Where Do Things End With Vlad? (h/t romad1)

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, 1984Echoes said:

There's news on explosions but nothing on the bridge itself...

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-ukraine-war-crimea-drones-kerch-bridge/33080939.html

they did do a little practice blowing a bridge in Kursk today though

https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-destroyed-bridge-over-seim-river-in-kursk-oblast-russian-official-claims/

[Crazy Cat Gentleman]

3 hours ago, romad1 said:

How is your bridge?

 

 

[Dan Gilmore]

I need to work the word confounded into my vocabulary. 

[romad1]

The guy who is in this article looks like a villain from the Command and Conquer game series

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1937097/russia-commander-vladimir-putin-removal-kremlin-wagner

[romad1]

 

Elon violating sanctions 

[romad1]

21 hours ago, romad1 said:

 

Elon violating sanctions 

The US Government needs to seize the assets of Starlink, redirect the board of the company and indict Musk for violating the sanctions if he does not explain this. 

[romad1]

This is really gripping stuff.  This country is playing for its very survival and is basically needing to roll a 15 or better on a 20 sided die in every battle but they are out there slashing and running.  

 

[romad1]

3 minutes ago, romad1 said:

This is really gripping stuff.  This country is playing for its very survival and is basically needing to roll a 15 or better on a 20 sided die in every battle but they are out there slashing and running.  

 

One thing that one of the bloggers I trust a bit said was that Ukraine had a mobilization that raised a lot of troops that have yet to be seen in the war.  They are a mystery to Russia.   They don't know if they should be expecting another offensive. 

[CMRivdogs]

Wrong thread

Edited August 21, 2024 by CMRivdogs

[romad1]

FTR, 

 

 

[mtutiger]

Just posted this over in the Media Meltdowns thread, but it's worth saying / asking here as well.... but after this indictment, does anyone really believe this activity stopped at just Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Benny Johnson, etc.?

Obviously it's not something any of us can prove, but it's exceedingly hard to believe that the commentators mentioned in the indictment are the only ones who benefited off of Russian payola over the years....

[romad1]

4 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Just posted this over in the Media Meltdowns thread, but it's worth saying / asking here as well.... but after this indictment, does anyone really believe this activity stopped at just Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Benny Johnson, etc.?

Obviously it's not something any of us can prove, but it's exceedingly hard to believe that the commentators mentioned in the indictment are the only ones who benefited off of Russian payola over the years....

Concur

[romad1]

RFK Jr is being followed

 

[romad1]

 

[ewsieg]

4 hours ago, mtutiger said:

Just posted this over in the Media Meltdowns thread, but it's worth saying / asking here as well.... but after this indictment, does anyone really believe this activity stopped at just Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Benny Johnson, etc.?

Obviously it's not something any of us can prove, but it's exceedingly hard to believe that the commentators mentioned in the indictment are the only ones who benefited off of Russian payola over the years....

I'm suspicious of anything that claims to be Russian interference or other interference.  Not saying it's not happening, just saying I reserve my opinion until I see more details.  Just reporting facts about Ukraine that don't tie directly to our 'rah rah' nature of supporting them is looked at as disinformation by some.  

Plus, even if Russians gave 10 million to Tenant media, doesn't mean individual podcasts off of it knew or were negligent.  

To your question though, I would venture Facebook and Twitter made many times more than just what Tenant got from questionable sources.

 

[romad1]

19 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I'm suspicious of anything that claims to be Russian interference or other interference.  Not saying it's not happening, just saying I reserve my opinion until I see more details.  Just reporting facts about Ukraine that don't tie directly to our 'rah rah' nature of supporting them is looked at as disinformation by some.  

Plus, even if Russians gave 10 million to Tenant media, doesn't mean individual podcasts off of it knew or were negligent.  

To your question though, I would venture Facebook and Twitter made many times more than just what Tenant got from questionable sources.

 

You have ample evidence that Russia is trying to influence the election. they have entire creatures in our political system who are beholden to them.  

[mtutiger]

44 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I'm suspicious of anything that claims to be Russian interference or other interference.  Not saying it's not happening, just saying I reserve my opinion until I see more details. 

Fair, I'm not making any specific accusations of anyone. But I still stand by my comment that it's exceedingly hard to believe that there aren't others, perhaps even more well known figures, who have been used in the way that Tim Pool or Dave Rubin were.

44 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Plus, even if Russians gave 10 million to Tenant media, doesn't mean individual podcasts off of it knew or were negligent.  

If I was offered the bag of money these guys were offered to produce their podcasts, I'd have a few questions about the sources of said cash. Particularly when the cash comes with conditions about content and ideology being shared.

I'll never be able to prove it, but they either didn't know (best case; they were useful idiots) or didn't care (worst case; they could put 1 and 1 together)

Edited September 5, 2024 by mtutiger

[ewsieg]

2 hours ago, romad1 said:

You have ample evidence that Russia is trying to influence the election. they have entire creatures in our political system who are beholden to them.  

Oh, I have no doubts that Russia, China, and many other countries, organizations are throwing money to influence the election.  My point is simply all to often 'disinformation' is often viewed as an alternate view point that someone doesn't like, not that it is necessarily incorrect facts.

Anyone that questions our Intelligence agencies or foreign diplomacy directives could be doing so based on facts but a different opinion of how to interpret those facts.  I don't think Democrats that wanted us out of Iraq during Bush were influenced by Russians, but i'm sure there was "Russian interference" aka money, fed into PACs or any other means to sow discourse within our politics and to try and get us out of the middle east.

[chasfh]

3 hours ago, ewsieg said:

I'm suspicious of anything that claims to be Russian interference or other interference.  Not saying it's not happening, just saying I reserve my opinion until I see more details. 

 

I would guess the indictment is giving plenty of details. Or are you looking for a non-Deep State source?

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, mtutiger said:

If I was offered the bag of money these guys were offered to produce their podcasts, I'd have a few questions about the sources of said cash. Particularly when the cash comes with conditions about content and ideology being shared.

Or they could say, or be advised to say, don't tell me where the money comes from. The less you actually know, the better chance you have in court.

[mtutiger]

34 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Oh, I have no doubts that Russia, China, and many other countries, organizations are throwing money to influence the election.  My point is simply all to often 'disinformation' is often viewed as an alternate view point that someone doesn't like, not that it is necessarily incorrect facts.

I believe there are room for alternative views on issues. And really, it isn't the consumer that I blame so much as the purveyors of this stuff.... if you have massive audiences like these folks did, you oughtta show a little bit more discretion or understand the kind of power that comes with the role. They maybe understood, but they didn't care.... it was all about those huge sums of money the source of which they either never questioned or didn't care about.

Either way, the commentators named in the indictment had, at times, used language that had very little daylight with the lines held by the Russian government. Not necessarily here, but in the greater zeitgeist, had someone suggested prior to yesterday that these commentators that figures might not be good faith actors (as they clearly weren't), you would have been tagged as a "Resist Lib" or "Blue Anon" or whatever.

The indictment is much more of a vindication that a lot of anti-Ukraine skepticism floating around in the podcast/media space isn't good faith than a lot of folks would like to admit.... because again, it's really hard to believe that these were the only folks being influenced.

Edited September 5, 2024 by mtutiger

[chasfh]

35 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Oh, I have no doubts that Russia, China, and many other countries, organizations are throwing money to influence the election.  My point is simply all to often 'disinformation' is often viewed as an alternate view point that someone doesn't like, not that it is necessarily incorrect facts.

I can relate. I similarly roll my eyes whenever someone complains about something or someone being "woke", or about "cancel culture", or "identity politics", or "cultural Marxism", or "critical race theory" ...

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, ewsieg said:

Oh, I have no doubts that Russia, China, and many other countries, organizations are throwing money to influence the election.  My point is simply all to often 'disinformation' is often viewed as an alternate view point that someone doesn't like, not that it is necessarily incorrect facts.

Anyone that questions our Intelligence agencies or foreign diplomacy directives could be doing so based on facts but a different opinion of how to interpret those facts.  I don't think Democrats that wanted us out of Iraq during Bush were influenced by Russians, but i'm sure there was "Russian interference" aka money, fed into PACs or any other means to sow discourse within our politics and to try and get us out of the middle east.

It's not the speech, it's the law. You can't spread around foreign money without registering as a foreign agent and foreign money is about the only kind the law does say you can't spend on an US election - though there are even some loopholes there.

[romad1]

11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

It's not the speech, it's the law. You can't spread around foreign money without registering as a foreign agent and foreign money is about the only kind the law does say you can't spend on an US election - though there are even some loopholes there.

Like the Russians and Saudis buying Twitter and the PRC using Tik Tok to act as an intelligence gathering tool. 

[mtutiger]

Interesting question