The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[El Guapo]

JUST NOW: Trump, asked if he still wants to testify before Mueller: “Yes. I would like to.”

C'mon cmon...

[Moliere]

The Facebook-Cambridge Analytica 'Scandal' Is a Nothingburger

The theory goes something like this: Facebook obtained information on users who took a personality quiz with their online friends. Another outlet, the advertising firm Cambridge Analytica, harvested that information, brainwashed a bunch of rubes and then yada, yada, yada...Russia! Former Cambridge Analytica contractor Christopher Wylie told CNN that while at the company, he helped build a "psychological warfare weapon" to "exploit mental vulnerabilities that our algorithms showed that (Facebook users) had." So, in other words, he worked in the advertising business.
...
Here's a thought: If you're uncomfortable with data mining and your information being shared, don't take surveys. Because, guess what, you don't have to be on Facebook. You don't have to use Twitter. You don't have a constitutional right to play FarmVille without answering a survey. You don't get free stuff. The very existence of social media and tech companies is predicated on mining data so that they, or third parties, can sell you things. That has always been the deal.
...
By constantly using the word "breach," reporters are trying to insinuate that someone stole voter data that typically was off-limits. Cambridge Analytica was allowed to pull that profile data. Facebook only changed its policy in early 2015. But before the general election, the Trump campaign dropped Cambridge Analytica for the Republican National Committee data, reportedly never using the any of the "psychographic" information. According to CBS News, in September 2016, it had "tested the RNC data, and it proved to be vastly more accurate."

Even if the campaign hadn't, however, its efforts would have been akin to those being heralded as revolutionary when serving the interests of Democrats. In fact, Facebook allowed the Obama campaign to harvest data in the same way that is now generating headlines and handwringing. Do you remember any outrage and trepidation over the privacy and manipulation of your thoughts in 2012? The only consistent position the left seems to take these days is that the mechanisms it uses to keep power automatically transform into something nefarious and undemocratic when the opposition uses them. If anything, there should be concerned about the ideological double standards of yet another tech giant.

[LawBeefaroni]

Whataboutism: The reason the frog never realizes the pot is boiling.


I mean if each incremental increase in malfeasance is excused because something kinda similar was done before by the other side, well, welcome to frog stew, starting you, dumbass American party loyalist.

[Zaxxon]

That article shows a profound misunderstanding of the Cambridge Analytica brouhaha. It isn't that folks who took the survey had their info used. It's that *all of their friends did, too*, without doing anything other than being friends with the rubes. Now sure, you can say Facebook bogeyman yadda yadda, but it's an entirely different premise than just some folks taking a quiz from a company that misused their data.

[Sepiche]

Wow, that article misses some important details in the spectacular fashion I've come to expect from "Reason".

In addition to what Zaxxon mentioned, while academics were allowed to access that extra user data for research purposes, they aren't allowed to resell it, which is what happened when the researcher allowed the data collected through his quiz to be used by CA. The rules were changed after the Obama campaign used Facebook for data in a similar way, but before CA did it.

Not noting those distinctions in the article makes me question either the author's competence or biases... take your pick.

[Paingod]

JUST NOW: Trump, asked if he still wants to testify before Mueller: “Yes. I would like to.”

Up next:

Trump says "I thought he said 'Do you want to test out a mullet'..."

[hepcat]

[Paingod]

I like the text on the image. Implying either that you should eliminate witnesses or that it shouldn't matter that someone saw you commit a crime.

[pr0ner]

I like the text on the image. Implying either that you should eliminate witnesses or that it shouldn't matter that someone saw you commit a crime.

Do you know who Bob Loblaw is?

[AWS260]

I like the text on the image. Implying either that you should eliminate witnesses or that it shouldn't matter that someone saw you commit a crime.

Do you know who Bob Loblaw is?

He probably needs to read Bob Loblaw's Law Blog.

[pr0ner]

I like the text on the image. Implying either that you should eliminate witnesses or that it shouldn't matter that someone saw you commit a crime.

Do you know who Bob Loblaw is?

He probably needs to read Bob Loblaw's Law Blog.

[Paingod]

Never seen Arrested Development. I suppose I should go sit in the corner for a while...

[Carpet_pissr]

Never seen Arrested Development. I suppose I should go sit in the corner for a while...

Whaaa?! Yes, sit in the corner while streaming it.

[Remus West]

Never seen Arrested Development. I suppose I should go sit in the corner for a while...

Neither have I. I had to google it.

[GreenGoo]

Neither have I. I had to google it.

I had to wait patiently while one of you did it.

I've seen episodes here and there, but I still had no idea who Bob Loblaw was. I assume someone calls him Boblob Law, because funny.

[Chaz]

I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.

[El Guapo]

I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.

I watched the first few episodes of the resurrected season. It wasn't very good.

But the original run was solid.

[Freyland]

Whoa, whoa there! This thread is moving uncomfortably close to EBG!

[El Guapo]

Here, I'll tie it back in.

[malchior]

I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.

I watched the first few episodes of the resurrected season. It wasn't very good.

But the original run was solid.

It was a mistake since they couldn't resolve cast scheduling differences. It is an ensemble show...so...

[Pyperkub]

Here, I'll tie it back in.

This could also apply:

[Alefroth]

Neither have I. I had to google it.

I had to wait patiently while one of you did it.

I've seen episodes here and there, but I still had no idea who Bob Loblaw was. I assume someone calls him Boblob Law, because funny.

They don't need to. Bob Loblaw works for teh funny.

[Archinerd]

I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.

I watched the first few episodes of the resurrected season. It wasn't very good.

But the original run was solid.

There were some rough spots in the original season too. I really don't think the Charlize Theron plot line was all that great.

[Scraper]

I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.

I watched the first few episodes of the resurrected season. It wasn't very good.

But the original run was solid.

There were some rough spots in the original season too. I really don't think the Charlize Theron plot line was all that great.

\

The second season is perhaps the best season of any sitcom ever. But yeah the 4th season was pretty terrible. There is a rumor going around that someone involved remixed the 4th season and made it more cohesive, but who knows if we'll ever see that version.

Anyway can we get back to Trump being investigated now?

[malchior]

Where Politico does something useful and sounds the alarm that attacks on Mueller seem coordinated.

When President Donald Trump lashed out against Robert Mueller by name earlier this month, the president’s supporters sprang into action—treating the chief Russia investigator to political campaign-style opposition research.

Within hours, the Drudge Report featured a story blaming Mueller, the special counsel leading the Justice Department’s Russia probe, for the FBI’s clumsy investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks when Mueller ran the bureau. The independent pro-Trump journalist Sara Carter posted a story charging that Mueller, as a federal prosecutor in Boston in the mid-1980s, had covered up the FBI’s dealings with the Mafia informant Whitey Bulger. Carter was soon discussing her findings in prime time with Fox News host Sean Hannity.


Meanwhile, Trump supporters on Twitter circulated video of testimony Mueller gave to Congress ahead of the 2003 Iraq War in which he endorsed the view, later proven false, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.

To some, the barrage looked coordinated among pro-Trump allies and media outlets, a concerted effort to tarnish Mueller’s reputation as part of a political strategy to undermine, or even eventually fire, the Russia investigator.

[Carpet_pissr]

I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.

I watched the first few episodes of the resurrected season. It wasn't very good.

But the original run was solid.

There were some rough spots in the original season too. I really don't think the Charlize Theron plot line was all that great.

\

The second season is perhaps the best season of any sitcom ever. But yeah the 4th season was pretty terrible. There is a rumor going around that someone involved remixed the 4th season and made it more cohesive, but who knows if we'll ever see that version.

Anyway can we get back to Trump being investigated now?

Fine, but the Arrested Development education had to happen. I can't help those who watched and didn't like (you're dead to me, BTW), but for those who never saw it? Gotta reach out and try to save them whenever the opportunity arises. It might not be their fault they never got exposure to Teh Funny.

[LordMortis]

Where Politico does something useful and sounds the alarm that attacks on Mueller seem coordinated.

When President Donald Trump lashed out against Robert Mueller by name earlier this month, the president’s supporters sprang into action—treating the chief Russia investigator to political campaign-style opposition research.

Within hours, the Drudge Report featured a story blaming Mueller, the special counsel leading the Justice Department’s Russia probe, for the FBI’s clumsy investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks when Mueller ran the bureau. The independent pro-Trump journalist Sara Carter posted a story charging that Mueller, as a federal prosecutor in Boston in the mid-1980s, had covered up the FBI’s dealings with the Mafia informant Whitey Bulger. Carter was soon discussing her findings in prime time with Fox News host Sean Hannity.


Meanwhile, Trump supporters on Twitter circulated video of testimony Mueller gave to Congress ahead of the 2003 Iraq War in which he endorsed the view, later proven false, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.

To some, the barrage looked coordinated among pro-Trump allies and media outlets, a concerted effort to tarnish Mueller’s reputation as part of a political strategy to undermine, or even eventually fire, the Russia investigator.

I doubt it. It's more like they're all getting in line to tell the people what they want to hear to sell their stories and be a part of this. I don't know which is more frightening. This is how fascism is born. People getting in line to get ahead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third ... xperiment)

[El Guapo]

Where Politico does something useful and sounds the alarm that attacks on Mueller seem coordinated.

When President Donald Trump lashed out against Robert Mueller by name earlier this month, the president’s supporters sprang into action—treating the chief Russia investigator to political campaign-style opposition research.

Within hours, the Drudge Report featured a story blaming Mueller, the special counsel leading the Justice Department’s Russia probe, for the FBI’s clumsy investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks when Mueller ran the bureau. The independent pro-Trump journalist Sara Carter posted a story charging that Mueller, as a federal prosecutor in Boston in the mid-1980s, had covered up the FBI’s dealings with the Mafia informant Whitey Bulger. Carter was soon discussing her findings in prime time with Fox News host Sean Hannity.


Meanwhile, Trump supporters on Twitter circulated video of testimony Mueller gave to Congress ahead of the 2003 Iraq War in which he endorsed the view, later proven false, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.

To some, the barrage looked coordinated among pro-Trump allies and media outlets, a concerted effort to tarnish Mueller’s reputation as part of a political strategy to undermine, or even eventually fire, the Russia investigator.

I doubt it. It's more like they're all getting in line to tell the people what they want to hear to sell their stories and be a part of this. I don't know which is more frightening. This is how fascism is born. People getting in line to get ahead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third ... xperiment)

Yeah, I dunno whether I'm convinced that attacks like that are "coordinated", as in someone literally organizing all of them. All that really needs to happen is the President launches an attack, and then shameless allies know that the President approves of that, and then they can all do their own attacks (and pick up on themes that other people have already run with).

[malchior]

The timing is too suspicious IMO. All these folks were just sitting on stories and happened to have them ready for when Trump made an off-hand remark? Maybe but why sit on these stories? To be clear, I agree that the twitter supporters was more about getting in line. However, Conservative media was probably too prepared for it to truly be a follow on effect. And suddenly the lady is booked on Hannity? That is way too much smoke.

[LordMortis]

The timing is too suspicious IMO. All these folks were just sitting on stories and happened to have them ready for when Trump made an off-hand remark? Maybe but why sit on these stories? To be clear, I agree that the twitter supporters was more about getting in line. However, Conservative media was probably too prepared for it to truly be a follow on effect. And suddenly the lady is booked on Hannity? That is way too much smoke.

What makes you think they were sitting on the stories? I'm not about to go clicking federalist links. They will get no satisfaction from me, but from the look of it this is not investigative journalism but rather OP/Ed from stories going back decades.

Within hours I can use google to find old stories on anything and give you a politically charged story. Conservative media has been positive feedback looping on the day's new events since the rise of Rush Limbaugh and that was before rise of Wiki and Google and before broadband put the history of the human race a few keyword searches away with countless people doing the same work in parallel for you.

[Zarathud]

What's very concerning is how conservative messages get tested against the most extreme audience then refined based on "what sticks" to move upstream from white nationalist and fringe sites to Breitbart, Drudge, Hannity, and Fox. Someone linked to an hour by hour breakdown of how the Comey or Pizzagate attacks evolved. Apparently this is common.

[LordMortis]

What's very concerning is how conservative messages get tested against the most extreme audience then refined based on "what sticks" to move upstream from white nationalist and fringe sites to Breitbart, Drudge, Hannity, and Fox. Someone linked to an hour by hour breakdown of how the Comey or Pizzagate attacks evolved. Apparently this is common.

Again, that's my concern. Not the coordination, but the echo chamber. The feedback loop. The perpetual motion. Again, this is how fascism is born. The need to be led by someone who will tell you you are right and absolve you your own inadequacies for a higher purpose. Work sets you free.

I repeat

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third ... eriment%29

[El Guapo]

The timing is too suspicious IMO. All these folks were just sitting on stories and happened to have them ready for when Trump made an off-hand remark? Maybe but why sit on these stories? To be clear, I agree that the twitter supporters was more about getting in line. However, Conservative media was probably too prepared for it to truly be a follow on effect. And suddenly the lady is booked on Hannity? That is way too much smoke.

What makes you think they were sitting on the stories? I'm not about to go clicking federalist links. They will get no satisfaction from me, but from the look of it this is not investigative journalism but rather OP/Ed from stories going back decades.

Within hours I can use google to find old stories on anything and give you a politically charged story. Conservative media has been positive feedback looping on the day's new events since the rise of Rush Limbaugh and that was before rise of Wiki and Google and before broadband put the history of the human race a few keyword searches away.

Yup. It's well known that Mueller is an Enemy of Trump at this point, so all the media in TrumpWorld are going to be working on stories to discredit Mueller / his team / the FBI / Democrats / etc. So the odds that TrumpWorld media outlets will have bad stories on Mueller at any point is pretty much 100%. And Hannity is the head Minister of Propaganda at this point, so he'll immediately book people who write anti-Mueller stories that get traction. Plus anti-Mueller stories are going to get more mainstream attention at times when Trump is harping on Mueller.

I'm not saying that there's no coordination at all (NO COLLUSION!), I just think that this can easily work without someone in the center directing everyone.

[Holman]

You can be sure that conservative media has been preparing anti-Mueller material (bidden or unbidden) because they know they need to be ready to go when the axe falls.

When Trump fires Mueller, Fox and Breitbart aren't going to waste time analyzing why the investigation was a failure and explaining away this or that piece of evidence. They're going to go 100% with the narrative that Mueller is worse that Clinton and Obama put together and that he needed to be stopped from carrying out his Deep State coup.

[Carpet_pissr]

You can be sure that conservative media has been preparing anti-Mueller material (bidden or unbidden) because they know they need to be ready to go when the axe falls.

When Trump fires Mueller, Fox and Breitbart aren't going to waste time analyzing why the investigation was a failure and explaining away this or that piece of evidence. They're going to go 100% with the narrative that Mueller is worse that Clinton and Obama put together and that he needed to be stopped from carrying out his Deep State coup.

Jesus. We're not in the darkest timeline yet, but it's already pretty damn murky.

[LordMortis]

As follow up, I've noticed a rise in 2nd Amendment pro Branch Davidian spam recently. It took me five seconds to google Mueller Waco to find this article which I could spin OP/Ed conspiracy tripe for days.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101811990/

[hepcat]

Pro Branch Davidian? There are people outside NAMBLA that publicly support pedophilia?

[Isgrimnur]

Not all of them enjoy the camaraderie of their fellow pedophiles in a national organization. One has to expect some offshoot organizations and dedicated loners with any interest group.

[hepcat]

At least I didn't mix it up with NAFTA again...

[LordMortis]

The fringe right conspiracy theorists have always been pro Branch Davidian and considered Clinton/Reno as an attack on citizenry to expand federal power and weaken the 2nd amendment under the ATF. Of course they will bend their theories to make them pro MAGA somehow but this fits the anti FBI conspiracy perfectly. Clinton's FBI is deep state destroying the legitimacy of the presidency using Russian hackers to take away our guns and Christ and jobs for muslims and the United Nations single state under the Illuminati.

Look at this way, Ruby Ridge>Waco Texas>Oklahoma City Bombings>Mueller comes to prominence>9/11

https://twitter.com/CharlieDaniels/stat ... 6192447488

Skull and Bones man, Skull and bones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_and_Bones

Facebook tracks everything you do, and what do you do? You blame Trump?

And look , just now

https://www.wired.com/story/the-case-of ... rk-matter/

An international team of astrophysicists has discovered a galaxy 65 million light years away with so little dark matter that it may contain none at all. To arrive at this conclusion, they measured the speeds of 10 twinkly blobs in the galaxy, called globular clusters, that each contain millions of stars. Their measurements showed that this galaxy’s stars can handle its rotational speed. Compared to other galaxies of the same brightness, “it has at least 400 times less dark matter than what we expected,” says astrophysicist Pieter van Dokkum of Yale University.

How can you possibly doubt the FBI wasn't trying to the disarm the law abiding citizens of the US for the benefit of globalist law superseding the Constitution?