Russian Facebook ads

[Disir]

Then I guess we will need to see them.

What do you mean "need to see them"? I'm sure you wouldn't die without seeing them.

They need to be released to the public.

They were released to the public.

Facebook has repeatedly brushed off calls to make the ads public, with a spokesperson telling Business Insider earlier this month that "Due to both federal law and the fact that investigations are ongoing with the relevant authorities, we’re unable to share the ads." However, when pressed by the publication, the company refused to specify which laws (if any) prevented them from releasing the ads.



What's more, Sen. Mark Warner has explicitly called for Facebook to make the advertisements public. "They shared the content with staff," Gizmodo reports him telling press earlier this month, "but the public deserves to look at that content.”
Mark Zuckerberg's refusal to make Russia-linked Facebook ads public is a disgrace

Okay, and?

Why do you want them released to the public? So you can... can... can what?

So, we can see the evidence. Is this a problem for you?

 

[John Shaw]

What do you mean "need to see them"? I'm sure you wouldn't die without seeing them.

They need to be released to the public.

They were released to the public.

Facebook has repeatedly brushed off calls to make the ads public, with a spokesperson telling Business Insider earlier this month that "Due to both federal law and the fact that investigations are ongoing with the relevant authorities, we’re unable to share the ads." However, when pressed by the publication, the company refused to specify which laws (if any) prevented them from releasing the ads.



What's more, Sen. Mark Warner has explicitly called for Facebook to make the advertisements public. "They shared the content with staff," Gizmodo reports him telling press earlier this month, "but the public deserves to look at that content.”
Mark Zuckerberg's refusal to make Russia-linked Facebook ads public is a disgrace

Okay, and?

Why do you want them released to the public? So you can... can... can what?

You know when/if they release them to the public it won't make a difference. People will just say that the FBI is making it up, or that Facebook sent them fake evidence because Zuckerberg is a Democrat.

Excellent point. Evidence doesn't really matter to partisan hacks or slavishly devoted followers of a cult of personality, like those who support Trump. They'll believe what they want to believe. Nothing more or less.

 

[Disir]

They need to be released to the public.

They were released to the public.

Facebook has repeatedly brushed off calls to make the ads public, with a spokesperson telling Business Insider earlier this month that "Due to both federal law and the fact that investigations are ongoing with the relevant authorities, we’re unable to share the ads." However, when pressed by the publication, the company refused to specify which laws (if any) prevented them from releasing the ads.



What's more, Sen. Mark Warner has explicitly called for Facebook to make the advertisements public. "They shared the content with staff," Gizmodo reports him telling press earlier this month, "but the public deserves to look at that content.”
Mark Zuckerberg's refusal to make Russia-linked Facebook ads public is a disgrace

Okay, and?

Why do you want them released to the public? So you can... can... can what?

You know when/if they release them to the public it won't make a difference. People will just say that the FBI is making it up, or that Facebook sent them fake evidence because Zuckerberg is a Democrat.

Excellent point. Evidence doesn't really matter to partisan hacks or slavishly devoted followers of a cult of personality, like those who support Trump. They'll believe what they want to believe. Nothing more or less.

It doesn't. It should be released for the rest of us.

 

[jc456]

The congressional critters have copies of them but refuse to release them and said it was up to Facebook to release them....

So, it doesn't exist.

Whatever you want to believe, you'll believe....You know that.....

Facebook testified before congressional investigators and special counsel for hours on end and supplied the emails and other meta data and are pulling together other stuff for them....

Facebook creator also came out on video and said Russia did infiltrate them with ads and bots and trolls......they got paid in rubles....

Research it.....

Believe what you want.

More bullishit without evidence! So it doesn’t exist

 

[jc456]

The congressional critters have copies of them but refuse to release them and said it was up to Facebook to release them....

So, it doesn't exist.

Whatever you want to believe, you'll believe....You know that.....

Facebook testified before congressional investigators and special counsel for hours on end and supplied the emails and other meta data and are pulling together other stuff for them....

Facebook creator also came out on video and said Russia did infiltrate them with ads and bots and trolls......they got paid in rubles....

Research it.....

Believe what you want.

Then FB will have no problem releasing that information. Right?

Ask them to.....start a handbag, #release Russian ads.....

They need to release them....with enough asking them to, pretty certain they will.... or get the Russians to hack them and give them to Wikileaks....Oh wait....


The Facebook trolls spreading the ads/articles were tracked to a troll farm, north of Moscow in Russia.

What about newspaper ads?

 

[frigidweirdo]

What do you mean "need to see them"? I'm sure you wouldn't die without seeing them.

They need to be released to the public.

They were released to the public.

Facebook has repeatedly brushed off calls to make the ads public, with a spokesperson telling Business Insider earlier this month that "Due to both federal law and the fact that investigations are ongoing with the relevant authorities, we’re unable to share the ads." However, when pressed by the publication, the company refused to specify which laws (if any) prevented them from releasing the ads.



What's more, Sen. Mark Warner has explicitly called for Facebook to make the advertisements public. "They shared the content with staff," Gizmodo reports him telling press earlier this month, "but the public deserves to look at that content.”
Mark Zuckerberg's refusal to make Russia-linked Facebook ads public is a disgrace

Okay, and?

Why do you want them released to the public? So you can... can... can what?

So, we can see the evidence. Is this a problem for you?

It's not a problem for me. But the evidence might be part of a legal case, in which case you'll have to wait.

 

[Disir]

They need to be released to the public.

They were released to the public.

Facebook has repeatedly brushed off calls to make the ads public, with a spokesperson telling Business Insider earlier this month that "Due to both federal law and the fact that investigations are ongoing with the relevant authorities, we’re unable to share the ads." However, when pressed by the publication, the company refused to specify which laws (if any) prevented them from releasing the ads.



What's more, Sen. Mark Warner has explicitly called for Facebook to make the advertisements public. "They shared the content with staff," Gizmodo reports him telling press earlier this month, "but the public deserves to look at that content.”
Mark Zuckerberg's refusal to make Russia-linked Facebook ads public is a disgrace

Okay, and?

Why do you want them released to the public? So you can... can... can what?

So, we can see the evidence. Is this a problem for you?

It's not a problem for me. But the evidence might be part of a legal case, in which case you'll have to wait.

Zuckerberg will more than likely not release that information, and again, because the 33 year old "daddy" thinks you and everyone else is stupid.

 

[frigidweirdo]

They were released to the public.

Facebook has repeatedly brushed off calls to make the ads public, with a spokesperson telling Business Insider earlier this month that "Due to both federal law and the fact that investigations are ongoing with the relevant authorities, we’re unable to share the ads." However, when pressed by the publication, the company refused to specify which laws (if any) prevented them from releasing the ads.



What's more, Sen. Mark Warner has explicitly called for Facebook to make the advertisements public. "They shared the content with staff," Gizmodo reports him telling press earlier this month, "but the public deserves to look at that content.”
Mark Zuckerberg's refusal to make Russia-linked Facebook ads public is a disgrace

Okay, and?

Why do you want them released to the public? So you can... can... can what?

So, we can see the evidence. Is this a problem for you?

It's not a problem for me. But the evidence might be part of a legal case, in which case you'll have to wait.

Zuckerberg will more than likely not release that information, and again, because the 33 year old "daddy" thinks you and everyone else is stupid.

Well, maybe he's been told not to release information that could be part of a trial.

 

[Disir]

Facebook has repeatedly brushed off calls to make the ads public, with a spokesperson telling Business Insider earlier this month that "Due to both federal law and the fact that investigations are ongoing with the relevant authorities, we’re unable to share the ads." However, when pressed by the publication, the company refused to specify which laws (if any) prevented them from releasing the ads.



What's more, Sen. Mark Warner has explicitly called for Facebook to make the advertisements public. "They shared the content with staff," Gizmodo reports him telling press earlier this month, "but the public deserves to look at that content.”
Mark Zuckerberg's refusal to make Russia-linked Facebook ads public is a disgrace

Okay, and?

Why do you want them released to the public? So you can... can... can what?

So, we can see the evidence. Is this a problem for you?

It's not a problem for me. But the evidence might be part of a legal case, in which case you'll have to wait.

Zuckerberg will more than likely not release that information, and again, because the 33 year old "daddy" thinks you and everyone else is stupid.

Well, maybe he's been told not to release information that could be part of a trial.

Right.

 

[Freewill]

Where is the proof Russia initiated "Pizzagate"?

Follow up question. Were the people that believed pizzagate ever, ever, ever going to vote for a Democrat?

They didn't have to start it, but spreading it all over the net certainly made a difference. Would you vote for someone that you thought was running a pedophile ring?

Dude, Were the people that believed pizzagate ever, ever, ever going to vote for a Democrat? Ever? Nope. In fact, most people saw it on the Alex Jones site. Do the people that frequent the Alex Jones site vote for Democrats?

Non-sequitur.

It doesn't matter if a person is a democrat or a republican. This has to do mostly with people who were on the fence in deciding who they would vote for. Do you think they would vote for someone that is being portrayed as leading a pedophile sex ring? This story wasn't JUST on Info Wars. Hell, this thread is about ads on Facebook... I would think I shouldn't even have to point this out.

You have as of yet to prove that Russia was involved in that story.

The fact that you don't have any evidence means you can play it anyway you want. And you don't have to back up your claims. How cool is that?

Again. How many conspiracy theorists vote for Democrats?

It was an ad on Facebook. People are supposed to give more credence to stories on Facebook than on Info Wars. I'm not real sure why you can't get that. This is a thread about FACEBOOK ads.

More credence to what they see on facebook? Are you mad? Facebook has to be the greatest supplier of fake news ever conceived.

 

[Disir]

They didn't have to start it, but spreading it all over the net certainly made a difference. Would you vote for someone that you thought was running a pedophile ring?

Dude, Were the people that believed pizzagate ever, ever, ever going to vote for a Democrat? Ever? Nope. In fact, most people saw it on the Alex Jones site. Do the people that frequent the Alex Jones site vote for Democrats?

Non-sequitur.

It doesn't matter if a person is a democrat or a republican. This has to do mostly with people who were on the fence in deciding who they would vote for. Do you think they would vote for someone that is being portrayed as leading a pedophile sex ring? This story wasn't JUST on Info Wars. Hell, this thread is about ads on Facebook... I would think I shouldn't even have to point this out.

You have as of yet to prove that Russia was involved in that story.

The fact that you don't have any evidence means you can play it anyway you want. And you don't have to back up your claims. How cool is that?

Again. How many conspiracy theorists vote for Democrats?

It was an ad on Facebook. People are supposed to give more credence to stories on Facebook than on Info Wars. I'm not real sure why you can't get that. This is a thread about FACEBOOK ads.

More credence to what they see on facebook? Are you mad? Facebook has to be the greatest supplier of fake news ever conceived.

Yes, he's mad.

 

[Seawytch]

Sorry, I'm still waiting on you to prove it wasn't Russia.

Not my job.

You don't have a case. You know you don't have a case. Suck it up, buttercup.

You are saying that Russia didn't do it. Prove that. Do you always go around making claims and then not prove it?

I'm telling you that you are not providing any evidence. Considering what your degree is in, that is kind of scary.

I've provide a 1,000 more evidence than you.

I'm simply using the "Trump supporter" discussion technique, where you have to prove a negative in the argument. You have to prove Russia didn't do it, and as of yet you haven't shown a shred of evidence.

I'm not a Trump supporter. Try again.

No, just a Clinton hater that believed the Russian propaganda.

 

[Disir]

Not my job.

You don't have a case. You know you don't have a case. Suck it up, buttercup.

You are saying that Russia didn't do it. Prove that. Do you always go around making claims and then not prove it?

I'm telling you that you are not providing any evidence. Considering what your degree is in, that is kind of scary.

I've provide a 1,000 more evidence than you.

I'm simply using the "Trump supporter" discussion technique, where you have to prove a negative in the argument. You have to prove Russia didn't do it, and as of yet you haven't shown a shred of evidence.

I'm not a Trump supporter. Try again.

No, just a Clinton hater that believed the Russian propaganda.

She has a track record that predated the run. She sucked all by herself.

 

[GreenBean]

I think some may have been facts regarding Socialist Bernie Sanders' substantiated claims that the election was rigged.

Black Lawmakers Pressure Facebook Over Racially Divisive Russian Ads

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...iq-4indjje49gV8cTZajnK8scieFl6In2UpJcelhDPbzg

 

[Lewdog]

They didn't have to start it, but spreading it all over the net certainly made a difference. Would you vote for someone that you thought was running a pedophile ring?

Dude, Were the people that believed pizzagate ever, ever, ever going to vote for a Democrat? Ever? Nope. In fact, most people saw it on the Alex Jones site. Do the people that frequent the Alex Jones site vote for Democrats?

Non-sequitur.

It doesn't matter if a person is a democrat or a republican. This has to do mostly with people who were on the fence in deciding who they would vote for. Do you think they would vote for someone that is being portrayed as leading a pedophile sex ring? This story wasn't JUST on Info Wars. Hell, this thread is about ads on Facebook... I would think I shouldn't even have to point this out.

You have as of yet to prove that Russia was involved in that story.

The fact that you don't have any evidence means you can play it anyway you want. And you don't have to back up your claims. How cool is that?

Again. How many conspiracy theorists vote for Democrats?

It was an ad on Facebook. People are supposed to give more credence to stories on Facebook than on Info Wars. I'm not real sure why you can't get that. This is a thread about FACEBOOK ads.

More credence to what they see on facebook? Are you mad? Facebook has to be the greatest supplier of fake news ever conceived.

People tend to believe stories shard by their friends.

 

[Freewill]

Dude, Were the people that believed pizzagate ever, ever, ever going to vote for a Democrat? Ever? Nope. In fact, most people saw it on the Alex Jones site. Do the people that frequent the Alex Jones site vote for Democrats?

Non-sequitur.

It doesn't matter if a person is a democrat or a republican. This has to do mostly with people who were on the fence in deciding who they would vote for. Do you think they would vote for someone that is being portrayed as leading a pedophile sex ring? This story wasn't JUST on Info Wars. Hell, this thread is about ads on Facebook... I would think I shouldn't even have to point this out.

You have as of yet to prove that Russia was involved in that story.

The fact that you don't have any evidence means you can play it anyway you want. And you don't have to back up your claims. How cool is that?

Again. How many conspiracy theorists vote for Democrats?

It was an ad on Facebook. People are supposed to give more credence to stories on Facebook than on Info Wars. I'm not real sure why you can't get that. This is a thread about FACEBOOK ads.

More credence to what they see on facebook? Are you mad? Facebook has to be the greatest supplier of fake news ever conceived.

People tend to believe stories shard by their friends.

In that case people tend to be stupid if they take anything read on facebook at face value.

 

[Freewill]

I think some may have been facts regarding Socialist Bernie Sanders' substantiated claims that the election was rigged.

Black Lawmakers Pressure Facebook Over Racially Divisive Russian Ads

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...iq-4indjje49gV8cTZajnK8scieFl6In2UpJcelhDPbzg

Does it not sound like it was Facebook and the Russians who were in collusion?

 

[Lewdog]

Non-sequitur.

It doesn't matter if a person is a democrat or a republican. This has to do mostly with people who were on the fence in deciding who they would vote for. Do you think they would vote for someone that is being portrayed as leading a pedophile sex ring? This story wasn't JUST on Info Wars. Hell, this thread is about ads on Facebook... I would think I shouldn't even have to point this out.

You have as of yet to prove that Russia was involved in that story.

The fact that you don't have any evidence means you can play it anyway you want. And you don't have to back up your claims. How cool is that?

Again. How many conspiracy theorists vote for Democrats?

It was an ad on Facebook. People are supposed to give more credence to stories on Facebook than on Info Wars. I'm not real sure why you can't get that. This is a thread about FACEBOOK ads.

More credence to what they see on facebook? Are you mad? Facebook has to be the greatest supplier of fake news ever conceived.

People tend to believe stories shard by their friends.

In that case people tend to be stupid if they take anything read on facebook at face value.

Sorry I can't take you seriously when you say you didn't hear about Pizzagate. I'm almost more worried about voters that are as non-informed as you, as those that believed the shit stories on Facebook.

 

[Disir]

 

[Freewill]

You have as of yet to prove that Russia was involved in that story.

The fact that you don't have any evidence means you can play it anyway you want. And you don't have to back up your claims. How cool is that?

Again. How many conspiracy theorists vote for Democrats?

It was an ad on Facebook. People are supposed to give more credence to stories on Facebook than on Info Wars. I'm not real sure why you can't get that. This is a thread about FACEBOOK ads.

More credence to what they see on facebook? Are you mad? Facebook has to be the greatest supplier of fake news ever conceived.

People tend to believe stories shard by their friends.

In that case people tend to be stupid if they take anything read on facebook at face value.

Sorry I can't take you seriously when you say you didn't hear about Pizzagate. I'm almost more worried about voters that are as non-informed as you, as those that believed the shit stories on Facebook.

Two things may be in play.

One, the pizzagate story was all over the news.

Two, I don't remember it because it was stupid then and is stupid now.