It seemed pretty clear to me. Dodgy FB ads aren't weaponized anything. Someone is paying for that content and it isn't a secret who -- all ads on FB point to a landing page by design. FB ads are designed to be clicked on to take you somewhere for a call to action: to play a game, to gamble, to join a dating site, to download a $19.99 diet book that will TOTALLY change your life, a political party, or to contribute money to a candidate or cause. The people making those ads aren't Kremlin masterminds, they are broke nerds trying to survive off clickbait -- like much of Eastern Europe and Israel. For these guys, America is a kind of plantation whose product is gullible people who like to click on things. If someone were to post the ads in question -- they would include the url of where they point to, which would show who pays the people making the ads for each conversion. I wouldn't hold your breath to wait for American journalists to understand how the Internet works. There's also a game of creating FB groups to have an easy demographic target. IF the group you make gets successful, it starts to build itself as people find it, and people start posting in it. I made several conservative ones in the UK for online bingo players because I found a correlation between British nativism and affinity for bingo. If you own the group, it's very inexpensive to target the people in it, and their friends. This is FB's business model. This is how they make their money. People are the commodity, and gullible Americans are the most valuable of all. I ran ads for bingo sites (not legal in the US, but totally ok in the UK) targeting those old bigoted farts. It paid my rent. There are still hundreds of groups I made years ago for free-to-play MMOs that are still around. I did not work for the Kremlin -- I worked for an Israeli ad agency that made millions of dollars and got bought by a larger Israeli ad agency that is making many ads that you see every day on FB. I suspect some of those guys made anti-Clinton ads, too, if they got paid enough. Conservative PACs used affiliate channels to run anti-Obama ads to do fundraising via social media for years. I know how it works -- I used to get paid to teach people how to do it in Israel and write better copy. I eventually quit and got a job in the public sector because I had no interest in being a dimestore Lee Atwater. And so far -- that's all I've seen for "Russia hacking the election" -- ad buys for bad political FB ads. Someone certainly is bankrolling it, but no matter who it is, it's 100% legal.
I have to disagree, and so would our intelligence agencies. Sorry, but I really don't care how many ad buys you've made and for who, although I respect the occupation. I do care about the news that has been coming out in Europe and America, supported by both our intelligence agencies and some of those in major European countries that happen to be allies of ours. That news, whether you like the description or not, is that the Russians under Putin are actively attempting to undermine our democracies. Facebook is just one of the many means at their disposal. I think that is unacceptable, and it also isn't legal, not in my opinion. If the trump campaign colluded with the Russians in subverting our elections, it is also my opinion that that would be an act of treason.
No, I prefer folks that aren't so hawkish and think military first and foremost. Yet, the stated goals aren't that and those folks are part of a larger team. I don't discount their influence but I don't assume the team as a whole will not be more balanced. Multiple different views can be good. But this is concerning that team... and, so back to the point. Protecting the US from Russian interference = war with Russia is not convincing. It's so far off. I don't know if you made the point (haven't read all of this thread), but even if there is a risk of war, that is not reason to do nothing. If we take that view, we will sit around doing nothing and hope others won't mess with us.
While I agree with John McCain that the subversion of our elections could be considered an act of war, the reality is that there won't be a war with Russia. No one wants that. If there is a conflict between us, it will be because of Russia, not because of "neo-cons" that are refugees from the Bush Administration. That's unless Mr. trump does something incredibly stupid, not impossible at all, that manages to draw a reluctant Russia into a war involving the United States. Vladimir Putin is a danger to our democracy and is looking to strengthen a weaker Russia at our expense, but I can't believe he's looking for a war. Not with us. If it was conventional, Russia would lose. The casualties on both sides would be huge, and others would be drawn in, of course. If it because nuclear, everyone would lose. No, I don't see it.
I agree. One no want a new cold war. We have been talking about physical war. There is an attack, just not physical and we are just catching up to it. We could consider that a NEW type of war - asymmetric and done only within our own soil by our own people as tools by external factors. We have to at least defend against those new methods.
And yet another dot... Trump business had additional contact with Russians during campaign: report http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...itional-contact-with-russians-during-campaign
Took six months for Mueller to get around to it but now the Steele dossier is now part of the investigation. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-special-counsels-probe-sources-idUSKBN1C92WN
[Premium Post] At this point, which crowd looks more ridiculous, the Birthers or the Russian conspiracy theorists? A year into this charade and not a shred of evidence suggesting 1) Russia actually had an influence on the election or 2) Russia colluded with the Trump campaign. What price will be paid by the dishonest, unscrupulous people who promoted this false narrative? GOOD DAY
Oh, but why? After Robert Mueller's lifetime of diligent work, why can't we now insult his work ethic and pretend he is out, like, bowling, or something? sincerely, internet, breaker of minds.
Lol.... did the Birthers have a special counsel? I should start charging you for the most premium posts by me!
Because obviously the Russians would never feed anyone misleading or untrue information in an attempt to interfere in the US campaigns.
Oh, look: news none of us knew months ago that is just now being reported. Didn't stop you, though ; ) Mueller's Team Met with Russia Dossier Author
