Facebook Busts Russian Disinfo Networks As US Election Looms (wired.com) 80
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Wired: Facebook announced on Thursday that it has taken down three "coordinated inauthentic behavior" networks promoting disinformation that included nearly 300 Facebook and Instagram accounts along with dozens of Facebook Pages and Groups. While the efforts were seemingly run independently, and focused primarily outside of the US, each has ties to Russian intelligence -- and they collectively provide a sobering echo of the social media assault that roiled the 2016 election. The networks Facebook tackled dated back at least three years, but most had few followers at the time they were caught. They primarily promoted non-Facebook websites in an apparent effort to get around the platform's detection mechanisms, focusing on news and current events, particularly geopolitics. They targeted users in a number of countries, including Syria, Ukraine, Turkey, Japan, the UK, and Belarus, as well as the United States to a lesser extent.
Facebook attributed one of the disinformation distribution networks to "actors associated with election interference in the US in the past, including those involved in 'DC leaks' in 2016." In other words, the actors were likely tied to Fancy Bear, also known as APT 28, the group also responsible for hacks of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. Facebook attributes the second network to "individuals associated with past activity by the Russian Internet Research Agency," the so-called troll farm that wreaked havoc on Facebook in 2016. The company noted that it is unclear whether the IRA is still an active entity or what form it takes at this point. The third network had "links to individuals in Russia, including those associated with Russian intelligence services." None of the networks focused solely on the US. Instead, they engaged with a broad array of topics connected to Russian interests, including the war in Ukraine, the Syrian civil war, the election and protests in Belarus, Russia's relationship with NATO, and politics in Turkey.
Facebook attributed one of the disinformation distribution networks to "actors associated with election interference in the US in the past, including those involved in 'DC leaks' in 2016." In other words, the actors were likely tied to Fancy Bear, also known as APT 28, the group also responsible for hacks of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. Facebook attributes the second network to "individuals associated with past activity by the Russian Internet Research Agency," the so-called troll farm that wreaked havoc on Facebook in 2016. The company noted that it is unclear whether the IRA is still an active entity or what form it takes at this point. The third network had "links to individuals in Russia, including those associated with Russian intelligence services." None of the networks focused solely on the US. Instead, they engaged with a broad array of topics connected to Russian interests, including the war in Ukraine, the Syrian civil war, the election and protests in Belarus, Russia's relationship with NATO, and politics in Turkey.
Ghost them ! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure they would figure that out pretty quickly. If they can ban IPs, email domains, blocks of phone numbers etc. it will be more effective.
Having said that Facebook's efforts have been pretty pathetic in the past. Accounts claiming to be Americans but which only post during Moscow office hours and occasionally forget to scrub the location data in uploaded photos are quite obvious to everyone except Facebook.
Re: Ghost them ! (Score:2)
The easiest solution is to simply prohibit discussion based on politics and religion. If all social media prohibited editorial or opinion regarding politics and religion, I think things would calm down. I guarantee you that if social media was legislated that they could be sued for libel for their content they would immediately bad those two topics immediately. Every social media hijacking and dissemination of fake content has almost always fallen into those teo subjects.
We, as a society of pseudo anonymou
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
The employee argued that, on a technical level, content from Republican politicians could get swept up by algorithms aggressively removing white supremacist material. [theverge.com]
Transparently Disingenuous (Score:1)
They could also start actually banning white supremacist trolls, but it turns out that those are the same thing as republicans... The employee argued that, on a technical level, content from Republican politicians could get swept up by algorithms aggressively removing white supremacist material. [theverge.com]
Now try the same with algorthms banning other racial supremacist trolls like black supremacists, or other deadly totalitarian ideologies like communism . . . there, that was fun.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
They shouldn't bust them (in the sense cancel their accounts) because they'll just show up as new accounts by the next day. They should just ghost them: make them invisible to normal accounts, only visible to themselves, other ghosted accounts and the rest of Russia.
Facebook already has millions of dead people. Now you want to haunt it too?
Yeah OK, Paul Bearer.
And this is an APT. They weren't compiled yesterday. To say they're likely well aware of countermeasures, is putting it mildly.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
That's some fancy conspiracy theory you are smoking there.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
They shouldn't bust them (in the sense cancel their accounts) because they'll just show up as new accounts by the next day. They should just ghost them: make them invisible to normal accounts, only visible to themselves, other ghosted accounts and the rest of Russia.
I know this *sounds* easy in theory, in practice it's not so easy to do this kind of thing. Remember, Facebook must balance it's "For Profit" status and because the thing they are selling is access to YOU (i.e. you are the product they sell) it's somewhat counter productive to just dump accounts or isolate them.
Personally, I wish that Facebook would just get out of the business of policing the truthfulness of political stuff and concentrate on driving off things like porn, incitement of violence and the l
Re:Ghost them ! (Score:5, Insightful)
Busting on the other hand...
Shows how fragile our democracy is. (Score:5, Insightful)
Our freedom of speech and expression, at its best means we can talk about the problems that are affecting us share what works and what doesn't without fear of reprisal, for saying something inconvenient to the agenda (good or bad) of the ruling system. Allowing for better changes in the system and allow the country to grow.
At its worse it is used to spread lies, discredit anyone who is in dissent of the of the running agenda (good or bad). Gaslight around real issues, and exaggerate or just lie about small issues to make them seem like it is the real problem. Painting people of the other side as characters or the real person Liberals are either Lazy Welfare Dependant bums, or Academic Elitist who live in a world separated from reality. Conservatives are either Wealthy corrupt businessmen, or poor rednecks hicks who delight in their cruelty towards others. Where we Americans are being shown to be more different than similar. Forcing us to stick more firmly into our sided political parties, and accepts each sides viewpoint as an absolute.
Blue states do care about the farmers in the Red States, we want them to prosper and do well. Red States do care about those city based industries in the Blue States as well. And would want the people living in these cities to do well and grow too. There is some disconnect because what it takes to succeed in a Rural area, is much different than what it takes in a City area.
This is where we are now, Freedom of Speech at its worse, because it is being used as a weapon against us, not as a tool to help us.
Having an informed populace is key for a democracy, It allows us to make better decisions, that will support the country on the whole. The problem isn't buzzwords like Socialism or Fascism. With a strong and informed Democracy it makes sure that the Government is working for the people and not the People working for the government.
Re: (Score:1)
And anonymous posting is STILL disabled on D2 right here on Slashdot.
Anonymous [Re:Shows how fragile our demo...] (Score:2)
And anonymous posting is STILL disabled on D2 right here on Slashdot.
Odd. That post saying anonymous posting is disabled... was posted anonymously.
Re:Anonymous [Re:Shows how fragile our demo...] (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And despite fucking those of us who DONT post that bullshit ASCII art, they can STILL post swastikas. That ought to tell you where Slashdot's priorities lie.
No, I'm not the swastika guy, despite the humorous comments alleging it. I do however report ASCII art as spam, and would support a filter to remove ASCII art, as it isn't making an actual argument of any kind.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get how it makes it past the lameness filter. God forbid I try to post a table with numbers, but 30 ASCII art swastikas get spammed all over the place.
Re: (Score:2)
What the hell is D2?
Re: (Score:1)
Jesus fuck. D1 and D2 are versions of the discussion system. You can select them in the preferences. read the FAQ already.
I posted that using D1, which is crap, but they removed the Post Anonymously checkbox, even when logged in, from D2.
Re: (Score:1)
Take a look at my ID, asshole.
I've been set on D1 forever (but at the time they called it "classic"), and haven't had a need or desire to change that preference in years and years.
You didn't need the attitude, jerk.
Re: (Score:2)
That UID is WHY I gave you an attitude. It was an enormous deal, for multiple years, and you STILL didn't notice?
Cry me a river. Actually, don't. It's not worth it anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
I will miss this feature, as I used to post anonymously with contrary points (less as troll and more as an attempt to keep conversations moving). Unfortunately I don't have the patience of the professional trolls to make sock puppet accounts.
https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Nice post (nm) (Score:1)
That's not very nice (Score:2)
Painting people of the other side as characters or the real person Liberals are either Lazy Welfare Dependant bums, or Academic Elitist who live in a world separated from reality.
There are more than a few Lazy Welfare Dependent bums and Academic Elitists who won't appreciate being labeled as Liberals.
Re:Shows how fragile our democracy is. (Score:4, Insightful)
You've made some accurate assessments, but unfortunately this highlights our stupidity, not merely fragility.
And the fragility? Yeah, that would be represented by the Woke Generation hell bent on elevating feelings over facts, which is the real issue we have to deal with regarding Freedom of Speech. And no, this is not meant to be an attack on some marginalized group, so don't even start with that bullshit either. This is a very serious issue. It is fairly easy to discredit a liar. It is becoming more and more difficult to get humans to accept facts, especially when they are as cold and hard as the bread they'll be getting in lines soon.
As far as Blue and Red states, let's just knock that shit off too. It's gang talk. Literally. I'm sick of it. The amount of true Representatives (meaning representing The People, not Greed) in America can be counted on one hand of a bad shop teacher. If you think there's still a "good" side left, then just show me your colors so I know which gang you belong to.
With a strong and informed Democracy it makes sure that the Government is working for the people and not the People working for the government.
Agreed, but even a strong and informed Democracy, doesn't stand a chance against rampant corruption. Your morals, truths, and do-the-right-thing attitude will be silenced by Greed, just as it is today.
We use social media to inform, and citizens accept that. Even defend it. We continue to support the bought-and-paid for MSM as the cheerleaders for our gangs. THAT is your average "strong" citizen representing our Democracy.
Re: (Score:2)
It is hard to accept facts today when there is another source saying that they are just as reputable if not more so saying something the opposite.
A Car Salesman will not try to sell you a car based on facts, They will sell you a car based on feelings.
So you are looking at that Toyota Tundra, it is a good Truck, it is reliable. But take a look at the Ford. Now that is a real manly Truck no soft curves here. I can tell you are a tough guy who is going to need something that can work with you.
This isn't a fa
Re: (Score:2)
It is hard to accept facts today when there is another source saying that they are just as reputable if not more so saying something the opposite.
My final comments on this sum it up. You have to give a shit enough to care. And hardly any two sides show "just as reputable if not more". Follow the money. Follow the politics. Follow the belief system. There are many ways to dig deeper into people's motivations to lie.
A Car Salesman will not try to sell you a car based on facts, They will sell you a car based on feelings.
Exactly. And now you know how to tell when someone is lying to you. Those making truthful statements can back them up with facts and evidence. Those trying to sell you something will back it up with emotions and feelings. And the
Re:Shows how fragile our democracy is. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not so sure about people in red and blue states caring about each other. It's not something you can take as given. You need to qualify it with "some". Some people in red states care about what happens to people in blue states and vice versa. Some do not.
That's always true; at any given time there is a certain *incidence* of caring or not caring in the population toward outsiders. And over time that incidence varies, and is subject to manipulation. Fear and insecurity are the best tools of the divider. Someone who feels secure and confident is more likely to care about other people; someone who feels insecure and fearful isn't going to care about people different from them; in fact they'll be looking for people to throw under the bus.
Our two party system already encourages a divide-an-conquer strategy which stokes fear and resentment between different groups of Americans. That was already bad enough, but on top of that COVID-19 is the greatest challenge to the nation since WW2. The experience of surviving both the Great Depression and WW2 created the most self-confident generation of Americans ever; and not coincidentally the most generous and caring. But that generation has mostly passed now; those that follow have inherited a superficially optimistic demeanor, but without the empowering experience of triumphing over adversity. We're still optimistic, but it's optimism of fact denial, not the kind that comes from knowing you can adapt and prosper.
Our enemies know this, and are doing everything they can to spread fear and doubt because that will lead to the election of polarizing politicians. Divided is weak, so they want us divided and politicians that profit from division are all too willing to go along.
Re: (Score:2)
Our two party system already encourages a divide-an-conquer strategy which stokes fear and resentment between different groups of Americans. ...
Yep!!
That is the real problem we need to solve. And, as far as I can see, nobody is trying to solve it.
(and, not the two-parties per se, but the actual root of the problem, which is the greatest-plurality winner-take-all ballot counting that underlies it.)
Our enemies know this, and are doing everything they can to spread fear and doubt because that will lead to the election of polarizing politicians. Divided is weak, so they want us divided and politicians that profit from division are all too willing to go along.
Indeed.
Re: (Score:2)
That is the real problem we need to solve. And, as far as I can see, nobody is trying to solve it.
Somebody already did. [apnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That is the real problem we need to solve. And, as far as I can see, nobody is trying to solve it.
Somebody already did. [apnews.com]
I like it! One state trying it; 49 to go!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not so sure about people in red and blue states caring about each other. It's not something you can take as given. You need to qualify it with "some". Some people in red states care about what happens to people in blue states and vice versa. Some do not.
I think it only takes a small but well placed few individuals to get entire populations to go along with their agenda. Some of the stuff I see on the internet especially social media gives impression the red and blue states are very close to a shooting war. In reality most are simply busy living day to day. But things can become ugly, I'd not be surprised this is how a few individuals manage to start the Civil War and get millions to engage in the worst war US has ever been involved with.
Re: (Score:2)
We are not seeing droves of Governors from the mid-west cheering that California has a lot of forest fires. We don't see east coast Governors cheering that Texas and Louisiana are getting hit with Hurricanes. While I am sure some people will say that the Wildfires are a sign from God that Californians are corrupt people (Ignoring the natural disasters going on in their neck of the woods) or some people will say those who are in the path of the Hurricanes serves them right to disbelieve global warming (Ig
Thanks? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We can all sleep better tonight thanks to Facebook's unrelenting efforts. I'm also full of shit.
If there is ONE principle you can count on with Facebook is that they will do what it takes to maximize profits. The only reason they even care about this is the near universal outcry about meddling in the election by foreign governments using their platform hurts their subscriber numbers. If it hadn't been brought to light, you can be sure they'd be out selling access to you to the highest bidder without regard to where the money comes from or what ads they are sending you. Which means this whole announ
Seriously guys, this again ? It's not a good look. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I remember when Slashdot had at least 3 stories a week about the FISA court and how abusive and unconsitutional it was... back when it was used against terrorists that is.
Being used against terrorists is, of course, what it is for. The problem with a secret court making secret decisions with a gag order against ever revealing them is that we have no way to know that it's only used against terrorists. There are no checks and balances
Now that FISA is being nakedly and blatantly abused to target a sitting president and disrupt the peaceful transition of power in a democracy...
First, delete "is" and substitute "was". You're talking about four years ago. (and delete "sitting president", too.)
But second and more important, you're wrong. The FBI was given a tip about Russian attempts to undermine the election. They invest
agree [Re:Meanwhile...= (Score:2)
>They investigated the tip, which is what they're supposed to do, and determined that part of it (the Steele dossier part) had no credibility, and that other parts of it were accurate.
That is a lie.
Uh, you posted "that is a lie" and then link to a source agreeing with what I said: they investigated a tip. Which is what they're supposed to do.
When they investigated the tip, they determined that part of it (the Steele dossier part) had no credibility, and that other parts of it were accurate. Read the Mueller Report.
(oh, and your Washington Examiner quote has one error: it says that the Steele dossier was paid for by the DNC. Only half true. Initially, the Steele dossier investigating Trump was funded
Funding [Re:agree [Re:Meanwhile...=] (Score:2, Informative)
> they investigated a tip.
And also used it for FISA applications.
Correct.That is how investigation works: they go to the court (which in this case is the FISA) and get a warrant.
They knew it was salacious lies
Yes. After they investigated.
from Russian FSB
No, here you're confusing the Steele dossier with the Russian interference. Two different things.
but still used it to spy on Trump's campaign. Read the Horrowitz report and the Durham investigation.
Read the Senate report and the Mueller report.
>r: it says that the Steele dossier was paid for by the DNC
No. The dossier was originally put together with funding from The Washington Free Beacon. They funded Fusion GPS, and Fusion funded Steele to put the dossier together when Trump was a primary candidate. Once Trump became the c
Re: (Score:1)
> Yes. After they investigated.
Ok, you are stuck on "they investigated". The FBI knew it was bad information but still used it. That's not "investigated and threw away". That's lying to the courts with known false information and fabricated evidence in some cases. Do you not understand this ? How do you not understand this? What are you missing here?
> here you're confusing the Steele dossier with the Russian interference
No. You are wrong. The source of Steele was Russian disinformation. From the link.
More slowly [Re:Funding [Re:agree] (Score:2)
> Yes. After they investigated.
Ok, you are stuck on "they investigated". The FBI knew it was bad information but still used it.
Let me repeat this again more slowly, because you didn't read. They knew it was bad information as a result of investigating.
They're supposed to investigate stuff like this.
I'm not a great fan of the FISA court. As I had posted:
The problem with a secret court making secret decisions with a gag order against ever revealing them is that we have no way to know that it's only used against terrorists. There are no checks and balances.
Re: (Score:1)
Let me repeat this again more slow because you don't understand.
They knew it was bad and still used it for FISA and their investigation into Trumps campaign. They lied to the courts.
Holy shit dude.
FBI gets tip.
FBI knows tip is based on lies partly because Steele was discredited and investigates that tip.
FBI still uses that tip anyway to get FISA warrant.
FBI lies to the court and uses that tip. Repeatedly.
You: but the FBI investigated the tip!!!
Get past step two for one bloody second.
Great you don't like FIS
Re: (Score:1)
Let me ask another way.
Do you think it is appropriate for cops to plant false evidence to justify a warrant? That is basically what happened.
Re: (Score:2)
They knew it was bad because they investigated it.
Getting a warrant was part of the investigation.
Investigating tips like that is their job.
Re: (Score:2)
Let me ask another way. Do you think it is appropriate for cops to plant false evidence to justify a warrant? That is basically what happened.
Since they didn't "plant" the Steele dossier, that is not "basically" what happened.
Re: (Score:1)
So cops can plant false evidence for a warrant.
You are beyond hopeless.
Re: (Score:1)
They lied to the courts with known false information to justify spying on Trumps campaign.
yes it is just like a cop planting false information.
That's their job [Re:More slowly [Re:Funding] (Score:2)
Nevertheless, they needed to investigate it, because that's their job.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think we need to bring in the ability to believe the alleged president (TDS) into this.
Proven interference [Re:Meanwhile...] (Score:4, Informative)
Once you know that, the left's obsession with this whole disproven "Russian interference" thing becomes clear...
Except the Russian interference was real, and very well supported by evidence. It's in the Mueller Report; it's in the (GOP-led) Senate report.
The part that was not proven was the allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.
(and that wasn't actually disproved... not proven is not the same as disproven.
(And even there, the Senate report concluded that some members of the campaign tried to collude with the Russians, althought it was not clear whether they succeeded in doing so, or if the Russians just did what they'd do anyway. Read the Senate report.)
Re: (Score:1)
Except the Russian interference was real
And very much the mole hill that was turned into a mountain for propaganda purposes.
We were supposed to be quaking in fear from a paltry amount of Facebook and Google ad buys.
Then the relevant fact came out that the spending occurred before and AFTER the election.
Russian interference amounts to pissing into the ocean, but since it is technically true, can be used for political effect. Just don't mind the hundreds of millions spent on 'political consultants', astroturfing and domestic troll farms, and just a
So, we agree 9Re:Proven interference] (Score:2)
Except the Russian interference was real
And very much the mole hill that was turned into a mountain for propaganda purposes.
The anonymous coward I was replying to says it was "disproven". This is inaccurate. I take it you agree that this statement was wrong?
The question of how important it was--a mountain or a molehill (or something between)--is not the question I was addressing.
Re: (Score:2)
The anonymous coward I was replying to says it was "disproven". This is inaccurate. I take it you agree that this statement was wrong?
Yes, because correlation is not causation.
I'll just repeat that, since some people want to go into instant denial the moment the idea is challenged that the usual activity the Russians have done year after year, had no meaningful impact on the 2016 election. Correlation is STILL not causation.
Mountain or molehill is absolutely relevant when claiming that certain "interference" affected election outcomes.
[Re:So, we agree] (Score:2)
The anonymous coward I was replying to says it was "disproven". This is inaccurate. I take it you agree that this statement was wrong?
Yes, because correlation is not causation.
Since you agree that the anonymous coward's assertion that Russian interference had been disproven is wrong, we seem to be in agreement.
I'm not sure why we are still arguing.
Re: (Score:2)
"it stretches credulity to think the Russians didn't turn the election
- James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence.
"that Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election, and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf."
- Carter
Political Kathleen Hall Jamieson thinks that Russians changed the election result.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, what could be better than an appeal to authority to James "Least Untruthful" Clapper. We don't need actual hard evidence for an extraordinary claim, let's just find out what a politician or ivory tower leftist says.
Now let's sit back, relax, and be at ease as Corporations like Facebook and Google police our political speech for us and enforce draconian internet censorship. Because Russians. Everything is fine.
Re:Meanwhile... (Score:4)
But no, let's talk about Facebook posts as the agent of Russian interference in American elections.
The fact that Russian agents use Facebook posts as a method of disrupting American elections (and, frankly, trying to disrupt everything about America, not just elections), is entirely independent of any of the other things you bring up.
Fake Facebook accounts aren't the only tool the Russians are using to try to foment dissent in America, of course-- just the most visible.
(The left tends to think that the Russians are primarily interfering in elections to advance Trump. No, not really. The Russians want to divide America, disrupt American elections, split America off from NATO, and inject the idea that American government is corrupt and can't be trusted. They only incidentally care who wins: their goal is to be disruptive, and they're attacking elections to do so.)
Re: (Score:2)
(The left tends to think that the Russians are primarily interfering in elections to advance Trump. No, not really. The Russians want to divide America, disrupt American elections, split America off from NATO, and inject the idea that American government is corrupt and can't be trusted. They only incidentally care who wins: their goal is to be disruptive, and they're attacking elections to do so.)
Sooo... Having an American president who alienates all of the US' allies at every turn and shits on NATO every other day is just a nice bonus? What a happy coincidence for the Russians.
Re:Meanwhile... (Score:4, Insightful)
(The left tends to think that the Russians are primarily interfering in elections to advance Trump. No, not really. The Russians want to divide America, disrupt American elections, split America off from NATO, and inject the idea that American government is corrupt and can't be trusted. They only incidentally care who wins: their goal is to be disruptive, and they're attacking elections to do so.)
Sooo... Having an American president who alienates all of the US' allies at every turn and shits on NATO every other day is just a nice bonus? What a happy coincidence for the Russians.
Yep. Disruption is what the Russians want.
Any disruption, all disruption. They tell white supremicists "get your guns and protect America against Antifa!"; they tell blacks "Black lives matter, you better shoot back"; they tell both of them to go protest in the same place at the same time.
Re:-1 off topic [Re:Meanwhile...] (Score:4, Insightful)
And a list of facts, was labeled Flamebait.
True, should have been moderated "-1 off topic", since nothing in the post was relevant in any way.
-1 Flamebait is a good second choice, though, since it clearly was trying to start a flamewar on an off-topic subject. That's flamebait.
And the sad part here, is people still feel that a list of facts is all that is needed, to start a flame war instead of simply engaging in civil discourse. This was a list of political corruption, not someone who called your mother a whore.
This is exactly the true problem. The elevation of facts, over feelings. Here's a few more for good measure. Truth hurts sometimes. Life is pain. Anyone who says differently, is selling something. What am I "inciting" here? Common sense?
Call me an asshole, and I'll challenge it with why to make you prove it. That's not a flame war. That's civil discourse. Otherwise, I would just do the ignorant thing and punch you in the face.
Re: (Score:2)
* The elevation of feelings, over facts.
Correction for clarity.
Re: (Score:2)
...the son of the sitting Vice President took $3 million in Ukrainian oligarch money, a $3.5 million transfer from the wife of the mayor of Moscow, and helped sell American military technology to a Chinese business partner with ties to the People's Liberation Army [battleswarmblog.com].
Mike Pence's son has been doing shady business in the Ukraine?
Re:Meanwhile... (Score:4)
I think that this would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous.
Republicans are investigating shit that Biden's son might have done, but are ignoring everything Trump is actively doing. I mean, it's astonishing.
There's a group trying to keep tabs on the Trump organization and family to document all of the ways they're being corrupt. The issue is that they can't keep up. Last I heard they were identifying an average of something like 4 instances a DAY where someone was doing something potentially illegal related to the commingling of business and politics.
We've got a president routinely billing the secret service for staying in his own hotels, and the Republicans don't bat an eye. But the shit that a relative of a former official did once? Gotta get on that!
While the president actively sets fires, they're going after someone suspected of arson years ago. It's astonishing that anyone could ever vote for them again.
What about the Koch Brothers? (Score:1)
First Amendment (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Get with the correct narrative there! The Koch Bros. suddenly became "honorable" the minute they went anti-Trump.
I hear a lot from left wingers in my various internet feed. Let me clue you: nobody on the left thinks that the Koch brothers are or have ever been "honorable" in any way whatsoever.
...Oh, and of course let's not talk about George Soros because all Billionaires are evil unless they are the "right kind" of billionaire.
Turn out the Koch brothers (well, the one Koch brother who is left) have an order of magnitude more money that George Soros.
He is the devil that the right rails against, but he's penny ante compared to Kochs.
Russian "disinfo" is bullshit (Score:1)
Watch out for republican and democrat disinfo! They're notorious!
All our election problems are domestic in origin, even the guys who hired the Russians, Chinese, whoever else you want to blame..
Re: (Score:2)
Hired? They do it for free. The chaos is beneficial to them. See how the term "civil war" is getting brought up repeatedly since their guy won. Utterly predictable, and widely predicted. If anyone's hiring in this scenario, it's the Eastern European oligarchs who employ our President's services as a money launderer. Still haven't seen those tax returns, huh? That's where a lot of them will be listed.
I suppose you could say the decades of propaganda from the domestic oligarchy via Fox News is the origin, tho
That’s so much! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So might as well as delete Trump's accounts. He's got as much influence as Tom in 11th grade by your logic.