Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Debating the Senate Intel Russia report" video.

  1. The NYTimes journalist simply never talks to anyone who disagrees with him. I don't think he has to spout this stuff on pain of being fired, but he is subject to (relatively) more subtle pressures.
    4
  2. Schwartz closes with "the Russian interference was probably decisive?!!" Okay. Nevermind.
    3
  3. Internet Research Agency is basically running experiments -- to see what effect these social media interventions might have. This information is much more important to them than the supposed aim of designing posts to "influence an election." I don't believe they were even trying -- a good part of the trolling occurred after the election. See the Adam Curtis documentary, "Hypernormalization."
    1
  4. Several months ago Putin acted decisively to undermine US energy independence. Don't people at NYTimes see this, and appreciate the ramifications? Or do they look away, because it disrupts their pet "narratives?" This was something Putin himself did, for real -- though the people whose water was polluted by fracking may be grateful.
    1