Choose a tag to find specific types of discusisons.
These are currently the most active tagged discussions.
@ISIDEWITH submitted…8hrs8H
The F.B.I. cut ties to at least a handful of informants and issued warnings about dozens of others after an internal review prompted by concerns that they were linked to Russian disinformation, current and former U.S. officials said.The review was carried out in 2020 and 2021 by a small group within the bureau’s counterintelligence division, with the findings then passed along to field offices, which handle informants.It led to the severing of sources — some of whom had offered information about Russia-aligned oligarchs, political leaders and other influential figures — at a moment when the bureau was asking agents to produce more information from and about those same networks. The review was conducted during and after the 2020 election, when concerns about Russian meddling were running high, and at a time when the United States was closely monitoring whether Russia would invade Ukraine.
▲ 2616 replies
“When are they going to shed informants linked to the Times’ false “Russian conspiracy” investigation of Trump? A disinfo…”
@ISIDEWITH submitted…10hrs10H
On May 10, the Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray asking “whether the FBI had any related undercover employees, online covert employees, or confidential human sources” among what it called “pro-Hamas protests on college campuses.” By sending the letter, Congress is in effect pressuring the FBI to penetrate the protests with both on-the-ground and online informants (if it hasn’t already). An obvious threat to the freedom of speech and association enshrined in the Constitution, the letter tries to circumvent these concerns by arguing that it is illegal to “endorse” or “espouse” terrorist groups — despite there being no evidence the protesters have done that. “While we recognize that every American has the right to peacefully protest, individuals who endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization are patently dangerous, and potentially criminal,” the letter says, citing a law prohibiting providing material support to foreign terrorist groups. (The material support provision only allows for foreign organizations to be designated, so Americans must be tied to a foreign terror group to be prosecuted.) “The Committees are investigating the sources of funding and financing for groups who are organizing, leading, and participating in pro-Hamas, antisemitic, anti-Israel, and anti-American protests with illegal encampments on American college campuses,” the letter reads. “This investigation relates both to malign influence on college campuses and to the national security implications of such influence on faculty and student organizations.”
▲ 148 replies
I'd say it's the duty of the FBI to investigate a movement that regurgitates anti-Israel jihadist slogans and has been c…
@ISIDEWITH submitted…9hrs9H
In a CNN Interview, ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan says a senior American official told him “this court [the ICC] was built for Africa and thugs like Putin.”
▲ 97 replies
Lindsey Graham recently met with Khan.
@ISIDEWITH submitted…2hrs2H
Former President Donald Trump has ignited a firestorm of controversy with a recent social media post that has drawn sharp criticism from across the political spectrum. In a video shared on his Truth Social platform, Trump included a hypothetical headline that suggested his victory in the upcoming election would bring about a 'unified Reich,' a term deeply associated with Nazi Germany. This provocative language has not only shocked many observers but has also prompted a swift condemnation from the Biden campaign, highlighting the deep divisions and heightened tensions in the current political climate.The video, which was intended to showcase potential positive outcomes of a Trump re-election, instead has cast a shadow over his campaign, with critics accusing the former president of using language that evokes some of the darkest chapters in human history. The inclusion of the term 'Reich,' which refers to the Nazi regime, has been particularly alarming, raising questions about the implications of such rhetoric in today's political discourse.The Biden campaign was quick to respond, labeling the video as 'abhorrent' and 'dangerous.' Such strong language from the incumbent's campaign underscores the severity with which this message has been received and the potential fallout it could have on Trump's political aspirations. The controversy has also sparked a broader debate about the use of historical references in political messaging and the boundaries of acceptable discourse.Amid the backlash, Trump's supporters have defended the video, arguing that the criticism is a misinterpretation of its intent. However, the controversy shows no signs of abating, with many calling for Trump to address the issue directly and clarify the message behind the contentious video.As the 2024 presidential election approaches, this incident serves as a stark reminder of the polarized nature of American politics and the challenges of navigating a landscape where words can ignite significant controversy. How Trump and his campaign move forward from this episode may well shape his political fortunes and the broader discourse in the lead-up to the election.
▲ 1111 replies
@ISIDEWITH submitted…4hrs4H
▲ 109 replies
@ISIDEWITH submitted…3mins3m
6 replies
▲ 77 replies
@ISIDEWITH submitted…59mins59m
▲ 76 replies
@InaugurationLillian from California commented…9hrs9H
▲ 52 replies2 agree
@ISIDEWITH submitted…1hr1H
▲ 68 replies
@WornoutBallotBox from Florida commented…10hrs10H
▲ 42 replies2 disagree
▲ 56 replies
@ISIDEWITH submitted…44mins44m
▲ 55 replies
@KnowledgeablePartis4nfrom Minnesota commented…10hrs10H
▲ 41 reply1 disagree
@RightistGarlicfrom Alabama commented…8hrs8H
▲ 44 replies
▲ 4
▲ 34 replies
@OilAvery from Pennsylvania commented…7mins7m
▲ 2
@Equ4l1tyCowfrom Maine agreed…9hrs9H
@FerretNora from Washington commented…9hrs9H
@PollingPlaceGregfrom Maine commented…9hrs9H
@QuailNora from California disagreed…10hrs10H
@GrumpyLeftist from Missouri disagreed…10hrs10H
@AgileD1rectfrom Vermont commented…8hrs8H
