Katy Tur has a penchant for asking questions and when not getting an answer that fits her narrative, interrupting the person answering the question in order to ‘steer’ the comment in a direction that would be more beneficial to her reporting.
She’s basically David Gregory without a penis, and while you may think that’s a harsh assessment, here’s the video proof! (we miss you Tony Snow!)
She did this to Donald Trump today and Trump was having none of it!
If you listen closely you can hear Katy’s manufactured outrage.
Well, except no one is sure that the Russians are indeed the ones that hacked the DNC server. The narrative put forward by the DNC is that the Russians are the party responsible for the hack.
Regardless who hacked the emails it changes nothing regarding the substance of the corruption that has been laid bare for everyone to see, THAT is the REAL story here.
I have to wonder if this is really helping relations between the two countries.
I don’t imagine that bringing allegations, that may be false, to the table is going to ‘win friends and influence people’ in Russia. If anything it drives a wedge in US/Russian relations, but most journalists are happy to carry the narrative without thinking it through.
The DNC has money coming in from everywhere, honestly, can’t you hire a competent security firm? If you can’t secure an email server, you sure in the hell can’t secure a whole country!
The DNC is a corporation, all of a sudden the media is concerned about the leaking of internal corporate emails.
Wonder if we will see the same level of outrage should Exxon endure the same unfortunate circumstance?
I won’t hold my breath on that one…
Twitter Needs to Be Held Accountable for Civil Rights Violations
The Declaration of Independence states that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal.”
Businesses in America to cannot proper in a system where the playing field is not equal, regardless whether you are a Christian who is forced to bake a cake for a customer, or a multi-national corporation, like Twitter Inc.
Twitter Inc. has insulated themselves behind an anonymous ‘Trust and Safety Panel’ where the rights of Twitter Inc. users are arbitrarily decided.
The evidence is shown by whom they ban, and whom they don’t.
There is one standard for one group of people, and another standard for another group of people, and in America this should not be.
Regardless of the ‘Trust and Safety Panel’, Twitter Inc. cannot simply shove the inequality of their systems under the rug, based on an anonymous committee’s decision.
No, Twitter Inc. is directly responsible, regardless who is making decisions behind their wall of unaccountability.
It’s very clear that Twitter Inc. is violating the civil rights of its users, and after numerous attempts by professional media outlets to have Twitter Inc. explain their Terms and Conditions, they have simply refused.
A multi-national corporation cannot simply violate the civil rights of a group of people, and then hide behind the ideology that:
‘We are a private corporation and can choose who can and who can’t use our services’
No, a business is held to the same ethical standards in America as it’s people, they are not above the basic laws that our country is founded upon.
We cannot have an equal society when a business is held to one standard, and another is held to quite a different one, as it erodes free enterprise in our Country.
This basic violation of civil rights sends the message that small business’ do not matter, and large multi-national corporations who have armies of attorneys to fight in court do, it’s really that simple.
Therefore, we are asking for a Congressional review of Twitter Incorporated business practices WITH FULL DISCOVERY including all records that are maintained by Twitter Incorporated as well as the personal accounts of its officers, including the following:
Marjorie Scardino J.D.
Twitter Inc. should not be allowed to exercise their power to continually violate the civil rights of their users.
Please send all press inquires to: firstname.lastname@example.org where they will be answered promptly.
I’m starting to understand the feelings of the African-American community. I don’t want to comment on specifics because frankly we know very little about the shooting in Minnesota.
If you can, imagine for a minute an inner-city African American kid who has joined the Armed Forces and has a desire to serve his country honestly. One day he accidentally takes home classified information and notifies his Superior Officer upon returning it, sharing the details that caused him to make the mistake with an apology offered from his heart.
The Commanding Officer, doing HIS due diligence would then write up this young man, strip him of his clearance and pursue Non-Judicial or perhaps Judicial Punishment where he could be Court-Martialed, jailed, fined, and dishonorably discharged.
There would be no special treatment for him, he’s just a cog in the system.
Now, on the other end of the spectrum we have a white woman, the absolute definition of ‘white-privilege’ who has done FAR WORSE, even to the point of an FBI investigation, yet even after hearing all of the evidence of her guilt laid bare, she gets off scot-free due to being the most powerful woman in America.
What have evidenced this week is; there is one system for the less fortunate, and another system for the Democratic candidate, and it’s horrific.
As a citizen I’m appalled at the treatment of the poor, and the DNC has shown that they really don’t care for the average American, winning elections is more important than truth.
This is not the country that I have fought in a war to protect anymore, I fought to protect every American’s rights, not just the political elite.
Thread updated, the last bot net is now manned after I found it, but is still re-tweeting away! Additionally, H/T to Mark Buchanan for reporting on the issue, he writes “Could the same happen in the U.S. and Europe?” Yes, and it’s happening now, but the bot nets are getting better, moving beyond poorly created now. Read Mark’s piece here
Andrew Kalven has found another bot-net on Twitter, post updated
Poorly constructed bot nets are very easy to spot because they are famous for not having a profile picture or cover image on Twitter, thus defaulting to the profile ‘egg image’ on Twitter.
On Facebook most bot-nets will use the picture of a smokin’ hot girl in a compromising position, and that account will ramble on about 1 or 2 subjects, post links to products, or click-bait stories, from here to eternity.
Another way that you can easily can spot a bot-net is by the usernames (like the examples in the image on the right), notice the random strings of numbers after the username.
The reason for this character string is so that your profile creating robot doesn’t accidentally run into an real live person with the same username, which would cause the ‘account creator bot’ to crash.
SIDEBAR: Bot nets are the reason that Twitter’s stock is going down, but the number of users is going up. Bot nets cause ad impressions to go up but return on investment for advertisers to go down. Click-bots are the bane of pay-per-click advertisers.
A well executed bot net can drive massive amounts of traffic to your websites, additionally, you can program your bots to spread a political message, send links to your products, etc.
If you are almost instantaneously attacked on Twitter or Facebook for something that you post, it’s most likely a bot net that is setup to reply to negative (or any) message.
Bot Nets Have a Lot of Shady Friends
Another hallmark of a bot net is looking at their friends, if you look at the following image on the left, you will notice that they are all following one another, and they have no description. DO NOT go to any of their profiles if you are at work, they are 99% porn (don’t say that I didn’t warn you).
This is a no-no in the bot-net community, you should never link them together! When 1 account gets banned they all do, totally a ‘jayvee’ move. Also, this screams ‘automation’ since none of the descriptions are completed.
However, we should give this guy props for at least having a profile picture and a cover image, but they are used to get the male juices flowing so that the person will click the ad and go to the porn site where they will earn a portion of the signup fee (affiliate commission).
Very Effective When Used Correctly!
While the run-of-the-mill bot creator is usually fixed on getting paid an affiliate commission, there new creators are focusing on a higher goal, winning elections.
There’s a question that needs to be asked regarding the Hillary Clinton investigation and I think that James Comey alluded to it in his testimony today.
He’s a bright man, he more than likely knew that he would be dragged in front of Congress, and then he could let the cat out of the bag and detail OTHER felonies that were committed that hadn’t been looked into.
Here’s his testimony:
There was a statute passed in 1917 that on its face makes it a crime, a felony, for someone to engage in gross negligence. So, that would appear to say … maybe it’s enough to prove they were just really careless beyond a reasonable doubt. At the time Congress passed that statute in 1917, there was a lot of concern in the House and Senate about whether that was going to violate the American tradition of requiring that before you’re going to lock somebody up, you prove they knew they were doing something wrong…. As best I can tell, the Department of Justice has used it once in the 99 years since, reflecting that same concern. I know from 30 years with the Department of Justice they have grave concerns about whether it’s appropriate to prosecute somebody for gross negligence, which is why they’ve done it once … in a case involving espionage. -James Comey, FBI Director 7/7/2016
Did James Comey purposely not prosecute Hillary on the basis that he knew the case would blow up in the media if she was charged with a statue that was written and only used once in the last 100 years?
AND with that in mind would he use a ‘tell’ (in poker terms) to instruct Congress which rock that they should be looking under to find felonies that have recently been tried with a slam dunk?
It seems pretty obvious to me that he is hinting in this direction:
Chaffetz asked Comey whether he had reviewed Clinton’s testimony before the Benghazi committee as part of his inquiry. He said that he had not, but that he was aware of it. Chaffetz also asked Comey whether Clinton had lied to the FBI, and he said he did not have reason to believe she had done so. -Breitbart
Time will tell but the other felonies are as obvious as heck to the American public!
“Did you review the documents where Congressman Jim Jordan asked her specifically, and she said ‘There was nothing marked classified on my emails either sent or received.’ … Did the FBI investigate her statements under oath on this topic?” Congressman Chaffetz asked.
“Not to my knowledge — I don’t think there has been a referral from Congress,” Director Comey replied.
“Do you need a referral from Congress to investigate her statements under oath?” Congressman Chaffetz asked.
“Sure do,” Comey replied.
“You’ll have one. You’ll have one in the next few hours,” Chaffetz said -Law Newz
This gives Comey the perfect alibi, “I had to look into this because of the Congress demanded it!”
This shifts the burden of investigating to the ‘Republican Congress’ and should he recommend charges it’s no longer him but the Republicans that will bear the burden.