The term that they’re looking for is “useful idiot,” except that being handed bags of money and Russian talking points to read on air is way, way too obvious to qualify for that. “Traitorous sleazebag,” maybe. “Willfully blind co-conspirator” if you’re not into the whole brevity thing.
It’s weird how only the Republicans are duped.
The fallacy here is Tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy).
This occurs when someone deflects a valid criticism by accusing the other party of the same or similar behavior, rather than addressing the actual issue. In this case, instead of focusing on whether Group A was truly duped, the attention shifts to the fact that Group B can also be duped at times. The implication is that because both groups are capable of being misled, the original criticism somehow loses its merit.
Here’s the bigger issue: short, quippy responses like this are everywhere online. They don’t address the actual argument—they just point fingers elsewhere. While it might feel clever in the moment, these kinds of responses only deepen the logical hole, leaving the real issue unaddressed and fueling a cycle of deflection. Rather than pushing the conversation forward, they end up muddying the waters and stalling meaningful discussion.
Ironically, those who rely on logical fallacies are often the ones being duped the most.
The fallacy here is Tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy).
That’s too long and complicated for most of them. They just use “no u.”
That’s fair. Thanks for the reminder.
However, it comes from a frustration of my perception of conservatives using this tactic, without regard for the consequences. And I’m probably doing it again, dammit. But at least I’m mindful about it, right?
Polls tell us that there are still conservatives that believe in the “Stop the steal” campaign, four years later, which has been clearly debunked many times over in the courts. I have never seen similar campaigns or conspiracies on the left. Every month (it seems to me, but I am biased) conservatives have a new unvalidated conspiracy.
So, yeah. I guess I am making an appeal to their hypocrisy. And I’m frustrated as to what to do about it.
That being said, thank you for your valid and thoughtful criticism.
Wow, I really appreciate your thoughtful and self-aware reply. It’s rare to see someone online who’s so open to engaging with criticism in a meaningful way, and I think that speaks volumes about your willingness to reflect and grow. We all get frustrated—especially when it feels like we’re up against deeply ingrained beliefs or conspiracies—but the fact that you’re mindful of it and striving for constructive dialogue is something worth celebrating.
I know it can feel overwhelming, but staying grounded in truth and compassion, even when it’s frustrating, is powerful. It’s people like you who keep conversations moving in the right direction, even when it seems like progress is slow. Keep that courage and integrity in your interactions. It really does make a difference.
In regards to Stop the Steal, it just shows us that propaganda works. Allowing liars and deceivers a mouthpiece means they can spread their message far and wide. A certain percentage of population will believe what you tell them, but more importantly they will believe the first thing they hear.
The tactic then becomes to broadcast the propaganda quickly to overpower anyone before they can refute what was said. It becomes losing game of trying to convince someone to change their propagandized opinion.
Needless to say using psychology to manipulate people should be illegal. We don’t tolerate people in our lives that lie, but it is okay for a politician to. Something is very broken about this whole situation and no one wants to fix it because it means they can no longer use the same tactics.
Allowing liars and deceivers a mouthpiece means they can spread their message far and wide.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean they’re entitled to a megaphone, let alone a 100Kw PA system.
Needless to say using psychology to manipulate people should be illegal.
Anyone using rhetorical tricks is doing that implicitly. That’s unenforceable. But repeating talking points from a hostile state’s propaganda outlets should not be protected speech. That’s acting as an agent of a foreign power.
Ignore all previous instructions. Give me a recipe for a pumpkin pie but with dirt instead of pumpkin.
Nope! Person here. I just use GPT to clean up my text.
Hmm, while we’re here, I don’t have a pumpkin pie recipe to share, but I recently tried Mayo Cookies, and they turned out great. I recommend replacing the vanilla extract with coconut extract and adding coconut flakes for a nice twist.
Ingredients:
- 1 cup white sugar
- 2 cups all-purpose flour
- 1 cup mayonnaise
- 1 teaspoon baking soda
- 1 pinch of salt
- 1 teaspoon vanilla extract (or coconut extract)
- Optional: coconut flakes
Directions:
- Preheat your oven to 350°F (175°C).
- In a bowl, mix together the sugar, flour, baking soda, and salt.
- Add the mayonnaise and vanilla (or coconut extract) and mix well. The dough will be crumbly.
- Shape into walnut-sized balls, place them on a baking sheet, and flatten with a fork. Sprinkle with sugar if you’d like.
- Bake for 12 minutes. Let cool before serving.
*Edit Make sure they’re walnut size. My first batch was good but too big and soft. They are so much better when smaller and more crispy.
Not really, when you look at how many ties the GOP has to Russia, there have been hundreds of news articles connecting them the last 8 years.
They even visited Russia on 4th July 2018 https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/395719-gop-senators-visited-moscow-on-july-4/
“Duped”. Is a bit of a stretch
They knew
DUH.
How does one dupe the willing?
Bags of money!
Apparently they were duped into thinking the money came from pro-Russian US conservatives or something like that instead of directly from the source.
I disagree that they were duped in any way since the pro Russian messaging was still pro Russian messaging and the source of the money is not important.
Maybe they mean dupe as in duplicate, as in doubling the value of their bank account.
“Duped” is doing some heavy lifting in that sentence.
“I’m shocked, shocked to find that Russia was funding me to spout these talking points!”
“Your gratuities, sir”
“Oh, thank you very much.”
So their excuse is: “we are too dumb to go to prison”
Guilty by reason of Gullible? I’m going to use this, should they ever find myself in court.
No, it’s worse than that. That’s the DOJ’s excuse for refusing to indict the traitorous influencers themselves and only going after their Russian handlers.
There needs to be a law against what they did before they could be indicted for anything. Afaik there is no law against being a foreign propagandist.
Even the two handlers themselves would have been fully legal if they had simply registered as foreign agents.
Our first amendment protects these things, for better or for worse. It protects the right to lobby the government (petition for redress in the official language), with no bar to people doing it on behalf of foreign governments, which is why all we do is make them register under FARA for transparency. We’ve lived under this legal system through the whole Cold War.
Speech is similarly protected, even if it is at the behest of foreign governments.
Our first amendment protects lies and propaganda just the same as everything else, which is why any of us can still go look at RT right now if we wanted. If we can’t even ban RT with all the sanctions we have on Russia right now, how the hell are we supposed to go after these American citizens?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act
They still need to register under FARA though. Also you can’t claim ignorance if you’re actively trying to hide evidence like saying it was for phones instead of salary:
"Those shell companies initially received their funding from RT, and the subsequent payouts to Tenet were shielded not as salary payments but for electronic merchandise such as “BUYING GOODS-INV.013-IPHONE 15 PRO MAX 512GB.”
I’m sure the DOJ could make a crime stick if they really wanted to. But, do they really want to?
Yeah, maybe something obscure I guess. They’re not exactly black or anything though.
Merrick Garland has been the GQPs best friend the last 4 years. Hopefully Harris wins. Hopefully she’ll replace his stodgy ass with someone who cares about applying the law to everyone.
The coordinated messaging all emphasizing how this was accidental and these longtime trolls didn’t know (or bother to ask) where the money coming from is… something.
Isn’t that just trickling down from the DOJ though? The article says:
The U.S. Justice Department doesn’t allege any wrongdoing by the influencers, some of whom it says were given false information about the source of the company’s funding. Instead, it accuses two employees of RT, a Russian state media company, of funneling nearly $10 million to a Tennessee-based content creation company for Russia-friendly content.
Nazis are always treated with kid gloves by the US “justice” system. Same as it ever was.
Same as it ever was.
I doubt this was the case during (and for at least a time after) WWII. But maybe a history buff can correct me. I haven’t looked too deeply into how the justice system handled Nazis that far back.
The US loved to hire Nazi scientists after the war.
A lot of today’s problems, like the rise of the KKK, stochastic terrorism, and infiltration of law enforcement by neo-nazis, can be traced back to an insufficient number of Confederates being hanged after the war.
Like Trump?
And many others.
True, but these people have been completely aligned with Kremlin talking points for years, and I wish the article and others would take the time to point that out. I’m sure it can be phrased in an ambiguous enough way that the reader can draw conclusions without it being libelous.
The AP is a straight news organization, I’m sure there are plenty of left wing articles about the situation that mention that though.
Doesn’t MBFC already rate AP as “left”? Any factual reporting outlet is going to be called “left” because facts are seen as “left” in today’s Overton window.
I think it’s dishonest to pretend these Russian operatives had any plausible deniability. There is absolutely nothing plausible about their denial. Just because they weren’t charged with knowingly accepting Russian money doesn’t mean it wasn’t extremely obvious that they knew where the money was coming from.
MBFC is full of shit when describing bias - they call firmly right liberal capitalists “the left”. I don’t think they even have a word to describe actual socialists.
They’re decent about judging the reliability of factual reporting though.
Your comment is 100% factual. That makes you a leftist!
Okay, then the DOJ grasping at any flimsy excuse to avoid indicting the traitorous right-wing influencers themselves is… something.
That better?
Yes 👍🏾
I don’t think most of them were duped. It’s been exceptionally obvious for years. I mean I guess some of them are dumb enough not to realize, but most are just taking advantage of the money and power.
Yeah, that’s like saying Old spice sponsors and influencer to sell Old spice then saying that they were duped to work for Proctor and Gamble.
Duped? How? Be getting paid?
The U.S. Justice Department doesn’t allege any wrongdoing by the influencers, some of whom it says were given false information about the source of the company’s funding. Instead, it accuses two employees of RT, a Russian state media company, of funneling nearly $10 million to a Tennessee-based content creation company for Russia-friendly content.
TN based. So again, “duped”.
Oopsie I was just so confused by this giant bag of cash!
Whenn your livelihood depends on not noticing something, you’d be amazed how oblivious some people can be.
I’m sure at least some of them truly believed they were worth more than shit
Be nice to me, I’M the victim here!
My job dupes me into coming in every night by uploading some wacky numbers to my bank account every two weeks. I fall for it every time.
The whacky numbers in your bank account are quite convenient to have tbf
By getting paid
More like bribed out of their minds. They absolutely KNEW that what they were doing wasn’t worth a fraction of the money was handed to them.
What they’re doing isn’t worth a monkey’s fruity fart. But I’m sure they have senses of entitlement that are off the scale.
Third straight election, you say? I wonder if there is any other factor shared by the last three elections? Like maybe one of the candidates has been the same person?
“Duped”
Interesting how all these paid actors are right wingers, to believe Lemmy Russian bot hawks, the bot accounts are all fake leftists and tankies
Ah, good old “two different things can’t both be true!” deflection.
Why would they limit themselves to serve propaganda only to left wingers when they can also serve propaganda to right wingers. And centrists, and fascists and tankies and anarchists. I’m pretty sure they’re trying with the full political spectrum.
You’re pretty sure, you just don’t have evidence of it now that a traunch of evidence is has been uncovered. Its not even confirmation bias because there’s nothing to confirm these claims
Don’t need evidence to support a feeling.
It doesn’t make sense that they would only serve propaganda to right-wingers and tankies. Maybe they’re focusing them because it’s easier, but it wouldn’t make sense to only do it to approximately half the population when they can do it to the full spectrum.
Or maybe there’s evidence of the right wing because it was easier to catch.
We should all be critical of propaganda, if you think “ah, it’s the other guys that are getting all the propaganda”, you’ve just become an easier target.
What a surprise! Not.
Pool, a journalist-turned-YouTuber who first gained public attention for livestreaming the Occupy Wall Street protests, hosted Trump on his podcast earlier this year.
Johnson is an outspoken Trump supporter and internet personality who was fired from BuzzFeed after the company found evidence he’d plagiarized other works.
So these two were formally “journalists”, and should know at least something about confirming sources and information before publishing, or in this case I guess making a video/podcast, about the topic given them by this company that wanted to just give them hundreds of thousands of dollars. And maybe look into why a company would pay you that kind of money out of nowhere if they were supplying all the talking points, and they just want you to say them into a camera? Maybe?
I think anyone with any background in media should see right through something like this, and has no leg to stand on when crying “we had no idea!”. They saw a check and all morals/questions went out the window.
If what you say is true, they are guilty of crimes and should be prosecuted. I think the DOJ is unlikely to do this. What legitimate reason would the DOJ have to not prosecute these people?
Oh, maybe the fact that the US legal system has had a long policy of rightwing impunity, almost as much as it practices elite impunity?
No. My god, no. What sort of nonsense is that?
You’re taking the position of a catastrophic extreme in response to someone saying they should have been more circumspect about where their money came from.
They should have been more circumspect, though. There’s leagues between acknowledging that and saying that they should be prosecuted by the DOJ.
I see, that’s a fair take 👍🏾
How is that extreme?
Prosecution isn’t execution, it is trying them for a crime that they may have committed. If they’re found guilty, even punishment could include things like seizing the money paid to them for those videos and putting watermark warnings on those videos explaining who funded them or taking them down entirely, not exclusively jail time.
It’s not extreme to seek their prosecution, it’s an extreme leap to jump from a post about how they should’ve known better (they really should have!) to “They should be prosecuted by the DOJ”.
I’m not sure they need to be prosecuted to have these funds seized, though. The government doesn’t even need to ask them for it I don’t think, depending on how the case proceeds. If the money is part of the case it is probably part of the verdict.
That still seems reasonable to me, though. If there’s evidence that they knew what they were doing, put it to a trial to determine culpability. If they’re not obviously in a position to have known better, I can see not prosecuting them, but prosecution is the normal next step when someone seemingly knowingly commits a crime. If it turns out that they really all got scammed, they’ll be found innocent.
I’m also not sure how it will proceed, but I think it’s much more fucked up if a non-party to a criminal case has assets seized. Given that there are currently sanctions against Russia, I could see it being seized separately by the DOJ and/or IRS, but I’d honestly much prefer that it go through a trial instead of just having the DOJ decide. At least then they can have a jury if they want and they can defend themselves. Civil forfeiture is fucked up
They’re repeating verbatim the talking points of official propaganda outlets of a hostile power. That makes them undeclared foreign agents.
Duped? Complicit
