rolling trump-russian collusion

whoa when did Bob Dole post to ILX

oh shit

that's the woman in the video upthread right?

xpost

Yeah, she's that hooker/escort/gal pal of that Russian oligarch/star of that weird epic Russian take-down video.

Want to hear some wanton Nastya gossip that I’m going to irresponsibly pass on? (With one solid source, however.) Nastya is said to know the sexworkers who were at the Ritz that...night. https://t.co/WaQ8gh7Z57

— Virginia Heffernan (@page88) February 27, 2018

there’s also stuff about a government plane that had a lot of cocaine on it when it flew from argentina and now it’s in thailand because some mucky muck wants to talk to their govt about prisoner conditions?

remember that tweet about the last season of america from 2016? i keep thinking of it lately

The U.S. intelligence community developed substantial evidence that state websites or voter registration systems in seven states [Alaska, Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Texas and Wisconsin] were compromised by Russian-backed covert operatives prior to the 2016 election — but never told the states involved, according to multiple U.S. officials.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/u-s-intel-russia-compromised-seven-states-prior-2016-election-n850296

so apparently a WAtchdog is looking at the alleged "improper FISA applications".

is this really a good move for the Trump admin? I mean, watchdogs tend to be bipartisan and impartial, and if he comes back with a "no wrongdoing", what does it help? I see the "people will have forgotten by then" angle but then why have the Watchdog look into it at all?

Even the "we can say the Inspector General is crooked and corrupt" isn't really going to have legs enough to make it worthwhile.

I think they are fully in throw-everything-at-the-wall mode (as w Nunes memo) doesn't really matter so long they can create some noise

Even the "we can say the Inspector General is crooked and corrupt" isn't really going to have legs enough to make it worthwhile.

I get that he can and will do it, but it won't move the needle much. not that this has stopped him before.

I really don't care about public trust in the motherfucking FBI

yeah if there was some way Trump and the FBI could resolve this in some sort of conjoined death pact that would rule

why don't we just redraw the state lines, make 50 new states

except for the 5 mile radius around my house, that's another country

I doubt the fbi is going away, and once he gets the lackies in it he wants, overseen by Prince or whoever, he will ride like a motherfucker for the fbi.

So im willing to go with a counter-trump fbi til he’s gone. Time is not our friend.

man I hope Prince leads the FBI from Heaven, it'll be mad sexy

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/02/27/russia-hacking

uh I have a question are you guys "down w/ the FBI" meaning this FBI/J Edgar heritage/post-Patriot act FBI or do you actually wish there was no law enforcement at the federal level

I mean nobody likes cops but

everybody's got a big but, as Special Agent Pee-wee Herman often said

i know you are but what am i

Deep in the heart of Texas!

deep in the heart of moscow

http://theweek.com/speedreads/758012/mueller-reportedly-interested-trumps-hotel-room-moscow

Hmm, I wonder why he's so interested in that hotel room?

Seriously, though, at this point even the pee tape would hardly qualify as kompromat. Trump is a walking embarrassment. But maybe the hookers are a savvy smokescreen, and in fact he was meeting with *Putin* in that hotel room!

And then Putin peed on the bed.

If everyone’s expectations are low enough and loyalty is purely tribal, they let you do it.

That would seem to answer the question I posed about Abramson vs. Marshall's reading of the case theory - Mueller's people are at least running down the road Abramson has lain out.

Yeah i think the point made earlier that mueller is the anti trump in terms of systematic thoroughness was correct. which given mueller’s resources and background is kinda “well, duh, hunt3r,” but plodding, thorough care seems so out of style.

also in his 70s, mueller has way better hair

On the other hand, "'You ask everything even if you don't think it's credible,' one of the sources said, adding, 'the allegations are out there, and it was checking the box.'" Abramson of course is perhaps preemptively patting himself on the back.

That would seem to answer the question I posed about Abramson vs. Marshall's reading of the case theory - Mueller's people are at least running down the road Abramson has lain out.

― Moo Vaughn, Wednesday, February 28, 2018 8:08 AM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

sb for abramson

What does that mean?

it's a reference to a long obsolete ILX system for Suggesting the Banning of certain posters

DUH!

(and almost always referenced tongue-in-cheek)

sb giving away company secrets

it's the collusion thread, i can't help it

too insidery

lmao

Retract every single news article that cited Hamilton68 to claim Russian bots are doing x. Here are its creators admitting it's all bullshit.https://t.co/sTkHQXsLmq pic.twitter.com/VYkzErIP7E

— Sam Sacks (bot) 🤖 (@SamSacks) February 28, 2018

I found the interview with Masha Gessen and NYTimes' Adrian Chen on NPR this morning really annoying. The premise was that Russian interference, while real, was overblown. Gessen took the stance that it's ridiculous that "sub-literate" Russia trolls would have such a decisive effect on the American public (which ignores the fact that much of America is equally sub-literate, which the internet makes clear, and also voluntarily propagates the same sort of shit the Russians pushed) and that we should focus on bigger things (which is probably true but doesn't negate the effect of Russian interference). Chen, likewise, was skeptical, for similar if more neutral reasons, and yet, in describing his reluctance to wade into this debate, essentially conceded the effectiveness of information warfare. And both sort of elide over the prima facia evidence that *Russia was trying to influence Americans*, so clearly they believed, even if it wasn't absolutely effective, it was certainly worth a shot. Otherwise they wouldn't have bothered, though as a couple of those interviews with indicted players shows, the Russians didn't try very hard and were as amused by their possible success.

Just so annoying. There is a lot going on right now, on numerous fronts, big and small, and they are not mutually exclusive. Trump Inc., Wikileaks, Russia - these can all be independent actors whose Venn diagrams occasionally overlapped and potentiated their somewhat aligned goals: Trump Inc. was desperate for a leg up in the election, Wikileaks was vindictive, Russia wanted to make trouble. Everything together likely magnified the effect of all of these things independently.

The banality of effective disruptive social media

it's not necessarily that it's *russia* that bothers me (though oh my god it's *russia*!) but that candidate trump and his team cooperated with them in exchange for sanctions relief, and while president trump hasn't been able to deliver yet, he refuses to impose further bipartisan sanctions, and he's obstructed the investigation into election interference from the jump. the GOP going along with this farce is every bit as horrible as watergate, reagan's various pre- and post-election iranian shenanigans, the brooks brothers riot (in the state candidate bush's brother was governor!), the bullshit bush v. gore supreme court decision, the deceit campaign that led us into iraq part ii, the birth certificate, and BENGHAZI. "conservative" politics is a giant zit on the face of lady liberty; if this russia probe can lance it, bravo. i'm not holding my breath of course because all this propaganda is in smoke screen service to cover up for the neo-feudalist voodoo economics revolution that's been in full effect since at least the powell memo was circulated, and the dark money lords (via ALEC, Fox, the NRA and their ilk) have brainwashed legions of bigots into their voting base, who'd eat glass before admitting they've ever been wrong about anything political

I'm not sure Gessen is wrong, but while it's probably giving into prejudice, my propaganda detector is always on low hum with any prominent Russian-American public intellectual/commenter like Gessen

That Sam Sacks idiot is on his timeline desperately spamming every reporter about “Hamilton68”, as though those innocuous quotes vindicates him for being wrong for months about the entire Russia story being a “hoax”. He’s another one of those guys that if you only got his version of the story you wouldn’t be aware that there have been indictments etc.

my propaganda detector is always on low hum with any prominent Russian-American public intellectual/commenter like Gessen

yes, this is giving into prejudice.

Gessen has been pretty reasonable compared to other skeptics on this. If you followed her reactions over the months she’s acknowledged the reporting, increasing evidence and adjusts accordingly. Like she use to question that Russia was behind the hacks and now sees it differently. Understandable concern about it being overblown maybe serves some faulty conclusions.

Chen’s recent piece about it was really interesting because he makes the point about not wanting to be used in either side of the debate. He seemed just as annoyed by how he was retweeted by Aaron Mate as what MSNBC expected him to say about the troll farms.

gessen is a v prominent putin critic, i don't think we should assume that every single russian person is somehow secretly plotting to spread pro-russian "propaganda"

I'm not sure Gessen is wrong, but while it's probably giving into prejudice, my propaganda detector is always on low hum with any prominent Russian-American public intellectual/commenter like Gessen

― Moo Vaughn, Thursday, March 1, 2018 7:33 AM (four hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

you're a clown

he's gonna get caught, just you wait and see

my propaganda detector squeals like a pig when moogabbneb posts

you know who else squeals like a pig

(with the usual provisos that you should run down shit you see on twitter yourself) it sure does look like the set of dem mercenary fake-woke lunkheads i've grown to detest over the past 24 months have benefited greatly from message-amplifying bots

Dear confused journalists: I found the bots you have been looking for. They amplify trolls. They impersonate. They spam. They are funded by oligarchs. What more could you want in a story?

And unlike @SecureDemocracy, I have actually shown my work. Gather round.

— liking online (@likingonline) March 1, 2018

who could have guessed

stoopid libs are like
https://i.imgflip.com/25kdf6.jpg