Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 50 posts

Re: Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

#41

Post by owebmaster »

justboxing wrote: post #5
spaceflunky wrote: post #4

It's funny how $100k of pro-Trump facebook ads by a foreign entity is a crime against humanity. But like Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other countries [0] or the US getting involved in god knows how many other elections is like totally... meh. [0] http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-us-intervention-foreign-...

> But like Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other countries The source you quoted shows nothing about 'Obama actively campaigning for politicians in other countries'. In fact it exonerates him of your charges. The most recent US interference in a foreign election (quoted in your source) was in 2000, when Dubya was President. You could arguable attribute that to Bill Clinton, since the groundwork would ha…

> The most recent US interference in a foreign election (quoted in your source) was in 2000

You are been naive. The coup in Brazil (2016) was deliberately discussed, supported and planned in events of american "NGOs" in Brazil. Also, a lot of Syrian rebel's like groups were created or supported by american money. Direct interference is one thing, but if you have a machine that mess with the elections of every country in the world it is still a state interference in another one's affair.

EDIT: and also direct State interference: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/09/nsa-spying-bra...

EDIT 2: and support of the media with ludicrous arguments. The corruption version of the WMD: https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2013/09/09/of...

Re: Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

#42

Post by cholantesh »

spaceflunky wrote: post #39
tim333 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politifact debunks example #1. Can't be bothered to research the others but I'm skeptical http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/aug/...

Yeah because Politifact is a totally unbiased trustworthy source....

All sources have some level of bias. can you demonstrate that Politifact's bias compromises them in this context?

Re: Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

#43

Post by scott_s »

mankash666 wrote: post #40
scott_s wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Testifying before a congressional committee does not mean one is involved with a crime - it may be, but not necessarily so. Congressional committees hold hearings to investigate things, and they ask people to testify about those things to learn what is going on.

so he's free to decline , given how he hasn't committed a crime?

You can be found in contempt of Congress if you decline the subpoena. But keep in mind that people who are subpoenaed to testify in criminal cases but are not a defendant nor suspected of any crime can be found in contempt of court for not testifying. In fact, the only time you can refuse to testify is when you are accused of a crime, as you can invoke the Fifth Amendment. (But in the case of Congressional testimony, you'll still have to show up and assert the Fifth. In a criminal trial where you are the defendant you'd just not take the stand at all.)

I am not a lawyer. But as a layperson, I find your objection to be a non-sequitur; I assume that most people who testify before Congress are not suspected of wrong-doing.

Re: Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

#44

Post by Overtonwindow »

The United States has been disrupting, corrupting, and in some cases, overthrowing elections for decades. Now all of a sudden another country as the audacity to screw with our elections and suddenly everyone is shocked! So much hypocrisy. If you want to really see how an election can be corrupted, and thrown, just wait to Zuckerberg runs for President.

Re: Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

#45

Post by dogma1138 »

The US funds political activism in countries including western allies constantly and does much worse in less friendly regimes.

Russia interfering with US elections is a problem for the US but it's a given fact since the dawn of diplomacy and geopolitics.

21 years ago this was on the cover of Time: http://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19960715,00.html

Now everyone is mad because Trump doesn't seem to fit the general agenda of the centrist and left leaning media.

I don't like Trump either but bitching about Russia is hypercritical and also pointless.

If the climate wasn't right Russia wouldn't been able to get Trump 1000 extra votes. Maybe we should look to how we got to a place where polarizing populist candidates without even the slightest shred of credibility are electable in the first place.

Re: Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

#46

Post by dogma1138 »

tim333 wrote: post #35
spaceflunky wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are six examples of Obama outwardly interfering in foreign elections. https://spectator.org/obamas-meddling-in-foreign-elections-s...

Politifact debunks example #1. Can't be bothered to research the others but I'm skeptical http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/aug/...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/07/1...

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/12/obama-admin-se...

Re: Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

#47

Post by Naritai »

ta_donk_gt wrote: post #26
Naritai wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Whataboutism is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

Call it whatever you want, but you know you are only distracting from the point of comments like these. That point is that you need to be consistent. If you have a problem with some behavior on the other side, then you also need to have a problem when the same behavior happens on your side. If you are ok with one, you must be ok with the other. If you have a problem with one, then you must have a problem with the oth…

It's entirely possible to be in favor of open democracies supporting democracy-friendly candidates in other countries, while being against autocracies supporting autocracy-friendly candidates in other countries (including your own).

That's really the danger of whataboutism, it basically asserts that any two actions must be considered morally equivalent, regardless of the intended aim. That is simply not the case.

Re: Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

#48

Post by Naritai »

emsy wrote: post #33
TeMPOraL wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but what's the name of the epistemic fallacy you commit when you single out one instance of a common phenomenon and subject it to extra scrutiny?

Also, as someone who criticized the Obama administration while it was still in charge, it's extra annoying. Because suddenly, every little government action is sharply judged. And when you point out that no one cared while Obama was in charge, you get accused of whataboutery.

What is your goal for pointing out that nobody cared when Obama was in charge? Showing that you were opposed to it before being opposed to it was cool? If you are objectively opposed to something, and now suddenly everybody else doesn't like it either, go ahead and lock in those gains. Say "you know what, you're right, we should get rid of ".

Re: Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

#49

Post by mankash666 »

scott_s wrote: post #43
mankash666 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so he's free to decline , given how he hasn't committed a crime?

You can be found in contempt of Congress if you decline the subpoena. But keep in mind that people who are subpoenaed to testify in criminal cases but are not a defendant nor suspected of any crime can be found in contempt of court for not testifying. In fact, the only time you can refuse to testify is when you are accused of a crime, as you can invoke the Fifth Amendment. (But in the case of Congressional testimony,…

It's not a non-sequitur. The only reason to drag an innocent person through a congressional hearing is to score political brownie points with constituents. I find that reprehensible, and do not think the visibly popular & successful personalities of our time need to be dragged through a sideshow for someone's political gain

Re: Make Mark Zuckerberg Testify

#50

Post by uoaei »

mankash666 wrote: post #37
uabstraction wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh please. Social media was exploited and abused like never before during this election cycle. All the major social networks have become a breeding ground for extremism, geopolitical propaganda, and misinformation. The public has every right to know what role the operators of these platforms served, and what actions - if any - they took. How much did they know about it and when? Did they fight to maintain the integri…

Where is the public deriving it's said entitlement from? Morals? Ethics? or laws? There's no legal obligation on FB to shed light on anything that's completely legal. I'm assuming you're citing ethics. If FB is capable of making YOU the product, you think they care about how their advertising dollars come? As long as they're legal

Yes, because nothing bad has ever happened from following the codes laid out by your friendly neighboorhood government.
Post reply on HN