Bernie Sanders 2020

[hanimmal]

(1) https://www.lawfareblog.com/documents-senate-intelligence-committee-publishes-two-reports-internet-research-agency

Its long and pretty boring, but worth looking over. The rest of the questions should pretty much be covered in it too.

 

[Padawanbater2]

(1) https://www.lawfareblog.com/documents-senate-intelligence-committee-publishes-two-reports-internet-research-agency

Its long and pretty boring, but worth looking over. The rest of the questions should pretty much be covered in it too.

That's fine, might take some time, but I'll try to respond back if I have any more questions

 

[Padawanbater2]

(1) https://www.lawfareblog.com/documents-senate-intelligence-committee-publishes-two-reports-internet-research-agency

Its long and pretty boring, but worth looking over. The rest of the questions should pretty much be covered in it too.

Executive Summary

They detail the 'how', "Russia did X, Y, and Z and a lot of Americans saw it and were influenced by it." But fail to explain the amount of Americans converted by it. How can you possibly quantify the amount of Americans who chose not to vote or voted for Trump based on foreign interference? How can you be sure they told the truth even if you interviewed them?

 

[hanimmal]

Id first understand what they were doing, it is a mass marketing campaign, just like our businesses. Its a number game, starting with the 70,000 people that it took to push Trump into the win, that is a very low success rate to the hundreds of millions that were exposed. Also note that is just the big names that make their data easy to use, sites like here on rollitup.org and every other website with a comment section (which is basically everyone) gets used too. Hell in that report, they even used Pokemon and other game chat rooms, it is very sophisticated.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Id first understand what they were doing, it is a mass marketing campaign, just like our businesses. Its a number game, starting with the 70,000 people that it took to push Trump into the win, that is a very low success rate to the hundreds of millions that were exposed. Also note that is just the big names that make their data easy to use, sites like here on rollitup.org and every other website with a comment section (which is basically everyone) gets used too. Hell in that report, they even used Pokemon and other game chat rooms, it is very sophisticated.

So it's based on an assumption. How is that any different than assuming the amount of people turned off by the content of the leaks themselves? How can you know whether the content of the leak was the problem or the leak of it itself?

 

[Padawanbater2]

More importantly, what do you believe?

Do you think the ultimate problem was the content of the leak within the emails that were exposed, or the fact that they were exposed by a foreign agency?

 

[hanimmal]

I think it is the combination of leaks that are not very meaningful being super sized with 'damaging' details that are usually just using out of context lines of text but and the facts that get inserted when they are not scandalous enough. Remember this is not good actors that have laws to follow trolling our electoral system, it is trolls who use everything they want.

I believe that the over 70 million people they had on Facebook combined with all the other social media platforms made it so easy for them to pinpoint the few hundred or so people they would have needed to hit in key districts to get the 70,000 voters that pushed Trump over Clinton.

edit: Seriously though, especially that second report I listed imo is really the important one. It only covers the tip of the iceberg, dealing with only a few tech companies.

 

[Padawanbater2]

'damaging' details that are usually just using out of context lines of text but and the facts that get inserted when they are not scandalous enough.

Do you have an example?

 

[Padawanbater2]

I think it is the combination of leaks

It's fundamentally important to be sure

 

[UncleBuck]

It's fundamentally important to be sure

Are you sure pelosi needed republican votes to become speaker

 

[hanimmal]

Do you have an example?

Of people using things out of context to support anything they want? If so I am sure you can find plenty everywhere, if you mean slipping in emails into a huge data dump, what you would need is to look at each email independently and look for the code that it is actually a legit email, there were a handful in the Clinton dump that did not have the code in it which means it is likely a plant. I didn't do the research on it, that is above my ability.

But keep reading, pages 7-10 on the second (bottom) report especially (imo). https://www.lawfareblog.com/documents-senate-intelligence-committee-publishes-two-reports-internet-research-agency

 

[Padawanbater2]

Of people using things out of context to support anything they want?

Of "supersized leaks that held damaging details"

Again though, how is it the fault of the leakers who exposed it instead of those that committed it? That's the most important thing I feel you have not addressed yet.

Do you believe government corruption should be exposed? If so, do you believe those that expose government corruption should be prosecuted for it, or those that did it?

 

[UncleBuck]

Of "supersized leaks that held damaging details"

Again though, how is it the fault of the leakers who exposed it instead of those that committed it? That's the most important thing I feel you have not addressed yet.

Do you believe government corruption should be exposed? If so, do you believe those that expose government corruption should be prosecuted for it, or those that did it?

How bad would you cry if I stole all your personal information and then disseminated it in the most embarrassing way possible

 

[hanimmal]

Of "supersized leaks that held damaging details"

Again though, how is it the fault of the leakers who exposed it instead of those that committed it? That's the most important thing I feel you have not addressed yet.

Do you believe government corruption should be exposed? If so, do you believe those that expose government corruption should be prosecuted for it, or those that did it?

Keep reading those reports man seriously, a lot will be answered by the time you get though them both. It is important enough that if you are not just a sock puppet and actually believe what you're saying I hope you will agree it is good to have a strong understanding of the stuff in the reports.

I think your question is faulty, I am saying what was 'exposed' wasn't something out of the ordinary or as unseemly as people would like to make it out to be.

 

[Padawanbater2]

I think your question is faulty, I am saying what was 'exposed' wasn't something out of the ordinary or as unseemly as people would like to make it out to be.

I read through the report you posted and I still completely disagree with this sentiment.

If what was exposed wasn't anything out of the ordinary, how did Wikileaks effectively weaponize it?

 

[hanimmal]

I read through the report you posted and I still completely disagree with this sentiment.

If what was exposed wasn't anything out of the ordinary, how did Wikileaks effectively weaponize it?

Wikileaks posted it slowly and with coordination of the Russians and timed to scandals that dropped on Trump so that they could steer the conversations. Then Trump (who a lot of evidence points to him actually knowing about it ahead of time) would shout it in his rally's, hate radio would also pick it up and run with it, then tv news stations would eventually have to report on the stories.

There are two reports, the second one I think is the more important one.

 

[UncleBuck]

If what was exposed wasn't anything out of the ordinary, how did Wikileaks effectively weaponize it?

mindless, willing dupes like you helped. you made a thread about every one of them

 

[Padawanbater2]

Wikileaks posted it slowly

If Wikileaks posted the stolen emails between the Clinton campaign and the DNC more quickly, would the content of said emails that proved the Clinton campaign colluded with the DNC to steal the Democratic primary have been easier for the American public to swallow?

I'm not sure I follow..

 

[UncleBuck]

he Clinton campaign colluded with the DNC to steal the Democratic primary

that's a retarded conspiracy theory straight out of putin's asshole you dupe

 

[Padawanbater2]

If it were a conspiracy theory, the content of the leaked emails wouldn't have damaged the Clinton campaign. It wasn't the time frame or speed in which the leaks were published. It was the content therein that proved DNC insiders conspired with the Clinton campaign to subvert the democratic vote in the primary

You say what was leaked was insignificant while also claiming what was leaked damaged the Clinton campaign. You can choose one, not the other