In Depth Look why Papadopuolos story starting Trump investigation is terrible

a reply to: Grambler

I still don't get the Pokemon reference, but yes, social media is becoming the campaign vehicle of choice. Ask Trump.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

I still don't get the Pokemon reference, but yes, social media is becoming the campaign vehicle of choice. Ask Trump.

Ok just to be clear, you believe 150 thousand dollars of facebook ads from russia was more effective than a billion dollars spent by hillary and the backing of nearly the entirety of the legacy media?

a reply to: Grambler

I have no idea how effective it was. The election was obviously a matter of choosing the lesser of two weevils.

The point is, there was a massive effort by Russia to influence the election in a covert manner. I have no doubt that ATS itself was subject to some of that effort. It certainly seems to have had some effect. Of course, fake news has always been a mainstay here (see: Sorcha Faal).

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

I have no idea how effective it was.

The point is, there was a massive effort by Russia to influence the election in a covert manner. I have no doubt that ATS itself was subject to some of that effort. It certainly seems to have had some effect. Of course, fake news has always been a mainstay here (see: Sorcha Faal).

Wow so you believe Russian trolls were on ATS as well?

Ok.

well I dont think 150 thousand dollars in a world with billions being spent is a massive effort.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

I still don't get the Pokemon reference, but yes, social media is becoming the campaign vehicle of choice. Ask Trump.

Ok just to be clear, you believe 150 thousand dollars of facebook ads from russia was more effective than a billion dollars spent by hillary and the backing of nearly the entirety of the legacy media?

This has nothing to do with the fine op you presented about the "start"of this "investigation".
They can't refute your op so it gets derailed.
Great op, well sourced, and well written.

a reply to: Grambler

Wow so you believe Russian trolls were on ATS as well?

Absolutely. There were many, many new "members" popping up (and disappearing) with odd usernames and using very odd syntax.

well I dont think 150 thousand dollars in a world with billions being spent is a massive effort.

Like I said, social media is proving to be a far more efficient method of spreading lies. A vast audience with low cost.

a reply to: Phage

Ok good to know!

150 thousand on facebook is more powerful than billions spent and the msm being on your side.

Knowing that you believe that really gives insight to how you ate looking at this whole situation.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

I still don't get the Pokemon reference, but yes, social media is becoming the campaign vehicle of choice. Ask Trump.

Ok just to be clear, you believe 150 thousand dollars of facebook ads from russia was more effective than a billion dollars spent by hillary and the backing of nearly the entirety of the legacy media?

This has nothing to do with the fine op you presented about the "start"of this "investigation".
They can't refute your op so it gets derailed.
Great op, well sourced, and well written.

I know it has nothing to do with the OP.

But its nice to get people to admit they think 13 russian trolls spending 15o thousand dollars is far more impactful than billions of dollars spent and having the MSM in your pocket.

Just nice to get absurd thoughts like that out in the open.

a reply to: Grambler

But its nice to get people to admit they think 13 russian trolls spending 15o thousand dollars is far more impactful than billions of dollars spent and having the MSM in your pocket.

Who spent billions? Or is that just more hyperbole?

But I did not say that. Feel free to reread the post which you quoted.

I have no idea how effective it was.

a reply to: Grambler

Just nice to get absurd thoughts like that out in the open.

Even more so when my Caps -- swimming upstream against history and DC sports' incompetence -- live to see another series.

HTTR

Back on topic: keep teasing out those absurd thoughts -- the kinda that would have you believe the Caps had a chance against the Pens and Sid...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

150 thousand on facebook is more powerful than billions spent and the msm being on your side.

Who spent billions? Or is that just more hyperbole?

But I did not say that. Feel free to reread the post which you quoted.

I have no idea how effective it was.

Ok I misread you.

Yes hillary raised over a billion for the campaign, its a matter of record.

Nonetheless, the fact you think 150 in facebook ads, many of which werent ran until after the election were a big deal, I stringly disagree with you, as thag doesnt even make a blip on the screen compared to having the MSM in hillarys pocket.

a reply to: Grambler

Yes hillary raised over a billion for the campaign, its a matter of record.

Not quite. And she didn't spend all she raised. So, not billions. Hyperbole?

Nonetheless, the fact you think 150 in facebook ads...

Those ads reached a lot of people. That's efficient advertising.

originally posted by: BeefNoMeat
a reply to: Grambler

Just nice to get absurd thoughts like that out in the open.

Even more so when my Caps -- swimming upstream against history and DC sports' incompetence -- live to see another series.

HTTR

Back on topic: keep teasing out those absurd thoughts -- that kinda that would have you believe the Caps had a chance...

OH NO!!! A CAPS FAN!!!!

Ughh, I am a bummy Pens fan!

Well bad news for you; all of their skill and energy will be taken down by my angry Facebook posts!

If a couple of facebook posts can steal the election from Hilary, I am sure it will be easy for them to ruin the Caps!

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

Yes hillary raised over a billion for the campaign, its a matter of record.

Not quite. And she didn't spend all she raised. So, not billions. Hyperbole?

Well it wouldnt just be what she spent. There were other groups spending as well.

But sure maybe a slight hyperbole.

Please tell me the amount that 150 thousand of facebook ads is more effective than.

500 million? 600 million?

a reply to: Grambler

Please tell me the amount that 150 thousand of facebook ads is more effective than.

You want me to repeat myself as to the efficacy of the ads, and bots, and trolls? Do you have short term memory problems?

a reply to: Grambler

How many voting age citizens use social media???

The final price tag for the 2016 election is in: $6.5 billion for the presidential and congressional elections combined, according to campaign finance watchdog OpenSecrets.org.

The presidential contest — primaries and all — accounts for $2.4 billion of that total. The other $4 billion or so went to congressional races. The tally includes spending by campaigns, party committees and outside sources. It's actually down, slightly, in inflation-adjusted terms from 2012 and 2008.

$6.5 billion is a staggering sum. With that much money you could fund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for 15 years, fix the Flint, Mich., lead pipe problem 30 times over or give every public school teacher a $2,000 raise.

Som ebody just put a price tag on the 2016 election. It’s a doozy.

But hey, who's counting?

Meanwhile, back at the topic...

Just what is SC Mueller doing again, and how did it all get started?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: BeefNoMeat
a reply to: Grambler

Just nice to get absurd thoughts like that out in the open.

Even more so when my Caps -- swimming upstream against history and DC sports' incompetence -- live to see another series.

HTTR

Back on topic: keep teasing out those absurd thoughts -- that kinda that would have you believe the Caps had a chance...

OH NO!!! A CAPS FAN!!!!

Ughh, I am a bummy Pens fan!

Well bad news for you; all of their skill and energy will be taken down by my angry Facebook posts!

If a couple of facebook posts can steal the election from Hilary, I am sure it will be easy for them to ruin the Caps!

Alright, I'm derailing (but it is your thread), if that was Malkin putting his shoulder through a Caps' player, does he get 3 games?!

I won't be surprised if they disappoint -- in all honesty, this felt like our Stanley Cup just getting past the Pens. Hey, I grew up a Sabres fan. Seriously. Dominick Hasek was doing his best 'Daniel-son' as I was growing up, I know hockey disappointment.

Cheers.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

Please tell me the amount that 150 thousand of facebook ads is more effective than.

You want me to repeat myself as to the efficacy of the ads, and bots, and trolls? Do you have short term memory problems?

No I have problems with the argument that 150 thousand in facebook ads (which implicitly would imply the trolls and bots that pushed them) was more effective than the vast majority of the MSM being on hillarys side, in addition to the HUNNDREDS OF MILLIONS (better for you?) that she spent.

The argument is laughable and its nice to see it in the open.

Oh and BTW, that is also assuming Hillary didnt have bots and trolls working with her, which she did.

The Twitter accounts of Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.), as well as those of top Democratic Sens. Cory Booker (N.J.) and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), have more fake than real followers.

The analysis site TwitterAudit, which calculates how many of one's Twitter followers are real, found that 9,086,280 of Clinton's 17.9 million followers are fake, while 8,729,955 are real accounts.

freebeacon.com...

OMG!!!! Her Twitter army of BOTS almost stole the election!

NOOOO!!!!
And not to mention we see many triolls for her, even on this site.

But I guess for some reason only russian trolls and bots are effective.

Damn those Russians!!!!

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical

The final price tag for the 2016 election is in: $6.5 billion for the presidential and congressional elections combined, according to campaign finance watchdog OpenSecrets.org.

The presidential contest — primaries and all — accounts for $2.4 billion of that total. The other $4 billion or so went to congressional races. The tally includes spending by campaigns, party committees and outside sources. It's actually down, slightly, in inflation-adjusted terms from 2012 and 2008.

$6.5 billion is a staggering sum. With that much money you could fund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for 15 years, fix the Flint, Mich., lead pipe problem 30 times over or give every public school teacher a $2,000 raise.

Som ebody just put a price tag on the 2016 election. It’s a doozy.

But hey, who's counting?

Meanwhile, back at the topic...

Just what is SC Mueller doing again, and how did it all get started?

Yeah my bad, I notice hardly any anti trumper has anything to say on the topic about what started the investigation.

As I have been saying since the GP story came out, if a low level drunk saying a russian mentioned they have emails of dirt on hillary is enough to start an investigation of this magnitude against the President (or candidate) of the US, including wiretaps on people connected to him, then we have reached the point where any sitting President can justify any investigation into any of his opponents, and use the FBI and all of their powers, including wiretaps, as their personal opp research and smear squad.

(And that was before finding out Papadopoulos, Mifsud, Pittella and Downer all have connections to hillary.)

Of course, weaponizing the FBI is small potatoes compared to russians posting on Facebook.