Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

Eric Cartman

everlast75 wrote: »

Trump is in power 18 months plus.

If there was any chance the dems rigged it, surely trump would be either negligent in not 'locking her up', or else the allegation she rigged the election is nonsense.

Trump on the other hand, had that meeting...

Ok, and the accusations of rigging are in relation to troll farms and fake news sites, this is only the third presidential election in US history where social media is really a thing, so still relatively new.

How much of an impact do you genuinely believe it had, the fake news has always been there be it biased print media, preachers at church, campaign tv ads. I'm not saying its right but why was it so effective this time. 306 electoral college votes to 232, how would that number have gone without this interference in your own opinion .

Do you think this is exclusive to trump or just a manifestation of how future US elections are going to play out with social media and analytics companies etc..

StringerBell

Eric Cartman wrote: »

he ran a company that used fraudulent ID to open PayPal accounts etc.., what was his actual Link in any investigation ?

Are you asking genuinely?

Eric Cartman

StringerBell wrote: »

Are you asking genuinely?

Yeah. Ive heard the name but even articles are a little vauge on how it links up, they all say what he did but theyre not bridging the gap for me, starts off with oaypal and bank fraud and goes on to talk about russia but doesnt explain the link

StringerBell

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Yeah. Ive heard the name but even articles are a little vauge on how it links up, they all say what he did but theyre not bridging the gap for me, starts off with oaypal and bank fraud and goes on to talk about russia but doesnt explain the link

I fail to accept that tbh. I'm pretty sure if I do a Google search right now it will throw up his links to the investigation.

Put simply he helped them identify Russians who he had sold fake accounts and IDs to. People he had helped commit fraud.

Eric Cartman

StringerBell wrote: »

I fail to accept that tbh. I'm pretty sure if I do a Google search right now it will throw up his links to the investigation.

Put simply he helped them identify Russians who he had sold fake accounts and IDs to. People he had helped commit fraud.

Ok so he sold russians paypal accounts that appeared to be US citizens , did those paypal accounts donate to the election or buy ads or ?

RIGOLO

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ok, and the accusations of rigging are in relation to troll farms and fake news sites, this is only the third presidential election in US history where social media is really a thing, so still relatively new.

How much of an impact do you genuinely believe it had, the fake news has always been there be it biased print media, preachers at church, campaign tv ads. I'm not saying its right but why was it so effective this time. 306 electoral college votes to 232, how would that number have gone without this interference in your own opinion .

Do you think this is exclusive to trump or just a manifestation of how future US elections are going to play out with social media and analytics companies etc..

I posted this before , you raise a valid question , some of the answers can be found below.

I think people are asking the wrong question. Instead of being focused on the witchhunt after Trump and Rusian collusion , they should be asking
Why/when/how did we hand over the democratic process (as well as many other aspects of society) to social media internet giants in Silicon valley ?

Id recommend watching both of the videos linked below

This is two part, scroll down on the link for part 1.
A two-part investigation into the threats to democracy posed by fake news and propaganda on social media

https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/peopleandpower/2018/02/disinformation-democracy-180201060250730.html

Couple of good docs from AlJazeera on how the Trump Campaign squeezed every vote and every dollar out of their digital campaign and their social media manipulation.
Facebook admit they offered both campaigns the same level of support.

The Trump Campaign are quite open about taking up this offer and asking FACEBOOK for every tweak, knob, button, hidden option they could use to target voters.

By all accounts the HRC campaign did not take FB up on the offer to the same degree.

And with a spend of close on 90million you can assume the Trump Campaign had a whole lot of help from FaceBook, including dedicated FB employees to assist them.
One can safely assume twitter and google and the other platforms were equally directly involved and supportive of the Trump social media campaign.
Although the TRump administration spent the bulk of their money with FB


One aspect which shows how clever the Trump campaign was is how even thought both campaigns spent similar amounts of money , the Trump campaign spent their dollars wiser, they targeted the swing states (Michigan,Pen, Wisconsin) whist hilary targetted the more expensive East coast and west coast media markets . Consequently for every dollar spent Trump campaign could target more voters than Hilary as FB had different rates for different states.

Aljazeera .. good news stations , has its bias as all do but not to the same extent as the MSM, it reminds me of news reporting before it became a toxic cesspool...
They have another good doc too on Russian Trolls etc.. worth a watch ...

Facebook, Russian trolls and the new era of information warfare

https://www.aljazeera.com/blogs/americas/2018/01/facebook-russian-trolls-era-information-warfare-180131135425603.html

batgoat

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ok so he sold russians paypal accounts that appeared to be US citizens , did those paypal accounts donate to the election or buy ads or ?

A quick google and it's in the first search result.

His service allowed people online to breeze through PayPal's financial verification steps and, in the case of the Russians, buy ads on Facebook. Pinedo had bought a few hundred bank accounts for $20 each and sold them for $40, generating him his sole income of about $40,000 over three years, according to prosecutors and his defense lawyer.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/10/politics/pinedo-mueller-sentencing/index.html

TomOnBoard

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ok, and the accusations of rigging are in relation to troll farms and fake news sites, this is only the third presidential election in US history where social media is really a thing, so still relatively new.

How much of an impact do you genuinely believe it had, the fake news has always been there be it biased print media, preachers at church, campaign tv ads. I'm not saying its right but why was it so effective this time. 306 electoral college votes to 232, how would that number have gone without this interference in your own opinion .

Do you think this is exclusive to trump or just a manifestation of how future US elections are going to play out with social media and analytics companies etc..

Before the 2016 election,Trump alleged that the whole election was rigged against him. After he won, he alleged that there had been massive voter fraud, denying him the popular vote majority. Later he set up a commission, despite there being little or no acceptance in political circles that there had been any meaningful voter fraud in an ongoing basis. That commission dies a death with no evidence of the alleged widespread voter fraud being found/produced.

The social media/troll farm scenario only became known to the general public after the election, and its impact on that election is disputed. However, in an electorate that produced a majority of 28,871 votes in Wisconsin for example, it would only have taken 14,236 people to vote the other way to have changed the result. And that is well within the realm of possible impact from even a medium scale rumour and dis-information campaign such as the troll farms were capable of delivering. So, while there is no direct evidence of cause & effect, there is absolutely direct evidence that such mechanisms were deployed as contained in the Mueller prosecutions.

Eric Cartman

batgoat wrote: »

A quick google and it's in the first search result.

thanks for that. People here get touchy about news sources so wanted to make sure.

So just to boil this down. Is the crux of the trump-russia collusion that Russian operatives operated troll farms and bought Facebook ads to plaster pro trump info everywhere ?

If I have gotten that correct then, had trump paid US companies to do the same would there be any scandal / would it be illegal in any way ?

Also is there hard evidence that Trump or his campaign transferred money to Russia for such purposes ?

StringerBell

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ok so he sold russians paypal accounts that appeared to be US citizens , did those paypal accounts donate to the election or buy ads or ?

You asked for the link to the investigation, I provided that.

At this point I'm just gonna have to ask you to Google for yourself to find out all the details, what was part of his plea agreement etc

It won't take long. It's not like he's a big fish.

All the info you want is there at the tip of your fingers

In terms of what you would be worried about, I'd be more concerned by Nader, the Russian bank link with the Trump's organisation and the internet logs etc

I'm sure Mueller is ahead of the curve on that but even if he isn't the Democrats will be on it once the house is taken. Their requests obviously fell on deaf ears with the majority party but I'm sure they have the subpoenas ready to go to find out exactly what the content of those communications were, and there were lots of them.

In terms of the transfer of money that you are after. The evidence generally comes out at the end of an investigation, I'd think George Nader would be a pretty obvious concern in that regard though.

aloyisious

ELM327 wrote: »

How is he clearly unfit?
Based on uncorroborated claims, which he is still innocent of (as he has not been convicted in a court of law)?
Or is it based on his performance in the farce of a hearing where he was asked questions such as "do you like beer", "did you drink in college"


How would you like if you had a disciplinary hearing in work and were faced with questions about your college life from 30 years ago?? Mind = blown.

Personally I see that both the people called before the committee were found guilty in the court of political party public opinion, which does count as equally damning a conviction to people as one from an actual court of law when it comes to life in certain circles at the moment. That procedure made it inevitable as sure as day follows night. Don Trump, IMO, has been absolutely no help to keeping the US together as a composite society by his behaviour prior to and since his election to the office of POTUS.

rossie1977

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Every election cycle there appears to be an attempt by both sides. John Mccain let it go, Al Gore let it go , The democrats didn't let it go this time so we still have quite a few cycles with question marks and investigations that could have been.

Im of the belief that both sides tamper with every election, maybe trump tampered harder than anyone , maybe Hillary underestimated the tampering a man without a few elections under his belt could do.

If you think the dam's weren't doing it too I think thats naive. I don't think the US has had a clean and fair election in a hundred years.

On what basis did John McCain have a case?

Al Gore didn't let it go. The Supreme Court halted the recount.

Republicans sent staff members down to Miami to pose as voters to try and stop recount and they were successful in getting recount halted. There is actually a famous photo of the protestors at the recount, everyone paid to be there by their party



It would later emerge that Gore would have won recount and thus Presidency had it been allowed to continue

Water John

Stock Exchange DOW down over 3% today. Maybe it will bounce back up a bit tomorrow but could equally signal the turning. Will Trump take ownership of it if that happens?
Will he go to Florida to throw kitchen rolls at the plebs after the hurricane?

TomOnBoard

Water John wrote: »

Stock Exchange DOW down over 3% today. Maybe it will bounce back up a bit tomorrow but could equally signal the turning. Will Trump take ownership of it if that happens?
Will he go to Florida to throw kitchen rolls at the plebs after the hurricane?

A terrible day alright on Wall St... Lots of Bulls heading off to feed off dividends for a while...

I'd be leaving stuff about Trump and Florida alone for a bit. There's all the makings of a sad catastrophe coming to residents of the Panhandle etc over the next couple of hours... No matter how it plays, you can betcha the ppl there wont be thinking of politics just about now... :eek::(:eek:

aloyisious

TV reports on the markets for the past few days has been that bonds were going up in price due to the increase in interest rates and there has been a reverse effect on share prices over the same few days.

TomOnBoard

Jesus H. Christ... I'm trying to be level-headed in all this, but as I'm catching up on last night's US politics, what do I see? Trump rally feeding red meat to the base via a new "Lock Her Up" chant targeting Diane Feinstein...

Fcukin disgusting... Simple as!!!

removed2

rally tonight from Erie Indiana, anyone one else watching?
i watched the last few and they are all exact copies of each other
fell asleep midway last nights rally
around 1am

Billy Mays

Trump's op-ed on healthcare in USA Today

"Almost every sentence contained a misleading statement or a falsehood"

everlast75

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Jesus H. Christ... I'm trying to be level-headed in all this, but as I'm catching up on last night's US politics, what do I see? Trump rally feeding red meat to the base via a new "Lock Her Up" chant targeting Diane Feinstein...

Fcukin disgusting... Simple as!!!

She's guilty until proven innocent, but Kavanaugh.....

TomOnBoard

Billy Mays wrote: »

Trump's op-ed on healthcare in USA Today

"Almost every sentence contained a misleading statement or a falsehood"

Well then, why did USA Today publish it?? Given that this is the paper of choice as the wakey up paper in hotels across the USA, propaganda before crappy coffee and square sausages should be outlawed, as our brains are not able to distinguish between truth and lies at that time...

spacecoyote

aloyisious wrote: »

TV reports on the markets for the past few days has been that bonds were going up in price due to the increase in interest rates and there has been a reverse effect on share prices over the same few days.

That would be standard market movements in general.

When markets are booming people buy stocks & sell bonds. When stock markets turn south people buy government bonds as they're seen as a safe investment (generally you're always guaranteed a pay off on a government bond even if that payoff is generally lower than a high performing stock)

jooksavage

everlast75 wrote: »

She's guilty until proven innocent, but Kavanaugh.....

Locking up FEMALE political rivals in particular seems to be a recurring theme. Much like one or two of the posters here, those men at the rallys are under the impression that they're losing a gender war. Unadulterated snowflakery really.

Dannyriver

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Well then, why did USA Today publish it?? Given that this is the paper of choice as the wakey up paper in hotels across the USA, propaganda before crappy coffee and square sausages should be outlawed, as our brains are not able to distinguish between truth and lies at that time...

Because those are the words he used...You can t not publish his statements just because he made them up. There d be nothing to publish ever from him if that were the policy. He lies through the sneaky device of minimization or exaggeration depending on what suits the narrative in the moment. Countless focus groups throughout his base that find out what they want to hear and he delivers the next day. It works two ways its not all Trump telling them what to think its him giving them what they want to hear. That's why some of the rhetoric is so hideous.

removed2

jooksavage wrote: »

Locking up FEMALE political rivals in particular seems to be a recurring theme. Much like one or two of the posters here, those men at the rallys are under the impression that they're losing a gender war. Unadulterated snowflakery really.

hillary and feinsteen should be locked up to be honest

Rhineshark

removed2 wrote: »

hillary and feinsteen should be locked up to be honest

Just in general for existing or is there to be due process and figuring out (or at least making up) some crimes first?

Also, where else would this president be when a chunk of Florida is being annihilated than pumping up a crowd in PA?

removed2

Rhineshark wrote: »

Just in general for existing or is there to be due process and figuring out (or at least making up) some crimes first?

Also, where else would this president be when a chunk of Florida is being annihilated than pumping up a crowd in PA?

Hillary, for trying to start a war with russia,
for the way she dehumanised Bill's accusers

feinstein for trying to play politics with the liar* christine ford
liar* because if you check the planning permission records she got the "second front door" to rent half her home out in 2007, not 2012 in her flase testimony

anyway my point is patriots and commies should be trying to find mutual ground and a way forward for America without left or right extremism

hill16bhoy

removed2 wrote: »

hillary and feinsteen should be locked up to be honest

That "due process" line that Trumpbots were disingenuously trotting out last week sure went out the window quickly.

Professor Moriarty

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Jesus H. Christ... I'm trying to be level-headed in all this, but as I'm catching up on last night's US politics, what do I see? Trump rally feeding red meat to the base via a new "Lock Her Up" chant targeting Diane Feinstein...

Fcukin disgusting... Simple as!!!

And what is the GOP saying or doing about it? Nothing. Venal cowards.

TomOnBoard

Dannyriver wrote: »

Because those are the words he used...You can t not publish his statements just because he made them up. There d be nothing to publish ever from him if that were the policy. He lies through the sneaky device of minimization or exaggeration depending on what suits the narrative in the moment. Countless focus groups throughout his base that find out what they want to hear and he delivers the next day. It works two ways its not all Trump telling them what to think its him giving them what they want to hear. That's why some of the rhetoric is so hideous.

Yeah, I know...you're right... I suppose in an ideal world I'd like some editor somewhere to manage my pre-brekkie news input to take account of the fact that my powers of discernment won't have quite kicked in yet at that time of the morning, and my BS meter wont be at full stretch either...

I suppose that so long as "Trump says" is in the title, I can trust my sub-conscious to filter him out...

Quin_Dub

removed2 wrote: »

fukk off snowflake the grownups are talking

Mod Note

removed2 will be taking a short break