• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pro-Hillary Trolls Shut Down Pro-Bernie Sanders Facebook Groups

No, Redress, I attacked exactly what you said. You think you never claimed that Surrealistik was failing to fact-check his OP? Well then either your post#5 was a complete misrepresentation your own views or else you have temporary memory loss. To wit, the Snopes article that you linked to discussed literally everything Surrealistik mentioned, and Surrealistik openly and carefully stated what was and wasn't conjecture.

So, no, Redress, I directly refuted and attacked your nonsense argument.

So you can show where I commented on bros4hillary? Advice: read what people actually write, you might not look nearly so silly.
 
Here's another fact....


"..On 26 April 2016, digital and social media manager for the Sanders campaign Aiden King addressed the rumors on the campaign's official Slack channel:

All of the groups are back up and it wasn't just Bernie groups.

Facebook hasn't released a public statement but they had a bug and it closed a ton of facebook groups. Our supporters are just more vocal so the internet blew up with "Bernie groups being shut down" rather than "Facebook groups are being shut down."​

King claimed a number of groups were affected by a Facebook glitch, not just pro-Sanders groups...".

Bernie Sanders Facebook Groups Controversy : snopes.com

First off, I explicitly stated in the post that you're now responding to that we have no idea what the full range of the Facebook glitches. You're just re-repeating what Redress said. You know what that doesn't abrogate or change? That there was, for a fact, a Hillary Clinton supporter admitted to (and was encouraged by other Clinton supporters) to attack Sanders pages.

That means the best case outcome that you're looking for right now is that this individual didn't take down all of the Sanders Facebook pages. And you think this is what, a good thing?
 
First off, I explicitly stated in the post that you're now responding to that we have no idea what the full range of the Facebook glitches. You're just re-repeating what Redress said. You know what that doesn't abrogate or change? That there was, for a fact, a Hillary Clinton supporter admitted to (and was encouraged by other Clinton supporters) to attack Sanders pages.

That means the best case outcome that you're looking for right now is that this individual didn't take down all of the Sanders Facebook pages. And you think this is what, a good thing?
Well, Sander's social media manager, Aiden King seemed to know. Are you suggesting that he doesn't have credibility?

The only official FB statement that I saw was in regard to the shutdown of a pro-Bernie group for threatening violence.
 
It wasn't Hillary supporters shutting down Bernie sites. It was bumblebees. I have a video about that someplace, but I can't find it right now. You will just have to take my word for it.
 
So you can show where I commented on bros4hillary? Advice: read what people actually write, you might not look nearly so silly.

Yeah, I can and have done so now twice. I don't see a reason in summarizing this for you a second time, so let's quote copy and paste the original sources, all bolded sections are my own:

It is possible, albeit unknown that these tactics may be connected to trolls employed by Hillary's SuperPAC Correct the Record, per their 1 million dollar paid trolling initiative launched on April 21st

This is what you said in response:

Oddly, Sanders campaign disagrees with you. Here is what social media manager for the Sanders campaign Aiden King had to say about it:

[SNOPES QUOTE]

Amazing what you can find out if you take the 2 minutes to actually check your facts...

This is what the Snopes article actually said in addition to your cherrypicked statement (in fact, literally directly above what you quoted, and the part that's further above it discusses Hillary Clinton's super PAC, the other part of the OP):

Bros4Hillary's political director told Heavy.comthat the group was not responsible overall:

“Bros4Hillary was created as a way to provide a positive and supportive community for supporters of Hillary Clinton to gather, and as a direct response to the hateful and divisive rhetoric used by other campaigns during this election cycle,” he said. “We have not and do not approve of or condone harmful or offensive rhetoric or harassing behavior targeting supporters of any other candidate in the race…”​

He then addressed specifically what happened on Monday.

“Last night, a former member … decided to engage in harassing behavior toward Facebook groups of Bernie Sanders and posted about it in the B4H Facebook group,” he said. “…This was not promoted or supported by the leadership of B4H… We removed the offending posts and member as soon as possible.”​

To wit: Surrealistik linked to an article that discussed how Clinton supporters shut down Sanders webpages, and discussed the possibility of it being related to the Correct the Record super PAC. You accuse him of not checking his facts, and to prove him wrong you link to something which confirms that a Clinton supporter admitted to being at least partially involved in shutting down Sanders Facebook pages and which discusses allegations that Hillary Clinton's super PAC may possibly have been involved.

I'll repeat the implicit question: What did Surrealistik fail to fact-check?
 
Well, Sander's social media manager, Aiden King seemed to know. Are you suggesting that he doesn't have credibility?

I'm suggesting that:

1.) A Hillary Clinton supporter has admitted to being partially involved, and even if a glitch took out the rest of them, he's not absolved of guilt.

2.) Surrealistik has not said a single incorrect thing on this thread.


Also, you're just repeating yourself now, which is forcing me to repeat myself. I don't feel like this is a particularly difficult issue to grapple with.
 
I'm suggesting that:

1.) A Hillary Clinton supporter has admitted to being partially involved, and even if a glitch took out the rest of them, he's not absolved of guilt.

2.) Surrealistik has not said a single incorrect thing on this thread.
His smarmy OP was based on a false rumor. Anyway, how do you know it wasn't a Trump operative named Roger Stone pretending to be a Clinton supporter?

"..Roger Stone is a longtime Trump ally, who most recently made headlines by threatening violence against any GOP delegates who defy the Donald’s will. Stone got his start in politics working for Richard Nixon’s 1972 reelection campaign. One of the many nefarious tactics that campaign employed was to divide Democrats against each other, by impersonating one of the party’s campaigns while attacking others...'

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/04/did-bros4hillary-attack-sanders-fb-pages.html



Also, you're just repeating yourself now, which is forcing me to repeat myself. I don't feel like this is a particularly difficult issue to grapple with.

If it seems like repetition, it's probably because you keep trying to ignore the statements made by Sander's digital media manager, Aiden King.
 
His smarmy OP was based on a false rumor.

This conversation apparently isn't taking place in the same universe. We have documentation that a person who was a part of a known pro-Hillary Clinton Facebook group, where he admitted to making false accusations against Sanders pages to get them shut down, he was egged on by other Clinton supporters, and your response is that pointing this out is "smarmy" and a "false rumor"? Huh.

You may need to look up the definition of "false" and "rumor" as you appear not to understand the correct use of either of those words.


Anyway, how do you know it wasn't a Trump operative named Roger Stone pretending to be a Clinton supporter?

Who's being conspiratorial now?
 
Yeah, I can and have done so now twice. I don't see a reason in summarizing this for you a second time, so let's quote copy and paste the original sources, all bolded sections are my own:



This is what you said in response:



This is what the Snopes article actually said in addition to your cherrypicked statement (in fact, literally directly above what you quoted, and the part that's further above it discusses Hillary Clinton's super PAC, the other part of the OP):



To wit: Surrealistik linked to an article that discussed how Clinton supporters shut down Sanders webpages, and discussed the possibility of it being related to the Correct the Record super PAC. You accuse him of not checking his facts, and to prove him wrong you link to something which confirms that a Clinton supporter admitted to being at least partially involved in shutting down Sanders Facebook pages and which discusses allegations that Hillary Clinton's super PAC may possibly have been involved.

I'll repeat the implicit question: What did Surrealistik fail to fact-check?

So you in fact cannot show where I commented on them. Good job, keep on failing.
 
This conversation apparently isn't taking place in the same universe. We have documentation that a person who was a part of a known pro-Hillary Clinton Facebook group, where he admitted to making false accusations against Sanders pages to get them shut down, he was egged on by other Clinton supporters, and your response is that pointing this out is "smarmy" and a "false rumor"? Huh.

You may need to look up the definition of "false" and "rumor" as you appear not to understand the correct use of either of those words.

Who's being conspiratorial now?

We also have a direct quote from Sanders digital media manager saying that it wasn't just pro-Sanders Facebook pages that went down. He seemed pretty sure...so how did he know it was a glitch?

You really have nothing but hearsay and innuendo. For all you know it could've just been another dirty trick by Roger Stone....or perhaps even David Bossie. They're both protégé's of the dirty tricksters Lee Atwater and David Segretti. Filthy, indeed.
 
We also have a direct quote from Sanders digital media manager saying that it wasn't just pro-Sanders Facebook pages that went down. He seemed pretty sure...so how did he know it was a glitch?

You really have nothing but hearsay and innuendo. For all you know it could've just been another dirty trick by Roger Stone....or perhaps even David Bossie. They're both protégé's of the dirty tricksters Lee Atwater and David Segretti. Filthy, indeed.

Yes, indeed, how _did_ Aiden King _know_ it was a glitch? His statement is at this point completely unverified, so at this point it is clearly nothing more than a diplomatic statement with an apparent attempt to prevent escalation of hostilities and retribution that would almost surely result in negative outcomes.

As for your second 'point', laughable, and the height of irony, which essentially amounts to falsely accusing me of fomenting rumour and conspiracy theory then trying to substantiate your dismissal with a _real_ conspiracy theory. See, the difference between my narrative and yours is that mine actually features evidence; yours lacks it entirely. The video I linked, in the likely event you have not bothered to watch it, goes into detail about the Clinton supporter who was caught, and throughout the entirety of this examination, there is nothing to suggest he is linked to the Republicans or Trump, and everything that points to him being at best a zealous Hillarite, or at worst, a Correct The Record Clinton SuperPAC operative.

So you in fact cannot show where I commented on them. Good job, keep on failing.

Actually it's pretty evident that FieldTheorist has done an admirable job debunking your apparently willful disingenuity, which is why I've had so little to say up until this point.

Your non-argument essentially amounts to Aiden King's diplomatic and transparent attempt at a hostilities diffusal as some kind of authoritative assessment of the situation despite its complete lack of proof or verification, which is, like virtually every other one posted by your fellow Hillary supporters in this thread, hilariously ironic and steeped in disingenuity, particularly in light of your inane accusations that I have not fact checked.

Again, what is known is that porn (including child porn in some cases) and other TOS violating material were systemically posted to these Bernie groups and that at least one Clinton supporter was caught and screencapped bragging about having taken down a group while other Clinton supporters like yourself not only celebrated these outcomes, but encouraged him to do further attacks; all this to the backdrop of a paid and organized trolling effort by a notorious Clinton SuperPAC, which the supporter in question liked and appears affiliated with. Though I am not making the assertion that he _is_ factually connected with this SuperPAC and its trolling campaign, it seems rather likely to me.

Who needs stinkin' facts? This is politics, where we make **** up and run with it! :lol:

The hilarious irony of mocking someone for lacking facts that actually exist while simultaneously taking Redress at face value and not actually verifying anything yourself despite an abundance of links in the OP is certainly not lost on me.
 
Last edited:
While FacebookGate rages, Bernie Sanders continues to ramp down his campaign rhetoric and layoff campaign staff. Aside from the interesting whodunit of this controversy, I'm wondering how it materially affected the recent primary results, including in New York. Punish violators if laws were broken. No one on this thread has argued otherwise from what I can tell. And no one has shown any evidence of law breaking either; when they do FacebookGate may count for something beyond another social media spat.
 
given the demographics, one would assume Goofy Bernie has plenty of followers who could ably retaliate against the lying bitch's tactics

Retaliation is why the country is so divided.
 
Yes, indeed, how _did_ Aiden King _know_ it was a glitch? His statement is at this point completely unverified, so at this point it is clearly nothing more than a diplomatic statement with an apparent attempt to prevent escalation of hostilities and retribution that would almost surely result in negative outcomes.
You're right, a guy named Casey Champagne claimed responsibility. All I can say is...he looks like a Bronie.



As for your second 'point', laughable, and the height of irony, which essentially amounts to falsely accusing me of fomenting rumour and conspiracy theory then trying to substantiate your dismissal with a _real_ conspiracy theory. See, the difference between my narrative and yours is that mine actually features evidence; yours lacks it entirely. The video I linked, in the likely event you have not bothered to watch it, goes into detail about the Clinton supporter who was caught, and throughout the entirety of this examination, there is nothing to suggest he is linked to the Republicans or Trump, and everything that points to him being at best a zealous Hillarite, or at worst, a Correct The Record Clinton SuperPAC operative.

"Politics is a blood sport" - Roger Stone.
 
Last edited:
While FacebookGate rages, Bernie Sanders continues to ramp down his campaign rhetoric and layoff campaign staff. Aside from the interesting whodunit of this controversy, I'm wondering how it materially affected the recent primary results, including in New York. Punish violators if laws were broken. No one on this thread has argued otherwise from what I can tell. And no one has shown any evidence of law breaking either; when they do FacebookGate may count for something beyond another social media spat.

I don't think it made a bit of difference. Independents, which is probably what most Sanders supporters are, couldn't vote in the NY primaries unless they were registered democrats. And too, this happened on Tuesday and most people didn't hear about it until two days later...if at all.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1-EFPqrT24

Clinton Trolls Shut Down Pro-Bernie Sanders Facebook Groups

It is possible, albeit unknown that these tactics may be connected to trolls employed by Hillary's SuperPAC Correct the Record, per their 1 million dollar paid trolling initiative launched on April 21st:

Pro-Clinton Super PAC Spending $1 Million Hiring Online Trolls

In summary, the already filthy tactics predominantly employed by one side of the Dem nomination race have gotten even filthier.

Nothing is beneath HRC, after all she started the Birther movement about Obama.
 
I don't think it made a bit of difference. Independents, which is probably what most Sanders supporters are, couldn't vote in the NY primaries unless they were registered democrats. And too, this happened on Tuesday and most people didn't hear about it until two days later...if at all.
I agree. If FacebookGate was a coordinated attack by the Clinton campaign, it's timing and negligable impact on the primary elections made it a waste of time and effort.
 
the terror in their eyes as their precious establishment crumbles, once mighty shills reduced to rage on the internet, priceless.
 
You're right, a guy named Casey Champagne claimed responsibility. All I can say is...he looks like a Bronie.

Wow, that's just so sad. You're so utterly, flatly wrong that you can't even deny the evidence anymore, but rather than just cede the obvious fact of the matter like an adult, you attempt to say that "He looks like a Bernie Bro, bro!"

Really? So a guy who is a part of "BrosForHillary" and actually behaves the way that Hillary attempted to hound (and wildly unsuccessfully) Bernie over his so-called "sexist supporters" for doing, and this guy allegedly (we know at least that he did it or some of them) posts pornography on Facebook to remove pro-Sanders Facebook pages... And you try to link this back to BernieBros?


That is such a level of cognitive dissonance, such a stunning display of motivated reasoning, and so pathologically illogical, you've defeated yourself. Top marks, Moot, top marks.
 
I agree. If FacebookGate was a coordinated attack by the Clinton campaign, it's timing and negligable impact on the primary elections made it a waste of time and effort.

I heard on NPR today that "Correct the Record" was formed to counter the attacks against Clinton by Bernie supporters.

But I don't think this was a coordinated effort, either. Getting a few "likes" on a FB page seems to be the only connection.
 
Nothing is beneath HRC, after all she started the Birther movement about Obama.

Let's keep it real... That's sadly just a fact. I keep on giving Hillary more credit than she deserves by forgetting this. Of course, she's double-dipping with this BernieBros bull****, because eight years ago it was the "Obama boys." Of course, it's important to keep up the narrative that the only reason anyone would be against her is because they're either sexist men, or horny women who want to find boys at political rallies. Oh, the irony-impairment.
 
Wow, that's just so sad. You're so utterly, flatly wrong that you can't even deny the evidence anymore, but rather than just cede the obvious fact of the matter like an adult, you attempt to say that "He looks like a Bernie Bro, bro!"

Really? So a guy who is a part of "BrosForHillary" and actually behaves the way that Hillary attempted to hound (and wildly unsuccessfully) Bernie over his so-called "sexist supporters" for doing, and this guy allegedly (we know at least that he did it or some of them) posts pornography on Facebook to remove pro-Sanders Facebook pages... And you try to link this back to BernieBros?


That is such a level of cognitive dissonance, such a stunning display of motivated reasoning, and so pathologically illogical, you've defeated yourself. Top marks, Moot, top marks.


Wrong. I said the guy looks like a "Bronie" not a "BernieBro". Cognitive dissonance, indeed.
 
Wrong. I said the guy looks like a "Bronie" not a "BernieBro". Cognitive dissonance, indeed.

I had to look that up, I just assumed it was another name for BernieBro given the name. Never heard that one before, but point conceded. I'm not sure if he looks like a Bronie, I've never seen one before.
 
Let's keep it real... That's sadly just a fact. I keep on giving Hillary more credit than she deserves by forgetting this. Of course, she's double-dipping with this BernieBros bull****, because eight years ago it was the "Obama boys." Of course, it's important to keep up the narrative that the only reason anyone would be against her is because they're either sexist men, or horny women who want to find boys at political rallies. Oh, the irony-impairment.
Se is as crooked as hell. I had always hoped the Clinton Foundation would be investigated. My personal opinion, funds were raised in shady ways.
 
Nothing is beneath HRC, after all she started the Birther movement about Obama.

No evidence she did anything at all here, and she did not start the birther movement. Lord, people will believe any ****ing thing...
 
Back
Top Bottom