Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by equalunique | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

equalunique

>The 2016 disinformation campaign clearly favored one candidate

How then would you characterize Russian sources on the Steele dossier?

Edit: Bring on the downvotes. I don't care.

View on HN

Ummm ... maybe those sources weren't part of the disinformation campaign?

Or are you trying to argue that evidence of possible Russian influence over one candidate, by its very existence, is evidence that they don't have influence over that candidate?

>Or are you trying to argue that evidence of possible Russian influence over one candidate, by its very existence, is evidence that they don't have influence over that candidate?

No. It's possible evidence - some of it is verifiable while other parts are simply allegations.

Can you prove that the part in the dossier about the hotel orgy was not a disinformation campaign used on western intelligence?

Has any part of the dossier been proven false? Not so far as I know. Has any part of the dossier been proven true? Yes.

^^ Comments like this continue to be stunning in how easily someone can toss out basic critical reasoning like knowing where the burden of proof lies when it comes to politics.

My mental framework to study this issue is equally simple, just a single question:

Is President Trump the type of dude that would be into golden showers?

If I claim MaysonL wore a blue shirt when this comment was made on HN, odds are that nobody can prove my claim is 100% false, and yet part of my claim is proven true, because here you are, and therefore all must believe me.

This is your logic.

I'm pretty sure the Steele dossier was not made public until Jan. 10, 2017 (i.e. after the election):

https://www.buzzfeed.com/kenbensinger/these-reports-allege-t...

Steele was shopping it around to media outlets extensively before the election, and Mother Jones reported on it on October 31, 2016:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gav...

Furthermore it was raw intelligence not meant for public consumption.

But wasn’t the Steele dossier used to get a FISA warrant to spy on the campaign, after the original request was denied?

Politicizing the intelligence apparatus would be highly disturbing, even moreso than when the Obama administration apparently used the IRS to target political opponents [1] like the tea party.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRS_targeting_controversy

Upvoted. I hope your comment does not get flagged like mine have been.

I think the biggest difference is that the disinformation was performed by state actors in Russia while the Steele Dossier was research on the actions and relationships that state actors had. Not to mention the fact that the details of the Dossier did not become public until after the election.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com