The Media's Portrayal of Trump and His Presidency

[reddogblitz]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Russia bought 10k worth of Facebook ads. 

 

Our IC created disinformation about a Russian/Trump conspiracy, fed it to the media and the people of our country, then lit a fire under anyone who dared question it, all in order to commit fraud on the FISC and (eventually) execute a backdoor coup. 

 

One is not like the other. 

 

One is a real threat to our country. The other has been going on since the nineteenth century.

 

Did Russia participate in the Brexit or French or Ukraine elections?  Did Russia not try to influence things here in 2016 at all?  What was the IRA doing?

 

Again, there were many bad actors.  I'm just trying to plug one hole.

 

I can't believe people are so adamant about protecting our Information Warfare enemy's 1st amendment rights.  And don't hand me the censorship thing, we're already heavily censored.  Besides I don't want to censor anyone.  Look it up if you want.  Just don't let them push it to us.

 

And you don't need FaceBook ads when news outlets like CNN and the New York Times are using your disinformation as a source for their stories.

 

How do we get all these people to be smarter again?  They're getting dumber by the minute thanks to the greatest population control device ever invented (so far).

 

As I said in my initial post, information warfare has been around forever. It has now risen to a much loftier/effective level than at any other point in human history by far.  We might need to re think this IMHO.

[TakeYouToTasker]

32 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Did Russia participate in the Brexit or French or Ukraine elections?  Did Russia not try to influence things here in 2016 at all?  What was the IRA doing?

 

Again, there were many bad actors.  I'm just trying to plug one hole.

 

I can't believe people are so adamant about protecting our Information Warfare enemy's 1st amendment rights.  And don't hand me the censorship thing, we're already heavily censored.  Besides I don't want to censor anyone.  Look it up if you want.  Just don't let them push it to us.

 

And you don't need FaceBook ads when news outlets like CNN and the New York Times are using your disinformation as a source for their stories.

 

How do we get all these people to be smarter again?  They're getting dumber by the minute thanks to the greatest population control device ever invented (so far).

 

As I said in my initial post, information warfare has been around forever. It has now risen to a much loftier/effective level than at any other point in human history by far.  We might need to re think this IMHO.

 

To what ends are we concerned with free and fair elections if not to protect freedom itself?

 

If we do away with freedom in order to protect our elections, what was the point in the first place of protecting them?

 

No one is arguing in favor of the First Amendment rights of disinformation agents.  We’re arguing in favor of the rights of everyone.

[reddogblitz]

3 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

To what ends are we concerned with free and fair elections if not to protect freedom itself?

 

Freedom and information in America is what needs to be protected.

 

And as I said, my plan is not to censor anything.  If you want to find out what Russia thinks about the election and what disinformation they're pedaling by all means, look it up.  Just don't let them push it to us just as we would not let them push a bomb in our direction.

 

America First.

 

As Ted Cruz would say, if all you got is people should be smarter, you ain't got nuthin'.

[Deranged Rhino]

30 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Did Russia participate in the Brexit or French or Ukraine elections?  Did Russia not try to influence things here in 2016 at all?

 

Sure. But not as much as our IC did (or Britain's, or the French). Again, Russia is a boogeyman to cover the real insidiousness of both Brexit and the 2016 election -- which was borne domestically, not in the GRU. 

 

31 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

What was the IRA doing?

 

The IRA has been known about since the NYT did an article on them way back in 2012. Mueller didn't uncover anything new with the IRA -- if anything, the fact that the IRA represents the only Russians indicted (meaningless indictments of course, they'll never appear in a court room), is further proof of what I'm saying. If the Russian interference were as bad as the media and IC wants us to believe, they'd have a stronger case to make than what they put forth in the Mueller report.

 

The IRA isn't even the tip of the spear in terms of the GRU/SVR cyber warfare divisions. They're easy marks to spark fear in the public. 

 

33 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

Again, there were many bad actors.  I'm just trying to plug one hole.

 

I hear you and I'm really not trying to say otherwise, I'm just pointing out that focusing on Russia -- who did meddle but did so at levels that are not in any way the threat they've been made out to be -- allows the true bad actors, the ones who actually threaten our democratic republic and national security, to get an easy pass. The real damage done in both Brexit and the 2016 elections were done by western intelligence agencies working for a globalist agenda. 

 

It's WMD all over again. 

Look here!

(not here)

 

36 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

I can't believe people are so adamant about protecting our Information Warfare enemy's 1st amendment rights. 

 

No one is trying to protect their first amendment rights, people are trying to protect our own. And yours. Freedom of speech and thought is a strength, not a flaw in our system. Setting up any form of state sanctioned censorship -- especially in the name of national security -- is helping the enemy's cause. 

 

The burden is on us to be better educated. To be better consumers of information. That's a learnable and teachable skill. 

 

38 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

And don't hand me the censorship thing, we're already heavily censored.  Besides I don't want to censor anyone.  Look it up if you want.  Just don't let them push it to us.

 

If I'm understanding you correctly, you want to set up a filter -- run by the state -- which prevents foreign information from being accessible to Americans. You're inserting a censor between the public and information, even if you do not call it a censor. That's precisely what we should strive to avoid for all the reasons stated above: it's doing the work of the enemy for them. 

 

Think back to the Patriot Act. How that was pushed, what triggers they pulled to get the people to agree to the exchange of freedoms for security. It should feel very familiar and I know you were no fan. 

 

41 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

And you don't need FaceBook ads when news outlets like CNN and the New York Times are using your disinformation as a source for their stories.

 

Again, the media were not doing the bidding of the Russians, they were doing the bidding (in large swaths) of our own IC who wanted them to stoke the fears of a boogeyman and a threat that was not real. 

 

Just like WMD. 

 

Just like the war on terror. 

 

Same tricks, same end goal: more control over us, more power for them.

 

42 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

How do we get all these people to be smarter again?  They're getting dumber by the minute thanks to the greatest population control device ever invented (so far).

 

By fighting, rather than giving up. The old control systems are being dismantled before our eyes and exposed as frauds. 

 

It's going to take time to unlearn what we have learned. 

/Yoda

 

44 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

As I said in my initial post, information warfare has been around forever. It has now risen to a much loftier/effective level than at any other point in human history by far.  We might need to re think this IMHO.

 

I'll posit it this way. I agree that information warfare is more effective than ever. And I agree that Russia has developed capabilities for which we must develop countermeasures. 

 

But if you believe that to be true, that Russian intelligence services' information warfare capabilities are potent and powerful -- do you think they're more or less powerful than the better funded western intelligence services? Do you think the GRU is better at their jobs than the NSA? 

[DC Tom]

Krugman's an asshat.  Yes, it belongs in this thread, because his only purpose is #orangemanbad.

 

 

[Q-baby!]

24 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

Krugman's an asshat.  Yes, it belongs in this thread, because his only purpose is #orangemanbad.

 

 

Is trump trolling Biden there? 

[Hedge]

 

 

 

?

[reddogblitz]

As always, thanks for the thoughtful response Deranged.

 

Quote

I hear you and I'm really not trying to say otherwise, I'm just pointing out that focusing on Russia -- who did meddle but did so at levels that are not in any way the threat they've been made out to be -- allows the true bad actors, the ones who actually threaten our democratic republic and national security, to get an easy pass. The real damage done in both Brexit and the 2016 elections were done by western intelligence agencies working for a globalist agenda.

 

It's WMD all over again.

Look here!

(not here)

 

I did only mention Russia but really I think other countries were in involved in the social media part of this.  Like China probably as well as some 400 lb guys in beds with laptops.

 

These people were not so much trying to influence the outcome of the election as in sowing unrest and division in the USA.  A house divided cannot stand.  That's the plan and we're falling for it.

 

We know they did this with stuff like organizing online competing protests on the same day or the Hillary Rape Ring run out of a Pizza Parlor.  Caused a lot of division and unrest and people got hurt. 

 

WMD  

 

Quote

The burden is on us to be better educated. To be better consumers of information. That's a learnable and teachable skill.

 

Agreed.  That's why one other thing I'd like to see is for Congress to pass a law for a public service campaign with people like Bill Clinton, W, Obama, Carter say we got snookered last time.  We gotta be smarter.  Don't believe everything you read or hear.  Simple, but might cause some people to think.

 

Quote

If I'm understanding you correctly, you want to set up a filter -- run by the state -- which prevents foreign information from being accessible to Americans. You're inserting a censor between the public and information, even if you do not call it a censor. That's precisely what we should strive to avoid for all the reasons stated above: it's doing the work of the enemy for them.

 

Think back to the Patriot Act. How that was pushed, what triggers they pulled to get the people to agree to the exchange of freedoms for security. It should feel very familiar and I know you were no fan.

 

You're not understating me correctly. 

 

My idea is for congress to pass a law that from 6 months before a presidential election until the day after it's decided, no social media posts, tweets, zings, Instagrams, Pinterest whatevers, etc. can be shown in the USA that originated outside the USA.  You could still search the internet on what other countries think of our candidates or what disinformation they're pedaling to your heart's content.  It just won't be pushed to you. That's not censorship.   If a tech company violates, they pay a hefty fine. Offer a reward for hackers to find them and turn them in.

 

Let's just talk it over amongst us Americans.

 

Quote

Same tricks, same end goal: more control over us, more power for them.

 

Amen.  That's what it's all about.

 

And yes, we have our own large sophisticated cyber/information warfare apparatus.  And they're good.  Stuxnet was effective for example.  That's the reason I think we are looking silly over this whole thing.  We've done worse.  Stop whining.  Move on.

Edited May 7, 2019 by reddogblitz

[/dev/null]

6 hours ago, DC Tom said:

Krugman's an asshat.  Yes, it belongs in this thread, because his only purpose is #orangemanbad.

 

 

The only people who Krugman seriously are Leftists in their echo chamber

[Nanker]

6 hours ago, Hedge said:

 

 

 

?

#LEARNTOCODE

[4merper4mer]

6 hours ago, DC Tom said:

Krugman's an asshat.  Yes, it belongs in this thread, because his only purpose is #orangemanbad.

 

 

Who the heck is Vin Scully?  Did you just make up a person?  I think you have to be famous to get the MOF.

[3rdnlng]

5 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

 

My idea is for congress to pass a law that from 6 months before a presidential election until the day after it's decided, no social media posts, tweets, zings, Instagrams, Pinterest whatevers, etc. can be shown in the USA that originated outside the USA.  You could still search the internet on what other countries think of our candidates or what disinformation they're pedaling to your heart's content.  It just won't be pushed to you. That's not censorship.   If a tech company violates, they pay a hefty fine. Offer a reward for hackers to find them and turn them in.

 

 

The most damage done to our republic by outside influence has been done since 11/9/16. What has been transpiring since Trump was elected is far and above any Russian expectations. Think of it this way: If individuals, especially politicians used common sense and/or judicious discernment then they could never be taken in by all of the outrageous faux charges. Instead of watering the seeds planted by outside sources looking to sow contention within our society, these politicians and others need to use common sense and discard the nonsense spewed by people that are taking part in instigating discord amongst us. Truth is not trumped by partisanship and repeating lies to further an agenda is how we as a society can be affected by those out to harm us. If we use common sense and seek the truth we'll be fine.

[row_33]

3 hours ago, /dev/null said:

 

The only people who Krugman seriously are Leftists in their echo chamber

 

Frank Rich and Krugman lost 99% of their brains and credibility when they started getting paid by the NYT

 

really really sad

 

 

[B-Man]

WELL, THEY STILL HAVEN’T ACCEPTED 2016: Liberal Media Scream: Anti-Trump media fears he’ll never leave office.

 

 

 

Related: Honoring elections is no longer the Democratic Party way.

 

[Bray Wyatt]

3 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

Who the heck is Vin Scully?  Did you just make up a person?  I think you have to be famous to get the MOF.

 

Just in case you seriously didnt know him, he was the legendary announcer for the Dodgers

[GG]

3 minutes ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

Just in case you seriously didnt know him, he was the legendary announcer for the Dodgers

 

He's got him confused with Vince Culley

[row_33]

14 minutes ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

Just in case you seriously didnt know him, he was the legendary announcer for the Dodgers

 

 

it was very trendy to pretend one actually sat through one game a year listening to him ramble on in his dotage

 

 

[B-Man]

HEH: Anderson Cooper denies he’s ‘on the left,’ then rips Trump for tweeting about Kentucky Derby.

 

 

 

.

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

Just in case you seriously didnt know him, he was the legendary announcer for the Dodgers

LOL @DC Tom 

 

I think he meant Vince Culley.  Vin Scully is the serial for Mulder's partner's car.

[Bray Wyatt]

14 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

LOL @DC Tom 

 

I think he meant Vince Culley.  Vin Scully is the serial for Mulder's partner's car.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vin_Scully

 

The surname of the Dana Scully character on the television show The X-Files is an homage to Vin Scully, as the show's creator Chris Carter is a Dodgers fan; Scully himself can be heard calling a game in the Season 6 episode "The Unnatural"