Go back
Obama intends election interference

Obama intends election interference

Debates

MB

Joined
07 Dec 05
Moves
22640
Clock
27 Nov 19
1 edit

The DNC rigged the primary against Sanders and now Obama has expressed his intention to ruin Sanders chances of winning the nomination.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-bernie-sanders-2020-nomination_n_5ddd31a1e4b00149f724793b

If a foreign nation did that it would be outrageous. Not so much when a domestic politician does it. The USA has a long history of election meddling to prevent leftists from getting elected in foreign countries. Looks like the same policy applies to domestic elections as well.

The establishment hates socialism. They will interfere with elections abroad and at home to undercut it.

bunnyknight
bunny knight

planet Earth

Joined
12 Dec 13
Moves
2917
Clock
27 Nov 19

@metal-brain said
The DNC rigged the primary against Sanders and now Obama has expressed his intention to ruin Sanders chances of winning the nomination.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-bernie-sanders-2020-nomination_n_5ddd31a1e4b00149f724793b

If a foreign nation did that it would be outrageous. Not so much when a domestic politician does it. The USA has a long history of electi ...[text shortened]... establishment hates socialism. They will interfere with elections abroad and at home to undercut it.
It all makes sense when you learn that the billionaire elites are in charge, not the citizens. They own all the mainstream news, and they buy and use politicians to their personal advantage, which is maintaining and growing their wealth and power.

MB

Joined
07 Dec 05
Moves
22640
Clock
27 Nov 19

@bunnyknight said
It all makes sense when you learn that the billionaire elites are in charge, not the citizens. They own all the mainstream news, and they buy and use politicians to their personal advantage, which is maintaining and growing their wealth and power.
Right. Billionaires don't want socialism. It is simply against their interests. Income inequality is why they are so powerful, but it is also the source of many problems. Nations with the most income inequality have more violence. More corruption is likely when buying off politicians is such a small portion of a billionaires wealth. It is like pocket change to them.

That is why they hate Andrew Yang and will not give him speaking time at the debates. They gave more speaking time to candidates with lower poll numbers than Yang. Yang is the smartest guy up there. He deserves to be heard.

Make American think again.

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
27 Nov 19

@metal-brain said
The DNC rigged the primary against Sanders and now Obama has expressed his intention to ruin Sanders chances of winning the nomination.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-bernie-sanders-2020-nomination_n_5ddd31a1e4b00149f724793b

If a foreign nation did that it would be outrageous. Not so much when a domestic politician does it. The USA has a long history of electi ...[text shortened]... establishment hates socialism. They will interfere with elections abroad and at home to undercut it.
How in the [expletive deleted] is an American citizen privately voicing his opinion "election interference"?

You've really gone off the rails (again).

MB

Joined
07 Dec 05
Moves
22640
Clock
27 Nov 19

@no1marauder said
How in the [expletive deleted] is an American citizen privately voicing his opinion "election interference"?

You've really gone off the rails (again).
How in the [expletive deleted] is RT voicing their opinion publicly "election interference"? Americans do it all the time.

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
27 Nov 19

@metal-brain said
How in the [expletive deleted] is RT voicing their opinion publicly "election interference"? Americans do it all the time.
Who said RT couldn't voice its opinions?

MB

Joined
07 Dec 05
Moves
22640
Clock
27 Nov 19

@no1marauder said
Who said RT couldn't voice its opinions?
Who said RT was election meddling in our election for voicing opinions? We are supposed to be a country that values freedom of speech. Can't I read RT without it being called election interference? I can get the same bias against HRC from Brietbart. What is the big deal?

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
27 Nov 19

@metal-brain said
Who said RT was election meddling in our election for voicing opinions? We are supposed to be a country that values freedom of speech. Can't I read RT without it being called election interference? I can get the same bias against HRC from Brietbart. What is the big deal?
I really don't know what you are talking about; if you want to rely on Russian propaganda, go ahead.

MB

Joined
07 Dec 05
Moves
22640
Clock
27 Nov 19

@no1marauder said
I really don't know what you are talking about; if you want to rely on Russian propaganda, go ahead.
Anybody can pick their propaganda. You do.
Why are you demonizing Russian propaganda while condoning the propaganda you prefer? You like leftist propaganda. What is wrong with far left propaganda? Is that too far left for you?

k
Flexible

The wrong side of 60

Joined
22 Dec 11
Moves
37304
Clock
27 Nov 19
1 edit

@metal-brain said
Anybody can pick their propaganda. You do.
Why are you demonizing Russian propaganda while condoning the propaganda you prefer? You like leftist propaganda. What is wrong with far left propaganda? Is that too far left for you?
Why are you pretending that you or anyone else cannot read RT if they choose to?
Why are you pretending that RT peddles left wing propaganda when it is directed by the Kremlin under Putin? Are you claiming Putins Kremlin is left wing.

MB

Joined
07 Dec 05
Moves
22640
Clock
27 Nov 19

@kevcvs57 said
Why are you pretending that you or anyone else cannot read RT if they choose to?
Why are you pretending that RT peddles left wing propaganda when it is directed by the Kremlin under Putin? Are you claiming Putins Kremlin is left wing.
I never said that. I'm making the point that what RT did should not be considered election interference. They were simply doing what every American has a right to, express bias for one candidate over another.

Google went farther than that. Gabbard is suing Google for election interference and she is also suing HRC for her false allegations. She should sue MSNBC and Joy Reid as well.

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
Clock
27 Nov 19

@metal-brain said
I never said that. I'm making the point that what RT did should not be considered election interference. They were simply doing what every American has a right to, express bias for one candidate over another.

Google went farther than that. Gabbard is suing Google for election interference and she is also suing HRC for her false allegations. She should sue MSNBC and Joy Reid as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcCOtOCZ_qY
Nobody's claiming that RT broadcasting their propaganda is "election interference."

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
27 Nov 19

@metal-brain said
I never said that. I'm making the point that what RT did should not be considered election interference. They were simply doing what every American has a right to, express bias for one candidate over another.

Google went farther than that. Gabbard is suing Google for election interference and she is also suing HRC for her false allegations. She should sue MSNBC and Joy Reid as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcCOtOCZ_qY
Gabbard hasn't sued HRC and her lawsuit against Google is almost certainly a legal loser:

"Koh noted in her 23-page ruling that other courts have ruled both that Facebook doesn't violate the First Amendment by removing content, and that web platforms are immune from liability for removing political speech.

Several years ago, Koh herself ruled in Facebook's favor in a similar lawsuit. In that matter, the nonprofit group Sikhs for Justice sued after its pages were blocked in India by Facebook. Koh dismissed that lawsuit, ruling that Facebook's decisions about content were protected by the Communications Decency Act. A federal appellate court upheld Koh's ruling in 2017.

Koh also ruled in Google's favor in a lawsuit by Prager University, which alleged it was discriminated against by Google for political reasons.

Prager alleged in a 2017 lawsuit that Google wrongly applied its "restricted mode" filter to the school's videos, effectively making them unavailable to some students and library patrons. Prager also alleged that Google "demonetized" some conservative videos.

Koh ruled that because Google is a private business, as opposed to a government entity, it can decide how to treat content on its platform.

Prager is currently appealing that decision to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Other district court judges have come to the same conclusion as Koh in comparable lawsuits. For instance, in May, U.S. District Court Judge Phyllis Hamilton in the Northern District of California threw out claims by an Egyptian activist who alleged Facebook violated his free speech rights by suspending his account, preventing him from joining groups, and marking his posts as spam.

And in March, U.S. District Court Judge Trevor McFadden in the District of Columbia dismissed a lawsuit against by right-wing activists Laura Loomer and Freedom Watch, who accused Google, Twitter, Facebook and Apple of conspiring to suppress conservative views."

https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/338512/facebook-defeats-russian-news-agencys-censorshi.html

Gabbard might be better off doing more campaigning and less hiring of lawyers to pursue borderline frivolous litigation.

MB

Joined
07 Dec 05
Moves
22640
Clock
27 Nov 19

@kazetnagorra said
Nobody's claiming that RT broadcasting their propaganda is "election interference."
Was it the use of bots to promote RT? Twitter banned RT for a reason.

https://www.rt.com/news/407861-twitter-policy-rt-accounts/

Cambridge Analytica, which worked with the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election, is accused of mining the data of 50 million Facebook users, without their explicit knowledge or consent, and then attempting to use it to influence voters.

The Trump campaign is reported to have paid the British firm more than $5 million for its services. Records also show that seventeen other Republican campaigns and political groups paid the firm $16 million for similar services.

https://www.rt.com/usa/422407-cambridge-analytica-election-interference/

Why is it that when the British are involved in election interference it is never used to demonize the British?

MB

Joined
07 Dec 05
Moves
22640
Clock
27 Nov 19

@no1marauder said
Gabbard hasn't sued HRC and her lawsuit against Google is almost certainly a legal loser:

"Koh noted in her 23-page ruling that other courts have ruled both that Facebook doesn't violate the First Amendment by removing content, and that web platforms are immune from liability for removing political speech.

Several years ago, Koh herself ruled in Facebook's favor in ...[text shortened]... ter off doing more campaigning and less hiring of lawyers to pursue borderline frivolous litigation.
Fake news?

https://newspunch.com/tulsi-gabbard-sues-hillary-clinton-claiming-russian-agent/

https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.