How a baseless conspiracy theory grew around Seth Rich’s murder

[Ahovv]

Seemed weird that you guys were pushing for jail or otherwise, when there was nothing illegal contained therein.

"You guys"

Seems weird that you're a right wing talking point meme machine then.

Soooooo right-wing http://imgur.com/a/JOvDU

[Cthulhu 2020]

"You guys"



Soooooo right-wing http://imgur.com/a/JOvDU

So wait, you're just a huge fan of right wing talking points, and you don't actually believe half of what you post?

[Noxx79]

You really don't think there's a difference between planning what intelligence you share, and simply blurting out intelligence obtained from allies?

The bias is you trying to equate the two.

Trumplings have to dumb everything down to an infantile level it's the only way they can attempt to (and fail) understand.

[Ahovv]

So wait, you're just a huge fan of right wing talking points, and you don't actually believe half of what you post?

Pointing out that 59% of Democrats believe Russia hacked voting machines to make Trump win isn't a "right-wing talking point." It's an opposition to retarded conspiracies and ideas.

If you're a "left-wing" person and get offended to know 59% of Democrats are absolute morons, *shrug*.

Wait, for you to believe me, do I need to also include dumb Republican concepts in the same post? Should I point at the 30% of Republicans who want to bomb Agrabah? Or the 50% of Trump voters who wish the South won the Civil War?

Just because the stupidity I attack happens to be on the Democratic Party in a post, don't push me into your bullshit dichotomy of "welp, guess he's a right-winger."

[Slybak]

Soooooo right-wing http://imgur.com/a/JOvDU

Given the general rigor of on-line "political compass" quizzes, the dump I just took would probably score as "Left Libertarian."

[Ahovv]

Given the general rigor of on-line "political compass" quizzes, the dump I just took would probably score as "Left Libertarian."

Take the test with what you perceive as "right-wing" and let me know if it's anywhere close to my result. You can claim the test isn't perfect, but I'm not a fucking conservative.

Honestly I'm not sure why I even bother posting on these forums, ever. The result is always insults and cries of "alt-right" or "right-wing." If I'm right-wing, I guess Kyle Kulinski is as well. We share 95% of the same beliefs.

This forum seems to dick-ride the corporate Democratic Party, and paradoxically if anyone is further left, those people are somehow "right-wing." Fantastic.

[Slybak]

Take the test with what you perceive as "right-wing" and let me know if it's anywhere close to my result. You can claim the test isn't perfect, but I'm not a fucking conservative.

Honestly I'm not sure why I even bother posting on these forums, ever. The result is always insults and cries of "alt-right" or "right-wing." If I'm right-wing, I guess Kyle Kulinski is as well. We share 95% of the same beliefs.

This forum seems to dick-ride the corporate Democratic Party, and paradoxically if anyone is further left, those people are somehow "right-wing." Fantastic.

I wouldn't describe Kyle Kulinski (and the so-called "Justice Democrats" in general) as anything other than a superficial moron but, hey, you do you.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Pointing out that 59% of Democrats believe Russia hacked voting machines to make Trump win isn't a "right-wing talking point." It's an opposition to retarded conspiracies and ideas.

If you're a "left-wing" person and get offended to know 59% of Democrats are absolute morons, *shrug*.

Wait, for you to believe me, do I need to also include dumb Republican concepts in the same post? Should I point at the 30% of Republicans who want to bomb Agrabah? Or the 50% of Trump voters who wish the South won the Civil War?

Just because the stupidity I attack happens to be on the Democratic Party in a post, don't push me into your bullshit dichotomy of "welp, guess he's a right-winger."

It seems weird that you like to point out Democrats stupidity but don't touch on egregious Republican stupidity, considering the latter stands out far more on far more fronts. Do the Dems piss you off more or something?

Did that one dubious email where there was some vague talks about nudging Bernie out of the way make you have fits?

[Garnier Fructis]

Did that one dubious email where there was some vague talks about nudging Bernie out of the way make you have fits?

If they're a big fan of Kyle Kulinski, then probably.

[Deleted]

Stayrect posts meme pictures and thinks he will replace any arguments with it.

Ridiculous.

Beside his "link list" full of normal news.

I mean, he tries to get people not to check his posts just by mass. Old trick by the disinformation league. Be sure, staryrect, that every single of your lies is being debunked, and already was on this thread.

[Cthulhu 2020]

If they're a big fan of Kyle Kulinski, then probably.

It's funny how every time the emails are mentioned, their response is "The content of the emails was real." As if that's particularly damning of Democrats/Hillary.

The fact that Bernie lost the primaries even without super delegates, his polling numbers were just overall low, as were the results. They can't ever pin anything specific on what Democrats did other than win against him in an election. But damn does it make them mad that there are a lot of unproven conspiracies out there that could explain how Clinton's shadow Democrat robot sheeple managed to magically turn the tide against Bernie using underhanded tactics.

It does seem a bit odd that they have unwavering belief in these random conspiracies about Bernie's loss, but seem in utter and complete denial when it comes to all of the underhanded tactics Trump and his own team used, and their contacts with Russian intelligence officers.



But what really seems to be the lowest point to me, is the concern trolling that the Trumpkins are showing them... and the fact that they're eating it up. Before the primaries the Trumpkins were railing about how Bernie supporters were poor lazy college kids that wanted a free ride through life. They used some of the harshest anti-socialist talking points they could bring out.

Then once the conspiracies about Bernie being plotted against came out, and the Trumpkins began pretending to sympathize with the BernieBros, they ate it up.

Seriously though, how low do you have to be to accept sympathy (or really, political talking points masked as sympathy) from a group that was calling you the lowest scum of the country BEFORE you hit rock bottom?

[Orbitus]

And Western mainstream media is any better?

Are you fucking kidding me? If our media speaks bad about Trump, they don't have to worry about being prosecuted or in your country ASSASSINATED. RT and Sputnik are ran by the Kremlin, so obviously they only report what the Kremlin wants. Whereas, we have the 1st amendment protecting our press. So yes, ANYTHING is better than government ran media like yours. The fact that you said that bullshit means you like being lied to.

- - - Updated - - -

Well 10 minutes is an estimate. Most of these were bookmarked, thanks for the ad hominem. Every single link is questionable in it's accuracy, blatantly false, or manufactured. It seems to me, you don't want to make acknowledge the fact that yes, the MSM produces fake news. While I don't disagree about Russian state media, stating that the US is somehow better is laughable.

Part of the equation that is missing here is biased reporting, or unbalanced reporting. The main stream media in this country now is DNC media. Here's a list of journalists who colluded with the Clinton campaign during the election.



Great example of bias here


At the end of the day, you can sit there and make an honest argument that the media in the US is any better then the Russian state.

See, your "meme" about the media is bullshit. All it is is scratching Wikileaks' ass. I don't fucking care what Wikileaks has to say.

And your 2nd picture was talked about in the thread about Trump giving classified information to Russia. Obama gave them intelligence that we were allowed to give them as it was ours. Trump gave Russia intelligence that Israel gave us, something we weren't supposed to tell anyone. Again, you are wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

I used to go in-depth back in 2014, tried to provide people with analysis and sources... But most of the time it ended up with "your sources aren't popular and mainstream therefore it's all conspiracy theories".

No, your sources were probably conspiracy theories, not that they weren't popular or mainstream. They were probably bullshit.

[Haven]

Are you fucking kidding me? If our media speaks bad about Trump, they don't have to worry about being prosecuted or in your country ASSASSINATED. RT and Sputnik are ran by the Kremlin, so obviously they only report what the Kremlin wants. Whereas, we have the 1st amendment protecting our press. So yes, ANYTHING is better than government ran media like yours. The fact that you said that bullshit means you like being lied to.

Uh-huh. Sure. The reason why "free press" can talk shit about Trump is because it's on the payroll of another faction. They won't dare justify Trump or even provide another opinion because the editor who leys this go to print will be substituted by a more obedient one, that's it. The basic principles of crowd control have remained unchanged for centuries; whoever owns the media, owns you. In your case, it's a small circle of oligarchs who invested in Hillary.

[ati87]

Pointing out that 59% of Democrats believe Russia hacked voting machines to make Trump win isn't a "right-wing talking point." It's an opposition to retarded conspiracies and ideas.

If you're a "left-wing" person and get offended to know 59% of Democrats are absolute morons, *shrug*.

Wait, for you to believe me, do I need to also include dumb Republican concepts in the same post? Should I point at the 30% of Republicans who want to bomb Agrabah? Or the 50% of Trump voters who wish the South won the Civil War?

Just because the stupidity I attack happens to be on the Democratic Party in a post, don't push me into your bullshit dichotomy of "welp, guess he's a right-winger."

You know how bullshit that comparison is....people generally don't read every single details find in the news (as evidence by people on this forum that don't understand the questions and answers ), so when they read ''russia hacked'' everything that comes afterwards will be merky since they could read for example ''attempt at hacking the machines'' which certainly was written and talked about.

But then if you look at the right and what they believe ''bomb fictional cities because they sound Muslim'' and ''is Obama a muslim born in Kenya'' all of these are based on their paranoid gut feelings and just their hatred for the others.

The right and left aren't equal,

[Orbitus]

Uh-huh. Sure. The reason why "free press" can talk shit about Trump is because it's on the payroll of another faction. They won't dare justify Trump or even provide another opinion because the editor who leys this go to print will be substituted by a more obedient one, that's it. The basic principles of crowd control have remained unchanged for centuries; whoever owns the media, owns you. In your case, it's a small circle of oligarchs who invested in Hillary.

So your theory is that there are a few hidden oligarchs that control the media and control what people think? Interesting unfounded theory you have there. That is what we call a conspiracy theory.

But in your case, we KNOW who tells you things. If it isn't kosher with the Kremlin, it doesn't get published. Putin is your oligarch. If something gets published that he doesn't want, he has the author gunned down in the street or thrown in jail.

But don't let facts get in your little bubble that you have built up there.

[Ahovv]

You know how bullshit that comparison is....people generally don't read every single details find in the news (as evidence by people on this forum that don't understand the questions and answers ), so when they read ''russia hacked'' everything that comes afterwards will be merky since they could read for example ''attempt at hacking the machines'' which certainly was written and talked about.

But then if you look at the right and what they believe ''bomb fictional cities because they sound Muslim'' and ''is Obama a muslim born in Kenya'' all of these are based on their paranoid gut feelings and just their hatred for the others.

The right and left aren't equal,

Except corporate Democrats are right-wing, centrist at best.

[Glorious Leader]

Uh-huh. Sure. The reason why "free press" can talk shit about Trump is because it's on the payroll of another faction. They won't dare justify Trump or even provide another opinion because the editor who leys this go to print will be substituted by a more obedient one, that's it. The basic principles of crowd control have remained unchanged for centuries; whoever owns the media, owns you. In your case, it's a small circle of oligarchs who invested in Hillary.

The irony is that theirs an absured amount of money spent by two particular individuals on the right wing who.keep alot of right.wing media floating.

[Haven]

So your theory is that there are a few hidden oligarchs that control the media and control what people think? Interesting unfounded theory you have there. That is what we call a conspiracy theory.

But in your case, we KNOW who tells you things. If it isn't kosher with the Kremlin, it doesn't get published. Putin is your oligarch. If something gets published that he doesn't want, he has the author gunned down in the street or thrown in jail.

But don't let facts get in your little bubble that you have built up there.

How is it a theory when journalists:
a) want butter on their bread, or to put it simple, money, hence sponsors,
b) whoever pays, sets conditions. You publish what I don't want published, I stop paying you. It's really simple.
c) media controls public opinion. Absolutely. If you question the extent of this control, look up "nazi propaganda". Normal German people, enlightened, cultural Europeans, treated jews and slavs worse than cattle because their trusted media told them so.

"Gunned down in the streets", haha, you read too many comicbooks. No, the opposition is allowed to exist, much like in USA, because it's doing a better job at presenting itself as idiots and traitors than any state institution would. And you clearly live in a cartoonish world, well, this primitive black and white vision has been hammered into you since childhood, so it's no wonder.

[LaserSharkDFB]

How is it a theory when journalists:
a) want butter on their bread, or to put it simple, money, hence sponsors,
b) whoever pays, sets conditions. You publish what I don't want published, I stop paying you. It's really simple.
c) media controls public opinion. Absolutely. If you question the extent of this control, look up "nazi propaganda". Normal German people, enlightened, cultural Europeans, treated jews and slavs worse than cattle because their trusted media told them so.

"Gunned down in the streets", haha, you read too many comicbooks. No, the opposition is allowed to exist, much like in USA, because it's doing a better job at presenting itself as idiots and traitors than any state institution would. And you clearly live in a cartoonish world, well, this primitive black and white vision has been hammered into you since childhood, so it's no wonder.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.fdfd80e0f110
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...lled_in_Russia
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-journ.../28439320.html
http://www.newsweek.com/russia-world...-maidan-430639
https://www.ifex.org/russia/2017/03/...ined-protests/

Why you Russians keep pretending that your country has anything remotely resembling free speech is beyond me.

[Shalcker]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.fdfd80e0f110
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...lled_in_Russia
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-journ.../28439320.html
http://www.newsweek.com/russia-world...-maidan-430639
https://www.ifex.org/russia/2017/03/...ined-protests/

Why you Russians keep pretending that your country has anything remotely resembling free speech is beyond me.

Hey, how about "those living in glass houses" for last one?

Four more journalists get felony charges after covering inauguration unrest

Four more journalists have been charged with felonies after being arrested while covering the unrest around Donald Trump’s inauguration, meaning that at least six media workers are facing up to 10 years in prison and a $25,000 fine if convicted.