Those YouTube videos got a combined viewing of 10 million people -a drop in the bucket. It doesn’t absolve the podcasters of responsibility for putting money ahead of integrity, but it’s a nothing burger in terms of geopolitics.
The problem isn’t the $20 crime. The problem is the DOJ - and whatever other alphabet agency was involved in the investigation - wasting time and taxpayer money on trivialities. Now they get to prove what warriors they are for democracy, saving the world from shoplifters. Maybe I’m wrong and they just stumbled across the crime without investing any real resources, but I’m very skeptical, for good reason.
So they shouldn't investigate crimes unless they are bigger? This operation had 15M views... What's the threshold for investigating?
Should we also not investigate robberies under $200? I guess the DA in some states agrees with you as they don't prosecute crimes under $800 (or whatever the number is) in, say, San Francisco. That's been working well.
Ugh. This is like investigating someone stealing a pack of chewing gum. The Young Turks have 7 million subscribers. Daily Wire has 15 million. They produce comment daily. There are probably more than a hundred political pundits or news sites with more than 1 million subscribers. You obviously don’t ignore someone stealing chewing gum, but every penny you expend investing is money diverted from something else.
Common propaganda tactic always used is to not refer to ”Russia” but to “Putin”. Personify the desired enemy. “Putin in tears as Ukranians take out ammo dump”
For years now, every single article in my news feed about the Ukraine war has been slanted towards Ukraine. The article will take a minor, company sized, action and portray it as a war winning decisive battle. “Putin horrified as…..” “Russians panic as drone takes out an APC” “is this the end? Putin panics as Ukraine advances”
I saw at least three dozen headlines on the Ukranian capture of Rabotino. The village traded hands dozens of times because it was a village of five roofless stone buildings and nobody occupied it for long because the artillery would soon zero on on the buildings. But every time they returned, it was a triumph!!
Didn't you get sick of this during Russiagate? There's no meat to the indictment, it's all smoke and mirrors like Russiagate. The WaPo, NYT, AP, are setting you up for another sad disappointment but you just keep on pushing their distortions and lies.
I think the actual point people are making is that nobody has any way to know what happened, nor do you.
To put it simply:
1. If you catch someone lying, they aren't trustworthy.
2. If they are punished, repent and apologize, you might start to believe them again. If there is no penalty and they never apologize, you have to assume they'll lie again.
3. If someone is a liar you need to ignore anything they say, otherwise you risk being tricked again.
4. If you ignore what they are saying then it's equivalent to nothing happening and there's nothing to answer.
There's nothing special about the DOJ in this case. The same logic holds in personal relations as well. Once you know someone is a liar and getting away with it, you cut off all contact.
It's not my belief. It's based on common sense. The last "Russiagate" scam came up with nothing. Russiagaters always forget that an indictment is not proof of anything and in many cases (read: almost all, even for low level offenders) they are trumped up.
In this case it's a very weak accusation with no proof at all displayed to the public a couple months before a pivotal election where the Dem candidate is looking, shall we say, shakey.
Russiagate I was similar: lots of smoke, no evidence, that wound up with nothing. Nada. Zilch. I actually read the NYT and media for the first one and every article was the same -- lots of assertions, leading questions, off the record quotes from "senior investigators" and NOT ONE BIT OF ACTUAL EVIDENCE. Not that it didn't ruin any lives of course. Witch hunts always do.
Connect the dots and you get the same old fearmongering nonsense from an establishment (DOJ/Media) that lies to us constantly about everything (or just refuses to report on extremely important topics).
It’s serious. I consider myself a free speech fundamentalist, but something about this situation is not resonating and I feel that a safeguard needs to be put in place here. Not “censorship” as it were, but maybe something like “speech passports,” or “speech nationalism” — basically the idea that constitutional protection of free speech is only guaranteed to US citizens, and that speech that originates outside of the US or non-citizens needs a passport. This would be some kind of badge saying “hey, I don’t have shared interest with your fundamental rights and society.” If we want migrants documented, this can be extended to their influence.
Free speech, yes, but I absolutely agree here - we need to know where it comes from for us to be responsible free speech consumers
Oh, so suddenly free speech is not a universal human right that you're eager to share with everyone but a privilege for Americans only? Now that's quite a leap.
Sorry, I understand how that might be misinterpreted. I was envisioning something more along the lines of an american independent journalist guild with standards for financing and citizenship. Think of it as a privilege above fundamental free speech rights.
1> Sushi is bad for you :) I know because I have a green tail🤣
2> impersonating a news outlet ir a person us illegal just about everywhere. Thise entities engaging in this activity should be shut down/out where possible and prosecuted is possible.
3> beyond that there is really not much a free society can do to limit disinformation without becoming Orwellian dictatorships.
4> It is up to the consumer to engage their brain and do even rudimentary investigation of every thing they consume before comming to their own conclusion on the matter. Will everyone.do that? of course not, but to try and protect those that do not 1st imvestigate from disinformation is IMHO a wide road leading to 1984.
I am the source of my opinions. Your feculent generation has simply forgotten how to think critically and research. FFS, these same assholes who tell us the US government as currently constituted is the source of all truth fail to notice the mountains of contradictions and lies - they barely even try anymore.
I consume news and information based on what I am researching. Doing some basic parsing of the studies and reporting usually rapidly reveal if ideology or reason is behind it. Then I choose the most relevant and sound reporting and studies from which to decide how I feel about an issue.
You don’t have to think as you’re told. And you’re definitely the one confusing facts and opinions. If someone in authority is telling you what is moral or right, that is opinion.
I hope you do your research and don’t just base opinions on what your group expects or your political side’s propaganda. But your screed did not include research or forming your own opinion after checking multiple sources until just now.
Gee this diatribe didn’t get the expected fawning, now, did it? lol.whatvdid you expect? The fucking media, all of it, is the propaganda arm of the uniparty. Those of us with a brain are reading this shit you put together like a joke.
Much if not most of the political “news” from US. Media is propaganda. Look how much is intentionally taken out of context. We all need to be hearing from primary sources instead of this medias cover of “an undisclosed source” or other “anonymous source”. There is no transparency.
DOJ has forfeited the public trust. That’s a problem for many reasons. The fact that half the country simply doesn’t take this seriously is something they brought on themselves.
There’s also a fucking retard trying to influence young boys to become girls. Or thirty of them. But that’s ok. Because it’s inthe approved narrative. But don’t you dare be Russian and hope the democrats lose. That’s against a law we haven’t made up yet! Let’s ask the doj! What a stupid, ineffectual hambone of a person you are.
No. It means I don’t take their word for it. I recognize that they have institutional interests that may outweigh truth telling. What they say is not enough without other corroboration.
You realize these claims have been investigated by multiple sources? The current DOJ claim...i recommend you read the indictment for yourself instead of outright rejecting it. You don't have to trust the DOJ outright, but at least examine the claims, whether they are plausible, and look at the evidence they present
I don’t doubt any of these particular countries do nefarious things. I also believe that claims of foreign influence are used to harass citizens who diverge from regime-approved narratives. Both are true.
Those YouTube videos got a combined viewing of 10 million people -a drop in the bucket. It doesn’t absolve the podcasters of responsibility for putting money ahead of integrity, but it’s a nothing burger in terms of geopolitics.
The problem isn’t the $20 crime. The problem is the DOJ - and whatever other alphabet agency was involved in the investigation - wasting time and taxpayer money on trivialities. Now they get to prove what warriors they are for democracy, saving the world from shoplifters. Maybe I’m wrong and they just stumbled across the crime without investing any real resources, but I’m very skeptical, for good reason.
So they shouldn't investigate crimes unless they are bigger? This operation had 15M views... What's the threshold for investigating?
Should we also not investigate robberies under $200? I guess the DA in some states agrees with you as they don't prosecute crimes under $800 (or whatever the number is) in, say, San Francisco. That's been working well.
Ugh. This is like investigating someone stealing a pack of chewing gum. The Young Turks have 7 million subscribers. Daily Wire has 15 million. They produce comment daily. There are probably more than a hundred political pundits or news sites with more than 1 million subscribers. You obviously don’t ignore someone stealing chewing gum, but every penny you expend investing is money diverted from something else.
First, you have to separate out the crime from the impact. If a robber robbed you and only got away with $20, a robbery was still committed.
Judging the overall impact of the crime is a different thing.
Second, this is far from being the only operation. This is a drop in the bucket, but there are many buckets.
Wow. Can you say “ I’m an imbecile “ without telling me you’re an imbecile?
Naw, the real question is: Who is influencing YOU?!? This is trash.
What did I write that's not true?
Russia has definitely pushed fake stories about Ukraine. Example:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/florida-fugitive-john-mark-dougan-heads-into-ukraine-war-zone-to-prove-bioweapons-conspiracy
Common propaganda tactic always used is to not refer to ”Russia” but to “Putin”. Personify the desired enemy. “Putin in tears as Ukranians take out ammo dump”
For years now, every single article in my news feed about the Ukraine war has been slanted towards Ukraine. The article will take a minor, company sized, action and portray it as a war winning decisive battle. “Putin horrified as…..” “Russians panic as drone takes out an APC” “is this the end? Putin panics as Ukraine advances”
I saw at least three dozen headlines on the Ukranian capture of Rabotino. The village traded hands dozens of times because it was a village of five roofless stone buildings and nobody occupied it for long because the artillery would soon zero on on the buildings. But every time they returned, it was a triumph!!
Didn't you get sick of this during Russiagate? There's no meat to the indictment, it's all smoke and mirrors like Russiagate. The WaPo, NYT, AP, are setting you up for another sad disappointment but you just keep on pushing their distortions and lies.
Who is influencing you is the better question.
So none of this happened is your claim? No money was paid illegally to Lauren Chen/Tenet Media and it is all made up, yes? That's your belief?
I think the actual point people are making is that nobody has any way to know what happened, nor do you.
To put it simply:
1. If you catch someone lying, they aren't trustworthy.
2. If they are punished, repent and apologize, you might start to believe them again. If there is no penalty and they never apologize, you have to assume they'll lie again.
3. If someone is a liar you need to ignore anything they say, otherwise you risk being tricked again.
4. If you ignore what they are saying then it's equivalent to nothing happening and there's nothing to answer.
There's nothing special about the DOJ in this case. The same logic holds in personal relations as well. Once you know someone is a liar and getting away with it, you cut off all contact.
It's not my belief. It's based on common sense. The last "Russiagate" scam came up with nothing. Russiagaters always forget that an indictment is not proof of anything and in many cases (read: almost all, even for low level offenders) they are trumped up.
In this case it's a very weak accusation with no proof at all displayed to the public a couple months before a pivotal election where the Dem candidate is looking, shall we say, shakey.
Russiagate I was similar: lots of smoke, no evidence, that wound up with nothing. Nada. Zilch. I actually read the NYT and media for the first one and every article was the same -- lots of assertions, leading questions, off the record quotes from "senior investigators" and NOT ONE BIT OF ACTUAL EVIDENCE. Not that it didn't ruin any lives of course. Witch hunts always do.
Connect the dots and you get the same old fearmongering nonsense from an establishment (DOJ/Media) that lies to us constantly about everything (or just refuses to report on extremely important topics).
Russia has pushed fake stories about Ukraine. They should be called to account.
Russian propaganda is running. 1:1,000,000 in this war and against the US. Please do keep up.
It’s serious. I consider myself a free speech fundamentalist, but something about this situation is not resonating and I feel that a safeguard needs to be put in place here. Not “censorship” as it were, but maybe something like “speech passports,” or “speech nationalism” — basically the idea that constitutional protection of free speech is only guaranteed to US citizens, and that speech that originates outside of the US or non-citizens needs a passport. This would be some kind of badge saying “hey, I don’t have shared interest with your fundamental rights and society.” If we want migrants documented, this can be extended to their influence.
Free speech, yes, but I absolutely agree here - we need to know where it comes from for us to be responsible free speech consumers
That’s up to you, fool. Or would you like the job of determining whose news, or comments, we plebs are allowed to consume?
Oh, so suddenly free speech is not a universal human right that you're eager to share with everyone but a privilege for Americans only? Now that's quite a leap.
We could at least examine stories about Ukraine coming from Russia.
What if the first casualty of war? Truth. We’ve been lied to about Ukraine for thirty years. But now it’s the Russians fault. WTF.
Wait! What was that? A flash across the sky! Could it be?!? Yes! Yes! It is! It’s the Ghost of Kiev! 🙄🫣😂
Sorry, I understand how that might be misinterpreted. I was envisioning something more along the lines of an american independent journalist guild with standards for financing and citizenship. Think of it as a privilege above fundamental free speech rights.
1> Sushi is bad for you :) I know because I have a green tail🤣
2> impersonating a news outlet ir a person us illegal just about everywhere. Thise entities engaging in this activity should be shut down/out where possible and prosecuted is possible.
3> beyond that there is really not much a free society can do to limit disinformation without becoming Orwellian dictatorships.
4> It is up to the consumer to engage their brain and do even rudimentary investigation of every thing they consume before comming to their own conclusion on the matter. Will everyone.do that? of course not, but to try and protect those that do not 1st imvestigate from disinformation is IMHO a wide road leading to 1984.
I am the source of my opinions. Your feculent generation has simply forgotten how to think critically and research. FFS, these same assholes who tell us the US government as currently constituted is the source of all truth fail to notice the mountains of contradictions and lies - they barely even try anymore.
You mistake opinions for facts.
And your opinions are formed based on the information (right and wrong) that you choose to consume.
I consume news and information based on what I am researching. Doing some basic parsing of the studies and reporting usually rapidly reveal if ideology or reason is behind it. Then I choose the most relevant and sound reporting and studies from which to decide how I feel about an issue.
You don’t have to think as you’re told. And you’re definitely the one confusing facts and opinions. If someone in authority is telling you what is moral or right, that is opinion.
It's weird that you'd assume that I don't do exactly what you've suggested: research. For example, I read the indictment. Have you?
I think we can agree that we don't have to think as we're told and should put time into parsing data.
I hope you do your research and don’t just base opinions on what your group expects or your political side’s propaganda. But your screed did not include research or forming your own opinion after checking multiple sources until just now.
Gee this diatribe didn’t get the expected fawning, now, did it? lol.whatvdid you expect? The fucking media, all of it, is the propaganda arm of the uniparty. Those of us with a brain are reading this shit you put together like a joke.
Lmao I don't one shit about this. Better to be influenced by Putin than Soros or Fink.
Well, that's certainly a..take.
If you were concerned about accurate reporting about Ukraine you’d definitely be concerned about Russian fake news.
Much if not most of the political “news” from US. Media is propaganda. Look how much is intentionally taken out of context. We all need to be hearing from primary sources instead of this medias cover of “an undisclosed source” or other “anonymous source”. There is no transparency.
DOJ has forfeited the public trust. That’s a problem for many reasons. The fact that half the country simply doesn’t take this seriously is something they brought on themselves.
So you're saying that there is no documented Russian, Iranian, Qatari and Chinese influence because you don't trust the DOJ?
There’s also a fucking retard trying to influence young boys to become girls. Or thirty of them. But that’s ok. Because it’s inthe approved narrative. But don’t you dare be Russian and hope the democrats lose. That’s against a law we haven’t made up yet! Let’s ask the doj! What a stupid, ineffectual hambone of a person you are.
No. It means I don’t take their word for it. I recognize that they have institutional interests that may outweigh truth telling. What they say is not enough without other corroboration.
You realize these claims have been investigated by multiple sources? The current DOJ claim...i recommend you read the indictment for yourself instead of outright rejecting it. You don't have to trust the DOJ outright, but at least examine the claims, whether they are plausible, and look at the evidence they present
I don’t doubt any of these particular countries do nefarious things. I also believe that claims of foreign influence are used to harass citizens who diverge from regime-approved narratives. Both are true.
People might claim that someone is a "Russian asset" or whatnot, but it's quite different than an actual indictment with a lot of documented evidence.