Study debunks Democrat conspiracy theory about Russians stealing the election
- Thread starter artichoke
- Start date
It's a matter of record at this point that the debunked collusion narrative was Russian disinformation. DEMOCRATS believed and repeated it, advancing Russian attempts to divide the country...while incessantly accusing everyone else of being a secret Russian agent.
Congratulations, on being a useful idiot for Putin, dumb-ass.
View attachment 12972
Truth.
Yes, he showed all five Facebook posts and all zero of the collusion (except the colluding DEMOCRATS did).
Democrats bringing up the concept of following the evidence at this point is like Bill Cosby or Bill Clinton bringing up "no" meaning no. You are the only people involved who need to be introduced to that concept. Everyone else has been doing it since the beginning and using it to humiliate and discredit your idiot conspiracy theories at every turn.
Hence all zero of the charges and the finding of "no collusion."
Total BS. They were charged with completely unrelated financial crimes from before Trump's campaign ever began and other utter irrelevancies when they wouldn't make up crap about Trump (hence the continued use of the term 'witch hunt').
View attachment 12973
You can't lie your way into negating the findings of the National Academy of the Sciences. Try again, dishonest demagogue.
View attachment 12974
Projection Level Reached: 1000
View attachment 12975
The people who scream, "Secret Russian agent!" at literally anyone who points out the gaping holes in their lunatic extremism and conspiracy theories...are accusing ANYONE else of resorting to their signature move?
For the record, the people who get accused of being in the Deep State are people like Comey, Clapper, McCabe...people who made inexplicable decisions that contradicted all known evidence to protect Hillary for provable, documented felonies while framing Trump on literally zero evidence. Only Democrats trash all dissent as a conspiracy. Acting like a petty emotional child is YOUR trademark move, not anyone else's.
And since no one has shown that the National Academy of Sciences WAS wrong, we come full circle back to..."What? Are you claiming that this too is a conspiracy?" On what basis are you claiming it's wrong?
Don't bother answering. It was rhetorical. We KNOW why you're denying the evidence with no actual basis...
Right. The source was open about this from the beginning. The study does not prove that five Facebook posts didn't alter the votes of 139 million Americans in 2016...just that it doesn't influence anyone whatsoever in THEIR OWN, LATER experiments...as if anyone but Democrats would ever need something so stupidly obvious spelled out for them.
Zero evidence actually shows this, hence the "no collusion" and zero charges. Just like the impeachment show trial, all the "evidence" is third-party hearsay, conjecture, feelings, and a debunked, DNC-funded dossier (in other words, the evidence is total horse shit). And for the record, it was DEMOCRATS who colluded with a foreign government to rig a major national election, as with everything else of which they falsely accuse others.
Nobody's ARGUING that Mueller said the election was stolen. Quite the opposite. Mueller produced not a damn thing. It's EVERY OTHER Democrat conspiracy theorist who HAS made this idiotic "stolen election" claim (for years) that this evidence and thread were aimed at.
And the Russians are still doing it. https://www.journalgazette.net/news/local/ohio/20191128/russian-firm-tried-to-hack-ohio-voting
StoneByStone
It's OK to Be White
I never accused anyone of being a secret Russian agent. What are you even talking about?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, Deep State, the Swamp, Never Trumper, blah blah blah.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
This is the CONCLUSION from your link:
From your link:
Even though we find no evidence that Russian trolls polarized the political attitudes and behaviors of partisan Twitter users in late 2017, these null effects should not diminish concern about foreign influence campaigns on social media because our analysis was limited to 1 population at a single point in time. We were unable to systematically determine whether IRA trolls influenced public attitudes or behavior during the 2016 presidential election, which is widely regarded as a critical juncture for misinformation campaigns. It is also possible that the Russian government’s campaign has evolved to become more impactful since the late-2017 period upon which we focused. https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...s-stealing-the-election&p=3373689#post3373689
Now, let's take apart your response piece by piece:
1. There were more than just five facebook posts. Read carefully and comprehensively: https://intelligence.house.gov/social-media-content/ this pulls a major credibility point from your links study.
2. As it was explained time and again, Mueller was NOT investigating "collusion", as there is no legal precedent or reference for such an investigation. Mueller reported that there was insufficient evidence that Trump had first hand knowledge or involvement with the Russian interference. However, Mueller did go out of his way to point out that Trump's conduct warranted investigation by Congress. Observe: https://www.latimes.com/politics/la...tion-russia-investigation-20190418-story.html
As for the recent impeachment hearings, you obviously didn't observe the FIRST HAND testimonies of Cooper, Hill, Yovanovitch, Holmes, Sandy, and Vindman. Either that, or you're just in denial.
3. The very subject title of this thread tries to do so, as YOU implied that accusations of theft occurred. I previously challenged you to produce a quote that states just so in no uncertain terms. If you can't, that makes you a liar. Carry on.
Why would they? I'm not a moron.
Last edited:
Um...every conservative on here gets accused of being an undercover Russian agent literally daily (because debating a bunch of gullible Democrat dumb-asses on a debate site is the key to their sinister world conquest), usually repeatedly. Obviously, THAT'S what I'm talking about.
Don't lie about who is being accused of being deep state and people won't have to set the record straight. Seems pretty straightforward.
Right. And they didn't change the mind of others, either. Anybody who believed a story about Hillary having a child sex ring in a pizza parlor already hated Hillary. Those most likely to believe such stories are those with little political interest or knowledge and most unlikely to be reading such stories.
I think it is impossible to determine whether anybody was influenced by Russian efforts.
I totally agree but that does not change the fact that the OP does start countless bull shit threads and likely does so on multiple Internet forums.
Of course there were. As when Democrats pretend there are Klansmen lurking behind every shadow and I respond with, "Yes, all five of them," I'm not literally asserting that the exact count is five Klansmen alive in the U.S...I'm pointing out that they are a trivial fraction of the population being wildly exaggerated by demagogues fear-mongering about non-existent "white supremacy." Similarly, there were tiny number of Facebook posts. Thanks for being so unnecessarily obtuse as to necessitate explaining out the readily obvious.
View attachment 12976
Which is splitting hairs over a non-existent distinction. They weren't looking for collusion, but for a "criminal conspiracy"...a conspiracy of collusion.
I was about to say exactly the same thing to you. Every cherry-picked, coached Democrat "witness" produced literally zero evidence. Each claim was third and fourth-person hearsay, conjecture, and personal guesswork and opinions about the non-crime of asking for an investigation into Biden's obvious and documented crimes and corruption (which only Democrats absurdly insist is worse than Biden actually BEING corrupt). It produced ZERO evidence of anything remotely scandalous and came NOWHERE NEAR establishing that any law had been violated. The issue here is not with the thinking adults watching or not watching the entire show trial...but with the left's unwillingness/inability to think past CNN's spoon-fed scandal-mongering propaganda enough to comprehend that literally nothing was proven...except that Democrats are the sorest losers in history.
Again you fail to comprehend what you read, even when it is painstakingly spelled out for you. Shall I use crayons this time? "The very subject title of this thread" says nothing about Mueller. It correctly identifies DEMOCRATS as the people peddling this idiot conspiracy theory that the election was stolen. As usual, this is not about me lying, but about Democrats being semi-literate.
Try again.
The study showed that those who engaged the trolls on line were always those who already had strong opinions...so NOBODY changed their minds...not even after all five Russian troll posts were made.
Unless you consider how unfeasible and ridiculous it is on its face to think a small handful of inane Facebook posts changed MILLIONS of votes.
A claim this absurd doesn't even NEED to be debunked. It was obviously bogus from the beginning. But just to make sure, the National Academy of the Sciences has now confirmed it.
View attachment 12978
Lashing out at debates you lost won't change the fact that the facts consistently humiliate and discredit your claims.
CharacterAssassin
Verified User
You'd problably live a healthier and happier life if you didn't eat dogshit and suck our own father's cock.