• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Here are some of the Russia-backed Facebook accounts being investigated

GDViking said:
Precisely trumpets keep trying to deflect by asking what votes were changed. This attack was not about changing votes, it was a out affecting turnout, and it worked...
Click to expand...

Umm...the media affected that far more than facebook posts. I can show video's of lots of people in the media that laughed at the thought of Trump even running, laughing just as much at the thought of him being POTUS. You want to know what affected voter turnout? Look to the news media like CNN and MSNBC and all the polls that they ran claiming that Hillary was going to win without any doubt what so ever. THAT is what affected voter turnout more than anything else.
 
GDViking said:
Precisely trumpets keep trying to deflect by asking what votes were changed. This attack was not about changing votes, it was a out affecting turnout, and it worked...
Click to expand...

And evidently a bunch of Bernie supporters actually voted for trump in protest.

Great plan, guys.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Actually, the law that you quoted before, applies to contributions/donations. IE: Money. Ads are not considered contributions or donations. As you can see here there are exceptions.
Click to expand...

Actually, you're mistaken.

Foreign money expenditures/disbursements applied to political communications/ads and/or for any US election purpose are forbidden. There is no ambiguity in these Code subsections.

(e)Disbursements by foreign nationals for electioneering communications. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make any disbursement for an electioneering communication as defined in 11 CFR 100.29.
Click to expand...

(f)Expenditures, independent expenditures, or disbursements by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make any expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.
Click to expand...

(C) An expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication
Click to expand...
 
Rogue Valley said:
Actually, you're mistaken.

Foreign money expenditures/disbursements applied to political communications/ads and/or for any US election purpose are forbidden. There is no ambiguity in these Code subsections.
Click to expand...

Did you not read the link that I gave? The quoted excerpt which wasn't even all of it? It shows exceptions.

Not to mention the "ads" shown in the OP's link were not actually ads. But actual FB accounts. Which cost no money to get and is open to anyone and everyone across the world.

Besides, do you really think that our Government can make laws dictating what foreign nationals may or may not say on an international forum? Who are they going to enforce the law against? Santa Clause? How would they prosecute such people? Kidnap them from their homes and bring em to the US? I'm sorry but I do not believe that our government can make laws and enforce laws against people that are not in the US and are not citizens of the US. The CAN make laws dictating that money from foreign nationals may not be used by organizations campaigning for politicians. Which is what the law that you're pointing to is about. Can you show that this has been done? If so then those organizations may be in violation of that law.

However there is no law which states that foreign nationals may not spend money for ad space that is open to one and all and for any purpose they wish to use such ad space for. There is also no law which states that foreign nationals may not advocate for, in the appropriate spaces/areas, specific politicians or specific groups and/or positions. Facebook for example. Which is a non-political organization which allows users from all over the world to not only make accounts and say things with in its TOS but also to rent ad space to be used at the ad space renters discretion.
 
rocket88 said:
Really, no one has said that? I think you're deliberately choosing not to see that. I've seen cons here call Putin a "Healer" and had one who openly hoped Russia would send troops to the US.

The rest of your rant against the left is typical fare for the non-thinking right. I'm not saying that's you, but it is typical. Putin has been actively trying to destabilize this country. That is undeniable. Bannon's stated goal was to undermine the political system.
Click to expand...

Funny you describing something that is factual observation as a rant. Really hilarious. As for Putin, I'm sure he's happy about it but he couldn't dream to cause as much destabilization in the US as progressives have. Not even close. Go turn on any news station and then tell me if you think Russia owns all of them because they are playing the same game but doing it better than the 2nd rate propagandists that is Russia.
 
Rogue Valley said:
If you're going to participate on a debate board, at least be familiar with the pertinent topic before you again demonstrate what everyone already knows.

CFR › Title 11 › Chapter I › Subchapter A › Part 110 › Section 110.20

52 U.S. Code § 30121 - Contributions and donations by foreign nationals

Lol. Jack McCoy you're not.
Click to expand...

Yeah...how about you read the law you quoted, go back and review the content of the adds, and then come back and tell me where you went wrong. Reminds me of how the libs got the whole Emoluments Clause wrong as well, when trying to get Trump.
 
rocket88 said:
Then why did they support Trump? Putin was known to support Trump and you guys have been saying "so what?"
Click to expand...

Putin wants Russia to be a 1st world country WORLD LEADER again. And instead of building up his paltry GDP and crappy one trick pony economy, he's trying to bring down all the other countries to their level or lower. Russia has supported every single split movement out there from Texas secession to California secession to catalonia secession to the break up of the EU.

Putin didn't want trump to be prez because of love for trump. He wanted to sow the most choas, division and destruction he could. Trump is just the best person for that job. Now we are at each others' throats and as divided as ever, the UN and NATO are weaker than ever. Everyting Putin could've wanted.

Putin has punked the GOP voters so hard that they bought every bit of the division Putin was selling. They bought Trump and they bought all the nuttiest conspiracy theories that were peddled to them.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Did you not read the link that I gave? The quoted excerpt which wasn't even all of it? It shows exceptions.
Click to expand...

You interpret it your way, I'll interpret it my way, and Mueller will interpret it his way.
 
Rogue Valley said:
You interpret it your way, I'll interpret it my way, and Mueller will interpret it his way.
Click to expand...

Is Mueller investigating this also? I thought he was investigating the Trump campaign being in supposed collusion with Russia? Had no idea that he was also investigating Russian Facebook accounts. Unless those accounts advocated on behalf of the Trump campaign? I didn't see any that did though..can you point to any?

Either way, its not about my interpretation or yours or even Muellers. It's about what the law says. And the law clearly indicates that it is about political organizations accepting money from foreigners.
 
Fishking said:
Funny you describing something that is factual observation as a rant. Really hilarious. As for Putin, I'm sure he's happy about it but he couldn't dream to cause as much destabilization in the US as progressives have. Not even close. Go turn on any news station and then tell me if you think Russia owns all of them because they are playing the same game but doing it better than the 2nd rate propagandists that is Russia.
Click to expand...

There's nothing factual about your observation. That's the problem today, conservatives think they have the right to their own facts.

rump is sowing division, just as Putin hoped he would.
 
rocket88 said:
There's nothing factual about your observation. That's the problem today, conservatives think they have the right to their own facts.

rump is sowing division, just as Putin hoped he would.
Click to expand...

Yes, Trump is sowing division as well but still can't hold a candle to leftists. Unfortunately for you...we have the internet and everyone has recording devices. Please...

 
Fishking said:
Yes, Trump is sowing division as well but still can't hold a candle to leftists. Unfortunately for you...we have the internet and everyone has recording devices. Please...

Click to expand...


Keep drinking the Kool-Aid..Trump needs useful idiots.

6.jpg
 
rocket88 said:
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid..Trump needs useful idiots.

6.jpg
Click to expand...

That's cute. 300 people pop up waaaay down the road and you think it's comparable. Lol....you're cute.
 
Fishking said:
Yes, Trump is sowing division as well but still can't hold a candle to leftists. Unfortunately for you...we have the internet and everyone has recording devices. Please...

Click to expand...


Wow was he walking down the street and a Nazi ran him over with his car?
No wait that was someone else she's dead he's not, but please continue with your cute story..
 
Kal'Stang said:
Looked at some of those ads while watching the video, pausing to read what they said. Seems to me that at most they were saying are the same things that have been said for years by their respective groups. So doubtful that they affected the election any more than any other ad or FB account taken out up by those respective groups. IE: LGBT groups, Secured Borders (which is an actual group that has been around for years now even long before Trump and Hillary ran for POTUS) etc etc.

Much ado about nothing, at least from what was shown in that CNN link.
Click to expand...

The ads certainly show intent.
 
Fishking said:
Lol...making stuff up, eh? Common tactic by those who have nothing.
Click to expand...

This is a great opportunity for you to denounce Nazis. Don't let it pass.
 
jmotivator said:
Please show me who said Russia is our friend? Because the Obama Era called, they want their policy back.

Or are you assuming that if I don't by in to the Russia/Trump conspiracy theory that I am down with Putin?
Click to expand...

Trump was and is like a bitch in heat to be Putin and Russia's friend.
 
BitterPill said:
The ads certainly show intent.
Click to expand...

Two things. One, they weren't even ads. They were accounts. Since Facebook is free to sign up no money was spent. Two, the only intent shown in those accounts are the same things that their respective groups here in the US advocate for. Any other "intent" is based on personal point of views in knowing that Russia had those accounts. If you had not known that Russia was behind those accounts (though I doubt at least one of them was for reasons already stated) you would have considered the intent the same as the actual groups here in the US intentions are.

*note: "you" is generalized, not personalized.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Two things. One, they weren't even ads. They were accounts. Since Facebook is free to sign up no money was spent. Two, the only intent shown in those accounts are the same things that their respective groups here in the US advocate for. Any other "intent" is based on personal point of views in knowing that Russia had those accounts. If you had not known that Russia was behind those accounts (though I doubt at least one of them was for reasons already stated) you would have considered the intent the same as the actual groups here in the US intentions are.

*note: "you" is generalized, not personalized.
Click to expand...

Of the first thing, you called them ads yourself, now you want to call them accounts, yet I'm not eager to let you switch dicks so readily. Two, the Putin inspired ads certainly show intent.
 
Last edited:
BitterPill said:
Of the first thing, you called them ads yourself, now you want to call them accounts, yet I'm not eager to let you switch dicks so readily. Two, the Putin inspired ads certainly show intent.
Click to expand...

Yes, I called them ads. In point of fact that was me simply mis-speaking. If you look at them they are clearly accounts. Even CNN's article title calls them that. But even if they had been ads it would make no difference for the simple fact that FB only rents space for ads, it does not rent out the ads themselves. Plus FB is not a political entity which means that those ads would not violate any law. Which brings it into free speech areas. Which I always have and always will support.

And what is that intent? To sow discord? If that's the case then all of those groups that was represented are doing the same thing when they say the same things as what was in those accounts. Is that really the kind of ideology that we want to spread?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom