If Seth Rich leaked the DNC emails, then that means there was no Russian hack. No Russian hack means this entire Russian narrative is fake. That's why the media is so desperate.
If the Russians really hacked the DNC servers, then the FBI would have been allowed to analyze the servers. They weren't. Does that not make you suspicious?
Maybe the extent of the hacking weren't fully understood, I'm not completely informed on that part of the issue, though I find it pretty easy to believe a country like Russia would attempt to do such a thing. Certainly not as suspicious as the things going on right now.
Even the corrupted left leaning CNN refutes your claim:
"The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed until well after the initial compromise had been mitigated," a senior law enforcement official told CNN. "This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information. These actions caused significant delays and inhibited the FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier."
By the time the FBI was able to get access, it was worthless.
That would definitely be a sound argument if we were blaming the fire department for the house burning down. Instead, we're talking about how suspicious the actions of the DNC are.
The fact that it took a while is in line with an organization that couldn't give up operations-critical hardware. The fact that they did give it willingly instead of requiring a subpoena or warrant is in line with the idea that they weren't hiding anything.
It's defensible to call it suspicious, but you're not just calling it suspicious, you're spreading something that isn't true and then defending it even though you're aware that it's a lie.
CNN. And if you believe it, it's the same source people are using to claim that they didn't let the FBI examine the servers. They're just ignoring the parts of the interview that run counter to their narrative.
"The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed until well after the initial compromise had been mitigated," a senior law enforcement official told CNN. "This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information. These actions caused significant delays and inhibited the FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier."
I don't see confirmation here that they ever received direct access to the servers in that article. It could easily mean they were rebuffed until later being given 3rd party information and nothing more. In fact that's exactly how it reads to me, especially when you get to this part:
The FBI instead relied on the assessment from a third-party security company called CrowdStrike.
Either way you're stating something as fact that this article in no way confirms. Talk about feeding a narrative.
As an aside, I still see cause for major concern even if the FBI was simply delayed in being given access to the server, especially considering the fact that this article shows the DNC flat out lying about access being requested at all:
"The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI's Cyber Division and its Washington Field Office, the Department of Justice's National Security Division, and US Attorney's Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC's computer servers," Eric Walker, the DNC's deputy communications director, told BuzzFeed News.
until well after the initial compromise had been mitigated
...at which point they were provided with the Crowdstrike findings, not the server. A different article lays it out more clearly:
The bureau made "multiple requests at different levels," according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a "highly respected private company" would get access and share what it found with investigators.
Nowhere does it say that the FBI ever got access. You're choosing to interpret it that way but when you look at everything that interpretation doesn't make sense.
Also emails are kept on servers FYI so what you're saying regarding the proof being in an email and not on a server is completely nonsensical.
I'm aware that the bureau ultimately chose not to examine the servers.
Which makes sense, if the work had already been done and the critical evidence was elsewhere.
Also, emails are also stored on workstations FYI. I guess you might not know this if you've never worked in an office, but enterprise-class email is usually downloaded.
The emails in this case were kept on a server, so what you said is still completely nonsensical and now I feel like I'm conversing with a troll. Peace.
When you start getting completely nonsensical by referencing workstations and pretending you weren't under the impression that the FBI had eventually looked at the servers I think it makes sense to take a look at what you've said in the past to see if it's equally as nonsensical, topic derailing, deflective etc. Nonetheless commenting on post history doesn't fit any definition of trolling, so that's nonsensical point #... what for you now? I'm starting to lose count so like I said, PEACE.
Maybe the reason my comment history is lucid is because I make lucid points, and you're getting confused because you don't understand the sequence of event's and how it relates to the media narrative describing it.
Comey was contradicting an earlier report from the DNC that said they didn't even ask.
When all the info is consolidated, the narrative that emerges is that the FBI did ask, the DNC asked them to do it later because they were busy, and the FBI gave up and just subcontracted to the people the DNC hired.
Not without a warrant they couldn't have. That's how the law works. Thanks for admitting you we're misinformed though. Seriously. Not enough people are open to changing their tune in the face of proof.
The DNC claimed the FBI never asked. I have worked in similar circumstances and found the FBI to do things like ask a low-level worker and then never follow up.
You say "clear", I say that you could interpret "never" "granted" and "access" to mean many different things. Do they have "server access" if they're looking through emails, since those are stored on the server?
Does "access" mean the physical machines? Does "granted" mandate accessing the servers, or would the opportunity to access the servers count?
And it has to be more than you would expect from a world power by default. Can't pretend everyone doesn't do some meddling in everyone else's elections.
James Clapper testified under oath to congress the other day and said the "17 intelligence agencies" story was bullshit. It only came out of Hillary Clinton's mouth and if you trust Hillary Clinton then I've got a Washington Post story to sell you.
Here's Clapper's testimony verbatim: "The two dozen or so analysts for this task were hand-picked, seasoned experts from each of the contributing agencies. They were given complete, unfettered mutual access to all sensitive raw intelligence data, and importantly, complete independence to reach their findings. They found that the Russian government pursued a multifaceted influence campaign in the run-up to the election, including aggressive use of cyber capabilities.
The Russians used cyber operations against both political parties, including hacking into servers used by the Democratic National Committee and releasing stolen data to WikiLeaks and other media outlets. Russia also collected on certain Republican Party- affiliated targets, but did not release any Republican-related data. The Intelligence Community Assessment concluded first that President Putin directed and influenced campaign to erode the faith and confidence of the American people in our presidential election process. Second, that he did so to demean Secretary Clinton, and third, that he sought to advantage Mr. Trump. These conclusions were reached based on the richness of the information gathered and analyzed and were thoroughly vetted and then approved by the directors of the three agencies and me.
These Russian activities and the result and (ph) assessment were briefed first to President Obama on the 5th of January, then to President-elect Trump at Trump Tower on the 6th and to the Congress via a series of five briefings from the 6th through the 13th of January. The classified version was profusely annotated, with footnotes drawn from thousands of pages of supporting material."
So the exact same thing the rest of the world does? Including our own media and government. Why is it now that propaganda from other countries is such a big deal? I am all for spreading the truth, but if we want positive change in this regard, it's our own house we will have to clean first.
You're at least the third or fourth pro-Trump commenter I've seen say something like "Just you wait for the libtards to start saying Seth Rich was working for the Russians!" But you're the only ones saying it.
This is from the Washington Post article today about Seth Rich:
Various theories have purported that Rich may have been the source of the DNC email leaks or that he was about to reveal Russia as the hacker.
I've never heard anyone suggest that Rich was killed by the Russians because he was about to expose them. In fact, it makes no sense because he was killed a week before the leak was even made public. Now WaPo is pushing that angle, which is suspicious.
It's not a theory. It's a distraction put in the WaPo article. I've never heard anyone suggest Rich was trying to expose Russia, and it makes no sense. If he was, how would Russia know about it but no one in the DNC or US government would? Rich somehow found out that Russia hacked into the DNC but he didn't alert anyone to that info, yet Russia figured out he knew this? And if he had evidence Russia was the hacker, where is that evidence? The FBI has his computer. It makes no sense.
The fact that this isn't higher is testament to the polarization of this sub and our political discourse into factions and their dependence on exclusive narratives
What annoys me is how easily this conspiracy can be proved either way. Get the damn computer and see if emails between Rich and Wikileaks exist. Let the Clinton crew choose their patsy so the entire DNC establishment doesn't fall (though it bloody well should) and at least let 1 head roll for this if true.
And if it's not, let the DNC up its stupid Russian narrative and play up the absurdity that they were even insinuated in an assassination of one of their own operatives.
The Clintons will be sealed into a beautiful home with a bunch of land, with security so no one comes in or out. Im sure they will still have servants and horses. Bill will ride. Bill loves his horses and he loves his circles. Day in day out Bill races around the track.
Meanwhile, a current FBI official and a former one completely discount the Fox News claim that an FBI analysis of a computer belonging to Rich contained thousands of e-mails to and from WikiLeaks.
Local police in Washington, D.C., never even gave the FBI Rich's laptop to analyze after his murder, according to the current FBI official.
And a former law enforcement official with first-hand knowledge of Rich's laptop said the claim was incorrect. "It never contained any e-mails related to WikiLeaks, and the FBI never had it," the person said.
Look at the front page of this sub, it's a distraction from Trump. I comment here sporadically but this bullshit has inspired me to post a lot to counteract the shit flood.
It's /r/conspiracy do you expect it to be the same as /r/politics or the 10 new Anti-Trump subs created weekly that somehow get 15k subscribers the day of creation and get posts on the Front Page?
As a Progressive, I hate Trump as much as anyone but you have to be blind not to notice the inorganic vote botting being used on these subs. It happens on T_D too, but they have 16k people online at all times and their posts still barely break 50% upvoted.
All of the Trump and Anti-Trump related subs exist as a means to push propaganda anyways, that's why I filter them.
If only these useful idiots focused on issues instead of one person, maybe the United States wouldn't be in such a mess.
Yeah, and so are the people nonstop accusing other redditors of beings Russian. Reddit is basically promoting astroturfing nowadays because it increases their ad revenue and site views.
It somewhat parallels to the Medias nonstop coverage of Trump for the past 2 years while ignoring, smearing or not even mentioning Bernie Sanders.
I agree with you but I don't accuse people of being Russian. I feel, legitimately, like there is something to this conspiracy. The ongoing congressional investigation, fbi investigation etc gives me hope.
I feel, legitimately, like there is something to this conspiracy.
May very well be and it should be investigated by non-partisans.
I just find it disturbing that both major candidates had even closer ties to Saudi Arabia yet that isn't even being discussed. They donated 25 million to the Clinton Foundation and bought 40+ million in property from Trump.
That country is one of the most repressive in the world. They execute gay people and Women have almost no rights at all(Including DRIVING).
Yeah the Saudis are dirty as fuck but they're the power players in the middle east. Trump just signed off a $100 BILLION arms deal to them. He's giving a speech in Riyadh today I believe...
Anyway, I believe the ongoing investigations are bipartisan, some republicans are starting to talk about impeachment.
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
Yeah well that reads like something drafted by a politically charged PR agency. Shariablue maybe. It certainly does read like your run of the mill Reddit post.
Look, this shit is getting out of hand.
Truce. We can talk about this differently. I apologize for my tone.
I guess I'm suspicious about what you are trying to accomplish here. You're anti-Trump, obviously. What good does it do to come in and be so disruptive in a thread like this? I've been banned from SRS, political humor, and politics for doing the opposite version. But you won't get that treatment here.
And can you understand why I would be suspicious? I guess I'm on edge with all the astroturfing going on.
Disinformation is intentionally false or misleading information that is spread in a calculated way to deceive target audiences.[1][2][3] The English word, which did not appear in dictionaries until the late-1980s, is a translation of the Russian дезинформация, transliterated as dezinformatsiya.[1][2][3] Disinformation is different from misinformation, which is information that is unintentionally false.[4] Misinformation can be used to define disinformation—where disinformation is misinformation that is purposefully and intentionally disseminated in order to deceive.[5]
It literally wasn't there in the dictionary till the 80s.
Then you have people like Clint Watts testifying that there have been active measures amplified by places like TD/4chan, etc. Remember the whole furore in 48 hrs over #MacronLeaks and how Macron honeypotted the whole operation. Do you remember how it was on conspiracy and TD?
You know comet ping ponger's ex boyfriend, David Brock? Well he ran Hillary Clintons online astroturfing super PAC Correct The Record. After the election, CTR became ShareBlue. It is a misinformation outlet designed to push narratives.
Not for a side job or a small amount of money but fuck yeah if I could quit my shit job. There's already lies everywhere. At least I could leave hints that it's bs. Everyone has a price. I've got a kid to take care of. For enough money I'd do it.
I understand the need for money, but you can give your kid a lot by being a good person and investing into them with things other than money. It's not about giving them shit or sending them places. All of my buddies who came from wealth didn't respect it because it came at the expense of relationships with their parents. They got 'everything they wanted' except the most important thing.
Teaching your kids to acknowledge and accept the fucked up world for what it is is infinitely more valuable than selling your soul for a salary. Teach your children principles to live by, not double standards for which to sell out by.
What our kids want is our attention. As a father, teach them to succeed. Don't rely on their school or the extracurriculars you can or can't afford. Life is the same for most of us. Teach them how to do life, and they'll take it from there. You are the best thing they will ever have if you just live up to your role. All the best to you and your family :)
I'm not truly planning on quitting my job and trying to make money by being a bad person. I like what you said though and am trying to teach my son to be a good person over everything else and be able to see bs as it is. I hope I'm doing a good enough job. Good luck with your children sir! Sounds youre raising some good people. The struggle is real.
I didn't think you actually were either, but I felt like saying it anyhow. Kudos and i'm sure you're doing fine. The fact that you want the best for your son says a lot on its own :) Have a good one
If I could get paid while being albe to spend time with my son I'd do it. The rest of the world is fucked my guy. I just want to help my son. I love him with all I have and i despise the world I brought him into. The real key is forming a solid bind with friends and family. Don't say fuck the rest of the world but making it your main concern will only serve to invest you into one side or another's bs. Help where you can and care for you're own. L
How do you resort to the Flynn meeting Kisliyak and subsequent resignation? And the charge that Sally Yates saw something dangerous in his behavior itself, not just hiding the meeting? What about the grand jury subpoena on Flynn? And the Senate subpoena on Carter Page? Why would they all be putting in so much effort into something that had nothing to do with hacking, but a lot to do with the Trump-Russia connection? You realize there's more smoke than just the DNC hack right?
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
I realize that op's title starts with "if". Well, "if" I win the lottery, I could become a millionaire. Doesn't mean I should start spending the money or expect everyone to call me daddy warbucks, just means, there's a chance. That's all people need to understand. Baseless theories without hard evidence are basically guesses, and no one should feel dumb for not buying into someone else's guess.
And if Seth Rich didn't leak the DNC emails, then that means there was a Russian hack. A Russian hack means this entire Seth Rich narrative is fake, and the Russian connection isnt. That is why you guys and the Trump administration are so desperate.
It's really not that complicated. If the conspiracy is true, the DNC emails are from Rich. But the Podesta emails are probably not (a normal staffer wouldn't have access to those). For those, there's a phishing email from a domain registered by a Russian citizen, and a reply from a staffer saying "This is a legitimate email".
Now, whether a simple phishing scam is really a hack, and why a presidential campaign advisor is that naive about security, is an entirely different matter.
Yea but if Russia wasn't Wikileaks source, then is it really that big a deal if Russia tried to or did hack the DNC servers? Who cares, I guarantee that we try to do the same thing.
I think whatever your politics if a foreign government is trying to interfere in our democratic process it should be troubling. I'm aware that the US has fucked up numerous countries with our meddling in the last 60+ years but I don't want others doing it to us.
That's why Dick Cheney calls it an act of war if it happened. Let's find out the truth.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/28/cheney-calls-russian-election-meddling-act-war/
Yea, its super vague. Maybe I interfered with the Democratic process when I convinced my Bernie-supporting friend to vote Trump rather than not vote at all.
You're not a foreign government- you're just being an American so you're not interfering. It's not vague- if a foreign government is trying to influence our elections to get the results they want - for whatever reason- that should bother Americans. This sub can be fun to try and sort fact from fiction and I'm pretty certain they were up to some hijinks but just how much effect they had who knows. Hillary and the DNC fucked up so much themselves Trump might not have needed too much help.
But here's a few things that interest me. I don't like the thought of Russia trying to influence America's sheep.
Did it bother you when Obama endorsed Macron? Personally, I haven't heard of any credible ways in which Russia might have influenced our election. Just vague accusations, including in the sources you linked. Nothing credible, just vague accusations and hand-wringing.
The big deal is that a country who doesn't have our best interests in mind is potentially influencing our president. When we do it it's not good for the other countries and when they do it it's not good for us.
Is there some crazy theories on here ? Of course, are there some things that make you think and are presented well with evidence supporting their claims ? You bet.
The Flynn story is accurate, the guy left out details about his dealings with Russia when asked about them during his confirmation hearing and is no longer national security director because of that. The rest I'm still waiting on solid evidence for.
Why would you use a derisive term blatantly like this? Aren't you "one of us"? If not, why are you here?
Furthermore why are you upvoted to 20+ by basically whitewashing every person who believes in conspiracies as "a tinfoil hatter? Anybody who honestly wants to discuss conspiracies would never use that term seriously. You couldn't just said "all these people do is deny". Why would you go derisive, especially if you're honestly here to discuss conspiracies?
Yep this comment is totally not engineered or gamed up to shit totally nothing suspicious about this person shitting on this entire community, then being upvoted like crazy.
Yeah seriously, not to mention the entire comment chain including whoosh guy.
And in tinfoil boy eventually gets brought down for his arrogant comment here's proof that yes, it indeed was sitting at 20+ when I first woke up at 5AM CST. The post is only 8hrs old so I'd say it was gamed overnight fresh & ready for a nice Wednesday morning of soft propaganda
Because I now only use this as a conspiracy alt acct because I do not want karma on my "real" account. So I now specifically use this account to post comments in this sub, and only sporadically. Hence why I go months without commenting. Anything else you'd like to insinuate from my account history? Or would you like to actually discuss the content of my comment?
Aren't you kinda white washing him for assuming he comes here to be a tin foil hatter?
Also
derisive
totally nothing suspicious about this person shitting on the entire community
Have you been on the internet lately? Yeah this sub is peaches and rainbows, everything is nuanced and has supporting evidence backing it up, if they aren't speaking neutrally they are against us!
Nobody comes here to be a tinfoil anything. People come here to discuss, research, and share ideas about conspiracies. If you come here to use the term "tinfoil" unironically then you're not here to improve the quality of this sub.
I described him as someone using a term that no conspiracy user would say. I didn't describe anything about his character or his life, just that his comment is absurdly suspicious. He whitewashed himself by posting "hurr durr tinfoil retards believe this shit" then getting upvoted like crazy in a sub where, yeah, a lot of "tinfoilers" actually do believe the content posted here.
I have been on the Internet and I have seen plenty of hateful comments. This one is being upvoted liek crazy, and more specifically upvoted by a community that knows tinfoil is a CIA term just like "conspiracy theory" was invented after the JFK assassination. Nobody here should respect someone using the term tinfoil to describe serious felony-level conspiracies. Yet there it sits, +25 points and counting.
Aren't you... being an a bit of an elitist by saying a real /r/conspiracy user wouldn't do this or that
Someone who is seriously interested in conspiracies knows how much stigma comes with even maybe being curious to research. Nevermind seriously putting in years of research to learn about this stuff. The level that "conspiracy theorists" get made fun of, mocked, and basically called crazy/nutcase/whackadoo/fringe/tinfoil etc is extreme.
I don't think it's "elitist" to think that someone mocking all conspiracy believers probably has malevolent intentions. To use your terminology, a "real" conspiracy user would not say "all these tinfoil hatters" seriously. Maybe tongue in cheek, but that is clearly not the case with the above comment.
And BTW on this point:
he insulted himself!
Sure doesn't seem it. He's not denying anything, he's saying tinfoil hatters deny deny deny. He's agreeing with everything, meaning he's NOT one of the deniers. He's not one of the tinfoil hatters. He's a totally sane member of society and anyone who denies this theory is a tinfoil nutjob who belongs in the nuthouse restrained away from society to keep everyone safe from those dangerous conspiracy theorists.
He did not insult himself, and he is not including himself in that comment. No idea why anyone would use collegiate-level mental gymnastics to try defending someone mocking a huge group of people on this sub but whatever dude
I think you're correct. I don't know whether you got the chance to see the comment I responded to, but it was basically some one calling uers of this sub idiots.
"If Seth Rich leaked the DNC emails, then that means there was no Russian hack" is an actual legitimate implication. If Seth Rich was the source, it logically couldn't have been a Russian hack. There aren't any more possibilities than "it was not a Russian hack".
"And if Seth Rich didn't leak the DNC emails, then that means there was a Russian hack" is not a legitimate implication, because unlike the above hypothetical there are more possibilities here than "it was a Russian hack".
They could, but I agree with u/G_petronius that a baseline of logical thoughts are the most important part right now, because the stuff he responded to is borderline retarded.
The entire claim about the Russians is that they hacked the DNC, not that they had an inside man leak the info. If Seth Rich was the leaker, it contradicts all of the supposed intelligence community accusations of Russian hacks, because a leak is not a hack. It's not possible for both to be true, unless they both happened completely independently of each other for no reason at all.
Putin used his influence to hack the dnc and release real information to get Trump elected.
Even though all evidence points to Hillary having a great working relationship with Putin.
The leaks were internally leaked by a patriot (Seth Rich), because of what the DNC did to bernie. The Russia narrative is a distraction from the obvious corruption, media collusion, and cronyism of the DNC.
That's why there's so much confirmation bias in this country at the moment. Everyone wants to confirm the narrative they've already bought into!
Because the Russian hack narrative is that the DNC leaks are from Russia and no one but Russia. If they are from Seth Rich, the Russian hack narrative falls to pieces.
Because the Russian hack narrative is that the DNC leaks are from Russia and no one but Russia.
Who does this narrative belong to? The Clintons? The MSM? The Democratic party? I still don't understand how the Russians and Seth Rich couldn't have acted independent of each other.
My problem is actually more with OP's original post, that this would shatter "the entire russian narrative." It wouldn't. The DNC emails are not the only issue, and really not even an issue at this point. The topic is just a distraction from the Trump administration
One of the biggest was hacking over 20 State voter rolls. Campaigns try to build voter rolls by getting email lists and it's considered one of the most valuable forms of campaign information possible
Russia directly hack the government butter rolls and got the real information on who votes where it's fantastically valuable information
The hacked voter rolls for fed to the Trump campaign through the secret Alfa computer after being scrub through a DeVos connected data laundering server
These hacked voter rolls were used by Cambridge analytica the Trump campaign and other GOP organizations
All the bases before we begin to discuss the amount of money that Russia laundered into the GOP, something which many of our allies and our own government claims to have several intelligence intercepts of Republicans admitting to the scheme
The DNC hack is so 2016
Anyone talking about DNC hack demonstrate to complete and lack of knowledge on this subject we have been passed that since before the election
Right now the major focus is the hack of voter rolls and the money laundering
In that case you quoted the wrong part of OPs statement. Russian hack narrative would be false.
Russian control of whitehouse is not disproved by seth rich involvement with wikileaks. But it discredits any source of news that said that russians hacked the DNC.
Russians may have influence over the president, but most media stating this as fact have now been discredited. I.e. the Russian naritive is dead.
Or as has been reported by the private investigator himself that there is no evidence whatsoever and that Fox News falsified the entire claim
The private investigator literally claims that the Fox News investigation falsified all of these claims by using fake circular sourcing to trick him into admitting something that isn't true
Hence the use of the conditional article in OPs title.
The logic used is sound. Whether seth is the source of the dnc leaks remains to be proven (although wikileaks have dropped strong hints almost confirming their source to be seth).
No the logical is hilariously broken, and relies on the amazingly ignorant claim "The only Russian hack relevant to the 2016 election was the DNC"
That's wholly false. We know the Russians hacked the DNC, DCCC, State Department, several other departments, several national democratic officials and organizaitons, several state level democratic officials and organizations, and hacked the voter rolls of over twenty states.
So, the logic "If Seth leaked DNC, then Russia did nothing" is demonstrably illogical, because evidence demonstrates that Russia hacked over 50 different targets in the lead up to the 2016 election./
Hence the articles you linked to are "fake news" (although the reporters may not have known that at the time of reporting).
Bless your heart.
Do you really, really think that source code analysis is the single and only tool used to demonstrate culpability?
Look at this broken logic, and you use it to then say "hence it's fake news".
Look how quickly you utterly failed to use basic reasoning to create an hilariously ignorant point ("The only way to attribute a hack is through source code/binary analysis, but since source/binary is weaponized and disseminated, it's misleading, and thus apparently useless") and use it to confirm a preconceived bias ("Fake news")
You poor thing.
The second half of your comment must be in response to a different post as it makes no sense here.
It's an examination of YOU, just like this post, and how your incredible ignorant irrationalism is fueling a system of "faux-logic" which is nothing more than a cognitive dissonance resolution tactic.
Oooh. Let's discuss these! Have you got any links you can share?
Why move on?
Your irrationalism serving cognitive dissonance forced you to ignorantly reject every point I made.
For a normal person, yes. But this approach doesn't work for hackers.
You sweet naive child. I wonder what War Games vision of l33t hax0rs you're imagining.
You do understand that government intelligence agencies are the main source of state sponsored information warfare and can be physically and digitally surveilled?
They can surveil the sites suspected of originating attacks
Nah. IP tracing doesn't mean shit.
You sweet naive child. You realize that governments operate hacking operations out of physical locations, right?
And sure, IP tracking means shit to private citizens who don't monitor and analyze the raw flow of all internet data in utterly massive data centers.
The subject hasn't changed. We are taking about how to identify the source of a hacker. You said there are many and varied technical tools. Please educate me.
The subject hasn't changed. We are taking about how to identify the source of a hacker. You said there are many and varied technical tools. Please educate me.
How can I educate you?
You literally just ignored an entire post.
You literally just deflected away from an entire posts worth of education.
Hi there. You can educate me by sharing your technical knowledge. In particular the many and varied technical intelligence tools outside of simple code analysis available for understanding source. Thanks. :D
I read your post. I'm not sure what more you want from me. Did you ask a question that wasn't retorical? If so please repeat your question.
The topic is just a distraction from the Trump administration's problems
Exactly. As if DNC emails are the only problem with Russia & the Donald McRonald Posse. To that end, I've started a little collection of copypasta. Here have a taste:
this would shatter "the entire russian narrative." It wouldn't.
If the Russians aren't responsible for the leaks, then their interference in the election never happened, which is the basis for the whole narrative thingy. You still have Trump's financial ties to Russian business interests, and you still have his troubling ideological embrace of Putin,(and Erdrogan & Duterte), but that's it.
That there's significant evidence for the Russian hacking over 50 different organizations in 2012 over 20 of them being state governments to hack voter rolls
The DNC was like one of over fifty different hacks of over 30 different Democratic organizations including the DCCC, as well as dozens of state and federal level democratic officials and departments like the state department.
You still have Trump's financial ties to Russian business interests, and you still have his troubling ideological embrace of Putin,(and Erdrogan & Duterte), but that's it
This subreddit and conspiracy forums in general on the internet are skeptical about the MSN narrative (and with good reason) and extremely pro-Wikileaks. Just because you perceive it that way because the large majority of people are not buying the Russian story and considers it a psy-op doesn't mean it's "pro-Trump". When Trump bombed Syria, for a month people were calling it a false flag and bashed Trump in the front page.
What are you even talking about, this sub has so many fucking copy-posters from the_d and other alt-right subs. They just come here with their bots and upvote their own conspiracies and downvote ones that don't fit with their narrative most likely.
Are you as fucking blind as I think you are? Just check the front Page of this sub and you can see all the pro-Trump narrative posts. So many distractions (Seth Rich murdered by DNC, Pizzagate, Hillarys emails) that Trump supporters upvote and try to spread around the internet.
They spread distractions when the republican party and Trump disintegrates the americans people with SHIT healthcare, maximum jail sentence for drugs (almost not even mentioned on this sub) and would war.
1 pro-Trump 1 anti-Trump. Where's this massive pro-Trump brigading? Seth Rich threads are pro-Trump? Pizzagate? Lmao.
They spread distractions when the republican party and Trump disintegrates the americans people with SHIT healthcare, maximum jail sentence for drugs (almost not even mentioned on this sub) and would war.
You admitted in the beginning "this sub isn't pro-Trump, it's pro-wikileaks.
Yes, has been like that even before the elections. If you want Wikileaks to start posting Republican info go hack Trump's mails or his party, see how Republicans complain about Wikileaks then.
WikiLeaks is pro truth. Did you consider them anti-RNC during Manning's leaks? I mean, they didn't post equivalent leaks making the DNC look equally as bad at the time, which for some reason is a requirement now.
Yeah, I see myself as a more intellectual and critically thinking human being than you.
So as I said, don't leave your bubble, it will be too much of a schock for you
So many distractions (Seth Rich murdered by DNC, Pizzagate, Hillarys emails) that Trump supporters upvote and try to spread around the internet.
This is your bias, not ours. You dismiss anything you dislike or that damages your narrative as a distraction.Trump is a big asshole, but so far(well, at least until the Comey firing) nothing he's done has been secretive conspiracy level stuff, it's all 'Imma fuck over immigrants, Imma break the ACA, Imma ignore separation of powers, Imma tweet stuff undermining the office of POTUS,'(all of which we were expecting). Guess what? He's going to deregulate the financial sector and give rich people a tax break too. That isn't conspiratorial, it was his goddamn platform.
Isnt it a leftist tactic to push the blame on others for what youre actually doing? Either way, source is froma heavily biased subreddit, nice try shareblue.
Many people ended up on t_D because it was the primary place where leaked emails were seriously investigated. If you have an interest in conspiracy it was the best place to view and conduct research for the window of time.
The quality of research during the leaks was actually pretty good, there was a concerted effort made which I haven't seen occur for the Russian allegations. I've tried digging a bit myself, but end up nowhere.
Notice how everytime a huge event like this happens that question the MSM narrative, we get a huge influx of shills and comments that are normally extremely stupid and deplorable are now the most upvoted? It's a joke
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
But only justice and arrest when it fits your political agenda right? You don't want actual justice for everyone right? Just for you and your direct peers?
You don't care about any ongoing injustices right because your side is in the White House?
Do you honestly expect me to take you seriously and be interested in talking to you after this comment?
Most people don't care about about the russian conspiracy because they don't believe it. The idea that the leaks have not been proven to have come from russia in the first place is one of the reasons why. Which is also why there is the focus on Seth Rich as the likely source of the leaks.
No of course not. I have never taken you serious I'm just trying to show the hypocrisy and your agenda to other people that might read your comment. I don't care to go into a discussion with you dude, it's pointless. You're unreasonable.
I've worked in Kiev. I've seen first hand what these Russian disinfo campaigns do. It's not a joke. People need to take this shit seriously because Russia is winning (at least in America, in Europe we've started waking up luckily).
There is actual proof of Russian disinfo campaigns instead of this random circumstantial evidence surrounding the DNC.
Trump fired the FBI director for crying out loud! Is this not worrying to you? We are on a conspiracy sub ffs!
What hypocrisy? What are you even talking about? I said there's not a single pro-trump post on the front page which was true. How could that even be hypocritical? You're just speaking nonsense and drawing out assumptions.
There is actual proof of Russian disinfo campaigns instead of this random circumstantial evidence surrounding the DNC.
I'm sure there are. I'm not in support of russia. I just haven't seen anything to actually support the idea that they "hacked our election" and are colluding with trump to "subvert our democracy" (that doesn't even exist--the US is an oligarchy). If you disagree with that feel free to show me proof.
And as much as russian might try to spread disinformation I have seen first hand a much greater and more disturbing history of the same from the US government and media as a US citizen.
Trump fired the FBI director for crying out loud! Is this not worrying to you? We are on a conspiracy sub ffs!
Worrying? No. Interesting? Yes.
What is there to be worried about? 2 months ago if you ask anyone if comey should be fired they would almost certainly say yes. We also don't know why he fired him and there are a vast number of potential reasons good or bad. I'm not going to jump to conclusions, especially not conclusions that trump's "opponents" want us to jump to.
There is a lot that could be going on here. It could be more theater because trump is just putting on a show to appear to be an outsider when he isn't. It could be trump just being a doofus being mad that elements within the government are still trying to villify every single thing he does and he feels Comey is either going along with that or not stopping it enough and made a feeble attempt to shut it down (whether or not the russian stuff is true). It could be any number of things comey did in the past to show he is not impartial and is incompetent. It could be that trump knew comey was involved in something behind the scenes that he didn't like. It could be a great number of things.
There's literally not a single pro-trump post on the front page of r/conspiracy right now
lmao the entire seth rich story is a classic t_d talking distraction point, it's only purpose is to help the trump supporters' narrative. if you can't see the pro-trump intentions behind this you are living with closed eyes
Well I'm not pro trump whatsoever and I believe he was assassinated. So right off you are wrong. It's not about trump at all. You only make it about trump so you can try to dismiss it.
Me too. Weather the downvotes. I fucking hate Trump but this thing that either you believe the Russians hacked the DNC and support Hillary or believe that Rich was murdered in a cover up and are an evil Donald supporter is just bullshit.
Hey fuckwads, can we please talk about the Seth Rich thing without assuming everyone on one side is either for or against Trump?
Can you imagine if the Watergate thing had happened and every discussion about the conspiracy had been silenced with "YOURE ONLY SAYING THAT BECAUSE YOURE A NIXON HEATER STFU"?
23 of the top 50 posts in the sub right now are about Seth Rich. Regardless of what happened to him, do you really think that a full half of the subreddit is being filled up by organic discussion of him right now? Right when a bunch of negative news is coming out on Trump?
You must be using an extremely narrow definition of pro-Trump.
The whole front page is telling everyone that Trump didn't have any nefarious dealings with Russia and instead his political opponents had someone murdered.
I'm using the actual definition of "pro" which means you are in favor of something.
Posting about Seth Rich being murdered by the DNC isn't IN FAVOR of trump. People who support trump no doubt are interested in pushing it because it shows the potential faults of his "enemies" but that doesn't make it PRO trump.
Then why the fuck every thread the most upvoted comments are BS comments like your own. Off topic and should be downvoted, yet your not. Where are all these raving Trump supporters? Shouldn;t they be downvoting the piss out of all of you since they're so rampant.
Since you seem to be quite involved in this, are you aware that Clinton herself suggested that a Russia hacking initiative should be pressed after she lost the election?
Do you recognize that after she lost that she wanted to press the issue of hacking? I get that the idea was floated prior to her losing, but my question to you is whether you have seen the evidence that she is contributing to the russia hysteria.
Are you aware that even Trump said it was probably the Russians?
Since I consider Trump and Clinton to be on the same team, this doesn't suprise me.
Are you aware that Bill Clinton personally asked Trump to run as a republican candidate? Or that Trump was a Democrat for a long time?
"The tone of the call was informal, and Clinton never urged Trump to run, the four people said. Rather, they said, Clinton sounded curious about Trump’s moves toward a presidential bid and told Trump that he was striking a chord with frustrated conservatives and was a rising force on the right."
So no, he didn't tell Trump to do that.
Or that Trump was a Democrat for a long time?
And for the past decade plus he's been running as a conservative. Everything he's done has been conservative. If it walks like a duck and it talks like a duck...
The experts have all agreed that the most likely culprit is Russia.
They have no all agreed. There have been experts that have come out saying that russia wasn't the issue. I frankly don't care to debate the issue though, I just wanted to see if you recognized Clintons involvement or not.
The tone of the call was informal, and Clinton never urged Trump to run, the four people said
What do you expect them to say?
It's rather hypocritical for you to take Trump at his word about the Clinton phone call, but not the Russia stuff. Maybe be consistent and assume he lies about everything.
After all, it wouldn't hurt to investigate if Clinton and Trump colluded. I mean the more ammunition against Trump the better right?
They have no all agreed. There have been experts that have come out saying that russia wasn't the issue.
The intelligence communities all agree its almost certainly Russia. Those are the experts who have the access to all the information.
What do you expect them to say?
It's rather hypocritical for you to take Trump at his word about the Clinton phone call, but not the Russia stuff. Maybe be consistent and assume he lies about everything.
What are you even talking about? I can tell you didn't click the link and just responded with what you already believe.
The people saying it wasn't discussed were both Trump aides and people around Clinton.
You said something happened. It never did. And the people involved both have said it never happened.
Maybe do research before posting things as if they're true.
The intelligence communities all agree its almost certainly Russia
These people have an incentive to lie. It's kinda their job. True experts should be unbiased.
The people saying it wasn't discussed were both Trump aides and people around Clinton.
These are one in the same. These people wouldn't be aides close enough to listen in on private phone calls if they weren't trusted to follow their agendas.
I don't assume, I research. Try it.
Good, then you won't have any problem in an investigation of the Clinton-Trump relationship. Lets see what skeletons get dug up between those two. Lets expose the real conspiracy going on.
These people have an incentive to lie. It's kinda their job as spies. True experts should be unbiased.
What's the incentive? Protecting a person who isn't president?
And your argument works in reverse, people making the claims it is Rich all would have "incentive" to blame Democrats.
Who is "unbiased"?
These are one in the same. These people wouldn't be aides close enough to listen in on private phone calls if they weren't trusted to follow their agendas.
Honestly, this is one of the most pathetic deflections I've ever seen from someone who just got called out on a false statement.
You said something happened. You lied or you simply have no idea what you're talking about. Choose one.
Good, then you won't have any problem in an investigation of the Clinton-Trump relationship. Lets see what skeletons get dug up between those two. Lets expose the real conspiracy going on.
Let's start with Trump, you know, the president and the one with all the Russian connections.
These people have an incentive to lie. It's kinda their job as spies.
What's the incentive?
Spies will lie to trick people. Like if they're sneaking into a foreign country, they will produce fake passports and pretend to be someone they're not.
Who is "unbiased"?
Good point, probably nobody. We should just assume that everyone is lying. Government snd the mainstream media is corrupt through and through.
Honestly, this is one of the most pathetic deflections I've ever seen from someone who just got called out on a false statement.
The fact that you don't think that spies lie and that aides to Clinton and Trump would lie tells me you're probably a shill pushing an agenda. I mean everyone knows that politicans, both Trump and Clinton are evil liars.
I suppose if you want to prove that you're not a shill, then you can say that Clinton is evil in your reply. I dare you.
You said something happened. You lied or you simply have no idea what you're talking about. Choose one.
I stand by the fact that Bill Clinton called Trump shortly before Trump announced his candidacy. Coincidences like these don't happen in politics, regardless of what the evil, lying politicians try to say.
Plus, I find it interesting that you are shilling to try to discredit Trump, yet you insist that Trump in this circumstance is 100% honest. See this is evidence that you're following a script. You have to twist around to defend Trump, so as to protect Clinton. An honest person would just say that both are evil liars. Since you can't do this proves you're pushing an agenda.
Let's start with Trump, you know, the president and the one with all the Russian connections.
Again deflecting attention away from Clinton. Let's see you prove that you're not a shill by saying that Clinton and Trump are both evil liars.
See I have no problem saying this, Trump is evil. Now it's your turn, to prove you're not getting paid to manipulate people here.
tracing Moscow's decades-long efforts to use misinformation to undermine democracies.
Replace Moscow with Washington and it is true!
The article further claims that 8 Russians (politicians, diplomats, etc). dying across the world is prove of Russian influence operations. Talk about conspirational thinking! /s
It pisses me off every damn time I see this. Trump or supporting Trump, has fuckall to do with Seth Rich. No matter how many times you repeat it, or how many shills upvote your BS.
But Tuesday afternoon, Wheeler told CNN he had no evidence to suggest Rich had contacted Wikileaks before his death.
Wheeler instead said he only learned about the possible existence of such evidence through the reporter he spoke to for the FoxNews.com story. He explained that the comments he made to WTTG-TV were intended to simply preview Fox News' Tuesday story. The WTTG-TV news director did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
"I only got that [information] from the reporter at Fox News," Wheeler told CNN.
Incoming 30 posts about fake news Fox? Haha no of course not.
Wheeler instead said he only learned about the possible existence of such evidence through the reporter he spoke to for the FoxNews.com story. He explained that the comments he made to WTTG-TV were intended to simply preview Fox News' Tuesday story. The WTTG-TV news director did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
I don't even know how that conversation would go. A Fox News reporter is asking Wheeler questions, and in doing so, tells Wheeler an absolute whopper/bombshell. Then Wheeler goes and reports it as fact to a different Fox News reporter?
The whole thing was clearly horseshit from the beginning. Somebody at Fox, where he's a regular contributor, wanted him to make up some clickbait bullshit to dominate the news over Trump giving Russia our ally's intelligence.
I don't even know how that conversation would go. A Fox News reporter is asking Wheeler questions, and in doing so, tells Wheeler an absolute whopper/bombshell. Then Wheeler goes and reports it as fact to a different Fox News reporter?
The initial story included a few lines about there being a federal agent that flipped and had seen the actual forensics report. So my guess is that is was something pretty leading like, 'one of my sources tells me that there was a forensics report that confirmed sent emails, do you care to comment?'. Which of course, he'd respond like, the police have been uncooperative, because I've asked to the see the report and have not.
Of course fox is fake. Just like every other MSM outlet, and most independant ones. Subversion is all part of the game.
Didn't stop this whole sub jumping all over the Seth Rich story though, did it?
If one thing should be certain though it would definitely be the irony of using something like CNN to try and prove a point on a conspiracy forum.
Are you claiming that CNN deliberately fabricated comments by Wheeler to disprove the story? That's a pretty serious allegation, but one that should be easily verified. Off you go, I'll wait.
Didn't stop this whole sub jumping all over the Seth Rich story though, did it?
The story existed before fox looked at it AFAIK. Dude got murdered in a 'robbery' with nothing stolen what? a day before the leaks started?
If that isn't suspicious at all, then I can't help you.
Are you claiming that CNN deliberately fabricated comments by Wheeler to disprove the story? That's a pretty serious allegation, but one that should be easily verified. Off you go, I'll wait.
Might wanna read what I said again. A simplified version for you:
The irony of using the MSM as evidence against conspiracy.
^ It's hilarious. Even if its fox, it's still hilarious. If you can't see the humour then really... I don't even know what to do for you. I'm not making any claim when I say this about the factual content, just the irony, the humour.
The story existed before fox looked at it AFAIK. Dude got murdered in a 'robbery' with nothing stolen what? a day before the leaks started?
I'm, of course, specifically referencing the events of the last 24 hours where Fox news "broke" a fake story about Seth Rich which this sub immediately & continues to spam the front page with (currently 18 of the submissions). Fox news may be fake news; but that apparently wasn't terribly important to the Seth Rich narrative.
The irony of using the MSM as evidence against conspiracy.
That word does not mean what you think it means.
Again, if you are claiming that CNN has deliberately fabricated Wheeler's quotes as part of a conspiracy to disprove the Seth Rich narrative, then go ahead and prove it. As I said, this should be a relatively easy to do, and a potentially explosive revelation if true. I would think that someone who hates "fake news" would be all over this. Simply saying "lol MSM fake news" isn't sufficient.
I'm, of course, specifically referencing the events of the last 24 hours where Fox news "broke" a fake story about Seth Rich which this sub immediately & continues to spam the front page with (currently 18 of the submissions). Fox news may be fake news; but that apparently wasn't terribly important to the Seth Rich narrative.
You specifically stated that the entire story is a fake.
Facts are that a DNC staff member was murdered days prior to wikileaks release. Nothing fake about that and it's certainly suspicious.
I can understand your suspicious regarding the number of threads on this issue, but your original statement was that the entire story is fake. That's my main issue here. The fact that you used CNN as a source was comedic gold.
That word does not mean what you think it means.
You think that CNN isn't mainstream?
Again, if you are claiming that CNN has deliberately fabricated Wheeler's quotes as part of a conspiracy to disprove the Seth Rich narrative, then go ahead and prove it.
Like I've already said, I pointed out the comedic irony of using CNN to argue against a conspiracy theory. Is this really that hard to see the humour in?
I'm not making a factual claim. I'm making a claim about your ironic posting.
I'll keep waiting.
I'll keep hoping that you see the humour, but I think you killed the moment.
Every single one of the Seth Rich posts buys into the assassination narrative (the posts themselves, not the comments). All 18 of them. There's not a single one on the front page of r/conspiracy that references the CNN revelations that the whole thing is bogus.
That is because it is an organized propaganda effort to influence people opinions. It's all paid shills or possibly bots. Not sure if they work for Russia or some group similar to Correct The Record, except for the Republicans.
Every single time some bombshell about Trump is dropped the front page of conspiracy and the donald are filled with Hillary Clinton news. I think it's funny that it's the least popular conspiracy here.
ah yah, it's the least popular conspiracy here but it's the most popular conspiracy here among people who write full length comments that contain coherent talk on the subject at hand...
almost as if the real people all believe one thing and the bots are all trying to push something else...
That's because it's the most popular conspiracy among mainstream news outlets, i.e. the people that normally spread propaganda for the regular conspirators. Who needs a conspiracy forum when WaPo is covering it extensively?
I think it's a pretty juicy conspiracy that someone with a skeptical / investigative mind would normally grab onto if it were commited by liberals and not the candidate that this sub largely backed. I get that conspiracies aren't conspiracies once they're mainstream but there is so much to dig through with this one.
Part of me feels bad for the posters here that are skeptical of Trump. Just a lil.
Eh, I see a lot more comments on the forum decrying the supposed T_D takeover than i see actual pro-Trump comments, and with more upvotes.
I'm plenty skeptical of Trump, but I'm more skeptical of the MSM making a concerted effort to push a narrative. It looks like a WMD level misinformation campaign, when the stories are based on anon "current and former" officials instead of named sources and/or documents. They can turn on the faucet and leak some mundane story with sensational editorializing and Trump/ Russia in the title, and all other news of the day gets buried. 100 million in weapon sales to Saudi Arabia, the net neutrality debate, and more conspiratorial stories like Seth Rich, all fly under the radar. Trump and any contact he has with Russia (which as President will continue to be regular and necessary) can be spun into a great distraction. He's someone's puppet, but I don't think they're Russia, and I doubt he's complicit.
I think both sides believe in shills too readily. I think it's more plausible that lots of this confusion and duelling narratives come from normal people. Not getting paid, just enthusiastic for one side or the other.
It's plausible that these stories are planted by 'shills' or disinfo artists, but I think they're propagated by people that often mean well. I think accusations of shilling in conspiracy circles are tearing it apart.
No, I never said that. It wouldn't surprise me in the least, but I have no idea if they are fabricating any stories with these new developments/claims with the Seth Rich case. If they did purposely deviate from the truth and create another story, it certainly would be to refute wheeler's claims because evidence linking SR to the leaks, more accurately, wikileaks, would mean there was no russian involvement and this data came from within, rather than being stolen from an outside entity.
What I was saying was they, (CNN and other entities within the MSM) were making false claims and lying about the Russians involvement, likely as they were instructed to do. Even though, we heard the obvious motive for that but haven't been presented with any serious or compelling evidence to back these claims.
Since you mentioned him, back to wheeler for a second. Today I was reading that Seth's family is refuting these claims that their son/brother is a collaborator with wikileaks, so not really sure about that. You hire a guy to find out who killed your son because the local and fed authorities have been compromised or are otherwise enept, he personally makes a report and public statement, yet they are saying they don't believe it's true.
So you are accusing CNN of fabricating Wheeler's quotes and publishing this to disprove the story?
Serious allegations. So far, nobody has been able to prove this to me beyond "lol fake news." Maybe you'll be the one to crack this CNN conspiracy wide open?
He says right here he has a credible Federal investigator who saw the laptop and the emails. Also that when he first at March tried to get the laptop with the police, it took them 2 days to reply and that the DNC called Seth's parents asking why he was snooping around. https://youtu.be/2J9YfQtqcuA
Objectively, Putin is evil. He has dissidents, political adversaries, and journalists killed. He takes companies from people and gives them to his friends who act as shells, funneling money to himself.
Russia actively works against the policy of the US and our Allies. He hates NATO for encroaching into Russia's sphere of influence.
To prove someones evil, you'd need to prove evil is (objectively) a real thing. Something you can pin point scientifically and study. It isn't.
He has dissidents, political adversaries, and journalists killed. He takes companies from people and gives them to his friends who act as shells, funneling money to himself.
None of which is inherently evil. A bad man surrounded by good people would do this, but so would a good man surrounded by evil. As would a bad man surrounded by worse men. All we can say objectively is that Putin consolidates power and wealth.
The most likely explanation is: for nefarious purposes. But that's not an objective fact, just an educated guess.
Russia actively works against the policy of the US and our Allies.
Not always. Is bombing ISIS and AQ against US policy?
He hates NATO for encroaching into Russia's sphere of influence.
IMO I suspect Putin does things for his own ideal 'greater good'. Most of the worst attrocities in history were committed in the name of a greater good, unforuntately the true value tends to only be known in hindsight.
Putin has definitely done a lot of nasty shit, the question is whether it will be justified in the end. When you consider the nightmare Russia was living in prior to Putin, he doesn't seem so bad, but theres plenty of room for him to slide into "Holy fuck he's completely insane" territory.
All things a relative to their environment. Putin is better than the environment he took power from, but compared to the west he's got a long way to go.
/u/bruneo used the word evil. He dismissed out of hand, any notion that Russia would work against american interest by using the term Evil. Any notion that Russia isn't America's best buddy gets met with an eye-roll.
This sub acts like it's not possible Russia did everything they could to influence the election. A stance which ignores Russia's history influencing and compromising elections. A stance which ignores Russia's desire to limit NATO and the Euro-American sphere of influence.
Hilary is garbage, but she's not running the country. She's become a tool for distracting from the truth. Seth Rich should be investigated. I hope people do keep raising awareness. But to use that as an excuse to close the door on investigating Russia is anti-american. As anti-american as squashing an investigation into the death of someone who was a possible whistle blower.
Which one feels right? Which do you more want to be true?
This has always been apart of this sub; aliens, big foot, conspiracies, etc. I think that's why this sub latched onto Trump so hard. Trump is someone who lives by what he feels regardless of the facts. He felt like he could end ISIS in 30 days. He felt like he would never go golfing because the job was so easy. He felt like we had the worst murder rate in history. He felt like all of our crimes were being committed by immigrants. He felt like the unemployment rate was 30% or greater. He felt like he could day 1 get rid of AHCA. He felt like he should be able to do what he wants and everyone would just fall in line. He felt like he had the biggest electoral win in history. He felt like he had the biggest inaugural crowds in history.
It's ridiculous how many times pro-orange people will divert an argument down some side road. This thread was about the validity of any notion of Russian influence in the election or over the current administration, but everyone who has responded has taken this side road about the term "Evil", which was by /u/bruneo to make any argument for a Russian investigation seem silly.
This sub acts like it's not possible Russia did everything they could to influence the election. A stance which ignores Russia's history of influencing and compromising elections. A stance which ignores Russia's desire to limit NATO and the Euro-American sphere of influence.
I think what you are seeing is basically a 'boy who cried wolf' situation.
Very few people I've talked with will claim that the Kremlin doesn't have a vested interest in fucking with the US + allies. The notion that Russia would actively hack US institutions and political parties is also met with virtually no resistence.
But the idea that Putin, using his omnipotent KGB agents, planted and subverted the entire US government specifically to lift sanctions against Russia is utter insanity.
Now, there's a big leap between the first points and the latter, but the media has been extremely active in pushing the latter. The result is a backlash of flat denial. That's just what happens when people push such a heavily polarised argument.
The middle ground is: Russia does everything it can to further it's own interests, including hacking or attempted hacking of foreign agencies.
I doubt many people would seriously argue against that.
Hilary is garbage, but she's not running the country.
But the Clintons have been under the thumb of the power brokers for a very long time. I don't believe that kind of authority dies out overnight.
She's become a tool for distracting from the truth.
Possibly.
But to use that as an excuse to close the door on investigating Russia is anti-american.
The US should opperate under the assumption that foreign powers are always attempting to hack them. That's common sense. So investigating if Russia did so is pointless: of course they did.
So the investigation is instead focused at the US government. The notion that the Kremlin has managed to literally steal the US government. That's theoretically possible, but it's really, really close to flat out insanity. Especially when the alleged motivation is removing sanctions.
Investigation? sounds fine, I encourage it. But the completely insane media hysteria? that reeks to high heaven of conspiracy. The moment I see every a conglomeration of the most powerful and corrupt organisations doing something I tend to think the opposite of what they say is true.
Which one feels right? Which do you more want to be true?
Instinctively I'd say elements of both are true. The possibility of the Kremlin planting agents isn't just possible, it's been done before by other groups. However, the idea that Trump is an agent is pretty laughable. No intelligence agency is stupid enough to put an agent in charge of a nation, nor resourceful enough to fill an entire administration with agents.
With Hillary I don't give a damn about her candidacy, I give a damn about that family leaving their footprints in the criminal enterprises of nations all over the world. For decades they've been implicated in conspiracies and global crime.
There's no such thing as rich saints.
pro-orange people
That's how you convince people who disagree with you that they shouldn't bother with your points at all.
This thread was about the validity of any notion of Russian influence in the election or over the current administration
The gap between influence in an election and influence over an administration is absolutely gigantic. It's like me saying that the Clintons either took some money they shouldn't have or trafficked children and ate them. It's such a wide target that you can't possibly miss. Lumping them together implies that they are linked.
but everyone who has responded has taken this side road about the term "Evil", which was by /u/bruneo to make any argument for a Russian investigation seem silly.
Well that is the narrative, the big bad evil Russia is comming for your country. The red scare has been building for quite some time if you haven't noticed.
I do get your point though, jumping to extremes is a method of making an argument seem worse than it is. I think an investigation is warranted, although I don't trust the agencies involved (then again, better the FBI than the CIA lmao).
Hearing "russia russia russia" on TV every single day since the election is crying wolf. Suggesting that russia is in the white house is tilting at windmills
any argument for a Russian investigation seem silly.
Go ahead and investigate them.
I have heard this call for action every single day since he was elected. Nothing has come from it. The implications aren't even meaningful.
It's worse than crying wolf, it's tilting at windmills
It's not objectively when it's happening in real life.
I live under Saddam's for a long period of my life, I've seen what he and his people done, and what Putin is doing is the same as well.
Bombing ISIS was never a goal for Russia (nor the US) for making the area safer, it's all about natural gas lines coming from Qatar and Iran that will feed Europe and the rest of the world. If Russia/Assad took control of that area, it means Iran will have the hold of these pipes, and same as with the Syrian resistance, if the control that, then Europe and US will have a control over it.
It's not objectively when it's happening in real life.
Putin is objectively a threat to his opposition, but that does not make him evil by necessity. Evil is a moral judgement. Moral judgements are always subjective.
I lived under Saddam's regime for a long period of my life, I've seen what he and his people done, and what Putin is doing is the same as well.
I don't know much about Saddam's regime, aside from a few things like gasing civilians, torture, wars etc. I won't pretend to know the experience of living under his regime.
What I do know is that pre-Putin Russia was probably the most corrupt nation on the planet. It was just a place where Oligarchs lived the high life and murdered all competitors in the street. I've heard some horror stories about what the lawlessness there was used to cover. Russia is better than it used to be, but I think Putin is nearing the point at which he becomes a liability instead of an asset.
How he manages that transition will determine how he goes down in history.
it's all about natural gas lines coming from Qatar and Iran that will feed Europe and the rest of the world. If Russia/Assad took control of that area, it means Iran will have the hold of these pipes, and same as with the Syrian resistance, if the control that, then Europe and US will have a control over it.
It's not that Russia is evil, it's that so many Russians that may have been involved with the US election and leaks have been murdered, presumably by Putin. Voronenkov, Churkin, Kadakin, Malanin, Erovinkin, Karlov, Polshikov, and of course Krivov, who fell off a roof in NYC on the day of the US elections.
With a death toll like that, what's one more leaker? A Democrat who might come clean about selling secrets to Russia? The logical conclusion is that Putin killed Seth Rich.
People say Hillary murdered various people, but come on, Weiner is still alive. That right there proves Hillary isn't a murderer. Putin, on the other hand, is a murderer. He was trained by the KGB, took over the oligarchs, cartels, and Gazprom, and people fall like flies around him.
That's not how it works for people who form their opinions based on fact and logic. Unfortunately, when it comes to Trump (and partially, clinton) supporters, they lie on the complete opposing side of fact and logic.
Just because they're prominent now doesn't mean they ever will be again.
During this election, we had people on the republican side who have never voted before just because they fell for trumps fluff pieces so well.
When he flip flopped - it perfectly represented the uninformed that he got their vote. I'm not going to even start talking about the republicans who purely voted for trump because he is the republican candidate, and still hate him...
But on the Democratic side we also had extreme left liberals, third wave feminists, and the 'PC' culture, who voted for Hillary because she was a woman, and because she opposed the bigot.
So all of these sides collided with the informed and logic based voters. Sadly, we got the worse of two evils. I know people hate it when that's said, but I would prefer almost anyone to trump and clinton.
What if Russia doesn't actually exist and Putin is just a small child's sock puppet. Maybe that's why this whole story is fake and Obama is so desperate.
I don't know how you have so many upvotes. Last night there were posts and comments discussing the implications of this whole thing, and now most of the comments are against it with hundreds of upvotes. I don't want to say shill but...
Here's the thing I don't get: so we know there was a phishing scam that podesta may have fallen for, and that the IPs involved were Russian. First of all, wouldn't those IPs be the first thing any state-sponsored operation would spoof? It's hard for me to accept that the Kremlin would be that sloppy. Secondly, what is the specific evidence that links the phishing scam to the leaks? That seems like a huge leap.
Please note that I'm just trying to connect more facts and have a productive conversation here, and follow reddiquette.
That's a load of shit. This isn't a pro trump sub, and this issue isn't black and white. Yet again, people who take reddit's front page narrative as true are trying to direct a hateful narrative here by attempting to ignite a soft brigade. It really is unfortunate that it has to be this way.
And if Seth Rich didn't leak the DNC emails, then that means there was a Russian hack.
No it doesn't. The 'hackers' used malware supposedly used by Russians (as if nobody else can do that) which is supposed to be proof of something. However, Seth Rich who is not a Russian hacker, leaking the emails means that Russians didn't do it.
Seth's family has denied it. I think the big issue here is that if the Seth Rich story is not true then that means that Julian Assange is lying to advance his own agenda which might be that he is so pissed at Hillary Clinton for wanting to have him killed via Drone strike. This is the simplest explanation I can think of.
Why do you guys have Russia so much? They are far from a perfect country and Putin is effectively a dictator. Not to many people complaining about the 300 billion arms sale to the ragheads and they are wayyy worse.
And neither does a report from Crowdstrike that Russia hacked the DNC servers. The FBI never got access to the servers. Until actual evidence is presented of Russian interference, I'll remain skeptical.
This sub questioned whether or not Wikileaks was compromised or not. But then the anti-Hilary/DNC started up again and now Wikileaks can do no wrong...
Think you need to reword that. WikiLeaks has always been trustworthy. They have a 100% record. That is trustworthy. You could question their motivations, but that has nothing to do with the material they release.
Guessing the slam-dunk proof is on Mr. Rich's laptop. What we've got now is more than enough pieces of the puzzle for me to come to my conclusion (hell, I thought Seth Rich was the leaker before all this stuff came out. It seemed obvious.)
Latest report by PI which hopefully he will follow-up with more evidence as he stated. I think Assange and Wikileaks RT'ing the initial report by FOX 5 DC was telling and adds more credence.
As stated below, the WL bounty for info on his murder.
The way this whole Seth Rich murder investigation has been handled.
The other party involved. Monsters with a long list of suspicious deaths of people who have gotten in their way.
The Podesta email stating he's "definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have a real basis for it".
The fact that there is literally no proof for this Russia narrative and the agenda has been painfully obvious to anyone in-the-know with what's really going on.
Is that enough to make your own inference? Is for me. In the meantime I'm kicking the feet back with my popcorn to watch this unfold and the MSM panic some more.
So no evidence. Meanwhile Russia just ran another disinfo campaign in France to try it again. But no it has to be some super elaborate yet stupid evil masterplan by the DNC. Stop spreading disinfo.
Which part is disinformation? Enlighten me, please. I said enough pieces to draw my own conclusion. Enough circumstantial evidence is evidence, by the way, and you can be criminally prosecuted on it alone. Obviously not going to happen here, though. Stop spreading disinfo? Stop being a fucking knobhead.
The DNC colluded with the media, rigged the primary, and are now paying propagandists to tell me that Hillary only lost because of evil Russian propagandists. Strange times.
and people just believe this because they see it on the news. it's absolute insanity how anybody can fall for this shit. it's like the bitch who cried wolf x1000 but these fucks keep coming back expecting it to be real this time.
How did they hack the election? What did they hack? What was the result of the hacking? The MSM simply referring to "Russian hacking" means nothing. I don't even think THEY know the specifics of what they are talking about.
Using fake/ghost accounts on social media is not hacking. Even if we considered it to be hacking, there are countless organizations that use this strategy. Why wouldn't we be talking about CTR as well? Why would we only focus on Russia when this is a widespread practice?
I still have yet to hear ANY information related to the questions I posed in my OP
Holy.shit. Did you really just say that? Not only does this show your agenda (apparently the circumstantial evidence surround trump and Russia doesn't count). It's also plainly the most ridiculous thing I've read today.
It's also scary as fuck. Damn. So all we need now is circumstantial evidence to prove stuff?
Disinformation here is pushing this DNC/Hillary conspiracy to try and distract everyone from all the shit going on around trump RIGHT NOW. He fired the FBI director do you realize what this means?!
Question- Is circumstantial evidence enough to convict?
Yes. Circumstantial evidence can be enough to convict someone. The question to the jury will be did the State prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt? It will come down to what is the actual evidence and can there be interpretations of the evidence other than that the accused committed a crime. The defense attorney will likely question the State's witnesses about other possible interpretations of the evidence. What those questions will be will depend on the exact nature of the evidence.
And Le pen. And the right wing idiot candidate in my country as well.
I have friends in Moldova who are scared as fuck and have been for years. I have had Russian interference while doing business with Kiev.
This shit is fucking real. It's easy for Americans to ignore it because it's very abstract for them and seems so far from home. Which is why Russia is succeeding tremendously in America.
WHY CANT WE AT LEAST DISCUSS BOTH CONSPIRACIES? Because this sub is also infected.
America literally overthrows governments it doesn't like. "disinformation campaigns" which at least in the US was just publishing their very real disgusting emails isn't in the same ballpark. Obama is advocating for all sorts of other politicians and you don't ever hear the outrage over the US' position of power and influence influencing other countries elections. just so much bullshit, Russia is a fucked up place don't get me wrong but the whole boogeyman attitude that comes with them gives me lulz. Like every other major country isn't committing acts just as bad or at the least coorporating with those who are.
That exact "ah whats the use, they are all equally fucked, Democracy is just a joke and corruption is the natural order of things" attitude is what some are trying to manufacture in the USA. Makes for easier Oligarchy.
all I'm saying is acting like Russia is the lone bad guy in our story trying to take down the peaceful Western Europe + America good guys at this point is dishonest. and claiming this all solely on leaked emails? it's retarded.
You're correct that Russia is not the only bad player around the world.
You seem to believe that the release of DNC emails is the only way in which the 2016 election was compromised. It wasn't. As in Brexit and the French elections there were and will continue to be psychometric targeted campaigns of misinformation to both suppress the vote on one side and get the electorate screaming mad on the other.
Using Trump himself and possibly the RNC itself as a vessel for money laundering seems the most likely thing to bring this all into the public sphere. Even with several shell companies one can usually find a paper trail.
but no paper trail evidence exists at all it's literally just speculation.
And since I'm American, please, inform me of the misinformation campaign Russian used on me. All I saw from what was referred to as a "Russian hack" were legitimate emails exchanged between people at the DNC (which they tried to lie about and say we're fabricated emails and were later verified as authentic).
Did they make her faint on 9/11? What did they sell to Americans that was snake oil?
Hillary lost because she got caught rigging the Democratic primary and she had the FBI investigations show shed was exempt from the law. There was 0 Russian influence other than Hillary giving them 20% of US uranium for millions given to bill the rapist and the Clinton's false charity.
Here's an article on psychometrics and its use and impact on the 2016 election. Any research along this avenue will reveal some pretty terrifying harm that can be done with this technology. I'm almost more concerned for when this tech is used by every company that can afford it. People had better get much, much better at bullshit discernment.
Its funny they don't realize how obvious they are. T_D goes from pushing hard for Trump to immediately rabidly trying to rally everyone around Le Pen(ignoring the elephant in the room with her ties to Russia), disinfo/distraction astroturfing every time stuff heats up around Trump/Russia, more astroturfing of suggestive thinking and narrative pushing in support for Le Pen, Macron leaks hit coupled with intense brigading during French blackout. The pattern is hilariously obvious. Fuck yourselves and your lying, manipulative, propaganda pushing piece of shit troll/bot army.
Haha just checked the sub and it is swamped with that dude that got murdered or something. Why are they not discussing trump meeting with the Russians without us media?
Hell, look a the stickied post: Attacking the media, and the posters who vote for anything but Pro-Trump content while claim to be neutral. The mods are compromised.
Make sense, since if I wanted to push a lie, first thing I would do it comprise sites that search for actual true and have them chase their tails with lies.
And where's your evidence that it was Russia? I'm all for calling out bullshitters, but just because there is no evidence to support his argument doesn't suddenly mean your 'side' is correct.
Just search around a bit. I thought this sub prouded itself with "going into the rabbit hole online" but apparently no one has been looking into these proven instances of Russian disinformation campaigns?
You can even check it yourself with a bit of google translate. On official government owned channels.
If you see how much those articles actually influenced elections in my country you would be worried.
Israeli sponsored Dutch politician that is rabidly anti Islam. He is a destabilizing factor in my countries politics and people voted on him partly due to these articles.
What are you even saying? This is textbook disinfo propaganda! This is akin to dropping panflets during wars in the past on villages. But it's even more effective because people think it's real.
How can you even say that nationalism in other countries doesn't help Russia? It sounds to me that you are very uninformed on this subject in general. And that's not trying to be a dick it just seems like it as you are saying stuff that does not make any sense.
Sorry, I've not seen anything good come from mass migration. The propaganda over here comes from our own media.
If your country is being destabilized due to Russian media outlets being pro-Russia, I'm not sure how you made it this long to begin with.
Party over country and all that right?
That is literally the opposite of what I believe. Are you sure it's Russian propaganda that your country has fallen victim to?
Anyway, a country full of considerate, open-minded, tolerant folks such as yourself will be just fine. God bless.
Haha sure buddy. Didn't expect you to actually have anything to say based on fact instead of emotion.
My country is doing fine. At least no one has to die because they don't have health insurance. At least my vote is not made irrelevant by a big lobby that pays off all my politicians :)
You just cited crumbling infastructure, healthcare, and corrupt politicians as problems in America while criticizing me for posting on t_d. Those issues were Trump's campaign platform.
As for religious extremists making policy, you're advocating for Islam which translates to "submission" and has an unquestionable doctrine of law.
Advocating for Islam? Lol please quote me doing that. Religion is moronic and has no place in government or schools.
It's cute that those issues where trumps campaign platform but he isn't really pushing them anymore is he? Just tax breaks for the wealthy. Why did he come up with such a bullshit healthcare plan? Why not just go with something that works? He can use my countries system as an example if he wants.
He didn't come up with the healthcare plan. We had great healthcare before Obamacare. I don't want government in healthcare like you don't want religion in government.
I do know that Trump is fought on every single policy by the media, the left, and the right. To me, that's a sign we elected the right man. The people in power are corrupt. If those people hate Trump, good.
You stated that an anti-Islamist candidate was the cause of problems in your country so I would assume you're wanting a pro-Islam candidate or one that turns a blind eye to mass migration. Good luck with that. It's worked out great elsewhere...
No. I don't want a candidate with propagating blind hate against a group of people to push his sponsors geo political agenda. I want a pro Dutch candidate. Dutch people are off every religion.
You don't have to be a nationalist to love your country. Difficult to phantom if you live in a country that uses patriotism as a propaganda tool I know
Pro-Dutch I would assume means a candidate who puts your country and culture first. That is what Trump does for America. Nationalist is just a term. Substitute patriotic if you like. No one is advocating for America to go conquer other countries.
The left here removed the American flag from their logo because it's offensive. They censor conservative viewpoints, control the media and academia, force social issues into law or use them to manipulate opinion, hire shills to manipulate social media, use the IRS to target conservative groups, prevent conservative speakers from speaking at colleges, call us racist, hateful, homophobic, misogynists, fascists, etc. all while trying to suppress free speech, inciting violence and promoting all forms of degeneracy in the name of diversity or inclusion.
If your media is telling you different, you can assume they're as dishonest as ours is.
We think flags are just for a handful of days in the year. And are a hilariously old fashioned and weird way to flash your national pride. I'm sure we have a different idea of nationalism. America is overtly nationalistic all the way trough in every political spectrum. That shows how incredibly powerful americas propaganda machine is.
why are you so afraid of Russia? Crazy how you folks are more afraid of them interfering with democracy than Islamic terrorists. Meanwhile the US has interfered with every election for the last 100 years. I think you are part of the disinfo.
Because Islamic terrorists aren't interfering with our democratic progress by using propaganda and lies to push one candidate versus another. Islamic terrorists aren't directly influencing our elections.
Why exactly should I be worried about 1 in thousands of odds of me getting killed by a terrorist? Are you worried about getting shot? Because you have a 1 in 30k chance of getting shot and killed in America. That is more likely than dieing from a terrorist attack.
I'm way more worried about the long term effects the muddling of facts with made up propaganda. I'm way more worried about people not being able to differentiator factual news from fake news anymore.
Remember Russia is still invading sovereign land in Europe. Russia obliterated Georgia and planted a puppet government.
Russia directly benefits from a destabilized Europe. Anyone who says otherwise simply doesn't understand the geo political climate in that region.
I totally understand when Americans see Russia as some far off problem but for us it hits a bit closer to home.
There are refugees from the Ukraine in my country who have fled Russian artillery. Let that sink in.
Anyway idk why you bring up Islamic terror. We can be worried about both you know? We are fighting both. Idk why you are derailing this conversation.
The democratic process that is already influenced by hundreds of millions of special interest and foreign dollars? You are trying to protect the integrity of that process? The system that has seen every president in the last 25 years threatens with impeachment? Suddenly the Russians are able threaten the stability of that system?
And so it's "I am under no threat of terrorism myself but I am worried about those Ukrainians getting hurt" meanwhile ISIS has displaced millions and murdered tens of thousands all funded by Middle East states that have millions living in indentured servitude. But Russia ... Jesus.
And let's not ask whether Seth was murdered for political reasons because, well, Russia.
I assume at this point Russia could make the Netherlands a province if it wanted to, particularly if he and Trump are so close now.
As for Wahhabism, totally with you. Major crime by the US enabled by US president after US president. I had hoped Trump would be different but I guess we buy too much oil and they too many weapons and our military bases too strategic. The US Saudi axis is what needs to go ... in this light I'd have thought you'd be pro Russia.
I strongly believe Iran is in a position to elevate that region out of this struggle. Russia is yet another neo colonial force in that region that won't do anything different from the us
I know that the MSM backed the DNC on the election.
I know the same MSM has been running pro DNC Russia hacking narrative.
I don't trust them, because they're in cahoots. It's part of the problem of being a slimy group of shitheads who try to cheat the system. A lot of people won't trust you anymore. Meanwhile, the Seth Rich narrative adds up when you're considering a bunch of slimy fucks getting together and trying to figure out how to save their asses.
"Kill Seth. Say it's the Russians on MSM since they already do what we want. Hands in the center, DNC on three.. 1,2,3, DNC!!!"
I KNOW the DNC and MSM should be in trouble, and are in collusion. So of course they'll stick with the Russia narrative. That means the investigation dies, and the DNC is free and clear.
Even if I'm wrong it means nothing, though. Here's the other narrative: a Russian agent sent a phishing email to John podesta. He fell for it. The results of his idiocy lead to Hillary Clinton losing the 2016 election, because when WikiLeaks released the valid information, it affected voters.
WHY DON'T YOU GUYS HATE TRUMP MORE COME ON LOOK RUSSIA
I hate Trump just fine, thanks. I'll hate him more when I see more, but I've seen enough to hate the DNC and MSM entirely. That's what the two sides boil down to. What do you hate more?
Grab the pussy, or lying and cheating in the primaries? Answer that and I'll know which narrative you believe. It just pisses me off that the DNC can get out of EVERYTHING they did this election and yet an unproven Trump Russia connection is enough for people to flip their shit. PROVEN TRUE DNC SCANDAL MEANS NOTHING, but don't worry, the media is on your side and thinks Trump should be impeached for a theory they refuse to show proof for. That's enough for you, because you're ultra biased against one side. It's nowhere near enough for me and most here, because we're ultra against BOTH SIDES for being fucking EVIL.
Go support your evil overlords elsewhere, r/politics.
Guccifer also said that Assange "may be connected with Russians" in those DMs... (assuming that they weren't doctored)
Either way, I don't think that Seth Rich being the whistleblower is mutually exclusive with the possibility that the Russian deep state was trying to interfere with the US elections and gain influence over Trump/his team.
Serious question. Does anyone know how the police/FBI came to be in possession of Seth Rich's laptop? Was he carrying it when he was murdered? Did they take action to retrieve it from his work/residence as part of the investigation?
I don't know the answer to these questions, but I really want to know.
I was thinking this yesterday. If it was in fact a botched robbery, why wouldn't his belongings from his domicile like a computer be given to the family? It is very bizarre that the police would take his laptop for a random act of violence.
If Seth Rich was in contact with Assange, Assange should have some kind of proof. Since all he does is repeat other people's baseless allegations I don't believe a second that there was contact.
The Donald is lame, don't get me wrong, but the DNC is evil. Obvious collusion and corruption at the highest levels. Wasserman steps down in shame; still no charges.
Oh I'm not protecting the DNC here. There's some fishy shit going on. But unfortunately that is pretty much business as usual in us politics. And by focussing on just one side you are only keeping the system standing.
Meanwhile Russia is destabilizing your country and making people think they're being patriotic by helping them do it.
Curious on this myself. The media said the hacks, (which turned out to be leaks), "were so sophiscated, that it has to be a foreign state, likely the russians". But to my knowledge, they, (the feds) had all the time in the world to connect the dots and state their case fingering the russians, yet they failed to do so.
I searched and looked and I waited and I never found any hard evidence.
Seems to be another layer to this elaborate psy-op, and more lies and political posturing.
I mean when have they told the American people / outside world the truth? Really all they've done is been caught in lie and lie.
But what about all the posters begging for us to equally investigate the Russia collusion? Are you saying that the FBI et al have been investigating that this whole time?
Not saying this couldn't potentially be a concern, but as long as we are investigating all foreign threats to america, we should be investigating the Saudis and Israelis at the top of this list as well. Which with the last two, that can get awkward because they are supposedly allies of ours. Lest we forget, allies that actively and repeatedly engage in human rights violations on a daily basis. But I digress, that's another thread for another time.
However, in my opinion, those people are misguided and focused on the wrong thing, and this is likely be design. The red scare, political propaganda and weaponizing fear are hardly new "things" and have been deployed for quite some time. Notwithstanding things that occur inside their country, because we are all guilty of something against our people, and apart from violating airspace of sovereign nations and this whole crimea/Ukraine revolution business, what have the russians really done to anyone in the last 2 decades?
The long and short of it is I believe the same people that are screaming about the Russians and how dangerous they are, are the same ones who are actively engaging in deflecting criminal responsibility on their political party and are otherwise unable to come to terms with what their leadership has done and is willing to do to remain in power (relevant).
Exactly. Extremely familiar with #vault7 and I've been following that story since the series of teasers were released in the very beginning.
As you've said, basically anything can be forged, faked or doctored. If they say something like, "this has russia finger prints all over it", that really doesn't mean very much because we now know the agency is well within their capability to create false flag cyber attacks and blame them on any group or foreign gov't they want.
Where did the mainstream media ever specifically say Russia hacked anything? Some may have used clickbait headlines, but they all reported accurately that phishing scams and selective leaks were used.
Dude, are you serious right now? That was the entire narrative as the situation was unfolding. Happy to fish out a pile of links from the scrape heap of garbage, if you prefer.
I could put a whole list together, but it's kind of a pain in the ass since I'm on mobile right now. These 3 are just from the ny times, but they are extremely liberal leaning and have been at the forefront of pushing this horseshit.
Sorry, I worded my statement poorly. The articles aren't pointing out that the "hacks" were phishing scams, as I said before. The NY Times have said so in other articles. As the article points out, the selective leaks were pretty obvious when nothing from the RNC came out.
I thought you were talking about hacking voting machines, which nobody has reported.
But to my knowledge, they, (the feds) had all the time in the world to connect the dots and state their case fingering the russians, yet they failed to do so.
State their case to who? How? What does this mean?
How about this? State their case to the American people? An international criminal court? When you make claims like these, certainly they must be founded on something. Saying the attacks are sophisticated so it must be the russians? That doesn't do it for me.
Why should they do that during an ongoing investigation related to this? So people that reflexively doubt them will find another reason not to believe them? What's in it for them versus what do they lose? There's the obvious answer.
These are extraordinary claims and investigations, I realize that. But typically, when you make accusations, there needs to be some kind of evidence that is publicly available which backs up these claims. Or else anyone could make damning claims against anyone else with no base or recourse for doing so. You can see how that is an extremely slippery slope, yes?
You speak of the current system and it's continual existence as a bad thing, which I fully agree with you on.
But you still think the russians are the real threat to the short and long term future of the states? That's where I disagree with you, because I believe these are the results of propaganda --> brainwashing.
It's also fairly obvious to me that the real threat faced by Americans today is sadly our own govt, and not some other group of people that live on the other side of the globe.
I will say again that I agree our two-party paradigm is quite outdated and archaic and needs to be completely overhauled.
But I'd also like to ask you a question since you've taken the time to respond. Even if the Russians have been actively working to undermine our "democracy" in hopes our country collapses from within, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that exactly what the agency has been doing literally for decades? If we can agree on that, is it a classic case of do as I say and not as I do??
Russia is not trying to collapse your country... Russia is trying to influence America so they will have a VERY powerful ally who will let them do whatever the fuck they want. Collapsing America is bad for them as well. This idea that they are trying to collapse America from within stems from Cold War propaganda. Which actually benefited them because they're doing the opposite but no one expects them to do that.
Americas two party system is undemocratic and one of the biggest threats you guys face I agree. But by spreading the unproven conspiracies as part of a political agenda supporting one side you just do what they want you to do.
This is all noise. Meant to distract. Meant to put you at odds with each other. You can be worried about the DNC and Russia. It doesn't have to be one or the other. But they managed to make it so.
You can be worried about the DNC and Russia. It doesn't have to be one or the other. But they managed to make it so.
Great point.
And then buddying up with America is a real threat being ignored by a lot of people on this sub because it's being done by their side of your pretend democracy...
With the level of scrutiny being leveled at the US-Russian relationship by our media, I don't think you need to worry. We should be more worried about those friendly relationships with foreign powers which fly under the radar, like our relationship with Israel. If ever a country had an outsized influence on our politics...
Oh god see it even effects me. I totally forgot about Israel for a second. The relationship with Israel has been so normalized even though its number 1 when it comes to propaganda campaigns and disinformation.
Israel i just can't wrap my head around how they managed to get into this power position. They could nuke the Gaza Strip and no one would really care
Our relationship with Israel is a story which needs much more daylight.
Foreign policy in that region has been driven by our relationship with Israel for decades (and our relationship to oil), and has created the greatest threat to world peace since WWII.
Well, current United States policy consists of letting Saudi Arabia do whatever the fuck they want, like funding Islamic extremism around the globe and deliberately causing mass starvation in Yemen. But of course the Saudis make sure to line all the right pockets, the Washington DC has already shown they are willing to whore out the country for foreign interests, they're probably just offended at the idea of Putin influencing US policy without paying them their cut.
I don't think at this current moment we face an immediate threat from anyone but I really truly think Donald Trump is incompetent and every world power sees and knows that. Doing arms deals with Syria and conversing with the likes of Vladimir Putin who is the truest form of a dictator is not good for us.
I was at a bar during election night and I remember thinking "haha people are sweating cuz Trump is taking some states". Then he won. And I realized how fucked we were when we were being congratulated by Putin and all of the countries we don't wanna hear "congratulations" from.
The DNC is corrupt, and I wouldn't want Hillary to be president at all. But at this point, I'd rather have a 14 year old who just learned what the Constitution was over our current president (semi sarcasm).
is it a classic case of do as I say and not as I do??
Yes, but this is just one aspect of the pervasive American Exceptionalism that runs the minds of those darn patriotic 'Murcans.
I generally don't like the debate tactic where "X is bad" is deflected by "X has always been bad and everyone already knows it", but in this case I think we need to focus on the actual details of possible Russian intervention, in the US, in 2016, possibly with Trump's complicity, and "But the US does it too!" is a distraction... If not a "non-stop", at least a story for another time.
Perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying at the end there but not sure how, "we do it too" is a, "non-story" as you've said.
This reminds me a lot of how during hillary's campaign, she and her people were focused the entire time on where the information came from, rather than what was provided in the leaks/hacks themselves.
The logic or lack there of doesn't make sense to me.
But unfortunately that is pretty much business as usual in us politics
It shouldn't be. Our government is becoming so corrupt, it's unstable. It's the reason why we have Trump.
Look, Trump's support base is shrinking by the hour. If you are interacting with Trump voters, bear in mind that they are also unsure of their support for him.
But when the time comes for them to vote, how will we show them that the democrats are party worth supporting? How will we persuade the to pull the lever for the left-wing, if the left-wing is untrustworthy?
How I wish the DNC weren't so entrenched. Any kind of re-invention of the party might have helped inspire trust in people turned off by what the party has become.
It's going to be very interesting. The DNC should be running full force fixing their party and making themselves more attractive. But from what it seems it still the same party as last year...
The thing is, the Democrats are NOT a party worth supporting, neither are the Republicans. So long as someone is supporting one party or the other, they are stuck in the paradigm used to divide us.
Personally im more worried about american corruption than russian. Russia didnt dissolve habeas corpus. Russia didnt attack us on 911. Russia didnt pass the patriot act. Russia isnt spying on every single american against there will. This whole focus on russia is a misdirection
But in terms of scandals and obvious crimes committed, the dnc has the rnc beat by a sizable margain.
These are non-partisan statements I've made in this thread; if you read my response to other comments in this thread, the 2-party system is worthless and really it's only one choice; the choice they give us, although they make it seems like there is an option.
Looking at top posts and how I get called an "Islam apologist" when I tell people I'm worried about Russia backing far right politicians in my country it sure as hell feels like t_d
And I agree. Both the democrats and republicans are cesspools of corruption but I'm not going to let emotion rule over facts and evidence. Nor does me knowing this mean I can't also be worried about other conspiracies...
There is corruption on both the left and the right.
And I believe we should all be able to hold multiple thoughts in our brain at the same time.
But forum threads are often about focus. And if someone is trying to focus on a particular point of corruption on one side, I can see how it's unhelpful to insert, at that point, that both sides are corrupt.
I mean even beyond the way it is a blatant tactic of biased journalists and apologists of the worst corruption (I'll never forget when Republicans tried to "shut down government" with the spending cap freeze and idiots said "our darn congress is feckless" implying equal culpability both sides...) it is somewhat objectively an annoying debate gambit.
And if someone is trying to focus on a particular point of corruption on one side, I can see how it's unhelpful to insert, at that point, that both sides are corrupt.
Well, I think it is helpful. We should all want a government free of corruption, and if we finger-point at the other guy, while never taking responsibility for our own flaws, then we really accomplish nothing.
Just because that other side over there deserves a sidewinder right up their exhaust, no need to jam the signal of the current missile homing in on its target here.
We have more missiles. Let each get their targets as unfettered as possible.
Oh look. Yet another comment trying to portray a sub that deals with the corruption of the previous government as supportive of their opposition. Thank you for giving me renewed determination.
Wikileaks doesn't necessarily know who leaks info to them, and it's their stated policy that they don't want to know. They have a secure site where leaks can be dropped anonymously. Assange only knew any personal info about Chelsea Manning because she volunteered it. But if Rich was careful, no one at Wikileaks would know he was the leaker.
He doesn't tweet about Rich being the leaker. He says ambiguous things with a wink and a nudge. He knows full well that some people will interpret that as an endorsement of their narrative, but at the same time it allows plausible deniability for people defending him against charges of baseless accusations.
Assange has never acknowledged any of his leakers, even Chelsea Manning. He might suspect Rich was the leaker but not know it, which is why he has offered a reward for info. Perhaps the leaker made clear he was an insider in the DNC but didn't give his name.
But if he didn't know Rich was the leaker, then why would he offer a reward for information related to his murder? Why would Rich's death have been of interest to him at all?
He might know and choose not to say. He might have strong suspicions based on personal info the leaker provided but doesn't know for sure. I don't know either way. It's possible that because Wikileaks portal is encrypted for anonymity for sources, the only way to know if Rich was the leaker is by accessing his laptop.
No they dont. Did you not read the post you replied to? Assange has claimed he doesnt know any of the leakers names and there isnt a way for him to know their name by default.
So the seth rich stuff is bullshit. Unless assange is a liar. In which case how can we believe him then?
Assange has also said that they never reveal sources under any circumstances. Even if the source is claiming they're the source he will neither confirm or deny they're the source, since they could be doing so under duress.
It's also a bit odd that both Assange and Wikileaks keep retweeting any tweets in reference to Rich, even that he had been in contact with Wikileaks prior to his death.
That makes sense, but because of their cryptic insinuations, Wikileaks own credibility has been weakened. The case for Seth Rich hasn't been strengthened.
Wikileaks doesn't necessarily know who leaks info to them, and it's their stated policy that they don't want to know. They have a secure site where leaks can be dropped anonymously. Assange only knew any personal info about Chelsea Manning because she volunteered it. But if Rich was careful, no one at Wikileaks would know he was the leaker.
Assange is dead or in some CIA black site so there isn't going to be any 'proof' coming from him. But when Seth was killed Assange did make some comments alluding to that Seth was the DNC leak.
Except wikileaks is personally raising money for justice in this case - the only other time they've done that is with their other source, Chelsea Manning.
Assange proving Rich was the leaker would do more to legally incriminate Rich than it would the democrats/ clinton campaign. That would be a tough decision to make. To some, it would make rich a martyr, and to others, a traitor of the highest order.
So we don't know the truth for sure- but Assange maintains that he is consistent to his supposed journalistic code of ethics in his unwillingness to name sources.
BUT... at the same time, he has certainly insinuated without too much evidence that Rich was a source. It has also been heavily insinuated by former british pm and ambassador Craig Murray, that he was Seth Rich's contact within wikileaks.
If you already are a fervant DNC supporter, you aren't going to immediately jump to the conclusion that the DNC murdered rich- just because you find out that he was the leaker. So I don't think there's a lot of value of them speaking outside of coded language regarding the issue.
Well there's a ton of evidence that Russia is very active in this community.
There's also a ton of evidence Trump has extensive financial ties to Russia. His son brags about it.
Seth Rich sent a 1000's of documents to WikiLeaks proving neocons within the DNC sabatouged Bernie.
I don't believe Trump stole the election. I do believe Russian psy-ops exploited newly connected Facebookers with targeted misinformation campaign using Brad Parscales big data similar to how Obama got elected.
This Seth Rich distraction in the midst of an ever growing POTUS scandal only proves how easily Trump supporters were manipulated.
Seriously. The set-up is in play already. Basically the whole front page of this sub is Seth Rich posts today. And people are placing seeds of doubt through.
The Shill level has been high since a couple days prior to the French election. Conspiracy gets their posts removed if they reach All and we are seeing a flood of new, confidentially against all conspiracy, sign ups.
That is odd. That would be like if all new subscribers to Politics only talked about how dumb politics was to talk about. It's clearly some form of shillary, though perhaps it's Reddit search manipulation, like how they manipulate the front page.
Are you subscribed to TinyTrumps and TheNewRussianHolocaust ? Try Conspiracy! - Shit like that can appear 'shillary' but is more manipulated search engine results, leading to a flood of 'anti' thinkers brigading thoughtful discussion.
Look at the "hottest" comments in this and other threads. Massive astroturfing. People claiming this is just a secondary t_d sub and calling everyone here idiots, even though weve been around much longer than t_d and the vast majority of our membors dont support trump or any partisan for that matter (its all a sham).
dont support trump or any partisan for that matter (its all a sham).
That's the clincher. The vast majority of people that are balls deep in conspiracy forums support no political candidate because they believe it's all the same shit, different face.
This sub is seeing hordes of people that denigrate conspiracy theories while citing MSM. It's bizzare. Recent hype with wikileaks has opened a few eyes, but there's way too many people bagging on well established conspiracy theories to be coincidental.
The purpose of this manipulation is not now, nor has it ever been, to reach the diehard skeptics or conspiracists. The purpose is to sway those who are tangentially interested and still invested in the paradigm of left/right. You get the newer people to fight each other, and both of them to turn on those that are here to actually discuss on the purpose of the sub.
This "astroturfing" or "brigading" that is an every week occurrence now, is why I spend most of my reddit time on /r/subnautica anymore, at least the discussion there is on topic.
Yeah, it's normal. One shred of a hint of a shadow of a conspiracy and the sub freaks out and goes autistic on it for a month....
like that pizza nonsense
Who the fuck is afraid of the russian, the north koreans or even isys or Iran? Only CNN and Fox news, nobody else except a bunch of secluded old people... Pretty sure North Korea would try to start shit and we'd fuck them up beyond recognition. Actually, we'd let them blow up a few cities so that we could get a fuck ton more military funding... good old war machine. People are worried about automated AI taking over the world, what about this self sustaining military complex, the biggest fuckin social program in the world besides the US government...
PS: I'm drunk, all comments are comliments of Jack Danials!
I've heard a crazy amount of people absolutely insisting he had a vaguely defined position in IT where they assume he would have had easy access to mail. Folks don't realize that "person who does computer stuff" is not a single title.
Has wikileaks shown they were in contact with Seth Rich? Wouldn't releasing that evidence not only shut a lot of people up about Russia but also give the family of Seth Rich some clue as to what really happen to him?
Wikileaks didn't disclose Manning, because Manning left a trail and was easily caught as the leaker. Snowden also didn't leak to WikiLeaks so he was never a source for them.
What are you talking about WikiLeaks have still never explicitly started that Manning was the leaker of the War Logs (though, yes, we do know that to be the case) and Snowden didn't leak through WikiLeaks.
Isn't that to protect the leakers though? If Seth Rich was their source, and Seth is now dead, then there's not really a reason to withhold the source is there?
also means there never should have been an investigation into trump-russia and if that never happened, people like Flynn would have been more likely to not try and cover some bull shit up
I disagree. Russia and Trump could have collusion. It just means the claim that Russia hacked our election is bogus, which I always thought that narrative was a bit much.
To empower Putin at the expense of the US and the EU. To enrich Russian oligarchs and the Trump family at the expense of the American people. To pour the US tres
So letting Russia and Trump drain our resources in addition to the Bilderbergs that's a good thing? Also Trump just met with Kissinger after the Russians. If you think he's not going to be in the lap of the Bilderbergs you're kidding yourself.
It just means the claim that Russia hacked our election is bogus
I don't know one way or the other, but I doubt there was any changing of the votes which is what most folks think of when they hear hacking.
But anyone who has even a basic knowledge of hacking knows that the vast majority of hacking is social engineering so when we look at the news stories and the way the DNC leaks were twisted into narratives, the populace was hacked not the voting machines.
So is MSM twists narratives to suit a particular candidate, in a non even handed way. That would be considered hacking as well? News is global, countries throwing out propaganda isn't exactly new.
I think we are all guilty of confirmation bias from time to time and it's important for us to consider the opposite side of things, who has an agenda, etc.
They ALL have an agenda. And it is really hard to ever truly check one's own bias. Most are passionate about our ideals, and in order to truly be unbiased, we have to detach ourselves, this is not an easy thing to do.
Agreed. Some are pretty simple to see - clicks/subscriptions/viewers etc, others are harder to uncover.
it is really hard to ever truly check one's own bias
I agree completely.
Most are passionate about ones ideals, and in order to truly be unbiased, we have to detach ourselves, this is not an easy thing to do
I'm not sure this is truly possible - I know that I am guilty of believing things that confirm my suspicions and being suspicious of things I previously regarded as false.
Only when we know that we don't know much more than we know, can we truly be aware of all that is.
Or some zen bullshit like that...the older I get the more I realize I'm just a lucky dumb ape walking around talking out my ass.
I don't even understand how I answer questions - like straight up black and white answers whether they be mathematical or scientific it comes from the ether in the same way that my gut judgement of another human being does; hopefully someday I can understand why I feel or think the way I do.
The further down that rabbit hole I go, the scarier it gets for me. Even our perceptions are easily influenced. Even our own mind can deceive us. Every experience we have IMO impacts us, we may not be aware of the impact, but our brain broke it down and set it away, awaiting of any future patterns that it may apply to, and then said experience bubbles back up to the surface. The question I suppose is. Are you you? Or are you nothing more than the sum of your experiences. The older I get the less reliable my memories are, and I have no doubt many have been tuned to fit the narrative my own brain is trying to sell me.
The latest news focuses on another attack on Trump, making fun of how he gave away classified information to Russians (again...).
Remember the HRC emails? How she had SAP level classified material on her laptop? Knowing the history of the Clintons, she was probably following her husband's footsteps and selling that information to foreign interests. The SAPs were mentioned in a few msm articles but downplayed by media in general.
Zooming out on this shit-show, a lot of top secret files are probably in non-American hands and probably, indirectly, all over the global private sector, but the media makes a HUGE deal out of some stupid ISIS Israeli spy?
Are you fucking kidding me? ISIS is MOSSAD! The msm narrative is SOOOO far from the truth it's mindblowing..
And because the FBI has never independently verified the hack because the DNC refused to let them look. The entire case revolves around and is held up because the the report and findings by CrowdStrike.
He "resigned" because of his contact with Russians. That's why Trump sacked him.
So even if this Seth rich hoax that's getting spammed is even credible 0.001% it still doesn't negate the fact that Flynn is out, Trump said Russia hacked the DNC Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Russian investigation because of HIS inappropriate contact with Russians
Ie the Russian narrative doesn't live or die solely on Seth rich.
I'm agnostic about this, at least for maybe one of the leaks. Russians are notoriously good hackers. It's whether or not the hacking was state-sanctioned by the Kremlin that would be the real question. That I personally doubt. The Russian government is known for turning a blind eye to this stuff.
Nothing to do with Russians. Podesta lost his phone in a cab, and also used very insecure passwords-both of these facts are actually IN the Podesta emails.
Anybody that has been aware of the active and ongoing psy-ops conducted through the media would have seen through all of this due to the lack of substantial evidence.
Did you ever consider this is all a game for keeping the masses dancing.
.
Isn't Seth rich leaking the conclusion we came to when the Russian narrative first came out.
Then we were all shocked that it gained traction because it was an obvious ploy by the Democratic Party to take trump down quite a few notches.
Then it worked.
.
I believe the truth is some where inbetween. Trump has ties to Russia. He has ties to the mob. And he is a position to allow a lot of bad stuff to happen including child trafficking, coke dealing, and whatever the fuck.
.
At the same time, Seth rich leaked and was murdered.
.
Has any one considered that this is a divide and conquer campaign? Antifa much, violent protests, probably domestic terrorism.
So what you trying to say is "look, see their family says they don't like this very much. " but his family didn't say jack shit it was just some PR douchebag.
Those didn't have much of an impact and have subsequently been forgotten, apparently, here at least. Ditto the random French official who died AKA the "french seth rich."
125813140 No one should be paying attention to or quoting anything Bauman has to say. They are Bauman's words and not the words of Seth Rich's family. The DNC made him the "spokesman" for the family but he doesn't speak for them. He is misrepresenting them in his own words. When he interacts with them he tells them what he wants them to say and then goes and says it by himself. He is not being honest, this guy is a pathological lying sociopath. There is an entire organized network of sociopaths/psychopaths at work here.
This Bauman guy already dismissed the emails by basically saying "I haven't heard of any emails but if emails come out, they are not evidence. They are just words that anybody can type". This is something a psychopath does when they don't have the answers. They make stuff up and dig further holes for themselves and then make some more stuff up. This doesn't work forever if they operate on their own but they are a giant network and they control the MSM so they can lie and spin and ignore then go on to the next subject. It's worked for them for decades.
Thanks for taking the time to put that together. I'm a Sanders liberal and I'm very curious.
BUT, what I'm looking for in evidence are real concrete sources. All you have is that a private investigator said "someone in the know" has told him that there are files on the computer linking him to wikileaks.
Assange hasn't been much help either, because all he does is float ideas, wink and nod. He's given you nothing concrete either. I kind of resent that. What's his game? If he has evidence Rich was murdered, then share it.
I'm not brigading from some other site, and I quit the DNC last year and really dislike the party. But your case is not persuasive.
If you want your case to be persuasive, we need real, concrete evidence. Otherwise, this is all circumstantial theorizing on your part. Interesting, but....
I'm with you, the "French Seth rich" allegation was a desperate, evidence-free stretch, not an isolated phenomenon I should stress. The whole affair seems a weak miniature of the US election, probably orchestrated by Prosobiec's Rebel Media.
I hadn't considered the rebel media angle. Interesting. I recall it was so-called "alt right" twitter accounts that propagated and amplified the Macron leaks, would be great to know who controls those twitter bots!
Personally I have suspicions around certain republican grass roots Caucus groups and of course Russia.
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
Yeah you heard about logic once and think you know something. Causation is always found through correlation. The statement you used is invariably used by someone who is denying mountains of evidence against their position. No not every correlation is a causation but every causation has a correlation. That's logic 101.(not logical 101. .that wouldn't be logical.)
I've been saying that it is weird that Russian cyber fingerprints were so easy to see during the French election. It seemed like an attempt to wash this whole thing over and completely change history. Why, after they supposedly had so much experience with us, would they leave such an obvious trail here when they should only be better? Just a theory though. Can anybody piece together any more reasons or tell me why I'm wrong?
If you guys ever wonder why so many of us refer to you as low information voters, this is why. You have no grasp of even the basic fundamentals of the issue, let alone an actual argument. Here let me drop another conspiracy on you:
Right media make shit. They shit into Trumps mouth. Trump digests and shits it into your mouth. You eat every bite of his shit with unquestioning belief. Repeat forever.
Who told you that nonsense? You are confused and spreading misinformation. Please stop. The CIA has a contract with Amazon for email and cloud storage....just like thousands of other organizations. Jeff Bezos is the CEO of Amazon and personally owns the Washington Post. Your version is wildly inaccurate and farcical.
What are you on? Kremlin has nothing to do with the discussion. You were shitting on right media, what the fuck are you talking about? Are you sayin that right media is funded by the Kremlin? Show evidence then lol
This thread is about Russia so not sure why you're confused why I would mention the Kremlin. It's kind of central to the discussion. But no, clearly there's no story here. It just so happens that Russia funded thousands of shills to perpetuate made up stories the right eats up.
Paid trolls are what constitutes a large part of right wing media. But like I said, pretty obvious that any facts I present you with you'll just automatically dismiss
Yeah definitely. It's Eurasia or Oceania right? If I don't support one tyranny, that means I have to support a foreign one yeah? I can't just be an individual against power and corruption. It's US vs THEM. Definitely. Solid logic buddy.
Whoa let me break down how dumb what you just said is. If the guy I responded to is American, him believing a foreign adversary like the Kremlin more than his own government makes him one of two things: a traitor or incredibly gullible. Oh, or maybe both
That's funny coming from the left. You cant even manage to accept the decision of a democratically practiced election that has been accepted and used since day 1.
Dumb argument. I accept the election results. Most of us do. What I don't accept is Trump colluding with Russia during his campaign whether it helped him win or not. That's, oh what's the word...treason.
Lol, k. You accept the election results. You're a bit out of your lane. Better becareful. They'll call you a trump supporter for saying things like you accept the results. My fucking sides.
How is that a false equivalence? CIA has a long history of giving false intel to journalists and the American people in order to advance their interests.
CIA is at least as bad as the Kremlin. Both agencies don't care about the well being of the people they are supposed to be working for.
I don't blindly believe anything I'm told. I don't believe the CIA, FBI, RUSSIA, or Wikileaks blindly. But when you take the track record of all of them and wikileaks has the only spotless record I'm more likely to believe that. There is no proof Seth Rich leaked the emails but it sure looks that way. And then on top of that you have wikileaks pretty much saying it was Seth Rich.... Idk man. This one seems pretty easy to believe.
You seem to think the CIA operates for the greater good. Are you not aware of their reputation? Are you seriously defending the fucking CIA? WOW
It's actually pretty clear you blindly believe anything you're told if you think Wikileaks has a "spotless record". Aside from very obvious collusion with the Russians to interfere in our election to support Trump what else do you need? I'm glad you at least admit you're more likely to believe the word of a foreign adversary than your own countrymen but christ, at least do your homework before just buying into something blindly. Like you just said, there is no evidence to support the Seth Rich conspiracy and now Fox News is getting sued by his family over it. But you choose to believe this because it supports your narrative and just as easily dismiss anything that doesn't.
You seem to think Wikileaks operates for the greater good. Are you not aware of their reputation? Are you seriously defending fucking Wikileaks? WOW
In all seriousness though, you know the difference between you and me? If this was Obama in Trump's shoes, and it looked like he was guilty of treason, I would have been calling for impeachment just like all the GOP would have. Some of us actually give a shit about country more than party. So yes, even though the CIA obviously has faults, at least I know they fight for America. Your side can't say the same.
Please don't delete the ones I removed; it makes us hard to review any potential ban you may get in the future. Just leave the removed ones as they are; it will make it better for you if another mod does end up banning you.
People should stop making knee-jerk false assertions if there isn't strong evidence to back it up. It's great to question, and consider other angles. But we shouldn't take a leap of faith based on imagination and conjecture to assert something as fact without considerable evidence and credible consensus.
There is no strong evidence supporting the "Seth Rich was killed because he leaked the emails" narrative. I repeat, there is no evidence to date supporting this narrative. It upsets me to no end that this story line is propagated across the internet as truth when there's nothing back it up.
This is the equivalent to the 'if the glove doesn't fit you must acquit' defence, it is not enough to brush off the Russian narrative. There are too many links
... the issue is they have pushed the Russia hacked the election narative when they should have focused on Russia's influence of Trump. There are shady goings on, though the hacked election is probably bs... hell no one is saying they did anything with the election but attempt to influence through the release of DNC Emails.
the best part was yesterday when the whole sub was either about some stupid Seth Rich story or how the whole Trump leaking stuff to Russia story was fabricated to distract from Seth Rich. but they went pretty silent when Trump twittered it himself.
Since there's no obligation to be able to substantiate things in this sub:
Seth Rich was a Russian agent planted within the DNC. He compromised systems and leaked information to his handlers. Whenever Russia wanted that information made public, they would have him send it to Wikileaks as a way of obfuscating any involvement by a foreign power. When he was no longer useful to them, they killed him to tie up any loose ends (as they do) and started spreading the narrative online (as they do) that Hillary did it.
I come here solely just to savour the fear and desperation of Russian bots. At least I can say what I feel about Trump in this place without getting banned.
I am ambiguous on this issue but the astroturfing around it gives it a bit of credence. I'm not sure these are actual people making these comments, it would be impossible to be so meek that you would follow these particular orders in killing this story.
I know that I as a citizen have nothing better to do then to stand up and argue for the body politic because clearly you people are insane because our manufactured reality is the reality and you're racist transphobic rape apologists.
Well, there probably was a russian hack. Several independent companies found traces of two russian toolsets on the clinton servers, but not on the DNC server.
But this doesn't mean that the russians leaked it publicly.
The DNC leak was very likely a leak, the Podesta gmail hack was probably done by amateurs/fishers. Maybe they even came from Russia/Ukraine, as most of those guys.
Of course the entire Russian narrative in the media is false. There is as with most CIA disinfo only a small core of half truth. Same as with the Russian Trump connection. There was a connection to the Russian mafia, but since 2016 they were heavily fighting, as the russians betrayed Trump with some of his projects. The whole Flynn narrative is a joke, as well as the Petraeus and Benghazi investigations. Petraeus and Benghazi was something completely different, much worse.
Guys let's just think about why this story is being dragged out again, we can see past this kind of blatant distraction - the investigator himself has already said he has no new evidence. Let's not dance for them this time.
So because there was a leak, you are sure that Russia didn't have the DNC, didn't give money or communicate with the Trump campaign, didn't give money to the GOP...
The Russia thing isn't just that they leaked the DNC Wikileaks emails. In fact, I don't think the investigation ever said anything about those emails in particular, just that they hacked certain politicians emails, including Democrats and Republicans. If Russia got emails they would likely use them for blackmail, not just make them public and be done with it
American public politics is no longer a serious affair, an affair of transcendental import for the technologically-led destiny of the late capitalist, post-truth state. The public, as a result, has been far too infantilized by the reigning plutocrat-bureaucrat axis and consequently what passes for political discussion in the U.S. has correspondingly been equally infantilized; the controlling oligarchs, masters of politics as masters of the purchased (or purloined) state, fear no consequences and thus their nihilistic unconcern before the inconsequential effects (for their class) of their malfeasance or incompetence causes them to indolently play a game of perpetual pseudo-suspence with the minds of the politically residual middling classes and below.
The American middle class has been both dumbed down as well as squeezed from top and bottom, to a point where it no longer exists in reality.
Large parts of the government have been outsourced to private corporations, think tanks, and lobby groups. There is no direct accountability between the public and their representatives who have become docile and unable to challenge the role of these quasi-governmental bodies.
The Military Industrial Complex has taken over the running of the government and the office of the president is ceremonial. Trump can't fart without permission. His missile attack on Syria last month was a gross violation of US law as well as international law. The fact that there has been no investigation of the so called chemical attack, and thus no evidence to support the missile strikes speaks volumes about the lack of public coherence as well as political coherence in America at the present time.
The fact of the matter is that ICBMs could be launched without the proper authority should be troubling for Americans. The fact that America has it's military active in Asia Europe and the middle east should also of concern.
America needs to ask itself who is running the shop. From Europe, from Asia and from the middle east, the answer is unclear.
If anybody anywhere has seen any evidence of Russian hacking this ought to have been presented publicly months ago. The fact that no evidence has been presented and no justification for the hacking presented can only lead to one conclusion. The hacking issue is based on American ignorance of what hacking involves, as well as an ignorance of any Russian advantage to be gained by Trump being in the White House.
Trump was never supposed to be president. That much is accepted by both parties as well as the MSM.
How the Russians could possibly benefit by having Trump being elected is a bizarre question also not answered.
The fact that Trump has flim flammed on various issues as well as being thwarted in his approaches to national security, health care, suggest that he is unable to initiate his agendas without prior scrutiny by forces and faces unknown.
When evidence of motive, opportunity, as well as techniques are revealed this can be treated as a real news item. At present it is an American fiction based on suspicion and innuendo. No facts or evidence are being debated.
You haven't answered my question. Importance aside, you said there is 'no evidence' to the conspiracy that Trump is colluding with Russia. Disregarding all the news that made headlines recently, Trump himself admitted on twitter that he had shared classified info with Russian ministers, essentially confirming the report that WPost released and the WH denied.
I wouldn't touch on which conspiracy is more important than the other, but saying there is no evidence on the Trump-Russia conspiracy is disingenuous.
Does the "russia" thing not bear a startling resemblance to the McCarthyism of the previous century? A classic bit of CIA inspired bullshit to keep America scared and the war economy going.
And now "Russia" is being used to divert the people's attention away from the corrupt corporate bought politicians who rig primaries and murder whistleblowers.
I don't see how that's an answer to my question, but even if Trump's leaking classified info to the ministers of Indonesia, that would count as an evidence for the Trump-Indo conspiracy.
The 'russia' conspiracy supports the establishment, pro war narrative. Of course, Trump is increasingly pro war these days, but I suppose not enough for the corporate psychopaths at the CIA.
Eh i blame shareblue. This directly goes against their narrative and everything theyve been fighting to sweep under the rug. There is no discussion here, just allegations that people are from t_d. Very blatant diversion and just some more RUSSIA LOL HAX DUDE.
Literally any evidence for russian collusion has been taken completely out of context and worded by the overwhelmingly leftist media to seem 100x worse than at actually is. Take the current "scandal" with the russian ambassador.
Lol the only thing you can say back is, "nuh uh we may do it but you do it worse!!! :(:(:(" right m8
The current scandal is real. It has real national security implications because our allies are less willing to share intel now. Trump has literally just made our country less safe, and you're acting like it's some made up smear campaign.
If you're taking the same approach to evidence for other allegations against Trump, no wonder you think it's all made up.
Read through the evidence again, but pretend it's Obama instead of Trump. Maybe then you'll see it for what it is.
Which scandal, the one where trump discussed a few declasified topics with the russian ambassador? The one being interpreted as "Trump shares classified information with Russian officials"? Or is there some other made up or out of context story theyre telling?
Now you're splitting hairs. It was classified in the sense that it would've been classified had anyone other than the president shared it. The president has the power to declassify things, so you can say he shared declassified things, but it's disingenuous. Had anyone else done what he did, they'd be facing criminal charges.
The issue is he shared info that was collected by a foreign intelligence agency. Traditionally, whichever agency collects the intel controls how it's disseminated. So, the country that shared the info with us shared it in confidence and it was up to them to decide whether or not to share it with Russia.
Since he betrayed that trust, it's less likely they will want to share intel with us in the future.
Sure, i can agree with that. But having a headline of "Trump Gives Russia Classified Information" tells a completely different story. And all you need is a headline now to make something "true"
God damn this sub is full of Share-blue "muh Russia" shills. The Russian narrative is so pathetic. They are literally grasping for straws. Trump is a Goldman-Sachs stooge for sure but this Russia shit is just embarrassing.
The days after he died it was one of the most obvious silencing done out in the open in a long time, the threads at the time got a few posts and people were figuring out that he was the leaker pretty fast. Especially with Wikileaks coming out with comments about him.
Months later its all over the place and now its being silenced. Its odd for it to come up now. The oddest part is because some fans of a particular world leader are pushing it the mainstream is shutting it down regardless of the facts of the situation like he was just a random guy who died in a mugging who is unrelated to polices, which is just untrue. Somebody murdered Seth Rich because of what he has done, this is reality.
The DNC emails had no impact on the election it was the Podesta emails that had an impact. If people have a shit about Seth riches leaks it would be President Bernie Sanders right now.
Just a friendly heads up that various hate subreddits from around reddit (most dedicated to mocking those who question the mainstream narratives which are so prevalent these days) have started linking to the comments section of this post in order to influence the vote totals therein.
To that end, we encourage all users to take vote totals on comments in this thread with a grain of salt. We are working actively with the reddit admins to stem the flow of these vicious brigades, and we hope some of these horrific hate subreddits (that exist only to manipulate content on subreddits such as /r/conspiracy, simply because this subreddit is resistant to having such narratives imposed from on high) will be addressed by the admins directly, as their behavior fundamentally undermines reddit as a platform in this regard.
To that end, if you see comments or submissions around reddit directed at this thread (or any other on /r/conspiracy), which directly encourage users to vote or participate in violation of reddit's site wide terms of service, please do let the mods know, as that is the only way we are able to work with the site admins to effectively stop the brigades.
Thanks for your consideration and please accept my apology on behalf of those vicious brigades who come to this comment section only to engage in ideological manipulation.
I don't want to give them any undue attention, but there are a few long standing subreddits which exist only to mock, derides, and manipulate /r/conspiracy. In those subreddits there are currently topics directed at this comment section.
Just checked it out...what even is the point of that sub? Do these people have nothing better to do than search this sub for stupid posts and laugh at them?
Assuming you're correct and that brigades come from both sides, it would seem that one side is better at hiding their brigades better than the other. I feel pretty confident that if a mod became aware of such brigades forming in other subreddits, they would post a sticky disclaimer at the top, just as /u/AssuredlyAThrowAway did in this thread. If you can find evidence that this is happening and the mods are intentionally ignoring it, beyond "if both sides brigade, they must brigade in equal amounts!" then that deserves a post on this sub in itself. Otherwise, though, I cannot go along with your conclusion that this gives off a perception of bias.
Where's the proof that anti-Trump brigades more? There was a post in this subreddit just the other day showing TheDonald telling their users to soak the Seth Rich story and upvote it everywhere.
My point is that both sides do it and it makes no sense to intervene only for one side.
I'm unaware of the exact numbers for either, as from what I've seen that information is not readily available.
There was a post in this subreddit just the other day showing TheDonald telling their users to spam the Seth Rich story and upvote it everywhere.
This isn't TheDonald. /r/conspiracy mods are choosing when to counter brigade tactics because that is their choice as mods. /r/conspiritard was notorious for this type of activity years ago and mods were heavily involved and placing sticky posts similar to this to stop it. This is not new to the recent Trump vs Liberals war on Reddit.
I think it's because the anti-trump subreddits brigade in.
It's quite disturbing to look at the anti-trump commenters here. If you look at their accounts, they are all less than 2 years old. They have a few token submissions of content about dumb stuff and then a lot of comment karma. Their comment karma is all from one or at the most two subreddits. They all appear to be sock puppets.
I'm not suggesting that these are all the same person, but it appears that they are not using their main accounts to comment in here. There seems to be a coordinated effort by some group to come in here with sock puppets and make it appear that they are real, average redditors.
So just look at these accounts for yourself. They don't look "normal". There is a group pushing an agenda here, but it's not a pro-trump one.
Less than two years? You make that sound like a short length of time. More than a year is a decent length and would make me less suspicious so the age of the account looks innocuous to me.
Lots of karma is also a good indicator, although obviously not fool proof.
I'm not saying these are clearly main accounts, but the reasons you provided for believing them to be sock accounts seem to be suggesting the opposite.
Two years is the time that the Clinton campaign started to ramp up for the election. So these people would have started these sock puppets to help manipulate social media.
Lots of karma is also a good indicator, although obviously not fool proof.
What you'll see with these accounts is that they only frequent a single subreddit, which is where all their karma comes from. A "normal" account will get their karma from several different places.
Like if I look at where you have submitted links, it's all over the place. Maybe you favor /r/aww and other such meme subreddits, but at least you aren't stuck in one small obscure subreddit.
Wouldn't it be interesting if the only way you can upvote/downvote an /r/conspiracy thread is if you are subscribed to /r/conspiracy? If this rule were able to spontaneously be implemented, we would know approximately how many shills are brigading this sub by monitoring the subscriber increases.
Unfortunately, that requires CSS tricks, which are easily circumvented. Something as simple as browsing via a mobile app will get around any of the ways mods can currently restrict voting/commenting on their subs.
Surely you can't be serious. This is clearly begging for votes, yet still remains on the front page.
You routinely flair anything that is remotely anti trump as false (yes we saw the one yesterday).
Everytime i lurk here all it is is shills this/shills that. People digging through others post history just to try and counter their argument.
I come here rather than than the other two shitholes because it's the least biased out of them all. It's on the tipping point though. I shouldn't have to wade through 100exaggeration seth posts just to find another story.
Right? I mean christ this post reads like some propagandist bullshit. Us vs. them mentality and all that. Give me a fucking break this sub is far from neutral.
It's more for attacking the mods (which you are doing now) and assuming we're a homogenous unit with a single political outlook which I assure you is not the case.
Jesus Christ, I'm not attacking the mods lol. Any time there is a post which questions trump, some mods stickies some bullshit or tags it as brigading or does something to try and control the narrative. You might not be apart of it but it is so obvious that they are pushing a pro trump narrative.
Some people support Trump and some don't. While we try to stay in the middle of the political squabbling it's inevitable that some bias will influence decisions occasionally, we're not robots.
Personally I think 90% of politicians from all sides should be put in Guantanamo for crimes against voters and fraud by misrepresentation, they don't represent our well-being in the slightest.
Just a friendly heads up that various hate subreddits from around reddit (most dedicated to mocking those who question the mainstream narratives which are so prevalent these days) have started linking to the comments section of this post in order to influence the vote totals therein.
Seth Rich was used by the Russians through a direct operative then killed to keep him from talking. As a lifelong democrat he had remorse for what he did.
or
Seth was killed during a botched robbery
or
Seth was killed by Hillary Clinton for leaking the emails
Trump has a Russia problem but it's a different one. The Dutch TV Russian Oligarchs used Trump to launder their money narrative. And Trump wants to sell federal lands, mineral rights, etc. to these same oligarchs.
Who is surprised by this come on?
Assange said it over and over again - it didn´t come from Russia.
Sad how a large group of people (country) fall for media lies over and over and over and over again. "Fool me a hundert times I am too stupid anyway."
A /r/The_Donald shill who is desperate to spread misinformation, say it ain't so... Once people start looking at comment history it'll be much harder for you shills to spread your propaganda. Ask yourself people, who is this person posting, and why?
A quick check confirms being doubt his agenda, comrade...
I'm confused as to how we're just completely ignoring the fact of Michael Flynn's connections. There is eveidence and admission there. Same with Jared Kushner. This does not mean to me though a Trump-Russia (in terms of politics, maybe business) connection.
I started screaming that Hillary Clinton eats babies and someone called the cops and they dragged me away, which makes me think the cops were on the DNC payroll as well.
the left are desperate, at this point they are a cornered animal ready to bite and claw. the russian narrative has always been bullshit. they're focused on the allegations of a foreign country leaking their own corrupt activities to distract from any attention towards those said activities.
He says right here he has a credible Federal investigator who saw the laptop and the emails. Also that when he first at March tried to get the laptop with the police, it took them 2 days to reply and that the DNC called Seth's parents asking why he was snooping around. https://youtu.be/2J9YfQtqcuA
ACtually that's not what he says at all. He says he talked to an anonymous source who saw the laptop and the case file, that's it, he does not even say he told him there were communications to wikileaks.
Rod Wheeler also claimed that there were over 150 "lesbian gangs" terrorizing people with "pink pistols" in the DC area. He shouldn't be considered a reliable source.
Ok so someone please fucking explain this binary horseshit to me. If Seth rich leaked dnc information how does this refute all of trump's nefarious ties to Russia?
I know that the dems just started blaming Russia for the hacks. I just don't understand people using Seth rich evidence to somehow prove that trump isn't in putin's pocket. Both could be true.
No it doesn't. Fuck off with your Pizzagate distractions. There's more evidence against Trump 10x over. I'm so sick of low information activists taking over this sub.
I love how I need to start from the beginning with sources on the most well documented topic in the world today but anything pro-trump is discussed without a hint of scrutiny.
And I'm only linking this so you'll stop dishonestly asking about a "source" when you obviously ignore the dearth of evidence that there is 10x more fact to Trump's impropriety than Seth Riches murder. Which I do believe was a conspiracy. I just hate when T_D uses his death to launch a distraction campaign. It's so fucking disgusting.
Or just look at who runs Zero hedge. If you think the DNC is your enemy but Russia is your friend, then the Psy-Op has gained control of your brain. It's much bigger than the DNC or Trump or Putin. These posts that zealously pick sides are just more avenues of disinformation. If you can sit on the internet all day and bitch about the DNC and not say one word about the GOP or Trump. You're part of the problem and worse than any MSM psy-op.
The PsyOp is ongoing, and its about the military industrial complex keeping the war economy going. The continuity of crony capitalism is at stake, and the corporate bought politicians are aligned with the corporate owned news media against the people. Im happy to criticize Trump, but not if it means lending my voice to the oligarchy, who are clearly trying to co opt the protest / opposition.
So tell me, who runs Zero Hedge?
Lets say youre right about DNC leaked emails... there are countless other issues you are ignoring. Honestly, your snarky post and obvious ignorance to this makes you come off as a complete tool. Why not do a little digging for yourself and actually understand the issues before firing off this nonsense? Seriously, just spend 2 hours on google looking up multiple sources from different outlets and you will see what so many others see. I challenge you to honestly set aside your bias and challenge your cognitive dissonance while doing your research. The most dangerous threat to our democracy is a misinformes citizenry.
How about instead of throwing insults, you provide some context for us? Or maybe you don't have anything and you're just stirring things up for no reason.
more insults. There's a direct connection. If the DNC emails were leaked (which they were), what does that say about the Corporate Democrat strategy of "russia russia russia"? It's bullshit misdirection to hide their own corruption.
And I'm a lefty bernie supporting nut, you don't know me!
The democratic process that is already influenced by hundreds of millions of special interest and foreign dollars? You are trying to protect the integrity of that process? The system that has seen every president in the last 25 years threatens with impeachment? Suddenly the Russians are able threaten the stability of that system?
And so it's "I am under no threat of terrorism myself but I am worried about those Ukrainians getting hurt" meanwhile ISIS has displaced millions and murdered tens of thousands all funded by Middle East states that have millions living in indentured servitude. But Russia ... Jesus.
And let's not ask whether Seth was murdered for political reasons because, well, Russia.
Nowadays people seem to be implying that the Russian narrative is something different than the wikileaks leaks. It's no longer "Russia hacked the DNC and influenced our election to boost trump"
Now it's "trump colluded with Russia" whatever they mean by that.
But it would mean that the DNC and media were initially lying and boosting a story with no merit. The DNC definitely wanted to get the spotlight off of them.
It was a random DC homicide. He was a low level staffer with no info to leak. HIS PARENTS ARE DESPERATELY PLEADING WITH YOU TO STOP THIS NONSENSE. You guys are nuts.
Everyone bitching about this sub is biased toward the right wont do the same for pseudoneutral subs like news, worldsnews and politics. Dont let them infiltrate
When this info comes out (its already starting to) i want every MSM asshole to come and apologize directly to the american people for being liars and crooks.
then i want the clintons in prison for murder.
Well, that's convenient. Lack of evidence is just evidence of a coverup! The guy has a history of spewing bullshit. There was no reason to believe him in the first place.
The Russians wanting to frame the DNC to get the blame away from themselves is a possible motive. Now let me just say, my personal opinion is that the DNC killed him, but I don't know for sure, and it's good to consider multiple theories
Except... The biggest contribution from Russia was the misinformation campaign on social media and Reddit. Pizza gate, the hype around the emails, the "surprise" leak of more emails that were mostly duplicates just a couple weeks before the election. Conservative media was so heavily inundated with Russian propaganda, that it's a gross over simplification to just say "Russians just leaked the emails".
How to get this sub banned before we've saved it locally on multiple offline drives. (self.conspiracy)
1 Hire all of Comet Pizza's crew to create shill accounts
2 Get them to spam private info about themselves
3 notify reddit CEO
4 sub is banned, nothing survives the big data deletion
Mountain out of mole hill. The Russian "hack" or hacking is probably part of routine intelligence gathering. They MIGHT have gotten lucky on a few DNC members. The original 'hack' was perpetuated by the same recycled/recirculated 13 page with one page of tech information that came to a conclusion that the Russians 'probably' did it. Force the narrative not actual evidence which was one page of software/code that Russians tend to use.
The problem is time. What's the saying- Repeat a lie long enough it becomes the truth
I mean it doesn't automatically make the whole thing fake. Trump could be a Russian agent and Seth rich can be the leaker. It doesn't destroy the entire story in one swoop.
I would disagree with that. The media not only ignored the death of Seth Rich they completely ridiculed the idea that he could have been a leaker or that his death was in any way related an effort to make him an example to other potential leakers. They just went with the attempted robbery explanation with no proof he was robbed. In point of fact, there were no witnesses to disrupt a robbery and his body lay in the street for hours. So, any evidence pointing to an execution by the DNC is going to be shoved off into the corner.
And like every r/conspiracy story this totally feel apart. But hey you didn't spend yesterday discussing actually real things that were taking place in the world.
Maybe one day you guys will learn who's actually being "distracted" here.
Bullshit story. Seth's own family says he was never in touch with Wikileaks. The reporter who apparently "leaked" this, Rod Wheeler, has already told CBS news that he personally has no knowledge nor had he seen any emails between Rich and Wikileaks, but was simply promoting the Fox News story, which quotes some anonymous source.
tl;dr Rod Wheeler admits he doesn't know a thing about any emails between Rich and Wikileaks, bullshit Fox News story, how fucking dumb do you have to be to take anything Fox News says seriously, it's literally the propaganda arm of the Trump admin at this point.
The russian narrative is fake, and it's the perfect story to sell in order to further two objectives of the deep state. 1) It undermines Trump, who is a nationalist and is working against their globalist agenda, and 2) It further presents Russia as the bogeyman du jour, thus making it ok to back the Syrian "rebels" in overthrowing Assad (who is aligned with russia). Oh, and happy coincidence, once the new west-friendly Syrian regime is in place, maybe Qatar will be allowed to build it's natural gas pipeline through syria into turkey to serve Europe.
I am really surprised someone else hasn't died or a terroist attack or something to veer the public off this story. It seems like all they have now is the "Russians did it."
If Seth Rich leaked the DNC emails, then that means there was no Russian hack.
Uh, that's not how logic works.
Seth Rich could have leaked the DNC emails AND there could have been a Russian hack.
That said, there is tons of evidence that there was a Russian hack and exactly 0 evidence that Seth Rich leaked the DNC emails.
That said, Russia and Trump shills have an interest in pushing the Seth Rich narrative, and a lot of people here are falling for it because "it's not the MSM."
The 'russian narative' did not start with emails at all, I'm clueless why this is repeated over and over when there was an investigation happening into russian agents compromising people involved with election officials. The email story is separate and literally has nothing to do with money being paid to politicians in the form of very large loans with no backing, paying double and triple the cost of a piece of real estate, or just plain paying someone for a trip. Absolutely nothing hinges on the email story, stop repeating this.
James Clapper testified under oath to congress the other day and said the "17 intelligence agencies" story was bullshit. It only came out of Hillary Clinton's mouth and if you trust Hillary Clinton then I've got a Washington Post story to sell you.
Isn't that to protect the leakers though? If Seth Rich was their source, and Seth is now dead, then there's not really a reason to withhold the source is there?
Here's Clapper's testimony verbatim: "The two dozen or so analysts for this task were hand-picked, seasoned experts from each of the contributing agencies. They were given complete, unfettered mutual access to all sensitive raw intelligence data, and importantly, complete independence to reach their findings. They found that the Russian government pursued a multifaceted influence campaign in the run-up to the election, including aggressive use of cyber capabilities.
The Russians used cyber operations against both political parties, including hacking into servers used by the Democratic National Committee and releasing stolen data to WikiLeaks and other media outlets. Russia also collected on certain Republican Party- affiliated targets, but did not release any Republican-related data. The Intelligence Community Assessment concluded first that President Putin directed and influenced campaign to erode the faith and confidence of the American people in our presidential election process. Second, that he did so to demean Secretary Clinton, and third, that he sought to advantage Mr. Trump. These conclusions were reached based on the richness of the information gathered and analyzed and were thoroughly vetted and then approved by the directors of the three agencies and me.
These Russian activities and the result and (ph) assessment were briefed first to President Obama on the 5th of January, then to President-elect Trump at Trump Tower on the 6th and to the Congress via a series of five briefings from the 6th through the 13th of January. The classified version was profusely annotated, with footnotes drawn from thousands of pages of supporting material."
The Shill level has been high since a couple days prior to the French election. Conspiracy gets their posts removed if they reach All and we are seeing a flood of new, confidentially against all conspiracy, sign ups.
That is odd. That would be like if all new subscribers to Politics only talked about how dumb politics was to talk about. It's clearly some form of shillary, though perhaps it's Reddit search manipulation, like how they manipulate the front page.
Are you subscribed to TinyTrumps and TheNewRussianHolocaust ? Try Conspiracy! - Shit like that can appear 'shillary' but is more manipulated search engine results, leading to a flood of 'anti' thinkers brigading thoughtful discussion.
He doesn't tweet about Rich being the leaker. He says ambiguous things with a wink and a nudge. He knows full well that some people will interpret that as an endorsement of their narrative, but at the same time it allows plausible deniability for people defending him against charges of baseless accusations.
Assange has never acknowledged any of his leakers, even Chelsea Manning. He might suspect Rich was the leaker but not know it, which is why he has offered a reward for info. Perhaps the leaker made clear he was an insider in the DNC but didn't give his name.
They could, but I agree with u/G_petronius that a baseline of logical thoughts are the most important part right now, because the stuff he responded to is borderline retarded.
Oh I'm not protecting the DNC here. There's some fishy shit going on. But unfortunately that is pretty much business as usual in us politics. And by focussing on just one side you are only keeping the system standing.
Meanwhile Russia is destabilizing your country and making people think they're being patriotic by helping them do it.
Look at the "hottest" comments in this and other threads. Massive astroturfing. People claiming this is just a secondary t_d sub and calling everyone here idiots, even though weve been around much longer than t_d and the vast majority of our membors dont support trump or any partisan for that matter (its all a sham).
Because the Russian hack narrative is that the DNC leaks are from Russia and no one but Russia. If they are from Seth Rich, the Russian hack narrative falls to pieces.
125813140 No one should be paying attention to or quoting anything Bauman has to say. They are Bauman's words and not the words of Seth Rich's family. The DNC made him the "spokesman" for the family but he doesn't speak for them. He is misrepresenting them in his own words. When he interacts with them he tells them what he wants them to say and then goes and says it by himself. He is not being honest, this guy is a pathological lying sociopath. There is an entire organized network of sociopaths/psychopaths at work here.
This Bauman guy already dismissed the emails by basically saying "I haven't heard of any emails but if emails come out, they are not evidence. They are just words that anybody can type". This is something a psychopath does when they don't have the answers. They make stuff up and dig further holes for themselves and then make some more stuff up. This doesn't work forever if they operate on their own but they are a giant network and they control the MSM so they can lie and spin and ignore then go on to the next subject. It's worked for them for decades.
Yeah, it's normal. One shred of a hint of a shadow of a conspiracy and the sub freaks out and goes autistic on it for a month....
like that pizza nonsense
I know that the dems just started blaming Russia for the hacks. I just don't understand people using Seth rich evidence to somehow prove that trump isn't in putin's pocket. Both could be true.
But in terms of scandals and obvious crimes committed, the dnc has the rnc beat by a sizable margain.
These are non-partisan statements I've made in this thread; if you read my response to other comments in this thread, the 2-party system is worthless and really it's only one choice; the choice they give us, although they make it seems like there is an option.
Ah, well if it was cleared and discussed beforehand, then it's fine. Although it's difficult to trust any of Trump's cabinet considering their tendency to lie and coverup mishaps, especially when there were reports of damage control having to be done after the fact.
according to NBC's Richard Engel (who is no fan of Trump), "US intel official tells me trump told Russians about laptop airline threat. Told it wasn't anything they didn't already know."
As I mentioned, the contents of the information is not necessarily an issue. What is an issue is the fact that Russia now knows Israel has that information and is sharing it with the US, as it gives Russia and Iran an insight into their intelligence apparatus; especially in terms of where Israel may have operatives. Furthermore, it decreases any international trust in Trump's ability to secure information correctly and follow due procedure in general.
I really don't think the intel was a big deal either way considering the anonymous sources had no issue revealing it all to the WaPo, and by now the general public has probably been told as much as was revealed to Russia.
What Engel is saying is that Russia didn't learn anything more than they already knew. Trump didn't say the intel came from Israel. It was the NYTimes that reported that, presumably because it's really not a big deal. Everyone is acting like Russia had no idea that Israel has a spy agency, and Israel itself said it hasn't decreased their trust in Trump at all.
Or maybe, it just means that Flynn's a high-ranking national security appointee, and like many people at his level, he meets with people from other important countries, including Russia.
So why did Trump ask him to resign and why did Flynn hide/lie about his talks with this one particular Russian? Seems like Trump agrees that Flynn's connection with Russia was NOT just a normal part of his duties nor was appropriate, otherwise Flynn would still have a job.
That makes sense, but because of their cryptic insinuations, Wikileaks own credibility has been weakened. The case for Seth Rich hasn't been strengthened.
Just because that other side over there deserves a sidewinder right up their exhaust, no need to jam the signal of the current missile homing in on its target here.
We have more missiles. Let each get their targets as unfettered as possible.
Pro-Dutch I would assume means a candidate who puts your country and culture first. That is what Trump does for America. Nationalist is just a term. Substitute patriotic if you like. No one is advocating for America to go conquer other countries.
The left here removed the American flag from their logo because it's offensive. They censor conservative viewpoints, control the media and academia, force social issues into law or use them to manipulate opinion, hire shills to manipulate social media, use the IRS to target conservative groups, prevent conservative speakers from speaking at colleges, call us racist, hateful, homophobic, misogynists, fascists, etc. all while trying to suppress free speech, inciting violence and promoting all forms of degeneracy in the name of diversity or inclusion.
If your media is telling you different, you can assume they're as dishonest as ours is.
988 comments
n/a SemiPureConduit 2017-05-17
Why can't the two con-exist?
n/a pby1000 2017-05-17
If the Russians really hacked the DNC servers, then the FBI would have been allowed to analyze the servers. They weren't. Does that not make you suspicious?
n/a SemiPureConduit 2017-05-17
Maybe the extent of the hacking weren't fully understood, I'm not completely informed on that part of the issue, though I find it pretty easy to believe a country like Russia would attempt to do such a thing. Certainly not as suspicious as the things going on right now.
n/a javi404 2017-05-17
If the FBI is willing to help investigate hacking on your behalf, why wouldn't you let them take a look at the server?
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
They did let the FBI look at the server. The FBI complained that they didn't have immediate access.
n/a javi404 2017-05-17
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/politics/fbi-russia-hacking-dnc-crowdstrike/
Even the corrupted left leaning CNN refutes your claim:
"The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed until well after the initial compromise had been mitigated," a senior law enforcement official told CNN. "This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information. These actions caused significant delays and inhibited the FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier."
By the time the FBI was able to get access, it was worthless.
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
Huh, and yet you yourself said they were able to get access with this sentence.
Weird how you say my claim is refuted and then go on to corroborate it.
n/a javi404 2017-05-17
it's like saying the fire department came to the fire two weeks after the house burned down.
FBI was denied access when it mattered.
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
That would definitely be a sound argument if we were blaming the fire department for the house burning down. Instead, we're talking about how suspicious the actions of the DNC are.
The fact that it took a while is in line with an organization that couldn't give up operations-critical hardware. The fact that they did give it willingly instead of requiring a subpoena or warrant is in line with the idea that they weren't hiding anything.
It's defensible to call it suspicious, but you're not just calling it suspicious, you're spreading something that isn't true and then defending it even though you're aware that it's a lie.
n/a pby1000 2017-05-17
Perhaps, but I think the last thing the DNC wanted was the FBI snooping around on their computers.
Did you see this Obama speech:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPpt7-QOGKc
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
The FBI was allowed to analyze the servers.
n/a VicLinton 2017-05-17
Source?
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
CNN. And if you believe it, it's the same source people are using to claim that they didn't let the FBI examine the servers. They're just ignoring the parts of the interview that run counter to their narrative.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/politics/fbi-russia-hacking-dnc-crowdstrike/
n/a VicLinton 2017-05-17
I don't see confirmation here that they ever received direct access to the servers in that article. It could easily mean they were rebuffed until later being given 3rd party information and nothing more. In fact that's exactly how it reads to me, especially when you get to this part:
Either way you're stating something as fact that this article in no way confirms. Talk about feeding a narrative.
As an aside, I still see cause for major concern even if the FBI was simply delayed in being given access to the server, especially considering the fact that this article shows the DNC flat out lying about access being requested at all:
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
Maybe you're interpreting this to mean something it doesn't, but as written it means that at some point they were no longer rebuffed.
They did rely on crowdstrike for their assessment, and the critical piece of proof is actually in a phishing email rather than the servers themselves.
n/a VicLinton 2017-05-17
...at which point they were provided with the Crowdstrike findings, not the server. A different article lays it out more clearly:
Nowhere does it say that the FBI ever got access. You're choosing to interpret it that way but when you look at everything that interpretation doesn't make sense.
Also emails are kept on servers FYI so what you're saying regarding the proof being in an email and not on a server is completely nonsensical.
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
I'm aware that the bureau ultimately chose not to examine the servers.
Which makes sense, if the work had already been done and the critical evidence was elsewhere.
Also, emails are also stored on workstations FYI. I guess you might not know this if you've never worked in an office, but enterprise-class email is usually downloaded.
n/a VicLinton 2017-05-17
The emails in this case were kept on a server, so what you said is still completely nonsensical and now I feel like I'm conversing with a troll. Peace.
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
Sure, you could criticize the dnc as suspicious, but saying the FBI didn't have access isn't true, and is otherwise misleading.
They had access to the server, the critical evidence was a URL shortening account
Oh, are we playing disinfo tactics now? Argument ad hominem? No specific criticism, just "holy shit your post history" Who's the troll here.
n/a VicLinton 2017-05-17
When you start getting completely nonsensical by referencing workstations and pretending you weren't under the impression that the FBI had eventually looked at the servers I think it makes sense to take a look at what you've said in the past to see if it's equally as nonsensical, topic derailing, deflective etc. Nonetheless commenting on post history doesn't fit any definition of trolling, so that's nonsensical point #... what for you now? I'm starting to lose count so like I said, PEACE.
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
Maybe the reason my comment history is lucid is because I make lucid points, and you're getting confused because you don't understand the sequence of event's and how it relates to the media narrative describing it.
n/a VicLinton 2017-05-17
They were nave given access period. Watch and inform yourself because you're the one spreading false info right now.
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
Comey was contradicting an earlier report from the DNC that said they didn't even ask.
When all the info is consolidated, the narrative that emerges is that the FBI did ask, the DNC asked them to do it later because they were busy, and the FBI gave up and just subcontracted to the people the DNC hired.
n/a VicLinton 2017-05-17
Nope, Comey says they were literally never given access. Did you even watch the video? Those are the exact words used.
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
Alright, I concede the point.
n/a VicLinton 2017-05-17
Not without a warrant they couldn't have. That's how the law works. Thanks for admitting you we're misinformed though. Seriously. Not enough people are open to changing their tune in the face of proof.
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
The DNC claimed the FBI never asked. I have worked in similar circumstances and found the FBI to do things like ask a low-level worker and then never follow up.
n/a VicLinton 2017-05-17
If it was in the middle then Comey lied under oath because the question could not have been clearer.
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
You say "clear", I say that you could interpret "never" "granted" and "access" to mean many different things. Do they have "server access" if they're looking through emails, since those are stored on the server?
Does "access" mean the physical machines? Does "granted" mandate accessing the servers, or would the opportunity to access the servers count?
n/a VicLinton 2017-05-17
I've considered everything you've said and I think you're firmly in stretch territory at his point. Your entire argument relies on semantics.
n/a bannanaflame 2017-05-17
What did Russia do if not hack the DNC?
And it has to be more than you would expect from a world power by default. Can't pretend everyone doesn't do some meddling in everyone else's elections.
n/a dwizzle36 2017-05-17
Not hack the DNC. No one is pretending but the Dems
n/a War-Hammered 2017-05-17
or you know, 17 intel agencies and other international allies who also confirmed russian meddling.
Really makes you wonder which narrative is fake...
n/a tonikoche 2017-05-17
The same intel agencies that said Iraq had WMDs...
n/a thegoodmourning 2017-05-17
James Clapper testified under oath to congress the other day and said the "17 intelligence agencies" story was bullshit. It only came out of Hillary Clinton's mouth and if you trust Hillary Clinton then I've got a Washington Post story to sell you.
n/a pijinglish 2017-05-17
Here's Clapper's testimony verbatim: "The two dozen or so analysts for this task were hand-picked, seasoned experts from each of the contributing agencies. They were given complete, unfettered mutual access to all sensitive raw intelligence data, and importantly, complete independence to reach their findings. They found that the Russian government pursued a multifaceted influence campaign in the run-up to the election, including aggressive use of cyber capabilities.
The Russians used cyber operations against both political parties, including hacking into servers used by the Democratic National Committee and releasing stolen data to WikiLeaks and other media outlets. Russia also collected on certain Republican Party- affiliated targets, but did not release any Republican-related data. The Intelligence Community Assessment concluded first that President Putin directed and influenced campaign to erode the faith and confidence of the American people in our presidential election process. Second, that he did so to demean Secretary Clinton, and third, that he sought to advantage Mr. Trump. These conclusions were reached based on the richness of the information gathered and analyzed and were thoroughly vetted and then approved by the directors of the three agencies and me.
These Russian activities and the result and (ph) assessment were briefed first to President Obama on the 5th of January, then to President-elect Trump at Trump Tower on the 6th and to the Congress via a series of five briefings from the 6th through the 13th of January. The classified version was profusely annotated, with footnotes drawn from thousands of pages of supporting material."
n/a skyboy90 2017-05-17
Hack the Podesta emails.
n/a wanking_furiously 2017-05-17
Spread propaganda through fake grassroots groups and news sites, and seed rumors on forums.
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
So the exact same thing the rest of the world does? Including our own media and government. Why is it now that propaganda from other countries is such a big deal? I am all for spreading the truth, but if we want positive change in this regard, it's our own house we will have to clean first.
n/a wanking_furiously 2017-05-17
Where this would be a bigger issue that usual is if people in Trump's camp were complicit in it.
n/a Rgh927 2017-05-17
Watch the new narrative of Seth was working for Russia start to come out.... that's a fix for it....
n/a MollyNostrils23 2017-05-17
His stars and stripes suit must be red with a hammer and sickle on the inside right?
n/a pijinglish 2017-05-17
You're at least the third or fourth pro-Trump commenter I've seen say something like "Just you wait for the libtards to start saying Seth Rich was working for the Russians!" But you're the only ones saying it.
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
This is from the Washington Post article today about Seth Rich:
I've never heard anyone suggest that Rich was killed by the Russians because he was about to expose them. In fact, it makes no sense because he was killed a week before the leak was even made public. Now WaPo is pushing that angle, which is suspicious.
n/a wwwes32 2017-05-17
It makes total sense ESPECIALLY if it was before they were public. It actually adds credibility to the theory.
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
It's not a theory. It's a distraction put in the WaPo article. I've never heard anyone suggest Rich was trying to expose Russia, and it makes no sense. If he was, how would Russia know about it but no one in the DNC or US government would? Rich somehow found out that Russia hacked into the DNC but he didn't alert anyone to that info, yet Russia figured out he knew this? And if he had evidence Russia was the hacker, where is that evidence? The FBI has his computer. It makes no sense.
n/a wwwes32 2017-05-17
I've said it
n/a Highaf_-_- 2017-05-17
Nah, atm they are doing the "omg stop politicizing a death" dance
n/a slippery_stare 2017-05-17
Because they are two completely opposing narratives.
n/a Cenethle 2017-05-17
The fact that this isn't higher is testament to the polarization of this sub and our political discourse into factions and their dependence on exclusive narratives
n/a soonerchad 2017-05-17
Bingo
n/a Putin_loves_cats 2017-05-17
Bango...
n/a ElGeneral1230 2017-05-17
Bongo
n/a dwizzle36 2017-05-17
Bong
n/a ShillsHveFeelingsToo 2017-05-17
Dabs?
n/a Devi1s_Adv0cate 2017-05-17
Bunco
n/a hect6r 2017-05-17
BONK
n/a SafetyDaily101 2017-05-17
de-bunco'd
n/a ShillsHveFeelingsToo 2017-05-17
Get Schwifty! Yeaaa!
n/a WooTs_67 2017-05-17
Bish
n/a DuctTapeWizard 2017-05-17
I don't want to leave the Congo.
n/a totally_not_a_pirate 2017-05-17
♫No no no no no no♫
n/a metro_field 2017-05-17
obongo obongo born in the congo https://i.redd.it/hk9gf8ayenoy.jpg
n/a Homegrone18 2017-05-17
Im so happy in the jungle!
n/a Homegrone18 2017-05-17
Oh nana nonononoooooo
n/a CharlieBigfoot 2017-05-17
Bish Bash Bosh
n/a S5S5S55S 2017-05-17
It's Roberto Luongo!
n/a cholera_or_gonorrhea 2017-05-17
What annoys me is how easily this conspiracy can be proved either way. Get the damn computer and see if emails between Rich and Wikileaks exist. Let the Clinton crew choose their patsy so the entire DNC establishment doesn't fall (though it bloody well should) and at least let 1 head roll for this if true.
And if it's not, let the DNC up its stupid Russian narrative and play up the absurdity that they were even insinuated in an assassination of one of their own operatives.
n/a ShitOfPeace 2017-05-17
I don't agree with this part. If it's as bad as some people think they should not be anywhere other than a federal prison for life.
n/a powerful_trump 2017-05-17
The Clintons will be sealed into a beautiful home with a bunch of land, with security so no one comes in or out. Im sure they will still have servants and horses. Bill will ride. Bill loves his horses and he loves his circles. Day in day out Bill races around the track.
n/a buttbutt_fartfart 2017-05-17
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/dnc-staffer-s-murder-draws-fresh-conspiracy-theories-n760186
n/a formeranimeavatar 2017-05-17
The claim isn't that the FBI had physical access to the computer. It's that they were able to produce a confidential report on its contents.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
Source for the claim of a confidential fbi report?
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
What about Mike Flynn? Jeff Sessions recusal? Carter Pages FISA warrant?
n/a pijinglish 2017-05-17
And now this little add-on, too: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-tweets-idUSKCN18C19Y
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
Gee I wonder if all these baseless Seth Rich posts are anything to do with that?
The brigade is strong, let the light disinfect them.
n/a Burkey 2017-05-17
Yeah by 3 month old accounts whose mission is to defend the Dem establishment...hmm who could I be talking about?
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
Look at the front page of this sub, it's a distraction from Trump. I comment here sporadically but this bullshit has inspired me to post a lot to counteract the shit flood.
n/a Burkey 2017-05-17
It's /r/conspiracy do you expect it to be the same as /r/politics or the 10 new Anti-Trump subs created weekly that somehow get 15k subscribers the day of creation and get posts on the Front Page?
As a Progressive, I hate Trump as much as anyone but you have to be blind not to notice the inorganic vote botting being used on these subs. It happens on T_D too, but they have 16k people online at all times and their posts still barely break 50% upvoted.
All of the Trump and Anti-Trump related subs exist as a means to push propaganda anyways, that's why I filter them.
If only these useful idiots focused on issues instead of one person, maybe the United States wouldn't be in such a mess.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
T_D is stuck at 50% because the rest of reddit downvotes them on site.
I think some of those March on Trump etc subs are dodgy yeah I agree.
The Seth rich astro turfing is a joke though, clearly just a deflection attempt because trump is about to hang.
n/a Burkey 2017-05-17
Yeah, and so are the people nonstop accusing other redditors of beings Russian. Reddit is basically promoting astroturfing nowadays because it increases their ad revenue and site views.
It somewhat parallels to the Medias nonstop coverage of Trump for the past 2 years while ignoring, smearing or not even mentioning Bernie Sanders.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
Poor Bernie.
I agree with you but I don't accuse people of being Russian. I feel, legitimately, like there is something to this conspiracy. The ongoing congressional investigation, fbi investigation etc gives me hope.
n/a Burkey 2017-05-17
May very well be and it should be investigated by non-partisans.
I just find it disturbing that both major candidates had even closer ties to Saudi Arabia yet that isn't even being discussed. They donated 25 million to the Clinton Foundation and bought 40+ million in property from Trump.
That country is one of the most repressive in the world. They execute gay people and Women have almost no rights at all(Including DRIVING).
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
Yeah the Saudis are dirty as fuck but they're the power players in the middle east. Trump just signed off a $100 BILLION arms deal to them. He's giving a speech in Riyadh today I believe...
Anyway, I believe the ongoing investigations are bipartisan, some republicans are starting to talk about impeachment.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Says the sander4president shill.
n/a Burkey 2017-05-17
You don't see me here defending every action Bernie has taken and I definitely didn't follow him in his "support" of Hillary.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Fair enough. Thank you for the earnest reply. I guess we're all a bit on edge with all this astroturfing. It's hard to tell who's genuine anymore.
n/a Burkey 2017-05-17
All good and I completely understand the skepticism.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Thanks man. Be well.
n/a Theekelso 2017-05-17
How do you read "he's a good guy. I hope you can let this go" as interfering or influencing an investigation?
n/a pijinglish 2017-05-17
Because he's asking him to stop investigating.
n/a dopp3lganger 2017-05-17
Shhh, we don't talk about those here.
n/a kaminsky_ 2017-05-17
Look at this shit: https://www.reddit.com/r/TrumpInvestigation/wiki/doc
This shit is from nearly a month ago! And it has ~50 areas of interest. Only one of them is the DNC hacks.
Everyone here is so quick to jump to circlejerk.
n/a AutoModerator 2017-05-17
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Yeah well that reads like something drafted by a politically charged PR agency. Shariablue maybe. It certainly does read like your run of the mill Reddit post. Look, this shit is getting out of hand.
n/a kaminsky_ 2017-05-17
Are you unable to refute facts and jumping to ad hominem? Besides, it's just a compilation of facts. Who cares who did it?
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Truce. We can talk about this differently. I apologize for my tone. I guess I'm suspicious about what you are trying to accomplish here. You're anti-Trump, obviously. What good does it do to come in and be so disruptive in a thread like this? I've been banned from SRS, political humor, and politics for doing the opposite version. But you won't get that treatment here. And can you understand why I would be suspicious? I guess I'm on edge with all the astroturfing going on.
n/a kaminsky_ 2017-05-17
Fair to be on the edge about astroturfing, but you have to understand how Russia has been doing it for decades, literally.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinformation
It literally wasn't there in the dictionary till the 80s.
Then you have people like Clint Watts testifying that there have been active measures amplified by places like TD/4chan, etc. Remember the whole furore in 48 hrs over #MacronLeaks and how Macron honeypotted the whole operation. Do you remember how it was on conspiracy and TD?
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Why are you posting in T_D and EnoughTrumpSpam? With the corresponding voice for both?
n/a kaminsky_ 2017-05-17
Am I posting in TD?
n/a GloriousBratwursts 2017-05-17
Exactly. It blows my fucking mind that some people here don't even realize that.
n/a Reltius 2017-05-17
They realize it they're just paid not to care.
n/a ManboyFancy 2017-05-17
How does one get paid to care? I'd love to shitpost and get paid for it.
n/a javi404 2017-05-17
Apply for a job at ShareBlue
n/a ManboyFancy 2017-05-17
I was joking but, what is shareblue about? Never heard if it.
n/a ManboyFancy 2017-05-17
Downvote all you want. I'm legit seeing if anyone can give me an insight into this place that isn't one of the top links on google.
n/a thinks_he_has_gold 2017-05-17
You know comet ping ponger's ex boyfriend, David Brock? Well he ran Hillary Clintons online astroturfing super PAC Correct The Record. After the election, CTR became ShareBlue. It is a misinformation outlet designed to push narratives.
n/a Girl_Drama 2017-05-17
also it iss not a conspiracy, but something validated existing by whistleblowers, including one today on 4chins
n/a flyPeterfly 2017-05-17
I get you, but it is still absolutely a conspiracy. From the sidebar: Conspiracy - a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
The theory part of this CT is waning.
n/a javi404 2017-05-17
This guy's outfit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brock
Originally he ran Correct the Record:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correct_the_Record
Now it is Share Blue
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareblue
All these operations are known to hire shills to spread messages on facebook, reddit, 4chan, 8chan etc.
n/a slippery_stare 2017-05-17
So you would "love" to post from a script onto the internet and manipulate people into believing lies, for money.
You sound like a great person.
n/a ManboyFancy 2017-05-17
Not for a side job or a small amount of money but fuck yeah if I could quit my shit job. There's already lies everywhere. At least I could leave hints that it's bs. Everyone has a price. I've got a kid to take care of. For enough money I'd do it.
n/a slippery_stare 2017-05-17
Great world you are making for your kids.
n/a ManboyFancy 2017-05-17
Maybe when you have kids you'll see how I do. The world is so fucked. All I want is for my kid to be able to do well in it and not suffer.
n/a oneinfinitecreator 2017-05-17
I understand the need for money, but you can give your kid a lot by being a good person and investing into them with things other than money. It's not about giving them shit or sending them places. All of my buddies who came from wealth didn't respect it because it came at the expense of relationships with their parents. They got 'everything they wanted' except the most important thing.
Teaching your kids to acknowledge and accept the fucked up world for what it is is infinitely more valuable than selling your soul for a salary. Teach your children principles to live by, not double standards for which to sell out by.
What our kids want is our attention. As a father, teach them to succeed. Don't rely on their school or the extracurriculars you can or can't afford. Life is the same for most of us. Teach them how to do life, and they'll take it from there. You are the best thing they will ever have if you just live up to your role. All the best to you and your family :)
n/a ManboyFancy 2017-05-17
I'm not truly planning on quitting my job and trying to make money by being a bad person. I like what you said though and am trying to teach my son to be a good person over everything else and be able to see bs as it is. I hope I'm doing a good enough job. Good luck with your children sir! Sounds youre raising some good people. The struggle is real.
n/a oneinfinitecreator 2017-05-17
I didn't think you actually were either, but I felt like saying it anyhow. Kudos and i'm sure you're doing fine. The fact that you want the best for your son says a lot on its own :) Have a good one
n/a professorbooty25 2017-05-17
Literally Hitler.
n/a ManboyFancy 2017-05-17
Thankyou
n/a Girl_Drama 2017-05-17
this is how many americans feel and probably more people across the world. this is why ShareBlue even exists.
n/a JimmyHavok 2017-05-17
Admit it, you got paid to post that.
n/a ManboyFancy 2017-05-17
If I could get paid while being albe to spend time with my son I'd do it. The rest of the world is fucked my guy. I just want to help my son. I love him with all I have and i despise the world I brought him into. The real key is forming a solid bind with friends and family. Don't say fuck the rest of the world but making it your main concern will only serve to invest you into one side or another's bs. Help where you can and care for you're own. L
n/a Afrobean 2017-05-17
The downsides of capitalism in action right here. All it takes is a handful of assholes to ruin it for everyone.
n/a ManboyFancy 2017-05-17
I didn't care about money when I only had to take care of myself. Also I'm most efficiently a hand full of assholes.
n/a thesadpumpkin 2017-05-17
This ^
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Holy shit didn't realize 80% of the country are paid shills
n/a frevaljee 2017-05-17
How many tin foil hats are you wearing right now?
n/a Telenerd 2017-05-17
I have been saying it since day 1.
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
It's because most of us aren't dipshits
n/a kaminsky_ 2017-05-17
How do you resort to the Flynn meeting Kisliyak and subsequent resignation? And the charge that Sally Yates saw something dangerous in his behavior itself, not just hiding the meeting? What about the grand jury subpoena on Flynn? And the Senate subpoena on Carter Page? Why would they all be putting in so much effort into something that had nothing to do with hacking, but a lot to do with the Trump-Russia connection? You realize there's more smoke than just the DNC hack right?
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
You won't get an answer on that buddy.
n/a kaminsky_ 2017-05-17
Doesn't hurt to ask. I mean look at this shit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TrumpInvestigation/wiki/doc
This shit is from nearly a month ago! And it has ~50 areas of interest. Only one of them is the DNC hacks.
n/a AutoModerator 2017-05-17
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
n/a JimmyHavok 2017-05-17
Quit bringing up real conspiracies. Boring!
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Boy you're all over this thread, aren't you? Isn't it about time to post under one of your alts? Don't forget to change the tone.
n/a kaminsky_ 2017-05-17
Reported for rule 10.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Funny, because I reported you for all the bullying you're doing in this thread.
n/a kaminsky_ 2017-05-17
Really? I'm bullying?
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-05-17
Removed. Rule 2.
n/a kaminsky_ 2017-05-17
Noted.
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-05-17
Removed. Rule 10.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
I apologize. I've re-read through the rules and I'll be smarter about my conduct.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
What about Mike Flynn? Jeff Sessions recusal? Carter Pages FISA warrant?
n/a S5S5S55S 2017-05-17
It was completely obvious the first day it started. When Hillary was expected to win they were all preaching how the election could never be hacked.
n/a TheMagicMarkerMan 2017-05-17
I realize that op's title starts with "if". Well, "if" I win the lottery, I could become a millionaire. Doesn't mean I should start spending the money or expect everyone to call me daddy warbucks, just means, there's a chance. That's all people need to understand. Baseless theories without hard evidence are basically guesses, and no one should feel dumb for not buying into someone else's guess.
n/a War-Hammered 2017-05-17
I'm sure that's why.
The 17 intel agencies had it all wrong and the internet trolls with zero evidence got it right. Just like the boston bomber
n/a tonikoche 2017-05-17
The same intel agencies that said Iraq had WMDs
n/a HideYaKidsHideYoWife 2017-05-17
And if Seth Rich didn't leak the DNC emails, then that means there was a Russian hack. A Russian hack means this entire Seth Rich narrative is fake, and the Russian connection isnt. That is why you guys and the Trump administration are so desperate.
n/a gnovos 2017-05-17
Bingo
n/a bigjimmyjam 2017-05-17
Bango
n/a siccoblue 2017-05-17
Bongo
n/a fuckin_white_people 2017-05-17
Django
n/a elgrundle 2017-05-17
I'm so happy in the jungle
n/a RyanMMac 2017-05-17
I don't wanna leave the Congo
n/a chaseketchum 2017-05-17
A no no no no
n/a Jonnycd4 2017-05-17
I refuse to gooo
n/a DThierryD 2017-05-17
Bish
n/a mitremario 2017-05-17
Bash
n/a SSB4Ike 2017-05-17
bosh
n/a peeonyou 2017-05-17
You sure about that?
n/a gjo345uigh3i4u5gh35i 2017-05-17
It's really not that complicated. If the conspiracy is true, the DNC emails are from Rich. But the Podesta emails are probably not (a normal staffer wouldn't have access to those). For those, there's a phishing email from a domain registered by a Russian citizen, and a reply from a staffer saying "This is a legitimate email".
Now, whether a simple phishing scam is really a hack, and why a presidential campaign advisor is that naive about security, is an entirely different matter.
n/a ShitOfPeace 2017-05-17
Not necessarily.
n/a CrustyGrundle 2017-05-17
Yea but if Russia wasn't Wikileaks source, then is it really that big a deal if Russia tried to or did hack the DNC servers? Who cares, I guarantee that we try to do the same thing.
n/a dirkalict 2017-05-17
I think whatever your politics if a foreign government is trying to interfere in our democratic process it should be troubling. I'm aware that the US has fucked up numerous countries with our meddling in the last 60+ years but I don't want others doing it to us. That's why Dick Cheney calls it an act of war if it happened. Let's find out the truth. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/28/cheney-calls-russian-election-meddling-act-war/
n/a TheMysteriousFizzyJ 2017-05-17
Yeah, fuck the BBC!
...right?
n/a fuckin_white_people 2017-05-17
I don't think you understand the meaning of "influence" in this context.
n/a CrustyGrundle 2017-05-17
Yea, its super vague. Maybe I interfered with the Democratic process when I convinced my Bernie-supporting friend to vote Trump rather than not vote at all.
n/a dirkalict 2017-05-17
You're not a foreign government- you're just being an American so you're not interfering. It's not vague- if a foreign government is trying to influence our elections to get the results they want - for whatever reason- that should bother Americans. This sub can be fun to try and sort fact from fiction and I'm pretty certain they were up to some hijinks but just how much effect they had who knows. Hillary and the DNC fucked up so much themselves Trump might not have needed too much help. But here's a few things that interest me. I don't like the thought of Russia trying to influence America's sheep.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/russian-trolls-hilary-clinton-fake-news-election-democrat-mark-warner-intelligence-committee-a7657641.html http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446339/donald-trump-russia-2016-election-controversy-explained
n/a CrustyGrundle 2017-05-17
Did it bother you when Obama endorsed Macron? Personally, I haven't heard of any credible ways in which Russia might have influenced our election. Just vague accusations, including in the sources you linked. Nothing credible, just vague accusations and hand-wringing.
n/a PrivilegeCheckmate 2017-05-17
Least. Reliable. Person. Ever.
n/a CrustyGrundle 2017-05-17
If they weren't Wikileaks' source, then they weren't "interfering with our democratic process." Hence why many people don't care.
n/a dehehn 2017-05-17
The big deal is that a country who doesn't have our best interests in mind is potentially influencing our president. When we do it it's not good for the other countries and when they do it it's not good for us.
n/a CrustyGrundle 2017-05-17
What makes you think Putin is potentially influencing Trump?
n/a thedeadlyrhythm 2017-05-17
woosh
n/a apunasatapatapuIobin 2017-05-17
Just fucking lol. This sub is seriously lacking members of the critical thinking department.
n/a fuckin_white_people 2017-05-17
but mah narrative
n/a modestokun 2017-05-17
Notice how when presented with a real life conspiracy with mountains of evidence, all the tin foil hatters in this sub can do is deny deny deny
n/a slippery_stare 2017-05-17
"Mountains of evidence"
I have followed every article since the "Trump-Russia" storiea started.
Not a single shred of evidence. Nothing. Zilch. Nada. Zero.
n/a Miss_spelled_meme 2017-05-17
Have you ever tried interpreting the world around you correctly?
n/a CountFarussi 2017-05-17
Have you ever tried bringing evidence to the discussion rather than dumb insults ?
n/a TheNimbleBanana 2017-05-17
kind of ironic considering the sub you're in
n/a CountFarussi 2017-05-17
Is there some crazy theories on here ? Of course, are there some things that make you think and are presented well with evidence supporting their claims ? You bet.
n/a TheNimbleBanana 2017-05-17
Yeah sadly it's been more of a no evidence circle jerk since last summer though.
n/a Guilf 2017-05-17
At least one law enforcement agency disagrees with you.
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
And on the other hand...Seth Rich... https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6bmifb/who_is_seth_rich_megapostthread/
n/a popups4life 2017-05-17
The Flynn story is accurate, the guy left out details about his dealings with Russia when asked about them during his confirmation hearing and is no longer national security director because of that. The rest I'm still waiting on solid evidence for.
n/a OmeronX 2017-05-17
Mountains of gas lighted evidence.
n/a youtoobinallday 2017-05-17
Why would you use a derisive term blatantly like this? Aren't you "one of us"? If not, why are you here?
Furthermore why are you upvoted to 20+ by basically whitewashing every person who believes in conspiracies as "a tinfoil hatter? Anybody who honestly wants to discuss conspiracies would never use that term seriously. You couldn't just said "all these people do is deny". Why would you go derisive, especially if you're honestly here to discuss conspiracies?
Yep this comment is totally not engineered or gamed up to shit totally nothing suspicious about this person shitting on this entire community, then being upvoted like crazy.
n/a modern_love_machine 2017-05-17
Yeah seriously, not to mention the entire comment chain including whoosh guy.
And in tinfoil boy eventually gets brought down for his arrogant comment here's proof that yes, it indeed was sitting at 20+ when I first woke up at 5AM CST. The post is only 8hrs old so I'd say it was gamed overnight fresh & ready for a nice Wednesday morning of soft propaganda
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6bmifb/who_is_seth_rich_megapostthread/
n/a umbrajoke 2017-05-17
Why does your account go from replying to multiple subs over a year ago to replying only to conspiracy without months of commenting?
n/a youtoobinallday 2017-05-17
Because I now only use this as a conspiracy alt acct because I do not want karma on my "real" account. So I now specifically use this account to post comments in this sub, and only sporadically. Hence why I go months without commenting. Anything else you'd like to insinuate from my account history? Or would you like to actually discuss the content of my comment?
n/a umbrajoke 2017-05-17
Not really I was curious because I have been seeing it a lot lately and it's suspicious. I asked and you answered thank you.
n/a ShieldedGred 2017-05-17
Aren't you kinda white washing him for assuming he comes here to be a tin foil hatter?
Also
Have you been on the internet lately? Yeah this sub is peaches and rainbows, everything is nuanced and has supporting evidence backing it up, if they aren't speaking neutrally they are against us!
n/a youtoobinallday 2017-05-17
Nobody comes here to be a tinfoil anything. People come here to discuss, research, and share ideas about conspiracies. If you come here to use the term "tinfoil" unironically then you're not here to improve the quality of this sub.
I described him as someone using a term that no conspiracy user would say. I didn't describe anything about his character or his life, just that his comment is absurdly suspicious. He whitewashed himself by posting "hurr durr tinfoil retards believe this shit" then getting upvoted like crazy in a sub where, yeah, a lot of "tinfoilers" actually do believe the content posted here.
I have been on the Internet and I have seen plenty of hateful comments. This one is being upvoted liek crazy, and more specifically upvoted by a community that knows tinfoil is a CIA term just like "conspiracy theory" was invented after the JFK assassination. Nobody here should respect someone using the term tinfoil to describe serious felony-level conspiracies. Yet there it sits, +25 points and counting.
n/a frayshur 2017-05-17
Someone who is seriously interested in conspiracies knows how much stigma comes with even maybe being curious to research. Nevermind seriously putting in years of research to learn about this stuff. The level that "conspiracy theorists" get made fun of, mocked, and basically called crazy/nutcase/whackadoo/fringe/tinfoil etc is extreme.
I don't think it's "elitist" to think that someone mocking all conspiracy believers probably has malevolent intentions. To use your terminology, a "real" conspiracy user would not say "all these tinfoil hatters" seriously. Maybe tongue in cheek, but that is clearly not the case with the above comment.
And BTW on this point:
Sure doesn't seem it. He's not denying anything, he's saying tinfoil hatters deny deny deny. He's agreeing with everything, meaning he's NOT one of the deniers. He's not one of the tinfoil hatters. He's a totally sane member of society and anyone who denies this theory is a tinfoil nutjob who belongs in the nuthouse restrained away from society to keep everyone safe from those dangerous conspiracy theorists.
He did not insult himself, and he is not including himself in that comment. No idea why anyone would use collegiate-level mental gymnastics to try defending someone mocking a huge group of people on this sub but whatever dude
n/a memnactor 2017-05-17
Yer, we have a huge influx of non-thinking fuckers every time we hit r/all.
n/a interesting_if_tru 2017-05-17
Did this hit /r/all? Not sure that's the reason there are so many random bullshit comments in here
n/a memnactor 2017-05-17
I think you're correct. I don't know whether you got the chance to see the comment I responded to, but it was basically some one calling uers of this sub idiots.
That was what I reacted to.
n/a SUPEROUMAN 2017-05-17
You should read the name of this subreddit again i think.
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-05-17
Removed. Rule 10.
n/a G_Petronius 2017-05-17
How is that a woosh?
"If Seth Rich leaked the DNC emails, then that means there was no Russian hack" is an actual legitimate implication. If Seth Rich was the source, it logically couldn't have been a Russian hack. There aren't any more possibilities than "it was not a Russian hack".
"And if Seth Rich didn't leak the DNC emails, then that means there was a Russian hack" is not a legitimate implication, because unlike the above hypothetical there are more possibilities here than "it was a Russian hack".
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
Well stated.
n/a NoNotoriety 2017-05-17
Check all the top posts and replies. All of them r/politics users jerking themselves off in this sub. Disgusting.
n/a threesixzero 2017-05-17
Yeah i dont see the whoosh either. Comment thread OP stated a false dichotomy.
n/a EvaCarlisle 2017-05-17
Why could both not have happened?
n/a memnactor 2017-05-17
They could, but I agree with u/G_petronius that a baseline of logical thoughts are the most important part right now, because the stuff he responded to is borderline retarded.
n/a slippery_stare 2017-05-17
Because they are two completely opposed narratives.
n/a lickedTators 2017-05-17
What if Seth Rich was working for Russia?
n/a foilmethod 2017-05-17
What if he was working for the Martians?
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
The entire claim about the Russians is that they hacked the DNC, not that they had an inside man leak the info. If Seth Rich was the leaker, it contradicts all of the supposed intelligence community accusations of Russian hacks, because a leak is not a hack. It's not possible for both to be true, unless they both happened completely independently of each other for no reason at all.
n/a lickedTators 2017-05-17
What if Seth Rich didn't have access to everything and he hacked from the inside?
n/a SquishyDelishy 2017-05-17
These are the two narratives.
Even though all evidence points to Hillary having a great working relationship with Putin.
That's why there's so much confirmation bias in this country at the moment. Everyone wants to confirm the narrative they've already bought into!
n/a G_Petronius 2017-05-17
Because the Russian hack narrative is that the DNC leaks are from Russia and no one but Russia. If they are from Seth Rich, the Russian hack narrative falls to pieces.
n/a EvaCarlisle 2017-05-17
Who does this narrative belong to? The Clintons? The MSM? The Democratic party? I still don't understand how the Russians and Seth Rich couldn't have acted independent of each other.
n/a tuffstough 2017-05-17
Why couldn't it be someone other than Seth rich?
n/a G_Petronius 2017-05-17
It could have been, but that would still imply that it wasn't a Russian hack.
n/a tuffstough 2017-05-17
sure, but it does not mean there was not a russian hack.
n/a farstriderr 2017-05-17
These people don't have a clue how logic works. Not worth the time tbh.
n/a Tsugua354 2017-05-17
Not necessarily.
n/a devils_advocaat 2017-05-17
Go on...
n/a Tsugua354 2017-05-17
My problem is actually more with OP's original post, that this would shatter "the entire russian narrative." It wouldn't. The DNC emails are not the only issue, and really not even an issue at this point. The topic is just a distraction from the Trump administration
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
What did Russia do then? Not donate enough to the Clinton Foundation?
n/a borkthegee 2017-05-17
Russia did several things
One of the biggest was hacking over 20 State voter rolls. Campaigns try to build voter rolls by getting email lists and it's considered one of the most valuable forms of campaign information possible
Russia directly hack the government butter rolls and got the real information on who votes where it's fantastically valuable information
The hacked voter rolls for fed to the Trump campaign through the secret Alfa computer after being scrub through a DeVos connected data laundering server
These hacked voter rolls were used by Cambridge analytica the Trump campaign and other GOP organizations
All the bases before we begin to discuss the amount of money that Russia laundered into the GOP, something which many of our allies and our own government claims to have several intelligence intercepts of Republicans admitting to the scheme
The DNC hack is so 2016
Anyone talking about DNC hack demonstrate to complete and lack of knowledge on this subject we have been passed that since before the election
Right now the major focus is the hack of voter rolls and the money laundering
n/a devils_advocaat 2017-05-17
In that case you quoted the wrong part of OPs statement. Russian hack narrative would be false.
Russian control of whitehouse is not disproved by seth rich involvement with wikileaks. But it discredits any source of news that said that russians hacked the DNC.
Russians may have influence over the president, but most media stating this as fact have now been discredited. I.e. the Russian naritive is dead.
n/a borkthegee 2017-05-17
Or as has been reported by the private investigator himself that there is no evidence whatsoever and that Fox News falsified the entire claim
The private investigator literally claims that the Fox News investigation falsified all of these claims by using fake circular sourcing to trick him into admitting something that isn't true
Why would you trust circular sourcing?
n/a devils_advocaat 2017-05-17
Hence the use of the conditional article in OPs title.
The logic used is sound. Whether seth is the source of the dnc leaks remains to be proven (although wikileaks have dropped strong hints almost confirming their source to be seth).
n/a borkthegee 2017-05-17
No the logical is hilariously broken, and relies on the amazingly ignorant claim "The only Russian hack relevant to the 2016 election was the DNC"
That's wholly false. We know the Russians hacked the DNC, DCCC, State Department, several other departments, several national democratic officials and organizaitons, several state level democratic officials and organizations, and hacked the voter rolls of over twenty states.
So, the logic "If Seth leaked DNC, then Russia did nothing" is demonstrably illogical, because evidence demonstrates that Russia hacked over 50 different targets in the lead up to the 2016 election./
http://abcnews.go.com/US/russian-hackers-targeted-half-states-voter-registration-systems/story?id=42435822
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/more-state-election-databases-hacked-than-previously-thought/
Those articles were from Summer too, not even fall, and only for the state voter rolls hacks. So much evidence out there!
Sad that this "logic" works on folks here!
n/a devils_advocaat 2017-05-17
Those articles are obviously based on bullshit. Simply, how can you tell who a hacker is working for?
BTW. I'm quite sure the Russians and multiple other countries attempt and succeed in hack everything.
n/a borkthegee 2017-05-17
You can lead a horse to water <3
When you're ready to deprogram, we're here for you.
n/a devils_advocaat 2017-05-17
Obviously you are unfamiliar with the CIA's UMBRAGE group that collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques 'stolen' from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation.. This should convince you that hacking cannot be attributed to any particular state. Hence the articles you linked to are "fake news" (although the reporters may not have known that at the time of reporting).
The second half of your comment must be in response to a different post as it makes no sense here.
n/a borkthegee 2017-05-17
Bless your heart.
Do you really, really think that source code analysis is the single and only tool used to demonstrate culpability?
Look at this broken logic, and you use it to then say "hence it's fake news".
Look how quickly you utterly failed to use basic reasoning to create an hilariously ignorant point ("The only way to attribute a hack is through source code/binary analysis, but since source/binary is weaponized and disseminated, it's misleading, and thus apparently useless") and use it to confirm a preconceived bias ("Fake news")
You poor thing.
It's an examination of YOU, just like this post, and how your incredible ignorant irrationalism is fueling a system of "faux-logic" which is nothing more than a cognitive dissonance resolution tactic.
n/a devils_advocaat 2017-05-17
Ok, this could be possible, although I doubt they would risk exposing their asset in such a fashion.
For a normal person, yes. But this approach doesn't work for hackers.
Nah. IP tracing doesn't mean shit.
A la guccifer? This is possible.
Oooh. Let's discuss these! Have you got any links you can share?
n/a borkthegee 2017-05-17
Why move on?
Your irrationalism serving cognitive dissonance forced you to ignorantly reject every point I made.
You sweet naive child. I wonder what War Games vision of l33t hax0rs you're imagining.
You do understand that government intelligence agencies are the main source of state sponsored information warfare and can be physically and digitally surveilled?
You sweet naive child. You realize that governments operate hacking operations out of physical locations, right?
And sure, IP tracking means shit to private citizens who don't monitor and analyze the raw flow of all internet data in utterly massive data centers.
n/a devils_advocaat 2017-05-17
The subject hasn't changed. We are taking about how to identify the source of a hacker. You said there are many and varied technical tools. Please educate me.
n/a borkthegee 2017-05-17
How can I educate you?
You literally just ignored an entire post.
You literally just deflected away from an entire posts worth of education.
DEMONSTRABLY you are uneducable.
Sad.
n/a devils_advocaat 2017-05-17
Hi there. You can educate me by sharing your technical knowledge. In particular the many and varied technical intelligence tools outside of simple code analysis available for understanding source. Thanks. :D
I read your post. I'm not sure what more you want from me. Did you ask a question that wasn't retorical? If so please repeat your question.
n/a borkthegee 2017-05-17
Lmao the American education system hard work here, -- WOW (p.s. "rHetorical")
Sure, I'll spoon feed you.
QUIZ
Q1: Does the American Intelligence community have the ability to discover the source of a cyber attack attempt without using technical analysis?
Q2: Does human intelligence have the ability to compromise humans performing cyberwarfare?
Q3: Can both clandestine and non-clandestine tactics be used to compromise humans engaged in state sponsored cyber attacks?
Maybe if you pass the quiz on HUMINT we can move onto SIGINT and or TECHINT
n/a devils_advocaat 2017-05-17
A1 any attack. No. A small proportion. maybe.
A2 surveillance of mutiple state sponsored actors. No. Some specific cases. Yes
A3 yes of course, providing you know who/where and when.
Did i pass?
By my answers you can see i belive it is very hard to identify the source of a specific hack using HUMINT, unless you are extremely lucky.
Note. I belive Russia and other countries hacked the dnc. I don't belive these hacks can be attributed to any state actor.
n/a WolfgangJones 2017-05-17
Exactly. As if DNC emails are the only problem with Russia & the Donald McRonald Posse. To that end, I've started a little collection of copypasta. Here have a taste:
Nevermind CambridgeAnalytica and AggregateIQ and their Russian connections to the deluge of fake news and alternative facts that swamped social media during the election. Nevermind no Trump financials forthcoming nor anything about his business history with the Russian mob in NY and Palm Beach. Nevermind that the Senate still wants to question Jared Kushner about his shady real estate financing business in 2016 with a Russian bank under U.S. sanctions. Nevermind that Trump's former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, also managed Putin's deposed strongman in Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, plus Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, who was denied a visa to the USA for ties to organized crime. Nevermind that a Trump server was directly connected to a server in the largest private commercial bank in Russia, Alfa Bank, founded and principally owned by Mikhail Fridman, a Russian Jewish oligarch with Israeli citizenship and close ties to both Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu. Nevermind that Trump's long-time legal team and tax counsel (since 2005), Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, recently won a "Russia Law Firm of the Year" award in 2016. Nevermind that a top Trump foreign policy advisor, Carter Page, founder and managing partner of Global Energy Capital, a New York investment fund and consulting firm specializing in the Russian and Central Asian oil and gas business, has long been suspected by American Iintelligence Community of being a Russian tool. Nevermind that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, as CEO of Exxon, was busy doing multi-billion dollar deals with the Russian firm Rosneft, allowing Exxon access to the Russian Arctic, Siberia, and Russia’s far east.. Nevermind what Michael Flynn knew and when Donald Trump also knew it. Nevermind that Comey violated the Hatch Act by announcing new evidence in the Clinton email scandal the week before the election, and then backtracking and admitting there was no new evidence just two days before the election. Nevermind that Jeff Sessions had to recuse himself from the Russian investigation but then turned around and recommended the President fire the top investigator. Nevermind that the new acting top investigator, Andrew McCabe, was also the lead FBI investigator in NY into Russian organized crime in 2003 (FBI archive), when one of Trump's closest Russian business associates (and Trump Tower neighbor), Felix Sater, was busted for financial fraud and then turned into an FBI stool pigeon.
Nevermind all of that. Get that spotlight back on Hillary's emails, now! /s
n/a PrivilegeCheckmate 2017-05-17
If the Russians aren't responsible for the leaks, then their interference in the election never happened, which is the basis for the whole narrative thingy. You still have Trump's financial ties to Russian business interests, and you still have his troubling ideological embrace of Putin,(and Erdrogan & Duterte), but that's it.
n/a borkthegee 2017-05-17
That's patently untrue
That there's significant evidence for the Russian hacking over 50 different organizations in 2012 over 20 of them being state governments to hack voter rolls
The DNC was like one of over fifty different hacks of over 30 different Democratic organizations including the DCCC, as well as dozens of state and federal level democratic officials and departments like the state department.
n/a Tsugua354 2017-05-17
Ya, that's no problem at all
n/a PrivilegeCheckmate 2017-05-17
That's sorta my point. There's plenty to indict this orange cocksucker - why push shit that's questionable?
n/a Tsugua354 2017-05-17
It's only being pushed by this sub and the_dumpster, no one else cares about it anymore
n/a favoritecattoy 2017-05-17
It's where it all started.
n/a favoritecattoy 2017-05-17
It's where it all started.
n/a uberduger 2017-05-17
I'm not him but it could have been another DNC insider. Why does it have to either be Rich or the Russians?
n/a ShitOfPeace 2017-05-17
Almost certainly though.
n/a tadm123 2017-05-17
This sub is not pro-Trumo its pro-Wikileaks. You guys are anti-Wilileaks, big difference.
n/a rokthemonkey 2017-05-17
This sub is obscenely pro-Trump. TF you mean lmao
n/a tadm123 2017-05-17
This subreddit and conspiracy forums in general on the internet are skeptical about the MSN narrative (and with good reason) and extremely pro-Wikileaks. Just because you perceive it that way because the large majority of people are not buying the Russian story and considers it a psy-op doesn't mean it's "pro-Trump". When Trump bombed Syria, for a month people were calling it a false flag and bashed Trump in the front page.
n/a biffsteken 2017-05-17
What are you even talking about, this sub has so many fucking copy-posters from the_d and other alt-right subs. They just come here with their bots and upvote their own conspiracies and downvote ones that don't fit with their narrative most likely.
n/a tadm123 2017-05-17
Proof?
n/a biffsteken 2017-05-17
Are you as fucking blind as I think you are? Just check the front Page of this sub and you can see all the pro-Trump narrative posts. So many distractions (Seth Rich murdered by DNC, Pizzagate, Hillarys emails) that Trump supporters upvote and try to spread around the internet.
They spread distractions when the republican party and Trump disintegrates the americans people with SHIT healthcare, maximum jail sentence for drugs (almost not even mentioned on this sub) and would war.
n/a tadm123 2017-05-17
1 pro-Trump 1 anti-Trump. Where's this massive pro-Trump brigading? Seth Rich threads are pro-Trump? Pizzagate? Lmao.
Sure, go post that on a politics sub.
n/a fuckin_white_people 2017-05-17
You admitted in the beginning "this sub isn't pro-Trump, it's pro-wikileaks.
Wikileaks, if not pro-Trump, is at least anti-DNC. Your biased, Wikileaks is biased, this while sub and others like are all biased.
n/a tadm123 2017-05-17
Yes, has been like that even before the elections. If you want Wikileaks to start posting Republican info go hack Trump's mails or his party, see how Republicans complain about Wikileaks then.
n/a fuckin_white_people 2017-05-17
So you're left with two options here.
1) Wikileaks hasn't received any leaks in regarding Trump's campaign or his presidency. Or,
2) Wikileaks had information on both sides, but chose to only release the pro-Trump/anti-DNC information.
Either way, to a critical thinker, Assange appears to be pushing his own agenda.
n/a foilmethod 2017-05-17
WikiLeaks is pro truth. Did you consider them anti-RNC during Manning's leaks? I mean, they didn't post equivalent leaks making the DNC look equally as bad at the time, which for some reason is a requirement now.
n/a open_ur_mind 2017-05-17
Truth is bias, why are you still arguing with that dude? That's literally his argument.
n/a Thorumar 2017-05-17
The DNC is biased. Missed one!
n/a biffsteken 2017-05-17
I can't be bothered with people like you.
Never leave your bubble.
n/a tadm123 2017-05-17
ah the moral superiority
n/a biffsteken 2017-05-17
Yeah, I see myself as a more intellectual and critically thinking human being than you.
So as I said, don't leave your bubble, it will be too much of a schock for you.
n/a tadm123 2017-05-17
I know how you see yourself.
n/a TILiamaTroll 2017-05-17
n/a Touchmethere9 2017-05-17
I don't think you even understand what morals mean.
n/a reini_urban 2017-05-17
Go away. Everybody is interested in this: pro-Trump, anti-Trump, pro-wikileaks, pro-Sanders, pro-Democracy. Only pro-Hillary call it distractions.
n/a PrivilegeCheckmate 2017-05-17
This is your bias, not ours. You dismiss anything you dislike or that damages your narrative as a distraction.Trump is a big asshole, but so far(well, at least until the Comey firing) nothing he's done has been secretive conspiracy level stuff, it's all 'Imma fuck over immigrants, Imma break the ACA, Imma ignore separation of powers, Imma tweet stuff undermining the office of POTUS,'(all of which we were expecting). Guess what? He's going to deregulate the financial sector and give rich people a tax break too. That isn't conspiratorial, it was his goddamn platform.
n/a whacko_jacko 2017-05-17
It seems that there are a lot more people like you that just come here to shit on this subreddit.
In my opinion, that's a lot worse than a little political bias getting in the way of an honest discussion sometimes.
n/a siccoblue 2017-05-17
Sigh...
For being in a conspiracy sub you really aren't very good at research are you
n/a thesaltiesthotdog 2017-05-17
Isnt it a leftist tactic to push the blame on others for what youre actually doing? Either way, source is froma heavily biased subreddit, nice try shareblue.
n/a EliteAsFuk 2017-05-17
n/a thesaltiesthotdog 2017-05-17
Not an arguement.
n/a biffsteken 2017-05-17
And yours is?
n/a S5S5S55S 2017-05-17
It's impossible to argue with these people. They think that if you post on the_donald you are literally a Hitler faccist that death.
n/a JimmyHavok 2017-05-17
Punch in the face won't kill you unless you're a girlieman like Nathan Damigo.
n/a MessisTaxAccountant 2017-05-17
There's as much proof of his claim as there is of Seth Rich being the leaker.
n/a madafaku 2017-05-17
That seems to be happening a lot around here.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
Many people ended up on t_D because it was the primary place where leaked emails were seriously investigated. If you have an interest in conspiracy it was the best place to view and conduct research for the window of time.
The quality of research during the leaks was actually pretty good, there was a concerted effort made which I haven't seen occur for the Russian allegations. I've tried digging a bit myself, but end up nowhere.
n/a thedeadlyrhythm 2017-05-17
you really believe what you're saying here? what a crock of shit.
n/a apunasatapatapuIobin 2017-05-17
lol dude you must be stupid if you cant see this sub is filled with donald loving sheep.
They just cant understand that Trump is not their friend. How? Idk. Its blatantly obvious but they still just refuse to accept reality.
n/a reltd 2017-05-17
Notice how everytime a huge event like this happens that question the MSM narrative, we get a huge influx of shills and comments that are normally extremely stupid and deplorable are now the most upvoted? It's a joke
n/a FalseFlagsAllAround 2017-05-17
I was just saying that to myself
"We need justice for Seth Rich " 5 upvotes
"But Russian hackers " 300 upvotes
LMFAO FOH
n/a Ickyfist 2017-05-17
There's literally not a single pro-trump post on the front page of r/conspiracy right now. Conversely there are 2 anti-trump posts.
Fuck off with that shit.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Hahaha dude have you even read these comments? There is no insightful discussion anymore. It's all just rrreeee Hillary rreeee DNC.
n/a TheMysteriousFizzyJ 2017-05-17
The same works in reverse.
"Russia! reeeeeee reeeeeee"
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Is that your excuse? So you admit having an agenda and pushing a narrative here?
n/a CrimsonStrike 2017-05-17
Except people are actually collecting and discussing actual evidence for that. https://www.reddit.com/r/TrumpInvestigation/wiki/doc
n/a AutoModerator 2017-05-17
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
n/a S5S5S55S 2017-05-17
Maybe we want some fucking justice and some goddamn arrests.
n/a dinodares99 2017-05-17
But nothing about the blatant lying and coverups, not to mention obstruction of justice going on in front of your eyes?
The whole Trump-Russia debacle is so much more solid
n/a S5S5S55S 2017-05-17
Right that's why the head intelligence agencies are saying they have 0 evidence. The dems are desperate to keep their asses out of jail.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
But only justice and arrest when it fits your political agenda right? You don't want actual justice for everyone right? Just for you and your direct peers?
You don't care about any ongoing injustices right because your side is in the White House?
You're a coward dude.
n/a S5S5S55S 2017-05-17
I'm not even American you stupid fuck.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Evidence or hearsay?
n/a Ickyfist 2017-05-17
Do you honestly expect me to take you seriously and be interested in talking to you after this comment?
Most people don't care about about the russian conspiracy because they don't believe it. The idea that the leaks have not been proven to have come from russia in the first place is one of the reasons why. Which is also why there is the focus on Seth Rich as the likely source of the leaks.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
No of course not. I have never taken you serious I'm just trying to show the hypocrisy and your agenda to other people that might read your comment. I don't care to go into a discussion with you dude, it's pointless. You're unreasonable.
I've worked in Kiev. I've seen first hand what these Russian disinfo campaigns do. It's not a joke. People need to take this shit seriously because Russia is winning (at least in America, in Europe we've started waking up luckily).
There is actual proof of Russian disinfo campaigns instead of this random circumstantial evidence surrounding the DNC.
Trump fired the FBI director for crying out loud! Is this not worrying to you? We are on a conspiracy sub ffs!
n/a Ickyfist 2017-05-17
What hypocrisy? What are you even talking about? I said there's not a single pro-trump post on the front page which was true. How could that even be hypocritical? You're just speaking nonsense and drawing out assumptions.
I'm sure there are. I'm not in support of russia. I just haven't seen anything to actually support the idea that they "hacked our election" and are colluding with trump to "subvert our democracy" (that doesn't even exist--the US is an oligarchy). If you disagree with that feel free to show me proof.
And as much as russian might try to spread disinformation I have seen first hand a much greater and more disturbing history of the same from the US government and media as a US citizen.
Worrying? No. Interesting? Yes.
What is there to be worried about? 2 months ago if you ask anyone if comey should be fired they would almost certainly say yes. We also don't know why he fired him and there are a vast number of potential reasons good or bad. I'm not going to jump to conclusions, especially not conclusions that trump's "opponents" want us to jump to.
There is a lot that could be going on here. It could be more theater because trump is just putting on a show to appear to be an outsider when he isn't. It could be trump just being a doofus being mad that elements within the government are still trying to villify every single thing he does and he feels Comey is either going along with that or not stopping it enough and made a feeble attempt to shut it down (whether or not the russian stuff is true). It could be any number of things comey did in the past to show he is not impartial and is incompetent. It could be that trump knew comey was involved in something behind the scenes that he didn't like. It could be a great number of things.
n/a JimmyHavok 2017-05-17
/r/conspiracy isn't generally interested in real conspiracies, they prefer things like "crisis actors."
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Wish there was a sub where we could have insightful discussions on conspiracies without all this politically motivated bullshit.
n/a _YouDontKnowMe_ 2017-05-17
/r/actualconspiracies
n/a PrivilegeCheckmate 2017-05-17
/br/conspiracy was never good.n/a JimmyHavok 2017-05-17
Eh, once Trump is in jail the alt-right will die down.
Unless he goes full beer hall on us.
n/a Tratix 2017-05-17
Have you read the top comment in this post?
Do you think something like that would make it in T_D?
n/a Tsugua354 2017-05-17
lmao the entire seth rich story is a classic t_d
talkingdistraction point, it's only purpose is to help the trump supporters' narrative. if you can't see the pro-trump intentions behind this you are living with closed eyesn/a Ickyfist 2017-05-17
Well I'm not pro trump whatsoever and I believe he was assassinated. So right off you are wrong. It's not about trump at all. You only make it about trump so you can try to dismiss it.
n/a uberduger 2017-05-17
Me too. Weather the downvotes. I fucking hate Trump but this thing that either you believe the Russians hacked the DNC and support Hillary or believe that Rich was murdered in a cover up and are an evil Donald supporter is just bullshit.
Hey fuckwads, can we please talk about the Seth Rich thing without assuming everyone on one side is either for or against Trump?
Can you imagine if the Watergate thing had happened and every discussion about the conspiracy had been silenced with "YOURE ONLY SAYING THAT BECAUSE YOURE A NIXON HEATER STFU"?
n/a calamariring 2017-05-17
exactly. This whole Seth rich issue needs to be investigated and brought to light. There's too many questions
n/a Sir_Edmund_Bumblebee 2017-05-17
23 of the top 50 posts in the sub right now are about Seth Rich. Regardless of what happened to him, do you really think that a full half of the subreddit is being filled up by organic discussion of him right now? Right when a bunch of negative news is coming out on Trump?
n/a maximumhamburger 2017-05-17
You must be using an extremely narrow definition of pro-Trump.
The whole front page is telling everyone that Trump didn't have any nefarious dealings with Russia and instead his political opponents had someone murdered.
n/a Ickyfist 2017-05-17
I'm using the actual definition of "pro" which means you are in favor of something.
Posting about Seth Rich being murdered by the DNC isn't IN FAVOR of trump. People who support trump no doubt are interested in pushing it because it shows the potential faults of his "enemies" but that doesn't make it PRO trump.
n/a TheMysteriousFizzyJ 2017-05-17
The whole reason anyone would make this distinction would be to divide us plebs. Virtue signaling, in reverse!
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
Then why the fuck every thread the most upvoted comments are BS comments like your own. Off topic and should be downvoted, yet your not. Where are all these raving Trump supporters? Shouldn;t they be downvoting the piss out of all of you since they're so rampant.
n/a aletoledo 2017-05-17
Your hate is blinding you. If anything, this is an anti-establishment subreddit and Trump (and you) is part of the establishment.
n/a terrorismofthemind 2017-05-17
Yeah well it's hard to be pro establishment if you have been following wikileaks the last ten years.
n/a chitiebang 2017-05-17
Op is a trump supporter and the Donald commentor and subscriber
n/a S5S5S55S 2017-05-17
People always say like it's Hitler. Ya some people support Trump fucking get over it.
n/a Highaf_-_- 2017-05-17
But but but muh russian haxorz
n/a chitiebang 2017-05-17
As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining....
n/a Chef_69 2017-05-17
Anyone who doesn't see through the charade of "trump is anti establishment!!1!!1!" is an idiot
n/a barc0debaby 2017-05-17
That is an unverified allegation sir.
n/a CptFizz 2017-05-17
Proof of Seth Rich leak: one dead body
Proof of Russian hack leak:
n/a MessisTaxAccountant 2017-05-17
Tens of dead bodies, all the top Intelligence Agencies agreeing it was them, not to mention other forensic evidence.
And him dying isn't proof of a leak. That doesn't make any sense.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
I've only heard of one, whats the evidence for tens? (Not trolling, genuinely interested here)
That's true.
It is a very suspicious death though.
n/a MessisTaxAccountant 2017-05-17
http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-follow-the-money-and-the-trail-of-dead-1490889366-htmlstory.html
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
Thank you for the link!
n/a aletoledo 2017-05-17
Since you seem to be quite involved in this, are you aware that Clinton herself suggested that a Russia hacking initiative should be pressed after she lost the election?
n/a MessisTaxAccountant 2017-05-17
The hacking came out during the campaign.
Are you aware that even Trump said it was probably the Russians?
n/a aletoledo 2017-05-17
Do you recognize that after she lost that she wanted to press the issue of hacking? I get that the idea was floated prior to her losing, but my question to you is whether you have seen the evidence that she is contributing to the russia hysteria.
Since I consider Trump and Clinton to be on the same team, this doesn't suprise me.
Are you aware that Bill Clinton personally asked Trump to run as a republican candidate? Or that Trump was a Democrat for a long time?
n/a MessisTaxAccountant 2017-05-17
So she wanted the thing that helped cause her loss to be investigated.
The experts have all agreed that the most likely culprit is Russia.
Not exactly a bombshell that she'd support an investigation. It would be weird if she didn't care.
That explains a lot about you.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bill-clinton-called-donald-trump-ahead-of-republicans-2016-launch/2015/08/05/e2b30bb8-3ae3-11e5-b3ac-8a79bc44e5e2_story.html
"The tone of the call was informal, and Clinton never urged Trump to run, the four people said. Rather, they said, Clinton sounded curious about Trump’s moves toward a presidential bid and told Trump that he was striking a chord with frustrated conservatives and was a rising force on the right."
So no, he didn't tell Trump to do that.
And for the past decade plus he's been running as a conservative. Everything he's done has been conservative. If it walks like a duck and it talks like a duck...
n/a aletoledo 2017-05-17
They have no all agreed. There have been experts that have come out saying that russia wasn't the issue. I frankly don't care to debate the issue though, I just wanted to see if you recognized Clintons involvement or not.
What do you expect them to say?
It's rather hypocritical for you to take Trump at his word about the Clinton phone call, but not the Russia stuff. Maybe be consistent and assume he lies about everything.
After all, it wouldn't hurt to investigate if Clinton and Trump colluded. I mean the more ammunition against Trump the better right?
n/a MessisTaxAccountant 2017-05-17
The intelligence communities all agree its almost certainly Russia. Those are the experts who have the access to all the information.
What are you even talking about? I can tell you didn't click the link and just responded with what you already believe.
The people saying it wasn't discussed were both Trump aides and people around Clinton.
You said something happened. It never did. And the people involved both have said it never happened.
Maybe do research before posting things as if they're true.
I don't assume, I research. Try it.
n/a aletoledo 2017-05-17
These people have an incentive to lie. It's kinda their job. True experts should be unbiased.
These are one in the same. These people wouldn't be aides close enough to listen in on private phone calls if they weren't trusted to follow their agendas.
Good, then you won't have any problem in an investigation of the Clinton-Trump relationship. Lets see what skeletons get dug up between those two. Lets expose the real conspiracy going on.
n/a MessisTaxAccountant 2017-05-17
What's the incentive? Protecting a person who isn't president?
And your argument works in reverse, people making the claims it is Rich all would have "incentive" to blame Democrats.
Who is "unbiased"?
Honestly, this is one of the most pathetic deflections I've ever seen from someone who just got called out on a false statement.
You said something happened. You lied or you simply have no idea what you're talking about. Choose one.
Let's start with Trump, you know, the president and the one with all the Russian connections.
n/a aletoledo 2017-05-17
Spies will lie to trick people. Like if they're sneaking into a foreign country, they will produce fake passports and pretend to be someone they're not.
Good point, probably nobody. We should just assume that everyone is lying. Government snd the mainstream media is corrupt through and through.
The fact that you don't think that spies lie and that aides to Clinton and Trump would lie tells me you're probably a shill pushing an agenda. I mean everyone knows that politicans, both Trump and Clinton are evil liars.
I suppose if you want to prove that you're not a shill, then you can say that Clinton is evil in your reply. I dare you.
I stand by the fact that Bill Clinton called Trump shortly before Trump announced his candidacy. Coincidences like these don't happen in politics, regardless of what the evil, lying politicians try to say.
Plus, I find it interesting that you are shilling to try to discredit Trump, yet you insist that Trump in this circumstance is 100% honest. See this is evidence that you're following a script. You have to twist around to defend Trump, so as to protect Clinton. An honest person would just say that both are evil liars. Since you can't do this proves you're pushing an agenda.
Again deflecting attention away from Clinton. Let's see you prove that you're not a shill by saying that Clinton and Trump are both evil liars.
See I have no problem saying this, Trump is evil. Now it's your turn, to prove you're not getting paid to manipulate people here.
n/a reddituser257 2017-05-17
Replace Moscow with Washington and it is true!
The article further claims that 8 Russians (politicians, diplomats, etc). dying across the world is prove of Russian influence operations. Talk about conspirational thinking! /s
n/a slyweazal 2017-05-17
n/a CptFizz 2017-05-17
Wikipedia. Lol. What's next? You're gonna quote snopes? Back to /r/politics with you.
n/a slyweazal 2017-05-17
Every claim in the wikipedia article is cited and links to independently verifiable evidence.
Try again.
n/a Pazzapa 2017-05-17
Were all confused that's why we're here lmao.
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
It pisses me off every damn time I see this. Trump or supporting Trump, has fuckall to do with Seth Rich. No matter how many times you repeat it, or how many shills upvote your BS.
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
Oh look and the whole story is a fabrication too
Incoming 30 posts about fake news Fox? Haha no of course not.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
I don't even know how that conversation would go. A Fox News reporter is asking Wheeler questions, and in doing so, tells Wheeler an absolute whopper/bombshell. Then Wheeler goes and reports it as fact to a different Fox News reporter?
The whole thing was clearly horseshit from the beginning. Somebody at Fox, where he's a regular contributor, wanted him to make up some clickbait bullshit to dominate the news over Trump giving Russia our ally's intelligence.
n/a SomeRandomGuydotdot 2017-05-17
I don't even know how that conversation would go. A Fox News reporter is asking Wheeler questions, and in doing so, tells Wheeler an absolute whopper/bombshell. Then Wheeler goes and reports it as fact to a different Fox News reporter?
The initial story included a few lines about there being a federal agent that flipped and had seen the actual forensics report. So my guess is that is was something pretty leading like, 'one of my sources tells me that there was a forensics report that confirmed sent emails, do you care to comment?'. Which of course, he'd respond like, the police have been uncooperative, because I've asked to the see the report and have not.
The problem is that there's no source.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
Of course fox is fake. Just like every other MSM outlet, and most independant ones. Subversion is all part of the game.
Was Seths murder coincidence or planned? Unknown.
If one thing should be certain though it would definitely be the irony of using something like CNN to try and prove a point on a conspiracy forum.
That's absolutely hilarious tbh. It's just as hilarious as using fox would be.
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
Didn't stop this whole sub jumping all over the Seth Rich story though, did it?
Are you claiming that CNN deliberately fabricated comments by Wheeler to disprove the story? That's a pretty serious allegation, but one that should be easily verified. Off you go, I'll wait.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
The story existed before fox looked at it AFAIK. Dude got murdered in a 'robbery' with nothing stolen what? a day before the leaks started?
If that isn't suspicious at all, then I can't help you.
Might wanna read what I said again. A simplified version for you:
The irony of using the MSM as evidence against conspiracy.
^ It's hilarious. Even if its fox, it's still hilarious. If you can't see the humour then really... I don't even know what to do for you. I'm not making any claim when I say this about the factual content, just the irony, the humour.
Because it's hilarious.
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
Might want to read what I said again.
I'm, of course, specifically referencing the events of the last 24 hours where Fox news "broke" a fake story about Seth Rich which this sub immediately & continues to spam the front page with (currently 18 of the submissions). Fox news may be fake news; but that apparently wasn't terribly important to the Seth Rich narrative.
That word does not mean what you think it means.
Again, if you are claiming that CNN has deliberately fabricated Wheeler's quotes as part of a conspiracy to disprove the Seth Rich narrative, then go ahead and prove it. As I said, this should be a relatively easy to do, and a potentially explosive revelation if true. I would think that someone who hates "fake news" would be all over this. Simply saying "lol MSM fake news" isn't sufficient.
I'll keep waiting.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
You specifically stated that the entire story is a fake.
Facts are that a DNC staff member was murdered days prior to wikileaks release. Nothing fake about that and it's certainly suspicious.
I can understand your suspicious regarding the number of threads on this issue, but your original statement was that the entire story is fake. That's my main issue here. The fact that you used CNN as a source was comedic gold.
You think that CNN isn't mainstream?
Like I've already said, I pointed out the comedic irony of using CNN to argue against a conspiracy theory. Is this really that hard to see the humour in?
I'm not making a factual claim. I'm making a claim about your ironic posting.
I'll keep hoping that you see the humour, but I think you killed the moment.
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
Alright, I'll concede I said the "whole" story, though the context should have made it clear I was referring to the events of the past 24 hours.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
Yeah, in hindsight that's a lot clearer to me, at the time I didn't quite see it. I can see what you mean though.
n/a GeometryPrime 2017-05-17
Have you looked at the front page lately?
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
Yes?
1) Seth Rich
2) Seth Rich
3) Seth Rich
4) Seth Rich
5) Pizzagate
6) Seth Rich
7) Seth Rich
8) Trump/Comey
9) Seth Rich
10) Unrelated
11) Unrelated
12) Seth Rich
13) Seth Rich
14) Unrelated
15) Seth Rich
16) Seth Rich
17) Seth Rich
18) Seth Rich
19) Seth Rich
20) Seth Rich
21) Seth Rich
22) Seth Rich
23) Comey/Flynn
24) Seth Rich
25) Hiliary
Every single one of the Seth Rich posts buys into the assassination narrative (the posts themselves, not the comments). All 18 of them. There's not a single one on the front page of r/conspiracy that references the CNN revelations that the whole thing is bogus.
n/a Infinity6 2017-05-17
That is because it is an organized propaganda effort to influence people opinions. It's all paid shills or possibly bots. Not sure if they work for Russia or some group similar to Correct The Record, except for the Republicans.
n/a octodo 2017-05-17
Every single time some bombshell about Trump is dropped the front page of conspiracy and the donald are filled with Hillary Clinton news. I think it's funny that it's the least popular conspiracy here.
n/a The3rdWorld 2017-05-17
ah yah, it's the least popular conspiracy here but it's the most popular conspiracy here among people who write full length comments that contain coherent talk on the subject at hand...
almost as if the real people all believe one thing and the bots are all trying to push something else...
n/a faderjack 2017-05-17
That's because it's the most popular conspiracy among mainstream news outlets, i.e. the people that normally spread propaganda for the regular conspirators. Who needs a conspiracy forum when WaPo is covering it extensively?
n/a octodo 2017-05-17
I think it's a pretty juicy conspiracy that someone with a skeptical / investigative mind would normally grab onto if it were commited by liberals and not the candidate that this sub largely backed. I get that conspiracies aren't conspiracies once they're mainstream but there is so much to dig through with this one.
Part of me feels bad for the posters here that are skeptical of Trump. Just a lil.
n/a faderjack 2017-05-17
Eh, I see a lot more comments on the forum decrying the supposed T_D takeover than i see actual pro-Trump comments, and with more upvotes.
I'm plenty skeptical of Trump, but I'm more skeptical of the MSM making a concerted effort to push a narrative. It looks like a WMD level misinformation campaign, when the stories are based on anon "current and former" officials instead of named sources and/or documents. They can turn on the faucet and leak some mundane story with sensational editorializing and Trump/ Russia in the title, and all other news of the day gets buried. 100 million in weapon sales to Saudi Arabia, the net neutrality debate, and more conspiratorial stories like Seth Rich, all fly under the radar. Trump and any contact he has with Russia (which as President will continue to be regular and necessary) can be spun into a great distraction. He's someone's puppet, but I don't think they're Russia, and I doubt he's complicit.
n/a rex_dart_eskimo_spy 2017-05-17
Cambridge Analytica
n/a Testostorator 2017-05-17
Oh look Twitter botnets were pumping this story non-stop
Pictures were taken on 5/16/17 at 6AM EST.
n/a sether22 2017-05-17
Oh yes now who sounds like a tin foil hat lunitic? Libtard
n/a terrorismofthemind 2017-05-17
It couldn't be that the right has been trying to home a light on this story for a year now. It has to be Russian bots.
n/a Jedeyesniv 2017-05-17
I think both sides believe in shills too readily. I think it's more plausible that lots of this confusion and duelling narratives come from normal people. Not getting paid, just enthusiastic for one side or the other.
It's plausible that these stories are planted by 'shills' or disinfo artists, but I think they're propagated by people that often mean well. I think accusations of shilling in conspiracy circles are tearing it apart.
n/a globalism_sux 2017-05-17
Or maybe it's because it's a conspiracy theory, and this is a conspiracy theory sub.
n/a insoucianc 2017-05-17
Both probably. Bernake fucked up.
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Yea, only problem is CNN is fake news just as surely as fox news is and that the sun sets in the west everyday.
CNN is obviously ultra-liberal leaning so it must make sense that they would want to bury this was some other bullshit narrative, yes?
As the days go on, we must carefully consider our sources of information.
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
As I said to another poster, you are claiming that CNN fabricated Wheeler's quotes in order to disprove the Seth Rich story?
That's a serious allegation which, if true, would be explosive. Can you prove it besides "lol CNN fake news"?
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
No, I never said that. It wouldn't surprise me in the least, but I have no idea if they are fabricating any stories with these new developments/claims with the Seth Rich case. If they did purposely deviate from the truth and create another story, it certainly would be to refute wheeler's claims because evidence linking SR to the leaks, more accurately, wikileaks, would mean there was no russian involvement and this data came from within, rather than being stolen from an outside entity.
What I was saying was they, (CNN and other entities within the MSM) were making false claims and lying about the Russians involvement, likely as they were instructed to do. Even though, we heard the obvious motive for that but haven't been presented with any serious or compelling evidence to back these claims.
Since you mentioned him, back to wheeler for a second. Today I was reading that Seth's family is refuting these claims that their son/brother is a collaborator with wikileaks, so not really sure about that. You hire a guy to find out who killed your son because the local and fed authorities have been compromised or are otherwise enept, he personally makes a report and public statement, yet they are saying they don't believe it's true.
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
Well, you said:
Implying that the CNN's interview with Wheeler was fake in some way.
n/a Testostorator 2017-05-17
Oh look Twitter botnets were pumping this story non-stop
Pictures were taken on 5/16/17 at 6AM EST.
n/a cow_moo_moo 2017-05-17
No one buys into anything CNN has to say. CNN is without a doubt the least credible MSM news source and has been since Ferguson.
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
So you are accusing CNN of fabricating Wheeler's quotes and publishing this to disprove the story?
Serious allegations. So far, nobody has been able to prove this to me beyond "lol fake news." Maybe you'll be the one to crack this CNN conspiracy wide open?
n/a RikaMX 2017-05-17
Where's the CNN link? I mean I know it's CNN but I'd like to see why it's bogus.
There's not much information here that is not altered with strong opinions.
It sucks because Seth's death really is something to investigate, but they decided to make it this way, so now it has lost any credibility, shame...
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
https://amp.cnn.com/money/2017/05/16/media/seth-rich-family-response-claims-of-wikileaks-contact/index.htm
n/a RikaMX 2017-05-17
I guess they took it down, it doesn't work.
n/a mrsilvers 2017-05-17
He says right here he has a credible Federal investigator who saw the laptop and the emails. Also that when he first at March tried to get the laptop with the police, it took them 2 days to reply and that the DNC called Seth's parents asking why he was snooping around. https://youtu.be/2J9YfQtqcuA
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
And he says right there in the CNN story that he got the wikileaks connection from Fox.
n/a Testostorator 2017-05-17
Oh look Twitter botnets were pumping this story non-stop
n/a ImMrMeeseekzLookAtMe 2017-05-17
That's shady, bots were also used for pushing French voters to vote for Le Pen.
n/a faultydesign 2017-05-17
Luckily the French are not as retarded.
n/a memnactor 2017-05-17
That is NOT how logic works.
Specifically this is known as a false dilemma which is an informal logical fallacy.
There are other plausible explanations that Seth/Russia and the disproval of one of these should not influence the other.
n/a setthetrap 2017-05-17
winner winner chicken dinner!
n/a bruneo 2017-05-17
Hillary Clinton's political cronies had someone murdered to protect their secrets
Or
Russia is evil.
Which one feels right? Which do you more want to be true?
That's what matters.
Logic is so 20th century. We're living in post modernism boy-o. Things are different now
n/a gestalts_dilemma 2017-05-17
Objectively, Putin is evil. He has dissidents, political adversaries, and journalists killed. He takes companies from people and gives them to his friends who act as shells, funneling money to himself.
Russia actively works against the policy of the US and our Allies. He hates NATO for encroaching into Russia's sphere of influence.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
That's a fundamentally flawed statement.
To prove someones evil, you'd need to prove evil is (objectively) a real thing. Something you can pin point scientifically and study. It isn't.
None of which is inherently evil. A bad man surrounded by good people would do this, but so would a good man surrounded by evil. As would a bad man surrounded by worse men. All we can say objectively is that Putin consolidates power and wealth.
The most likely explanation is: for nefarious purposes. But that's not an objective fact, just an educated guess.
Not always. Is bombing ISIS and AQ against US policy?
Russia hates the anti-russia alliance?
Well I'll be damned, didn't see that coming.
n/a TheJollyVereenGiant 2017-05-17
DO you think Putin does bad things or not?
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
Bad?
IMO I suspect Putin does things for his own ideal 'greater good'. Most of the worst attrocities in history were committed in the name of a greater good, unforuntately the true value tends to only be known in hindsight.
Putin has definitely done a lot of nasty shit, the question is whether it will be justified in the end. When you consider the nightmare Russia was living in prior to Putin, he doesn't seem so bad, but theres plenty of room for him to slide into "Holy fuck he's completely insane" territory.
All things a relative to their environment. Putin is better than the environment he took power from, but compared to the west he's got a long way to go.
n/a gestalts_dilemma 2017-05-17
/u/bruneo used the word evil. He dismissed out of hand, any notion that Russia would work against american interest by using the term Evil. Any notion that Russia isn't America's best buddy gets met with an eye-roll.
This sub acts like it's not possible Russia did everything they could to influence the election. A stance which ignores Russia's history influencing and compromising elections. A stance which ignores Russia's desire to limit NATO and the Euro-American sphere of influence.
Hilary is garbage, but she's not running the country. She's become a tool for distracting from the truth. Seth Rich should be investigated. I hope people do keep raising awareness. But to use that as an excuse to close the door on investigating Russia is anti-american. As anti-american as squashing an investigation into the death of someone who was a possible whistle blower.
This has always been apart of this sub; aliens, big foot, conspiracies, etc. I think that's why this sub latched onto Trump so hard. Trump is someone who lives by what he feels regardless of the facts. He felt like he could end ISIS in 30 days. He felt like he would never go golfing because the job was so easy. He felt like we had the worst murder rate in history. He felt like all of our crimes were being committed by immigrants. He felt like the unemployment rate was 30% or greater. He felt like he could day 1 get rid of AHCA. He felt like he should be able to do what he wants and everyone would just fall in line. He felt like he had the biggest electoral win in history. He felt like he had the biggest inaugural crowds in history.
It's ridiculous how many times pro-orange people will divert an argument down some side road. This thread was about the validity of any notion of Russian influence in the election or over the current administration, but everyone who has responded has taken this side road about the term "Evil", which was by /u/bruneo to make any argument for a Russian investigation seem silly.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
I think what you are seeing is basically a 'boy who cried wolf' situation.
Very few people I've talked with will claim that the Kremlin doesn't have a vested interest in fucking with the US + allies. The notion that Russia would actively hack US institutions and political parties is also met with virtually no resistence.
But the idea that Putin, using his omnipotent KGB agents, planted and subverted the entire US government specifically to lift sanctions against Russia is utter insanity.
Now, there's a big leap between the first points and the latter, but the media has been extremely active in pushing the latter. The result is a backlash of flat denial. That's just what happens when people push such a heavily polarised argument.
The middle ground is: Russia does everything it can to further it's own interests, including hacking or attempted hacking of foreign agencies.
I doubt many people would seriously argue against that.
But the Clintons have been under the thumb of the power brokers for a very long time. I don't believe that kind of authority dies out overnight.
Possibly.
The US should opperate under the assumption that foreign powers are always attempting to hack them. That's common sense. So investigating if Russia did so is pointless: of course they did.
So the investigation is instead focused at the US government. The notion that the Kremlin has managed to literally steal the US government. That's theoretically possible, but it's really, really close to flat out insanity. Especially when the alleged motivation is removing sanctions.
Investigation? sounds fine, I encourage it. But the completely insane media hysteria? that reeks to high heaven of conspiracy. The moment I see every a conglomeration of the most powerful and corrupt organisations doing something I tend to think the opposite of what they say is true.
Instinctively I'd say elements of both are true. The possibility of the Kremlin planting agents isn't just possible, it's been done before by other groups. However, the idea that Trump is an agent is pretty laughable. No intelligence agency is stupid enough to put an agent in charge of a nation, nor resourceful enough to fill an entire administration with agents.
With Hillary I don't give a damn about her candidacy, I give a damn about that family leaving their footprints in the criminal enterprises of nations all over the world. For decades they've been implicated in conspiracies and global crime.
There's no such thing as rich saints.
That's how you convince people who disagree with you that they shouldn't bother with your points at all.
The gap between influence in an election and influence over an administration is absolutely gigantic. It's like me saying that the Clintons either took some money they shouldn't have or trafficked children and ate them. It's such a wide target that you can't possibly miss. Lumping them together implies that they are linked.
Well that is the narrative, the big bad evil Russia is comming for your country. The red scare has been building for quite some time if you haven't noticed.
I do get your point though, jumping to extremes is a method of making an argument seem worse than it is. I think an investigation is warranted, although I don't trust the agencies involved (then again, better the FBI than the CIA lmao).
n/a bruneo 2017-05-17
I agree wholeheartedly.
Hearing "russia russia russia" on TV every single day since the election is crying wolf. Suggesting that russia is in the white house is tilting at windmills
n/a bruneo 2017-05-17
I don't care what russia tries to do.
I care what America does. There is zero evidence (not scant evidence, but zero) that Trump colluded with them.
Until a shred of evidence surfaces, this is all hysterical nonsense
n/a bruneo 2017-05-17
Go ahead and investigate them.
I have heard this call for action every single day since he was elected. Nothing has come from it. The implications aren't even meaningful.
It's worse than crying wolf, it's tilting at windmills
n/a Tarazena 2017-05-17
It's not objectively when it's happening in real life. I live under Saddam's for a long period of my life, I've seen what he and his people done, and what Putin is doing is the same as well.
Bombing ISIS was never a goal for Russia (nor the US) for making the area safer, it's all about natural gas lines coming from Qatar and Iran that will feed Europe and the rest of the world. If Russia/Assad took control of that area, it means Iran will have the hold of these pipes, and same as with the Syrian resistance, if the control that, then Europe and US will have a control over it.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
Putin is objectively a threat to his opposition, but that does not make him evil by necessity. Evil is a moral judgement. Moral judgements are always subjective.
I don't know much about Saddam's regime, aside from a few things like gasing civilians, torture, wars etc. I won't pretend to know the experience of living under his regime.
What I do know is that pre-Putin Russia was probably the most corrupt nation on the planet. It was just a place where Oligarchs lived the high life and murdered all competitors in the street. I've heard some horror stories about what the lawlessness there was used to cover. Russia is better than it used to be, but I think Putin is nearing the point at which he becomes a liability instead of an asset.
How he manages that transition will determine how he goes down in history.
That is a major part of the conflict. I agree.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Russia definitely hates NATO... It's an alliance designed to protect former Soviet satellite nations from Russia.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
Exactly, there's nothing surprising about a country hating an alliance specifically formed to oppose it.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
It's a purely defensive pact. It's so Russia doesn't decide to "annex" a sovereign nation.
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
Purely defensive?
Oh that's interesting, so it only defends? it doesn't respond or retaliate?
It's so that smaller nations allied with the USA have a guarantee that, in the case of a foreign aggression, the USA will curbstomp the invader.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
I'm not sure what semantics you're playing at, but yes, it's so Russia doesn't go after those smaller nations.
n/a peeonyou 2017-05-17
Objectively he says, then goes on to state subjective label.
n/a bruneo 2017-05-17
Sounds like good enough reason to whip up some hysteria!
n/a RikaMX 2017-05-17
Damn, is there evidence for this?
I mean, that's a really big claim, so big I'm very interested in reading more about it, please share info.
n/a go_there 2017-05-17
It's not that Russia is evil, it's that so many Russians that may have been involved with the US election and leaks have been murdered, presumably by Putin. Voronenkov, Churkin, Kadakin, Malanin, Erovinkin, Karlov, Polshikov, and of course Krivov, who fell off a roof in NYC on the day of the US elections.
With a death toll like that, what's one more leaker? A Democrat who might come clean about selling secrets to Russia? The logical conclusion is that Putin killed Seth Rich.
People say Hillary murdered various people, but come on, Weiner is still alive. That right there proves Hillary isn't a murderer. Putin, on the other hand, is a murderer. He was trained by the KGB, took over the oligarchs, cartels, and Gazprom, and people fall like flies around him.
So...
n/a memnactor 2017-05-17
I'm a conspiracy nut.
Both are true and I don't trust you either.
n/a Freiling 2017-05-17
Now Irish intelligence is involved!
n/a Ishouldnt_haveposted 2017-05-17
That's not how it works for people who form their opinions based on fact and logic. Unfortunately, when it comes to Trump (and partially, clinton) supporters, they lie on the complete opposing side of fact and logic.
Just because they're prominent now doesn't mean they ever will be again.
During this election, we had people on the republican side who have never voted before just because they fell for trumps fluff pieces so well. When he flip flopped - it perfectly represented the uninformed that he got their vote. I'm not going to even start talking about the republicans who purely voted for trump because he is the republican candidate, and still hate him...
But on the Democratic side we also had extreme left liberals, third wave feminists, and the 'PC' culture, who voted for Hillary because she was a woman, and because she opposed the bigot.
So all of these sides collided with the informed and logic based voters. Sadly, we got the worse of two evils. I know people hate it when that's said, but I would prefer almost anyone to trump and clinton.
n/a moosic 2017-05-17
Or both are true...
n/a bruneo 2017-05-17
Russia is evil. [And all powerful and has taken over the executive branch]
n/a RikaMX 2017-05-17
We are living in the year of the feels.
n/a sammythemc 2017-05-17
Tell that to the OP?
n/a kingwroth 2017-05-17
Woosh dumbass
n/a setthetrap 2017-05-17
one is not dependent on the other- this is irrational
n/a quartzguy 2017-05-17
What if Russia doesn't actually exist and Putin is just a small child's sock puppet. Maybe that's why this whole story is fake and Obama is so desperate.
n/a Daktush 2017-05-17
Well consider the DNC refused the FBI access to their servers to investigate. Why would they do that if there was evidence of a hack in there?
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
Podesta email sent February 2015 over a year before Seth was murdered.
And looking at the rest of that email chain appears to be about a Washington Post article.
n/a bruneo 2017-05-17
Oh. He only wanted to make examples of other leakers. We have no way of knowing his stance on handling this leaker
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
He was campaign manager... Obviously he's concerned with leaks.
Like Trump going after Assange after vault 7. No one wants leaks from their team.
n/a bruneo 2017-05-17
Dead men tell no tales
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
A stitch in time saves nine.
n/a PrivilegeCheckmate 2017-05-17
The pepper and salt are passed together.
n/a bruneo 2017-05-17
At the end of the game the pawn and the king go back in the same box
n/a maximumhamburger 2017-05-17
Would you voluntarily give the FBI access to all your shit even if you were the victim of a crime?
n/a Daktush 2017-05-17
I would hand them what they asked for to help them track down the perpetrator tbh
n/a DeepStateOfMind 2017-05-17
And you both forgot about Podesta who was hacked by someone claiming to be Russian
n/a Cat-Hax 2017-05-17
The hacks came from from China yous both wrong
n/a Fuckoffmebitch 2017-05-17
That's not quite how it works. A square is a rectangle, but rectangle isn't necessarily a square.
n/a peeonyou 2017-05-17
That is very poor logic.
If it rains then the ground is wet. If the ground is wet it doesn't mean it rained.
n/a ixora7 2017-05-17
It's getting sad with these deluded fuckers.
n/a Chef_69 2017-05-17
I don't know how you have so many upvotes. Last night there were posts and comments discussing the implications of this whole thing, and now most of the comments are against it with hundreds of upvotes. I don't want to say shill but...
n/a cow_moo_moo 2017-05-17
David Brock is pulling out all the stops to kill the Seth Rich story. I
n/a valhalla13375 2017-05-17
https://youtu.be/Kp7FkLBRpKg?t=16s
n/a dantepicante 2017-05-17
Here's the thing I don't get: so we know there was a phishing scam that podesta may have fallen for, and that the IPs involved were Russian. First of all, wouldn't those IPs be the first thing any state-sponsored operation would spoof? It's hard for me to accept that the Kremlin would be that sloppy. Secondly, what is the specific evidence that links the phishing scam to the leaks? That seems like a huge leap.
Please note that I'm just trying to connect more facts and have a productive conversation here, and follow reddiquette.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
Your response has the intellectual depth of a 5 year old. If Seth didn't leak it, he was made an example of, as Podesta stated in his emails.
n/a dokapon111 2017-05-17
That's a load of shit. This isn't a pro trump sub, and this issue isn't black and white. Yet again, people who take reddit's front page narrative as true are trying to direct a hateful narrative here by attempting to ignite a soft brigade. It really is unfortunate that it has to be this way.
n/a Golden_Shart 2017-05-17
Long time subscriber here. This is definitely a pro Trump sub. I've never seen this place be such a safe haven for the right.
n/a BorisKafka 2017-05-17
It doesn't mean that at all. It would be entirely possible that another DNC employee who leaked.
n/a farstriderr 2017-05-17
No it doesn't. The 'hackers' used malware supposedly used by Russians (as if nobody else can do that) which is supposed to be proof of something. However, Seth Rich who is not a Russian hacker, leaking the emails means that Russians didn't do it.
n/a Skykeep 2017-05-17
So if seth rich didn't leak the emails then the ONLY other option is russia? Is that what you're saying?
n/a macsenscam 2017-05-17
Wow, that logic you are using is awful. You really don't understand that it's possible neither Seth or the Russian government is at fault?
n/a LurkPro3000 2017-05-17
Lol 987 up votes. Y'all could at least try not to look like shills.
n/a Jabbajaw 2017-05-17
Seth's family has denied it. I think the big issue here is that if the Seth Rich story is not true then that means that Julian Assange is lying to advance his own agenda which might be that he is so pissed at Hillary Clinton for wanting to have him killed via Drone strike. This is the simplest explanation I can think of.
n/a BigZwigs 2017-05-17
Why do you guys have Russia so much? They are far from a perfect country and Putin is effectively a dictator. Not to many people complaining about the 300 billion arms sale to the ragheads and they are wayyy worse.
n/a Itmustjustbeme 2017-05-17
There were even sanctions.
n/a Vote4PresidentTrump 2017-05-17
Where is the evidence to prove either way
n/a w0rdd 2017-05-17
Wikileaks bounty for info about his death.
n/a mysteryroach 2017-05-17
That doesn't prove anything.
n/a theinfin8 2017-05-17
And neither does a report from Crowdstrike that Russia hacked the DNC servers. The FBI never got access to the servers. Until actual evidence is presented of Russian interference, I'll remain skeptical.
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
There will not be any evidence. Just strong insinuations that keep feeding off each other as a new one emerges.
n/a Carkly 2017-05-17
trump himself said russia did it
n/a terrorismofthemind 2017-05-17
The only other time they put money up for someone was for Chelsea Manning. Seth was their source.
n/a DeathorGlory9 2017-05-17
Wikileaks stopped being trustworthy months ago.
n/a WyattAbernathy 2017-05-17
This sub questioned whether or not Wikileaks was compromised or not. But then the anti-Hilary/DNC started up again and now Wikileaks can do no wrong...
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
When did they have to retract a publication because it was false?
Or are they still sitting on that 100% accuracy rating?
n/a Pierre_bleue 2017-05-17
n/a DeathorGlory9 2017-05-17
Ever since it's leader entered the Ecuador embassy it couldn't be trusted.
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
Think you need to reword that. WikiLeaks has always been trustworthy. They have a 100% record. That is trustworthy. You could question their motivations, but that has nothing to do with the material they release.
n/a DeathorGlory9 2017-05-17
Thank you, I have gone back and edited my post. I wrote it without thinking.
n/a memnactor 2017-05-17
How so?
Can you point me to any false information they have released?
n/a DeathorGlory9 2017-05-17
I misspoke, I have gone back and edited my post.
n/a BWet00 2017-05-17
Guessing the slam-dunk proof is on Mr. Rich's laptop. What we've got now is more than enough pieces of the puzzle for me to come to my conclusion (hell, I thought Seth Rich was the leaker before all this stuff came out. It seemed obvious.)
Guccifer naming "Seth" as his whistle-blower in DMs
Latest report by PI which hopefully he will follow-up with more evidence as he stated. I think Assange and Wikileaks RT'ing the initial report by FOX 5 DC was telling and adds more credence.
As stated below, the WL bounty for info on his murder.
The way this whole Seth Rich murder investigation has been handled.
The other party involved. Monsters with a long list of suspicious deaths of people who have gotten in their way.
The Podesta email stating he's "definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have a real basis for it".
The fact that there is literally no proof for this Russia narrative and the agenda has been painfully obvious to anyone in-the-know with what's really going on.
Is that enough to make your own inference? Is for me. In the meantime I'm kicking the feet back with my popcorn to watch this unfold and the MSM panic some more.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
So no evidence. Meanwhile Russia just ran another disinfo campaign in France to try it again. But no it has to be some super elaborate yet stupid evil masterplan by the DNC. Stop spreading disinfo.
n/a BWet00 2017-05-17
Which part is disinformation? Enlighten me, please. I said enough pieces to draw my own conclusion. Enough circumstantial evidence is evidence, by the way, and you can be criminally prosecuted on it alone. Obviously not going to happen here, though. Stop spreading disinfo? Stop being a fucking knobhead.
n/a S5S5S55S 2017-05-17
Don't bother arguing with the paid help.
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
The DNC colluded with the media, rigged the primary, and are now paying propagandists to tell me that Hillary only lost because of evil Russian propagandists. Strange times.
n/a KillerK0ala 2017-05-17
and people just believe this because they see it on the news. it's absolute insanity how anybody can fall for this shit. it's like the bitch who cried wolf x1000 but these fucks keep coming back expecting it to be real this time.
n/a BWet00 2017-05-17
Ding ding ding.
n/a BiBiClosetHelloWorld 2017-05-17
That means Russia did hack the election.
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
"Evidence" is different than "media coverage"
n/a moosic 2017-05-17
The WTF comment of the week.
n/a REAL-BIG-TUNA 2017-05-17
How did they hack the election? What did they hack? What was the result of the hacking? The MSM simply referring to "Russian hacking" means nothing. I don't even think THEY know the specifics of what they are talking about.
n/a BiBiClosetHelloWorld 2017-05-17
What about fake and ghost accounts on social media? You can't dispute that. 'Hack' is an umbrella term covering much unconventional use of I.T
n/a REAL-BIG-TUNA 2017-05-17
Using fake/ghost accounts on social media is not hacking. Even if we considered it to be hacking, there are countless organizations that use this strategy. Why wouldn't we be talking about CTR as well? Why would we only focus on Russia when this is a widespread practice?
I still have yet to hear ANY information related to the questions I posed in my OP
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
"Enough circumstantial evidence is evidence"
Holy.shit. Did you really just say that? Not only does this show your agenda (apparently the circumstantial evidence surround trump and Russia doesn't count). It's also plainly the most ridiculous thing I've read today.
It's also scary as fuck. Damn. So all we need now is circumstantial evidence to prove stuff?
Disinformation here is pushing this DNC/Hillary conspiracy to try and distract everyone from all the shit going on around trump RIGHT NOW. He fired the FBI director do you realize what this means?!
n/a captenplanet90 2017-05-17
read this
Question- Is circumstantial evidence enough to convict?
n/a Rubulisk 2017-05-17
This anayakii person is all over this thread replying to dozens and dozens of posts, with a seemingly very personal attachment to it.
n/a captenplanet90 2017-05-17
Yea I've noticed. That's the only reason I replied to them with that link. They were so obviously wrong that I couldn't not correct them.
n/a moosic 2017-05-17
He's not wrong. Trump tried to shut down an investigation, that is illegal. You guys are desperately trying to whataboutism anything else.
n/a Dinkir9 2017-05-17
Wtf, he didn't 'whataboutism' anything there.
n/a faderjack 2017-05-17
not that familiar with criminal law are you?
n/a paradise_circus157 2017-05-17
People forget Brexit was propagandized heavily in favor of by Russia as well.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
And Le pen. And the right wing idiot candidate in my country as well.
I have friends in Moldova who are scared as fuck and have been for years. I have had Russian interference while doing business with Kiev.
This shit is fucking real. It's easy for Americans to ignore it because it's very abstract for them and seems so far from home. Which is why Russia is succeeding tremendously in America.
WHY CANT WE AT LEAST DISCUSS BOTH CONSPIRACIES? Because this sub is also infected.
n/a KillerK0ala 2017-05-17
America literally overthrows governments it doesn't like. "disinformation campaigns" which at least in the US was just publishing their very real disgusting emails isn't in the same ballpark. Obama is advocating for all sorts of other politicians and you don't ever hear the outrage over the US' position of power and influence influencing other countries elections. just so much bullshit, Russia is a fucked up place don't get me wrong but the whole boogeyman attitude that comes with them gives me lulz. Like every other major country isn't committing acts just as bad or at the least coorporating with those who are.
n/a MaximumDestruction 2017-05-17
That exact "ah whats the use, they are all equally fucked, Democracy is just a joke and corruption is the natural order of things" attitude is what some are trying to manufacture in the USA. Makes for easier Oligarchy.
n/a KillerK0ala 2017-05-17
all I'm saying is acting like Russia is the lone bad guy in our story trying to take down the peaceful Western Europe + America good guys at this point is dishonest. and claiming this all solely on leaked emails? it's retarded.
n/a MaximumDestruction 2017-05-17
You're correct that Russia is not the only bad player around the world. You seem to believe that the release of DNC emails is the only way in which the 2016 election was compromised. It wasn't. As in Brexit and the French elections there were and will continue to be psychometric targeted campaigns of misinformation to both suppress the vote on one side and get the electorate screaming mad on the other. Using Trump himself and possibly the RNC itself as a vessel for money laundering seems the most likely thing to bring this all into the public sphere. Even with several shell companies one can usually find a paper trail.
n/a KillerK0ala 2017-05-17
but no paper trail evidence exists at all it's literally just speculation.
And since I'm American, please, inform me of the misinformation campaign Russian used on me. All I saw from what was referred to as a "Russian hack" were legitimate emails exchanged between people at the DNC (which they tried to lie about and say we're fabricated emails and were later verified as authentic).
Did they make her faint on 9/11? What did they sell to Americans that was snake oil?
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
It's not speculation. There is a digital paper trail. There are entire companies that exist to spread Russian disinfo on online forums...
n/a backtotheocean 2017-05-17
Hillary lost because she got caught rigging the Democratic primary and she had the FBI investigations show shed was exempt from the law. There was 0 Russian influence other than Hillary giving them 20% of US uranium for millions given to bill the rapist and the Clinton's false charity.
n/a MaximumDestruction 2017-05-17
Here's an article on psychometrics and its use and impact on the 2016 election. Any research along this avenue will reveal some pretty terrifying harm that can be done with this technology. I'm almost more concerned for when this tech is used by every company that can afford it. People had better get much, much better at bullshit discernment.
n/a EyeBraveheart 2017-05-17
Because this is /r/T_D 2.0
n/a dfu3568ete6 2017-05-17
Its funny they don't realize how obvious they are. T_D goes from pushing hard for Trump to immediately rabidly trying to rally everyone around Le Pen(ignoring the elephant in the room with her ties to Russia), disinfo/distraction astroturfing every time stuff heats up around Trump/Russia, more astroturfing of suggestive thinking and narrative pushing in support for Le Pen, Macron leaks hit coupled with intense brigading during French blackout. The pattern is hilariously obvious. Fuck yourselves and your lying, manipulative, propaganda pushing piece of shit troll/bot army.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Haha just checked the sub and it is swamped with that dude that got murdered or something. Why are they not discussing trump meeting with the Russians without us media?
Russia is laughing at trump
n/a dfu3568ete6 2017-05-17
Just look at the number of upvotes this post has lol. Astroturfing and the bot brigade are in full force
n/a the_shadowmind 2017-05-17
Hell, look a the stickied post: Attacking the media, and the posters who vote for anything but Pro-Trump content while claim to be neutral. The mods are compromised.
Make sense, since if I wanted to push a lie, first thing I would do it comprise sites that search for actual true and have them chase their tails with lies.
n/a terrorismofthemind 2017-05-17
Yeah it couldn't have been that people want the right to self determination. It's was the damn Russians!
n/a uberduger 2017-05-17
And where's your evidence that it was Russia? I'm all for calling out bullshitters, but just because there is no evidence to support his argument doesn't suddenly mean your 'side' is correct.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
http://www.stopfake.org/en/six-outrageous-lies-russian-disinformation-peddled-about-europe-in-2016/
Just search around a bit. I thought this sub prouded itself with "going into the rabbit hole online" but apparently no one has been looking into these proven instances of Russian disinformation campaigns?
You can even check it yourself with a bit of google translate. On official government owned channels.
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
Some rabbit holes are just holes. That article is claiming that Russian media outlets are running stories sympathetic to Russia. Shocker.
The first one is about the migrant crisis which doesn't even help Russia to encourage nationalism in other countries.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
If you see how much those articles actually influenced elections in my country you would be worried.
Israeli sponsored Dutch politician that is rabidly anti Islam. He is a destabilizing factor in my countries politics and people voted on him partly due to these articles.
What are you even saying? This is textbook disinfo propaganda! This is akin to dropping panflets during wars in the past on villages. But it's even more effective because people think it's real.
How can you even say that nationalism in other countries doesn't help Russia? It sounds to me that you are very uninformed on this subject in general. And that's not trying to be a dick it just seems like it as you are saying stuff that does not make any sense.
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
Sorry, I've not seen anything good come from mass migration. The propaganda over here comes from our own media.
If your country is being destabilized due to Russian media outlets being pro-Russia, I'm not sure how you made it this long to begin with.
Anyway, a country full of considerate, open-minded, tolerant folks such as yourself will be just fine. God bless.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Haha sure buddy. Didn't expect you to actually have anything to say based on fact instead of emotion.
My country is doing fine. At least no one has to die because they don't have health insurance. At least my vote is not made irrelevant by a big lobby that pays off all my politicians :)
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
Amazing.
You just cited crumbling infastructure, healthcare, and corrupt politicians as problems in America while criticizing me for posting on t_d. Those issues were Trump's campaign platform.
As for religious extremists making policy, you're advocating for Islam which translates to "submission" and has an unquestionable doctrine of law.
I'm at a loss for words.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Advocating for Islam? Lol please quote me doing that. Religion is moronic and has no place in government or schools.
It's cute that those issues where trumps campaign platform but he isn't really pushing them anymore is he? Just tax breaks for the wealthy. Why did he come up with such a bullshit healthcare plan? Why not just go with something that works? He can use my countries system as an example if he wants.
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
He didn't come up with the healthcare plan. We had great healthcare before Obamacare. I don't want government in healthcare like you don't want religion in government.
I do know that Trump is fought on every single policy by the media, the left, and the right. To me, that's a sign we elected the right man. The people in power are corrupt. If those people hate Trump, good.
You stated that an anti-Islamist candidate was the cause of problems in your country so I would assume you're wanting a pro-Islam candidate or one that turns a blind eye to mass migration. Good luck with that. It's worked out great elsewhere...
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
No. I don't want a candidate with propagating blind hate against a group of people to push his sponsors geo political agenda. I want a pro Dutch candidate. Dutch people are off every religion.
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
A nationalist candidate that doesn't tolerate any religion. Got it.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
You don't have to be a nationalist to love your country. Difficult to phantom if you live in a country that uses patriotism as a propaganda tool I know
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
Pro-Dutch I would assume means a candidate who puts your country and culture first. That is what Trump does for America. Nationalist is just a term. Substitute patriotic if you like. No one is advocating for America to go conquer other countries.
The left here removed the American flag from their logo because it's offensive. They censor conservative viewpoints, control the media and academia, force social issues into law or use them to manipulate opinion, hire shills to manipulate social media, use the IRS to target conservative groups, prevent conservative speakers from speaking at colleges, call us racist, hateful, homophobic, misogynists, fascists, etc. all while trying to suppress free speech, inciting violence and promoting all forms of degeneracy in the name of diversity or inclusion.
If your media is telling you different, you can assume they're as dishonest as ours is.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
We think flags are just for a handful of days in the year. And are a hilariously old fashioned and weird way to flash your national pride. I'm sure we have a different idea of nationalism. America is overtly nationalistic all the way trough in every political spectrum. That shows how incredibly powerful americas propaganda machine is.
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
See what you think
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6bmifb/who_is_seth_rich_megapostthread/
n/a bleepul 2017-05-17
why are you so afraid of Russia? Crazy how you folks are more afraid of them interfering with democracy than Islamic terrorists. Meanwhile the US has interfered with every election for the last 100 years. I think you are part of the disinfo.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Because Islamic terrorists aren't interfering with our democratic progress by using propaganda and lies to push one candidate versus another. Islamic terrorists aren't directly influencing our elections.
Why exactly should I be worried about 1 in thousands of odds of me getting killed by a terrorist? Are you worried about getting shot? Because you have a 1 in 30k chance of getting shot and killed in America. That is more likely than dieing from a terrorist attack.
I'm way more worried about the long term effects the muddling of facts with made up propaganda. I'm way more worried about people not being able to differentiator factual news from fake news anymore.
Remember Russia is still invading sovereign land in Europe. Russia obliterated Georgia and planted a puppet government.
Russia directly benefits from a destabilized Europe. Anyone who says otherwise simply doesn't understand the geo political climate in that region.
I totally understand when Americans see Russia as some far off problem but for us it hits a bit closer to home.
There are refugees from the Ukraine in my country who have fled Russian artillery. Let that sink in.
Anyway idk why you bring up Islamic terror. We can be worried about both you know? We are fighting both. Idk why you are derailing this conversation.
n/a bleepul 2017-05-17
The democratic process that is already influenced by hundreds of millions of special interest and foreign dollars? You are trying to protect the integrity of that process? The system that has seen every president in the last 25 years threatens with impeachment? Suddenly the Russians are able threaten the stability of that system?
And so it's "I am under no threat of terrorism myself but I am worried about those Ukrainians getting hurt" meanwhile ISIS has displaced millions and murdered tens of thousands all funded by Middle East states that have millions living in indentured servitude. But Russia ... Jesus.
And let's not ask whether Seth was murdered for political reasons because, well, Russia.
Fool.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Haha no I'm taking about my country, the Netherlands. I'm worried about Russian interference in my country.
n/a bleepul 2017-05-17
I assume at this point Russia could make the Netherlands a province if it wanted to, particularly if he and Trump are so close now.
As for Wahhabism, totally with you. Major crime by the US enabled by US president after US president. I had hoped Trump would be different but I guess we buy too much oil and they too many weapons and our military bases too strategic. The US Saudi axis is what needs to go ... in this light I'd have thought you'd be pro Russia.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
I strongly believe Iran is in a position to elevate that region out of this struggle. Russia is yet another neo colonial force in that region that won't do anything different from the us
n/a Thorumar 2017-05-17
I know that the MSM backed the DNC on the election.
I know the same MSM has been running pro DNC Russia hacking narrative.
I don't trust them, because they're in cahoots. It's part of the problem of being a slimy group of shitheads who try to cheat the system. A lot of people won't trust you anymore. Meanwhile, the Seth Rich narrative adds up when you're considering a bunch of slimy fucks getting together and trying to figure out how to save their asses.
"Kill Seth. Say it's the Russians on MSM since they already do what we want. Hands in the center, DNC on three.. 1,2,3, DNC!!!"
I KNOW the DNC and MSM should be in trouble, and are in collusion. So of course they'll stick with the Russia narrative. That means the investigation dies, and the DNC is free and clear.
Even if I'm wrong it means nothing, though. Here's the other narrative: a Russian agent sent a phishing email to John podesta. He fell for it. The results of his idiocy lead to Hillary Clinton losing the 2016 election, because when WikiLeaks released the valid information, it affected voters.
WHY DON'T YOU GUYS HATE TRUMP MORE COME ON LOOK RUSSIA
I hate Trump just fine, thanks. I'll hate him more when I see more, but I've seen enough to hate the DNC and MSM entirely. That's what the two sides boil down to. What do you hate more?
Grab the pussy, or lying and cheating in the primaries? Answer that and I'll know which narrative you believe. It just pisses me off that the DNC can get out of EVERYTHING they did this election and yet an unproven Trump Russia connection is enough for people to flip their shit. PROVEN TRUE DNC SCANDAL MEANS NOTHING, but don't worry, the media is on your side and thinks Trump should be impeached for a theory they refuse to show proof for. That's enough for you, because you're ultra biased against one side. It's nowhere near enough for me and most here, because we're ultra against BOTH SIDES for being fucking EVIL.
Go support your evil overlords elsewhere, r/politics.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Haha what are you talking about. Both sides flip their shit. Both sides are corrupt. Im not denying that. But whatever
n/a peyote_the_coyote 2017-05-17
Not a shred of Evidence Russia was involved in any of this. Stop spreading disinfo.
n/a favoritecattoy 2017-05-17
Translate: Sleep, Sleep, Sleep
n/a gay_frog_shill 2017-05-17
Guccifer also said that Assange "may be connected with Russians" in those DMs... (assuming that they weren't doctored)
Either way, I don't think that Seth Rich being the whistleblower is mutually exclusive with the possibility that the Russian deep state was trying to interfere with the US elections and gain influence over Trump/his team.
n/a PrivatePyle 2017-05-17
Serious question. Does anyone know how the police/FBI came to be in possession of Seth Rich's laptop? Was he carrying it when he was murdered? Did they take action to retrieve it from his work/residence as part of the investigation?
I don't know the answer to these questions, but I really want to know.
n/a OutRaged_Indian 2017-05-17
So what happened there?
n/a sidebycide 2017-05-17
If its a botched robbery why did the police steal his computer???
n/a smokeyrobot 2017-05-17
I was thinking this yesterday. If it was in fact a botched robbery, why wouldn't his belongings from his domicile like a computer be given to the family? It is very bizarre that the police would take his laptop for a random act of violence.
n/a sidebycide 2017-05-17
Quite rare, more rare to not release any info as to why, or what was even on the computer... quite strange!
n/a krylosz 2017-05-17
If Seth Rich was in contact with Assange, Assange should have some kind of proof. Since all he does is repeat other people's baseless allegations I don't believe a second that there was contact.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Of course not. But we're the Donald now so anything against the dnc gets voted up
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
The Donald is lame, don't get me wrong, but the DNC is evil. Obvious collusion and corruption at the highest levels. Wasserman steps down in shame; still no charges.
sigh
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Oh I'm not protecting the DNC here. There's some fishy shit going on. But unfortunately that is pretty much business as usual in us politics. And by focussing on just one side you are only keeping the system standing.
Meanwhile Russia is destabilizing your country and making people think they're being patriotic by helping them do it.
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
Really? What did Russia do?
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Curious on this myself. The media said the hacks, (which turned out to be leaks), "were so sophiscated, that it has to be a foreign state, likely the russians". But to my knowledge, they, (the feds) had all the time in the world to connect the dots and state their case fingering the russians, yet they failed to do so.
I searched and looked and I waited and I never found any hard evidence.
Seems to be another layer to this elaborate psy-op, and more lies and political posturing.
I mean when have they told the American people / outside world the truth? Really all they've done is been caught in lie and lie.
n/a yinmnblues 2017-05-17
But what about all the posters begging for us to equally investigate the Russia collusion? Are you saying that the FBI et al have been investigating that this whole time?
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Not saying this couldn't potentially be a concern, but as long as we are investigating all foreign threats to america, we should be investigating the Saudis and Israelis at the top of this list as well. Which with the last two, that can get awkward because they are supposedly allies of ours. Lest we forget, allies that actively and repeatedly engage in human rights violations on a daily basis. But I digress, that's another thread for another time.
However, in my opinion, those people are misguided and focused on the wrong thing, and this is likely be design. The red scare, political propaganda and weaponizing fear are hardly new "things" and have been deployed for quite some time. Notwithstanding things that occur inside their country, because we are all guilty of something against our people, and apart from violating airspace of sovereign nations and this whole crimea/Ukraine revolution business, what have the russians really done to anyone in the last 2 decades?
The long and short of it is I believe the same people that are screaming about the Russians and how dangerous they are, are the same ones who are actively engaging in deflecting criminal responsibility on their political party and are otherwise unable to come to terms with what their leadership has done and is willing to do to remain in power (relevant).
Again, just my two cents.
n/a yinmnblues 2017-05-17
That's what I believe too.
n/a grkirchhoff 2017-05-17
Not only that, but are you familiar with Vault 7? The CIA has the ability to make something look like it came from some other entity when it did not.
Then again, they couldn't keep a lid on most of their tools, so that ability may be available by other entities as well.
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Exactly. Extremely familiar with #vault7 and I've been following that story since the series of teasers were released in the very beginning.
As you've said, basically anything can be forged, faked or doctored. If they say something like, "this has russia finger prints all over it", that really doesn't mean very much because we now know the agency is well within their capability to create false flag cyber attacks and blame them on any group or foreign gov't they want.
Trust no one.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Where did the mainstream media ever specifically say Russia hacked anything? Some may have used clickbait headlines, but they all reported accurately that phishing scams and selective leaks were used.
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Dude, are you serious right now? That was the entire narrative as the situation was unfolding. Happy to fish out a pile of links from the scrape heap of garbage, if you prefer.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Ok sure.
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/obama-russia-election-hack.html?_r=0&referer=https://www.google.nl/
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/us/politics/spy-agency-consensus-grows-that-russia-hacked-dnc.html?referer=https://www.google.nl/
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/politics/us-formally-accuses-russia-of-stealing-dnc-emails.html?referer=https://www.google.nl/
I could put a whole list together, but it's kind of a pain in the ass since I'm on mobile right now. These 3 are just from the ny times, but they are extremely liberal leaning and have been at the forefront of pushing this horseshit.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Sorry, I worded my statement poorly. The articles aren't pointing out that the "hacks" were phishing scams, as I said before. The NY Times have said so in other articles. As the article points out, the selective leaks were pretty obvious when nothing from the RNC came out.
I thought you were talking about hacking voting machines, which nobody has reported.
n/a bartink 2017-05-17
State their case to who? How? What does this mean?
What kind of evidence would you accept?
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
How about this? State their case to the American people? An international criminal court? When you make claims like these, certainly they must be founded on something. Saying the attacks are sophisticated so it must be the russians? That doesn't do it for me.
n/a bartink 2017-05-17
Why should they do that during an ongoing investigation related to this? So people that reflexively doubt them will find another reason not to believe them? What's in it for them versus what do they lose? There's the obvious answer.
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
These are extraordinary claims and investigations, I realize that. But typically, when you make accusations, there needs to be some kind of evidence that is publicly available which backs up these claims. Or else anyone could make damning claims against anyone else with no base or recourse for doing so. You can see how that is an extremely slippery slope, yes?
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
You speak of the current system and it's continual existence as a bad thing, which I fully agree with you on.
But you still think the russians are the real threat to the short and long term future of the states? That's where I disagree with you, because I believe these are the results of propaganda --> brainwashing.
It's also fairly obvious to me that the real threat faced by Americans today is sadly our own govt, and not some other group of people that live on the other side of the globe.
I will say again that I agree our two-party paradigm is quite outdated and archaic and needs to be completely overhauled.
But I'd also like to ask you a question since you've taken the time to respond. Even if the Russians have been actively working to undermine our "democracy" in hopes our country collapses from within, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that exactly what the agency has been doing literally for decades? If we can agree on that, is it a classic case of do as I say and not as I do??
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Russia is not trying to collapse your country... Russia is trying to influence America so they will have a VERY powerful ally who will let them do whatever the fuck they want. Collapsing America is bad for them as well. This idea that they are trying to collapse America from within stems from Cold War propaganda. Which actually benefited them because they're doing the opposite but no one expects them to do that.
Americas two party system is undemocratic and one of the biggest threats you guys face I agree. But by spreading the unproven conspiracies as part of a political agenda supporting one side you just do what they want you to do.
This is all noise. Meant to distract. Meant to put you at odds with each other. You can be worried about the DNC and Russia. It doesn't have to be one or the other. But they managed to make it so.
Who benefits from this chaos?
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
Great point.
With the level of scrutiny being leveled at the US-Russian relationship by our media, I don't think you need to worry. We should be more worried about those friendly relationships with foreign powers which fly under the radar, like our relationship with Israel. If ever a country had an outsized influence on our politics...
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Oh god see it even effects me. I totally forgot about Israel for a second. The relationship with Israel has been so normalized even though its number 1 when it comes to propaganda campaigns and disinformation.
Israel i just can't wrap my head around how they managed to get into this power position. They could nuke the Gaza Strip and no one would really care
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
Our relationship with Israel is a story which needs much more daylight.
Foreign policy in that region has been driven by our relationship with Israel for decades (and our relationship to oil), and has created the greatest threat to world peace since WWII.
n/a Zieg_Heil_Mein_Mods 2017-05-17
Are you retarded?
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Well yes I know how they got there it is just mind boggling that it has been able to happen.
And no. I don't but the whole Jewish conspiracy bullshit. It's simple neo colonialism
n/a obscure_renegade 2017-05-17
Not with all those green rivers and pollution they're not.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Moving towards. They're not there yet. But at least they're making huge steps.
n/a obscure_renegade 2017-05-17
Those cats are downright colonizing that continent.
n/a Rostale 2017-05-17
Well, current United States policy consists of letting Saudi Arabia do whatever the fuck they want, like funding Islamic extremism around the globe and deliberately causing mass starvation in Yemen. But of course the Saudis make sure to line all the right pockets, the Washington DC has already shown they are willing to whore out the country for foreign interests, they're probably just offended at the idea of Putin influencing US policy without paying them their cut.
n/a EhrmantrautWetWork 2017-05-17
Dumb. Geopolitics is a competitive sport
n/a ForeverInaDaze 2017-05-17
I don't think at this current moment we face an immediate threat from anyone but I really truly think Donald Trump is incompetent and every world power sees and knows that. Doing arms deals with Syria and conversing with the likes of Vladimir Putin who is the truest form of a dictator is not good for us.
I was at a bar during election night and I remember thinking "haha people are sweating cuz Trump is taking some states". Then he won. And I realized how fucked we were when we were being congratulated by Putin and all of the countries we don't wanna hear "congratulations" from.
The DNC is corrupt, and I wouldn't want Hillary to be president at all. But at this point, I'd rather have a 14 year old who just learned what the Constitution was over our current president (semi sarcasm).
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Arms deal with syria? Is that right? Who in Syria did we do an arms deal with?
Pretty sure you mean the recently announced 100 billion dollar deal with the saudis.
n/a ForeverInaDaze 2017-05-17
you're right holy shit i'm dumb. it was the country that when he imposed a ban he left saudi arabia out.
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Don't worry about it. Atleast you copped to the mistake.
n/a reddituser257 2017-05-17
You know Russia is a democracy and has elections right?
n/a smackson 2017-05-17
Yes, but this is just one aspect of the pervasive American Exceptionalism that runs the minds of those darn patriotic 'Murcans.
I generally don't like the debate tactic where "X is bad" is deflected by "X has always been bad and everyone already knows it", but in this case I think we need to focus on the actual details of possible Russian intervention, in the US, in 2016, possibly with Trump's complicity, and "But the US does it too!" is a distraction... If not a "non-stop", at least a story for another time.
n/a HelperBot_ 2017-05-17
Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism
HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 69229
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying at the end there but not sure how, "we do it too" is a, "non-story" as you've said.
This reminds me a lot of how during hillary's campaign, she and her people were focused the entire time on where the information came from, rather than what was provided in the leaks/hacks themselves.
The logic or lack there of doesn't make sense to me.
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
It shouldn't be. Our government is becoming so corrupt, it's unstable. It's the reason why we have Trump.
Look, Trump's support base is shrinking by the hour. If you are interacting with Trump voters, bear in mind that they are also unsure of their support for him.
But when the time comes for them to vote, how will we show them that the democrats are party worth supporting? How will we persuade the to pull the lever for the left-wing, if the left-wing is untrustworthy?
How I wish the DNC weren't so entrenched. Any kind of re-invention of the party might have helped inspire trust in people turned off by what the party has become.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
It's going to be very interesting. The DNC should be running full force fixing their party and making themselves more attractive. But from what it seems it still the same party as last year...
n/a Rubulisk 2017-05-17
The thing is, the Democrats are NOT a party worth supporting, neither are the Republicans. So long as someone is supporting one party or the other, they are stuck in the paradigm used to divide us.
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
I agree. But without a party, we have no voice, and the electoral process becomes meaningless.
I'm describing my own dilemma. I quit the democratic party last year, and voted for Stein. I feel shut out, because I'm not attached to a party.
I wish we could start a third party...
n/a icedicks 2017-05-17
There has been, to date, 0 evidence of any Russian involvement. Much more likely the entire Russian narrative is a deflection tactic from the DNC.
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
This is the condensed version of what I was trying to say^
n/a Anandamidee 2017-05-17
Personally im more worried about american corruption than russian. Russia didnt dissolve habeas corpus. Russia didnt attack us on 911. Russia didnt pass the patriot act. Russia isnt spying on every single american against there will. This whole focus on russia is a misdirection
n/a DawnPendraig 2017-05-17
Exactly
n/a bartink 2017-05-17
How is the DNC evil? They are a typical political party, seems to me.
Is the RNC evil?
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Well yes, politics is inherently evil.
But in terms of scandals and obvious crimes committed, the dnc has the rnc beat by a sizable margain.
These are non-partisan statements I've made in this thread; if you read my response to other comments in this thread, the 2-party system is worthless and really it's only one choice; the choice they give us, although they make it seems like there is an option.
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
No we are not. I'm not a Trump supporter. Lots of us aren't Trump supporters.
I'm a progressive, and I think the DNC is a cesspool, and would believe just about anything about them at this point.
But as rabid as I am in my dislike for the DNC, I still need better evidence regarding Rich's death than that which has been provided.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Looking at top posts and how I get called an "Islam apologist" when I tell people I'm worried about Russia backing far right politicians in my country it sure as hell feels like t_d
And I agree. Both the democrats and republicans are cesspools of corruption but I'm not going to let emotion rule over facts and evidence. Nor does me knowing this mean I can't also be worried about other conspiracies...
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
I just got seriously downvoted on /r/politics because I said there was corruption on both the right and left. Just now. I'm at -11 and dropping.
I guess that was a completely unacceptable view-point eh?
It's like a mad-house around here these days.
n/a smackson 2017-05-17
There is corruption on both the left and the right.
And I believe we should all be able to hold multiple thoughts in our brain at the same time.
But forum threads are often about focus. And if someone is trying to focus on a particular point of corruption on one side, I can see how it's unhelpful to insert, at that point, that both sides are corrupt.
I mean even beyond the way it is a blatant tactic of biased journalists and apologists of the worst corruption (I'll never forget when Republicans tried to "shut down government" with the spending cap freeze and idiots said "our darn congress is feckless" implying equal culpability both sides...) it is somewhat objectively an annoying debate gambit.
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
Well, I think it is helpful. We should all want a government free of corruption, and if we finger-point at the other guy, while never taking responsibility for our own flaws, then we really accomplish nothing.
n/a smackson 2017-05-17
I think of it like firing missiles.
Just because that other side over there deserves a sidewinder right up their exhaust, no need to jam the signal of the current missile homing in on its target here.
We have more missiles. Let each get their targets as unfettered as possible.
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
I see your point, but in the end, we both get blown up.
n/a ihavetenfingers 2017-05-17
It's just because people keep winding up here from /r/all, TD and srs
n/a peyote_the_coyote 2017-05-17
Well yeah the DNC is a criminal organization, the current lawsuit against them for rigging the primaries is exposing that.
n/a ronintetsuro 2017-05-17
Don't you dare spread that evil. It's called catapulting the propaganda and whoever convinced you to do it is your enemy.
n/a Tunderbar1 2017-05-17
Not a Trump supporter.
n/a MollyNostrils23 2017-05-17
Oh look. Yet another comment trying to portray a sub that deals with the corruption of the previous government as supportive of their opposition. Thank you for giving me renewed determination.
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
Wikileaks doesn't necessarily know who leaks info to them, and it's their stated policy that they don't want to know. They have a secure site where leaks can be dropped anonymously. Assange only knew any personal info about Chelsea Manning because she volunteered it. But if Rich was careful, no one at Wikileaks would know he was the leaker.
n/a krylosz 2017-05-17
Then how come Assange himself tweets about Rich being the leaker? This whole Wikileaks
garbagenarrative makes no sense whatsoever!n/a pingveno 2017-05-17
He doesn't tweet about Rich being the leaker. He says ambiguous things with a wink and a nudge. He knows full well that some people will interpret that as an endorsement of their narrative, but at the same time it allows plausible deniability for people defending him against charges of baseless accusations.
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
-16.MAY.2017, Brad Bauman claims evidence is nonexistant -anonymous federal investigator corroborates Rod Wheeler having witnesed fbi forensics report assange talks about seth rich @ 0.28 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp7FkLBRpKg
from https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6bmifb/who_is_seth_rich_megapostthread/
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
Assange has never acknowledged any of his leakers, even Chelsea Manning. He might suspect Rich was the leaker but not know it, which is why he has offered a reward for info. Perhaps the leaker made clear he was an insider in the DNC but didn't give his name.
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
But if he didn't know Rich was the leaker, then why would he offer a reward for information related to his murder? Why would Rich's death have been of interest to him at all?
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
He might know and choose not to say. He might have strong suspicions based on personal info the leaker provided but doesn't know for sure. I don't know either way. It's possible that because Wikileaks portal is encrypted for anonymity for sources, the only way to know if Rich was the leaker is by accessing his laptop.
n/a -ghost-in-the-shell- 2017-05-17
Wikileaks keeps the names secret unless the leaker wants everyone to know. Wikileaks does that even if the person dies.
n/a Theappunderground 2017-05-17
No they dont. Did you not read the post you replied to? Assange has claimed he doesnt know any of the leakers names and there isnt a way for him to know their name by default.
So the seth rich stuff is bullshit. Unless assange is a liar. In which case how can we believe him then?
n/a juan0farc 2017-05-17
Assange has also said that they never reveal sources under any circumstances. Even if the source is claiming they're the source he will neither confirm or deny they're the source, since they could be doing so under duress.
It's also a bit odd that both Assange and Wikileaks keep retweeting any tweets in reference to Rich, even that he had been in contact with Wikileaks prior to his death.
n/a ihavetenfingers 2017-05-17
I still refuse to believe it's the original Assange.
n/a DawnPendraig 2017-05-17
It's a Cylon
n/a smackson 2017-05-17
Downvote because this phrase is useless...
What "Seth Rich stuff" is bullshit?
The possibility that he was murdered is bullshit?
What he possibly leaked about the DNC is bullshit/fake?
The claim that his possible leaks imply No Russkies is bullshit?
Assange's (implied) claim that the leaks were from Seth Rich is bullshit?
My man, it's a complicated topic. Please avoid the word "stuff" if you want people to get what you're talking about.
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
But if someone was murdered, then they have a moral obligation to bring that crime to light.
Right now all they are doing is toying with us, and i resent that.
n/a DawnPendraig 2017-05-17
Except it could endanger the victim's family
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
That makes sense, but because of their cryptic insinuations, Wikileaks own credibility has been weakened. The case for Seth Rich hasn't been strengthened.
n/a titiwiwi 2017-05-17
So, if Assange didn't know he was the leaker... how could the DNC have known he was the leaker so soon before the leaks even came out???
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
Wikileaks doesn't necessarily know who leaks info to them, and it's their stated policy that they don't want to know. They have a secure site where leaks can be dropped anonymously. Assange only knew any personal info about Chelsea Manning because she volunteered it. But if Rich was careful, no one at Wikileaks would know he was the leaker.
n/a Thy_Gooch 2017-05-17
Assange is dead or in some CIA black site so there isn't going to be any 'proof' coming from him. But when Seth was killed Assange did make some comments alluding to that Seth was the DNC leak.
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
I really support Wikileaks, but I resent this particular game Assange is playing. He's floating allegations, but not supporting them.
n/a LordDongler 2017-05-17
Then why did Assange raise money for his funeral?
n/a peyote_the_coyote 2017-05-17
No he just put out a reward for information in regards to Seth Rich's death.
And used his name when talking about how leakers take huge risks when doing what they are doing.
Get real.
n/a terrorismofthemind 2017-05-17
Except wikileaks is personally raising money for justice in this case - the only other time they've done that is with their other source, Chelsea Manning.
n/a know_comment 2017-05-17
Assange proving Rich was the leaker would do more to legally incriminate Rich than it would the democrats/ clinton campaign. That would be a tough decision to make. To some, it would make rich a martyr, and to others, a traitor of the highest order.
So we don't know the truth for sure- but Assange maintains that he is consistent to his supposed journalistic code of ethics in his unwillingness to name sources.
BUT... at the same time, he has certainly insinuated without too much evidence that Rich was a source. It has also been heavily insinuated by former british pm and ambassador Craig Murray, that he was Seth Rich's contact within wikileaks.
If you already are a fervant DNC supporter, you aren't going to immediately jump to the conclusion that the DNC murdered rich- just because you find out that he was the leaker. So I don't think there's a lot of value of them speaking outside of coded language regarding the issue.
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
SETH RICH extended updated TIMELINE with SOURCES megapost http://riggedit.com/seth-rich/
TLDR (Images /Screencaps ): https://imgur.com/a/qw31M
n/a Horaenaut 2017-05-17
That heavily leans on posts on 4chan...
n/a bartink 2017-05-17
Wheeler claims he learned from a Foxnews reporter. No one seems to know where it came from. Here is CNN article on the story.
Wheeler is a hack. He went on O'Reilly to discuss lesbian gangs terrorizing America with their pink guns. I'm not making that up.
n/a fuzzydunlots 2017-05-17
Well there's a ton of evidence that Russia is very active in this community.
There's also a ton of evidence Trump has extensive financial ties to Russia. His son brags about it.
Seth Rich sent a 1000's of documents to WikiLeaks proving neocons within the DNC sabatouged Bernie.
I don't believe Trump stole the election. I do believe Russian psy-ops exploited newly connected Facebookers with targeted misinformation campaign using Brad Parscales big data similar to how Obama got elected.
This Seth Rich distraction in the midst of an ever growing POTUS scandal only proves how easily Trump supporters were manipulated.
n/a rochameist 2017-05-17
They're just gonna say Seth Rich was working for the Russians.
n/a Solctice89 2017-05-17
How can you refute this?
n/a flyPeterfly 2017-05-17
How can you refute the flying spaghetti monster?
n/a goemon45 2017-05-17
Because they say that about anyone who opposes them
n/a Afrobean 2017-05-17
How can you refute a baseless allegation with no evidence that makes no sense? Huh?
n/a WaitTilUSeeMyDick 2017-05-17
Seriously. The set-up is in play already. Basically the whole front page of this sub is Seth Rich posts today. And people are placing seeds of doubt through.
Regulars? Does any of this seem natural to you?
n/a ass_boy 2017-05-17
Although I will agree it does not seem natural I do want to see what is on that laptop so we might as well roll with it
n/a ThermalStability 2017-05-17
When you have a full front page of the same thing it's guaranteed to be heavily monitored and controlled.
n/a kybarnet 2017-05-17
The Shill level has been high since a couple days prior to the French election. Conspiracy gets their posts removed if they reach All and we are seeing a flood of new, confidentially against all conspiracy, sign ups.
That is odd. That would be like if all new subscribers to Politics only talked about how dumb politics was to talk about. It's clearly some form of shillary, though perhaps it's Reddit search manipulation, like how they manipulate the front page.
Are you subscribed to TinyTrumps and TheNewRussianHolocaust ? Try Conspiracy! - Shit like that can appear 'shillary' but is more manipulated search engine results, leading to a flood of 'anti' thinkers brigading thoughtful discussion.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
It's so blatant. It's like they're not even trying to hide it anymore.
n/a Stevo182 2017-05-17
Look at the "hottest" comments in this and other threads. Massive astroturfing. People claiming this is just a secondary t_d sub and calling everyone here idiots, even though weve been around much longer than t_d and the vast majority of our membors dont support trump or any partisan for that matter (its all a sham).
n/a AkoTehPanda 2017-05-17
That's the clincher. The vast majority of people that are balls deep in conspiracy forums support no political candidate because they believe it's all the same shit, different face.
This sub is seeing hordes of people that denigrate conspiracy theories while citing MSM. It's bizzare. Recent hype with wikileaks has opened a few eyes, but there's way too many people bagging on well established conspiracy theories to be coincidental.
n/a Rubulisk 2017-05-17
The purpose of this manipulation is not now, nor has it ever been, to reach the diehard skeptics or conspiracists. The purpose is to sway those who are tangentially interested and still invested in the paradigm of left/right. You get the newer people to fight each other, and both of them to turn on those that are here to actually discuss on the purpose of the sub.
This "astroturfing" or "brigading" that is an every week occurrence now, is why I spend most of my reddit time on /r/subnautica anymore, at least the discussion there is on topic.
n/a antibubbles 2017-05-17
Yeah, it's normal. One shred of a hint of a shadow of a conspiracy and the sub freaks out and goes autistic on it for a month....
like that pizza nonsense
n/a sir_drink_alot 2017-05-17
Who the fuck is afraid of the russian, the north koreans or even isys or Iran? Only CNN and Fox news, nobody else except a bunch of secluded old people... Pretty sure North Korea would try to start shit and we'd fuck them up beyond recognition. Actually, we'd let them blow up a few cities so that we could get a fuck ton more military funding... good old war machine. People are worried about automated AI taking over the world, what about this self sustaining military complex, the biggest fuckin social program in the world besides the US government...
PS: I'm drunk, all comments are comliments of Jack Danials!
n/a wwwes32 2017-05-17
He probably was tho. If you think Hillary and Podesta don't murder people, it's the only logical explanation.
n/a pingveno 2017-05-17
I've heard a crazy amount of people absolutely insisting he had a vaguely defined position in IT where they assume he would have had easy access to mail. Folks don't realize that "person who does computer stuff" is not a single title.
n/a wwwes32 2017-05-17
And mail is something you just generally do not get access to. For exactly the reasons we saw last year (god, it wasn't even a year ago).
n/a MessisTaxAccountant 2017-05-17
And if they don't?
Never mind, y'all will just move on to the next anonymous 4chan post claiming to have insider information.
n/a TOPICALJOKELOL 2017-05-17
Er, that wouldn't justify murdering him.
n/a jmflna 2017-05-17
Has wikileaks shown they were in contact with Seth Rich? Wouldn't releasing that evidence not only shut a lot of people up about Russia but also give the family of Seth Rich some clue as to what really happen to him?
n/a Girl_Drama 2017-05-17
wikileaks never discloses sources
n/a niakarad 2017-05-17
Well they're not supposed to vaguely hint at it either but that's still happening.
n/a zerton 2017-05-17
By "vaguely" I think you mean "blatantly" ha.
n/a XDiabolusExMachinaX 2017-05-17
Tell that to Snowden, manning...
n/a chapacha 2017-05-17
Wikileaks didn't disclose Manning, because Manning left a trail and was easily caught as the leaker. Snowden also didn't leak to WikiLeaks so he was never a source for them.
n/a WaitTilUSeeMyDick 2017-05-17
He's just here "to watch retards be retards". Ignore him.
n/a mkultra5512 2017-05-17
What are you talking about WikiLeaks have still never explicitly started that Manning was the leaker of the War Logs (though, yes, we do know that to be the case) and Snowden didn't leak through WikiLeaks.
n/a Lord_of_Jam 2017-05-17
Isn't that to protect the leakers though? If Seth Rich was their source, and Seth is now dead, then there's not really a reason to withhold the source is there?
n/a letsgetphysical_ 2017-05-17
It's to protect anonymity of future leakers.
n/a SooperModelsDotCom 2017-05-17
B. Wikipedia put out a reward for information regarding Seth Rich's death which proves he was the leaker.
Pick one.
n/a Dinkir9 2017-05-17
Orrr Seth Rich has a family and they need to be kept safe.
OR it was someone else in the DNC and they're trying to keep them out of the spotlight.
There are a million possibilities.
n/a MessisTaxAccountant 2017-05-17
How so?
It's not like they're leaking names of people who are alive.
n/a foilmethod 2017-05-17
They also still haven't confirmed whether Manning was a leaker, despite her admitting it and having served a sentence for it.
n/a MessisTaxAccountant 2017-05-17
Because she's still alive.
Which still fits perfectly into my argument.
n/a GundalfTheCamo 2017-05-17
For the protection of the source. Who is dead.
They could probably make an exception here, since it could reveal the truth of the Russia accusations.
n/a Hi_mom1 2017-05-17
...or releases info on Russia or their allies; seems to be an anti-US outfit for at least the past 5 years.
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
They don't necessarily know the identities of their sources. It's a confidential leaking process.
n/a Girl_Drama 2017-05-17
also means there never should have been an investigation into trump-russia and if that never happened, people like Flynn would have been more likely to not try and cover some bull shit up
n/a gnovos 2017-05-17
There were multiple leaks.
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
I disagree. Russia and Trump could have collusion. It just means the claim that Russia hacked our election is bogus, which I always thought that narrative was a bit much.
n/a CrustyGrundle 2017-05-17
Collusion to do what, exactly?
n/a Freqwaves 2017-05-17
To not start a new cold war of course silly.
/collusion
n/a dehehn 2017-05-17
To empower Putin at the expense of the US and the EU. To enrich Russian oligarchs and the Trump family at the expense of the American people. To pour the US tres
n/a ItsJustbanterm8 2017-05-17
...As oppose to letting the Bilderberg group keep all the power?
n/a WhoAreTheGlobalists 2017-05-17
Weve been letting the globalists leech off of us for decades. Weve been sending money all around the globe. But now its a problem.
n/a dehehn 2017-05-17
When it's Russia it's not a problem?
n/a WhoAreTheGlobalists 2017-05-17
its a problem with whoever it is thats leeching off of us, have we given Russia any money yet? no?
n/a dehehn 2017-05-17
Give them time. Now would not be the best moment considering everything that's going on.
n/a dehehn 2017-05-17
So letting Russia and Trump drain our resources in addition to the Bilderbergs that's a good thing? Also Trump just met with Kissinger after the Russians. If you think he's not going to be in the lap of the Bilderbergs you're kidding yourself.
n/a CrustyGrundle 2017-05-17
Too bad there is literally no evidence for this.
n/a Hi_mom1 2017-05-17
I don't know one way or the other, but I doubt there was any changing of the votes which is what most folks think of when they hear hacking.
But anyone who has even a basic knowledge of hacking knows that the vast majority of hacking is social engineering so when we look at the news stories and the way the DNC leaks were twisted into narratives, the populace was hacked not the voting machines.
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
So is MSM twists narratives to suit a particular candidate, in a non even handed way. That would be considered hacking as well? News is global, countries throwing out propaganda isn't exactly new.
n/a Hi_mom1 2017-05-17
You have a great point here.
I think we are all guilty of confirmation bias from time to time and it's important for us to consider the opposite side of things, who has an agenda, etc.
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
They ALL have an agenda. And it is really hard to ever truly check one's own bias. Most are passionate about our ideals, and in order to truly be unbiased, we have to detach ourselves, this is not an easy thing to do.
n/a Hi_mom1 2017-05-17
Agreed. Some are pretty simple to see - clicks/subscriptions/viewers etc, others are harder to uncover.
I'm not sure this is truly possible - I know that I am guilty of believing things that confirm my suspicions and being suspicious of things I previously regarded as false.
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
My ego tells me I can be completely unbiased. I know this not to be true though.
n/a Hi_mom1 2017-05-17
Well-said.
Only when we know that we don't know much more than we know, can we truly be aware of all that is.
Or some zen bullshit like that...the older I get the more I realize I'm just a lucky dumb ape walking around talking out my ass.
I don't even understand how I answer questions - like straight up black and white answers whether they be mathematical or scientific it comes from the ether in the same way that my gut judgement of another human being does; hopefully someday I can understand why I feel or think the way I do.
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
The further down that rabbit hole I go, the scarier it gets for me. Even our perceptions are easily influenced. Even our own mind can deceive us. Every experience we have IMO impacts us, we may not be aware of the impact, but our brain broke it down and set it away, awaiting of any future patterns that it may apply to, and then said experience bubbles back up to the surface. The question I suppose is. Are you you? Or are you nothing more than the sum of your experiences. The older I get the less reliable my memories are, and I have no doubt many have been tuned to fit the narrative my own brain is trying to sell me.
n/a tadm123 2017-05-17
Judging by the downvotes, it's not only the media whose desperate.
n/a GlipGlopSuperMop 2017-05-17
I like how we think in here
n/a tetefather 2017-05-17
I'll give you guys another point of view.
The latest news focuses on another attack on Trump, making fun of how he gave away classified information to Russians (again...).
Remember the HRC emails? How she had SAP level classified material on her laptop? Knowing the history of the Clintons, she was probably following her husband's footsteps and selling that information to foreign interests. The SAPs were mentioned in a few msm articles but downplayed by media in general.
Zooming out on this shit-show, a lot of top secret files are probably in non-American hands and probably, indirectly, all over the global private sector, but the media makes a HUGE deal out of some stupid ISIS Israeli spy?
Are you fucking kidding me? ISIS is MOSSAD! The msm narrative is SOOOO far from the truth it's mindblowing..
n/a Shadowandlight64 2017-05-17
And because the FBI has never independently verified the hack because the DNC refused to let them look. The entire case revolves around and is held up because the the report and findings by CrowdStrike.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
What about Mike Flynns resignation?
n/a applextrent 2017-05-17
Flynn has nothing to do with the DNC or Seth Rich or Wikileaks.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
No shit sherlock.
He "resigned" because of his contact with Russians. That's why Trump sacked him.
So even if this Seth rich hoax that's getting spammed is even credible 0.001% it still doesn't negate the fact that Flynn is out, Trump said Russia hacked the DNC Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Russian investigation because of HIS inappropriate contact with Russians
Ie the Russian narrative doesn't live or die solely on Seth rich.
n/a sydewayzsoundz 2017-05-17
Until they say Seth Rich was a Russian agent... You know that's coming.
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
The Washington Post already floated this nonsense:
n/a goemon45 2017-05-17
These people are trying to tell me they hacked the polls
n/a Otelo2 2017-05-17
Fallacies at its finest right here
n/a wildblade64 2017-05-17
Damn straight.
n/a Freqwaves 2017-05-17
Of course there was no Russian hack whether Rich was the DNC leaker or not.
n/a zerton 2017-05-17
I'm agnostic about this, at least for maybe one of the leaks. Russians are notoriously good hackers. It's whether or not the hacking was state-sanctioned by the Kremlin that would be the real question. That I personally doubt. The Russian government is known for turning a blind eye to this stuff.
n/a Freqwaves 2017-05-17
Nothing to do with Russians. Podesta lost his phone in a cab, and also used very insecure passwords-both of these facts are actually IN the Podesta emails.
The DNC leaks were leaks not hacks.
n/a Hi_mom1 2017-05-17
So who hacked the RNC?
n/a wwwes32 2017-05-17
Not just a blind eye, they have a team of hackers working for the government for intelligence purposes and psyops.
n/a slyweazal 2017-05-17
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections
n/a slyweazal 2017-05-17
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections
n/a Aqua_lung 2017-05-17
Anybody that has been aware of the active and ongoing psy-ops conducted through the media would have seen through all of this due to the lack of substantial evidence.
n/a AFuckYou 2017-05-17
Did you ever consider this is all a game for keeping the masses dancing.
.
Isn't Seth rich leaking the conclusion we came to when the Russian narrative first came out.
Then we were all shocked that it gained traction because it was an obvious ploy by the Democratic Party to take trump down quite a few notches.
Then it worked.
.
I believe the truth is some where inbetween. Trump has ties to Russia. He has ties to the mob. And he is a position to allow a lot of bad stuff to happen including child trafficking, coke dealing, and whatever the fuck.
.
At the same time, Seth rich leaked and was murdered.
.
Has any one considered that this is a divide and conquer campaign? Antifa much, violent protests, probably domestic terrorism.
More rights stripped, etc.
n/a SaltHash 2017-05-17
The right-media does seem desperate.
http://www.businessinsider.com/seth-rich-family-right-wing-media-report-wikileaks-2017-5
n/a HoboBobo28 2017-05-17
so is the left. they've been pushing the russia narrative with little to no proof
n/a RedEyesBlackSwaggin 2017-05-17
yeah, there's no proof that Trump gives preferential treatment to Russian press or discloses classified information to....oh wait...
well, it's not like Trump's close associates were forced to recuse themselves or resign from.....oh wait.....
n/a I_just_want_da_truth 2017-05-17
"A representative for the Rich family"?
Is that a fucking joke? Is he a Butler?
So what you trying to say is "look, see their family says they don't like this very much. " but his family didn't say jack shit it was just some PR douchebag.
n/a Male_strom 2017-05-17
Correlation between DNC emails and French election emails then?
n/a paulie_purr 2017-05-17
Those didn't have much of an impact and have subsequently been forgotten, apparently, here at least. Ditto the random French official who died AKA the "french seth rich."
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
She was not the French Seth Rich and there is no evidence Seth Rich actually was Wikileaks source, the source of the Macron emails was a Russian hack.
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201705071053351620-wikilieaks-macron-email-leak/
http://news.sky.com/story/french-mp-dies-after-collapsing-during-macron-campaign-speech-10865399
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
There is plenty of evidence; there is no concrete proof:
http://riggedit.com/seth-rich/
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
The very first image on that shitty website you've linked has been proven incorrect already. Keep your spam up to date at least.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/hold-fire-on-those-stories-about-seth-rich-the-slain-dnc-staffer/article/2623263
http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/16/media/seth-rich-family-response-claims-of-wikileaks-contact/index.html
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
Interesting way to discredit!
125813140 No one should be paying attention to or quoting anything Bauman has to say. They are Bauman's words and not the words of Seth Rich's family. The DNC made him the "spokesman" for the family but he doesn't speak for them. He is misrepresenting them in his own words. When he interacts with them he tells them what he wants them to say and then goes and says it by himself. He is not being honest, this guy is a pathological lying sociopath. There is an entire organized network of sociopaths/psychopaths at work here. This Bauman guy already dismissed the emails by basically saying "I haven't heard of any emails but if emails come out, they are not evidence. They are just words that anybody can type". This is something a psychopath does when they don't have the answers. They make stuff up and dig further holes for themselves and then make some more stuff up. This doesn't work forever if they operate on their own but they are a giant network and they control the MSM so they can lie and spin and ignore then go on to the next subject. It's worked for them for decades.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
Lmao you're actually quoting 4chan posts, post number and all.
n/a juan0farc 2017-05-17
In this day and age, there's more truth coming out of /pol/ than is coming out of the MSM. Sad to say.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
Lol,,,,,,, ok
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
Evidence Compiled: https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6bmifb/who_is_seth_rich_megapostthread/
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
All bullshit based on bullshit that has already been discredited.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/hold-fire-on-those-stories-about-seth-rich-the-slain-dnc-staffer/article/2623263
http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/16/media/seth-rich-family-response-claims-of-wikileaks-contact/index.html
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
Glad you think so!
n/a Slagct 2017-05-17
Like CNN, they are becoming overly aggressive in their shilling.
n/a dylan522p 2017-05-17
That doesn't debunk the threads contents....
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
It does, it's all bullshit.
n/a dylan522p 2017-05-17
Literally read both. They don't even address the same things.
n/a _Amish_Electrician 2017-05-17
I believe there is more to this then a robbery gone wrong?
Quoting wapo and cnn does not look great, they are openly biased in support of the one side of the argument.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
I didn't quote wapo Einstein.
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
Thanks for taking the time to put that together. I'm a Sanders liberal and I'm very curious.
BUT, what I'm looking for in evidence are real concrete sources. All you have is that a private investigator said "someone in the know" has told him that there are files on the computer linking him to wikileaks.
Assange hasn't been much help either, because all he does is float ideas, wink and nod. He's given you nothing concrete either. I kind of resent that. What's his game? If he has evidence Rich was murdered, then share it.
I'm not brigading from some other site, and I quit the DNC last year and really dislike the party. But your case is not persuasive.
If you want your case to be persuasive, we need real, concrete evidence. Otherwise, this is all circumstantial theorizing on your part. Interesting, but....
n/a Slagct 2017-05-17
How much are you paid daily?
n/a Ballsdeepinreality 2017-05-17
There's no evidence, it's heavily inplied, even by WL itself.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
Yes, and who benefits from an oblique insinuation that Seth was the source?
n/a paulie_purr 2017-05-17
I'm with you, the "French Seth rich" allegation was a desperate, evidence-free stretch, not an isolated phenomenon I should stress. The whole affair seems a weak miniature of the US election, probably orchestrated by Prosobiec's Rebel Media.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
I hadn't considered the rebel media angle. Interesting. I recall it was so-called "alt right" twitter accounts that propagated and amplified the Macron leaks, would be great to know who controls those twitter bots!
Personally I have suspicions around certain republican grass roots Caucus groups and of course Russia.
n/a vargwulf 2017-05-17
Seth Rich's ghost.
n/a theghostofsethrich 2017-05-17
Yo waddup
n/a cyberst0rm 2017-05-17
correlation between idiots and distractions? did anyone see pizzagate?
n/a peyote_the_coyote 2017-05-17
Logical Fallacy 101 - Correlation is not causation.
n/a OfTheAlien 2017-05-17
Hilarious. Cuck hypocrite talking about logical fallacy's. Never forget u/peyote_the_coyote being a military imposter
n/a AutoModerator 2017-05-17
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
n/a SmedleysButler 2017-05-17
Yeah you heard about logic once and think you know something. Causation is always found through correlation. The statement you used is invariably used by someone who is denying mountains of evidence against their position. No not every correlation is a causation but every causation has a correlation. That's logic 101.(not logical 101. .that wouldn't be logical.)
n/a Drewcifer419 2017-05-17
Grasping at straws
n/a Tunderbar1 2017-05-17
None.
n/a TheWolskinator 2017-05-17
I've been saying that it is weird that Russian cyber fingerprints were so easy to see during the French election. It seemed like an attempt to wash this whole thing over and completely change history. Why, after they supposedly had so much experience with us, would they leave such an obvious trail here when they should only be better? Just a theory though. Can anybody piece together any more reasons or tell me why I'm wrong?
n/a sparky2212 2017-05-17
Let no death go un-politicized.
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
If you guys ever wonder why so many of us refer to you as low information voters, this is why. You have no grasp of even the basic fundamentals of the issue, let alone an actual argument. Here let me drop another conspiracy on you:
Right media make shit. They shit into Trumps mouth. Trump digests and shits it into your mouth. You eat every bite of his shit with unquestioning belief. Repeat forever.
n/a sceneredacted 2017-05-17
You sound like an authentic intellectual.
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
I'm not but if you're one of the low info voters im talking about I could get why it seems that way
n/a drillpoint 2017-05-17
Holy shit
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
r/iamverysmart
n/a Bumi_Earth_King 2017-05-17
He literally says he's not smart. This is the opposite of /r/iamverysmart. This is /r/youareverydumb.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Another example of r/iamverysmart
n/a Bumi_Earth_King 2017-05-17
How?
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
r/iamverysmart
n/a Bumi_Earth_King 2017-05-17
You are?
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Me too thanks ;)
n/a Bumi_Earth_King 2017-05-17
Oh wow, you're actually this stupid.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
r/iamverysmart
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-05-17
Removed. Rule 4.
n/a Bumi_Earth_King 2017-05-17
Alright
n/a TRAIN_WRECK_0 2017-05-17
So you getting your Russia collusion information from anonymous sources is any better?
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
My info comes from every credible US intelligence agency. What are you smoking?
n/a reddituser257 2017-05-17
Hahahaha, good one.
n/a TheMysteriousFizzyJ 2017-05-17
And the Washington Post had a $600 million dollar CIA contract to make shit.
n/a S5S5S55S 2017-05-17
And have Podesta the Molesta on staff.
n/a ron_swansons_meat 2017-05-17
Who told you that nonsense? You are confused and spreading misinformation. Please stop. The CIA has a contract with Amazon for email and cloud storage....just like thousands of other organizations. Jeff Bezos is the CEO of Amazon and personally owns the Washington Post. Your version is wildly inaccurate and farcical.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Shariablue.
n/a TRAIN_WRECK_0 2017-05-17
"cloud storage"
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Right. So tell me more about how you'll blindly believe any bullshit the right tells you but won't believe our own intelligence agencies
n/a FalseGodMoloch 2017-05-17
Lol so the CIA is now a trustworthy agency?
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
More than the Kremlin? Uh ya
n/a FalseGodMoloch 2017-05-17
What are you on? Kremlin has nothing to do with the discussion. You were shitting on right media, what the fuck are you talking about? Are you sayin that right media is funded by the Kremlin? Show evidence then lol
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
This thread is about Russia so not sure why you're confused why I would mention the Kremlin. It's kind of central to the discussion. But no, clearly there's no story here. It just so happens that Russia funded thousands of shills to perpetuate made up stories the right eats up.
Oh evidence lol? I know you guys don't believe anything outside what Breitbart tells you but here ya go: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/russia-internet-trolls-and-donald-trump-2016-7
Please, tell me more about how this is fake but there's a Clinton funded child sex ring in a pizza place
n/a HoboBobo28 2017-05-17
so you think that Russia hired Gopnik's to troll the internet? hiringGOPNIKS to shitpost? gopniks will fucking shitpost for free
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Did you read the article? I know they did. And yeah, you losers might do it for free but the hundreds of sites from Macedonia need a paycheck.
n/a FalseGodMoloch 2017-05-17
I ask for evidence on media you give paid trolls. Lol.
You have been jumping everywhere and not following the discussion, in addition to be a condescending asshole. Nice job :D
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Paid trolls are what constitutes a large part of right wing media. But like I said, pretty obvious that any facts I present you with you'll just automatically dismiss
n/a jellyfishjumpingmtn 2017-05-17
Ever heard of MKULTRA? I'm guessing not, you seem like a pretty low-information individual
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Got it so you're suggesting the Kremlin is more trustworthy. Well at least you're open about being a traitor
n/a jellyfishjumpingmtn 2017-05-17
Yeah definitely. It's Eurasia or Oceania right? If I don't support one tyranny, that means I have to support a foreign one yeah? I can't just be an individual against power and corruption. It's US vs THEM. Definitely. Solid logic buddy.
n/a TOPICALJOKELOL 2017-05-17
You sound like a low information voter. Trusting one thing more than another does not make one a traitor. In your case, it makes you blind.
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Whoa let me break down how dumb what you just said is. If the guy I responded to is American, him believing a foreign adversary like the Kremlin more than his own government makes him one of two things: a traitor or incredibly gullible. Oh, or maybe both
n/a EliteAsFuk 2017-05-17
I'm not sure if they are actual traitors, or if the right wing media has literally washed their minds with bullshit.
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Right. I think a lot of them are misled but then too insecure to ever admit they are wrong so it leads them to just supporting acts of treason
n/a rex_dart_eskimo_spy 2017-05-17
Gullible traitors is a great phrase to describe the Trump/Russian/Confederate Flag loving crowd.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Jesus. You're a fucking bully. Go away.
n/a TOPICALJOKELOL 2017-05-17
You don't even know what a traitor is rofl
n/a reddituser257 2017-05-17
Lol, you certainly are quick to call people traitors. Maybe he is just good at spotting lies? The USG does that a lot you know.
n/a Mutedthenbanned 2017-05-17
That's funny coming from the left. You cant even manage to accept the decision of a democratically practiced election that has been accepted and used since day 1.
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Dumb argument. I accept the election results. Most of us do. What I don't accept is Trump colluding with Russia during his campaign whether it helped him win or not. That's, oh what's the word...treason.
n/a Mutedthenbanned 2017-05-17
Lol, k. You accept the election results. You're a bit out of your lane. Better becareful. They'll call you a trump supporter for saying things like you accept the results. My fucking sides.
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Way to be redundant
n/a terrorismofthemind 2017-05-17
What is the 2003 Iraq War?
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
What is a false equivalence?
n/a terrorismofthemind 2017-05-17
How is that a false equivalence? CIA has a long history of giving false intel to journalists and the American people in order to advance their interests.
CIA is at least as bad as the Kremlin. Both agencies don't care about the well being of the people they are supposed to be working for.
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
If you think that's as bad as the Kremlin, you clearly don't know too much about the Russian government
n/a reddituser257 2017-05-17
The Kremlin is not an agency numbnuts, it's a building.
n/a 6jarjar6 2017-05-17
You're in /r/conspiracy asking if someone trusts the CIA...
n/a I_just_want_da_truth 2017-05-17
I don't blindly believe anything I'm told. I don't believe the CIA, FBI, RUSSIA, or Wikileaks blindly. But when you take the track record of all of them and wikileaks has the only spotless record I'm more likely to believe that. There is no proof Seth Rich leaked the emails but it sure looks that way. And then on top of that you have wikileaks pretty much saying it was Seth Rich.... Idk man. This one seems pretty easy to believe.
You seem to think the CIA operates for the greater good. Are you not aware of their reputation? Are you seriously defending the fucking CIA? WOW
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
It's actually pretty clear you blindly believe anything you're told if you think Wikileaks has a "spotless record". Aside from very obvious collusion with the Russians to interfere in our election to support Trump what else do you need? I'm glad you at least admit you're more likely to believe the word of a foreign adversary than your own countrymen but christ, at least do your homework before just buying into something blindly. Like you just said, there is no evidence to support the Seth Rich conspiracy and now Fox News is getting sued by his family over it. But you choose to believe this because it supports your narrative and just as easily dismiss anything that doesn't.
You seem to think Wikileaks operates for the greater good. Are you not aware of their reputation? Are you seriously defending fucking Wikileaks? WOW
In all seriousness though, you know the difference between you and me? If this was Obama in Trump's shoes, and it looked like he was guilty of treason, I would have been calling for impeachment just like all the GOP would have. Some of us actually give a shit about country more than party. So yes, even though the CIA obviously has faults, at least I know they fight for America. Your side can't say the same.
n/a reddituser257 2017-05-17
It's actually pretty clear you blindly believe anything you're told if you think there is any evidence the Russians interfered in the elections.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
If we're so wrong, why are you here if not to brigade?
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Because I like mocking you dumdums
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
All by your lonesome?
n/a Tsorovar 2017-05-17
Pick one
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
it was a question.
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-05-17
Removed. Rule 10. Only warning.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Shariablue motherfucker. Go away. You're a cancer that's ruining Reddit.
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Please, I wish I could get paid to tell you Trumpies how gullible and easily misled you are. The real cancer is The_Dumbass and everyone knows it
n/a Drozz42 2017-05-17
This comment brought to you by David Brock.
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
This comment brought to you by whatever u/Drozz42 saw from Breitbart and Drudge this morning
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Bahahaha
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Come in, pay me my rubles. I know you Trumpies are good for it
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-05-17
Removed. Rule 10. Final Warning.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
I understand. I apologize. I made all the comments yesterday before I was aware of it. I'll go through and look at my comments.
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-05-17
Please don't delete the ones I removed; it makes us hard to review any potential ban you may get in the future. Just leave the removed ones as they are; it will make it better for you if another mod does end up banning you.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Okay. Sorry.
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-05-17
It's okay.
n/a jewscales 2017-05-17
hahahaha, jesus, look at smart kid's post history
n/a gravitas73 2017-05-17
Just another /politics troll
n/a I_just_want_da_truth 2017-05-17
Haha I like this 👍this is pretty damn good. Thanks.
n/a inkw3ll 2017-05-17
Low information, and intellectually lazy.
People should stop making knee-jerk false assertions if there isn't strong evidence to back it up. It's great to question, and consider other angles. But we shouldn't take a leap of faith based on imagination and conjecture to assert something as fact without considerable evidence and credible consensus.
There is no strong evidence supporting the "Seth Rich was killed because he leaked the emails" narrative. I repeat, there is no evidence to date supporting this narrative. It upsets me to no end that this story line is propagated across the internet as truth when there's nothing back it up.
It's irresponsible, and lazy.
n/a RGA64 2017-05-17
im sure the money trail agrees with the email trail, or not
n/a stophamertime 2017-05-17
This is the equivalent to the 'if the glove doesn't fit you must acquit' defence, it is not enough to brush off the Russian narrative. There are too many links
n/a neverthatone 2017-05-17
... the issue is they have pushed the Russia hacked the election narative when they should have focused on Russia's influence of Trump. There are shady goings on, though the hacked election is probably bs... hell no one is saying they did anything with the election but attempt to influence through the release of DNC Emails.
n/a chitiebang 2017-05-17
Wow a the_ Donald commentor defending Russia I am so shocked stay on the Donald with this shit
n/a Schnidler 2017-05-17
the best part was yesterday when the whole sub was either about some stupid Seth Rich story or how the whole Trump leaking stuff to Russia story was fabricated to distract from Seth Rich. but they went pretty silent when Trump twittered it himself.
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-05-17
Removed. Rule 10.
n/a chitiebang 2017-05-17
I don't give a fuck you shill I am gonna tell people when the Donald cancer is trying to spread its Russia narrative through Reddit
n/a carpentron 2017-05-17
Hmm, I just thought that Assange and Wikileaks were already sympathetic to Russian interests and have been. How does this change anything?
n/a SuperFestigio 2017-05-17
Lol oh shills
n/a carpentron 2017-05-17
Dammit, okay I confess. I receive about $6/month from the feds to promote their agenda on reddit.
n/a fleabitten 2017-05-17
Since there's no obligation to be able to substantiate things in this sub:
Seth Rich was a Russian agent planted within the DNC. He compromised systems and leaked information to his handlers. Whenever Russia wanted that information made public, they would have him send it to Wikileaks as a way of obfuscating any involvement by a foreign power. When he was no longer useful to them, they killed him to tie up any loose ends (as they do) and started spreading the narrative online (as they do) that Hillary did it.
Just as plausible, just as much evidence.
n/a wwwes32 2017-05-17
Not an agent, a disgruntled employee willing to be a mule for those files, which needed to look like they were not from random hackers.
n/a hidflect1 2017-05-17
Obama himself referred to the mails as having been leaked. You're news sources need to be widened.
n/a BiBiClosetHelloWorld 2017-05-17
I come here solely just to savour the fear and desperation of Russian bots. At least I can say what I feel about Trump in this place without getting banned.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
'russian bots' eh... you mean the pro corporate America bots?
n/a thesaltiesthotdog 2017-05-17
So you come to conspiracy instead of the 500 i hate trump subreddits?
n/a BiBiClosetHelloWorld 2017-05-17
Not just for that though,
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
What? Time for you to clock out of Shariablue for the day, you're starting to lose your mind.
n/a girlfriend_pregnant 2017-05-17
I am ambiguous on this issue but the astroturfing around it gives it a bit of credence. I'm not sure these are actual people making these comments, it would be impossible to be so meek that you would follow these particular orders in killing this story.
n/a sickofallofyou 2017-05-17
I know that I as a citizen have nothing better to do then to stand up and argue for the body politic because clearly you people are insane because our manufactured reality is the reality and you're racist transphobic rape apologists.
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-05-17
Removed. Rule 4.
n/a Scaredycrow 2017-05-17
Meanwhile Moscow sits back and sops it all up, laughing their way to the bank.
n/a reini_urban 2017-05-17
Well, there probably was a russian hack. Several independent companies found traces of two russian toolsets on the clinton servers, but not on the DNC server. But this doesn't mean that the russians leaked it publicly. The DNC leak was very likely a leak, the Podesta gmail hack was probably done by amateurs/fishers. Maybe they even came from Russia/Ukraine, as most of those guys.
Of course the entire Russian narrative in the media is false. There is as with most CIA disinfo only a small core of half truth. Same as with the Russian Trump connection. There was a connection to the Russian mafia, but since 2016 they were heavily fighting, as the russians betrayed Trump with some of his projects. The whole Flynn narrative is a joke, as well as the Petraeus and Benghazi investigations. Petraeus and Benghazi was something completely different, much worse.
n/a Oerath 2017-05-17
You're an idiot if you think the supposed DNC hack is the only thing driving the Russian investigations.
n/a AusGeno 2017-05-17
Guys let's just think about why this story is being dragged out again, we can see past this kind of blatant distraction - the investigator himself has already said he has no new evidence. Let's not dance for them this time.
n/a yoLeaveMeAlone 2017-05-17
So because there was a leak, you are sure that Russia didn't have the DNC, didn't give money or communicate with the Trump campaign, didn't give money to the GOP... The Russia thing isn't just that they leaked the DNC Wikileaks emails. In fact, I don't think the investigation ever said anything about those emails in particular, just that they hacked certain politicians emails, including Democrats and Republicans. If Russia got emails they would likely use them for blackmail, not just make them public and be done with it
n/a El_Taco_Boom 2017-05-17
Saying the whole Russian narrative is fake based on this is a joke.
n/a macronius 2017-05-17
American public politics is no longer a serious affair, an affair of transcendental import for the technologically-led destiny of the late capitalist, post-truth state. The public, as a result, has been far too infantilized by the reigning plutocrat-bureaucrat axis and consequently what passes for political discussion in the U.S. has correspondingly been equally infantilized; the controlling oligarchs, masters of politics as masters of the purchased (or purloined) state, fear no consequences and thus their nihilistic unconcern before the inconsequential effects (for their class) of their malfeasance or incompetence causes them to indolently play a game of perpetual pseudo-suspence with the minds of the politically residual middling classes and below.
n/a NYLON_G 2017-05-17
The American middle class has been both dumbed down as well as squeezed from top and bottom, to a point where it no longer exists in reality.
Large parts of the government have been outsourced to private corporations, think tanks, and lobby groups. There is no direct accountability between the public and their representatives who have become docile and unable to challenge the role of these quasi-governmental bodies.
The Military Industrial Complex has taken over the running of the government and the office of the president is ceremonial. Trump can't fart without permission. His missile attack on Syria last month was a gross violation of US law as well as international law. The fact that there has been no investigation of the so called chemical attack, and thus no evidence to support the missile strikes speaks volumes about the lack of public coherence as well as political coherence in America at the present time.
The fact of the matter is that ICBMs could be launched without the proper authority should be troubling for Americans. The fact that America has it's military active in Asia Europe and the middle east should also of concern.
America needs to ask itself who is running the shop. From Europe, from Asia and from the middle east, the answer is unclear.
n/a NYLON_G 2017-05-17
If anybody anywhere has seen any evidence of Russian hacking this ought to have been presented publicly months ago. The fact that no evidence has been presented and no justification for the hacking presented can only lead to one conclusion. The hacking issue is based on American ignorance of what hacking involves, as well as an ignorance of any Russian advantage to be gained by Trump being in the White House.
Trump was never supposed to be president. That much is accepted by both parties as well as the MSM. How the Russians could possibly benefit by having Trump being elected is a bizarre question also not answered.
The fact that Trump has flim flammed on various issues as well as being thwarted in his approaches to national security, health care, suggest that he is unable to initiate his agendas without prior scrutiny by forces and faces unknown.
When evidence of motive, opportunity, as well as techniques are revealed this can be treated as a real news item. At present it is an American fiction based on suspicion and innuendo. No facts or evidence are being debated.
n/a LaCo29 2017-05-17
Fox news already said this Seth Rich story was DEBUNKED so it must not be true
n/a mr__bad 2017-05-17
Considering the Russian narrative hasn't produced anything that resembles evidence, I think this is correct.
n/a mr__bad 2017-05-17
Considering the Russian narrative hasn't produced anything that resembles evidence, I think this is correct.
n/a PM_MEMONEYYY 2017-05-17
Oh you don't hate trump like we do? YOU MUST BE A SUPPORTER AND PRO TRUMP SHAME ON YOU.
n/a Ramazotti 2017-05-17
Finally an almost proven conspiracy and r/conspiracy denies it. Well played.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
I guess if 'almost proven' means 'no evidence'
n/a psychedelicsexfunk 2017-05-17
Trump himself admitted he leaked the info, though?
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
Is that more important than the entire primary system of a major party being totally rigged, and that we have the evidence based on leaked emails?
n/a psychedelicsexfunk 2017-05-17
You haven't answered my question. Importance aside, you said there is 'no evidence' to the conspiracy that Trump is colluding with Russia. Disregarding all the news that made headlines recently, Trump himself admitted on twitter that he had shared classified info with Russian ministers, essentially confirming the report that WPost released and the WH denied.
I wouldn't touch on which conspiracy is more important than the other, but saying there is no evidence on the Trump-Russia conspiracy is disingenuous.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
Does the "russia" thing not bear a startling resemblance to the McCarthyism of the previous century? A classic bit of CIA inspired bullshit to keep America scared and the war economy going.
And now "Russia" is being used to divert the people's attention away from the corrupt corporate bought politicians who rig primaries and murder whistleblowers.
n/a psychedelicsexfunk 2017-05-17
I don't see how that's an answer to my question, but even if Trump's leaking classified info to the ministers of Indonesia, that would count as an evidence for the Trump-Indo conspiracy.
n/a tenillusions 2017-05-17
Yes. It is.
n/a Ramazotti 2017-05-17
Thats what I mean. Usually if there is 'almost evidence', the conspiracy mind laps it up. Whats wrong this time?
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
The 'russia' conspiracy supports the establishment, pro war narrative. Of course, Trump is increasingly pro war these days, but I suppose not enough for the corporate psychopaths at the CIA.
n/a thesaltiesthotdog 2017-05-17
Eh i blame shareblue. This directly goes against their narrative and everything theyve been fighting to sweep under the rug. There is no discussion here, just allegations that people are from t_d. Very blatant diversion and just some more RUSSIA LOL HAX DUDE.
n/a [deleted] 2017-05-17
[removed]
n/a thesaltiesthotdog 2017-05-17
Literally any evidence for russian collusion has been taken completely out of context and worded by the overwhelmingly leftist media to seem 100x worse than at actually is. Take the current "scandal" with the russian ambassador.
Lol the only thing you can say back is, "nuh uh we may do it but you do it worse!!! :(:(:(" right m8
n/a AvocadosAndBanana 2017-05-17
The current scandal is real. It has real national security implications because our allies are less willing to share intel now. Trump has literally just made our country less safe, and you're acting like it's some made up smear campaign.
If you're taking the same approach to evidence for other allegations against Trump, no wonder you think it's all made up.
Read through the evidence again, but pretend it's Obama instead of Trump. Maybe then you'll see it for what it is.
n/a thesaltiesthotdog 2017-05-17
Which scandal, the one where trump discussed a few declasified topics with the russian ambassador? The one being interpreted as "Trump shares classified information with Russian officials"? Or is there some other made up or out of context story theyre telling?
n/a AvocadosAndBanana 2017-05-17
Now you're splitting hairs. It was classified in the sense that it would've been classified had anyone other than the president shared it. The president has the power to declassify things, so you can say he shared declassified things, but it's disingenuous. Had anyone else done what he did, they'd be facing criminal charges.
The issue is he shared info that was collected by a foreign intelligence agency. Traditionally, whichever agency collects the intel controls how it's disseminated. So, the country that shared the info with us shared it in confidence and it was up to them to decide whether or not to share it with Russia.
Since he betrayed that trust, it's less likely they will want to share intel with us in the future.
n/a thesaltiesthotdog 2017-05-17
Sure, i can agree with that. But having a headline of "Trump Gives Russia Classified Information" tells a completely different story. And all you need is a headline now to make something "true"
n/a wheelinganddealing 2017-05-17
God damn this sub is full of Share-blue "muh Russia" shills. The Russian narrative is so pathetic. They are literally grasping for straws. Trump is a Goldman-Sachs stooge for sure but this Russia shit is just embarrassing.
n/a SmarkoftheTiles 2017-05-17
I find the whole thing very strange.
The days after he died it was one of the most obvious silencing done out in the open in a long time, the threads at the time got a few posts and people were figuring out that he was the leaker pretty fast. Especially with Wikileaks coming out with comments about him.
Months later its all over the place and now its being silenced. Its odd for it to come up now. The oddest part is because some fans of a particular world leader are pushing it the mainstream is shutting it down regardless of the facts of the situation like he was just a random guy who died in a mugging who is unrelated to polices, which is just untrue. Somebody murdered Seth Rich because of what he has done, this is reality.
n/a peeonyou 2017-05-17
Moreso than that it means the president lied to the country and the world all while staying there was some hidden/secret intelligence backing him up.
Just like what happened with Bush and Iraq.
The secret intelligence, national security threat bullshit had gone on for far too long.
n/a DonTrumpIsTheWorst 2017-05-17
You're reaallllyyyy reaching here.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Username. Christ, Shariablue, try a little harder.
n/a DonTrumpIsTheWorst 2017-05-17
Obama is black, which means he isn't white, which means white people aren't real.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Wot.
n/a dontzu 2017-05-17
Russia hacked the election! According to fake news anchor David Gregory. https://twitter.com/davidgregory/status/864565852749877249
n/a YoshiTakimatsui 2017-05-17
The DNC emails had no impact on the election it was the Podesta emails that had an impact. If people have a shit about Seth riches leaks it would be President Bernie Sanders right now.
n/a I_just_want_da_truth 2017-05-17
I thought the DNC emails came out after Bernie lost?
n/a AssuredlyAThrowAway 2017-05-17
Hello all,
Just a friendly heads up that various hate subreddits from around reddit (most dedicated to mocking those who question the mainstream narratives which are so prevalent these days) have started linking to the comments section of this post in order to influence the vote totals therein.
To that end, we encourage all users to take vote totals on comments in this thread with a grain of salt. We are working actively with the reddit admins to stem the flow of these vicious brigades, and we hope some of these horrific hate subreddits (that exist only to manipulate content on subreddits such as /r/conspiracy, simply because this subreddit is resistant to having such narratives imposed from on high) will be addressed by the admins directly, as their behavior fundamentally undermines reddit as a platform in this regard.
To that end, if you see comments or submissions around reddit directed at this thread (or any other on /r/conspiracy), which directly encourage users to vote or participate in violation of reddit's site wide terms of service, please do let the mods know, as that is the only way we are able to work with the site admins to effectively stop the brigades.
Thanks for your consideration and please accept my apology on behalf of those vicious brigades who come to this comment section only to engage in ideological manipulation.
n/a Chef_69 2017-05-17
Which subreddits?
n/a AssuredlyAThrowAway 2017-05-17
I don't want to give them any undue attention, but there are a few long standing subreddits which exist only to mock, derides, and manipulate /r/conspiracy. In those subreddits there are currently topics directed at this comment section.
n/a DontTreadOnMe16 2017-05-17
Most likely the ironically named "Top Minds"...
n/a Chef_69 2017-05-17
Just checked it out...what even is the point of that sub? Do these people have nothing better to do than search this sub for stupid posts and laugh at them?
n/a Her_Excellency 2017-05-17
Why do mods seem to intervene on pro-Trump posts? The flairs, this...
n/a CharsCustomerService 2017-05-17
Likely because those are the ones that attract the most brigading, and thus require the most mod action.
n/a Her_Excellency 2017-05-17
Brigades come from both sides, and you can't deny that this certainly gives off the perception of bias.
n/a twiceblessedman 2017-05-17
Assuming you're correct and that brigades come from both sides, it would seem that one side is better at hiding their brigades better than the other. I feel pretty confident that if a mod became aware of such brigades forming in other subreddits, they would post a sticky disclaimer at the top, just as /u/AssuredlyAThrowAway did in this thread. If you can find evidence that this is happening and the mods are intentionally ignoring it, beyond "if both sides brigade, they must brigade in equal amounts!" then that deserves a post on this sub in itself. Otherwise, though, I cannot go along with your conclusion that this gives off a perception of bias.
n/a Her_Excellency 2017-05-17
Where's the proof that anti-Trump brigades more? There was a post in this subreddit just the other day showing TheDonald telling their users to soak the Seth Rich story and upvote it everywhere.
My point is that both sides do it and it makes no sense to intervene only for one side.
I'm unaware of the exact numbers for either, as from what I've seen that information is not readily available.
n/a smokeyrobot 2017-05-17
This isn't TheDonald. /r/conspiracy mods are choosing when to counter brigade tactics because that is their choice as mods. /r/conspiritard was notorious for this type of activity years ago and mods were heavily involved and placing sticky posts similar to this to stop it. This is not new to the recent Trump vs Liberals war on Reddit.
n/a ihavetenfingers 2017-05-17
Ofcourse one side is better, they've been around here for years. The other side just posts photos of gay frogs
n/a aletoledo 2017-05-17
I think it's because the anti-trump subreddits brigade in.
It's quite disturbing to look at the anti-trump commenters here. If you look at their accounts, they are all less than 2 years old. They have a few token submissions of content about dumb stuff and then a lot of comment karma. Their comment karma is all from one or at the most two subreddits. They all appear to be sock puppets.
I'm not suggesting that these are all the same person, but it appears that they are not using their main accounts to comment in here. There seems to be a coordinated effort by some group to come in here with sock puppets and make it appear that they are real, average redditors.
So just look at these accounts for yourself. They don't look "normal". There is a group pushing an agenda here, but it's not a pro-trump one.
n/a Her_Excellency 2017-05-17
Less than two years? You make that sound like a short length of time. More than a year is a decent length and would make me less suspicious so the age of the account looks innocuous to me.
Lots of karma is also a good indicator, although obviously not fool proof.
I'm not saying these are clearly main accounts, but the reasons you provided for believing them to be sock accounts seem to be suggesting the opposite.
n/a aletoledo 2017-05-17
Two years is the time that the Clinton campaign started to ramp up for the election. So these people would have started these sock puppets to help manipulate social media.
What you'll see with these accounts is that they only frequent a single subreddit, which is where all their karma comes from. A "normal" account will get their karma from several different places.
Like if I look at where you have submitted links, it's all over the place. Maybe you favor /r/aww and other such meme subreddits, but at least you aren't stuck in one small obscure subreddit.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
The entire first page is still dominated by a story that was debunked this morning. Nobody is up voting an update?
n/a aletoledo 2017-05-17
what story was debunked?
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Wheeler already came out and said he was "misquoted."
n/a BigTinz 2017-05-17
Because this sub was invaded by pro-Russia trolls in 2016.
Sad!
n/a hawksaber 2017-05-17
Please, that's so pathetic you wrote that!
n/a BigTinz 2017-05-17
It's completely true. This place went to hell during the election, and the sudden pro-russia bias was painfully obvious.
That paired with the fact that we know Russia pays online trolls to sway opinion backs up the claim.
n/a reddituser257 2017-05-17
A lot of people here don't swallow the anti-Russian propaganda. That does not mean they are pro- Russian.
n/a BigTinz 2017-05-17
Those probably aren't the people I'm talking about.
n/a Killadillas 2017-05-17
Wouldn't it be interesting if the only way you can upvote/downvote an /r/conspiracy thread is if you are subscribed to /r/conspiracy? If this rule were able to spontaneously be implemented, we would know approximately how many shills are brigading this sub by monitoring the subscriber increases.
n/a CharsCustomerService 2017-05-17
Unfortunately, that requires CSS tricks, which are easily circumvented. Something as simple as browsing via a mobile app will get around any of the ways mods can currently restrict voting/commenting on their subs.
n/a twiceblessedman 2017-05-17
Step 1: create database of all accounts that subscribe to /r/conspiracy (or, if possible, who had been subscribed to /r/conspiracy for a while)
Step 2: create /r/conspiracy_2 and make it private, but auto-allow the subscription of anyone in the database
Step 3: elect mods democratically within the sub who will try their best to maintain certain standards of reddiquette
n/a CosmicSynergy 2017-05-17
I like this idea :)
n/a Geddpeart 2017-05-17
Surely you can't be serious. This is clearly begging for votes, yet still remains on the front page.
You routinely flair anything that is remotely anti trump as false (yes we saw the one yesterday).
Everytime i lurk here all it is is shills this/shills that. People digging through others post history just to try and counter their argument.
I come here rather than than the other two shitholes because it's the least biased out of them all. It's on the tipping point though. I shouldn't have to wade through 100exaggeration seth posts just to find another story.
n/a sapperRichter 2017-05-17
Right? I mean christ this post reads like some propagandist bullshit. Us vs. them mentality and all that. Give me a fucking break this sub is far from neutral.
n/a bryoneill11 2017-05-17
I have seen you bitch about news, worldnews, and politics. Why?
n/a WhiteyNiteNite 2017-05-17
Careful the mods here ban people for export their bias
n/a IntellisaurDinoAlien 2017-05-17
It's more for attacking the mods (which you are doing now) and assuming we're a homogenous unit with a single political outlook which I assure you is not the case.
n/a WhiteyNiteNite 2017-05-17
Jesus Christ, I'm not attacking the mods lol. Any time there is a post which questions trump, some mods stickies some bullshit or tags it as brigading or does something to try and control the narrative. You might not be apart of it but it is so obvious that they are pushing a pro trump narrative.
n/a IntellisaurDinoAlien 2017-05-17
Some people support Trump and some don't. While we try to stay in the middle of the political squabbling it's inevitable that some bias will influence decisions occasionally, we're not robots.
Personally I think 90% of politicians from all sides should be put in Guantanamo for crimes against voters and fraud by misrepresentation, they don't represent our well-being in the slightest.
n/a marieknocks 2017-05-17
Wasn't it you who added the flair on the last Trump post?
n/a IntellisaurDinoAlien 2017-05-17
Nope.
n/a AlwaysALighthouse 2017-05-17
Proof?
n/a Hawking69Tyson 2017-05-17
Ha ha
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Well said. There are only a few mod teams that I admire, and you guys are one of them.
n/a Physics-1 2017-05-17
Wait so is Spez up this subreddits ass too then? Or are you independent still?
n/a ronintetsuro 2017-05-17
Thank you mods for working hard at what is essentially a thankless job. Stay neutral and impartial, and you have our support.
n/a EhrmantrautWetWork 2017-05-17
Thanks for this, I appreciate it
n/a WhiteyNiteNite 2017-05-17
Oh no, the anti trump comments are getting up voted too much. Better sticky a comment telling them to not take the vote count serious.... so neutral
n/a holytulsibasil 2017-05-17
I mean the mod isn't wrong. If you have been on conspiracy for a long time you would know that.
n/a gravitas73 2017-05-17
So we can call the obvious shills shills now?
n/a TotesMessenger 2017-05-17
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)
n/a rodental 2017-05-17
First you should worry about your in house problem: CelineHagbard.
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
Vicious Brigades indeed.
www.riggedit.com/seth-rich/
n/a donaldtroll 2017-05-17
Everyone is saying this is debunked by CNN or something
Is this true?
n/a brettyrocks 2017-05-17
Or, what if both stories are fake/limited hangout, so They can still hide the real shit?
n/a potato_bus 2017-05-17
/r/the_donald is leaking
n/a Justplainandy 2017-05-17
Seth Rich was used by the Russians through a direct operative then killed to keep him from talking. As a lifelong democrat he had remorse for what he did.
or
Seth was killed during a botched robbery
or
Seth was killed by Hillary Clinton for leaking the emails
n/a twy3440 2017-05-17
Trump has a Russia problem but it's a different one. The Dutch TV Russian Oligarchs used Trump to launder their money narrative. And Trump wants to sell federal lands, mineral rights, etc. to these same oligarchs.
http://www.alternet.org/video/donald-trumps-financial-ties-russian-oligarchs-and-mobsters-detailed-new-documentary
n/a WolfgangJones 2017-05-17
Nevermind CambridgeAnalytica and AggregateIQ and their Russian connections to the deluge of fake news and alternative facts that swamped social media during the election. Nevermind no Trump financials forthcoming nor anything about his business history with the Russian mob in NY and Palm Beach. Nevermind that the Senate still wants to question Jared Kushner about his shady real estate financing business in 2016 with a Russian bank under U.S. sanctions. Nevermind that Trump's former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, also managed Putin's deposed strongman in Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, plus Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, who was denied a visa to the USA for ties to organized crime. Nevermind that a Trump server was directly connected to a server in the largest private commercial bank in Russia, Alfa Bank, founded and principally owned by Mikhail Fridman, a Russian Jewish oligarch with Israeli citizenship and close ties to both Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu. Nevermind that Trump's long-time legal team and tax counsel (since 2005), Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, recently won a "Russia Law Firm of the Year" award in 2016. Nevermind that a top Trump foreign policy advisor, Carter Page, founder and managing partner of Global Energy Capital, a New York investment fund and consulting firm specializing in the Russian and Central Asian oil and gas business, has long been suspected by American Iintelligence Community of being a Russian tool. Nevermind that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, as CEO of Exxon, was busy doing multi-billion dollar deals with the Russian firm Rosneft, allowing Exxon access to the Russian Arctic, Siberia, and Russia’s far east.. Nevermind what Michael Flynn knew and when Donald Trump also knew it. Nevermind that Comey violated the Hatch Act by announcing new evidence in the Clinton email scandal the week before the election, and then backtracking and admitting there was no new evidence just two days before the election. Nevermind that Jeff Sessions had to recuse himself from the Russian investigation but then turned around and recommended the President fire the top investigator. Nevermind that the new acting top investigator, Andrew McCabe, was also the lead FBI investigator in NY into Russian organized crime in 2003 (FBI archive), when one of Trump's closest Russian business associates (and Trump Tower neighbor), Felix Sater, was busted for financial fraud and then turned into an FBI stool pigeon.
Nevermind all of that. The entire Russian narrative is fake! / s
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
I TOO SUPPORT THE VALUES OF IMPEACHING THE
HUMAN OVERLORDTYRANNICAL PRESIDENTIAL FIGURE (initiate sarcasm metrics)n/a WolfgangJones 2017-05-17
What happened? I built a wall of impermeable text there and lookkit Mr. Smartipants just waltz around it.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
:)
n/a B2RW 2017-05-17
Who is surprised by this come on? Assange said it over and over again - it didn´t come from Russia. Sad how a large group of people (country) fall for media lies over and over and over and over again. "Fool me a hundert times I am too stupid anyway."
n/a Unexpected_reference 2017-05-17
A /r/The_Donald shill who is desperate to spread misinformation, say it ain't so... Once people start looking at comment history it'll be much harder for you shills to spread your propaganda. Ask yourself people, who is this person posting, and why?
A quick check confirms being doubt his agenda, comrade...
n/a Comanche6 2017-05-17
Shariablue tactic #5: discredit. Fucking shill.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Go away, shill.
n/a jackanapes8 2017-05-17
I'm confused as to how we're just completely ignoring the fact of Michael Flynn's connections. There is eveidence and admission there. Same with Jared Kushner. This does not mean to me though a Trump-Russia (in terms of politics, maybe business) connection.
n/a GrayManTheory 2017-05-17
Wow the DNC/ShareBlue astroturfing in this thread is astonishing. You can tell when you hit too close to the truth.
These people are fucking terrified that the truth might finally come out.
n/a octodo 2017-05-17
I started screaming that Hillary Clinton eats babies and someone called the cops and they dragged me away, which makes me think the cops were on the DNC payroll as well.
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Yeah man, it is unbelievable. This thread is full of Shariablue shit.
n/a GirthBrooks 2017-05-17
Big story breaks on Russian collusion so you shills have to push fake news.
n/a wolf6152ag 2017-05-17
I miss when this sub was about actually consolidated instead of /r/the Donald part 2
n/a Saigunx 2017-05-17
the left are desperate, at this point they are a cornered animal ready to bite and claw. the russian narrative has always been bullshit. they're focused on the allegations of a foreign country leaking their own corrupt activities to distract from any attention towards those said activities.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
corporate democrat whores are not 'left'
n/a mrsilvers 2017-05-17
He says right here he has a credible Federal investigator who saw the laptop and the emails. Also that when he first at March tried to get the laptop with the police, it took them 2 days to reply and that the DNC called Seth's parents asking why he was snooping around. https://youtu.be/2J9YfQtqcuA
n/a ejkeebler 2017-05-17
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuRJDKEVxHY&t=2m02s
ACtually that's not what he says at all. He says he talked to an anonymous source who saw the laptop and the case file, that's it, he does not even say he told him there were communications to wikileaks.
n/a zhootki 2017-05-17
Rod Wheeler also claimed that there were over 150 "lesbian gangs" terrorizing people with "pink pistols" in the DC area. He shouldn't be considered a reliable source.
http://reason.com/blog/2007/07/09/killer-lesbians-on-the-prowl
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Wheeler already is claiming he was "misquoted."
n/a agentfaux 2017-05-17
Top comments in here prove that this sub is no longer the conspiracy sub. It is not. Don't be fooled.
n/a drewbdoo 2017-05-17
Ok so someone please fucking explain this binary horseshit to me. If Seth rich leaked dnc information how does this refute all of trump's nefarious ties to Russia?
n/a favoritecattoy 2017-05-17
It all started there
n/a drewbdoo 2017-05-17
I know that the dems just started blaming Russia for the hacks. I just don't understand people using Seth rich evidence to somehow prove that trump isn't in putin's pocket. Both could be true.
n/a favoritecattoy 2017-05-17
Anything could be true. The point is a place like the Washington Post went full on with the Russian hacks. Why? Did they ever recant?
n/a Steven_Negaverse 2017-05-17
It doesn't, this post is bullshit water muddying.
n/a Infinity6 2017-05-17
There were multiple leaks. Seth Rich leaked some to Wikileaks. The Russians also phished Podesta. Not sure about the rest.
n/a Kerigor 2017-05-17
Conservative journalists have debunked this story.
n/a mirkwood11 2017-05-17
I see no desperation. There are basically lit up blinking neon signs pointing to various Russian links to this trump administration
n/a barc0debaby 2017-05-17
Is there going to be a sidebar of what conspiracies to believe in?
n/a ntmyrealacct 2017-05-17
Actually it means that you have a hole in your head
n/a Aintnojusticejustus 2017-05-17
Only issue I have with this post is "if"
n/a fuzzydunlots 2017-05-17
No it doesn't. Fuck off with your Pizzagate distractions. There's more evidence against Trump 10x over. I'm so sick of low information activists taking over this sub.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
source?
n/a fuzzydunlots 2017-05-17
I love how I need to start from the beginning with sources on the most well documented topic in the world today but anything pro-trump is discussed without a hint of scrutiny.
I picked AOL news because it sounds like the last source T_D hasn't banned. https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/04/15/source-claims-concrete-evidence-of-collusion-between-trump-russia/22041057/
And I'm only linking this so you'll stop dishonestly asking about a "source" when you obviously ignore the dearth of evidence that there is 10x more fact to Trump's impropriety than Seth Riches murder. Which I do believe was a conspiracy. I just hate when T_D uses his death to launch a distraction campaign. It's so fucking disgusting.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
Yes, plenty of corporate disinfo about this manufactured Russia crisis, which serves to distract us from the really existing corruption of the DNC.
n/a fuzzydunlots 2017-05-17
Or just look at who runs Zero hedge. If you think the DNC is your enemy but Russia is your friend, then the Psy-Op has gained control of your brain. It's much bigger than the DNC or Trump or Putin. These posts that zealously pick sides are just more avenues of disinformation. If you can sit on the internet all day and bitch about the DNC and not say one word about the GOP or Trump. You're part of the problem and worse than any MSM psy-op.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
The PsyOp is ongoing, and it
s about the military industrial complex keeping the war economy going. The continuity of crony capitalism is at stake, and the corporate bought politicians are aligned with the corporate owned news media against the people. Im happy to criticize Trump, but not if it means lending my voice to the oligarchy, who are clearly trying to co opt the protest / opposition.So tell me, who runs Zero Hedge?
n/a fuzzydunlots 2017-05-17
Friends of the former Soviet Union of course
http://streetwiseprofessor.com/?p=8947
n/a fuzzydunlots 2017-05-17
Do you have a source for the manufacturered crisis? I'll wait. Forever.
n/a fuzzydunlots 2017-05-17
Yup still waiting.
n/a erraticassasin 2017-05-17
Lets say youre right about DNC leaked emails... there are countless other issues you are ignoring. Honestly, your snarky post and obvious ignorance to this makes you come off as a complete tool. Why not do a little digging for yourself and actually understand the issues before firing off this nonsense? Seriously, just spend 2 hours on google looking up multiple sources from different outlets and you will see what so many others see. I challenge you to honestly set aside your bias and challenge your cognitive dissonance while doing your research. The most dangerous threat to our democracy is a misinformes citizenry.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
How about instead of throwing insults, you provide some context for us? Or maybe you don't have anything and you're just stirring things up for no reason.
n/a erraticassasin 2017-05-17
Right... and what are you doing? Lol youre like a horse with blinders on...
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
more insults. There's a direct connection. If the DNC emails were leaked (which they were), what does that say about the Corporate Democrat strategy of "russia russia russia"? It's bullshit misdirection to hide their own corruption.
And I'm a lefty bernie supporting nut, you don't know me!
n/a iDontWannaBeOnReddit 2017-05-17
The Russia investigation isn't about the hacks anyways so sure, I believe it.
n/a bleepul 2017-05-17
The democratic process that is already influenced by hundreds of millions of special interest and foreign dollars? You are trying to protect the integrity of that process? The system that has seen every president in the last 25 years threatens with impeachment? Suddenly the Russians are able threaten the stability of that system?
And so it's "I am under no threat of terrorism myself but I am worried about those Ukrainians getting hurt" meanwhile ISIS has displaced millions and murdered tens of thousands all funded by Middle East states that have millions living in indentured servitude. But Russia ... Jesus.
And let's not ask whether Seth was murdered for political reasons because, well, Russia.
Fool.
n/a buttaholic 2017-05-17
Nowadays people seem to be implying that the Russian narrative is something different than the wikileaks leaks. It's no longer "Russia hacked the DNC and influenced our election to boost trump"
Now it's "trump colluded with Russia" whatever they mean by that.
But it would mean that the DNC and media were initially lying and boosting a story with no merit. The DNC definitely wanted to get the spotlight off of them.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
Weeew look at this brigade. You touched a nerve, OP.
n/a ShitStainSucknFuck 2017-05-17
Who?
n/a just_zhis_guy 2017-05-17
Haha! What's desperate is Trump asking Comey to end the Flynn investigation. Jesus, this and r/the_dummy are pathetic these days.
n/a nixfu 2017-05-17
He didn't ask or order anything. He just said he hopes he could drop it.
n/a just_zhis_guy 2017-05-17
Hahaha! Holy shit. So naive. Love it.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Yeah, he just casually brought it up. You know, not as the president or as Comey's boss or anything.
n/a Kathmandid 2017-05-17
It was a random DC homicide. He was a low level staffer with no info to leak. HIS PARENTS ARE DESPERATELY PLEADING WITH YOU TO STOP THIS NONSENSE. You guys are nuts.
n/a silentmonkeys 2017-05-17
Not a chance. Two things can be true.
n/a sidebycide 2017-05-17
We are among the New World Order.
n/a bryoneill11 2017-05-17
Everyone bitching about this sub is biased toward the right wont do the same for pseudoneutral subs like news, worldsnews and politics. Dont let them infiltrate
n/a fencehoppa 2017-05-17
Except Russia has been hacking countries left and right trying to get right wing nationalists elected (like La Pen) so.. .
n/a nixfu 2017-05-17
Accused but zero evidence. All indications are it was a lie to get sympathy of the French voters.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Really? What indications?
n/a fencehoppa 2017-05-17
Isn't that the same as OP's accusation though. Accused but no evidence?
n/a Bobbafeck 2017-05-17
Guys! There is a fire destroying Trump's presidency. Why are you all talking about Seth Rich? Guys! Trump is going down in flames!
n/a PloughToe 2017-05-17
I don't think his handlers want him gone. His sole purpose is to absorb.
n/a scuczu 2017-05-17
Correlation between shady business deals in Florida, Russia mob staying in trump tower, trump pushing the birther movement after meeting with putin...
n/a serial_crusher 2017-05-17
But what if the Russians killed Seth Rich and framed him for leaking the memo?
n/a zachariassss 2017-05-17
When this info comes out (its already starting to) i want every MSM asshole to come and apologize directly to the american people for being liars and crooks. then i want the clintons in prison for murder.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Wheeler came out this morning and said he was "misquoted."
n/a zachariassss 2017-05-17
yea. dont believe that for a second. if you dont think peoples lives are being threatened over this, then youre nuts.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Well, that's convenient. Lack of evidence is just evidence of a coverup! The guy has a history of spewing bullshit. There was no reason to believe him in the first place.
n/a WhiteyNiteNite 2017-05-17
No it does not. All it would mean is russia didn't hack. All they shady connections to members of the administration are real.
n/a TheSeaBeast_96 2017-05-17
"entire Russion narrative is fake." So Trump didn't just leak classified information to Russian officials and is in no way colluding with them?
n/a MACKSBEE 2017-05-17
Anyone think it's possible that the Russians killed Seth to make it seem like the DNC did it? Honestly, either scenario seems feasible to me.
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
Motive? Seems like the DNC had a pretty clear motive.
n/a MACKSBEE 2017-05-17
The Russians wanting to frame the DNC to get the blame away from themselves is a possible motive. Now let me just say, my personal opinion is that the DNC killed him, but I don't know for sure, and it's good to consider multiple theories
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
lol I guess... I just refuse to entertain bullshit CIA / WaPo lies. Why do they deserve our attention after all the lies into the Iraq War etc?
n/a MACKSBEE 2017-05-17
Just in case they're not lying
n/a sweetholymosiah 2017-05-17
May I humbly suggest your limited faith is misplaced. Have a lovely day.
n/a Painsanity666 2017-05-17
Except... The biggest contribution from Russia was the misinformation campaign on social media and Reddit. Pizza gate, the hype around the emails, the "surprise" leak of more emails that were mostly duplicates just a couple weeks before the election. Conservative media was so heavily inundated with Russian propaganda, that it's a gross over simplification to just say "Russians just leaked the emails".
n/a 01314150 2017-05-17
How to get this sub banned before we've saved it locally on multiple offline drives. (self.conspiracy)
1 Hire all of Comet Pizza's crew to create shill accounts 2 Get them to spam private info about themselves 3 notify reddit CEO 4 sub is banned, nothing survives the big data deletion
n/a postonrddt 2017-05-17
Mountain out of mole hill. The Russian "hack" or hacking is probably part of routine intelligence gathering. They MIGHT have gotten lucky on a few DNC members. The original 'hack' was perpetuated by the same recycled/recirculated 13 page with one page of tech information that came to a conclusion that the Russians 'probably' did it. Force the narrative not actual evidence which was one page of software/code that Russians tend to use.
The problem is time. What's the saying- Repeat a lie long enough it becomes the truth
n/a Big_Lego_Castle 2017-05-17
Hey Hillaray how many leakers did you kill today?
n/a a_trashcan 2017-05-17
I mean it doesn't automatically make the whole thing fake. Trump could be a Russian agent and Seth rich can be the leaker. It doesn't destroy the entire story in one swoop.
n/a johnknoefler 2017-05-17
I would disagree with that. The media not only ignored the death of Seth Rich they completely ridiculed the idea that he could have been a leaker or that his death was in any way related an effort to make him an example to other potential leakers. They just went with the attempted robbery explanation with no proof he was robbed. In point of fact, there were no witnesses to disrupt a robbery and his body lay in the street for hours. So, any evidence pointing to an execution by the DNC is going to be shoved off into the corner.
n/a FamineGhost 2017-05-17
Then they might have to actually face reality
n/a snorkleboy 2017-05-17
That us false. The dnc was hacked before the leaks came out, same with podesta.
Why is it thay trumpets have nothing but disinformation and lies?
n/a Jeffmtait 2017-05-17
And like every r/conspiracy story this totally feel apart. But hey you didn't spend yesterday discussing actually real things that were taking place in the world.
Maybe one day you guys will learn who's actually being "distracted" here.
n/a sushisection 2017-05-17
Plot twist: Seth Rich was working with the Russians
n/a tikitiger 2017-05-17
r/conspiracy is no longer r/conspiracy, holy shit. Is anyone reading these comments? There's no discussion, just outright denial from both sides.
n/a xfearbefore 2017-05-17
Bullshit story. Seth's own family says he was never in touch with Wikileaks. The reporter who apparently "leaked" this, Rod Wheeler, has already told CBS news that he personally has no knowledge nor had he seen any emails between Rich and Wikileaks, but was simply promoting the Fox News story, which quotes some anonymous source.
tl;dr Rod Wheeler admits he doesn't know a thing about any emails between Rich and Wikileaks, bullshit Fox News story, how fucking dumb do you have to be to take anything Fox News says seriously, it's literally the propaganda arm of the Trump admin at this point.
n/a skuzmak 2017-05-17
The russian narrative is fake, and it's the perfect story to sell in order to further two objectives of the deep state. 1) It undermines Trump, who is a nationalist and is working against their globalist agenda, and 2) It further presents Russia as the bogeyman du jour, thus making it ok to back the Syrian "rebels" in overthrowing Assad (who is aligned with russia). Oh, and happy coincidence, once the new west-friendly Syrian regime is in place, maybe Qatar will be allowed to build it's natural gas pipeline through syria into turkey to serve Europe.
n/a Iloveliberaltears 2017-05-17
I am really surprised someone else hasn't died or a terroist attack or something to veer the public off this story. It seems like all they have now is the "Russians did it."
n/a RikaMX 2017-05-17
Damn, conspiracy theories went so mainstream now we have MSN debating two of them.
n/a PloughToe 2017-05-17
Weird Assange interview here, where he calls out the Seth Rich murder, but why?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp7FkLBRpKg
n/a ChocolateHead 2017-05-17
Uh, that's not how logic works.
Seth Rich could have leaked the DNC emails AND there could have been a Russian hack.
That said, there is tons of evidence that there was a Russian hack and exactly 0 evidence that Seth Rich leaked the DNC emails.
That said, Russia and Trump shills have an interest in pushing the Seth Rich narrative, and a lot of people here are falling for it because "it's not the MSM."
n/a e-socrates 2017-05-17
DNC refused to let FBI look at servers, instead a private company called CrowdStrike made the report.
CrowdStrike has a history of fabricating reports for political purposes.
Leaked CIA hacking tools show that they include disguise feature to blame the hack on various countries according to need.
Wikileaks received the leaks from a DNC insider in WA DC, near where Rich was Arkancided. Guccifer2 said his whistelblower's name was "Seth."
n/a Banda8820 2017-05-17
I don't know anyone IRL who was dumb enough to swallow the 'Russian hack' bullshit.
n/a Lord_Holmes 2017-05-17
http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/125871795#p125887977
Joe Capone the owner of Lou's City Bar, last place that Seth Rich was seen alive was in a private room of the White House 6 days prior to his death.
http://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1495/00/1495004263062.jpg
n/a bannana 2017-05-17
The 'russian narative' did not start with emails at all, I'm clueless why this is repeated over and over when there was an investigation happening into russian agents compromising people involved with election officials. The email story is separate and literally has nothing to do with money being paid to politicians in the form of very large loans with no backing, paying double and triple the cost of a piece of real estate, or just plain paying someone for a trip. Absolutely nothing hinges on the email story, stop repeating this.
n/a theFute 2017-05-17
Seth would explain DNC emails but not Podesta emails. Still unlikely that Russian intelligence is the purp.
n/a tonikoche 2017-05-17
The same intel agencies that said Iraq had WMDs...
n/a thegoodmourning 2017-05-17
James Clapper testified under oath to congress the other day and said the "17 intelligence agencies" story was bullshit. It only came out of Hillary Clinton's mouth and if you trust Hillary Clinton then I've got a Washington Post story to sell you.
n/a mysteryroach 2017-05-17
That doesn't prove anything.
n/a niakarad 2017-05-17
Well they're not supposed to vaguely hint at it either but that's still happening.
n/a XDiabolusExMachinaX 2017-05-17
Tell that to Snowden, manning...
n/a Lord_of_Jam 2017-05-17
Isn't that to protect the leakers though? If Seth Rich was their source, and Seth is now dead, then there's not really a reason to withhold the source is there?
n/a GundalfTheCamo 2017-05-17
For the protection of the source. Who is dead.
They could probably make an exception here, since it could reveal the truth of the Russia accusations.
n/a ass_boy 2017-05-17
Although I will agree it does not seem natural I do want to see what is on that laptop so we might as well roll with it
n/a ThermalStability 2017-05-17
When you have a full front page of the same thing it's guaranteed to be heavily monitored and controlled.
n/a pijinglish 2017-05-17
Here's Clapper's testimony verbatim: "The two dozen or so analysts for this task were hand-picked, seasoned experts from each of the contributing agencies. They were given complete, unfettered mutual access to all sensitive raw intelligence data, and importantly, complete independence to reach their findings. They found that the Russian government pursued a multifaceted influence campaign in the run-up to the election, including aggressive use of cyber capabilities.
The Russians used cyber operations against both political parties, including hacking into servers used by the Democratic National Committee and releasing stolen data to WikiLeaks and other media outlets. Russia also collected on certain Republican Party- affiliated targets, but did not release any Republican-related data. The Intelligence Community Assessment concluded first that President Putin directed and influenced campaign to erode the faith and confidence of the American people in our presidential election process. Second, that he did so to demean Secretary Clinton, and third, that he sought to advantage Mr. Trump. These conclusions were reached based on the richness of the information gathered and analyzed and were thoroughly vetted and then approved by the directors of the three agencies and me.
These Russian activities and the result and (ph) assessment were briefed first to President Obama on the 5th of January, then to President-elect Trump at Trump Tower on the 6th and to the Congress via a series of five briefings from the 6th through the 13th of January. The classified version was profusely annotated, with footnotes drawn from thousands of pages of supporting material."
n/a kaminsky_ 2017-05-17
Doesn't hurt to ask. I mean look at this shit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TrumpInvestigation/wiki/doc
This shit is from nearly a month ago! And it has ~50 areas of interest. Only one of them is the DNC hacks.
n/a DeathorGlory9 2017-05-17
Wikileaks stopped being trustworthy months ago.
n/a DoesNotTalkMuch 2017-05-17
They did let the FBI look at the server. The FBI complained that they didn't have immediate access.
n/a Hi_mom1 2017-05-17
...or releases info on Russia or their allies; seems to be an anti-US outfit for at least the past 5 years.
n/a Hi_mom1 2017-05-17
So who hacked the RNC?
n/a kybarnet 2017-05-17
The Shill level has been high since a couple days prior to the French election. Conspiracy gets their posts removed if they reach All and we are seeing a flood of new, confidentially against all conspiracy, sign ups.
That is odd. That would be like if all new subscribers to Politics only talked about how dumb politics was to talk about. It's clearly some form of shillary, though perhaps it's Reddit search manipulation, like how they manipulate the front page.
Are you subscribed to TinyTrumps and TheNewRussianHolocaust ? Try Conspiracy! - Shit like that can appear 'shillary' but is more manipulated search engine results, leading to a flood of 'anti' thinkers brigading thoughtful discussion.
n/a Simplicity3245 2017-05-17
There will not be any evidence. Just strong insinuations that keep feeding off each other as a new one emerges.
n/a pingveno 2017-05-17
He doesn't tweet about Rich being the leaker. He says ambiguous things with a wink and a nudge. He knows full well that some people will interpret that as an endorsement of their narrative, but at the same time it allows plausible deniability for people defending him against charges of baseless accusations.
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
Assange has never acknowledged any of his leakers, even Chelsea Manning. He might suspect Rich was the leaker but not know it, which is why he has offered a reward for info. Perhaps the leaker made clear he was an insider in the DNC but didn't give his name.
n/a memnactor 2017-05-17
They could, but I agree with u/G_petronius that a baseline of logical thoughts are the most important part right now, because the stuff he responded to is borderline retarded.
n/a slippery_stare 2017-05-17
Because they are two completely opposed narratives.
n/a anayakii 2017-05-17
Oh I'm not protecting the DNC here. There's some fishy shit going on. But unfortunately that is pretty much business as usual in us politics. And by focussing on just one side you are only keeping the system standing.
Meanwhile Russia is destabilizing your country and making people think they're being patriotic by helping them do it.
n/a Stevo182 2017-05-17
Look at the "hottest" comments in this and other threads. Massive astroturfing. People claiming this is just a secondary t_d sub and calling everyone here idiots, even though weve been around much longer than t_d and the vast majority of our membors dont support trump or any partisan for that matter (its all a sham).
n/a G_Petronius 2017-05-17
Because the Russian hack narrative is that the DNC leaks are from Russia and no one but Russia. If they are from Seth Rich, the Russian hack narrative falls to pieces.
n/a LilMissGuided 2017-05-17
A stitch in time saves nine.
n/a lopestatus 2017-05-17
Interesting way to discredit!
125813140 No one should be paying attention to or quoting anything Bauman has to say. They are Bauman's words and not the words of Seth Rich's family. The DNC made him the "spokesman" for the family but he doesn't speak for them. He is misrepresenting them in his own words. When he interacts with them he tells them what he wants them to say and then goes and says it by himself. He is not being honest, this guy is a pathological lying sociopath. There is an entire organized network of sociopaths/psychopaths at work here. This Bauman guy already dismissed the emails by basically saying "I haven't heard of any emails but if emails come out, they are not evidence. They are just words that anybody can type". This is something a psychopath does when they don't have the answers. They make stuff up and dig further holes for themselves and then make some more stuff up. This doesn't work forever if they operate on their own but they are a giant network and they control the MSM so they can lie and spin and ignore then go on to the next subject. It's worked for them for decades.
n/a antibubbles 2017-05-17
Yeah, it's normal. One shred of a hint of a shadow of a conspiracy and the sub freaks out and goes autistic on it for a month....
like that pizza nonsense
n/a devils_advocaat 2017-05-17
Those articles are obviously based on bullshit. Simply, how can you tell who a hacker is working for?
BTW. I'm quite sure the Russians and multiple other countries attempt and succeed in hack everything.
n/a Dyslexter 2017-05-17
How was the hysteria over nothing?
n/a bartink 2017-05-17
How is the DNC evil? They are a typical political party, seems to me.
Is the RNC evil?
n/a CheezStik 2017-05-17
Did you read the article? I know they did. And yeah, you losers might do it for free but the hundreds of sites from Macedonia need a paycheck.
n/a Burkey 2017-05-17
You don't see me here defending every action Bernie has taken and I definitely didn't follow him in his "support" of Hillary.
n/a favoritecattoy 2017-05-17
It all started there
n/a drewbdoo 2017-05-17
I know that the dems just started blaming Russia for the hacks. I just don't understand people using Seth rich evidence to somehow prove that trump isn't in putin's pocket. Both could be true.
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Well yes, politics is inherently evil.
But in terms of scandals and obvious crimes committed, the dnc has the rnc beat by a sizable margain.
These are non-partisan statements I've made in this thread; if you read my response to other comments in this thread, the 2-party system is worthless and really it's only one choice; the choice they give us, although they make it seems like there is an option.
n/a Dinkir9 2017-05-17
Orrr Seth Rich has a family and they need to be kept safe.
OR it was someone else in the DNC and they're trying to keep them out of the spotlight.
There are a million possibilities.
n/a particle409 2017-05-17
Wheeler came out this morning and said he was "misquoted."
n/a Dyslexter 2017-05-17
Ah, well if it was cleared and discussed beforehand, then it's fine. Although it's difficult to trust any of Trump's cabinet considering their tendency to lie and coverup mishaps, especially when there were reports of damage control having to be done after the fact.
As I mentioned, the contents of the information is not necessarily an issue. What is an issue is the fact that Russia now knows Israel has that information and is sharing it with the US, as it gives Russia and Iran an insight into their intelligence apparatus; especially in terms of where Israel may have operatives. Furthermore, it decreases any international trust in Trump's ability to secure information correctly and follow due procedure in general.
n/a rayfosse 2017-05-17
I really don't think the intel was a big deal either way considering the anonymous sources had no issue revealing it all to the WaPo, and by now the general public has probably been told as much as was revealed to Russia.
What Engel is saying is that Russia didn't learn anything more than they already knew. Trump didn't say the intel came from Israel. It was the NYTimes that reported that, presumably because it's really not a big deal. Everyone is acting like Russia had no idea that Israel has a spy agency, and Israel itself said it hasn't decreased their trust in Trump at all.
n/a morkman100 2017-05-17
So why did Trump ask him to resign and why did Flynn hide/lie about his talks with this one particular Russian? Seems like Trump agrees that Flynn's connection with Russia was NOT just a normal part of his duties nor was appropriate, otherwise Flynn would still have a job.
n/a Steven_Negaverse 2017-05-17
It doesn't, this post is bullshit water muddying.
n/a Carkly 2017-05-17
trump himself said russia did it
n/a Bumi_Earth_King 2017-05-17
Oh wow, you're actually this stupid.
n/a TripleEEE1682 2017-05-17
That makes sense, but because of their cryptic insinuations, Wikileaks own credibility has been weakened. The case for Seth Rich hasn't been strengthened.
n/a smackson 2017-05-17
I think of it like firing missiles.
Just because that other side over there deserves a sidewinder right up their exhaust, no need to jam the signal of the current missile homing in on its target here.
We have more missiles. Let each get their targets as unfettered as possible.
n/a MrJDouble 2017-05-17
Arms deal with syria? Is that right? Who in Syria did we do an arms deal with?
Pretty sure you mean the recently announced 100 billion dollar deal with the saudis.
n/a FilterBubbles 2017-05-17
Pro-Dutch I would assume means a candidate who puts your country and culture first. That is what Trump does for America. Nationalist is just a term. Substitute patriotic if you like. No one is advocating for America to go conquer other countries.
The left here removed the American flag from their logo because it's offensive. They censor conservative viewpoints, control the media and academia, force social issues into law or use them to manipulate opinion, hire shills to manipulate social media, use the IRS to target conservative groups, prevent conservative speakers from speaking at colleges, call us racist, hateful, homophobic, misogynists, fascists, etc. all while trying to suppress free speech, inciting violence and promoting all forms of degeneracy in the name of diversity or inclusion.
If your media is telling you different, you can assume they're as dishonest as ours is.
n/a e-socrates 2017-05-17
DNC refused to let FBI look at servers, instead a private company called CrowdStrike made the report.
CrowdStrike has a history of fabricating reports for political purposes.
Leaked CIA hacking tools show that they include disguise feature to blame the hack on various countries according to need.
Wikileaks received the leaks from a DNC insider in WA DC, near where Rich was Arkancided. Guccifer2 said his whistelblower's name was "Seth."
n/a reddituser257 2017-05-17
You know Russia is a democracy and has elections right?
n/a jimmyhandle 2017-05-17
Okay. Sorry.