Information Warfare Education, Propaganda, and How to Tell the Difference

Town Square
744

No.

The “What about Clinton” spin has been shown to be completely without base about a dozen times now since 2016.
And also, it will not stop the wheels of justice that are now starting to steamroll the corrupt Trump inner circle.

Stop

You are damaging your own brain.

There are only a limited number of Lawyers in the USA who are able to handle high profile cases.

Two groups having the same lawyer is NOT a link between the two groups. That is such an absurd idea I really do see desperation there in grasping to it, and a refusal to accept reality, instead trying to fabricate obscure links that any reasonable rational person would easily see as flimsy.

For example, if the ACLU decided to represent me on some legal issue, that does NOT mean I am linked to all the other clients the ACLU is representing.

745

Also from the daily Mail

lmao

This is like
image

746

Besides, this is old news and Hunter himself came forward with the information voluntarily over a year ago:

Hunter Biden revealed in December 2020, weeks after his father was elected the 46th president, that he was being investigated for his “tax affairs.”

“I take this matter very seriously but I am confident that a professional and objective review of these matters will demonstrate that I handled my affairs legally and appropriately, including with the benefit of professional tax advisors,” the first son said in a statement at the time.

https://nypost.com/2022/02/16/hunter-biden-lover-lunden-roberts-testifies-before-jury-report/

Also, Important to note that hunter’s Accounting firm has not stated that they cannot stand behind the work they did. :joy: :joy: :joy:
mail

747

Bit of news on Hunty’s 3-year running DOJ probe.

It feels like you are doing a bit of “scandal shopping” here, which is another popular disinformation tactic – throw everything you can against the wall, and if nothing sticks, just throw some more against the wall until something does.

I’d be curious to know what you think of Ray’s responses to your Durham claims before diverting the discussion toward a totally different “scandal”.

I’d also be curious to know why you seem so focused on the “scandals” you perceive on the left, while almost totally dismissive of the countless proven “scandals” that we’ve seen from the right.

748

Wait, as long as we are scandal shopping, what about this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton–Lewinsky_scandal

Doesn’t this let Trump off the hook?
A democrat political scandal. Ooooohh That must mean Trump is free and clear.

Oh, here’s ANOTHER ONE! This may be the missing link QAnon is looking for!!!

749

But in the serious discussion, this just in about how dishonesty and constant lying and corruption ultimately places Trump in a no-win situation. Boo-hoo so unfair. :joy: :joy: :joy:

750

I wanted to point out, specifically to Ray, that apparently there are probes into Leftists beyond the Durham probe. Seemingly not many leaks or media coverage.

Ray pulls some very weak inferences out of his “court of public opinion” media articles. I’ve read both right and left media, but have also read Durham’s court filing.
Again, media narratives (aka Hillary’s statements, MSM, etc) and court filings live in very different domains yet have some modicum of overlap.
Just as with Palin’s NYT slander/liable lawsuit, the legal stuff has to play out in the legal domain. We can gnash teeth all we want, but that’s not really productive.

But I do think it worthwhile to view both media/court of public opinion as well as legal domain information. I try to preface any media narratives with something like “not a good look”.

Fair enough that I don’t spend much time on “scandals” narrated by Left leaning media outlets. But do know that I’m more than happy to see folks on the Right “suffer the consequences” of corruption or illegal activities.

As an example, Gaetz from Florida was a child molester and statutory rapist as little as 6 months ago in the “court of Leftist media”. These are incredibly serious charges that a vast majority of Americans want brought to justice. But the Leftist Media “OMG” adrenal spike seems to have dissipated. I don’t have any “proof” of anything, but since Maddow and Tapper aren’t talking about Gaetz any more, I’m assuming this is a big nothing burger other than the media attempting to “Kavanaugh” or “Sandmann” Rep Gaetz.

Also I consider systemic bias in enforcement based on personal and organizational agendas, just as someone on the Left might take a critical view of police searching a minority drivers car.

I think we use the term “proven” somewhat differently. Court of Public Opinion in my mind is a likely indicator of future elections (which still matter). But having CNN, NYT, WaPo, MSNBC all align on narratives is hardly “proof” of much of anything. Seemingly a growing majority of the population sees these “trusted outlets” as PR firms for the DNC with little credibility.

751

No, I read the official court document you linked to and yo have yet to answer my question about which page you found your information on.

You made claims that are not based in fact and not in the legal document at all, and I am asking you to tell me which page you found them on.

Let’s continue with the actual legal document:

  • Where do you find any citation of a law that it then claims Hillary Clinton violated, and which law does it say she violated?
  • Where in the court document does it establish a timing that the data was collected during Trumps administration and not Obama’s?
  • Where does it say that “Executive 1” committed a crime, and which crime does it say he violated?

You are talking out of two sides of your mouth and the only one you are tricking is yourself.

You said you read the Durham filing - well, then it should be easy for you to point out to me where you get any specific crime that was committed other than the defendant lying to the FBI?

Yes, yes, and I pointed out that these were addressed way back in 2020. Specifically the baby momma story because Hunter came clean and directly addressed the issue in a press release, so there wasn’t any need to leak anything. He didn’t hire a bunch of goons to try and bury the story as Trump did with Stormy Daniels and a half dozen other cases.

Let’s get back to the actual document - where specifically in the Actual court document posted by you
and provided by CNN do you see that Durham is accusing anyone besides the defendant of a specific crime, and what specifically is that crime?

I will also point out that the last time I asked you these questions, it was you who diverted to the Atlantic story, then tried to falsely say I was attempting an either/or argument (I wasn’t), then you said “just grab a beer and a bag of popcorn”. In your three posts following my challenge to factually discuss the court paper you presented, you completely avoided a fact based and legitimate discussion. I attempted to bring it back, and you again attempted to divert it with some kind of Qanon - clinton link (you avoided a fact-based discussion), and then went into diverting to Hunter Biden.

So at that point I just said “fuck it, this is a trash discussion so I’ll treat it like trash”. There is no point in even attempting to pursue a legitimate discussion when you completely avoid any kind of legitimate discussion of facts.

752

The document is a court filing, not an indictment with specific charges.

I don’t think specific timelines were laid out in the court filing.

Again, the filing is not an indictment with charges.

What the filing does do is put everyone on notice that the Special Investigator sees collusion between parties that are under subpoena, that each party need to find legal counsel with no conflicting interests, and that at least 2 law firms are under investigation directly so will not have a shield of lawyer client privilege.

@raybennett There are some legal basics I think you are conflating with both Leftist media narratives and Righty media narratives. Don’t worry though since i think the 2023 Congress will be quite rigorous in helping unravel for us… That’s one of the “mandates” the 2022 election will demand.

753

@FermentedAgave Complete nonsense

You and the right wing media claimed the document said all kinds of things and when I press you, you change what you are saying.

Utter and complete bullshit.

The document doesn’t “put anyone on notice”. Again, that is just some kind of fantasy you have.

Exactly - you and the right wing media were just making it up. Anything about the Trump White house being spied on was a complete fabrication and not according to anything in the document. Your accusations were not based on any facts and are contrary to actual facts.

Of course it isn’t - and the right wing hype is based on complete fabrication and misrepresentation of what the document is saying. You can’t even identify any crimes that might possibly have been committed except in your fantasies and even then only if you completely make up crimes that don’t actually exist. Like collusion - how is that even a crime unless it is with a foreign power? Yes, it is illegal to collude with a foreign power, or to spy on the government for a foreign power. But it is NOT a crime to collude against a person, nor is it even a crime to spy on a person, and it isn;t a crime to spy on a person who later becomes president. All these nonsense crimes are just fantasies that will not even be the reasonable basis to begin an investigation.

All the rest is bullshit because there is no actual crime anyone can point to. Investigate away - put people “on notice” - just like Trump put Hillary on notice in 2016. Oh boy, really scared … oh wait, there isn’t a crime, so who cares?

No, I only started reading the media on this topic AFTER I read the document, and you can see very clearly in the timeline above that is so. There is a complete log of exactly what time I formed each opinion, and then the later date when it was printed by the media. You are the only one in here who is glued to a specific media narrative and conflating fact with fantasy.

What we have here is just classic transference of Trump’s guilt onto other people. "Oh, Trump was accused of Colluding with the Russians so therefore all collusion is illegal and we can point to Democrats colluding with each other …ooooohhhh. Or "Oh, Trump Organization is in trouble because Trump had a conflict of interest and violated the law, so therefore all conflict of interest is illegal (except when trump does it), and so these Democrats that have a conflict of interest are in troooobleeee.

Sorry, no. Apples and Oranges.

754

Given that there are multiple intertwining law firms representing each other and multiple defendants, the following was including to preempt or “put on notice” that each needs to find untainted representation.
“a defendant’s counsel-of-choice right may sometimes be trumped
by a conflict of interest.” This is because “w here a defendant’s chosen counsel suffers from a
conflict of interest, . . . the court’s own institutional interests” are implicated. Id. Guaranteeing
conflict-free counsel protects not just defendants’ rights, but also the “‘[f]ederal courts[’] …
independent interest in ensuring that criminal trials are conducted within the ethical standards of
Case 1:21-cr-00582-CRC Document 35 Filed 02/11/22 Page 5 of 13
6
the [legal] profession and that legal proceedings appear fair to all who observe them.’”

That is incorrect Ray. Susseman feed the Steele Dossier to the FBI claiming he wasn’t working for any, but he actually was being paid by the Clinton Campaign and a “Tech Executive”.

An "updated reported was “provided” to a second government agency after 45 was inaugurated.

In fact, the defendant had assembled
and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including (i) a
technology executive (“Tech Executive-1”) at a U.S.-based Internet company (“Internet Company-
1”), and (ii) the Clinton Campaign.
3. The defendant’s billing records reflect th at the defendant repeatedly billed the
Clinton Campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations. In compiling and disseminating
these allegations, the defendant and Tech Executive-1 also had met and communicated with another
law partner at Law Firm-1 who was then servi ng as General Counsel to the Clinton Campaign
(“Campaign Lawyer-1”).

5. The Government’s evidence at trial will also establish that among the Internet data
Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited wa s domain name system (“DNS”) Internet traffic
pertaining to (i) a particular healthcare provider, (ii) Trump Tower, (iii) Donald Trump’s Central
Park West apartment building, and (iv) the Executiv e Office of the President of the United States
(“EOP”). (Tech Executive-1’s employer, Internet Company-1, had come to access and maintain
dedicated servers for the EOP as part of a sensitive arrangement whereby it provided DNS
resolution services to the EOP. Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by
mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information
about Donald Trump.)
6. The Indictment further details that on February 9, 2017, the defendant provided an
updated set of allegations – incl uding the Russian Bank-1 data a nd additional allegations relating
Case 1:21-cr-00582-CRC Document 35 Filed 02/11/22 Page 3 of 13
4
to Trump – to a second agency of the U.S. government (“Agency-2”). The Government’s evidence
at trial will establish that these additional allegations relied, in part, on the purported DNS traffic
that Tech Executive-1 and others had assembled pertaining to Trump Tower, Donald Trump’s New
York City apartment building, the EOP, and the aforementioned healthcare provider

755

@raybennett

I know this is technical stuff, but I’m afraid that Leftist’s simply saying “Durham is political so throw it out” is not how our legal system is supposed to work in the US. Sometimes, more often than we all probably like, it does come down to “prosecutorial discretion” or “legislating from the bench” - i.e. arbitrary outside the law decisions. (Mayors son gets community service for drunk driving, while the poor girl gets 90 days in jail.)

This is fundamentally one of the key issues in the current “Culture War”.
Mob Rule vs Rule of Law, prosecutorial discretion vs equal application of law, … This is all why we have elections - Did the Left receive a “mandate” from the US Citizenry to scuttle Rule of Law in favor of Wokeism, Intersectionality, Progressiveanity? Will there be a “mandate” in 2022 or 2024 to reinstill Rule of Law back into the US?

756

Listen - I deal with conflict of interest representing clients all the time with tax law. The only thing he is “put on notice” for is to possibly change counsel. Nothing more. Conflict of interest isn’t a crime, and is even allowed if there is good reason for it, and if all parties who may potentially be misrepresented agree. It’s probably stricter for court, but not to the level of being a crime. Normally when there is a potential conflict of interest it’s up to the clients if they want to waive it. Yes, the courts can override a waiver. But this is NOT A CRIME.

Yes, so now - is exploiting DNS to obtain data a crime? It sounds bad. Oh boy, “exploiting”. But it’s all just political grandstanding and not an actual crime. IT companies “exploit” DNS data all the time. Hell, I can show you here how to “Exploit” DNS data. NOT A CRIME

Search for integrallife.com at:

https://lookup.icann.org/lookup

Oh, I see @corey-devos uses godaddy and his billing address is located in Colorado
Here are his DNS Name Servers:
AMIR.NS.CLOUDFLARE.COM
IVY.NS.CLOUDFLARE.COM
His domain Registration expires on Feb 17, 2023 and he first purchased the domain name in 2004

There - I EXPLOITED @corey-devos Corey’s DNS Data to serve my futile and shallow political ends.

NOT A CRIME

Now this is where the timing becomes important, and why the politically motivated Durham left it out - The White House DNS data was “exploited” according to a contract with the Obama administration prior to Trump even taking office. So it wasn’t even a crime to “exploit” the white hose DNS because he was under contract, and also Trump wasn’t being spied on in the White House because he wasn’t elected. As I showed you above, explanting DNS data and looking up who and where emails or web traffic come and go from is NOT A CRIME. If it was, Facebook’s and other social media’s primary revenue funnel would be illegal.

Yes, please educate yourself on the technical stuff before just following whatever you read in the Daily Mail.

Our legal system can only operate on ACTUAL crimes, not made up crimes, and only crimes that ACTYALLY occurred, not crimes that were not even possible in the time period being noted.
In this case, the right wants to implement “mob rule” and just make up laws that don’t exist and change the timeline of events that occurred.
I’m not actually worried, though - I trust this will go nowhere in the courts and the right will just keep crying about it - like they keep crying about Hillary’s emails years later.
The only purpose of this whole exercise is to beat the political drums.

757

It’s a bit amazing to me to see you say something like this, while posting links from the Daily Mail.

There is an odd strain of “critical thinking” out there which says “I should always be critical of other people’s views, but never my own.”

Fortunately/unfortunately, justice is slow, and the case is still making its way through the courts. But the media is still reporting on it, when there is something to report.

So this kind of cuts against your narrative that a) the investigation is a “nothingburger”, and b) that Maddow and company are only pushing fake conspiracies.

Maddow isn’t talking about this right now, because there currently isn’t anything to talk about until we have more information from the investigation. But from what you’ve said, you believe that Maddow et al are only here to politicize and perpetuate fake leftist conspiracies. Since you believe the Gaetz is another one of those fake conspiracies, shouldn’t she be talking about it nonstop? But she’s not. She’s not working for the Daily Mail, after all :slight_smile:

Meanwhile…

758

I just don’t see what Gaetz has to do with the discussion myself. Honestly, supporting law enforcement to investigate and prosecute politicians engaged in criminal activity regardless of political affiliation is just bottom line the absolute basic requirement for a civil society. If this belief has become rare, then my expectation for an overwhelming global upheaval isn’t that far fetched.
The other side of that is limitations on law enforcement to only prosecute actual crimes.

@corey-devos I was doing a bit of hypnosis work this past week and am reminded there is a school / technique of hypnosis that actually convinces people things are true when they are in fact not true at all. It’s one of those “black arts” branches that nobody wants to talk about, lol. But I do think that what we have achieved is mass hypnosis through repetition of messaging and willingness to accept that messaging to a point where tens of millions of people readily believe things that are demonstrably untrue - just like in a hypnotism show, but in reality.
I don’t actually think the people doing this know what they are doing except for the immediate results. I don’t think they have a plan per se - I think they are just like everyone else and following where pursuing the almighty dollar takes them.
Which to me highlights a fundamental self destructive flaw in capitalism as we have enacted it. Corporate motives and objectives rule human behavior rather than the other way around.

759

Aaaannnd … I’ll add in another victory for the rule of law and a civil society where even a president can be held accountable for his actions. If not criminally, in Tort law and bear financial responsibility.

Whether he wins or loses will be according to the “reasonable judgement” ruling rather than the “beyond a shadow of a doubt” rule in criminal cases. Since Trump has used (and abused) civil law throughout his life, it’s only fitting now that he sit in the opposite chair.

760

Add it to the pile…

But surely this is nothing compared to the unmitigated political corruption of Hunter Biden!

761

@corey-devos Are you ever not critical of the Right and silent regarding the Left? Your conflation of Hunter Biden with President Trump is kind of unusual in this regard.

But your question is something we should all consider, beyond utilizing as rationalization of our own ideologies and agendas.

Should we be critical of say an ABC (veneer of reliability) using “as reported by” The Daily Beast - a well recognized Leftists outlet with marginal accuracy credibility. Not everything the Beast publishes is without merit.

Thanks for the Gaetz investigation update. I was not aware of the continued investigations. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

762

Can you address discussions where the faults of the left are actually based in fact?

@corey-devos is critical of the left - it’s just you choose the wrong topics. If you want to hear him be critical of the left, just bring a topic that is actually worthy of this site.

It wasn’t conflation = you are using that word a bit too much and again I think it’s a word you just heard recently and don’t understand what it means.

Corey was COMPARING - and yes, it is perfectly valid to compare a person - especially when YOU bring him into the discussion. You want to bring Hunter Biden into the discussion and then you say we can’t compare hi to the big fat orange elephant in the room? Go to hell, lol.

763

The Classified documents story SHOULD cause anyone to physically wince who has ever worked with classified documents or other sensitive information.

Military and civilian government employees who have done that in the past have literally gone to prison because of it. It’s a not just an “oops”. Most people who have done military service have also heard stories of thousands of people spending hours looking in the woods for a lots piece of equipment classified as “Secret”. If any military officer or civilian employee of the government took any classified documents home, it would be the end of their career - no excuses, and probably with a separation indicating dishonorable status, ruining any future job prospects.

In health care we have HIPPA laws, and anyone in the medical or insurance filed knows they cannot just take documents home from work. Lawyers and Accountants as well.

How is this gross negligence just glossed over, and then Hunter Biden brought in as an counter point time after time? He isn’t even a government employee and did not take an oath of office - as Trump did?