uncadonego on 23/2/2021 at 11:50

---

With your penchant for motivated reasoning, it won't be long before you prove it to yourself....

Tocky on 24/2/2021 at 01:07

---

Do you realize we wouldn't even be here if it were not for the Citizens United decision brought about by Republicans?

Also LOL that Cipheron handed you your ass and you keep going like he didn't.

june gloom on 24/2/2021 at 03:58

---

Do you have proof of this?

june gloom on 24/2/2021 at 06:05

---

Okay, but I asked for proof, not a restatement of your claim.

Cipheron on 24/2/2021 at 10:59

---

Yes, I'm clearly an ActBlue employee, otherwise how would I have known how to look them up on Wikipedia?

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ActBlue)

I'd never even *heard* of ActBlue before writing that post, or possibly the one before it, about David Brock. I don't even live in America. It's called doing *extremely* basic research. It says they're a payments processor and that they charge a 3.95% fee on the Wikipedia article. So much for having employee-only knowledge. What the people feeding nbohr lack isn't some special knowledge, they lack basic knowledge such as for **what a payments processing platform does**.

It's a lack of basic common sense knowledge that also permeated that court document I shredded before, where they seemed confused about what a "similar domain" report actually meant. It just meant that one site has a subdomain similar in spelling to another site. It's just basic common sense about how domain registration works: supposedly some other sites were "connected" to Dominion, because they had **subdomains** that had the same spelling as a **misspelled** version of a Dominion domain (dvscopr instead of dvscorp), but Dominion doesn't have a domain called that (there is no such registered site as dvscopr.com). You don't need to be a computer scientist to realize that subdomains can be anything you like and don't require registration or uniqueness, and on top of that being "similar" to a site that doesn't even exist is extra meaningless. The writer of the court document pulled sleight of hand by saying that sometimes companies register a range of misspellings in order to pick up traffic where someone mistyped the address. However, the problem with using that argument is that *nobody* **ever** registered dvscopr.com, there are no registration records for such a domain on who-is. So saying that sites were "similar" to dvscopr is some weird sort of follow-the-links, but the stated links literally don't even exist, and when they do, they clearly don't make any sense. Debunking this is low hanging fruit that can be done on your lunch break.


As for the David Brock stuff, well working out that he's not connected to ActBlue wasn't exactly rocket science either. He's not mentioned anywhere in connection with it, and some googling did turn up a connection between him and something called "ShareBlue", which more google revealed absolutely no connection to ActBlue other than the word "Blue" so it was pretty obvious that someone got their wires crossed there, but in the "never fact check anything if the story is good" world of right-wing conspiracies, that's apparently enough for them to claim David Brock created ActBlue, despite their being literally no evidence of this being the case.



For the record, when I looked up WinRed, assuming they were just the same as ActBlue, I had no idea of the details. I just saw they're listed as a for-profit so I figured *someone* must be making money of it, but I had no idea who, so I did some digging.

It actually took quite a while before I found anything that mentioned Kushner, but at that point Trump's obsession with getting everyone to use that platform (even sabotaging rival Conservative donation platforms) started to make sense. Right up to the end I had no idea it had any Trump connection whatsoever, I just assumed it was feeding money into the RNC. That's why any mention of the Trump / Kushner connection is WAY down in my post. If I *had* known the connection to start with, I'd have written a much stronger post, to be honest, but it meanders because I was working it out as I went, and just kept finding more interesting stuff. Notice how I said at the top that ActBlue and WinRed are basically the same? Yeah, nope. I wouldn't have written that bit if I'd known then what I found out later.

But the reality, like always, turned out to be 10 times as corrupt as I had expected. Trump, like Steve Bannon and similar, have ZERO party loyalty. They'd rip gold teeth out of dying Republican boomers if they thought they could get away with it.

At least the worst they're saying with the ActBlue conspiracy theory is that it's feeding money into party coffers. If that's the case, then it wouldn't even be a huge issue for the donors, since it's a platform for DEMOCRATS, so if you told them a small percentage was going to the Democratic Party coffers, they probably wouldn't CARE. But WinRed is bypassing the Republican Party completely and they're desperate to skim money off every donation - and stick it into private pockets, not the party.