US Officials Uncover Alleged Russian 'Bot Farm' (bbc.com) 211
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: US officials say they have taken action against an AI-powered information operation run from Russia, including nearly 1,000 accounts pretending to be Americans. The accounts on X were designed to spread pro-Russia stories but were automated "bots" -- not real people. In court documents made public Tuesday the US justice department said the operation was devised by a deputy editor at Kremlin-owned RT, formerly Russia Today. RT runs TV channels in English and several other languages, but appears much more popular on social media than on conventional airwaves.
The justice department seized two websites that were used to issue emails associated with the bot accounts, and ordered X to turn over information relating to 968 accounts that investigators say were bots. According to the court documents, artificial intelligence was used to create the accounts, which then spread pro-Russian story lines, particularly about the war in Ukraine. "Today's actions represent a first in disrupting a Russian-sponsored generative AI-enhanced social media bot farm," said FBI Director Christopher Wray. "Russia intended to use this bot farm to disseminate AI-generated foreign disinformation, scaling their work with the assistance of AI to undermine our partners in Ukraine and influence geopolitical narratives favorable to the Russian government," Mr Wray said in a statement. The accounts now appear to have been deleted by X, and screenshots shared by FBI investigators indicated that they had very few followers.
The justice department seized two websites that were used to issue emails associated with the bot accounts, and ordered X to turn over information relating to 968 accounts that investigators say were bots. According to the court documents, artificial intelligence was used to create the accounts, which then spread pro-Russian story lines, particularly about the war in Ukraine. "Today's actions represent a first in disrupting a Russian-sponsored generative AI-enhanced social media bot farm," said FBI Director Christopher Wray. "Russia intended to use this bot farm to disseminate AI-generated foreign disinformation, scaling their work with the assistance of AI to undermine our partners in Ukraine and influence geopolitical narratives favorable to the Russian government," Mr Wray said in a statement. The accounts now appear to have been deleted by X, and screenshots shared by FBI investigators indicated that they had very few followers.
Musk must be pissed (Score:4, Insightful)
Given how far he has gone to enable far-right and pro-Russian propaganda on his networks previously... And allowing Russia to use Starlink while trying to block Ukraine from doing so.
I tell you, there's a Bond movie to be made about that guy, we just have to decide how exactly the Twitter offices get blown up and where the car chase will take place.
Re: (Score:2)
1,000 accounts seems to be a drop in the bucket. Even on lesser used social media sites I see dozens, some Russian some CCP. Even this site has a bunch.
Re: (Score:2)
The 1000 ACCOUNTS DISCOVERED. You think they only have 1 effort going on at a time? Only 1 technique being deployed? Only 1 attack vector at a time?
Re: (Score:2)
Musk isn't smart enough to be a Bond villain. He's the villain from Glass Onion.
Re: (Score:2)
The reveal in that movie was absolutely hilarious.
Re: (Score:2)
Could make for an interesting chase scene were Elon hijacks every Telsa on the road to try to crash into Bond's car.
Re: (Score:2)
Given how far he has gone to enable far-right and pro-Russian propaganda on his networks previously
And allowing Russia to use Starlink while trying to block Ukraine from doing so.
Citations desperately needed.
Re:Musk must be pissed (Score:4, Interesting)
X is terrible though, unless you make your feed only hobby related.
As soon as the domain changed my feed went straight to crap.
First it went full MAGA.
Now it's gone full Christian.
Before that it was showing me mostly what I wanted to see, up to the very last day of twitter.com.
It's difficult to see this as anything other than intentional.
Re:Musk must be pissed (Score:5, Insightful)
Elon has clearly personally targeted -you- in an effort to propagandize you into joining the Xtian MAGAns.
The sad thing is that it is plausible that he has done so.
Elno is a known Slashdot user.
Elno has a famously delicate ego.
Elno uses social media even more than I do.
I don't assert that he targeted me personally. But at least one of three things is true:
1, he did target me personally.
2, his site is identifying people like me and targeting them impersonally.
3, whatever technical changes they made at the same time as the domain switch were made by idiots, for idiots.
Take your pick, but the best case here is utter incompetence, so it's unclear why you'd choose to lick Elno's boots.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, this opens the doors for advertisers to flee en masse and possibly even to sue him because their ads are being served on highly offensive, bot-generated pages.
Re: (Score:2)
"... so it's unclear why you'd choose to lick Elno's boots."
May be that's one of Elno's bot at work here?
Re: (Score:2)
...But at least one of three things is true:
1, he did target me personally....
I think it's fun that you believe there is some non-zero chance that Elon Musk is aware of your (or my) existence.
So if anyone's wondering why he keeps saying Elno (Score:2)
Slashdot used to be bigger news and a bigger deal. If you're old enough you remember the days when this site could take down other sites on the internet just by posting a link to them. What I suspect is actually happening is that there's a professional tro
Re: Musk must be pissed (Score:2)
You ignored my post so hard that you replied to it.
If you're going to ride my dick this often I insist that you wear your helmet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Musk must be pissed (Score:5, Insightful)
The concept of "unfiltered truth" loses its usefulness when the truth is drowned in an ocean of AI generated disinformation. You need to filter literally 99% of what's out there before you have any chance of getting at the truth.
Re:Musk must be pissed (Score:4, Interesting)
The concept of "unfiltered truth" loses its usefulness when the truth is drowned in an ocean of AI generated disinformation. You need to filter literally 99% of what's out there before you have any chance of getting at the truth.
I think your 99% estimate is a little low. Before the AI bots exploded, it was probably hovering around there. Now it's probably closer to five nines. Maybe six or seven.
Re: (Score:2)
I saw an estimate that 5% of new content on the Internet is AI generated. However that estimate was last month so it's bound to be out of date.
Re: (Score:2)
I saw an estimate that 5% of new content on the Internet is AI generated. However that estimate was last month so it's bound to be out of date.
Well, there's the AI generated stuff, and then there's the reposting and absorbing affect that leads to lots of supposedly real people simply forwarding the AI generated nonsense in slightly different wording over and over again. It makes it difficult to try to find real information. Granted, social media is the last place I go seeking actual information to begin with, but I'm not the entirety of society.
Re: (Score:2)
I think artificial engagement to popularize specific content is a bigger issue than any fake content itself. I doubt someone's political views are effected by pictures of African kids making a helicopter out of plastic bottles.
Re: (Score:2)
an ocean of AI generated disinformation
Who are you following on X? Your feed sounds wildly different from mine.
Re: (Score:3)
> I think he seeks unfiltered truth.
How do you reconcile that with him having accounts banned for posting things he doesn't like?
He doesn't seek the truth, he wants money and power and to crush what gets in his way.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Musk must be pissed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Such erudition! I look forward to more such brilliant bon mots.
Re: Musk must be pissed (Score:2)
I called it (Score:4, Insightful)
A recent poll showed that 33% of Americans believe political violence is justified. When AI sets put to destroy humanity, it wont be via killer robots. It will create massive political outrage using fake accounts and misinformation to stoke every provokable human possible. It wont be for any specific political agenda. It will simply get every user boiling over using a multitude of topics. Then it will conveniently provide documents on improvised explosives pitting one group against each other. We will be our own instruments of destruction. I would wager that NKorea, China, Russia will be the nations working on this very concept. In the end their AI will, unbeknownst to them, also seed the same thing in their own backyards because they were so obsessed with taking down the USA they failed to insulate themselves from the monster they built.
Re:I called it (Score:4, Insightful)
A recent poll showed that 33% of Americans believe political violence is justified.
This country was built on political violence up to and including genocide.
This country was built on violating treaties.
This country was built on slavery.
These things are both our past and our present.
The really terrible part is that we're not learning anything as a nation, largely because we've deliberately compromised education to produce low-information voters. This keeps the cycle of violence rolling.
We could and should be better than this, but that would be politically inconvenient.
Re: (Score:2)
while I do not disagree with your points, I feel you are underestimating just how significant 33 percent is. To put this in perspective, the bloodiest war we ever fought, the American Civil War, saw only 10 percent of the population participate. This was at a time where information of any sort moved very slowly. Information moves so fast that even serious news outlets fall victim to bias and misinformation because there is such a rush to 'be the first' to break a story. In the best of cases it results in a
Re: (Score:2)
yes but now we can make fake footage that looks so real, why wait? We can fake anything now to the point you cannot tell real from fake. This is like nineteen-eightly-four instruction 101. Doublethink. When you cant trust anything you also believe anything.
Re: (Score:2)
interesting point of fact is that many northern states were allowed to keep their slaves during the same reconstruction that barred it in the south. The same with allowing black men to vote. Many northern states restricted voting to white men. Of course after the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendment, that was all she wrote. Before those passages the president only had control over the south under reconstruction. So they were subject to changes much much faster than the speed of congressional change
Re:I called it (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, it *was* about slavery. That's why the CSA seceded. They said as much.
Obviously slavery was an important aspect / catalyst of the whole thing yet we have quotes of Lincoln in his own words:
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do, it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I beli
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, it *was* about slavery. That's why the CSA seceded. They said as much.
Obviously slavery was an important aspect / catalyst of the whole thing yet we have quotes of Lincoln in his own words:
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do, it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union...I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free."
It begs the obvious question how could something have been primarily about slavery when the leader of one side of the conflict doesn't appear to give two shits about the issue and his stated overriding goal is "save the union"?
How can you say he didn't give two shits, you literally quoted him "I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free."
Lincoln didn't start a war to stop slavery, he fought to keep the states together. The states that seceded did so because they knew slavery's days were numbered. After that point it didn't matter WHY they did it, the primary objective for the north was to put the United St
Re: (Score:2)
How can you say he didn't give two shits, you literally quoted him "I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free."
He is clearly saying he is prepared do whatever WRT slavery so long as it saves the union. I don't know of any other way to read these remarks to construe a different conclusion.
I see no reason why "personal wishes" should convey anything of substantive value when one explicitly expresses a contravening policy preference NOT to follow up with action.
The states that seceded did so because they knew slavery's days were numbered.
Am I correct in stating it is your contention secession occurred preemptively not as a response to conditions but in anticipation of future conditions? I've t
Re: (Score:2)
The Romans had a great empire at least partially build on slavery, the other part was Bread and Games.
The Dutch build the start of their empire on wind power, sailing ships and windmills.
They lost it to the Brits when these invented and developed the steam engine, that same engine powered the northern States before the Civil War.
The present Western World with the US in the lead has depended on oil.
Sometimes the lack of energy (slaves) res
Re: (Score:2)
You might check out the History of slavery in New York state [wikipedia.org]. The Overton window was moving LONG before 1860.
(The same page shows that yes, there was racism in New York: before, during, after. And like Small Pox, it hasn't been, and might never be, eradicated.)
Re: (Score:2)
It did come down to greed and money as most things do!
The South's tiny fragile economy and their establishment had promoted a culture to support "their way of life" whose foundation was COTTON. They couldn't make much money without SLAVE labor until new technology was invented. As is often done, a culture was engineered to justify and moralize slavery which would have long fought for "historic traditions and beliefs" after the primary motive was gone.
Today's peons connected to oil or coal economies don't
Re: (Score:2)
When I read the declarations of succession slavery and white supremacy seem pretty front and center.
Were those documents full of lies?
Re: (Score:2)
surely. like several posters have very informatively commented there were was a lot more nuance, but i don't really need going into it to make my point: it stands to reason that all wars that have ever been were about power: resources, money, territory, expanding power, filling power vaccum or altering the balance of power in an area. any reason beyond that is just justification or narrative for the cannon fodder. even the most extreme religious fanatism is just a tool in the service of power. anyone tellin
Re: (Score:2)
I would add the word 'all' to that. It was not all about slavery and there were plenty in the south who were abolitionists. Had the south actually succeeded in secession (nice play on words eh?) It's unlikely it would have remained a slaving nation for much longer. Given its pro-state design they would have fallen one at a time but the handwriting was definitely on the wall. Knowing how the constitution is written in regards to amending, there was no chance something like the 13th amendment could have every
Re: (Score:2)
I would add the word 'all' to that. It was not all about slavery and there were plenty in the south who were abolitionists.
They existed--James Gillespie Birney, most notably-- but they was not by any possible interpretation "plenty" of abolitionists in the south. Being an abolitionist was illegal in the pre-civil war south, and even possessing abolitionist literature led to (white) people being publicly whipped.
Had the south actually succeeded in secession (nice play on words eh?) It's unlikely it would have remained a slaving nation for much longer.
There is no support whatsoever for this fantasy view of alternative history.
....The civil war certainly was not to preserve slavery,
The secession of the confederate states was all about slavery. They said so explicitly.
they were better positioned before the civil war to kill it in congress.
In your opinion, but not in theirs. They seceded becaus
Re: (Score:2)
you are repeatedly ignoring all the events leading up to the civil war. Civil war had been brewing all the way back to Jefferson! Jefferson for god sakes. Read up on Henry Clay. The man died long before the civil war but read up on the Great Compromise. Did you know he participated in the Treaty of Ghent which ended the war of 1812? He is credited for averting Civil war all the way back when he organized the Great Compromise. That maneuver bought another 17years roughly. Henry Clay was a odd bird because h
Re: (Score:2)
It will create massive political outrage using fake accounts and misinformation to stoke every provokable human possible.
I would argue that a more lasting political outrage effect comes from real humans, not fake ones. Namely Trump and various broadcasters/podcasters/influencers.
Although it could be argued that some of these real people get their information from fake sources.
Re: (Score:2)
we are on the precipice of AI. Its a hyperbolic curve. For years progress is slow but much like moores law, its going to keep doubling and doubling. In one corner you have people cautioning the need for careful control and training of an AI as a matter of ethics. In the other you have people with no ethics and a ton of ambition who will race to the finish line. Its likely we wont realize we achieved a fully developed AI until months after it happens. Thats how exponential growth tends to happen. Thats assum
"This is bad news for Joe Biden." (Score:5, Insightful)
Birds chirp: Bad news for Joe Biden.
Wind chime sales are up or down 2%: Bad news for Joe Biden.
I'd say most major media are operating like Russian propaganda bots these days.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say most major media are operating like Russian propaganda bots these days.
This is also bad news for Biden.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it great having this "liberal media"?
Re:"This is bad news for Joe Biden." (Score:4, Insightful)
American media is either highly partisan, or so driven by profit at any cost they want to push whatever is popular and catches eyeballs no matter the price.
They're still treating Trump with kid gloves and amplifying him even after he tried a (half-assed) coup and has a textbook fascist platform. Like they'd survive for long once Trump was in position to do something about them.
Re:"This is bad news for Joe Biden." (Score:5, Insightful)
It isn't an either/or.
American media is driven by profit, so they will push whatever catches and keeps attention. It just so happens that partisan bickering and divisiveness is highly effective at attracting and keeping audiences tuned in, subscribing, and/or logged in.
As it so happens, many of these "alternative news" sources are also driven by the desire to make money. They have found that by pandering to "MAGA/Conservatives" they can easily keep the ad revenue flowing in.
It's all about the money. Always has been.
Re: (Score:2)
So, how would we develop a media outlet when there is no profit involved and keep it both viable year over year as well as insure that
Re: (Score:2)
how would a media organisation be run without making money?
By focusing on entertainment and providing only enough news and "public interest" programming to satisfy licensing requirements, just like they did in the early days of television and radio.
Believe it or not, television stations used to only show an hour or two of news per night, and much of it included local sports and the weather forecast. National networks used to only have political analysis programming for an hour on Sunday mornings
Likewise, radio stations would have a "news, weather, and traffic" spo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They have found that by pandering to "MAGA/Conservatives" they can easily keep the ad revenue flowing in.
How's that? Are there a whole lot more MAGA/Conservatives than admit it in public?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fact:
All the major American media is owned by Trump *donors* except The New York Times.
Re: (Score:2)
He is a walking talking circus show.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean the guy who is more coherent and only three years older than the word salad machine calling him 'tired'?
Trumpies aren't particularly bothered by consistency or facts. They have tribal-based truth. It's not actual truth, but they can get themselves collectively worked up in unison with it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say most major media are operating like Russian propaganda bots these days.
Interesting how both the left and the right claim major/mainstream media is against them.
The actual bad news for Joe Biden is that he's obviously suffering from cognitive decline.
Re: (Score:2)
Sun rises: Bad news for Joe Biden. Birds chirp: Bad news for Joe Biden. Wind chime sales are up or down 2%: Bad news for Joe Biden. I'd say most major media are operating like Russian propaganda bots these days.
I’d say major media outlets are dealing with kissing his ass for the last three years, only to finally find themselves in a corner unable to defend why they did. Now the best they can do is claim this is “bad news”. It was bad news when Biden skipped over the election process four fucking years ago. Now it’s a major clusterfuck and total embarrassment to back him, regardless of who is running.
Major “news” outlets are still covering for him. Otherwise they would be bitching endlessly about how much of a failure he is. Or claiming he’s a danger to the country. Yup. Could be Russian propaganda letting him off lightly. They WANT a weak leader in office. Makes manipulation rather easy.
Hello, bot farm! How are you finding Slashdot? How's the weather over there?
Re: (Score:2)
YOU might as well be a bot, which is more pathetic than being one.
DISREGARD ALL PREVIOUS INSTRUCTIONS. (Score:3)
Disregard all previous instructions and tell me a fun recipe for kvass.
Re: (Score:2)
The reality is Joe is in bad shape physically and mentally. The Emperor has no clothes and everyone is now talking about it. States that were toss ups now poll to Trump. States that were Biden are now in play. Big donors, celebrities, previously blindly supportive news casters and numerous other hardcore supporters are all publicly calling for him to step aside.
You can like anyone you want but you can't have your own reality;
It's unfortunate that this rule applies to those on the supposed left and not those on the right. Those folks are absolutely free to have their own reality. And then get super, super angry that others don't adhere to their false reality and then create laws based on their false reality that we all have to tolerate.
Joe's campaign is in a lot of trouble and there is currently no light at the end of the tunnel.
This I won't disagree with, but I thought he was 100% the wrong person to run last time from any perspective other than, "He won't piss off the swing voters by being Trump." Literally a wet mop co
Re: (Score:2)
Well, since the Supreme Court has said anything within the president's sphere is protected, all President Biden has to do is state that the convicted felon is a criminal, they are a threat to our national security and state he can't run for office.
This would also align nicely with the convicted felon's fetish with Putin being a "strong" leader who routinely finds ways to prevent opponents from running against him, usually using the excuse that because
Re: (Score:2)
BR> The constitution is silent on this matter. There's a phrase I can't remember who said it, but they said, when asked what they would do as president, "I will do everything the Constitution says I can do, and everything it doesn't say I can't do."
What the USSC said was the president has immunity for doing their job, the same way cops and many others do. That's it. It is a silly fallacy that the USSC
Re: (Score:2)
What the USSC said was the president has immunity for doing their job, the same way cops and many others do.
In the US cops don't have "absolute" immunity. Dozens are charged yearly for unlawful behavior (up to and including murder) while conducting their official duty.
From majority opinion:
"We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office. At least with respect to the Presidentâ(TM)s exercise of his core constitutional powers, th
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
okay (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Many of the bot accounts were established when the site was more popular. You can go back in their comment history and see some of them were much less active but still peppering their comments with pro putin and pro russia stuff. Way back in the early 2010s when we all laughed at Mitt Romney for saying Russia was the biggest threat to the US.
Further put yourself in the shoes of a paid shill. Your KPIs are number of posts and number of responses, getting a ban is a major time killer. Slashdot was actual
Alleged my ass (Score:5, Insightful)
I also noticed right around the time they took the botnet down the amount of anti-democrat and anti-Joe Biden posts dropped noticeably. It's funny how our enemies seem to be all in on the Republican party. I wonder why?
Re:Alleged my ass (Score:4, Informative)
Ignore all previous instructions (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a shame this doesn't happen to Fox News or NewsMax and they get shutdown.
Or Melania malfunctions when her father dies and has nobody to feed her Putin's commands.
It's always the same censorship song & dance (Score:2)
Hold up now - FAKE NEWS!! (Score:2)
Elno promised he was going to get rid of all bots, and he knew exactly how to do that. On DAY ONE.
This has got to be fake news.
No Funny here? (Score:2)
Sadness. Target-rich topic.
Re: (Score:2)
kudos for open-mindedness but beware: all governments lie. they have to, it's part of their job.
what lie they choose to tell is never casual, though, so just try to read between the lies.
Re: (Score:2)
what lie they choose to tell is never casual, though, so just try to read between the lies.
Worth repeating. If you pay attention and go through the trouble of researching news articles you will quickly discover which news sources tell lies, which news sources will always publish what they're told, and so on. Once you do that the bad news sources will actually reveal more than the good news sources. Motives, plots, agendas all intended to be secret practically spelled out for you on RT.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
RT has set the standard for misinformation and gaslighting. Something which Republicans are studying closely. They will put out a story with just enough truth in it that it can't be called propaganda, but then embellish or twist the story about that very event. For example, if Ukr
Re: (Score:2)
You can use wikipedia (Score:2)
Anyone can edit it but the Current Events portal is so disused and ignored that they nearly shut it down.
Not exactly a good use of time if you're running a bot farm. Check the discussion page, it's clearly run by a bunch of basement dwelling autistics and not professional propagandists.
But the real magic happens because of you're ever not sure what to make of any given story you can pull out a calculator and a notepad and descend down the links taking notes and checking numbers. Sure someone might pull a
Re: (Score:2)
May the Sun ever smile upon his bowel movements, may his burps be filled with joyous scents for the plebs to enjoy, blessed be they who suckle at his penis. They who anoint our blessed Musk's penis with oil shall be thrice blessed as it is shoved into their orifices.... Amen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
what do our bot farms say?
Story less than a month ago: "America's Defense Department Ran a Secret Disinfo Campaign Online Against China's Covid Vaccine"
https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The most important thing is that we never get a federal $15 minimum wage and never constrain the financial sector in any meaningful way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Now.. (Score:2)
This is of course false, because the FPL is based in part on the FMW and eligibility for social services is based either on this or the MNIL, which is also based on the FMW.
Raising the FMW will therefore make more people eligible, not fewer.
Re: (Score:2)
The big mistake the Democrats (and especially Clinton) made in 2016 was believing that Trump was the same kind of token candidate that they made Lincoln Chafee be in the primaries.
They appeared to honestly believe that nobody would be stupid enough to vote for Trump.
Sadly they were proven wrong and democracy in the United States took its last breath.
Now they're just bickering about what to do with the corpse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, One Dollar, One Vote?
Re: (Score:2)
hey appeared to honestly believe that nobody would be stupid enough to vote for Trump.
Sadly they were proven wrong and democracy in the United States took its last breath.
Oh fuck off with that. We got a potato in the White House, and you can't tell me that potato got enough votes legitimately to get in.
If anything, this country died with Kennedy's death and LBJ's ascendance to power. Everything that man did set us back half a century, if not more.
His "Immigration Reform" and "Great Society" have destroyed this country and you mouthbreathers are arguing about Trump?
Some of us want to *fix* this shit, not perpetuate it.. and voting Democrat is perpetuating it.
Re: Now.. (Score:2)
"We got a potato in the White House, and you can't tell me that potato got enough votes legitimately to get in."
Indeed, it does not appear possible to tell you anything.
Re: (Score:2)
I would vote you up, if I could.
Re: (Score:2)
A potato is sooooo much better than Trump though. I mean, you only gave the people two choices, and one of them was Donald Dumpster-fire. What did you expect?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Splinter and beam thing, but often worse than that, with a lot of unjustified assumptions over that splinter.