clinton actually did not mention her by name. nonetheless gabbard went on a twitter hissy fit and outed herself.
That combined with russian troll/bots posting in support of gibbard suggests to me that hillary is correct. there is equal activity aimed at supporting gabbard as there is to attacking clinton
objective presentation of russian troll/bot activity (unfortunately lacking any real context):
https://botsentinel.com/trending-topics
some context for the data, in case it changes (the bot data site regularly monitors and updates):
https://twitter.com/cbouzy/status/1185332311983869952?s=20
Originally posted by Robtard
She should be thanking Clinton for ranting about her. Gabbard never really had a chance, now she'll be in the headlines for a bit.
🙄
Right. The military veteran Tulsi Gabbard--who actually really loves her country, unlike most leftists--should be thanking the b*tch Clinton for accusing her of being a "russian asset." Yup, that makes a whole lot of sense.
Just some more of that looney leftist logic for ya. 😉
The fact that Gabbard never really had a real chance to become the dem nominee (which is a too bad for you Trump-haters because she would've had the best chance by far of beating Trump of all the dem candidates) doesn't change the fact that what Hillary said was sick. Seriously, that old two-time loser evil witch just needs to keep her disgusting mouth shut. She isn't relevant anymore.
Originally posted by SurturBut wait Hillary just pushed a conspiracy theory...lol
Haven't you learned yet, Surtur, that it's totally fine when those on the left push crazy ass conspiracy theories? Especially when the person doing it is "it's all just a vast right-wing conspiracy" Hillary goddamn Clinton.
But hey, don't you dare talk about the government putting flouride in the water to lower people's IQ or how they're slowly killing us with GMO's, chem trails, and now probably 5G technology as well. That's a big no-no. 😉
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
clinton actually did not mention her by name. nonetheless gabbard went on a twitter hissy fit and outed herself.That combined with russian troll/bots posting in support of gibbard suggests to me that hillary is correct. there is equal activity aimed at supporting gabbard as there is to attacking clinton
objective presentation of russian troll/bot activity (unfortunately lacking any real context):
https://botsentinel.com/trending-topicssome context for the data, in case it changes (the bot data site regularly monitors and updates):
https://twitter.com/cbouzy/status/1185332311983869952?s=20
Those tools are cool.
What Clinton did is exactly what Tulsi said, she used cnn and nytimes as proxies prior to Clinton coming out to make a statement of russia asset, her assertion was obvious based on the previous claims from other organizations. Not to mention Tulsi left the DNC and said Hillary stole the position from Bernie in 2016.
Clinton's attack machine is in full motion. It's not like Clinton hasn't used russian fed information in the past using the DNC to procure it........she's just a saint looking out for our democracy..... 🙄
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
how are clinton's motives even relevant to the point? how does it then magically invalidate the point? feelings?
Because I can clearly identify a motive in statements and actions, Tulsi flat out called Clinton out in the 2016, I mean the verifiable facts. What has been done to Tulsi is clearly a smear campaign unless all those outlets can verify they are russian bots and not just bots in general.
See one is facts, the other is feelings.........(hint the smear campaign without actual facts is the fee fees which is all that has been presented "beliefs."😉
We also know that the democratic party just recently got caught creating troll accounts in the alabama elections
again, word salads of ad hominem attacks on the messenger does not negate the point. but may I point out that I never claimed proof on gabbard, but her self-outing kinda reminds me of starfly when he got trig'd by a birthday thread I made for one of his many sock accts.
sure it's not concrete proof by any stretch of the imagination, but if it doesn't give you a moment of pause and consideration (further punctuated by russia's government social media account supporting her), you're obviously just having a good troll in categorically dismissing it as some hairbrained "conspiracy theory".
I wonder if you'll keep the lulz going if she runs as a 3rd party candidate. that's the going speculation:. that her whole purpose is to rat**** the democrats via 3rd party run and take enough votes to ensure trump's victory ala ralph nader. I hope that's not the case, because it would probably work.
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
again, word salads of ad hominem attacks on the messenger does not negate the point. but may I point out that I never claimed proof on gabbard, but her self-outing kinda reminds me of starfly when he got trig'd by a birthday thread I made for one of his many sock accts.sure it's not concrete proof by any stretch of the imagination, but if it doesn't give you a moment of pause and consideration (further punctuated by russia's government social media account supporting her), you're obviously just having a good troll in categorically dismissing it as some hairbrained "conspiracy theory".
I wonder if you'll keep the lulz going if she runs as a 3rd party candidate. that's the going speculation:. that her whole purpose is to rat**** the democrats via 3rd party run and take enough votes to ensure trump's victory ala ralph nader. I hope that's not the case, because it would probably work.
Right, which is why I said it was a smear campaign used circumstantially just prior to the democratic debates. No one knows for a fact if its really happening, they based it on circumstantial evidence for the feels to smear.
It's a tactic Trump uses ALL the TIME on twitter, it doesn't have to be fact based just remotely believable to sway opinion.
I wonder if they are so afraid Tulsi would run 3rd party they put this out there just to 100% confirm she never would, cuz if she did they could go "ha ha russian!".
See just the conspiracy theory alone betrays a lack of intelligence. There is no proof third parties like Jill Stein cost Hillary the election. It assumes every vote for Stein would have went to Hillary, and you can't do that without assuming every vote for Johnson would have gone to Trump. And if you do that? Trump still wins lol.
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
clinton actually did not mention her by name. nonetheless gabbard went on a twitter hissy fit and outed herself.That combined with russian troll/bots posting in support of gibbard suggests to me that hillary is correct. there is equal activity aimed at supporting gabbard as there is to attacking clinton
objective presentation of russian troll/bot activity (unfortunately lacking any real context):
https://botsentinel.com/trending-topicssome context for the data, in case it changes (the bot data site regularly monitors and updates):
https://twitter.com/cbouzy/status/1185332311983869952?s=20
Oh, was not aware that Clinton didn't actually name drop, serves me right for reading a Right news source.
Gabbard should have not responded then. Should have let it sit as is, would have looked like an empty Clinton rant.
I wanna give a kudos to the usual suspects here, minus Bash. None of you were foolish enough to try to defend these conspiracy theories. You're learning 👆
Originally posted by Robtard
Oh, was not aware that Clinton didn't actually name drop, serves me right for reading a Right news source.Gabbard should have not responded then. Should have let it sit as is, would have looked like an empty Clinton rant.
No it wouldn't have looked like an empty rant, stop being disingenuous. This Russia shit has only been slung at *one* of the female candidates. Everybody knew who Clinton meant and her reps later confirmed it. Tulsi literally called out people for smearing her with this not long before this. The media was saying Clinton was referring to Tulsi even before she responded.
Literally everybody knew who Clinton meant. Anyone pretending otherwise is being dishonest or just isn't a very bright person.