NBC Publishes 200,000 Tweets Tied To Russian Trolls

An anonymous reader quotes a report from NBC News: NBC News is publishing its database of more than 200,000 tweets that Twitter has tied to "malicious activity" from Russia-linked accounts during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. These accounts, working in concert as part of large networks, pushed hundreds of thousands of inflammatory tweets, from fictitious tales of Democrats practicing witchcraft to hardline posts from users masquerading as Black Lives Matter activists. Investigators have traced the accounts to a Kremlin-linked propaganda outfit founded in 2013 known as the Internet Research Association (IRA). The organization has been assessed by the U.S. Intelligence Community to be part of a Russian state-run effort to influence the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential race. And they're not done. At the request of NBC News, three sources familiar with Twitter's data systems cross-referenced the partial list of names released by Congress to create a partial database of tweets that could be recovered. You can download the streamlined spreadsheet (29 mb) with just usernames, tweet and timestamps, view the full data for ten influential accounts via Google Sheets, download tweets.csv (50 mb) and users.csv with full underlying data, and/or explore a graph database in Neo4j, whose software powered the Panama Papers and Paradise Papers investigations.

NBC News' partners at Neo4j have put together a "get started" guide to help you explore the database of Russian tweets. "To recreate a link to an individual tweet found in the spreadsheet, replace 'user_key' in https://twitter.com/user_key/status/tweet_id with the screenname from the 'user_key' field and 'tweet_id' with the number in the 'tweet_id' field," reports NBC News. "Following the links will lead to a suspended page on Twitter. But some copies of the tweets as they originally appeared, including images, can be found by entering the links on webcaches like the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine and archive.is."

Comments

200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd say the Russians got a better bang for their buck.

Re:200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the scary thing about it, and it doesn't just concern Russia or governments in general. One or two years ago a guy showed how easy it was to get an arbitrary (and obvious) fake story on the top page of reddit with a ridiculously small budget. (200 bucks or so) While this might be a dream for viral marketing agencies, used by the wrong people such ways of influencing a large number of people can wreak quite some havoc. (Not that I think that the traditional ways of propaganda and advertisement/branding are more beneficial.)

 

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Anonymous Coward]

Please... The obvious point is that it didn't influence shit.

If $1.2 billion in Clinton propaganda, 94% favorable domestic media coverage, an army of celebrity shills, a brainwashed electorate hooked on the welfare plantation, and every dirty trick in the book (plus new ones like buying FISA warrants) can't win you a presidency, then Russians tweeting about BLM literally did nothing.

This is obviously the Democrats and NeverTrumps desperately searching for an excuse so they don't have to admit that they lost to the worst candidate in history.

Re:200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Mr D from 63]

200K tweets over a few years might as well be zero when considering the total number of tweets generated of this period of time. Over 500 million tweets are generated per day.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Mr D from 63]

Please... The obvious point is that it didn't influence shit.

Very true. For comparison, there were 3.5 Millions Tweets generated in a couple hours during the 2012 VP debate between Biden and Ryan, a debate that didn't mean squat.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Anonymous Coward]

And once again the Hillary supporters are out modding en masse. Little propagandists complaining about the Russians, what a laugh! Well, they definitely showed who was better at the job. and cheaper too.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[lucm]

Many of those tweets are about politics but without a clear purpose:

"How fucked up our country will be if Hillary wins in 2016 and Trump wins in 2020
Or vise versa"

What's the angle there? Sow the seeds of common sense?

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[AmiMoJo]

The relevant metric is how much influence these tweets had. How much they were retweeted, how much they shaped the discourse.

Just comparing the language in the tweets to some of the posts on Slashdot suggests that some people were heavily influenced. Usually the ones who insist that the Russians had no effect on anything.

You see the same behaviour with cult members.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[alvinrod]

I think you make the mistake of thinking that the people who read those tweets or follow this accounts were anywhere close to neutral to start with. I do not think you could find many people who had their minds changed.

Also, why do you assume posts made here are genuine and not also troll accounts, whether Russian or just asshats from wherever? If they would use Twitter, why not other popular sites as well?

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Anonymous Coward]

The losing side needs to move themselves out of the first two stages of grief. Its hard I know, but you can get to bargaining > depression > and finally Acceptance. Then finally you can work toward a democrat as loved as Obama and JFK were. Ahhh who am I kidding.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Mr D from 63]

The relevant metric is how much influence these tweets had.

Application of common sense tells us very little if any. Do you actually believe someone changed their vote because they read one of these tweets among the tons of other tweets out there?

I think we need to address Russian meddling, but its not like its made any difference to this point.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[ilguido]

What's the angle there? Sow the seeds of common sense?

Common sense is what the warmongering cryptocracy establishment fear the most.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Hal_Porter]

I reckon the fact that all the money celebs and media were on one side made people think they were being railroaded.

If the media is 60:40 in favour of one side, it looks like one side is ahead. If it's 70:30 it looks like one side is more ahead. If it's 94:06 it starts to look dubious.

It's like those elections in a dictatorship where the dictator gets 99% of the vote. Everyone knows they're fake.

I.e. a plurality on one side looks like a consensus. Unanimity one side looks like the system is rigged.

Maybe the DNC should funnel some of its vast cash reserves to conservative commentators like Ben Shapiro through a law firm in order to get the media balance back to 90:10 and see if that makes people start believing them again.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[AHuxley]

Re "Do you actually believe someone changed their vote"
That would be a good quality speech using terms people in each state could relate too.
Jobs, education, trade, spending.
Talking up the past and future of the state.
Talking to the people of that state in a positive way.
Been able to give a good quality speech in person in that state and the next state.
A good speaking voice and the duration of the speech is also important. So is an accent.
Then giving another great speech in the next state.
Not staying in one part of the USA and talking about the rest of the USA in a negative way.
Positivity and optimism wins elections as it sways the needed states. Its all in the candidate and their ability to talk all over the US and what they talk about.

People in every state also consider how a speech is given. Full of energy and charm? A positive story that connects a candidate with a city, local history, their state?
Thats what stays with voters. Good political advisors can help with a good speech and how to give a good speech. The words and terms that will make for a speech that is talked about by voters in that state.

The internet and social media can only reflect on what candidate did or did not do.
Great speeches in every state starts to take on a positive momentum.
Not giving great speeches all over the US starts to become a question.
Citizens then vote and recall who they want and who was listening and talking to them.
Social media will not win an election. Voters all over the USA have to like a candidate.

Re:200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Lisandro]

They sure did, and it is scary as fuck.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Mr D from 63]

You understatement the gullibility of the uneducateds.

And if you understand their gullibility, common sense might tell you these relatively few tweets were not likely to change the minds of people who are getting orders of magnitude more tweets, just as misleading, from domestic sources.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[PopeRatzo]

If the media is 60:40 in favour of one side, it looks like one side is ahead. If it's 70:30 it looks like one side is more ahead. If it's 94:06 it starts to look dubious.

So, if 94% of the media says today is Saturday, do you throw away your calendars?

You're buying into the "there is no such thing as truth" mindhack, which is how Donald Trump got elected in the first place. Once you can get people to believe nothing is true, then you can get them to do anything. It is the ultimate "Listen and Believe".

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Hal_Porter]

Donald Trump got elected because as dislikable he is he's less dislikable than Hillary Clinton. And having a bunch of even more dislikable journalists on her side didn't do her any favours.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[jader3rd]

I think you make the mistake of thinking that the people who read those tweets or follow this accounts were anywhere close to neutral to start with. I do not think you could find many people who had their minds changed.

True, but it might have riled them up enough to remember to vote; when without the false placed anger, they might have not voted.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[ScentCone]

How do we know AmiMoJo isn't a Russian?

To the contrary, we KNOW that AmiMoJo is a Russian. We know this because a law firm hired by a political consultant paid a foreign national to write down things that people he paid in Russia told him, and he put it in a dossier. And that dossier was confirmed by news articles that were written because the same guy who was paid to assemble the phony dossier briefed the reporters who then pretended they had other sources. So, obviously we know that AmiMoJo is a Russian, because we have enough evidence to convince a judge (as long as we don't mention who was paying for all of this) to grant the government the power to listen in on his communications, and the mainstream media will thus spend a year and a half repeating all of this non-stop as if it were fact. There, see how this works?

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[PopeRatzo]

Donald Trump got elected because as dislikable he is he's less dislikable than Hillary Clinton.

Hillary got 3 million more votes, Hal.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[thegarbz]

were anywhere close to neutral

In American politics there's no such thing. You are blue or red. Any alternative viewpoint or idea that you could meet in the middle is heresy. Any deviation from the party line needs to be punished.

Democracy at its finest.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Anonymous Coward]

a) yes, it is easiest to whip up furor in and manipulate those that aren't neutral.

b) There are definitely troll and bot accounts on Slashdot.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[ScentCone]

That WOULD be funny you weren't simply lying, like liberals do when they have nothing useful to say.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump won the electoral college by just 70,000 votes and the Russian effort wasn't random. Don't forget, they had stolen all the DNC's and probably the RNC's polling data too (though they may have been given the latter).

"A number of Russian-linked Facebook ads specifically targeted Michigan and Wisconsin, two states crucial to Donald Trump's victory last November"

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[_Sharp'r_]

Not much was announced regarding the indictments of these Russians which wasn't already known, i.e. some people from Russia spent some money and effort on what they thought would disrupt things in the U.S., but didn't really accomplish much.

The most telling part of the statement from the Special Counsel's office was:

“Now, there is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity,” Rosenstein said. “There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.

So I guess the only potential for "collusion" remaining is that someone wanted to know what had been found in the DNC's email phishing which was published publicly by wikileaks and has already been discredited by time and date stamps. Doesn't seem to be anything there to this whole Trump campaign "collusion" narrative anymore...

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[_Sharp'r_]

So what specific allegation remains regarding "collusion" between the Trump Campaign and the Russians?

Can you tell us who was supposed to have colluded when and what they colluded about? I'm not asking you to prove it at this point, just to at least be able to list the criminal accusation.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Lisandro]

Equating HRC to Trump. This was incredible effective too - just read this story.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[butzwonker]

If it didn't influence shit then you and the rest of the US of A wouldn't talk about it all the time, like e.g. now here. According to the reports they wanted to divide your nation. Well, if that was their goal then they have been tremendously successful (judging from the posts on /.)

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Ol Olsoc]

Please... The obvious point is that it didn't influence shit.

Oh, Boris. Just wait until yo see just what it influences

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[ScentCone]

Aren't you up past your bedtime? Did your mom tuck you in yet? Be sure to check under your bed for Russians.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[tinkerton]

As far as I can see what is known is some people in Russia spent money on clickbait in order to make money. As usual I concur with this guy : http://www.moonofalabama.org/2...

Most people will disagree, but then most people aren't able to think for themselves.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[ABEND]

were anywhere close to neutral

In American politics there's no such thing. You are blue or red. Any alternative viewpoint or idea that you could meet in the middle is heresy. Any deviation from the party line needs to be punished.

Democracy at its finest.

That is red-pilled vs blue-pilled.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[ScentCone]

It's weird, I go months without coming on here

Hey, look! An obvious lie.

But even so, you can't muster the intellectual honesty or energy to actually address the substance of the matter. Which would be pretty typical of a Russian troll like yourself, I guess. Carry on, Ivan.

Re: 200k tweets vs 6.5 billion dollars

[Quirkz]

If $1.2 billion in Clinton propaganda, 94% favorable domestic media coverage, an army of celebrity shills, a brainwashed electorate hooked on the welfare plantation, and every dirty trick in the book (plus new ones like buying FISA warrants) can't win you a presidency, then Russians tweeting about BLM literally did nothing.

If I've learned one thing from the Joker, it's that no matter how many tens of millions it took to build, you can usually burn it down with $10 of gasoline and a match.

I take this as a badge of honor

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that our elections are free and open enough that they think they can influence them through social media meddling, and everyone knows that their elections are a sham with Putin having an iron grip on the outcome speaks volumes for the superiority of our system. It shows that we are a society that has a say in who our leader are, even if we don't always like them personally. Unlike their system where they have a de facto dictator who is president in name only.

Re:I take this as a badge of honor

[ThomasBHardy]

The fact that our elections are free and open enough AND THEY KNOW they can influence them through social media meddling,.

Fixed that for ya

Re:I take this as a badge of honor

[ABEND]

The fact that our elections are free and open enough AND THEY KNOW they can influence them through social media meddling,.

Fixed that for ya

The Russian social media meddling was rather low budget and they likely got what the paid for.

A much more expensive but much more effective way to meddle in an election is to manipulate content on television networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, ...) and manipulate the results of highly regarded polls in order to demoralize supporters of a candidate. Tens (or hundreds) of millions of people are exposed to network media every day.

Anyhow, the demoralization of a candidate's supporters isn't likely to influence their voting preference but it is likely to influence whether or not and, how much, they donate to their preferred candidate's campaign. Who wants to put their money on a sure loser?

The candidate with the smaller campaign chest is less able to buy media coverage to influence voters who haven't already made a firm choice. Thus the candidate, who's been targeted by network media for negative coverage, will lose potential voters.

Reminder to all there are multible invistagations.

[jellomizer]

There are two key invitations going on.
1. Russian Meddling in the election
2. Trumps teams collision with the Russians

While proof in the #2 also means #1 was an issue. Having proof for the #1 doesn't necessary point to #2.

However I think #1 is a bigger problem. Because these constant trolling egged on by the Russian government has hurt us tremendously, it has created a situation of distrust of the other side, vs just disagreeing with them. For the bulk of left leaning and right leaning people, they are actually rather similar, they are all trying to make it in this world the best that they can, and they hope their contributions were overall positive.

However this trolling had successfully made groups seem like they are on a more devious path. It isn't about fighting for just rules ans safety, it has became their side fighting for majority power, or rethinking a policy becomes destroying all the people who benefit from it.

Now Trump is a bad president, as his statements seem to be focused on himself and not the nation, being too unpredictable to properly plan, unable to manage his own staff, and not able to unify a political party that has control of all parts of government. He has surrounded himself with Yes Men, who knows how to manipulate him, because they just need to tweak his ego, and he will go into that direction. However he is just a reflection of a polarized group of people, we have been bombarded with saying x group of people are good and y group of people are bad. As a Rich White man, being influenced by such media, he is going to assume the Poor minority group is causing all the problems, because you can plainly see their trolling is obviously false, while you ignore the tolling on your side.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not that hard. Just click the unsubscribe button. We'll all be happier for it.

Sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "I can't hear you! la, la,la!" isn't working. Go crawl back under your rock.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[ThomasBHardy]

That's the trap now isn't it.

Facts start to come out after the investigation has had time, and now it's "I'm tired of this".

Shame to let facts start intruding onto our personal bubbles, isn't it?

The reality is that we're on the verge of a new cold war based on information and social media. This isn't about one election, it's about how states are choosing to behave with meddling. And I'm not suggesting we're not guilty of doing some of the same things. But it's all escalating and it'll get worse before it gets better.

You just put your lips together, and blow.

[drinkypoo]

Putin, that is.

Re:You just put your lips together, and blow.

[PopeRatzo]

You'd think Putin has a sore dick from all the blowing going on... Even he must have his limits!

Trump was chosen for his soft lips.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[AbRASiON]

Even if it's true. Why do we need a bloody Russia post every 12 hours on this site? So people can have political fights? Seriously.

We're not all Americans here. So we're not all crazy about politics, day in, day out.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[drinkypoo]

Even if it's true. Why do we need a bloody Russia post every 12 hours on this site? So people can have political fights? Seriously.

Political fights means more new content means more page views means more ad impressions means Slashdot continues to be a thing. As ever, if you don't like a story, you can skip it. Or can you? Maybe you have a problem, and should see someone about it.

Re: Reminder to all there are multible invistagati

[Anonymous Coward]

It's funny how you decry people being turned against each other by lies and manipulation, then proceed to spew those same lies and hatred.

If you took a moment to consider your position rationally, you'd realize that you are behaving in the manner they programmed you to: irrational anger, baseless accusations, raw hatred for "the other side", and a belief in unproven statements because they confirm a bias you were brainwashed to desperately need to believe.

Re:Get the popcorn!

[Anonymous Coward]

mrclydepratt,5/1/2017 22:22,"RT @AshAgony: ""This is fucking class war. #EatTheRich, feed the poor!"" #Antifa in NYC marching & chanting finally. #MayDay https://t.co/twp"
baobaeham,3/25/2017 18:56,RT @HubCityAntifa: Spotted fash at #maga rally in #philadelphia believed to be with American vanguard @DisruptMAGA https://t.co/W3Ro9B0GUQ
lazykstafford,4/1/2017 2:15,"RT @MarALagoAntifa: Another BRUTAL ACT OF VIOLENCE DONE BY TRUMP SUPPORTERS TO #ANTIFA
patriotblake,3/29/2017 12:33,RT @JackPosobiec: Antifa calls for end to hiring and dating of whites https://t.co/yGQUkYcgYN
laurabaeley,2/6/2017 5:07,RT @RealAlexJones: Antifa’s Reign Of Terror Now Targeting Women And Children - https://t.co/ETj0PoQukq,
mr_clampin,4/22/2017 9:21,#ThingsToBeAshamedOf Confronting nazi Trump supporters who leave me hanging out to dry!! #ANTIFA #RESIST! baobaeham,5/4/2017 0:41,"RT @stimulator: The first step in fighting fascism effectively is understanding what it is we're up against. #Antifa #Trouble
laurabaeley,1/27/2017 1:19,RT @PrisonPlanet: Antifa tears. https://t.co/mZmDcFgpqJ
lazykstafford,4/1/2017 2:15,RT @LagBeachAntifa: One of our comrades was attacked today on the beach by a group of Nazis and buried in the sand. Everyone who voted for

Right-wingers are so easy to bait.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you kidding? This is actual computer data organized in a database and worthy of greater analysis by knowledgable people to see if it is legit. It's supposedly evidence of foreign influence in the politics of a democracy. It's practically a duty for people who know about this stuff to find out if it is bogus or not. It's relevant to /. You'll just have to deal with the politics.

Did you read the spreadsheet?

[Anonymous Coward]

What a bunch of BS. Download the spreadsheet, read a bunch of the tweets.

Most of the tweets are trivial, inane. Many back Hillary or bash Trump.

A bunch of noise, I don't see how this could affect any election.

And the issue is not a bunch of foreigners tweeting, it is how stupid Americans are assumed to be so weak that their r vote is determined by Facebook or twitter noise.

Re:Get the popcorn!

[Anonymous Coward]

mrclydepratt,5/1/2017 22:22,"RT @AshAgony: ""This is fucking class war. #EatTheRich, feed the poor!"" #Antifa in NYC marching & chanting finally. #MayDay https://t.co/twp"
baobaeham,3/25/2017 18:56,RT @HubCityAntifa: Spotted fash at #maga rally in #philadelphia believed to be with American vanguard @DisruptMAGA https://t.co/W3Ro9B0GUQ
lazykstafford,4/1/2017 2:15,"RT @MarALagoAntifa: Another BRUTAL ACT OF VIOLENCE DONE BY TRUMP SUPPORTERS TO #ANTIFA
patriotblake,3/29/2017 12:33,RT @JackPosobiec: Antifa calls for end to hiring and dating of whites https://t.co/yGQUkYcgYN
laurabaeley,2/6/2017 5:07,RT @RealAlexJones: Antifa’s Reign Of Terror Now Targeting Women And Children - https://t.co/ETj0PoQukq,
mr_clampin,4/22/2017 9:21,#ThingsToBeAshamedOf Confronting nazi Trump supporters who leave me hanging out to dry!! #ANTIFA #RESIST! baobaeham,5/4/2017 0:41,"RT @stimulator: The first step in fighting fascism effectively is understanding what it is we're up against. #Antifa #Trouble
laurabaeley,1/27/2017 1:19,RT @PrisonPlanet: Antifa tears. https://t.co/mZmDcFgpqJ
lazykstafford,4/1/2017 2:15,RT @LagBeachAntifa: One of our comrades was attacked today on the beach by a group of Nazis and buried in the sand. Everyone who voted for

Right-wingers are so easy to bait.

Yeah, as are left wingers. But this is a great example of how these tweets had no influence in the election. People who pay attention to this stuff, and similar left wing trash, have already made up their minds.

Twitter is a big group think clusterfest, one reason I don't use it.

Re:Reminder to all there are multible invistagatio

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd say there are potentially 3 investigations:

1. Russian meddling in the election
2. Trump's team's collusion with the Russians
3. Trump's personal involvement in collusion with the Russians.

Like you say, these are quite different questions and a "yes" on one does not necessarily imply the others are true (depending on which we're talking about). #1 is pretty much settled. It occurred, and the data that NBC published is more evidence. #2 is suspicious, because you've got people like Paul Manafort who led the campaign and have been indicted for highly questionable financial activities with Russian interests. Then there's the meeting in Trump Tower with Trump's son and others. #3 is not clear at all. Trump keeps professing his innocence, and I could even believe it because it is entirely possible his campaign did collude (wittingly or unwittingly), yet still have Trump entirely oblivious. Goodness knows he's oblivious on all sorts of other things.

The thing that bothers me in all this is that Trump is utterly fixated on his own innocence. If he is innocent and was doing his job, he should be accepting #1 like everyone in the intelligence community is telling him, and *doing* something about it to protect the next election. He should be applying the sanctions that the Congress and Senate passed almost unanimously and he fricking signed into law. Instead he keeps chanting "no collusion! no collusion!" as if that is *all* that matters. No, you incompetent fool. Even if there was no collusion (which is not yet demonstrated), you need to get off your butt and lead the changes necessary to discourage attempts at it in future, because clearly the Russians *tried*.

The guy is straight up self-interested and/or incompetent even if you grant that he's innocent. Thankfully the intelligence agencies and justice department will slowly and thoroughly labor through the investigation anyway as long as they are allowed to do their job, but the guy needs to stop trying to interfere with it.

Everyone is upset about Russia

[pecosdave]

When Russia made some Tweets, bought some ads and asked nicely.

Meanwhile Mexican citizens literally rode buses from one poling place to the next voting multiple times in our elections, a literal serious interference in our election, to the point of qualifying as an act of war - silence.

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[pecosdave]

Really?

http://www.judicialwatch.org/w...

https://thepoliticalinsider.co...

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2...

https://www.ice.gov/news/relea...

https://www.ice.gov/news/relea...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

https://www.justice.gov/usao-w...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

https://www.snopes.com/cascade...

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[Anonymous Coward]

Cascade Mall Shooter? C'mon Dave, at least vet your links.

Arcan Cetin, immigrated to the United States from Turkey as a child when his mother married an American citizen. He's not even from Mexico, and there's no evidence he rode a bus to vote multiple times in ANY election. And he became a naturalized American Citizen so you can't even claim it was unlawful for him to vote.

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[Ryanrule]

someone downvote this shitweasle

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[pecosdave]

If you're comfortable with a life of fallacy so be it. You dismiss Snopes (on the opposite end of the political spectrum) and multiple federal websites when you do it.

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[pecosdave]

I have looked at your comment history.

I take your recommendation as almost irrelevant and as something akin to a drive-by considering the number of "kill yourself" posts and similar low-brow nonconstructive commentary you tend to make.

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[pecosdave]

That Harvard study disagrees with your last statement.

BTW, those videos you refuse to watch from Project Veritas have New York (and other) election officials admitting to buses going from neighborhood to neighborhood with the same people voting multiple times. "Ducks on the ground" talk started to get somewhat hilarious sounding after a while.

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[pecosdave]

Project Veritas is such a pain the ass to people who refuse to accept evidence of reality because they tend to go undercover and get indisputable video (and other) records of shenanigans going on.

Since you don't like the video-only YouTube stuff (and to be honest the modern era of making everything and video and having print stuff become increasingly rare and hard to filter and find bothers me too) I'll leave you with a couple of less video-centric links.

https://www.projectveritas.com...

https://www.projectveritasacti...

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[pecosdave]

If you'll actually read the links most of them predate the current POTUS, so sure, whatever.

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[pots]

I don't know which Harvard study you're talking about, so I did a search for 'in-person voter fraud peer-reviewed study'. These were the first two links from Duck Duck Go:

But a look at the facts makes clear fraud is vanishingly rare, and does not happen on a scale even close to that necessary to “rig” an election.

In-person voter fraud ‘a very rare phenomenon’

That first link has many links of its own, to papers from NYU, Columbia University, Arizona State, etc. Nothing from Harvard though.

I appreciate your willingness to accommodate my distaste for video references, but I don't see how recordings of shenanigans are supposed to demonstrate anything. If you show me an hour's worth of video showing people committing fraud, and I show you nine hours of people voting without fraud, does that mean that 10% of votes are fraudulent? No. What If I show you ninety nine hours, does that mean it's 1%? No. So what have we actually demonstrated here? Nothing, it's just anecdote.

That's what the studies are for. If you see an event, you can't just assume that event is commonplace. That's something you have to measure, and that takes work.

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[pecosdave]

I know about the edit accusations. They released two versions, a long form unedited and a version that trimmed out dead time and irrelevant info.

The propaganda mills that wanted to downplay and discredit Project Veritas simply pointed at the trimmed one and kept yelling "edited!" While pretending the other wasn't also available.

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[Arzaboa]

Your studies state that even the very few people that illegally voted could not have changed the outcome of any election.

The rest of these are onsy twosy cases, or terrible articles based off of misreading of the studies presented.

--
Whats up Doc? - B. Bunny

Re:Everyone is upset about Russia

[pots]

He actually only links to one study there, that's the first link, and it does claim that a decent number of people voted illegally and probably swung North Carolina for Obama in 2008. The problem is that the study authors didn't account for error. Here's a response to that study.

Re: Everyone is upset about Russia

[pecosdave]

Just the edited one, not the long form. Ignoring exactly what was said....

What about Canada?

[William Baric]

I'm not American, I live in Canada, and I certainly admit posting a lot of comments on social networks during the last US election. Worse, a lot of prominent Canadian figures made comment after comment on social networks about both Trump and Clinton. I'm sure Canadians posted more than 200,000 tweets. So why not accuse Canada of interfering with the US elections?

Re:What about Canada?

[cascadingstylesheet]

I'm not American, I live in Canada, and I certainly admit posting a lot of comments on social networks during the last US election. Worse, a lot of prominent Canadian figures made comment after comment on social networks about both Trump and Clinton. I'm sure Canadians posted more than 200,000 tweets. So why not accuse Canada of interfering with the US elections?

Because I doubt most of them supported the unapproved (by the left) outcome ... that's why Canadian tweets were OK.

Re:What about Canada?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is AIPAC not a problem because 50% of DNC funding comes from Jews? Israel does everything Russia does, and more, yet no one ever talks about it... and those of us who do are viewed as less than human (and worthy of physical assault.) Does anyone actually think anymore?

Re:What about Canada?

[thegarbz]

Because it doesn't fit the narrative? Also because we're only angry at people who don't apologise for their interference ;-)

Re:What about Canada?

[Actually, I do RTFA]

There is a huge difference between individual Canadians trying to influence our election and an organized push by the Canadian government, much as there is a difference between a Canadian citizen committing murder in the US and the Canadian military shooting people in the US.

Re: How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[JayBean]

Agreed. Wait, are we discussing the tweets or the Steele dossier?

Russian "trolls" didn't cause Hillary! to lose

[Anonymous Coward]

Hillary! Clinton has been in the national US spotlight for 25+ years.

A dozen fucking Russian trolls didn't cause her to lose to Donald Fucking Trump.

Hillary has lost every election that wasn't handed to her. She lost to Barack Obama, then she tried hard as hell to lose to Bernie Sanders despite the entire corrupt Democratic Party apparatus working to hand her the nomination.

And then she lost to Donald Trump because she's a hateful, conniving, amoral, untrustworthy, corrupt harridan. Period. She didn't "forget" to go to Michigan or Ohio or Pennsylvania - she didn't campaign there because when she did, her polling went down (don't think Democrats didn't know they needed help there? Look at where Barack Obama spent the day before the election - yep, Michigan...)

And it goes back decades - Hillary! got her ass fired from her job as a lawyer working for the Watergate investigating committee for being corrupt and and utter lack of respect for the US Constitution.

And don't fucking bother trying to say "Snopes says Hillary! wasn't fired". One, the guy who had the power to fire her says he did, and two, Snopes can't even get his name right.

Hillary!'s only accomplishment was getting married to Bill.

(Don't forget that Bill got away with lying about his affairs because everyone looked at Hillary! and felt sorry for him...)

Re:Russian "trolls" didn't cause Hillary! to lose

[bussdriver]

Where did you learn to write such good english? I went to American schools but clearly Russian schools can do better

Re:Russian "trolls" didn't cause Hillary! to lose

[Bartles]

Yes. We do. She still lost to him.

Re:Russian "trolls" didn't cause Hillary! to lose

[MightyMartian]

You know we know you're a Russian troll, right? The cat's out of the bag, Comrade.

Maybe you think I'll get tired of calling out this

[Iamthecheese]

Or maybe you're posting it for guaranteed replies, which would just be sad.

Here's what really happened: People wanting to influence the election purchased ads through Russia, which happened to be selling for the lowest cost. Also the media, including someone who is paying Slashdot, is STILL trying to push the idea that Trump's presidency is somehow illegitimate because "Russian interference". At the same time claims are being made that Russia is somehow related to the DNC leaks. This is being done to avoid discussion of the content of the leaks. You post this on a daily basis, Slashdot, and we're ALL sick of seeing it. But I'm going to keep calling out your bullshit every time because the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Stop spreading propaganda.

Is it illegal to tweet?

[CRB9000]

So, question: Is it illegal to tweet a political opinion? Is it illegal to tweet about a candidate? I remember Mikhail Gorbachev writing editorials about American politics. What is the crime here?

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[Lisandro]

Is it illegal to tweet a political opinion? Is it illegal to tweet about a candidate?

No. And, again, no.

The crime here is conspiracy to defraud the United States. From the actual indictment text, "...knowingly and intentionally conspired with each other (and with persons unknown to the Grand Jury) to defraud the United States by impairing, obstructing and defeating the lawful functions of the government through fraud and deceit for the purpose of interfering with the U.S. political and electoral processes, including the Presidential election of 2016."

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[CRB9000]

So, it's illegal to discuss and plan your tweets? Isn't this what "activists" do in their PAC's? How is a tweet defrauding the United States? If you and I get together and decide we are going to relentlessly tweet that X Legislation is bad for America and we create a bunch of bots to tweet the same, how is that illegal? It may violate various user agreements with the services it goes out on, but what law is broken by amplifying your voice with bots and stating your opinion or the general opinion of a group?

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[Lisandro]

It very much is if you're a foreigner who's getting paid to distribute political propaganda, be it through Twitter or any other media. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... for detais.

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[ScentCone]

Which means that the Clinton campaign and the DNC are guilty of at least as much, by paying a foreign entity to influence the election. Looking forward to THAT basket of indictments. Hope it comes soon.

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[MightyMartian]

The Dossier's origins are more complicated than that, so there'd be a few conservatives on your little charge sheet as well, if the Dossier were in any way equivalent to Russian troll farms, which it isn't.

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[Lisandro]

https://media.giphy.com/media/...

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[ScentCone]

No, it's not complicated. FusionGPS, the oppo-research firm, was no longer doing any work with any Republican candidates when the Clinton/DNC machine started paying them to buy Steele's artistic writing skills under the guise of "legal services" through their law firm.

And no, the two aren't equivalent, you're right. The business with Steele lying, the Clinton machine hiding their hand and payments, and the use of Steele's phony narrative (and phony self-corroboration) in order to facilitate an in-power political party's ability to listen in on the campaign of their opponents through a nonsense court petition is: much, much worse than the ineffective Russian trolling project.

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[ScentCone]

I can always tell when I'm right because the people who don't like the implications of it trot out silly memes instead of actually speaking to the substance of the matter.

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[Lisandro]

There's no "substance" to the matter. If you're referring to the Steele dossier it had zero influence on the election. But, whatever floats your boat i guess.

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[ScentCone]

Who's talking about influence on the last election by the Russians? We're talking about violation of several laws as the Democrats and partisan supporters in federal agencies attempted to influence the election. And more importantly, the fact that the breathless, shrieking narrative that the Dems and their media water-carriers have been bleating about for the last year (trying desperately to do with distraction and sleaze what they couldn't do by winning executive and legislative seats) isn't just wrong, it's exactly backwards. The only collusion present is on their part, and even they know it. Which is why they're getting even more unhinged as the narrative they've been trying to sell continues to fall apart. This may and should have an impact on the 2018 mid-terms (and thus on countless other issues) because what they've invested so heavily in - the whole "Trump is a nazi putin colluder!" hilarity - demonstrates more of exactly the sort of crap that people outside of a couple of dense liberal urban areas voted against in 2016. And their instincts were correct.

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[Lisandro]

Ok.

Re:Is it illegal to tweet?

[ScentCone]

You can always tell when the Shillaries are lying because they post as the cowards they are.

Re:Reminder to all there are multible invistagatio

[pots]

The trolling has certainly perpetuated the problem, but we have only ourselves to blame for creating it. Painting your political opponents as abjectly evil has been at the forefront of politics for a couple of decades now, and it's something which has happened on an occasional basis forever.

Aside from ferreting out shills, maybe an approach to addressing this is taking another stab at reforming our system to allow for more than two political parties. It's harder to vilify your opponents when you'll be forced to work with them after the election because no one party is able to get a majority of seats.

Re:Get the popcorn!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I'm sorry, but I've lurked at right-wing websites, and they're constantly citing stuff that looks exactly like the above. They've convinced themselves that "mainstream news is fake", and so just take whatever social media fits worldview as if it's actual news.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[drinkypoo]

As ever, if you don't like a post, you can skip it. Or can you? Maybe you have a problem, and should see someone about it.

I'm having fun! It's the GP that's whinging.

Re:Get the popcorn!

[Lisandro]

That really reads like most AC comments on ./ for the past 5 years. Scary.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[Lisandro]

It is sort of Stuff That Matters, you know.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[Bartles]

No. It's been 18 months of Russia, Russia, Russia. They have to eat it. They put it on the plate, they cannot leave the table until it's gone.

Re:This happened on Obama's watch...

[Lisandro]

Why didn't he do something to secure our elections?

He did. Maybe you forgot the time back in 2016 when the Obama WH met with McConnell to inform him and others in Congress of Russian interference, and asked for a public warning announcement. McConnell denied it and stated he would oppose any announcement as political interference by Obama in the election.

Re:Get the popcorn!

[PopeRatzo]

But this is a great example of how these tweets had no influence in the election.

Of course they had no influence on the election. They're dated after the election.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[PopeRatzo]

Even if it's true. Why do we need a bloody Russia post every 12 hours on this site?

I wonder the same thing about Apple posts, or cryptocurrency. I mean, isn't once a week enough?

Re:Get the popcorn!

[Rei]

The interesting thing when you look through the dataset is how high of a portion of the tweets are "@Name", particularly "@InfluentialName". They weren't just putting things out in the ether - they were taking steps to make sure that they got seen.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[jader3rd]

Why do we need a bloody Russia post every 12 hours on this site?

Because it's the nerds who enabled this new kind of targeted enabling to happen.

Here's my take on it. Flame away...

[Anonymous Coward]

Noticed about 2012 how the Internet seems to change. Lots more ranty right-wing stuff, lots of unhinged SJW posts, outburst of trolling designed to annoy or piss off.

I like looking at conspiracy sites for fun. Similarly around 2012 there's a big change from the usual Ron Paul stuff & general government distrust to progressively more extreme right-wing material. Lots of posts trying to rehabilitate uncle Adolf, lots more racism, not much in the way of conspiracies - RedIce being an obvious example. At the same time many sites suddenly decided they love Putin (Godlikeproductions Putin obsession was particularly egregious) and thousands of memes spew out which contrasted wimpy Obama with manly bear-riding Putin.

Hmmm. Bit odd that. The Obama hate gets ever more demented. The racism gets worse. Posters with moderate opinions are pushed away.

The chan sites get ever more crazy and neo-nazi. Meanwhile in real-world politics all of a sudden lots of strange little separatist/right wing movements start getting lots of funding thrown at them. Weird shit like Brexit's main funder being married to a Russian and boasting about meeting the KGB is glossed over in the media.

Something is going on here.

Back to conspiracy sites... Donald eventually announces a run. The conspiracy sites which by now are politically to the right of Mussolini LOVE Donald. They create their own North Korean-style personality cult surrounding the orange one. Sites that a few years before were promoting UFOs or alternative remedies for sore asses go full out on the paranoia. JADE HELM!! MUSLIMS!!! SJW FEMINISTS FUCKING BLACK GUYS WHO DINDU NUFFIN ARE KILLING THE WHITE RACE!!!!

Then this stuff leaks out onto the wider Internet making discussions even worse than they were previously. Sites like IMDB's message boards become unreadable (and are eventually killed), extreme politics is the 'in' thing. Slashdot goes from nerd paradise to alt-right-troll-cave. Newspaper and movie sites comments look like something from 1930s Germany - assuming 1930s Germans couldn't spell and had mental health issues.

Where did this shit come from? Am guessing the far-right in the US and other countries decided to work together and with the help of some shady money men successfully managed to fuck up discussions on the Internet. Funding of extreme political movements helped fuck up political discussions in real life as well. Russia was clearly a part of that which can easily be seen in the amount of 'conservative' websites that seemingly worship the place. Contrast also with the number of said conservatives who believe Obama is a Muslim but think the idea of state-sponsored cyberwar from Russia is silly - i.e. most of the posts on here or Reddit today.

Add in characters whose agendas are somewhat confusing (Assange, Snowden) and we're currently in this clusterfuck of a mess where democracy is on its last legs and the world is being run by dickheads.

The only thing that amuses me about all this is that if we do end up going full fascist the first people to get put before a firing squad will be the unemployed autists whose contribution to Western society so far has been frog memes and a fascinating with MLP porn. Karma, you little shits.

However, being somewhat of a moderate and in the unlikely event of any FBI agents or non-hack journalists reading this, I'd going to give you a bit of advice. Devote some time to looking at the conspiracy sites and the alt-media political hangouts. Note how at the same time as traditional conspiracy interest was declining (911, Peak Oil, Roswell etc.) and the New Age craziness falling apart (no Mayan apocalypse) these sites started to rapidly expand. I don't believe for one second that Alex Jones is funding a multimillion dollar empire via Youtube money and the sale of shady vitamins to idiots. Check out this guy. Check out Henrik at Red Ice. Check out the cretin who runs Natural News. Find out who actually runs Godlike productions and similar.

You'll discover lots of interesting connections no doubt many involving our friends from Eastern Europe and their cut-outs in the US.

Re:Here's my take on it. Flame away...

[Actually, I do RTFA]

I don't believe for one second that Alex Jones is funding a multimillion dollar empire via Youtube money and the sale of shady vitamins to idiots.

It's hard to underestimate how much money you can make selling vitamins. According to his former employees, he could see $10,000/hr of vitamins, and is playing 4 hours a day five says a week. That certainly seems plausible.

Or rather, if Candy Crsuh can sell 2.2 million dollars of digital nonsense a day, it's easy to believe Alex Jones can see overpriced vitamins enough to maintain a business.

Re:Here's my take on it. Flame away...

[ABEND]

When you type "conspiracy sites" you do mean "vast right-wing conspiracy" sites--don't you?

I hope you can get the joke.

If not, Google is your friend.

Btw, when DJT first announced he was running for POTUS, rational persons, who were unfamiliar with his personal history, thought he was running as a publicity stunt. Remember (or look it up), he was previously a registered Democrat before he switched parties to run in the Republican primary.

Re:Get the popcorn!

[MightyMartian]

Basically, a large fraction of the American Right has basically swallowed the Russian propaganda without question. I'm still not sure that turned the election towards Trump, but it has certainly created a pro-Trump base in the GOP.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[MightyMartian]

It's about Twitter, it's tech news. If you don't like it, don't read the fucking article or posts. Jesus, you're a delicate little snowflake.

Re:Reminder to all there are multible invistagatio

[ScentCone]

The thing that bothers me in all this is that Trump is utterly fixated on his own innocence

Wouldn't you be, too, if all day long the mainstream media and vitriolic political opponents were screeching non-stop about how you're a traitor? He has work to do, and has been doing a great deal of it, despite this phony relentlessness from the Clinton camp and her supporters. No, I'm sure that if you had CNN calling you a traitor 24 hours a day, you'd just clam up and let them lie about you, right? Sure, of course.

Re:Reminder to all there are multible invistagatio

[MightyMartian]

You know, at the end of the day, it wouldn't surprise if Trump was at least technically innocent. He seems so detached from reality, with only a few touch points to the outside world (mainly Fox News) that I wouldn't be at all surprised if Kushner, Don Jr., Manafort, Flynn and whoever else were cozying up to the Russians without really informing him, or if they did, because it wasn't Sean Hannity saying it, he probably didn't process it.

I really do believe that anyone who talks about Trump himself colluding with the Russians is giving him far too much credit. It's pretty obvious the man is an idiot. His speech is rambling and disjointed, Tweets are just about the extent of his attention span, he doesn't read, he just watches the boob tube. The American people elected a malicious Forest Gump, so I really think you need to start looking at his team during the campaign and in the first six or seven months of the Presidency.

Re: Progress

[MightyMartian]

I grew up in the 1970s and 1980s, and I remember the paranoia. It might not have been as bad as the 50s and 60s, since the Soviet Union was pretty obviously in a decline it couldn't even hide by the 1980s, but still, there was no lack of fear of some sort of nuclear war. The TV movie the Day After, which was a big deal at the time, gives you an idea of the kind of fear that many in the West felt at in the early and mid-80s.

So no, the concern of Russian interference now is nothing like the fear thirty or forty years ago.

Re:Get the popcorn!

[MightyMartian]

And I suspect that's why Twitter, Facebook, Google and the rest are going to have to start putting some serious efforts into preventing these Russian troll farms from using their platforms in the future. France already has some rules that basically limited the Russians from offering the Front National too much aid and comfort in the final lead up to the French presidential election, and the warnings are going up in many Western countries "Regulate your platforms or governments will regulate you."

Re:This happened on Obama's watch...

[MightyMartian]

And what was Obama supposed to do, bomb St. Petersburg?

Re:Get the popcorn!

[HiThere]

The problem is that mainstream news *is* fake. Which doesn't make the social media garbage any more reliable. There aren't any reliable sources of news. Local news, from local sources, is often biased in a predictable way, and that's the best you can do. If 90% of their audience can't check what they're reporting, they feel free to get totally creative.

OK, I exaggerate. But not by that bloody much. And you can't even tell which direction they're spinning things, since it generally seems to turn more on which will get them most views rather than which is most accurate, or most favored by some ideologue. And if you're given a choice between that and some propaganda put out by an ideologue, which are you going to believe, and why?

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[HiThere]

How are you supposed to decide if this is real data? I think you need evidence of it's provenance before it's worth anything. Do you believe it because Microsoft's NBC says that Twitter says that it's accurate?

Re:This happened on Obama's watch...

[HiThere]

And an interesting question is whether this response indicates that at that time McConnell was aware that the Russians were intervening in favor of the Republicans. It is, of course, far from proof, but it's certainly suggestive.

Re:This happened on Obama's watch...

[Lisandro]

I don't think they did. The GOP and McConnell in particular just made a point of obstructing Obama on everything possible back in the day - he even acknowledged so publicly.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[evil_aaronm]

I get your point on the whole "Russian saturation" aspect, but you don't have to read these. I scanned the top 20 articles on /. and chose two or three of interest. You won't find me complaining about the other articles I didn't read.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[AbRASiON]

There really has been an intense amount for weeks and weeks.

I think my main issue is that someone, who should probably whining and fighting on Reddit politics or something, is so bitter and angry they want EVERYONE to have to discuss this shit, by bringing it here to stir up a fuss. It's effectively trolling at this point.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[fatwilbur]

Agreed. Russia is about 5% of the size of the US (economically).. they are nothing. If the Americans stick to their principles (free speech, etc), everything will be fine.

Re:This happened on Obama's watch...

[Lisandro]

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/1...

Cohen was never in Prague

[Babel-17]

https://www.washingtonian.com/... "Two USC baseball sources confirm that Cohen and his son were in fact on campus visiting the baseball program on the 29th."

it isn't difficult

[Ol Olsoc]

To figure out the Russian trolls, bots, or their useful idiots here in the states, you just look at the content. Often strange syntax, howaboutism, continued reference to the defeated candidate. As people become more used to the sillieness, it just becomes sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Re: How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[HiThere]

So some, unknown fraction, of the data can be validated as accurate, the those who are offering the data know in advance what can be validated.

I'm sorry, but to me this says "You can split the data into two chunks. One chunk you can validate, and the other you can't. We know ahead of time which pieces you can validate, but trust us, the rest is honest."

Please note, this doesn't mean I believe they're lying this time. It just means I don't trust the protocol. (I actually have no opinion about whether they're lying this time. This could just be setting a protocol up for later abuse after it's been accepted. Or it really could be that they don't understand why they aren't trusted.)

You know, this whole "Russians are good at ads"

[eric_harris_76]

This whole "Russians are good at advertising to voters who don't think well" problem would be a moot point if there weren't so many idiots voting. But all you have to do is say a magic word (the word varies by idiot) and thinking shuts down. It even works on supposedly smart educated people.

Clearly, voter turnout is too high.

We need public service announcements to discourage excitable people from voting. Because they can't think worth a damn.

They're bad. Compared to what?

[eric_harris_76]

It's bad that Russians (real or imaginary) try to influence the election by using advertising effectively.

But is it any worse than NBC using news coverage effectively to influence the election? Or ineffectively?

Their support of the anointed Donkey Party candidate worked out well. They got the intended nominee. Their opposition to the "outsider" Elephant Party candidate didn't work out so well.

Me? I think NBC is just jealous. ;-)

Re: How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[drinkypoo]

Yes, facts such as there was just as much pro Hillary as there was was pro Trump.

If only that meant something, you might not be a Russian shill.

Re:How does a long term member unsubscribe?

[drinkypoo]

New cold war based on freedom of speech. I'm so terrified. When I walk past the tabloid section of my bookstore, I am raped.

Americans weren't in any danger from the first cold war, because the USSR was building cardboard tanks to try to look like they actually could keep up with our manufacturing capacity and still went bankrupt... apparently, building cardboard tanks is too expensive for Russia. Nobody is worried about an all-out military confrontation with them. It's only nuclear war that's scary.

Re:http://qanonmap.github.io/

[ABEND]

Qanon's posts are only interesting to genuine nerds. Slashdot has been overrun by normies ... or maybe they're pod people. Well, whatever, nerds on Slashdot seems to be a disappearing breed.

Re:And yet the indictments are real

[ScentCone]

Be the smartass all you like, the indictments are real and the net is closing.

It's true. The actions of a handful of partisan law-breakers fairly high up the food chain in multiple agencies, trying their best to make sure the Clinton machine regained its cash-printing political power, is definitely getting more sunlight by the week. The indictments of Russians trying to make you angry so you'll dish out more toxic, low-information vitriol are appropriate, but do the exact opposite of your dearly held wish - they demonstrate, again, the lack of any collusion by the Trump campaign, and point out, again, the lack of any impact on the actual election results. But please, continue to anonymously post your delusions. It's quite humorous, really.