Elon Musk: Officially a fraud and piece of shit. Official or unofficial war criminal?

[Captainant 27638]

23 minutes ago, McCroskey said:

As I said, my issue has NEVER been about the laptop. As I said, I don’t GAF about the laptop. For some reason you keep going back to that.

My guy, the release that elmo got your tits all jacked over was blurry dick picks of hunter Biden. It's not a free speech issue to remove non consentual nudes from a platform. Nobody was threatened legally and the publication itself wasnt forced to retract it's words - they just weren't allowed to use twitter as a platform to advance their speech. 

But you sure do seem to care, despite your protests lol

[McCroskey 1504]

Fair enough, but that just circles back to this is basic content moderation. If some trash rag like the NYP puts obviously inappropriate material on a website it should absolutely be taken down and if they keep at it they should be barred. It's very simple. It's not a left or right thing.

The only place I’m coming from is I’m trying to separate “obviously inappropriate” from “questionably inappropriate.”

I think we need lines between the two and they aren’t the same thing.

I’m just not explaining it very well with this group, lol.

[cactusflinthead 27598]

7 minutes ago, McCroskey said:

verified? 

Who verified it was his dong? Beulah Ballbreaker?

That's what you want to publish? Unleash the dongs? 

[G650 14245]

4 minutes ago, McCroskey said:

The only place I’m coming from is I’m trying to separate “obviously inappropriate” from “questionably inappropriate.”

I think we need lines between the two and they aren’t the same thing.

I’m just not explaining it very well with this group, lol.

That is certainly the case and I think it this instance the NYP story was obviously, wildy and unquestionably inappropriate and it should have been nuked from orbit. In my view they debated it way too much and should have done more sooner than they did

[McCroskey 1504]

My guy, the release that elmo got your tits all jacked over was blurry dick picks of hunter Biden. It's not a free speech issue to remove non consentual nudes from a platform. Nobody was threatened legally and the publication itself wasnt forced to retract it's words - they just weren't allowed to use twitter as a platform to advance their speech. 
But you sure do seem to care, despite your protests lol

“Just weren’t allowed to use Twitter.”

Yeah, suddenly, and for reasons that make no sense and should be concerning to people who may not think about precedents. You say this as if removing a media company from sharing their content with over a million people, probably a large % of their base, is a nothingburger.

That’s really all I was talking about, I’m not sure why you are spouting the other shit except I guess you want some rep points from someone and think you got a pwn.

[McCroskey 1504]

Who verified it was his dong? Beulah Ballbreaker?
That's what you want to publish? Unleash the dongs? 

You seem awfully caught up in Hunters dong or dongs in general. Please understand that’s not what the rest of us are trying to discuss.

[Captainant 27638]

Just now, McCroskey said:

Yeah, suddenly, and for reasons that make no sense and should be concerning to people who may not think about precedents. You say this as if removing a media company from sharing their content with over a million people, probably a large % of their base, is a nothingburger.

So you disagree with Elmo and think that everyone has a right to freedom of speech AND freedom of reach?

And yes, it is a nothing burger. Twitter is a private company. If you don't like their policies, don't use their service. Nobody is making you use it.

[McCroskey 1504]

That is certainly the case and I think it this instance the NYP story was obviously, wildy and unquestionably inappropriate and it should have been nuked from orbit. In my view they debated it way too much and should have done more sooner than they did

But you can respect free speech and what that means and that others may have a different opinion than yours?

And for the record and this is my last post but my personal opinion is mostly in line with yours. I don’t mind opposing speech or viewpoints in our great country and don’t think it’s typically as “hurtful” as people make it out to be.

What a cluster we are in.

[Chopper 17230]

10 minutes ago, McCroskey said:

What a cluster we are in.

The ultimate concern troll.

[Prepuce of Doom 21054]

29 minutes ago, McCroskey said:

The only place I’m coming from is I’m trying to separate “obviously inappropriate” from “questionably inappropriate.”

I think we need lines between the two and they aren’t the same thing.

I’m just not explaining it very well with this group, lol.

I'm sorry to see that you're still struggling with your glue addiction. 

[McCroskey 1504]

The ultimate concern troll.

Thanks. I’ve been around here long enough…not a troll.

Sorry to share a different viewpoint than yours.

I'm sorry to see that you're still struggling with your glue addiction. 

Amphetamines.

[Chopper 17230]

Just now, McCroskey said:

Thanks. I’ve been around here long enough…not a troll.

Sorry to share a different viewpoint than yours.

Concern trolling is a distinction unto itself. 

You must be deeply concerned that Kanye was suspended from twitter for exercising the free speech of merely posting a flag.

[cactusflinthead 27598]

29 minutes ago, McCroskey said:

You seem awfully caught up in Hunters dong or dongs in general. Please understand that’s not what the rest of us are trying to discuss.

No, that is what this is about. Whether the NYP can post dick pics. You got some other examples of moderated content from them? We can go down the list of unverified bullshit they habitually post. Let's go. What you got? Otherwise it's arguing about their right to post dick pics.

[G650 14245]

21 minutes ago, McCroskey said:

But you can respect free speech and what that means and that others may have a different opinion than yours?

And for the record and this is my last post but my personal opinion is mostly in line with yours. I don’t mind opposing speech or viewpoints in our great country and don’t think it’s typically as “hurtful” as people make it out to be.

What a cluster we are in.

It's not free speech and opinion. It was literally broadcasting illegally obtained private information.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

My favorite part so far is GRU saying the public seeing hunter biden’s penis would have created a more informed electorate.

[Hefeweizen 5310]

18 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

My favorite part so far is GRU saying the public seeing hunter biden’s penis would have created a more informed electorate.

He’s just trying to see them himself.  You know, for information purposes.  NTTAWWT.

[Chooky 13307]

How can we say we're free if we don't allow NYP to publish spuriously obtained photos of people's dicks?

[Goredho 17397]

1 minute ago, Chooky said:

How can we say we're free if we don't allow NYP to publish spuriously obtained photos of people's dicks?

I take it you are not a dick pic absolutist?

 

[Chopper 17230]

3 minutes ago, Goredho said:

I take it you are not a dick pic absolutist?

Uncharacteristically @McCroskey found the last couple of erection cycles hard to swallow.   nttawwt

[Neonmoon 38129]

1 hour ago, McCroskey said:

I never said the NYP was “unapproachable.” I think you mean irreproachable, but I never said that either.

In hindsight, wasn’t it later proven as verified? Didn’t CBS and other outlets recently start discussing the broader topic?

I am NOT one of those people you describe.

As I said from the beginning, my whole point around this is that I don’t think the NYP as a news outlet should have been suspended from Twitter for a story they posted. A different standard was applied for their story, and why that happened is what I think is important and how do we prevent it from happening again…again from a Musk-owned Twitter who may try to silence a story negative towards him or something he favors.

Again, I ask, WHY is the NYP irreproachable from Twitter, a private company? 
 

Even when employees of the NYP themselves claimed they didn’t do enough to verify the authenticity of the hard drive 

https://www.vox.com/22992772/hunter-biden-laptop

Not to mention, the story was covered 

Media outlets, for their part, didn’t block anything — there was ample coverage of all this in the conservative press and, albeit more slowly, in mainstream media outlets. There is no obligation for media outlets to run with conveniently timed opposition research pushed by one presidential candidate’s team shortly before an election. (For example, most media outlets did not cover the Steele dossier allegations before the 2016 election — only Mother Jones and Yahoo! News did. The dossier itself was eventually published by BuzzFeed News after Trump won, the following January.)

 

Some commentators did go too far in asserting that this was part of a Russian plot, when the evidence hasn’t emerged to back that up. The Biden campaign similarly sought to cast doubt on the story by alluding that it could be Russian misinformation — when the underlying emails appear to be authentic. But in general, major journalism outlets did try to assess whether there was genuine news there. 

And here’s where we come to the real dispute, which wasn’t just about whether the emails were fake or real, but about what they show. Trump allies have insisted the leaked material proves that Joe Biden was corrupt. If you think that’s what’s being covered up, of course it seems outrageous that the mainstream media wasn’t devoting more attention to it. 

But that case is weak. 

There were two supposed “smoking guns” about Joe Biden that conservatives touted in the materials. The first was an email the Post called a “blockbuster,” in which an executive at the Ukrainian gas company Burisma thanked Hunter for the “opportunity to meet your father” in 2015. If you’re steeped in Trumpworld lore, this was damning because of the theory that Biden had the corrupt prosecutor general of Ukraine fired to benefit Burisma, and Biden had said he knew nothing about Hunter’s Ukrainian work, but look, a meeting! (Apparently, it was a dinner at Cafe Milano that Hunter had organized, with about a dozen people.) This appears to amount to Vice President Biden seemingly going to one dinner.

The second involved a business venture that Hunter tried to set up with a Chinese energy tycoon in 2017 (after Joe Biden was no longer vice president). One email mentions that the equity split would include “10 held by H for the big guy ?” A former business partner of Hunter’s named Tony Bobulinski came forward to claim “the big guy” was Joe Biden. But a subsequent email from Hunter says his “Chairman” gave him “an emphatic no,” and a further email clarifies that the chairman is his dad. 

So this amounts to Joe Biden apparently refusing some deal Hunter tried to enmesh him in. An alternative possibility is that Joe was not actually ever involved and that Hunter had just been throwing his name around. By Bobulinski’s own account, he briefly met Joe Biden the day before and after an event, and the former vice president only said vague things to him (and the proposed deal never came together in the end).

All of this was indeed covered in the press in October 2020 (I wrote about it at the time). So the real objection from conservatives is that they didn’t get the narrative they liked out of the mainstream media.

Hunter’s emails contained a whole lot of embarrassing and arguably newsworthy material about himself, and the shady foreign business interests of the son of the potential next president are certainly a worthy topic of media coverage. But as for the Biden who was actually on the ballot, there was very little from him personally in those messages (other than an exchange where he comforts his despondent, drug-addicted son). The emails didn’t dominate mainstream media because, at least so far, they didn’t have the goods.

[956 Worldwide 34704]

1 hour ago, McCroskey said:

But you can respect free speech and what that means and that others may have a different opinion than yours?

And for the record and this is my last post but my personal opinion is mostly in line with yours. I don’t mind opposing speech or viewpoints in our great country and don’t think it’s typically as “hurtful” as people make it out to be.

What a cluster we are in.

Let me help you here: Twitter, as a private company, can decide what it wants to host or not host, to say or not say. Thus, Twitter was exercising its First Amendment rights and not violating them. A violation of free speech would be the government coercing Twitter to host material it doesn’t want to host. 

[Chopper 17230]

[cactusflinthead 27598]

 

[cactusflinthead 27598]

Now if you are one of the normals—someone who would never think about posting another person’s penis on your social media account; has no desire to see politicians’ kids’ penises when scrolling social media; doesn’t understand why there are other people out there who care one way or another about the moderation policies surrounding stolen penis photos; or can’t even figure out what it is that I’m talking about—then this might seem like a gratuitous matter for an article. Sadly, it is not.

 

[Chopper 17230]

These two thoughts have captured the republiqan imagination on the very same day:

Pro-government moderation of Twitter because "the Constitution"

Pro-suspension of the Constitution

 

[wildcat09 29347]

Anyone who thinks there’s anything scandalous here (aside from Matt Taibbi’s breaches of journalistic ethics) probably gets a headache whenever they try to calculate a tip at a restaurant.

[Clintonaldo 2573]

9 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Anyone who thinks there’s anything scandalous here (aside from Matt Taibbi’s breaches of journalistic ethics) probably gets a headache whenever they try to calculate a tip at a restaurant.

Jokes on you brother because I don't even give Jesus 10%. 

[Hefeweizen 5310]

1 minute ago, Clintonaldo said:

Jokes on you brother because I don't even give Jesus 10%. 

What you got against the spandex?

[Nivek 16923]

On 12/2/2022 at 5:44 PM, Bama Chick said:

These conversations are always enlightening to me.

Most men do not understand the “female gaze”. At all.

What men think women find attractive -







What women actually find attractive -

Seems to me this could also be called what some men find attractive vs. what some women find attractive.   

Edited December 4, 2022 by Nivek

[Chopper 17230]

 

Why is Elmo such a fucking dunce? How can the man be so fucking stupid? Also how is that tunnel from SF to LA he said he'd dig going?

 

[safe sex 11700]

3 hours ago, mchookem said:

hooboy yeah, Timothee makes me feel... funny 😏 

 

i'm sorry what thread is this? 😊

 

"Is there such a thing as a butch twink? Yes, there is, and Timothée Chalamet goes all Larry Clark on us here, a soft-trade hetero cannibal who kills an evil closeted gay trick so he and his flesh-eating girlfriend can feed. Is that gay-bashing or cannibally correct love? Just asking." - John Waters, in the best movie review of 2022.

[elfenix 34225]

5 hours ago, G650 said:

TIL you don't know know what FAFO means.

это не переводится на его родной язык

Edited December 4, 2022 by elfenix

[cactusflinthead 27598]

 

[cactusflinthead 27598]

Uh did this just happen?

 

[Chopper 17230]

More words on why Elmo sucks

The Redpilling of Elon Musk Isn’t Funny
Because he isn’t either.
By Luke Winkie
Dec 01, 2022

https://slate.com/technology/2022/12/elon-musk-twitter-gop-redpilling-humor-posting.html

...

There’s already a lot of literature that’s been published on Musk’s shortcomings as a poster. In 2021 the New York Times went long on the frequency at which Elon pilfers memes he finds on Reddit without proper accreditation (a big no-no—just ask @FuckJerry). The underlying thesis here is that he was never able to engineer the creativity, humor, or cultural fluency necessary to become an elite tweeter, so, like innumerable struggling YouTubers and canceled podcast hosts before him, Musk has started playing to the cheap seats by taking on the woke mob in the name of free speech, which has, frankly, become the hackiest and most overplayed hand on social media.

But he can’t even do that right. Musk’s newfangled based persona is wooden and vibeless, a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy. To clap back at CBS News, he’s using terrible photoshops of Brokeback Mountain, which has to be the most inept, warmed-over touchstone in anyone’s meme arsenal. He believes that millennials spend too much money on Starbucks Frappuccinos—that old “$12 avocado toast” chestnut—a satirical terrain most often explored by guys like Andrew Dice Clay. He’s shared a photo of his bedside table, which is covered with four cans of caffeine-free Diet Coke and an antique pistol, which I assume is a way to better endear himself to the only demographic who will still be on Twitter by 2023. All of these missives are nakedly counterfeit and desperately needy—like someone who’s learned the contours of alt-right diction from an academic journal—but most pertinently, Musk is plainly not very funny. It is the eldritch truth that eats at his core—his Rosebud, if you will. Musk can never outrun it for long, so he jumps from one pandering scheme to another, owning the libs to diminishing returns. A few years ago, Musk was poaching Onion staffers to start a competing national lampoon. (It never got off the ground.) Now he’s restored Twitter access for the Babylon Bee, a MAGA-tinged Onion facsimile that also happens to be one of the cringiest humor publications on the internet. The political polarities have flipped, but the fundamental fraughtness of Musk’s being remains the same. He doesn’t have the juice, so he must outsource his way toward the repartee he so clearly desires.

[Francisco 2.0 32389]

Not my work, but fitting:

 

 

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

His Lunatic Lordship is currently doing a Twitter Space - from his plane, natch.

And it’s just as Alex Jonesy batshit as you can imagine.

Thread of the highlights -

[Bama Chick 28596]

lol

[Francisco 2.0 32389]

 

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19189]

4 hours ago, Captainant said:

If you don't like their policies, don't use their service. Nobody is making you use it.

Unless you're an advertiser that is fed up with Rocketboi's shit and pull your ad dollars.  Then you suck and hate freedom.

[G650 14245]

2 hours ago, Chopper said:

More words on why Elmo sucks

The Redpilling of Elon Musk Isn’t Funny
Because he isn’t either.
By Luke Winkie
Dec 01, 2022

https://slate.com/technology/2022/12/elon-musk-twitter-gop-redpilling-humor-posting.html

...

There’s already a lot of literature that’s been published on Musk’s shortcomings as a poster. In 2021 the New York Times went long on the frequency at which Elon pilfers memes he finds on Reddit without proper accreditation (a big no-no—just ask @FuckJerry). The underlying thesis here is that he was never able to engineer the creativity, humor, or cultural fluency necessary to become an elite tweeter, so, like innumerable struggling YouTubers and canceled podcast hosts before him, Musk has started playing to the cheap seats by taking on the woke mob in the name of free speech, which has, frankly, become the hackiest and most overplayed hand on social media.

But he can’t even do that right. Musk’s newfangled based persona is wooden and vibeless, a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy. To clap back at CBS News, he’s using terrible photoshops of Brokeback Mountain, which has to be the most inept, warmed-over touchstone in anyone’s meme arsenal. He believes that millennials spend too much money on Starbucks Frappuccinos—that old “$12 avocado toast” chestnut—a satirical terrain most often explored by guys like Andrew Dice Clay. He’s shared a photo of his bedside table, which is covered with four cans of caffeine-free Diet Coke and an antique pistol, which I assume is a way to better endear himself to the only demographic who will still be on Twitter by 2023. All of these missives are nakedly counterfeit and desperately needy—like someone who’s learned the contours of alt-right diction from an academic journal—but most pertinently, Musk is plainly not very funny. It is the eldritch truth that eats at his core—his Rosebud, if you will. Musk can never outrun it for long, so he jumps from one pandering scheme to another, owning the libs to diminishing returns. A few years ago, Musk was poaching Onion staffers to start a competing national lampoon. (It never got off the ground.) Now he’s restored Twitter access for the Babylon Bee, a MAGA-tinged Onion facsimile that also happens to be one of the cringiest humor publications on the internet. The political polarities have flipped, but the fundamental fraughtness of Musk’s being remains the same. He doesn’t have the juice, so he must outsource his way toward the repartee he so clearly desires.

This is what I can never really wrap my head around. This dude is lame as fuck, and so desperately wants to be cool, yet does everything in his power to amplify his lameness.

[atomheartbevo 89630]

6 hours ago, McCroskey said:

Whatever the Post had done to date…99.99% of their content was deemed acceptable. Then suddenly there’s no more benefit of the doubt?

The Post understands what a “chain of custody” is, and the moment that laptop was handled by somebody other than Hunter or the computer repair guy, the chain of custody was irrevocably broken.  As a result, nothing on the laptop that the Post or anybody else published can truly be trusted without a helluva lot of verification.  

The fact that it was handled by multiple people completely shredded whatever chain of custody existed, and that’s before we get into the fact that the computer repair guy was legally blind to the point that he couldn’t identify Hunter, and he was into conspiracy theories.  And if you want to create a disinformation campaign around a laptop, you would have legitimate files and emails on it alongside the misinformation, so there will be stuff on it that is legitimate.  The problem for the Post is that the Post and others admitted to not doing due diligence on all of it.

[dcbc 14465]

36 minutes ago, G650 said:

This is what I can never really wrap my head around. This dude is lame as fuck, and so desperately wants to be cool, yet does everything in his power to amplify his lameness.

This.  He's supremely uncool.  A try-hard, if you will.

[atomheartbevo 89630]

 

9 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

They claim there’s more to follow. We’ll see. 

9 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

FAFO. 

3 hours ago, Chopper said:

Why is Elmo such a fucking dunce? How can the man be so fucking stupid?

Chopper, FYI not linking you to GRU/Crispy/Humble, but just pointing out that you hit the nail on the head of what Humble is failing to grasp.

First, Humble, there’s nothing else coming, big or small, that’s relevant.  Musk is one helluva an attention whore, and if there was something bigger than Hunter’s dick pics, #1 Musk would have published it himself and #2 it would have been the lead story.  Instead, they led with somebody that anybody who is paying attention already knew about,  and if you didn’t pay attention to it a few years ago, you aren’t now.  So none of this is new to most people who are paying attention. 

The fact that this was dumped on a Friday night heading into a big sports weekend, as well as some major legal stuff happening in D.C. is very odd.  Not so odd if you want to bury that story or distract people from the fact that you literally allowed the guy who helped found the most active white supremacy website back onto Twitter after a 9 year ban.

Second, this feels like yet another case of Musk hearing about something for the first time, and because he thinks he’s brilliant, he believes if he didn’t hear about it before now, then nobody else has heard about it.  Those of us who follow current events have known about the laptop for over two years now, about the attempts to get the photos of Hunter’s dick suppressed and to deal with the chain of custody issues, but Elon is acting like this is new.  

Maybe it is new to Elon, but that’s his fault.  Hell, for weeks, he’s posted dozens of times about the 1st Amendment in a way that shows he didn’t know what it meant and that it didn’t apply to what he was saying.  Yesterday, he all of the sudden made a post that properly referenced the 1st Amendment, and it sounded like something he copied-and-pasted from Wikipedia or a message from one of his lawyers, as if he just discovered what it meant.

Another example - this past week, Elon acted like he was exposing Apple’s and Google’s royalty rates for their app stores, as if hundreds of thousands of app developers and companies and the media somehow didn’t know about the %30 thing since it was openly published by Apple back in 2008 (and Google). Hell, I knew about this back in 2010 when I was submitting an app for the first time.  Again, he acted like he had just learned about some big secret, instead of something that’s been in the public eye for 14 years.

[atomheartbevo 89630]

9 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

The real concerns here have nothing to do with “hate speech”. They want Twitter to die and a viable alternative to pop up so they can regain this power that is rightfully theirs. It’s really simple.  

We (including you) as a community bailed on Shaggy when ownership changed.

I didn’t see you sticking around Shaggy, trying to make it work with the new owner.  Why is that?  Almost sounds like you wanted Shaggy to die and a viable alternative to pop up.

[Humble Beast 258]

But, muh advertisers. 
 

15 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Second, this feels like yet another case of Musk hearing about something for the first time, and because he thinks he’s brilliant, he believes if he didn’t hear about it before now, then nobody else has heard about it.

This may be true. I can cite a bitcoin specific example of Elon doing this recently.  When he picked up on Dogecoin, he discovered the blockchain scaling debate like it was 2017 and these things hadn’t already been settled by the market. He sounded like a total dumbass. He’s since moved on. Maybe he does the same here. Who knows?

 

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

We (including you) as a community bailed on Shaggy when ownership changed.

I didn’t see you sticking around Shaggy, trying to make it work with the new owner.  Why is that?  Almost sounds like you wanted Shaggy to die and a viable alternative to pop up.

 

What are you talking about? I like it here. That’s a dumb comparison. 

[Chopper 17230]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

The fact that this was dumped on a Friday night heading into a big sports weekend, as well as some major legal stuff happening in D.C. is very odd. 

 

Not to mention the performance was led by Matt Taibbi who has either lost his marbles or is being paid by Russia, along with Greenwald. The dude has zero cred. He's like a not-ready-for-tv Fox news commentator.

46 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

But, muh advertisers. 

 

 

edit: I mean, their ad revenue is off by what...80 percent or more? I don't see a huge line forming to get back to advertising on the site esp with the nazi takeover.

So if Twitter supposedly put its thumb on the scale unethically or by mistake to influence an election merely by trying to keep outright lies off its platform, what was the National Enquirer doing in 2015 and 2016 when they were going around the country buying stories about bad behavior by Dotard, and then burying it under the lock of a NDA and an exclusivity agreement. The Enquirer later admitted to such behavior.

 

Edited December 4, 2022 by Chopper

[atomheartbevo 89630]

Once again, an old Onion video is extremely relevant.  Not saying Musk would do this, but he/Twitter is on the hook for a lot of money,

 

[atomheartbevo 89630]

43 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

But, muh advertisers. 

Musk lied about his dead kid a few weeks ago, and he’s known for misrepresenting the facts, so whatever happened, there is a lot more that he’s not saying.

[Humble Beast 258]

7 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Not to mention the performance was led by Matt Taibbi who has either lost his marbles or is being paid by Russia, along with Greenwald. The dude has zero cred. He's like a not-ready-for-tv Fox news commentator.

I hate to break it to you cause I know some douchebag got your hopes up, but Elmo is a sociopathic liar.

So if Twitter supposedly put its thumb on the scale unethically or by mistake to influence an election merely by trying to keep outright lies off its platform, what was the National Enquirer doing in 2015 and 2016 when they were going around the country buying stories about bad behavior by Dotard, and then burying it under the lock of a NDA and an exclusivity agreement. The Enquirer later admitted to such behavior.

 

What about Bari Weiss? Is she controlled by the Russians too?