatively new. It used to be the Post Office.
Drew, are there often supporters or protesters (or both!) hanging out around Trump's properties?
You don't have to support hillary, I won't either. But to think she will win in a landslide is hopeful thinking. People like PNS and PLC and H20 will be voting for trump. There is significant shame in republicans
and the fear of defending trump that they often move back and forth for gary johnson, his recent slide in the polls has gone right to trump. While trump still has a large electoral hurdle dont kid yourself on his support
But this pouncing on every piece of news that isnt news is weirdly aggressive and we dont need to work ourselves up about every single leak when theyre pretty par for the course for clinton.
What's not newsworthy?
They are blaming Russia with little evidence, escalating tensions. That recklessness is newsworthy.
They claim forgery, proven false. Also newsworthy.
The degree of presstitution exposed is newsworthy. Before it was merely suspicion. Now there's proof.
It may not be news to you or me. But that's no reason to ignore it.
Is it more or less newsworthy than pussygate (which already seems to be fading quickly)?
I don't really care if it's "par for the course for Clinton".
Corruption deserves sunlight, not just when it's convenient.
Lol seriously.. "par for the course".... That's why it's not real news?! Wtf man.
Reminds me of that MadTV sketch.. Lower Expectations.
The press is just overheated all the time now. They make news where there is none, for example headlines that imply news...where there isn't any. But it gives you the impression of some wrongdoing that lingers.
It's a product of a truly continuous news cycle...24-7-365. There isn't enough real news to fill that up most days. So they're left to manufacture it.
And then they have a narrative before the facts like.. Hands up don't shoot, UVA rape, Keith Lamont scott... List goes on..
@Evil - I agree that news is manufactured to fill the cycle.
But...are you implying these stories aren't newsworthy or are manufactured controversies?
who's raping grapes?
@ 6 months ago
Cerritos, CA, USA
Headlines! Drew accusations of grape rape! News at 11! :-)
I believe there is actual news but there is also a lot of manufactured news or perhaps you might call it implied news. I think a lot of things get artificially magnified to compete.
This is the problem with the media, imo. They compete like starving dogs for tiny scraps of nothing because there isn't enough news to satisfy the ADHD news cycle.
What the #### are you guys talking about, its not news to us. this isnt about the news cycle its about us as people and the reactions were having to the election
i really dont understand why everytime i say something you take it somewhere else and run with it. this is like the 4th time in this thread alone.
so if donald trump comes out and says he really doesnt know why bill clinton even has sex with hillary because shes so unattractive drew and ami will just shake their heads but it wont generate new controversy.
THAT is "not really news" or "par for the course" it certainly doesnt ####ing need 24/7 coverage on any station.
####, you guys, get your #### together.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present the party of Hillary Clinton.
@ 6 months ago
The part that *is* news is the confirmation. Before it was just suspicion, easily dismissed.
you said "we dont need to work ourselves up about every single leak when theyre pretty par for the course for clinton"
The hypothetical you just gave was Trump talking about hillary being unattractive. Not similar.
Before it was suspected that the clintons were involved in shady dealings with the CF. These suspicions were dismissed for lacking proof. Now that's coming out in the WL.
That's nothing like your hypothetical.
In your opinion Josh, is the big news story from yesterday's leak (WJC, Inc.) newsworthy?
everything is newsworthy isnt it? i tuned the whole leak story out though so if it was on tv i didnt watch it, i havent seen anything on the internet about it. but you already say its a big news story?
here are the top 10 stories on politico
1Trump: 'We should just cancel the election and just give it to Trump'
2The nation’s cartoonists on the week in politics
3Republicans at war over Supreme Court
4GOP insiders: Polls don't capture secret Trump voters
5 Man who destroyed Trump's star is 'proud' of his work
6 Trump's direct transfers to RNC in October: $2.2 million
7 Swing-state polls: Clinton pulls even with Trump in Iowa and Georgia
8 Who could replace Paul Ryan?
9 Trump blames 'the microphones' for catching his 2005 talk about sexual assault
10 Dems demand apology for Kirk comments on Duckworth's heritage
but you say there is a big story?
will i have to go to fox news to find this big story?
OH YES I ####ING DO!
Right there, front page, big blaring headline.
Trump seizes on damning emails
to accuse Clintons of corruption
Emphasis and capital letters not my own.
SNARKY BEHAVIOR: Emails show Clinton staffers sought to 'bern' Sanders with poolside pic
EXCLUSIVE: Podesta relative earned $$$ lobbying State Department
SUPPORTING HIS CASE: Trump cites voter registration problems to
WHY USE DAD?
Garner's daughter rips Clinton camp over leaks
VIDEO: Eric Garner's daughter rips Clinton camp over latest emails MEDIA BUZZ: Even Chelsea ripped 'hustling' at lucrative family foundation
Lawyer tased as Bundys win dramatic acquittal
VIDEO: Bundy brothers acquitted in occupation of wildlife sanctuary
I'm ####ing done with wikileaks
^Translation: I liked Wikileaks when they were going after the former Bush administration, but now....
Pretty much. He sounds mad. You see that deflection?
You like NPR, let's try going there:
Oh yeah, another big non-story:
Interesting one (seriously):
What we have here is an election where either a dirty corrupt scumbag or Mussolini Lite will get elected.... it truly will be a fun 4 years
I linked the same story in the NBC link, PLC...
Yeah, I saw that too late. Sorry.
Doesn't nbc know that by publishing an article like that, it furthers - - agenda - -
@Drew - You're right. They better "cut it out".
The gift that keeps on giving!
I knew that Huma Abedin was going to be a problem for Hillary as soon as Anthony's Weiner got exposed. That's been an uncomfortable connection...so to speak.
Dickileaks, The Stroking Gun. Lol NY Post.
I just saw the post's cover and almost had to buy myself a new keyboard.
you guys are ####ing retarded
you may want to go back to arguing with bhaven
U mad bro?
Next you'll be telling me that the FBI reopening an investigation on the leading presidential candidate 11 days before the election isn't newsworthy.
Nothing to see here, move along folks.
Those Hillary supporters are a funny bunch.
I think he's upset at the Dickileaks.
no, im done telling you what i was telling you and its really not my fault that you are too upset to realize what you look at. Bhaven is more your speed if youre going to be emotional and not rational about this.
he should be here with a new post soon enough for you.
^from the guy who thinks the test for newsworthiness ought to be based on which political party he thinks the story harms.
never once said that but who cares right?! just say whatever the #### you want?! why the #### not?!
wont let facts get in the ####ing way here, drew and skal are here to say whatever the #### they want regardless of what the people were talking to are saying.
oh and plc will jump back into the conversation when he has people to cover him again! wow look at that!
you guys are right, youre not on bhavens level at all!
where the #### is racer?
im voting for gary johnson out of principle and for more options in the future, youre voting for him because youre ####ing butthurt that bernie lost. move the #### on.
do you think the hillary campaign is any more underhanded than michelle saying hillary cant control her own house how is she going to control the country? this is an election, youre a grown ass man, ####ing act like it.
am i ####ing mad bro? this is just the first time i have directed it at you.
I don't think you know who is voting for Johnson or their real reason for doing it. Do we not often settle for "less than ideal but more in line with our own thinking than the other candidates"? To that extent you are butt hurt too I'd guess.
Anyone's views are as valid as yours.
Anyway my plan is to vote for Johnson but I may change my mind once that ballot is in front of me. I admit I am scared to think that Trump could win. I'll pretty much do what I think I must to prevent that.
if I lived in a purple state I'd likely be resigned to vote for Hillary just cuz I'm scared of Trump and I don't want to contribute to his electoral college score.
omg I bought a VR headset for my phone...fúcking awesome! And cheap, no doubt they give you the tech at cost so you buy the shít within the app that drives the headset. I don't care. It's fúcking cool you can do this with your phone.
^wants to use VR porn
Doc, VR is the future. it is awesome!
if you like the phone headset, which I love as well... shell out some money for the Oculus Touch or HTC Vive 2 coming out in a few months
Experiencing those is life changing for real.... it's hard to describe how truly awesome the room experience is
Given that computers weren't even available to the public when I was a kid, and phones were just (hardwired) phones, it's really mind blowing on more than one front for me.
@josh - am I still invited to your birthday party?
LOL Drew, the last time I watched porn was in college. True story, our student-funded campus activities planning committee (made up solely of students!) had weekly porn showings. Free, only for students. They let you bring alcohol and food in.
I just worry the porn actresses will get distracted with porn actors fcking them with headmounted GoPros
This was a very popular campus activity as you can imagine. We went in large groups, got stinking drunk, then walked downtown to the bars. On-campus life was nice then.
indeed Doc, exciting times in tech
Addison, IL, USA
And the drinking age was 18 in NY at the time. Much better partying atmosphere than now. Also you'd not get away with mandatory student fees paying for porn now!
imagine the triggering!
Adam's probably mad because he's the only person in West Virginia supporting Hillary.
That woman could sell the country for her profit and commit murder in public, he'd still deny it and blame a Republican for setting her up.
Maybe, but that seriously sounds like something Trump might actually do!
Ami, I'm sure it was triggering to some. It always has been.
yes, but my birthday was in september.
Speaking of meltdown mode.
so. What do you think the odds are for Obama issuing a blanket pardon for Hillary as he leaves. You know. For the purpose of ending all of rancor and uniting the country.
@ 6 months ago
Yellow Springs, OH 45387, USA
I can't foresee any situation where that action would have those intended consequences.
I don't think Obama particularly likes Hillary
Lol JC at that joke.
@Skal, there is one.
protecting his legacy
I'm just sayin'. Stranger things have already happened during this election cycle.
What's the difference, no matter what once she's in office Congress will impeach Clinton and that's what we'll hear about for four fúcking years. This as a strategy to finally elect a Republican.
I hope it's a male Caucasian!
Hinckley Township, OH 44233, USA
@H2O - yes, it would protect Obama's legacy.
But my point was it wouldn't have the desired effect of "ending all of rancor and uniting the country."
@JC - had their not been events during the investigation that gave the appearance of WH interference (such as the plane meeting or BO being caught lying about his knowledge of the setup), that option might have worked.
I think I'm at a honey boo boo's mom look alike contest
University Circle, Cleveland, OH
now I'm at the art museum
Lakewood, OH, USA
How much is the full body latte?
Pleading the fifth is totally in these days
I just can't stop laughing how it's come down to WEINER. The joke was supposed to be over in 2011 and it's still here, he's like some kinda Democratic Herpes with periodic break outs.
So... How long until Brazile steps down?
Maybe not at all, don't the Clintons like to keep their corrupt friends very close?
The real question is where will the parachute land
There will be no one, really, at the helm of the DNC, yet the party is (still) relatively united...the opposite problem from that of the RNC.
I really am disappointed in Brazile. I thought she had integrity. I hoped she would bring that to the DNC. I was so wrong.
^thinks politicians have integrity. Hahhahaa
RNC and DNC are both united in corruption. And the Berniebros... They called it on DNC.
Well I suppose integrity is relative when it comes to politicians, but she hasn't really been that...not directly anyway.
I'm really enjoying team HRC going into full panic mode.
If only there were a name for that feeling.
yeah, an American name.
she pulled a Munson
let's see, Obama? No that's not an American name
American words are the best words.
HRC team has gallons of urine soaking through their GoodNites®
didn't something similar happen to Bush Jr right before his second election?
Elmhurst, IL, USA
I know something happened with Bush Sr before his reelection. If you wikisearch October Surprise, a list of stuff comes up.
There's a long Demxplanation in the wiki for Bush Sr. I'm guessing that whole page is under massive edit wars at the moment.
if youre not watching fox news all the time fivethirtyeight did an examination on if october surprises affect an election, showed 1-3% change, bush jr was drunk driving arrest release.
Oh yeah was an interesting article. Rathergate I wonder what affect that had, was a September thing though.
But ya know, that was Fake But Accurate lol.
Fake but accurate Duke Lacrosse, Fake but accurate Tawanna Brawley, fake but accurate Michael Brown, fake but accurate 'Rape on Campus'....
Also Fivethirtyeights article is incorrectly titled, it should be "How much have October Surprises moved the polls (in the past)".
I think Fivethirtyeight gets stuck trying to fit events into some kinda political "rules' they invent looking at past elections. That's why they kept discounting the rise of Trump, cuz it violated all the rules they came up with.
Well they are statisticians at heart. Each of their models is based on prior observations. It's the world they live in.
I'm sure they are great at parties
They mean well
I still think voting for Killary gets me closer to my goal in life but I will have a hard time doing it.
President Not Sure
@ 6 months ago
Wright City, MO, USA
I have some ammo that will go to waste when I die. killary will make the US a hunting ground. I will have a reason to use my ammo.
ok then, slappy.
Fivethirtyeight definitely mean well, but I think the present-tense of that headline shows that they are falling into the same trap they criticized *themselves* for.
And am sad you missed the bad pun.
At least you're not mean about it. :(
It would take a perfect square or maybe even a medium to solve that mean meant mean and not mean
Stop being so obtuse
I was trying to figure out something with the Pythagorean Theorem, but it just didn't add up
try rootin' for it, AMI
This thread isn't normal
define "Voter Map normal", please
see, mr pink is brave enough to proudly admit he follows fake news stories in support of donald trump because he is a trump voter, it doesnt matter that he made fun of a handicapped guy!
barack obama made a self depricating joke about his bowling skills only a social justice warrior would actually care about indirect offensiveness.
mr pink has only been pounding the special olympics joke over and over and over not because he actually cares, of course he doesnt, he just didnt like obama, now donald trump, there is a man with principle!
there are a lot of things that can be said about that, but at least hes honest.
"I would bust that tight pússy so hard and so often that you would leak and limp for a week"
-Anthony Weiner to underage teen
leak... that's romantic
North Royalton, OH 44133, USA
Dickileaks and 'Ginaleaks
‘Vote Trump’ painted on wall of burned-out black church in Mississippi
White Male Supremacy 2016!!!
we dont know who did that yet mr pink but we know trump supporters did this.
you'll get a laugh out of it.
oh my God that's hilarious. She's from Mexico right? Too funny!
Go Johnson! You can do it! The polls are all skewed... He can win this thing!
Maybe Trump can help him sue when he doesn't win, due to the rigged election.
White Bear Lake, MN, USA
Absolutely not. > 5% is the goal.
I am the 5℅
Shh skål, don't rain on my parade
What if it's purple?
MSNBC already called it for Clinton
@ 4 months ago
@ 4 months ago
Thanks for posting. I loved reading that in depth analysis of RT programming
@ 4 months ago
I know, right? It reads like a bad term paper.
McCain called it an act of war, what a goofball
CNN was just freaking out about it with Don "It wasn't evil" Lemon leading the charge
Don may still be hungover from NYE.
What happened to that WV guy?
In b4 h2o says he was deported.
he's trying to sell his mesican Ford stock
@ 4 months ago
reddit's worst ama ever compliments of julian assange prompted me to check in on you guys. im not really interested in this is the people who used to be smart are stupid now.
@ 4 months ago
Julian did an ama?
@ 4 months ago
South Redondo, Redondo Beach, CA 90277
most replies are in video form, if you can call them replies
wow. do you know if they responded to the issue of the hashes?
Southwood Riviera, Torrance, CA 90505
Which hashes? The hashes released on twitter?
@Josh - http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee385/Midnight1337/u-mad-bro-again.jpg
apparently they release hashes with each document. several posters on Reddit were concerned that some did not match.
So maybe it's not really Assange or what I'm confused. Explain it like I'm five?
Those hashes were in reference to insurance files for upcoming releases. If something were to have happened and the deadman's switch was activated, those files would be released.
Those hashes could be used to confirm that the files have not been tampered with.
In October, they released 3 hashes. The corresponding insurance files do not match those.
It is very curious, Drew. Maybe the files were tampered with or added to since then? No real explanation yet.
@Josh - I'm just curious, have you looked at the Buzzfeed dossier that McCain gave the FBI?
BC I really hope that wasn't the source of their intelligence assessments...
I used to envision you as a well dressed Scandinavian, but now it's more like Sloth from the Goonies
Roseville, MN 55113, USA
The golden shower jokes are pretty funny though.
@AMI - a giant troll?
@Drew - hilarious. And it's full of errors. If that's the quality of intelligence that gave the spooks high confidence, skepticism is well deserved.
Buzzfeed just publishing memos without any verification is fcked up though esp with the editor voicing his concerns about 'fake news', the more this kinda stuff is done the more the born-fake stuff becomes a problem.
It also looks like a lot of *this* stuff could be 'born-fake' so these distinctions between the types of "fakes' keep getting more and more broken down.
I'm a frog, and the water feels toasty.
Welcome to the new war zone. Bad news for us is that Russia is already winning the war.
@ 4 months ago
giant trolls are lumbering about
Energy Park, Saint Paul, MN
Apparently near the Como Zoo. :)
@Evil - How is Russia winning?
Information war. It's on now and we're already losing. Russia planned this well.
Stillwater, MN 55082, USA
I assume you are referring to basically what is in Annex A of the DNI report? Correct?
New Lisbon, WI 53950, USA
Yeah that is exactly it, Schaden. They've seen the soft underbelly of our digital addiction and are using it to incredible advantage...digitally bombing the fúckwads out of us. It's going to get much worse than it is now too.
I don't know whether or not to believe what used to be reliable factual sources anymore. Once we are firmly there, it's not hard to take the next step to insert the desired propaganda into the stream. The mooing herds will consume their digital
diets like always and the desired topics will be discussed with the right slant.
JUST like the election!!! Hey that was so easy!
Would you agree that HRC losing WI, IA, MI, PA, and OH is what cost her the election?
Now I could be wrong, but I really don't think the voters who swung to Trump in those states get their news from RT...
Similarly, the case they tried to build in the DNI report about RT's social media popularity uses all the old statistical tricks in the book.
For example, "RT had the most rapid growth (40 percent)"
Did viewership go from 10 to 14? 100K to 140K?
"Audience tripled": So now 30 people watch it?
The relative % are useless.
Likewise, the social media buzz is over-sold. Very few follow them on twitter or likes/share their content on Facebook. They also lump together RT and RT America to inflate YouTube numbers.
If you actually go to their youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday), scroll down to the bottom to see their most popular videos:
Meteor - 40M
Singing homeless person ~ 40M
Tsunami vid1 - ~36M
Tsunami vid2 - 21M
Cruise ship - 18M
Amusement park ride - 16M
Tsunami vid3 - 13M
Tsunami vid4 - 12M
Tsunami vid5 - 12M
Tsunami vid6 - 13M
Kid falling from ferris wheel - 10M
The list goes on.
Those type of videos make up about 1/2 of those 900 million views.
"I don't know whether or not to believe what used to be reliable factual sources anymore."
Yep. Even WaPo recently had to retract two articles (the PropOrNot and the Vermont Power hacking) for being fake news
Don't get me wrong - there's no question that RT pushes propaganda. I just doubt the assertions of how influential it actually was because it doesn't add up.
RT didn't make WI, IA, OH, PA, and MI go red.
It wasn't our fault!!! wahhhh wahhhh wahhhh
well that was insightful and helpful.
Like anything here is (except for Tjaden occasionally), let's not get too full of ourselves
After all the whining about the fake news, seems like a lot of mainstream sources have now lowered their standards about what to publish if they think it's against Trump.
I didn't mean to imply that Russia's influence swung the election completely. But I do believe there could have been additional covert activity, easy to pay people to past fake shít. And I think all of this is just getting started.
Eagan, MN, USA
^ post fake shít ^
Like I said, the first stage is having us doubt our own reliable sources of factual information. That's where we are headed.
Insertion of propaganda is more effective after you break people's confidence in previously reliable
sources. This is the information war I'm talking about.
The so-called previously reliable sources have already broken people's confidence by their own behavior.
Newest Trump advisor???
Steve Harvey of course!
So we're an easier target then, Drew.
Obama's change in Cuban immigration policy is just more last minute pettiness
"easy to pay people to past fake shít. "
@Evil - are you familiar with "Correct the record"?
"Like I said, the first stage is having us doubt our own reliable sources of factual information."
When those once-reliable sources become unreliable, they have only themselves to blame.
The wonderful thing about the internet is that getting raw information from the source is much easier.
It no longer has to be pre-digested and served to us by newspapers, etc.
I no longer have to read about what Rep XYZ said. I can just pull it up on YouTube and watch them say it.
In the process, blatant bias/omission by these previously reliable sources is easier to notice.
I agree but it's a double edged sword and you know it: otherwise an armed idiot would not show up at a pizza joint looking for a pedophile sex ring led by Hillary Clinton.
It's not as if most people fact check the shít they read. So paying people to post fake facts is an easy way to manipulate a large section of the U.S. public.
Just because you CAN fact check doesn't mean you will. most people are all too happy to swallow everything wholesale. I've seen stuff on here like Obama is gay or molested his kids etc. you know is some idiot spouting off online but some on this
forum choose to just believe it. Then they repeat it like it's a fact. Unfortunately these idiots, collectively, are our greatest national weakness in the Information War. And they are everywhere.
nah, I do that to piss off bmoron and compare his own logic idiocy.
now if YOU started to believe,,, I'll call buzz feed or wp.
Re Pizzagate - Those people are conspiracy nuts. Conspiracy nuts didn't believe objective facts before the internet, why would they now?
Why pay people to post fake facts on the internet to manipulate large sections of the US public? That's what AM radio is for...
"Just because you CAN fact check doesn't mean you will." True, but someone might. And if it's a big error/omission it can be quickly disseminated.
To be fair, it's not just idiots that promote fake news uncritically. Going back to the WaPo's PropOrNot story, that was spread like wildfire by journalists - giving it legitimacy to many people.
By becoming partisan cheerleaders, many journalists and news orgs have become rightly seen as biased.
But hey, objectivity doesn't get eyeballs, so at least they're making money, right?
Protocols of the Elders of Zion published 1903, there'd be no Internet for quite some time. Pizzagate was a complete nothingburger in comparison to the damage that one did.