Stone & Infowars knew before, Putinbots all over it. Is this a plan to undermine #metoo

[Madam45for2923]

Stone & Infowars knew before, Putinbots all over it: how to deal with the horrific possibility
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/11/16/1716256/-Roger-Stone-knew-before-Putinbots-all-over-it-how-to-deal-with-the-horrific-possibility

STONE:

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

INFOWARS:

Link to tweet

Now look at the timestamps on those tweets. They’re all within nine minutes of each other — from 1:12 to 1:21 a.m. Nov. 16.

So look how a fake allegation against a Dem, especially a Dem who passionately defends sexual assault victims, is a win for the right wing. Liberals themselves will be inclined to believe it, driven by their own morality. Any liberal who doubts it will be attacked by other liberals (amply helped by the Trumpcult and the bots) as a hypocrite or rape apologist. Liberals will be emotionally crushed by disillusionment to see one of their champions found guilty (before he’s actually been found guilty), adding to their cynicism about powerful men in general.

However it gets even bigger and more evil than that. They cannot lose even if their plot is exposed and the accuser, or, better still, multiple accusers, are discredited.

Why? Because, in far too many peoples’ minds, that discredits ALL accusers.

Including those accusing Roy Moore and... Donald Trump.

And discrediting all accusers is exactly what is needed for powerful men to be able to go back to getting away with systemic sexual violation!

5) Look for patterns. If there really is a plan to put a “long line” of Democrats “in the barrel,” it will give us an opportunity to do this. Because this is a new situation, I am not sure, but I think that there will be features that distinguish genuine media sexual assault allegations from false ones. I have noticed some patterns already in two cases I suspect of being false, George Takei and Al Franken, vs. ones I think are genuine either due to overwhelming evidence, e.g. Roy Moore, or an admission, e.g Louis CK:

• there’s a single accuser rather than multiple ones

• the accuser approached news media (or, in Tweeden’s case, was the news media) rather than news media approaching them (WaPo was careful to point this out in their original Moore story)

• the accuser did not ask for an investigation or charge or say that they had previously attempted to find some sort of recourse, unsuccessfully. (In my Takei diary, or perhaps a comment, I wrote that Takei, if he’s innocent, should try to initiate an investigation somehow, or at least welcome one; Franken, interestingly, has done exactly that)

• the news media outlet they went to was not a major, established one that did a comprehensive investigation with fact-checking

• recorded media that the accused says depicts clowning around was used as substantiation (a Howard Stern interview and a photo, respectively) of more severe abuse that was not recorded

• Russian bot/trolls allocated the vast majority of their resources to the accusation while it was trending on Twitter

• the accused has a solid reputation as a champion of women’s concerns including with respect to sexual assault/abuse
he displays that in his response, even if it is a denial, rather than making excuses for his behaviour (e.g. “I ask the girl’s mother”).
[Edit: John Ziegler notices some of these and other anomalies here.]

With the Franken case we can also now say that Roger Stone knew about it beforehand. Same with every Dem politician who gets accused from now on.

Other points:

She did not look sincere the first time to me. Looked like someone trying to have her facial expressions match her words but not quite managing it.

Also the fact of Hannity saying in his interview with her, that she showed him the photo years ago, but he kept quiet all these years. Tweeden laughs when he says that in the interview.

Yeah, sure! (BTW: Funny how Hannity suddenly cares about sexual abuse!)

If this is a hit job, it shows the GOP does not give a crap about victims of sexual abuse , & may it all backfire on the GOP.

I am sorry but I think we are divided in this issue, even though we all care about sexual abuse and sexual assault.

Also in a court of law what would Franken be convicted of? Giving a kiss she consented to. Photo of grabbing breasts but not really grabbing.


Edited to add link mentioned in article above:

I Loathe Al Franken, But It Sure Seems Like He is Getting Totally Railroaded
https://www.mediaite.com/online/i-loathe-al-franken-but-it-sure-seems-like-he-is-getting-totally-railroaded/

[Madam45for2923]

1. Another point: photo seems to have been photoshopped! WHY?

• •

[sharedvalues]

2. K&R

[sharedvalues]

3. If only we had a real investigative media

Maybe Mother Jones or Propublica or NYT or TPM will put their investigative resources into figuring out what really happened.
We know the infotainment media— CNN and the rest — will not.

[Madam45for2923]

15. Yep! Which is why the fact she did not go to a real investigative media that could verify her stor

[Control-Z]

4. This is frightening.

There are several people here on DU who have written bold "This is BS" OPs. My own OP was not a bold statement like theirs but questions the validity of the allegations. It's a longer version of this following simple statement:

"Also in a court of law what would Franken be convicted of? Giving a kiss she consented to. Photo of grabbing breasts but not really grabbing."

The Kiss
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029856268

We're going to need to stay on our toes if we want to fight this. We have to be alert, intelligent, careful and organized to fight this anticipated onslaught. I think a warning should be pinned for DU members to see lest we be taken out with the help of our own.

Damn them. They lie and cheat at every turn. Nothing they do or say can be trusted.

[Loki Liesmith]

5. Russia does not care about #metoo

They do care about fomenting chaos and damaging democrats (and to be honest, Republicans too). That’s all they want here.

[Igel]

9. It's easier to think "they're against us"

when "us" is a narrow group. Increases group loyalty, that external threat, and enhances group boundaries.

It's harder to think "they're against us" when "us" includes our foes. Then suddenly have to choose which battle to fight--do we team up with those we despise to counter an external threat or continue to exacerbate divisions at the risk of doing the external threat's job for them?

I think it's worth noting the reports that say the shift from purely "we like Trump" to a large portion of "we don't like Trump" on the part of "Russial media" (Russian-influenced social media) occurred in less than a day or two after Trump's election. What did Trump do to piss off the Russians? Nothing. But if chaos and discord are the goal, as the combined US intelligence report said, then the data track.

Ukraine found this out. The tussle between pro-Russia/pro-Western political forces continued after Crimea annexation and in the run-up to the Donbas fiasco. The result was at that critical point when Russian-backed actors were busy taking over towns, people were debating pro-Russia/pro-Western. Pro-Ukraine was lost in the shuffle until hundreds of people were dying. Helping the fiasco along was a continual bombardment of Ukraine by Russian media and infiltration of Ukraine news and social media sites by Russian disinformation. DU fell for it--there were frantic reports posted here of Russian disinformation like a huge convoy of fascist Ukrainian forces about to invade Crimea.

The problem began years before the actual Donbas takeover. There were Donets'k People's Republic flags flying at paramilitary youth camps for 5, 6, 7 years before the actual takeover. Training teens to use weapons. Forming them into squads. Teaching them that Ukrainians that opposed Russia and Russian were fascists. Nobody shut them down. To shut them down wouldn't be pro-Ukrainian, but pro-Western and anti-Russian. It's not mere framing--it really is a question of what's more important and what's to be ignored.

[dalton99a]

6. Kick

[kcr]

7. I'm sure that was a bonus.

But I think its main purpose was to take down a prominent and popular Dem. ETA Franken handled it brilliantly. I notice this morning it's barely present on the MM. Almost no one talking about it.

[Madam45for2923]

8. Maybe MSM looked into it and found unanswered questions. Plus Moore & Donald look much worse.

[Initech]

10. Just remember - Alex Jones and Breitbart now have seats in the White House Press Room.

Think about it - Trump has given ultra far right conspiracy theorists the keys to a direct line at the fucking White House. And every time Trump tries to undermine real journalism as "fake news", remember who he considers to be the "real news".

And remember that people like Steve Bannon, Alex Jones, Sean Hannity, and Roger Stone have direct links to inside information. We know now that this was a carefully coordinated right wing hit job on Franken. And now anyone with a D next to their name is a sitting duck. We can beat these assholes at their own game, but we have to be prepared for the next hit job. I'm afraid the Mercers unleashed Skynet with Steve Bannon. That guy is dangerous.

[Madam45for2923]

11. This is interesting: ...next hit job. I'm afraid the Mercers unleashed Skynet with Steve Bannon.

next hit job. I'm afraid the Mercers unleashed Skynet with Steve Bannon. That guy is dangerous.

Can you say more about this?

[Initech]

12. Steve Bannon and Sebastian Gorka are out campaigning to get their people in government.

And when white supremacists win, we all lose. Bannon is dangerous, if he can put out a hit job on Franken, he can put out one on just about anyone. And he's got Russia and his army of bot accounts to back his every move.

[Madam45for2923]

13. and what about Skynet?

[Initech]

14. Nothing, that was a throw away reference.