Slashdot Mirror
Justice Department, FBI Are Investigating Cambridge Analytica (cbsnews.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CBS News: The Justice Department and FBI are investigating Cambridge Analytica, the now-shuttered political data firm that was once used by the Trump campaign and came under scrutiny for harvesting data of millions of users, The New York Times reported on Tuesday. The Times, citing a U.S. official and people familiar with the inquiry, reported federal investigators have looked to question former employees and banks connected to the firm.
The Times reports prosecutors have informed potential witnesses there is an open investigation into the firm, whose profiles of voters were intended to help with elections. One source tells CBS News correspondent Paula Reid prosecutors are investigating the firm for possible financial crimes. A company that has that much regulatory scrutiny is almost guaranteed to have federal prosecutors interested, Reid was told. Christopher Wylie, a former Cambridge Analytica employee who spoke out about the data sharing practices, told the Times federal investigators had contacted him. The American official told the Times investigators have also contacted Facebook as a part of the probe.
The Times reports prosecutors have informed potential witnesses there is an open investigation into the firm, whose profiles of voters were intended to help with elections. One source tells CBS News correspondent Paula Reid prosecutors are investigating the firm for possible financial crimes. A company that has that much regulatory scrutiny is almost guaranteed to have federal prosecutors interested, Reid was told. Christopher Wylie, a former Cambridge Analytica employee who spoke out about the data sharing practices, told the Times federal investigators had contacted him. The American official told the Times investigators have also contacted Facebook as a part of the probe.
Gotta hand it to Trump, if nothing else he did what no other politician or internet freedom activist over the last several decades could. He got people to finally care about privacy. People weren't only indifferent. They were slobbering in ecstasy over the likes of google and obama for vacuuming all their PI everyday. Trump changed all of this. Maybe indirectly due to the fact that people couldn't stand him allegedly benefiting but change the game he did.
That they don't like the outcome?
That its ok for commercial purposes, but not in elections?
Clear proof that voters can get accurate targeted information that alters 'default' vote patterns.
That the info/dirt can be used from other countries, legally if the lawyers do their bit properly.
Phoenix operations. Next time there will be the same manipulation from wherever. The issue cannot be resolved as data is global.
Unless the USA enacts data privacy laws, it will remain the wild west, and the best funded party with the most 'tricks' wins.
Bwa ha ha, Someone using "The View" as a standard for political accuracy.
Go away, you a f-ng useless.
Didn't they just change their name? Or am I thinking of some other association of shysters?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
The thing to bear in mind here is that Cambridge Analytica managed to obtain only a relatively small percentage of information about Facebook Users. The information it managed to obtain was either information voluntarily provided by users in response to a survey, or publicly-visible information carried by "friends" of the relatively small number of users who took their survey.
Facebook have access to data on ALL their users. They have the complete history of all their users. They have a vast trove of information about what their users do when they are not on the Facebook platform, thanks to a combination of cookies delivered by their servers and the beacons they place all across the Internet, courtesy of Facebook "Like" buttons on popular web sites.
Cambridge Analytica are only getting this level of scrutiny because Christopher Wylie basically left regulators with no choice, after publicly telling the world what CA had the ability to do. An equivalent FB insider, anyone who chose to reveal the full scope of what FB can do, would scare most people silly.
It's amazing to think that people are getting worked up about this relatively small data set obtained by this relatively tiny company, when the data is being held by this behemoth call Facebook, run by a guy who makes no secret of his political ambitions. Talk about elephant in the room.
The fuss is because it rests on data that wasn't given permission to be used in this manner - unlike before with Obama - and therefore everything that happened with the data is part of this crime - (and it does count as a crime on the UK, where the academic and CA are based).
The company has morhped already:
https://www.metro.us/news/the-...
They are really catching the discarded skin of the snake.
While I too doubt there was personal contact between Trump and Putin (but never heard anything to suggest that's what Mueller was specifically looking for, but rather operatives of his campaign working with operatives representing Russia, of which he might have approved or had knowledge of), the fact is we have no idea what evidence the investigation has/will turn up. All you Trumpsters have this preordained conclusion where despite all the smoke, you insist since we can't see the fire, the absolutely is none and the investigation into the matter should just be shut down before it looks. Further, there's other components of the investigation, like obstruction. The underlying crime doesn't even need to have occurred, and busting people for that alone is routine criminal procedure, not some loophole they just made up specifically to nail Trump.
And yet another angle is that Trump and his sons have explicitly stated they've borrowed large amounts from Russian banks, which could potentially give them significant leverage over our President on one end, and probably involves laundering on the other. These are critical to investigate.
Not that any of this will matter to you, no matter what is presented when Mueller actually reveals his findings, you'll still think he's innocent, it's a witch hunt, Trump Did No Wrong, it's all a partisan hit job, and on and on to protect your boy.
Cambridge Analytica went a step further by creating psychological profiles on all citizens, and using those to manipulate people, in some cases nudging people not to vote at all.
If the American people that Obama's level of activity was illegal, you should act on that too.
Y'know, there's a pretty big difference between "please give us your personal information so we can use it to build our statistical models to improve our chances at winning an election" and "take this vapid quiz while we hoover up all your info and all your friends' info without you knowing."
Two people agreeing to have sex is fine. One person sneaking in to another person's house after they run into each other at the grocery store and proceeding to fuck them while they're asleep pointedly is not fine. Sure, the end result might be the same, but it turns out how you get there actually matters.
Never underestimate the stupidity inherent in all human beings.
These never seem to go anywhere. There's never enough evidence to convict any significant decision maker of a crime, especially when they have enough resources for counsel that is able to obfuscate sufficiently.
At best you see some kind of vague conspiracy charge -- which really, anyone could be charged with -- or real bullshit stuff, like mid-level flunkies who get convicted of something like "lying to the FBI", which seems to make a serious felony out of either honest people's inadvertent "lies by omission" or the natural reaction people have to the intimidation of being questioned by a serious law enforcement organization.
So a handful of people might wind up scapegoats on technicality charges since prosecutors don't like failure publicity. No film at 11, you can find this story buried on the back of the sports section.
Data mining is data mining. A checkoff box to provide some form of 'consent' is just an excuse. The fact that Facebook was approving of Obama to the point of being deep up his rear so that the data miners could enter through the Front Door is really irrelevant.
It's more relevant (slightly) today to study what the email leaks reveal about the DNC. That is the proper equivalent to the 'truth' about what C.A. did in the election. Little Debbie and her snack cakes are rather odious, to be honest.
Sexual Harassment in the workplace does not reduce to 'a blow job' you sexist pos.
Ya, my guess is that you'd have no problems with Trump dating your daughter or loaning him money.
They're a foreign firm. Who cares? The damage is done. There are people out there with fucking chainsaws and the Justice Department is going after Cambridge Analytica. Is anyone else sick of this? Yes, Cambridge Analytica fucked up. Ban them from doing business with American firms and slap a huge fine on them.
More left wing mythology. It wasn't about a blow job it was about forcing an intern to lie to a grand jury. An actual crime was committed.
I still don't understand how what Cambridge Analytica was doing is any different than any other modern marketing campaign.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Yes, but only biased genocidal maniac feminist fact checkers.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
It's their job to enforce technicalities.
As for the collusion investigation, we don't know what' they've got yet, because unlike the White House the Mueller team doesn't leak very much. But it's not surprising to see peripheral pressure being put on the President's associates; that's the way prosecutors work. The way you take down a mob boss isn't that you go straight for him; you put pressure on his associates using whatever you can find.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Not that any of this will matter to you, no matter what is presented when Mueller actually reveals his findings, you'll still think he's innocent, it's a witch hunt, Trump Did No Wrong, it's all a partisan hit job, and on and on to protect your boy.
I'm actually good with believing he's innocent, until there's evidence.
I absolutely *hate* it when some police force make a flashy claim about someone - all the guns confiscated during the search, all the electronic devices taken from the home, nebulous "tip from an informant" - everything is being tried in the court of public opinion nowadays. None of that is evidence of a crime.
Let's not forget that after 9/11 someone was sending anthrax letters to people (remember those?) and Mueller - the lead investigator - ignored a tip about Bruce Edwards Ivins (the perpetrator, from one of Ivins' colleagues) and focused on Steven Hatfill. Mueller went before congress and swore under oath that Steven Hatfill was the person responsible, when in fact there was no evidence implicating Steven Hatfill whatsoever. Among other items, Steven Hatfill had no access to anthrax. The FBI didn't bother to explain this fact, and didn't seem to care.
Steven Hatfill went through several years of hell, having his life turned upside down, condemned in the media, death threats... and was eventually exonerated and sued the government for (IIRC) 5 million dollars.
That's the history of your "unimpeachable, honorable" Mueller.
Remember the indictments of 13 Russian nationals and 3 corporations recently released? It turns out one of the corporations didn't exist at the time of the purported crimes. Mueller indicted the proverbial "ham sandwich".
I like to think everyone is innocent, until proven guilty. and this thing about the court of public opinion is bollocks. Show us the evidence.
I sometimes ask a *question* about how someone appears to have broken the law. For example, Trump is widely believed to be obstructing justice for firing Comey, despite having a memo in-hand recommending it, but the Oakland mayor can warn illegal immigrants of an upcoming ICE raid... and that's not?
Or how Michael Flynn can be charged under the Hatch act for meeting with a Russian diplomat (as a member of the incoming administration, opening dialog and not specifically making claims or policy) while Kerry can negotiate with Iran and European countries to save the Iran agreement... and that's not?
I like to think everyone is innocent, until proven guilty.
Show me the evidence. What you have so far is nothing.
Also the Hillary strategy was to get people to send messages to specific friends. Like they had to actually approve sending a message.
Cambridge Analytica literally stole their data, against Facebook's rules.
Maybe "literally stole" is a bit strong, but "illegally acquired"
So to keep things equal, we should impeach trump over Stormy Daniels.
the only people he has taken down so far, are people with issues unrelated to any collution
what is this until anyone can nonsense, thats ALL it has been so far!
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
What about when WalMart does it? Or Starbucks? Or your college alumni association? Face it, privacy has been gone for more than 20 years now. The only difference is that facebook is a one-stop-shopping-center for gross analytical data and specific targeted marketing.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Trying to generate negative publicity by blowing lots of smoke is what accusers tend to do when they can't find any evidence of a fire.
How would that give the banks leverage? The borrower has leverage over the lender, not the other way around - the borrower has the lender's stuff. If you get a mortgage from the bank, the bank has to hope you pay them back, and won't skip town. The only leverage the bank has is their power provided by the country's law to repossess your home. No such power exists in an international loan - the bank is relying on the borrower's creditworthiness and desire to freely travel to the bank's country again in the future. When I was in grad school, I met several international students who'd racked up significant amounts of credit card debt, who weren't planning to repay but were simply going to leave the country forever after they graduated. The borrower holds all the cards in international loans.
One important difference, In Clinton's case the investigation shifted FAR from criminal matters. The whole Daniels investigation surrounds potential violations of campaign finance law. That is, the payoff on the downlow, not the alleged affair and not lying or not about the affair.
Let's get back to overthrowing the guy the electorate picked and democracy !!
Please read a history book before publicly showing your ignorance.
Bill Clinton was being sued by Paula Jones for sexual harassment Bill committed while Governor of Arkansas. Bill was questioned about similar behavior in other work environments. Specifically, he was asked, under oath, about having an affair with an intern in the White House while acting as President. Bill Clinton LIED about that...under oath. That is a crime that we call 'perjury', which Bill Clinton was convicted of.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
You are correct. Bill did the lying himself.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
And almost all of those pleas and indictments are for process crimes (perjury) or events that happened years ago and had nothing to do with the Presidential election. The biggest plea so far, Flynn, is already in legal trouble as released FBI documents show that none of the investigators believe he perjured himself during their meeting and the charges were only later created out of thin air to apply pressure. It was only after they threatened to go after his son for similar trumped up charges and almost bankrupted him that he pled out.
As for Manafort, he's the scum of the earth and probably deserves to rot in prison but even some of the charges brought against him are facing some legal issues.
For those indictments that were added to pad the numbers (Russian companies and persons) Mueller knew that he had no legal ground to even pursue the charges so was completely taken by surprise when one of the companies actually sent a lawyer to represent them. It was so bad that Mueller's team had to ask for a continuance because they were completely unprepared. Hell, one of the companies that he indicted didn't even exist at the time of the crime they were indicted for; as the defense lawyer stated, they were the proverbial ham sandwich in front of the grand jury.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
Campaign finance laws aren't really criminal matters either. At worst this is a violation to the tune of $130,000. Obama's campaign was found guilty of violations in the millions and, as is pretty par for the course, paid a small fine and life continued.
Trumps image was hardly squeaky clean to begin with so the revelations that he had an affair with a porn star would have hardly rocked the boat. John Edwards had a similar case during his presidential run and was easily able to claim it was a payoff for personal reasons and it is guaranteed that the news of him having a love child while his wife was dying of cancer would have had a much greater political impact on his presidential chances than the news that a thrice married reality TV star who cheated on each wife with the next one had had a one night stand with a stripper.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
Yet, it seems that a judge isn't to happy with this particular technique.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
qanonposts.com
When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
You mean because they covered up all the dirt they found? Including Wiener's laptop with blackmail on the entire DNC that two detectives were killed over?
Facebook and Cambridge Analytica are different issues.
So why wasn't Obama investigated by them in 2012?.
The Obama’s reelection team was “building a vast digital data operation that for the first time combines a unified database on millions of Americans with the power of Facebook to target individual voters to a degree never achieved before.” Obama’s new database would be gathered by asking individual volunteers to log into Obama’s reelection site using their Facebook credentials. “Consciously or otherwise,” “the individual volunteer will be injecting all the information they store publicly on their Facebook page — home location, date of birth, interests and, crucially, network of friends — directly into the central Obama database.”
Facebook had no problem with such activity then. They do now, but only because it's Trump.
The former Obama director of integration and media analytics stated that, during the 2012 campaign, Facebook allowed the Obama team to “suck out the whole social graph”; Facebook “was surprised we were able to suck out the whole social graph, but they didn’t stop us once they realized that was what we were doing. They came to [the] office in the days following election recruiting & were very candid that they allowed us to do things they wouldn’t have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side.”
As soon as Facebook realized that Cambridge Analytica had pursued a similar strategy, they suspended them.
I do not belong to the church of the lowercase 'i'
There were significant issues with timely donation disclosures and refunds of excess donations, but Trump is in it for PERSONAL comingling of funds and mis-use of campaign funds.
May 16, 2018
Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/us/politics/crossfire-hurricane-trump-russia-fbi-mueller-investigation.html