That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
C'mon cmon...Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Mar 22, 2018 4:26 pm https://twitter.com/rebeccaballhaus/sta ... 0338004993
JUST NOW: Trump, asked if he still wants to testify before Mueller: “Yes. I would like to.”
The theory goes something like this: Facebook obtained information on users who took a personality quiz with their online friends. Another outlet, the advertising firm Cambridge Analytica, harvested that information, brainwashed a bunch of rubes and then yada, yada, yada...Russia! Former Cambridge Analytica contractor Christopher Wylie told CNN that while at the company, he helped build a "psychological warfare weapon" to "exploit mental vulnerabilities that our algorithms showed that (Facebook users) had." So, in other words, he worked in the advertising business.
...
Here's a thought: If you're uncomfortable with data mining and your information being shared, don't take surveys. Because, guess what, you don't have to be on Facebook. You don't have to use Twitter. You don't have a constitutional right to play FarmVille without answering a survey. You don't get free stuff. The very existence of social media and tech companies is predicated on mining data so that they, or third parties, can sell you things. That has always been the deal.
...
By constantly using the word "breach," reporters are trying to insinuate that someone stole voter data that typically was off-limits. Cambridge Analytica was allowed to pull that profile data. Facebook only changed its policy in early 2015. But before the general election, the Trump campaign dropped Cambridge Analytica for the Republican National Committee data, reportedly never using the any of the "psychographic" information. According to CBS News, in September 2016, it had "tested the RNC data, and it proved to be vastly more accurate."
Even if the campaign hadn't, however, its efforts would have been akin to those being heralded as revolutionary when serving the interests of Democrats. In fact, Facebook allowed the Obama campaign to harvest data in the same way that is now generating headlines and handwringing. Do you remember any outrage and trepidation over the privacy and manipulation of your thoughts in 2012? The only consistent position the left seems to take these days is that the mechanisms it uses to keep power automatically transform into something nefarious and undemocratic when the opposition uses them. If anything, there should be concerned about the ideological double standards of yet another tech giant.
Up next:Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Mar 22, 2018 4:26 pm https://twitter.com/rebeccaballhaus/sta ... 0338004993
JUST NOW: Trump, asked if he still wants to testify before Mueller: “Yes. I would like to.”
Trump says "I thought he said 'Do you want to test out a mullet'..."
Do you know who Bob Loblaw is?Paingod wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:10 am I like the text on the image. Implying either that you should eliminate witnesses or that it shouldn't matter that someone saw you commit a crime.
He probably needs to read Bob Loblaw's Law Blog.
Whaaa?! Yes, sit in the corner while streaming it.Paingod wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 1:09 pm Never seen Arrested Development. I suppose I should go sit in the corner for a while...
Neither have I. I had to google it.Paingod wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 1:09 pm Never seen Arrested Development. I suppose I should go sit in the corner for a while...
I had to wait patiently while one of you did it.
I watched the first few episodes of the resurrected season. It wasn't very good.Chaz wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:41 pm I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.
It was a mistake since they couldn't resolve cast scheduling differences. It is an ensemble show...so...El Guapo wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:43 pmI watched the first few episodes of the resurrected season. It wasn't very good.Chaz wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:41 pm I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.
But the original run was solid.
They don't need to. Bob Loblaw works for teh funny.GreenGoo wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:14 pmI had to wait patiently while one of you did it.
I've seen episodes here and there, but I still had no idea who Bob Loblaw was. I assume someone calls him Boblob Law, because funny.
There were some rough spots in the original season too. I really don't think the Charlize Theron plot line was all that great.El Guapo wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:43 pmI watched the first few episodes of the resurrected season. It wasn't very good.Chaz wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:41 pm I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.
But the original run was solid.
\Archinerd wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 5:27 pmThere were some rough spots in the original season too. I really don't think the Charlize Theron plot line was all that great.El Guapo wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:43 pmI watched the first few episodes of the resurrected season. It wasn't very good.Chaz wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:41 pm I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.
But the original run was solid.
When President Donald Trump lashed out against Robert Mueller by name earlier this month, the president’s supporters sprang into action—treating the chief Russia investigator to political campaign-style opposition research.
Within hours, the Drudge Report featured a story blaming Mueller, the special counsel leading the Justice Department’s Russia probe, for the FBI’s clumsy investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks when Mueller ran the bureau. The independent pro-Trump journalist Sara Carter posted a story charging that Mueller, as a federal prosecutor in Boston in the mid-1980s, had covered up the FBI’s dealings with the Mafia informant Whitey Bulger. Carter was soon discussing her findings in prime time with Fox News host Sean Hannity.
Meanwhile, Trump supporters on Twitter circulated video of testimony Mueller gave to Congress ahead of the 2003 Iraq War in which he endorsed the view, later proven false, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
To some, the barrage looked coordinated among pro-Trump allies and media outlets, a concerted effort to tarnish Mueller’s reputation as part of a political strategy to undermine, or even eventually fire, the Russia investigator.
Fine, but the Arrested Development education had to happen. I can't help those who watched and didn't like (you're dead to me, BTW), but for those who never saw it? Gotta reach out and try to save them whenever the opportunity arises. It might not be their fault they never got exposure to Teh Funny.Scraper wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 8:17 am\Archinerd wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 5:27 pmThere were some rough spots in the original season too. I really don't think the Charlize Theron plot line was all that great.El Guapo wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:43 pmI watched the first few episodes of the resurrected season. It wasn't very good.Chaz wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:41 pm I watched the original run. It was okay. I didn't feel strongly enough about it to watch the resurrected season.
But the original run was solid.
The second season is perhaps the best season of any sitcom ever. But yeah the 4th season was pretty terrible. There is a rumor going around that someone involved remixed the 4th season and made it more cohesive, but who knows if we'll ever see that version.
Anyway can we get back to Trump being investigated now?
I doubt it. It's more like they're all getting in line to tell the people what they want to hear to sell their stories and be a part of this. I don't know which is more frightening. This is how fascism is born. People getting in line to get ahead.malchior wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 8:52 am Where Politico does something useful and sounds the alarm that attacks on Mueller seem coordinated.
When President Donald Trump lashed out against Robert Mueller by name earlier this month, the president’s supporters sprang into action—treating the chief Russia investigator to political campaign-style opposition research.
Within hours, the Drudge Report featured a story blaming Mueller, the special counsel leading the Justice Department’s Russia probe, for the FBI’s clumsy investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks when Mueller ran the bureau. The independent pro-Trump journalist Sara Carter posted a story charging that Mueller, as a federal prosecutor in Boston in the mid-1980s, had covered up the FBI’s dealings with the Mafia informant Whitey Bulger. Carter was soon discussing her findings in prime time with Fox News host Sean Hannity.
Meanwhile, Trump supporters on Twitter circulated video of testimony Mueller gave to Congress ahead of the 2003 Iraq War in which he endorsed the view, later proven false, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
To some, the barrage looked coordinated among pro-Trump allies and media outlets, a concerted effort to tarnish Mueller’s reputation as part of a political strategy to undermine, or even eventually fire, the Russia investigator.
Yeah, I dunno whether I'm convinced that attacks like that are "coordinated", as in someone literally organizing all of them. All that really needs to happen is the President launches an attack, and then shameless allies know that the President approves of that, and then they can all do their own attacks (and pick up on themes that other people have already run with).LordMortis wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 9:22 amI doubt it. It's more like they're all getting in line to tell the people what they want to hear to sell their stories and be a part of this. I don't know which is more frightening. This is how fascism is born. People getting in line to get ahead.malchior wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 8:52 am Where Politico does something useful and sounds the alarm that attacks on Mueller seem coordinated.
When President Donald Trump lashed out against Robert Mueller by name earlier this month, the president’s supporters sprang into action—treating the chief Russia investigator to political campaign-style opposition research.
Within hours, the Drudge Report featured a story blaming Mueller, the special counsel leading the Justice Department’s Russia probe, for the FBI’s clumsy investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks when Mueller ran the bureau. The independent pro-Trump journalist Sara Carter posted a story charging that Mueller, as a federal prosecutor in Boston in the mid-1980s, had covered up the FBI’s dealings with the Mafia informant Whitey Bulger. Carter was soon discussing her findings in prime time with Fox News host Sean Hannity.
Meanwhile, Trump supporters on Twitter circulated video of testimony Mueller gave to Congress ahead of the 2003 Iraq War in which he endorsed the view, later proven false, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
To some, the barrage looked coordinated among pro-Trump allies and media outlets, a concerted effort to tarnish Mueller’s reputation as part of a political strategy to undermine, or even eventually fire, the Russia investigator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third ... xperiment)
What makes you think they were sitting on the stories? I'm not about to go clicking federalist links. They will get no satisfaction from me, but from the look of it this is not investigative journalism but rather OP/Ed from stories going back decades.malchior wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:19 am The timing is too suspicious IMO. All these folks were just sitting on stories and happened to have them ready for when Trump made an off-hand remark? Maybe but why sit on these stories? To be clear, I agree that the twitter supporters was more about getting in line. However, Conservative media was probably too prepared for it to truly be a follow on effect. And suddenly the lady is booked on Hannity? That is way too much smoke.
Again, that's my concern. Not the coordination, but the echo chamber. The feedback loop. The perpetual motion. Again, this is how fascism is born. The need to be led by someone who will tell you you are right and absolve you your own inadequacies for a higher purpose. Work sets you free.Zarathud wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:45 am What's very concerning is how conservative messages get tested against the most extreme audience then refined based on "what sticks" to move upstream from white nationalist and fringe sites to Breitbart, Drudge, Hannity, and Fox. Someone linked to an hour by hour breakdown of how the Comey or Pizzagate attacks evolved. Apparently this is common.
Yup. It's well known that Mueller is an Enemy of Trump at this point, so all the media in TrumpWorld are going to be working on stories to discredit Mueller / his team / the FBI / Democrats / etc. So the odds that TrumpWorld media outlets will have bad stories on Mueller at any point is pretty much 100%. And Hannity is the head Minister of Propaganda at this point, so he'll immediately book people who write anti-Mueller stories that get traction. Plus anti-Mueller stories are going to get more mainstream attention at times when Trump is harping on Mueller.LordMortis wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:45 amWhat makes you think they were sitting on the stories? I'm not about to go clicking federalist links. They will get no satisfaction from me, but from the look of it this is not investigative journalism but rather OP/Ed from stories going back decades.malchior wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:19 am The timing is too suspicious IMO. All these folks were just sitting on stories and happened to have them ready for when Trump made an off-hand remark? Maybe but why sit on these stories? To be clear, I agree that the twitter supporters was more about getting in line. However, Conservative media was probably too prepared for it to truly be a follow on effect. And suddenly the lady is booked on Hannity? That is way too much smoke.
Within hours I can use google to find old stories on anything and give you a politically charged story. Conservative media has been positive feedback looping on the day's new events since the rise of Rush Limbaugh and that was before rise of Wiki and Google and before broadband put the history of the human race a few keyword searches away.
Jesus. We're not in the darkest timeline yet, but it's already pretty damn murky.Holman wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:07 am You can be sure that conservative media has been preparing anti-Mueller material (bidden or unbidden) because they know they need to be ready to go when the axe falls.
When Trump fires Mueller, Fox and Breitbart aren't going to waste time analyzing why the investigation was a failure and explaining away this or that piece of evidence. They're going to go 100% with the narrative that Mueller is worse that Clinton and Obama put together and that he needed to be stopped from carrying out his Deep State coup.
How can you possibly doubt the FBI wasn't trying to the disarm the law abiding citizens of the US for the benefit of globalist law superseding the Constitution?An international team of astrophysicists has discovered a galaxy 65 million light years away with so little dark matter that it may contain none at all. To arrive at this conclusion, they measured the speeds of 10 twinkly blobs in the galaxy, called globular clusters, that each contain millions of stars. Their measurements showed that this galaxy’s stars can handle its rotational speed. Compared to other galaxies of the same brightness, “it has at least 400 times less dark matter than what we expected,” says astrophysicist Pieter van Dokkum of Yale University.
