Biden to start "Ministry of Truth" bureau. Wants to crackdown on the internet.

@zaryia: Here ya go, at your command.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276

dozens of intel officials I guess are completely incompetent or dumb as a box of rocks lol

@sargentd said:

@zaryia: Here ya go, at your command.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276

dozens of intel officials I guess are completely incompetent

Do you have proof none of the emails they are specifically talking about were disinformation? Also they are former officials, they wouldn't have direct inside info right?

@zaryia: These are the people you trust to stop Disinformation online?????

@zaryia: Biden never made a public statement saying the laptop isn't real, But did go along with "Russian disinformation" narrative at the debates.. what's up with that dude?

So? Seems like a nothing burger, Trump lied about bigger stuff during those debates? You know, like actual policy and things that matter?

"But Hunter" is so tired now lol. No one cares. What a weird tangent.

Which explains the oddity of the paraphrasing, especially since it's poorly regurgitated from a source you can't even link too. Very bizarre.

No one cares. You guys are grasping at straws here.

If Hunter and Biden have intertwined bank accounts with Hunter pulling in millions sitting on a Ukraine energy board... Especially with everything going on in the world right now... id say its cause for concern.

They also have records now showing those business partners of Hunter Biden's on those foreign deals did in fact visit the White House on several occasions and even met with Joe Biden while he was president. So if it was all just an honest and separate business venture with no tries to Biden, why is Biden meeting with them while this is going on?

Any time the government is involved you can be it is not for your benefit. Just look at whom is going to lead this new piece of crap, a woman who said Hunter Bidens laptop was Russian misinformation.

Yea, little difficult to read the source material without a link. Lol

You would require proof of the Ukraine money going to Biden, and the specific laws brokens. Also does Hunter still work there and get the cash?

Showed up in my news feed. I read it. I'm not paying for the site to find it for you. I gave you the source.

You're not taking his objection seriously, right? He supports a walking sledgehammer to the emoluments clause.

lol I'm not surprised at the lack of a link. But now that you've advised your statement below is a regurgitation of material you cannot locate, let's take a look at it. :)

So, you're referring to the documented connection (a la "chain of custody") from the moment evidence is seized and until it is presented in court. The connections (we use the term evidence continuity) are documented, be it the location, officers/non sworn, and purpose. What you are referring to is different and displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept; which, again, is because you're regurgitating someone else's material.

In the warrants I have written for electronic devices (cell phones, laptops), the forensic review is extremely in-depth and with that comes an extremely detailed look at users/timeframes/locational data. Indeed, the "meta" data which comes from these warrants can be massive. We also use Cellebrite to make some of the data more user friendly to digest, especially content from Apple devices (*cringe*).

Now, the point of that is you're referring to the potential issue of "reliability" for the evidence in question. You can read about admissible evidence here. Basically, it must be relevant, reliable, not unfairly prejudicial, properly collected/documented/preserved (here's your 'chain of custody'), and no violation of defendant's rights.

More than happy to continue to explain the process if you desire.

Yikes. It's worse than I thought. If I hand over a laptop to you and tell it was horgen's then the chain of custody is not intact.

Um. lol

Let's try again, shall we.

So, "chain of custody" is the documented connections from the time it (the evidence) is collected and until the time it is presented at trial.

Therefore, in this scenario, the chain of custody begins when I seize the laptop. When the laptop is booked at the station, the evidence continuity is updated to showcase the transfer from my possession to now an evidence locker, for example.

You do you. But since I had my hands on horgen's laptop a defense attorney will eat you alive on the stand. Enjoy!

lol, very bizarre.

@Stevo_the_gamer: Yeah what would YOU know Steve? First hand experience with the subject matter < Some guy I read.

This answers a lot of my questions about law enforcement TBH. You cannot put horgen on trial for a laptop that had other people involved in it. Sure if it was taken from his home. But that is different than myself walking up to you and handing it to you.

Passive aggressive trolling.

To be fair, I don't play a role in the stipulations/all admissibility challenges though, that's for lawyers to partake in with their shenanigans. Been privy to a number of motion to suppress hearings, but those are usually related for the PC for the encounter. Either way, I can always bring out the crayons to help explain chain of custody further. :P

Does it also point out the lies and propaganda that the US says about its enemies and competitors?

Such as Russia hacking our election? You know damn well the lies and disinformation of the state agencies are well protected... it's anybody who points out they are lies and disinformation that will be silenced for "spreading disinformation."

Hacking is disingenuous but Russia was shown to have been interfered in the election. That is factual and has been confirmed.

You're lying.

The US agencies all claimed Russia greatly interfered in our 2016 election (2020 too). This turned out true after investigations. The largest meddling in US history. Primarily to aid Trump. This did include successfully hacking the DNC and releasing that info to harm them politically, as well as hacking election systems in 50 states but making no changes.

Senate panel finds Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election | PBS NewsHour

Why would any American defend Russia on this lol. They interfered, bigly.

Actually, looking at the 1,000 page report, using the term hacking itself isn't completely a disingenuous straw-man.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/senate-intelligence-committee-russian-interference/8cf58e574d235164/full.pdf

Control-F, hack. They were successful in their Hack and Leak campaign in 2016.

Hack and Leak (U ) The Committee found that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the Russian effort to hack computer networks and accounts affiliated with the Democratic Party and leak information damaging to Hillary Clinton and her campaign for president . Moscow's intentwas to harm the Clinton Campaign , tarnish an expected Clinton presidential administration , help the Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and undermine the U.S.democratic process.

...

"The Senate Intelligence Committee concluded Thursday that election systems in all 50 states were targeted by Russia in 2016, an effort more far-reaching than previously acknowledged and one largely undetected by the states and federal officials at the time."

But the suggest that Russia directly hacked voting machines and changed results, I am unaware of any US agency that made that claim and that does appear to be a straw-man from Eoten. In fact, Paul Manafort may have intentionally created that disinformation straw-man according to the report.

TLDR: Eoten's posts are almost always full of shit.

Well they said hacking, and we all know why they said that. To convey the impression Russia actually had a hand in influencing our election. That was dishonest, and that's not going to be the kind of dishonesty any "ministry of truth" is going to be filtering out, we both know it. We both also know the moment someone like Trump or DeSantis gets elected, you're not going to want them to have say over what is and what is not deemed credible information. So if you're smart, you'll oppose the executive branch having that kind of power, period.

They did. I'm not sure what you're going on about. Russia interfered in our 2016 election.

Senate panel finds Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election | PBS NewsHour

Which includes hacking.

I'm unaware of any agency claiming Russia changed votes directly through voting machine hacking. Just by massive disinformation campaigns and hacking the DNC to release negative information on them.

Remember that RNC was also hacked yet no info released. Might answer why several top Republicans went to Russia on 4th of July in 2018 or so.

I definitely think Russia has some stuff on members in the GOP, including trump.

The NY Post is a bad source for anything and nobody should read it.

Here is a much better article from CBS.

Seems like people are getting all upset over nothing. Disinformation campaigns are something DHS needs to keep tabs on. It's cheap and easy information warfare.

Yup. This, this was another fake outrage flop thread from SargentD.

Thanks Rand.

gottem

I would disagree. This is concerning that a group of people caught lying repeatedly would be responsible for any type of disinformation campaigns.

🤣

😆

Unironically linking anti-vaxxing climate denier Rue Paul's crazed rants and thinking it helps your flimsy case instead of further hurting it, lol. You would be taken more seriously for putting up a Stephen Crowder or Prager U video. And I'm not even joking, he's below those.

Your original post and article was full of shit and in no way does Rue Paul's lunacy fix that,

I don't see what's wrong with dealing with Russian and Cartel disinformation. This was set up prior to Biden. This thread was trash and you should have waited for real information instead of linking a far right loon piece.

@zaryia: this will be used on Americans.

It will not only be used on Russians and Cartel.

You are asking for the same government who lied to us about weapons of mass destruction to go into the middle east.

To now police social media and online discourse and give them full range to classify "disinformation" at their will.

You literally fall for it hook line and sinker.

How's that boot taste?

[Citation Needed].

Also,

The new board is intended to standardize the department's efforts to respond to disinformation that could be connected with violent threats to the U.S. So, if an agency under DHS — like Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) or Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) — identifies disinformation under its purview, it's the new disinformation board that would come up with the best practices for any DHS agency handling the disinformation.

What is the Disinformation Governance Board?

The board is tasked with standardizing and streamlining DHS' efforts to respond to disinformation that could be connected with violent threats to the U.S. homeland.

Disinformation is defined as "false information that is deliberately spread with the intent to deceive or mislead."

Previously, efforts to curb disinformation were carried out independently by agencies and offices operating under DHS' purview.

For instance, according to DHS, some of those projects include CISA's accounting of Russian cyber attacks and election interference, CBP's efforts to undermine false narratives peddled by human traffickers operating near the U.S.-Mexico border, DHS' guidance to the U.S. telecom industry to debunk false claims suggesting 5G cell towers spread COVID-19, and FEMA's fraud alerts, warning of criminals who take advantage of disaster survivors in the wake of super storms.

Will the board act as a censor?

"This is not the truth police," Mayorkas declared to the Senate panel, Wednesday, responding to accusations of censorship. "Our work in addressing disinformation that threatens the security of the homeland has been going on for almost 10 years. I asked the question – and we asked the question within the [Department of Homeland Security] – what efforts do we have underway? What policies, procedures and standards of conduct do we have in place to ensure that that vitally important homeland security work… does not infringe on fundamental rights?"

Mayorkas has repeatedly stated that the board will not censor and will not have "operational authority.

Seems pretty clear to me. No censorship, which you and your stupid fake article implied. Fighting against human trafficking and the Russian government fucking with us. What's the problem again?

The only reason I see why you would be upset about this is that the Kremlin usually tries to help Republicans with their disinformation. Party over country I guess for you?

Tell me how that Kremlin and Human trafficker boot tastes first.

@zaryia: "Fighting against human trafficking and the Russian government fucking with us. What's the problem again?"

Citation needed.

Show me where they state this is the ONLY thing this bureau with be combating. I want to see it in writing that this is the ONLY "disinformation" they will be involved with.

It's the exact same BS excuse as the Patriot Act.

Tell everyone it's for thier safety. That we are only trying to catch terrorists.

Then blatantly disregard the 4th amendment while proceeding to gather personal data on millions of Americans. Through bank records, phone records, computer records, ect

The new board is intended to standardize the department's efforts to respond to disinformation that could be connected with violent threats to the U.S. So, if an agency under DHS — like Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) or Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) — identifies disinformation under its purview, it's the new disinformation board that would come up with the best practices for any DHS agency handling the disinformation.

What is the Disinformation Governance Board?

The board is tasked with standardizing and streamlining DHS' efforts to respond to disinformation that could be connected with violent threats to the U.S. homeland.

Disinformation is defined as "false information that is deliberately spread with the intent to deceive or mislead."

Previously, efforts to curb disinformation were carried out independently by agencies and offices operating under DHS' purview.

For instance, according to DHS, some of those projects include CISA's accounting of Russian cyber attacks and election interference, CBP's efforts to undermine false narratives peddled by human traffickers operating near the U.S.-Mexico border, DHS' guidance to the U.S. telecom industry to debunk false claims suggesting 5G cell towers spread COVID-19, and FEMA's fraud alerts, warning of criminals who take advantage of disaster survivors in the wake of super storms.

Will the board act as a censor?

"This is not the truth police," Mayorkas declared to the Senate panel, Wednesday, responding to accusations of censorship. "Our work in addressing disinformation that threatens the security of the homeland has been going on for almost 10 years. I asked the question – and we asked the question within the [Department of Homeland Security] – what efforts do we have underway? What policies, procedures and standards of conduct do we have in place to ensure that that vitally important homeland security work… does not infringe on fundamental rights?"

Mayorkas has repeatedly stated that the board will not censor and will not have "operational authority.

That's a straw-man. I never said that. But your guess work that they will "target" anyone is baseless and requires citation.

Also, there is no censorship. What are you crying about? Get to work fixing your original post and changing the linked article, it's false.

What rights will this group break? Be specific. There is no censorship. Lmao you're just mad because the Kremlin's disinfo usually is intended to aid the GOP. I already know that's your real hang up 🤣.

As I read it, it's for foreign disinformation. It's not about citizens amendment rights. Your side is so busy being outraged they don't look for facts.

@zaryia: freedom of speech and right to privacy are the most obvious ones.

I want you to answer this.

Has the US government ever promoted misinformation??

Yes or No

Are we doing whataboutism now? Not sure why the right likes non friendly nations spreading misinformation but there it is.

Why are you lying.

Will the board act as a censor?

"This is not the truth police," Mayorkas declared to the Senate panel, Wednesday, responding to accusations of censorship. "Our work in addressing disinformation that threatens the security of the homeland has been going on for almost 10 years. I asked the question – and we asked the question within the [Department of Homeland Security] – what efforts do we have underway? What policies, procedures and standards of conduct do we have in place to ensure that that vitally important homeland security work… does not infringe on fundamental rights?"

Mayorkas has repeatedly stated that the board will not censor and will not have "operational authority.

Still waiting for you to fix your OP which was wrong.