Not a fan of Russel Brand, but everybody should give this a listen to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W3nxWLdByo

Not a fan of Russel Brand, but everybody should give this a listen to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W3nxWLdByo

I have seen that video, and thought it was important, and wanted to post it, but knew If I did it would be dismissed as just another "Mr. Youtube" post and not watched or discussed.

I'm glad you posted it.

And Russel Brand is another one who comes from the left that sees the clear and present danger to "our democracy by the direct, or even indirect leverage, of government agencies over what information the public gets and their phony "debunking" that paints actual information as disinformation. The Twitter revelations show the direct hand of government control over information in order to discredit or shut down what it doesn't want the public to hear.

And, again, the typical government/media complex response is trying to discredit the Twitter files as nothing burger, nothing to see here, move on to more important and relevant things like Trump's tax records which are the real threat to "our Democracy."

Rolling Stone has obtained the Jan 6 committee's unreleased report on how Twitter and other social networks were used to fuel the insurrection.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I have seen that video, and thought it was important, and wanted to post it, but knew If I did it would be dismissed as just another "Mr. Youtube" post and not watched or discussed.

I'm glad you posted it.

And Russel Brand is another one who comes from the left that sees the clear and present danger to "our democracy by the direct, or even indirect leverage, of government agencies over what information the public gets and their phony "debunking" that paints actual information as disinformation. The Twitter revelations show the direct hand of government control over information in order to discredit or shut down what it doesn't want the public to hear.

And, again, the typical government/media complex response is trying to discredit the Twitter files as nothing burger, nothing to see here, move on to more important and relevant things like Trump's tax records which are the real threat to "our Democracy."

Let's posit that Trump is mentally and morally sound and that he wants the best for our country. By what calculus could you conclude that he has the skills to actually deliver results as president?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Let's posit that Trump is mentally and morally sound and that he wants the best for our country. By what calculus could you conclude that he has the skills to actually deliver results as president?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He was doing quite well before covid.

Don't know what skills a President must have when the confluence of Deep State illegal tactics against him, opposition party treachery, haters in his own party, as well as fake news legacy media lying about him, constantly accusing him with insinuations, conjectures, inferences, implications, innuendos, hints, suggestions, without solid evidence, and all of the above constantly-without-end investigating him, all the while conspiring to prevent or falsely "debunk" information that favored him, trying to crush him with legal and political indictments in order to imprison him, remove him from office, prevent him from running, totally destroy him, and oh yeah, overturning his election--I don't know what extraordinary skills it would require to enable him to deliver results.

In the meantime, as the video, and the subject of this thread point out, the real and present danger to "our democracy," to our Republic, is that very pernicious, anti-constitutional government suppression of free speech. I know, from previous posts and threads of yours, that you approve of denying any voice to "conservative" views. So it serves your agenda well to change the subject.

It’s more of the same noise in your last video. supposed government, censorship coordination.

I don’t know how anyone can say they tried to bury the New York post story when it was in print it was on New York Post website it was on other websites, but they seem to be making their entire case that Twitter, is the only source of information in the country or the world. For people to be informed?

The latest complaint is that Fauci‘s daughter worked at Twitter since 2015 so she must had something to do with Covid. It’s all just more conspiracy theories !

There ate more ask factual evidence in the January 6 commission report then there is an anything this woman says, but the same people who support her dismiss that report out of hand. Funny how that works.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

On Tuesday, one of Brand’s recent YouTube videos, titled “Trump was RIGHT About Clinton & Russia Collusion!!” started going viral. In it, he claims there is “serious evidence” that Hillary Clinton worked with Russia to create this “conspiracy.”


And Russel Brand is another one who comes from the left that sees the clear and present danger to "our democracy

Wishful thinking

Perhaps Brand should be viewed as less of an ideologue and more of an opportunist;

Knows where the money is it’s in pushing crazy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Twitter files as nothing burger,

They are nothing burger . they are a selected release by one man (Musk). without context to selected people, he selected , with. restrictions by musk ! that they must be released only on, Twitter yet Musk he chosen to not have any released to any independent news organizations of course, to avoid scrutiny

And you people are worried about government control of information it’s laughable
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The thing I found most interesting (if true) was the FBI gave various "news" outlets that suspected Russian misinformation was coming in regard to the whole thing so they were ready to remove the content.

It’s more of the same noise in your last video. supposed government, censorship coordination.

This is exactly the type of "debunking" that is used to suppress interest in a subject. Label it as "noise" and "supposed," while assiduously avoiding any attempt to give any real proof that it is just "noise.

What the twitter files show is that the government coordinated censorship is actual, not "supposed."

don’t know how anyone can say they tried to bury the New York post story

Perhaps it's because you're willfully ignorant. It's buried by willful neglect.

When a leftist talking point somehow gets released in some media outlet, within hours it is regurgitated, even verbatim, on all the other news outlets and becomes a "big story" that is discussed and given credence at least for the next week and sometimes months and sometimes it is repeated, even if not verified, ad infinitum. So the left sided population of the country, as well as many "Republicans" who depend on the "mainstream" media are conditioned to see it as credible. Fox and various "alternative" media may have the opposite opinion about its credibility, but they have been cast as purveyors of misinformation. Even more importantly, it is not blocked on social media like Twitter (but negative comments about the story may be blocked as disinformation). So a majority of the country will consider it worthy of much thought and probably true.

When something like the Hunter laptop story comes out, it is immediately dismissed by the majority of big media (which is leftist) as a nothing burger, or is sometimes aided by a deep state government acency, like the FBI, etc., claiming it as some form of disinformation (Russian, etc.) so the media can claim that the story is legitimately "debunked." Fox and various "alternative" media may cover it positively, but they too have been cast as purveyors of misinformation. And, again, the social media, like Twitter, which a growing number of people, especially younger ones, use as a, or the, news sight of choice, will block it as mis or dis information. So a majority of the country will not consider it worthy of much attention, or won't even be aware of it, and will, hopefully, dismiss it. It is thus "buried" by being dismissed in the eyes of the majority population. Mission accomplished.

Whether you think the laptop story is meaningless noise, or not, it is a story, not a false story nor Russian disinformation, it is public speech that the government should have no power to squelch on any public or private platform. If you do not see the actual danger to "our democracy" when the power of government is used to suppress speech, then you're not a true believer in our constitutionally based system of government.

when it was in print it was on New York Post website it was on other websites, but they seem to be making their entire case that Twitter, is the only source of information in the country or the world. For people to be informed?

The latest complaint is that Fauci‘s daughter worked at Twitter since 2015 so she must had something to do with Covid. It’s all just more conspiracy theories !

Labeling something as "just a conspiracy story", especially without proving it, is a way of suppressing the free flow of ideas by stopping it in its tracks--shut up, don't want to hear it, its just a conspiracy.

There ate more ask factual evidence in the January 6 commission report then there is an anything this woman says, but the same people who support her dismiss that report out of hand. Funny how that works.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you believe the government should have the power to suppress the flow of information regarding that "factual" evidence?

The American population doesn’t trust the government with their private information. Imagine how much better they’ll feel knowing that Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss are in possession of it instead.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He was doing quite well before covid.

Don't know what skills a President must have when the confluence of Deep State illegal tactics against him, opposition party treachery, haters in his own party, as well as fake news legacy media lying about him, constantly accusing him with insinuations, conjectures, inferences, implications, innuendos, hints, suggestions, without solid evidence, and all of the above constantly-without-end investigating him, all the while conspiring to prevent or falsely "debunk" information that favored him, trying to crush him with legal and political indictments in order to imprison him, remove him from office, prevent him from running, totally destroy him, and oh yeah, overturning his election--I don't know what extraordinary skills it would require to enable him to deliver results.

In the meantime, as the video, and the subject of this thread point out, the real and present danger to "our democracy," to our Republic, is that very pernicious, anti-constitutional government suppression of free speech. I know, from previous posts and threads of yours, that you approve of denying any voice to "conservative" views. So it serves your agenda well to change the subject.

Trump is a mentally unwell, morally bankrupt person, comically unqualified for the presidency.

Otherwise decent people argue we should ignore this because ends.

Then he debased and disgraced his defenders, waging war against the ends for which they prostituted themselves.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump is a mentally unwell, morally bankrupt person, comically unqualified for the presidency.

Otherwise decent people argue we should ignore this because ends.

Then he debased and disgraced his defenders, waging war against the ends for which they prostituted themselves.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yada, yada, yada . . . Meanwhile back to government suppression of speech . . .

Twitter files as nothing burger,

They are nothing burger . they are a selected release by one man (Musk).

Actually, the honcho who initially was seclecting what was released from the Twitter files to the journalists that Musk appointed was a disgraced highly partisan ex-FBI operative, James Baker, who was selectively releasing, to the investigative journalists, only files that did not show FBI or government involvement in suppressing Twitter speech. That would have neutered the investigation of the files to a "nothingburger." Musk, wisely got rid of him. And he greatly expanded the number and types of files that were released.

Baker is an example of what has been called the "revolving door between government, liberal groups and Big Tech." He was probably an agreed upon government plant within the Twitter organization. That he was there to decide who or what would be banned and who would be in charge of what files to release, shows the thoroughness of FBI ability to influence even into the future.

without context

Not sure, but, at least part of the context, if there was one, was to investigate intervention, intrusion, or influence, of any sort by the federal government. What context did you want? The Twitter files are way, way more massive than the number of those within "the context."

to selected people, he selected ,

The journalists he selected, like Matt Taibi, have a reputation of being either non-partisan, or mostly so, or even (Taibi for instance) leaning left in his personal politics if not in his rather politically neutral reportage

with. restrictions by musk ! that they must be released only on, Twitter yet Musk he chosen to not have any released to any independent news organizations of course, to avoid scrutiny

The journalists he selected were "independent". They were not tied to politicized news organizations like the NYT or WAPOST, or FOX, etc. In my opinion it's probably impossible to find any journalist more independent than Matt Taibi. Musk was smart enough to know what would result if the NYT or WAPOST or even FOX were selected would or could have happened. The fact that the original Twitter staff member, James Baker, who was releasing the files to the "independent" journalists was basically a highly partisan mole and was selecting only "nothingburger" files attests to what probably would have happened if Musk released the files to mainstream news orgs.

And you people are worried about government control of information it’s laughable
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The fact that you are not worried about it is tragic.

People tend to believe what they want to believe and that explains a lot of the far right leaning and if you think ALL news is being manipulated by the left or the government, you might be the one being manipulated.

People tend to believe what they want to believe and that explains a lot of the far right leaning

Well, the way you put it," people tend to believe what they want to believe", it would explain a lot of everybody's leaning from far left to middle to far right . . . also why most people, according to that believing what they want to believe syndrome, don't actually know much. They just believe stuff.

and if you think ALL news is being manipulated by the left or the government, you might be the one being manipulated.

Personally, I haven't run into anyone who thinks ALL news is being manipulated by the left. I'm mostly concerned by government manipulation of political speech being done by any form of government from whatever direction, left to right or middle or anarchical.

Do you believe the government should have To the power to suppress the flow of information regarding that "factual" evidence?

The only person controlling the flow of information I see is Musk only allowing 1 person Matt Taibbi Analysis these releases that only are allowed on twitter

And the biggest reason he won’t release any of the major news organizations as he doesn’t want any scrutiny. He’s in the camp of fake news they’re all in on it so he tries to twist it at this independent journalist is above reproach and no one needs to check his work for that would be called censorship

The government has always controlled the flow of information
This isn’t new.

The problem I see is your what you call factual evidence.

Is never based on facts .. it’s hearsay and innuendo and opinion

There’s never a smoking gun.

Still trying to figure out what speech they suppressed because so far I haven’t seen any examples.

Can you give us a few?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Buffalo Bills Safety Hamlin in Critical Condition After Cardiac Arrest,


The response below are from the same type of people who think Trump won the election.
The FBI suppressed speech the Doj called parents domestic terrorist drag queen shows should be banned .
And Jan6th is a lie. And who the new House will put on a show for. And their latest saviorMusk
because he’s rich and he’s a genius. And they think that he validates their opinions.



These events are happening all over the world in young previously extremely healthy professional and non pro athletes with no indication of heart or other heart related problems. They all have one similar administered "health safety" inoculation as do 4 billion around the world supposedly given to reduce a certain viral infection called covid. Evidence has been released by world recognized scientists and heart specialists as to the one thing they all have in common, the covid vaccine. According to their research and factual evidence the VACCINE causes heart problems, aggressive cancers, blood clots and aneurysm's and a myriad of other serious ailments which cause "sudden death" or debilitating diseases that cause an inability to preform at previous levels and possibly life long disability. The impostor federal government , big pharma, intell agencies and others have suppressed this info and still are for unknown reasons other than possibly liabilities in the trillions of dollars in damages and or prosecution, yet they still disavow the vaccines as the problem. Researchers and fact checkers like Steve Kirsch and Ed Dowd have shown as many 2500 unexplained deaths PER DAY and 5000 disabling events from the vaccines PER DAY, at this rate our work force and military will be reduced to unsustainable levels and get this fact, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS will have to be trained to REPLACE them thus the open border debacle on our border.


So the guys name Ed dowel he’s a Rumble regular.

Claiming Ed Dowd: "Millennial age group, 25 to 44 experienced an 84% increase in excess mortality"

Blaming Covid vaccines

We’ll here is the problem .. those age groups are the lowest vaccinated in the country

The KFF poll, conducted May 18-25, found that the highest share of unvaccinated respondents were 30-49 years old (41%), followed by 29% ages 18-29 and 20%

But highest age groups for fentanyl overdose

Adults aged 26-39 years had the highest rates of fentanyl overdose deaths




Ed profession : Equity Investment Executive

Yep ( they used to be called snake oil salesmen). Now their Buyers call them and they . proclaim their experts peddling their wares to those who are the most gullible


5 min internet search is all it took to show his claims are bogus.

But you can’t have a conspiracy with out a cover up. And my information would be dismissed as false information because it came from the government..

All conspiracy are just never ending like playing wack a mole once one theory is disproven they just move on and another mole pops from the hole

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

People tend to believe what they want to believe and that explains a lot of the far right leaning and if you think ALL news is being manipulated by the left or the government, you might be the one being manipulated.

except no one is claiming that.

common tactic among the dim…when you can’t respond to what was actually said, then pretend he said something he actually never came close to saying, and respond to that instead.

Sure its possible, its the same FBI that did a sham investigation of Kavanaugh and exploited and then supressed info about Reality Winner exposing Russian interference for trump. There are trump loyalists there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The only person controlling the flow of information I see is Musk only allowing 1 person Matt Taibbi Analysis these releases that only are allowed on twitter

He is allowing 4 journalists. If it were only the NYT or only WAPO or only CNN or only CBS or or only NBC or only 5 of those, would you then believe what they concluded? I would guess, maybe am wrong, that you would. And if he only allowed FOX, I would guess you wouldn't believe its conclusions.

And the biggest reason he won’t release any of the major news organizations as he doesn’t want any scrutiny.

He is allowing scrutiny. The journalists he's allowing have all worked for major news orgs in the past. They're just as competent as any reporter that work for them now. And are not now bound by the bias of those orgs.

He’s in the camp of fake news they’re all in on it so he tries to twist it at this independent journalist is above reproach and no one needs to check his work for that would be called censorship

There are 4 and their work will be checked by all manner of news outlets, including major ones. As GS says, you will believe what you want to believe.

The government has always controlled the flow of information
This isn’t new.

Don't think you mean it, but this contradicts your first sentence in this post. In any event this statement seems to say that you're OK with government oversight and control of the flow of information that can be delivered to the public. That would be unconstitutional, and rather frightening.

The problem I see is your what you call factual evidence.

Is never based on facts .. it’s hearsay and innuendo and opinion

There’s never a smoking gun.

I was referring to your statement: "There ate more ask factual evidence in the January 6 commission report then there is an anything this woman says, but the same people who support her dismiss that report out of hand. Funny how that works" when I responded with "Do you believe the government should have the power to suppress the flow of information regarding that "'factual' evidence?"

Still trying to figure out what speech they suppressed because so far I haven’t seen any examples.

Can you give us a few?


O lord . . . if you don't see "debunking" the Hunter laptop story as Russian disinformation (when they knew it wasn't) in order to discredit and dismiss it is not suppression of speech, then why bother giving you any more examples--the examples, which you can find, even on google, of such suppression exposed in the Twitter files are numerous, but, very apparently, you will believe what you want to believe. Do your own research and believe what you want to believe.

O lord . . . if you don't see "debunking" the Hunter laptop story as Russian disinformation (when they knew it wasn't) in order to discredit and dismiss it is not suppression of speech, then why bother giving you any more examples--the examples, which you can find, even on google, of such suppression exposed in the Twitter files are numerous, but, very apparently, you will believe what you want to believe. Do your own research and believe what you want to believe.

Do you believe the Hunter Biden laptop is going to provide what exactly because the information on that laptop is so corrupted in the chain of custody. You can’t trust anything that’s on that, but that won’t stop you from believing it.


to say that you're OK with government oversight and control of the flow of information that can be delivered to the public. That would be unconstitutional, and rather frightening.

What’s frightening is you believe that it’s actually unconstitutional for the government to control the flow of information apparently, you’ve never heard of national security, top-secret information the Manhattan project I guess in your opinion does it all need to be fed to the public? As it happens

And, like I said, the Hunter, Biden laptop story was covered by many many different news agencies, someone suggesting to take something with a grain of salt, does not equal suppression


And I’m still confused by the hunter laptop story get your goat more than what happen on January 6 maybe you can explain why one is worse than the other
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sure its possible, its the same FBI that did a sham investigation of Kavanaugh and exploited and then supressed info about Reality Winner exposing Russian interference for trump. There are trump loyalists there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

wdmso would not believe that the FBI suppressed info . . . or would he . . . if it would fit whatever model he wanted to believe . . .

Do you believe that the FBI or any other government agency suppressing information is a threat to "our democracy"?

wdmso would not believe that the FBI suppressed info . . . or would he . . . if it would fit whatever model he wanted to believe . . .

Do you believe that the FBI or any other government agency suppressing information is a threat to "our democracy"?

Sure, but Elon is far from a safe source.

Elon Musk is the first person in history to lose 200 BILLION dollars.

Let that sink in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you believe that the FBI or any other government agency suppressing information is a threat to "our democracy"?

The only threat to our democracy I’ve seen in my 57 years on this planet was on January 6 and a guy named Donald Trump

Question, do I think suppressing information? Is a threat to our democracy . I take exception with your definition of information. It seems very generic.

Can you be more specific on what information you’re speaking about so I could give you a more informed answer


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you believe the Hunter Biden laptop is going to provide what exactly because the information on that laptop is so corrupted in the chain of custody. You can’t trust anything that’s on that, but that won’t stop you from believing it.

So why did the FBI suggest or say or imply or indicate that it was Russian disinformation when they knew it wasn't?


to say that you're OK with government oversight and control of the flow of information that can be delivered to the public. That would be unconstitutional, and rather frightening.

What’s frightening is you believe that it’s actually unconstitutional for the government to control the flow of information apparently, you’ve never heard of national security, top-secret information the Manhattan project I guess in your opinion does it all need to be fed to the public? As it happens

You just said "information" which implies all information, and the Hunter laptop info was not Manhattan Project kind of stuff.

And, like I said, the Hunter, Biden laptop story was covered by many many different news agencies, someone suggesting to take something with a grain of salt, does not equal suppression

It was "debunked" as Russian disinformation, not a grain of salt. And there is no need for the FBI to tell us, or filter through any media, about any mere grain of salt. They are not paid, nor is it their mission, to waste time telling us about mere grains of salt. So why would the FBI spread false information to news outlets other than to suppress the story, to "debunk" it?

And it was falsely covered by most major news agencies, and suppressed by social media outlets, as Russian Disinformation. The lie that it was Russian disinformation was not suppressed by them. The fact that it wasn't Russian disinformation was suppressed. Ergo, the story was suppressed sufficiently enough to dismiss it in the eyes of those who trust major media and social media.


And I’m still confused by the hunter laptop story get your goat more than what happen on January 6 maybe you can explain why one is worse than the other
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I am concerned about government suppression of speech. If you can show that government suppressed information about January 6, then I would be with you in saying that was wrong.

that government suppressed information about January 6, then I would be with you in saying that was wrong.

The elected government was the Threat from the Top down and many elected leaders to include Trump refused to testify. Willfully suppressing information.from Americas

As for Hunters laptop it’s a good thing it’ll go through a congressional committee, because it wouldn’t survive in a court of law and rules of evidence

If the DOJ doesn’t indict Trump, there’s no way they’re going to indict Hunter over a laptop

Hunters laptop is just noise for 2024 just like Benghazi was .

and I quote

Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), told Fox News’s Sean Hannity explicitly on Tuesday night that the Clinton investigation was part of a “strategy to fight and win.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that government suppressed information about January 6, then I would be with you in saying that was wrong.

The elected government was the Threat from the Top down and many elected leaders to include Trump refused to testify. Willfully suppressing information.from Americas

As for Hunters laptop it’s a good thing it’ll go through a congressional committee, because it wouldn’t survive in a court of law and rules of evidence

If the DOJ doesn’t indict Trump, there’s no way they’re going to indict Hunter over a laptop

Hunters laptop is just noise for 2024 just like Benghazi was .

and I quote

Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), told Fox News’s Sean Hannity explicitly on Tuesday night that the Clinton investigation was part of a “strategy to fight and win.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

so every time the right is accused of wrongdoing, they are guilty. every time the left is accused of wrongdoing, they are innocent, and the accusations are just a political stunt.

Every single time?

“over a laptop”.

right. it’s about Hunter having a laptop, not what may have been on the laptop.

wayne, the american people threw president trump out on his rump as soon as they could.

If the FBI is telling social media what stories to bury, that’s a problem because FBI officials aren’t elected. We can’t vote them out if we don’t like what they’re doing. That’s why it’s a bad idea for unelected bureaucrats to have a lot of power.

That’s why it’s a threat to democracy. With elected politicians, we can always un-elect them. Can’t do that with FBI agents or Dr Faucci. So people
like that shouldn’t be setting policy. They should be advising those who do.

This doesn’t mean i think January 6th was a good thing. It’s a separate issue.

that government suppressed information about January 6, then I would be with you in saying that was wrong.

The elected government was the Threat from the Top down and many elected leaders to include Trump refused to testify. Willfully suppressing information.from Americas

Asking for testimony is searching for a story. If the story is not known, there is no story to suppress. The story, at that point is that someone is asked to testify but refuses to do so. If there are legal consequences for that, they can be imposed and that would be the remedy. There is no government suppression of speech in that instance--there is no speech to suppress. There is instead, in government seeking testimony, its attempt to coerce speech, not suppress it. And at the time that the Jan6 committee was asking for any testimony, Trump was no longer an acting government official.

As for Hunters laptop it’s a good thing it’ll go through a congressional committee, because it wouldn’t survive in a court of law and rules of evidence

Whether or not it survives anything is beside the point that it should not have been suppressed by an agency of the government.

If the DOJ doesn’t indict Trump, there’s no way they’re going to indict Hunter over a laptop

That is not a valid argument that a government agency should have falsely characterized the story with the obvious attempt to suppress it.

Hunters laptop is just noise for 2024 just like Benghazi was .

Yep, now that kind of unproven verbiage is one of the many ways to discredit and suppress speech. But since you are not a government agent, you have a right to do so.

and I quote

Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), told Fox News’s Sean Hannity explicitly on Tuesday night that the Clinton investigation was part of a “strategy to fight and win.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A typical political strategy--not that it was just a pack of lies. And it wasn't a government attempt to suppress speech.

wayne, the american people threw president trump out on his rump as soon as they could.

If the FBI is telling social media what stories to bury, that’s a problem because FBI officials aren’t elected. We can’t vote them out if we don’t like what they’re doing. That’s why it’s a bad idea for unelected bureaucrats to have a lot of power.

That’s why it’s a threat to democracy. With elected politicians, we can always un-elect them. Can’t do that with FBI agents or Dr Faucci. So people
like that shouldn’t be setting policy. They should be advising those who do.

This doesn’t mean i think January 6th was a good thing. It’s a separate issue.


I still haven’t seen anything to suggest the FBI was trying to help Biden to hide anything ?

I saw a general message sent to all social media and news media to be aware of Russia influencing

And the Hunters laptop origin story is on par with Monica’s giz stained dress she happened to keep for over a year with Linda Tripp advice

Hunters laptop was clearly Planted to discredit Biden since that failed now they blame the FBI

Hell you have

Jim Jordan claiming on the floor of the house that the Biden administration has Weaponized the government against the American people..

It’s all theater for the republican party
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I still haven’t seen anything to suggest the FBI was trying to help Biden to hide anything ?

I saw a general message sent to all social media and news media to be aware of Russia influencing

And the Hunters laptop origin story is on par with Monica’s giz stained dress she happened to keep for over a year with Linda Tripp advice

Hunters laptop was clearly Planted to discredit Biden since that failed now they blame the FBI

Hell you have

Jim Jordan claiming on the floor of the house that the Biden administration has Weaponized the government against the American people..

It’s all theater for the republican party
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"I still haven’t seen anything to suggest the FBI was trying to help Biden to hide anything ?"

Come on Wayne. Mark Zuckerberg stated the FBI told them to watch out for Russian disinformation regarding Hunter, just before the laptop story broke. At that time, the FBI had the laptop, so they obviously knew it wasn't Russian disinformation.

"Jim Jordan claiming on the floor of the house that the Biden administration has Weaponized the government against the American people.."

The FBI misled a FISA court to get surveillance on Carter Page. The FBI went to Facebook and told them to be alert for bogus stories regarding Hunter (and as far as I know, the only thing Facebook censored regarding Hunter was the laptop, which we now know was legit). When the FBI arrested Roget Stone, they did so with a fully armed tactical team, after alerting CNN so they could be there to cover it. We all saw the emails between Trump-hating FBI agents Strzok and his mistress.


It's not the whole DOJ. But there's some politically motivated stuff happening there.

If you don't see it, it's because you don't want to see it, because it doesn't serve your narrative.

Do you know what's on the laptop? You seem convinced already it's a nothingburger.

"It’s all theater for the republican party"

As was the Russia hoax investigation.

Elections have consequences. It's the GOPs turn now. Is the GOP supposed to let the dems engage in political theater, and not do the same when it's their turn? What's good for the goose, right? Or is there some reason why only the Democrats get to engage in political witch hunts?

Democrats get to engage in political witch hunts?

How do you get convictions with witchhunts?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim is so oblivious to the current or what will be the eventual criminal head count his party ends up owning and if you are old enough to remember the score of the Pats/Bears Super Bowl, that will be close to the blue vs red criminal convictions delta if the current gop lead congress decides to go on a revenge campaign instead of governing for all Americans.

Come on Wayne. Mark Zuckerberg stated the FBI told them to watch out for Russian disinformation regarding Hunter, just before the laptop story broke.

Prove it. I’ll wait.

When the FBI arrested Roget Stone, they did so with a fully armed tactical team, after alerting CNN so they could be there to cover it.

I’d this the same source tell you what’s on Hunters laptop

More conspiracy Jim really.

Stone has repeatedly criticized the dramatic arrest at his home in January, which was caught on film by a CNN camera crew staking out his South Florida house. Stone claims CNN was tipped off about the arrest to film the raid,

Yep Stones credible lol
Of course more rumors and innuendo masquerading as facts

Law enforcement agencies often conduct early-morning arrests or raids with large numbers of officers and tactical equipment.

With stone they should include a bag over his head

they were armed Mar-a-Lago raid, also

Not sure why Republicans are against police or the FBI conducting raids via protocol as they would against other Americans?

So we should treat seditious scum with white gloves?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Twitter Files 11: Hillary's Russia 'Cues' at Core of Intel Meddling

Now Hillary ? Musk feeding the right wing deep state narrative shocking


In depth reporting only allowed on twitter with a 280 character limit


And the right wing is spewing these conclusions

Ultimately, U.S. government influence at Twitter would work to derail Trump's administration, spur a widespread censorship campaign by U.S. government agencies during the 2020 presidential election and pandemic, and perhaps even light the fire for Russia's invasion of Ukraine,

Wow.amazing how republicans love to hate America when they lose elections and why they seek political power via lies or force


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I find. It odd Republicans are all over Tik Tok which have all the security flaws of Twitter and content yet

GOP Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin told NBC’s “Meet The Press TikTok is an addictive drug China’s government is providing to Americans, says the incoming chairman of a new House select committee on China.

As GOPers ban TikTok, they’re not keeping that same energy with Twitter
There seems to be an obvious reason Republicans are banning TikTok from government devices but not Twitter, which carries many of the same security risks.

What isn’t clear, though, is how these security issues are materially different from issues on social platforms Republicans tend to love these days — like Twitter and Facebook.

Both of those platforms, for example, have well-documented histories of being used by foreign governments to manipulate and demoralize Americans. Whistleblowers from both companies have come forward with damning claims. If the GOP were concerned about influence from foreign governments, you’d think more of them would decry the fact that the Saudis have openly touted their investment in Elon Musk’s Twitter.



The FBI is concerned that the Chinese government could use TikTok to influence American users or control their devices.


So let me get this straight the GOP trust the FBIs views on TikTok

Yet the FBI is in bed with Twitter

As I’ve said The Twitter-FBI story relies far more on insinuation than evidence

https://www.techdirt.com/2022/12/20/no-the-fbi-is-not-paying-twitter-to-censor/

Some reading outside people’s bubble

But, since at least some of us still believe in facts and truth, let’s walk through this.
First up, we already did a huge, long debunker on the idea that the FBI (or any government entity) was in any way involved in the Twitter decision to block links to the Hunter Biden laptop story. Most of the people who believed that have either ignored that there was no evidence to support it, or have simply moved on to this new lie, suggesting that “the FBI” was “sending lists” to Twitter of people to censor.
The problem is that, once again, that’s not what “the Twitter Files” show, even as the reporters working on it — Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, and Michael Shellenberger — either don’t understand what they’re looking at or are deliberately misrepresenting it. I’m no fan of the FBI, and have spent much of the two and a half decades here at Techdirt criticizing it. But… there’s literally no scandal here (or if there is one, it’s something entirely different, which we’ll get to at the end of the article).
What the files show is that the FBI would occasionally (not very often, frankly) use reporting tools to alert Twitter to accounts that potentially violated Twitter’s rules. When the FBI did so, it was pretty clear that it was just flagging these accounts for Twitter to review, and had no expectation that the company would or would not do anything about it. In fact, they are explicit in their email that the accounts “may potentially constitute violations of Twitter’s Terms of Service” and that Twitter can take “any action or inaction deemed appropriate within Twitter policy.”

you can see that if they can get a 2703(d) order (again, signed by a judge) they can seek to obtain subscriber info, transaction records, retrieved communications, and unretrieved communications stored for more than 180 days (in the past, we’ve long complained about the whole 180 days thing, but that’s another issue).
You know what’s not on that list? “Censoring people.” It’s just not a thing.

It’s got nothing at all to do with “censorship demands.” And yet Musk and friends are going hog wild pushing this utter nonsense.




Notice the attached chart the FBI was seeking data request from Twitter since 2016. So Trumps FBI was doing the same thing ?

But it’s the liberals weaponizing the Government against the American people with this imaginary censorship regime and of course don’t for get the goose stepping IRS agents come to audit and steal your hard earned Money

So let me get this straight the GOP trust the FBIs views on TikTok

Yet the FBI is in bed with Twitter

As I’ve said The Twitter-FBI story relies far more on insinuation than evidence

wayne, no one on the right said that the FBI can never be trusted. Why is everything one extreme or the other?

Two things can be true at the same time. Some in the FBI could have very inappropriately tried to cleanse social media of things unfavorable to Biden. At the same time, the FBI might be right about Tik Tok and China.

In your mind, life is as simple as “the republican is always wrong.”. Most of us realize the world isn’t that simple.

wayne, no one on the right said that the FBI can never be trusted. Why is everything one extreme or the other?

Two things can be true at the same time. Some in the FBI could have very inappropriately tried to cleanse social media of things unfavorable to Biden. At the same time, the FBI might be right about Tik Tok and China.

In your mind, life is as simple as “the republican is always wrong.”. Most of us realize the world isn’t that simple.

Russia Russia Russia

Funny how it keeps turning up

A former aide to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was convicted Thursday after being found guilty of helping funnel illegal foreign campaign contributions from a Russian national into former President Trump's 2016 campaign.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Russia Russia Russia

Funny how it keeps turning up


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So we aren't supposed to mention a huge, empty, politically-motivated investigation that your side started. But if the GOP plans to do the same thing with Hunter, THAT needs to be discussed. But we can't discuss why it's OK when the left does the same thing.

Please explain why it's always OK when the left does it, but never OK when the right does it?

Prove it. I’ll wait.

Zuckerberg said it. Was he lying to help Republicans? Is that what you're saying? I'm truly sorry if you don't happen to like it, but the CEO of Facebook who is a die hard liberal, claimed that's what happened.

"Because I don't like it", isn't an acceptable reason to deny what Zuckerberg said.

Spence, the FBI had possession of the laptop. They knew it wasn't Russian disinformation.

Zuckerberg said it. Was he lying to help Republicans? Is that what you're saying? I'm truly sorry if you don't happen to like it, but the CEO of Facebook who is a die hard liberal, claimed that's what happened.

"Because I don't like it", isn't an acceptable reason to deny what Zuckerberg said.

Spence, the FBI had possession of the laptop. They knew it wasn't Russian disinformation.

From BBC. Bold is my emphasis.

Zuckerberg told Rogan: "The background here is that the FBI came to us - some folks on our team - and was like 'hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert. We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that'."
He said the FBI did not warn Facebook about the Biden story in particular - only that Facebook thought it "fit that pattern".

From BBC. Bold is my emphasis.

Zuckerberg told Rogan: "The background here is that the FBI came to us - some folks on our team - and was like 'hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert. We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that'."
He said the FBI did not warn Facebook about the Biden story in particular - only that Facebook thought it "fit that pattern".

I've said many times that Zuckerberg never claimed the FBI specifically warned them about the laptop. But Zuckerberg did say they were specifically warned about Russian disinformation concerning Hunter Biden.

Bryan, the FBI had the laptop in their possession, there was absolutely no reason for anyone to speculate that it was Russian disinformation. But with exactly zero evidence, that's how the left spun it.

Look, it's not a big story, America had an election and the voters obviously didn't care. But let's be honest about what happened. Part of being honest about what happened is admitting the FBI never specified the laptop.

And part of being honest is admitting that MANY of the outlets that banned the story, now (now that it can't hurt Biden) say it was wrong to ban it, because it was legit. two years later they're conceding that.

It's not illegal for a private company to have a political bias. If Foxnews can be biased, so can Facebook. But that doesn't mean we can't be honest about it.

wayne, no one on the right said that the FBI can never be trusted. Why is everything one extreme or the other?


Jim the right is screaming the FBI can never be trusted ever unless they but a democratic in jail


Two things can be true at the same time. Some in the FBI could have very inappropriately tried to cleanse social media of things unfavorable to Biden. red"]Only in the imaginary world of the far right no individual has that power[/COLOR] At the same time, the FBI might be right about Tik Tok and China.

In your mind, life is as simple as “the republican is always wrong.”. Most of us realize the world isn’t that simple.

No Jim in my experience and their actual behavior their always lying and misrepresentation facts ignoring truth. The last 5 year is filled with examples

All these so called upcoming investigations are not for truth and transparency No different than a Benghazi hearings even McCarthys let the cat out the bag on that one .

all they’re gonna do is talk to discredit Biden and anyone around him prior to the 2024 election it’s so obvious all the Republicans can’t see it


Jiim this is the narrative of the house GOP suggesting to the American people (actually just their base )

That Ultimately, U.S. government influence at Twitter would work to derail Trump's administration, spur a widespread censorship campaign by U.S. government agencies during the 2020 presidential election and pandemic, and perhaps even light the fire for Russia's invasion of Ukraine,

That last comment is amazing A. Republicans claim a migrant invasion is Biden’s Fault. And Now Twitter and Biden are some how responsible for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine !

But it’s really not surprising how Republicans are pulling back from Ukraine using their go to excuse of fiscally responsibility bla bla bla

Because once again their base sees Putin as a Savior and hero fighting Traditional western values. Which is code for no people of color gays transgender. Or liberals

2014 Buchanan blushed with praise for Putin’s policies, writing, “In the culture war for the future of mankind, Putin is planting Russia’s flag firmly on the side of traditional Christianity.”


2022 A growing number of white nationalists identify with Vladimir Putin

The U.S. Christians Who Pray for Putin

So this new house leadership or lack of it might seem comical today
It’s more dangerous than it looks

Or, since the FBI did not warn about the ‘Laptop’ they were warning more generally about Russian disinformation. Both things (that there was a laptop in the FBI possession AND that there was a likely chance of Russian disinformation possibly coming) can be true.

If in any other time, Rudy (in his present form) came out and said this legally blind computer repair guy (who has turned into a crackpot in his own right from what I have seen when he has been interviewed) has a laptop he claims is Hunter Biden’s in the weeks leading up to an election. What reasonable person wouldn’t have serious misgivings about the origin of the story? At the time I didnt know if I believed Russia, but it was certainly reasonable to think it was a plant. That has been proven wrong, and it clearly was Hunters, however many of the documents out there (including emails) have missing or altered metadata which makes it damn hard to believe anything on there that is out in the Twitterverse.


You are right though, the FBI (Under Barr, who up until the end was a ball washing Trump loyalist) had the laptop and did nothing. So either, A., Deep State wanted Trump out OR B., there is a lot of #^&#^&#^&#^&ed up personal stuff about Hunter on there, but nothing criminal/Biden corruption. Which do you think it is?

My vote is B. Hunter is a dirtbag and there is a lot of personal stuff on there, but had there been any ‘there, there’ we would have heard about it before the DOJ changed out of Trump’s control.

Or, since the FBI did not warn about the ‘Laptop’ they were warning more generally about Russian disinformation. Both things (that there was a laptop in the FBI possession AND that there was a likely chance of Russian disinformation possibly coming) can be true.

If in any other time, Rudy (in his present form) came out and said this legally blind computer repair guy (who has turned into a crackpot in his own right from what I have seen when he has been interviewed) has a laptop he claims is Hunter Biden’s in the weeks leading up to an election. What reasonable person wouldn’t have serious misgivings about the origin of the story? At the time I didnt know if I believed Russia, but it was certainly reasonable to think it was a plant. That has been proven wrong, and it clearly was Hunters, however many of the documents out there (including emails) have missing or altered metadata which makes it damn hard to believe anything on there that is out in the Twitterverse.


You are right though, the FBI (Under Barr, who up until the end was a ball washing Trump loyalist) had the laptop and did nothing. So either, A., Deep State wanted Trump out OR B., there is a lot of #^&#^&#^&#^&ed up personal stuff about Hunter on there, but nothing criminal/Biden corruption. Which do you think it is?

My vote is B. Hunter is a dirtbag and there is a lot of personal stuff on there, but had there been any ‘there, there’ we would have heard about it before the DOJ changed out of Trump’s control.

you also left out, somewhat conveniently, that zuckerberg admits it was wrong to ban it.

i agree on reflexive doubts on the laptop. But the NY Post reported in it, and sourced it. They weren’t just taking anyone’s word for it. Their twitter account was banned for posting a story that was accurate. and again that’s not illegal, but we should admit what happened.

nobody had to take rudy’s ( and i agree his current form is a pathetic shell of his 9/11 days) word for it. But There was zero evidence that the NY Posts reporting was bogus. But your side didn’t like it, so they all claimed it as russian disinformation.

Bryan they reported accurately, and were accused of spreading russian disinformation. If you’re going to a accuse someone of that, shouldn’t you have some speck of proof?

I am truly glad you come out here sometimes. You and Paul are the only ones left of center cap or of discussing things with.

And i don’t know which it is, which is why i hope the hearings reveal which it is.

I’m suspicious of Buntwrs success in ukraine, of all places, and at all times. Had to be the one country that daddy was our point man on. that’s either a huge coincidence, or not a coincidence. which do you think it is?

you also left out, somewhat conveniently, that zuckerberg admits it was wrong to ban it.

i agree on reflexive doubts on the laptop. But the NY Post reported in it, and sourced it. They weren’t just taking anyone’s word for it. Their twitter account was banned for posting a story that was accurate. and again that’s not illegal, but we should admit what happened.

nobody had to take rudy’s ( and i agree his current form is a pathetic shell of his 9/11 days) word for it. But There was zero evidence that the NY Posts reporting was bogus. But your side didn’t like it, so they all claimed it as russian disinformation.

Bryan they reported accurately, and were accused of spreading russian disinformation. If you’re going to a accuse someone of that, shouldn’t you have some speck of proof?

Yup.
They got it wrong (I did say it was proven false above).
The difference is, I see it (and read the Taibbi stuff with a huge grin of salt) as uncertainty of the source and 'CYA' not some grand plan to oust Trump. But we all have our biases on how we see it.

(You missed my question about the laptop and the FBI....)

Yup.
They got it wrong (I did say it was proven false above).
The difference is, I see it (and read the Taibbi stuff with a huge grin of salt) as uncertainty of the source and 'CYA' not some grand plan to oust Trump. But we all have our biases on how we see it.

(You missed my question about the laptop and the FBI....)

but it’s not just that they banned it when they shouldn’t have. they accused those who wanted to discuss it, if knowingly spreading russian disinformation. They made that accusation knowing there was no basis for it. Not one of them has been asked to defend that.

what was your question?

Yup.
They got it wrong (I did say it was proven false above).
The difference is, I see it (and read the Taibbi stuff with a huge grin of salt) as uncertainty of the source and 'CYA' not some grand plan to oust Trump. But we all have our biases on how we see it.

(You missed my question about the laptop and the FBI....)

and you’re right about biases. but geez, how many of these mistakes benefit the right, and how many benefit the left? isn’t there a pattern there? Ferguson MO, Freddy Gray, Duke lacrosse case, Nick Sandman, Rittenhouse, the rolling stone fake rape accusation…

What was the FBIs evidence that there was actual
russian disinformation regarding hunter? did big tech ban any stories that actually were russian disinformation? or did they only ban the laptop story? those are sincere questions.

Interesting read

https://www.theshortcut.com/p/twitter-files

Still not sure why Jim in the right are so fixated on Twitter the Hunter Biden laptop story And this magical suppression

No one can Explain why the FBI would only look to censor Twitter and FB but not the New York post or any other Print or online media outlets

It ran all over the Internet and print news through the entire world..

They only reason I can conclude it fits the rights narrative of not liking big technology, because big tec doesn’t give them money like they give Democratic’s they’re the same with Unions they hate them for the same reason

Many rightfully question the source of the material due to the chain of custody and Rudy Giuliani clearly not a trustworthy source

Still not sure why Jim in the right are so fixated on Twitter the Hunter Biden laptop story And this magical suppression

No one can Explain why the FBI would only look to censor Twitter and FB but not the New York post or any other Print or online media outlets

It ran all over the Internet and print news through the entire world..

They only reason I can conclude it fits the rights narrative of not liking big technology, because big tec doesn’t give them money like they give Democratic’s they’re the same with Unions they hate them for the same reason

Many rightfully question the source of the material due to the chain of custody and Rudy Giuliani clearly not a trustworthy source

"Still not sure why Jim in the right are so fixated on Twitter the Hunter Biden laptop story"

Because you can't comprehend why anyone would be interested in a story that doesn't help democrats.

"No one can Explain why the FBI would only look to censor Twitter and FB but not the New York post "

Huh? How would the FBI convince the NY Post to censor their own story, which they knew to be factual? Do you not understand what took place? The NY Post knew it was a legit story at the time they reported on it. Why would they censor themselves?

"No one" can explain that to you? Probably because no one considered the possibility that something that obvious would need to be explained.

The circulation of the NY post is nothing compared to how many people are on FB and Twitter and Instagram.

Wayne, you guys go on and on about Foxnews. On a good night, 1% of the country is watching Foxnews. One percent. That's nothing compared to who controls big tech. And it's fine if Big tech wants to have a political slant, it's a free country. But let's not deny it just because it makes your life easier.

I don't think you understand what happened. They called a legit story "russian disinformation", and they did so with absolutely zero evidence. They banned it when it might have hurt Biden, then they all admitted they had no legit reason to ban it.

you guys go on and on about Foxnews. On a good night 1% of the country is watching Foxnews. One percent. That's nothing compared to who controls big tech. And it's fine if Big tech wants to have a political slant, it's a free country. But let's not deny it just because it makes your life easier.

I don't think you understand what happened. They called a legit story "russian disinformation", and they did so with absolutely zero evidence.

There’s plenty of evidence

As far as your number two hit of Faux News having only a small share of the market

CNN, Fox News Top List of Main Sources

Overall, when respondents are asked what outlet they turn to most often for news about government and politics, the most frequent mentions are two cable networks: CNN (named by 16%) and Fox News (14%). But wide ideological differences exist both in the sources that top the list for those on the left and right and in the degree to which there is reliance on a single source.

Those with consistently conservative political values are oriented around a single outlet—Fox News—to a much greater degree than those in any other ideological group: Nearly half (47%) of those who are consistently conservative name Fox News as their main source for government and political news. Far fewer choose any other single source: Local radio ranks second, named by 11%, with no other individual source named by more than 5% of consistent conservatives. Those with mostly conservative views also gravitate strongly toward Fox News – 31% name it as their main source, several times the share who name the next most popular sources, including CNN (9%), local television (6%) and radio (6%) and Yahoo News (6%).

On the left of the political spectrum, no single outlet predominates. Among consistent liberals, CNN (15%), NPR (13%), MSNBC (12%) and the New York Times (10%) all rank near the top of the list. CNN is named by just 20% of those with mostly liberal views, but still tops their list, followed by local television (11%) and NPR (9%). Both MSNBC and Fox News are mentioned by 5% of those who are mostly liberal. Those in other ideological groups name the New York Times, NPR and MSNBC less frequently as top news sources.

Respondents with a roughly equal mix of liberal and conservative values also have a diffuse mix of news providers. CNN (20%) and local television (16%) are the most frequently-named top sources, with a long list of other news sources named by fewer than one-in-ten. Fox News (8%) is among the most-named sources in this “long tail,” along with Yahoo News (7%) and Google News (6%), both of which primarily aggregate and highlight news produced by other outlets.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There’s plenty of evidence

As far as your number two hit of Faux News having only a small share of the market

CNN, Fox News Top List of Main Sources

Overall, when respondents are asked what outlet they turn to most often for news about government and politics, the most frequent mentions are two cable networks: CNN (named by 16%) and Fox News (14%). But wide ideological differences exist both in the sources that top the list for those on the left and right and in the degree to which there is reliance on a single source.

Those with consistently conservative political values are oriented around a single outlet—Fox News—to a much greater degree than those in any other ideological group: Nearly half (47%) of those who are consistently conservative name Fox News as their main source for government and political news. Far fewer choose any other single source: Local radio ranks second, named by 11%, with no other individual source named by more than 5% of consistent conservatives. Those with mostly conservative views also gravitate strongly toward Fox News – 31% name it as their main source, several times the share who name the next most popular sources, including CNN (9%), local television (6%) and radio (6%) and Yahoo News (6%).

On the left of the political spectrum, no single outlet predominates. Among consistent liberals, CNN (15%), NPR (13%), MSNBC (12%) and the New York Times (10%) all rank near the top of the list. CNN is named by just 20% of those with mostly liberal views, but still tops their list, followed by local television (11%) and NPR (9%). Both MSNBC and Fox News are mentioned by 5% of those who are mostly liberal. Those in other ideological groups name the New York Times, NPR and MSNBC less frequently as top news sources.

Respondents with a roughly equal mix of liberal and conservative values also have a diffuse mix of news providers. CNN (20%) and local television (16%) are the most frequently-named top sources, with a long list of other news sources named by fewer than one-in-ten. Fox News (8%) is among the most-named sources in this “long tail,” along with Yahoo News (7%) and Google News (6%), both of which primarily aggregate and highlight news produced by other outlets.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if there is “plenty” of evidence it was russian disinformation, why is everyone now denying that claim?

my numbers were right. a good show for fox gets 3m viewers, which is 1% of the US population.

Numbers on FB, twitter, and instagram, dwarf that.

if there is “plenty” of evidence it was russian disinformation, why is everyone now denying that claim?

my numbers were right. a good show for fox gets 3m viewers, which is 1% of the US population.

Numbers on FB, twitter, and instagram, dwarf that.

People - including you as the very worst perpetrator of misinformation - very rarely say false facts. Instead, they say true things without enough context. But nobody will ever agree what context is necessary and which context is redundant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

People - including you as the very worst perpetrator of misinformation - very rarely say false facts. Instead, they say true things without enough context. But nobody will ever agree what context is necessary and which context is redundant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

foxnews can’t influence those who don’t watch. Is that true or is it false?

1% of the country watches foxnews. according to pew research, 70% of americans use big social media.

the reason why fox has a big market share among conservatives, is a lack of competition. every other tv station is liberal, so all the rest are splitting the liberal viewership. that doesn’t mean that more than 1% watch fox at any one time.

context is indeed important. nothing i said was misleading. it’s way way more powerful to control big social media than foxnews. o comparison. not even close.

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/

foxnews can’t influence those who don’t watch. Is that true or is it false?

1% of the country watches foxnews. according to pew research, 70% of americans use big social media.

the reason why fox has a big market share among conservatives, is a lack of competition. every other tv station is liberal, so all the rest are splitting the liberal viewership. that doesn’t mean that more than 1% watch fox at any one time.

context is indeed important. nothing i said was misleading. it’s way way more powerful to control big social media than foxnews. o comparison. not even close.

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/

Maybe you should pay more attention to American news, instead of Russian
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

From BBC. Bold is my emphasis.

Zuckerberg told Rogan: "The background here is that the FBI came to us - some folks on our team - and was like 'hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert. We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that'."
He said the FBI did not warn Facebook about the Biden story in particular - only that Facebook thought it "fit that pattern".

The "pattern" was crafted by the FBI and fed to the news agencies.

From Twitter Files release #7 by Michael Schellenbeger:

Yoel Roth (Twitter’s former head of trust and safety) admitted in a sworn declaration that the feds had primed him to view any reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop as a “Russian ‘hack and leak’ operation.

The FBI via it's special agent Elvis Chan shared information with Twitter's Roth relating to the Russian hacking organization, APT28, through the FBI's secure, one-way communications channel, Teleporter.

Yoel Roth told @karaswisher that he had been primed to think about the Russian hacking group APT28 before news of the Hunter Biden laptop came out.

In Sept 2020, Roth participated in an Aspen Institute “tabletop exercise” on a potential "Hack-and-Dump" operation relating to Hunter Biden

The goal was to shape how the media covered it — and how social media carried it

The organizer was Vivian Schiller, the fmr CEO of NPR, fmr head of news at Twitter; fmr Gen. mgr of NY Times; fmr Chief Digital Officer of NBC News

By mid-Sept, 2020, Chan (FBI) & Roth had set up an encrypted messaging network so employees from FBI & Twitter could communicate.

They also agreed to create a “virtual war room” for “all the [Internet] industry plus FBI and ODNI” [Office of the Director of National Intelligence].

Then, on Sept 15, 2020 the FBI’s Laura Dehmlow, who heads up the Foreign Influence Task Force, and Elvis Chan, request to give a classified briefing for Jim Baker (the disgraced former FBI agent who was now working for Twitter [well wasn't that just ducky?] and was eventually tasked with choosing what files would be released to the journalists that Musk allowed to report on the files and was then fired by Musk because he only released files that would not show negative FBI influence), without any other Twitter staff, such as Yoel Roth, present.

When Roth repeatedly didn't see any actual violation of Twitter policy in the Hunter story, Baker repeatedly insists that the Hunter Biden materials were either faked, hacked, or both, and a violation of Twitter policy. Baker does so over email, and in a Google doc, on October 14 and 15. (Shellenberger says "And yet it's inconceivable Baker believed the Hunter Biden emails were either fake or hacked. The @nypost had included a picture of the receipt signed by Hunter Biden, and an FBI subpoena showed that the agency had taken possession of the laptop in December 2019.

The FBI, as are all intelligence agencies, is well tasked in cloaking what it does illegally in bureaucratic ways that make it appear legit. It didn't "order" or directly tell Twitter and other news orgs. and social media to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story. It primed them well to perceive the story as "potential" or actual Russian disinformation. It knew the story was about to be released, and timed its misinformation campaign to "debunk" the story before the election.

And, BTW, since it was in such direct communication with Twitter and all the rest of the news and social media orgs. and certainly knew that it's direct efforts to "warn" them about Russian hacking and disinformation which was about to happen shortly would very likely influence them to bury the Hunter laptop story and have an effect on the election, it should have, in the interests of not influencing the election, told them that the laptop story was, as they knew, not Russian disinformation.

"Still not sure why Jim in the right are so fixated on Twitter the Hunter Biden laptop story"

Because you can't comprehend why anyone would be interested in a story that doesn't help democrats.

"No one can Explain why the FBI would only look to censor Twitter and FB but not the New York post "

Huh? How would the FBI convince the NY Post to censor their own story, which they knew to be factual? Do you not understand what took place? The NY Post knew it was a legit story at the time they reported on it. Why would they censor themselves?

"No one" can explain that to you? Probably because no one considered the possibility that something that obvious would need to be explained.

The circulation of the NY post is nothing compared to how many people are on FB and Twitter and Instagram.

Wayne, you guys go on and on about Foxnews. On a good night, 1% of the country is watching Foxnews. One percent. That's nothing compared to who controls big tech. And it's fine if Big tech wants to have a political slant, it's a free country. But let's not deny it just because it makes your life easier.

I don't think you understand what happened. They called a legit story "russian disinformation", and they did so with absolutely zero evidence. They banned it when it might have hurt Biden, then they all admitted they had no legit reason to ban it.


The truth finally come out it!

They banned it when it might have hurt Biden

It all comes back to looking for excuses why Trump lost

Even with the story running in the NY post print and online version
And covered by hundreds and hundreds of other sources of all political persuasions your excuse is circulation of the NY post is nothing compared to how many people are on FB and Twitter and Instagram.

That’s flawed logic it assumes because you’re on any of those platforms. You were denied information and couldn’t or it wasn’t the individual responsibility to seek other sources

Many people have FB Twitter and Instagram and tic toc Read the NYpost NY times the Washington Post. Watch CNN or Fox. And their local news sources it wasn’t a hard story to find

So people looked for the Hunter Biden laptop story on Twitter and couldn’t find it.
Just gave up? And looked no place Else

It all comes back to the GOP Narrative of Big tech is mean to us

The truth finally come out it!

They banned it when it might have hurt Biden

It all comes back to looking for excuses why Trump lost

Even with the story running in the NY post print and online version
And covered by hundreds and hundreds of other sources of all political persuasions your excuse is circulation of the NY post is nothing compared to how many people are on FB and Twitter and Instagram.

That’s flawed logic it assumes because you’re on any of those platforms. You were denied information and couldn’t or it wasn’t the individual responsibility to seek other sources

Did the FBI saying the hunter laptop story was, or was probably, Russian disinformation have any influence at all on how you viewed it?

Your tall tale might be believable but I doubt there is a Hunter Biden hard-drive…
If there was so much damning proof on the harddrive why didn’t Rudy go straight to the Justice department instead of the rightwing media circuit.
Why wasn’t the original hard-drive left pristine?…..Is there a pristine hard drive out there? There would have to be an original hard drive to make copies of..
Is there no original hard drive without added files ? Did the hard-drive in Rudy’s possession already have the added files before he passed it around?
Rudy is/was a lawyer, he would know about chain of custody, he would know adding data to the harddrive post Hunter’s possession would taint the evidence.
If Rudy had a smoking gun….No way he’d allow it to get spoiled by messing with it.

There is no Hunter hard drive…It is Russian disinformation.
Of course if Rudy or some other Team Trump person had a smoking gun, it’s probably because they just shot themselves in the foot.

So if there’s a “Hunter Biden” “laptop”, but from what I’ve seen no proof that it was ever Hunter Biden’s. And they’ve never explained why, when he was living in L.A., he’d go all the way across the US to an obscure store with an owner who couldn’t identify him and leave his laptop without contact information or even a name attached.

And you wonder why the con man lost……
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They can’t even elect a speaker, going after the Hunter laptop joke investigation if they ever do so, will only embarrass this lame arse party further.

The truth finally come out it!

They banned it when it might have hurt Biden

It all comes back to looking for excuses why Trump lost

Even with the story running in the NY post print and online version
And covered by hundreds and hundreds of other sources of all political persuasions your excuse is circulation of the NY post is nothing compared to how many people are on FB and Twitter and Instagram.

That’s flawed logic it assumes because you’re on any of those platforms. You were denied information and couldn’t or it wasn’t the individual responsibility to seek other sources

Many people have FB Twitter and Instagram and tic toc Read the NYpost NY times the Washington Post. Watch CNN or Fox. And their local news sources it wasn’t a hard story to find

So people looked for the Hunter Biden laptop story on Twitter and couldn’t find it.
Just gave up? And looked no place Else

It all comes back to the GOP Narrative of Big tech is mean to us

"They banned it when it might have hurt Biden

It all comes back to looking for excuses why Trump lost "

I said very explicitly, it likely didn't effect the outcome since Trump got creamed. Why are you lying?

Detbuch posted that Twitters head of content security, was tipped off specifically by the FBI, about the laptop being Russian disinformation. But the FBI had the laptop, therefore they knew it wasn't Russian disinformation.

So instead of insulting those who bring it up, why not tell us what you think happened here?

"Many people have FB Twitter and Instagram and tic toc Read the NYpost NY times the Washington Post. Watch CNN or Fox. And their local news sources it wasn’t a hard story to find "

Fact: 1% of the US population watches Foxnews. And according to Pew Research, 70% of Americans are on the big social media.

I don't know how good you are at math. But do you understand the difference in magnitude between 1% of the population, and 70%?

Advertising revenue is surging at big tech, and drying up everywhere else, because that's where the people are.

Again, why are you lying?

They can’t even elect a speaker, going after the Hunter laptop joke investigation if they ever do so, will only embarrass this lame arse party further.

From the clown who obviously never read the NY Post article on what's on that laptop, and will never care no matter what gets revealed.

Lame arse party that hold smore federal+state elected seats than your party. So if the GOP is a lame arse party, what does that make the democrats?

From the clown who obviously never read the NY Post article on what's on that laptop, and will never care no matter what gets revealed.

Lame arse party that hold smore federal+state elected seats than your party. So if the GOP is a lame arse party, what does that make the democrats?

Among the reasons for the inconclusive findings was sloppy handling of the data, which damaged some records. The experts found the data had been repeatedly accessed and copied by people other than Hunter Biden over nearly three years.

The answer to your last question is easy. In light of the legislation passed and signed by Biden, it’s the party that governs for the good of all Americans.

Online activists used the on-field collapse of American football star Damar Hamlin to spread anti-vaccination messages starting just minutes after Monday night's incident.

They included the Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who tweeted: "Before the covid vaccines we didn't see athletes dropping dead on the playing field like we do now... Time to investigate the covid vaccines."

These are the same people the GOP are catering to . and the same people complaining twitter is censoring them. They just expect private companies should allow them to lie while yelling Freedom

It’s not hard to figure out why they were banned to begin with

And these are the free thinkers who are going to conduct hearings. And expect Americans to believe them

Only a few Americans are that Dumb
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Among the reasons for the inconclusive findings was sloppy handling of the data, which damaged some records. The experts found the data had been repeatedly accessed and copied by people other than Hunter Biden over nearly three years.

The answer to your last question is easy. In light of the legislation passed and signed by Biden, it’s the party that governs for the good of all Americans.

Except today, all the people who banned the story, are now saying it was legit. So it was banned when it might have hurt Biden, and now that it can't hurt him, they all concede it was a legit scoop.

The FBI, who had the laptop, was saying it was Russian disinformation.

Nothing to see, though.

foxnews can’t influence those who don’t watch. Is that true or is it false?
False. You are exhibit A.

False. You are exhibit A.

we don’t know what that means.

spence, how many americans watch fox regularly, and how many use FB, twitter, and instagram regularly, do you suppose?

pew research says 70% of adult americans are in those big social
media platforms. How many do you suppose are watching foxnews?

instead of lobbing vague insults like always, how about giving me some tangible information to suggest i’m wrong?

obviously more than 1% listen to what fox has to say as you don’t haven’t watch it to seee what those hosts are saying. but the numbers are nowhere near what the big social media platforms get. Fox is a tiny fraction, according to more research.

You know more than Pew research? please share, madam.

Online activists used the on-field collapse of American football star Damar Hamlin to spread anti-vaccination messages starting just minutes after Monday night's incident.

They included the Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who tweeted: "Before the covid vaccines we didn't see athletes dropping dead on the playing field like we do now... Time to investigate the covid vaccines."

These are the same people the GOP are catering to . and the same people complaining twitter is censoring them. They just expect private companies should allow them to lie while yelling Freedom

It’s not hard to figure out why they were banned to begin with

And these are the free thinkers who are going to conduct hearings. And expect Americans to believe them

Only a few Americans are that Dumb
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

can we be clear on what you’re objecting to?

sounds like you’re saying that when there’s a tragedy, it’s wrong for some folks to try and exploit it for political gain, based on assumptions made before all the facts are in.

is that what you’re saying?

because i could break john’s server with examples of liberals doing exactly that in the last few years, and you defend it every single
time. Ask Nick Sanan and Kyle Rittenhouse. What happens every time a white cop shoots a black citizen?

“everything is OK when democrats do it!”

because i could break john’s server with examples of liberals doing exactly that in the last few years,

:deadhorse:

You've been trying for years and haven't succeeded yet.

Tell us, who is Sylvia?

Trout fishing has been pretty good the last fw days....:kewl::kewl:

can we be clear on what you’re objecting to?

sounds like you’re saying that when there’s a tragedy, it’s wrong for some folks to try and exploit it for political gain, based on assumptions made before all the facts are in.

is that what you’re saying?

because i could break john’s server with examples of liberals doing exactly that in the last few years, and you defend it every single
time. Ask Nick Sanan and Kyle Rittenhouse. What happens every time a white cop shoots a black citizen?

“everything is OK when democrats do it!”

Again how did I know you were going there right to false equivalence. I am shocked

Nick Sanan story corrected after more info and Kyle Rittenhouse.found not guilty

But with the anti vax crowd also the election was stolen crowd and Greene.

No new evidence or information matters ever.

Jim whenever a white cop shoots a black unarmed person people should be outraged

Time square guy machete attacks 3 police result. Not Dead do you think being white helped?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Again how did I know you were going there right to false equivalence. I am shocked

Nick Sanan story corrected after more info and Kyle Rittenhouse.found not guilty

But with the anti vax crowd also the election was stolen crowd and Greene.

No new evidence or information matters ever.

Jim whenever a white cop shoots a black unarmed person people should be outraged

Time square guy machete attacks 3 police result. Not Dead do you think being white helped?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

yes the Nick Sandman reporting was correct “when we got more info”. which is why people should #^&#^&#^&#^& up until we get more info, rather then exploit the situation with assumptions

I say it’s always wrong to do that. You only condemn it when republicans do it.

yes we should be upset when a cop shoots anyone. that doesn’t mean we assume it was a race-based assassination, until there’s some evidence to support that. But that never, ever stops your side from doing it. And you’ll never, ever criticize it, because you can’t.

“everything is OK when democrats do it.”

your hypocrisy literally knows no bounds. None.

yes the Nick Sandman reporting was correct “when we got more info”. which is why people should #^&#^&#^&#^& up until we get more info, rather then exploit the situation with assumptions

I say it’s always wrong to do that. You only condemn it when republicans do it.

yes we should be upset when a cop shoots anyone. that doesn’t mean we assume it was a race-based assassination, until there’s some evidence to support that. But that never, ever stops your side from doing it. And you’ll never, ever criticize it, because you can’t.

“everything is OK when democrats do it.”

your hypocrisy literally knows no bounds. None.


:faga:: is no defense it’s a choice :kewl: