Trump finally signing the Russia sanctions 8 months after Congress overwhelmingly passed them is the best you have showing Trump’s hard stance on Russia? LOL
If they are forced to state who they are if they make political statements, your rights are not violated.
Actually I was responding to a post wanting evidence that he was doing something. I did that without evaluating the degree of “hardness”
Oh…LOL (if that ads something)
You’re right. And what has a large component of Russian interference been? Anonymous or falsely attributed social media propaganda. How does not allowing that to happen violate my or a non-US citizen right? Other allegations, such as email hacking or donations to third parties as means of proxy contributions are already not allowed. All modes of interference need to be addressed.
I don’t see how preventing any of these things violates a foreign individual from expressing a political opinion.
Waiting 8 months is doing something but that something was the absolute minimum.
Are you trying to be stupid? Internet use is open to the public, where a lot of disinformation comes from. So, you want the fed gov going on the internet shutting down sites the Russian visit spewing their disinformation? Hell, why stop there, lets shut down American media too, we all know they always spew disinformation.
The American media is covered under the Constitution, Russian trolls working out of a building in Kiev are not
It’s mind boggling how trump huggers defend Russia to no end. The same Russia that’s had its claws in Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba. How in the hell is this even possible?
Yep, we shouldn’t prevent Russians, either acting anonymously or posing as US nationals, from buying ads and artificially promoting false or misleading political information. That’s totally the same as shutting down websites and American media.
back in 1967 I built a “short wave” radio. With essentially a clothesline in my Pennsylvania back yard as an antenna, I picked up Radio Moscow, Radio Peking, and Radio Havana. I had never heard propaganda before. They even read “letters from America” that seemed to come from people unhappy with our government. You know what? The US government could have jammed those frequencies, making them impossible for me to hear. But they were not jammed. The government assumed that as a free and educated ( 9th grade?) American citizen, I could be permitted to listen and judge for myself. No need to send a missile to the transmitter or jam the stations.
Now compare progressive libs screaming about the Russian propaganda. Thank God they were not as loony back then. I grew up not having information censored. I want that for everyone in this country.
It seemed you were well aware you were listening to “Radio Moscow, Radio Peking, and Radio Havana.” How does one tell if an anonymous online article or social media political ad comes from Russia or another country? If Russia wants to create a website to post their propaganda, all power to them. Then visitors would know the source.
you have a point. And I don’t want to dismiss it. It is a factor.
But I have the same problem with any site. I don’t consider progressive liberal information sites to be honest and helpful for a strong and sovereign USA. So how do I know what the intent of any site is?
We have a responsibility to be educated enough to be able to process and judge infirmation. While vast numbers of voters cannot do that, I am not ready to give up my rights to judge for myself and be forced to live in a dumbed down, censored society just because the voter down the street is a moron.
Because they are out of our jurisdiction.
What does that have to do with their speech not being protected by our Constitution?
My right to hear it is. Speech has two components, speaking and hearing.
The right to hear speech originating from foreign sources have never been tested. I’m guessing you don’t have a right to watch ISIS training videos either
I agree that it is ultimately the responsibility of the individual to gather information and make an informed decision. Part of that process is determining where the information is coming from. If it’s hosted on a political site, you know it’s possibly biased, and you can avoid the site/writers, or use the information it contains with proper perspective. When a foreign entity posts on a social media site, there is no way to determine the source or validity. If people knew where it was coming from and still chose to belive it, that would be their (at least somewhat) informed decision.
Would this mean you think there is no constitutional prohibition on foreigners campaigning during our election?
like those supposed “brits” and “aussies” who were very supportive of lib positions in the old forum during the campaign?
Can you answer the question or not?
