- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Official RT Indictment Thread -- Youtubers Lauren Chen, Dave Rubin, Tim Pool Linked
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:08 am to jclem11
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:08 am to jclem11
China and Russia have raped your brain so hard you have nothing left between your ears other than a slurry of General Tso and Ivan jizz.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:13 am to jclem11
Lets put this story through our common sense filter:
- Why would an entity pay this much money over content it didnt have direct influence over?
- How long has DOJ known about this? Why now?
-Our government and DOJ has already demonstrated without a shred of doubt that it is biased and corrupt. Why should we think we are getting the honest full story in this indictment?
-Who is benefiting from this indictment becoming public?
- Why would an entity pay this much money over content it didnt have direct influence over?
- How long has DOJ known about this? Why now?
-Our government and DOJ has already demonstrated without a shred of doubt that it is biased and corrupt. Why should we think we are getting the honest full story in this indictment?
-Who is benefiting from this indictment becoming public?
This post was edited on 9/6/24 at 11:15 am
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:17 am to Pettifogger
Anyone else remember when Teddy Kennedy sent cables to the soviets asking for help to beat Reagan in the 80s? The media doesn’t, either
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:27 am to GumboPot
quote:
How are the influencers supposed to know Tenet Media was paying them with Cia...I mean Russian money?
Do you ask your employer where they are getting their money to pay your salary? 1000 out of a 1000 employees don't ask that question. They just want to get paid for services due.
Why does everything have to be some conspiracy. You list the CIA here for what reason? To make it look like this was fake? These people took money from a Russian source to promote a narrative driven by the source. The CIA was not involved in that chain. There is this like cognitive dissonance among RW people where absolutely everything is fake/nothing is real. It is like watching a cult in real time. Truly amazing to witness a bunch of free thinkers all think the same exact thing.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:28 am to scottydoesntknow
quote:
Our government and DOJ has already demonstrated without a shred of doubt that it is biased and corrupt. Why should we think we are getting the honest full story in this indictment?
-Who is benefiting from this indictment becoming public?
So I guess the "crime" here is the FARA violations and associated wire fraud and no one is really disputing the validity of the content?
Meanwhile Hunter Biden was running around for years doing much worse on behalf of the CCP and Ukrainian and Russian oligarchs and didn't catch a single charge.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:32 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:
I just watched a Robert Barnes rant on this and he carved up a lot of it
Balldowasher Barnes is not credible.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:33 am to Old Money
quote:
Why does everything have to be some conspiracy. You list the CIA here for what reason? To make it look like this was fake? These people took money from a Russian source to promote a narrative driven by the source. The CIA was not involved in that chain. There is this like cognitive dissonance among RW people where absolutely everything is fake/nothing is real. It is like watching a cult in real time. Truly amazing to witness a bunch of free thinkers all think the same exact thing
Both things can be true, TBH
Our RW circles are way too quick to kneejerk determine that it's an inside job or the experts are lying to us. Sometimes, Russian intelligence is just doing what Russian intelligence does. Sometimes the experts are right and they're trying to do their best with a noble goal of helping the most people (even if with blinders on to unintended consequences or potential manipulation, etc.).
BUT, plenty of things involving international intrigue will have US intelligence fingerprints on them if/when we know the full story. Is it completely unrealistic that some CIA or western intelligence asset gets into these Russian disinformation efforts and influences them? I don't know how anyone who is an amateur student of US intelligence history could say that with confidence.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:34 am to jclem11
quote:
jclem11
Boy you’ve fallen more than funbumch. Just go ahead and vote for Kamala
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:35 am to Sweep Da Leg
quote:
Boy you’ve fallen more than funbumch. Just go ahead and vote for Kamala
He has been shite for a while now.
This post was edited on 9/6/24 at 11:36 am
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:44 am to Pettifogger
quote:
BUT, plenty of things involving international intrigue will have US intelligence fingerprints on them if/when we know the full story. Is it completely unrealistic that some CIA or western intelligence asset gets into these Russian disinformation efforts and influences them? I don't know how anyone who is an amateur student of US intelligence history could say that with confidence.
I agree its not completely unrealistic since we dont know the full story, but to flat out immediately jump to the conclusion everything is fake and gay/CIA every single time is just laughable. No point in actually looking into anything if you write it off immediately and let your twitter circle dictate your thoughts.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:49 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:
I just watched a Robert Barnes rant on this
Something more people should do is stop filling your head with other peoples thoughts. Come to your own conclusions with as little outside influence as possible. If you are a person of even average intellect, you shouldnt let others fill your head with their thoughts. A good chance you may be smarter than they are...
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:51 am to Old Money
I'm with you. Personally, I struggle with it.
Naturally, I respect authority, I'm a rule follower, etc. I like structure and order. I don't believe in romanticized notions that the US was always a good actor or that our intelligence apparatus never engaged in awful stuff, etc.
BUT, I do think we previously lived in an era of somewhat unspoken rules in that regard, where you didn't go too far or if we did test the boundary there were levels of subtlety involved, and I see those increasingly collapsing in the current age. Both due to boldness of the actors and the public's ability to get information more easily. I've heard intelligence folks from the Cold War era talk about this in the IC context (breakdown of "norms").
I think the same is true with other institutions, the motivators that were once a comfort against unpredictable actions (like, profit motivation) have started to crumble at times under the weight of ideology. Admittedly, it's mixed with profit motivation in the ESG era. We had a long discussion on the OT yesterday about trusting the medical community in this era, and one of the points I raised is that when the CDC tells your 6 month old to get a COVID shot but 75%+ of the country's pediatricians are quietly ignoring that guidance (including many progressive ones) - it begs the question of whether it's really possible that a government agency might be motivated by something other than the absolute best decision making for the health of small children. Which is a pretty crazy place to be.
Naturally, I respect authority, I'm a rule follower, etc. I like structure and order. I don't believe in romanticized notions that the US was always a good actor or that our intelligence apparatus never engaged in awful stuff, etc.
BUT, I do think we previously lived in an era of somewhat unspoken rules in that regard, where you didn't go too far or if we did test the boundary there were levels of subtlety involved, and I see those increasingly collapsing in the current age. Both due to boldness of the actors and the public's ability to get information more easily. I've heard intelligence folks from the Cold War era talk about this in the IC context (breakdown of "norms").
I think the same is true with other institutions, the motivators that were once a comfort against unpredictable actions (like, profit motivation) have started to crumble at times under the weight of ideology. Admittedly, it's mixed with profit motivation in the ESG era. We had a long discussion on the OT yesterday about trusting the medical community in this era, and one of the points I raised is that when the CDC tells your 6 month old to get a COVID shot but 75%+ of the country's pediatricians are quietly ignoring that guidance (including many progressive ones) - it begs the question of whether it's really possible that a government agency might be motivated by something other than the absolute best decision making for the health of small children. Which is a pretty crazy place to be.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:52 am to Old Money
Russiagate and the Ukraine impeachment were intel setups, how can you not be skeptical?
To your other post, Barnes is the only alt-right guy would say I follow. Maybe Bongino once in a while if he fits that category. I tend to trust what I consider the alt-leftists (Greenwald, Taibbi, Aaron Mate, Michael Tracey) as most intellectually consistent. How do you form your opinions? By not reading anything?
To your other post, Barnes is the only alt-right guy would say I follow. Maybe Bongino once in a while if he fits that category. I tend to trust what I consider the alt-leftists (Greenwald, Taibbi, Aaron Mate, Michael Tracey) as most intellectually consistent. How do you form your opinions? By not reading anything?
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:52 am to Bunk Moreland
Bongino is tearing arse on everyone who has fallen for this FBI/DOJ op.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:54 am to TrueTiger
Old Money says don't trust him, form your own conclusions!
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:00 pm to Bunk Moreland
Anyone who obviously exploits the outrage of their listeners/viewers/followers for profit is someone we should be skeptical of.
I'm sure Dan Bongino and I are kindred spirits on most things, but there is still an inherent conflict of interest when his livelihood depends on clicks and getting me worked up.
I'm sure Dan Bongino and I are kindred spirits on most things, but there is still an inherent conflict of interest when his livelihood depends on clicks and getting me worked up.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:00 pm to Bunk Moreland
We can't trust the FBI who misled the public on Hunter's laptop.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:01 pm to jclem11
When the MSM is held accountable for it's lies and bias get back to me.
Government agencies have used and colluded with the MSM to push their agenda to influence elections.
Shouldn't they be held accountable?
Government agencies have used and colluded with the MSM to push their agenda to influence elections.
Shouldn't they be held accountable?
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:04 pm to AU86
We are in a zero trust environment.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:10 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
We can't trust the FBI who misled the public on Hunter's laptop.
The non-indicted principals involved don't seem to be disputing the facts.
Tim Pool just said he was a patsy.
Popular
Back to top


0










