mymonkeyhusb

I found this little historical treatise about the alternating rising and falling of the White House building. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/10/27/mansour-trumps-big-beautiful-ballroom-is-a-gift-for-america-in-the-best-tradition-of-his-predecessors/ Please don't judge a website by its political leanings. 🤔

Partisan as defined is "Adherent to a party or faction; especially, having the character of blind, passionate, or unreasonable adherence to a party" I am not partisan. I showed that I change my views when presented with evidence. Have you not glossed over my posts? Seems you overlooked that. Impartial as defined is "Not partial; not favoring one more than another" I never pretend to be impartial. I'm not impartial. I absolutely prefer sound and reasonable laws and political viewpoints from whoever has them. Agreed. No worries.

You are correct. My post title said so. Demeaning by the left. The reason for the post was that I noticed the invective against the right leaning posters in the Political Soapbox forum was intense and I didn't understand why. What knowledge of world history and even local history I have caused my common sense alarms to sound because posts were dehumanizing. I would like to hear you tell your story about how you arrived at our present political views. For example, I grew up with a father who only knew hard work on farms and heavy industry in West Virginia. Then he only knew hard work as a "Mule Skinner" in the 36th Infantry Division for 4 years of WW2 in Europe. Then he knew only hard work in the steel industry until he put himself through technical college and became a metalurgist. He was a Democrat until the party started their swing towards more liberal philosophy. His common sense passed on to me regarding acting your wage, being honest, take care of family and go fishing when opportunity allowed. He was very racist against blacks. Of course growing up in this environment, I adopted his racist views. He had great respect for religion and patriotism. As I grew up I noticed his racism, my racism clashed with the teachings of Jesus Christ (religion) and patriotism (Declaration, Bill of Rights and Constitution). Hapily my life path crossed with folks who were great teachers of American history, European history and religion. Even my love of the English language was started as a young boy by watching Firing Line with William F. Buckley who had a phenomenal command over all aspects of the language. High school was a disaster. Pot. Alcohol. Bad time. My financial views were born from experience. Don't get into debt. Racism was conquered with my first wife who was Ugandan from the Buganda tribe. She passed away three years in our marriage. She had three kids who were being educated in the U.S. and I saw them being taught reverse racism by black Americans. Ugh. This is when my views on education versus indoctrination were formed. I believe in the power of "We the people" to take action in controlling our government and making it ensure our basic rights are kept intact. I really want federal powers to be those constrained by the Constitution. States take over all the rest. I try to be a stickler about America being a democratic constitutional republic. I really don't want a pure democracy... it just takes a vote of 51% to silence me... permanently if voted on. Anyway, this short story explains how I arrived at the bedrock of my politics. I need to talk with folks who disagree with me. I've modified my views agreeing with left arguments on this forum. Yeah, it was a long post. Sorry about that.

Thank you for your reply. We both know there is common ground to meet and discuss upon. There's a way to bypass all this political mire and reason our way to a good outcome. I think we all know what needs to be done, our common sense tells us one of the first actions being communicate; make known your thoughts to the people in Washington who want to keep their jobs. Keep sending them your ideas until they notice and take you seriously. I do contact the President, my 2 Senators and my Representative in the House. Your post should be taken to heart by all in this forum. Message to President Trump: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/ Message to your Senators: https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm?Class=1 Message to your House of Representative: https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

One more comment please. It's a wonderful experience to read a lot of different genres which broadens my vocabulary amazingly fast and allows me to put word to thought. Two necessary things I use for communicating my thoughts are an older dictionary and a complete thesaurus. Better if they're books and not online. That's just my preference. It's a constant quest to zero in on the exact English word that precisely conveys on paper the pure meaning of the thought in my head. It's a satisfying and enjoyable process. I have my own thoughts which I value and communicate to others if I think they may benefit from them.

Thanks for your reply. The source is myself. Why would you assume I copied from a right side source? I simply express my thoughts here on AN. So, what does it matter if demeaning started by left or right ? The subject of my post IS about demeaning people and more. Summarizing the big picture: don't do it. Don't participate in making anybody subhuman. Right or left. Throwing mud at people i.e. demaning isn't really good... you get your own hands dirty and you tend to lose a lot of ground.

The Left’s Moral Blind Spot: Moral superiority arrogance. There’s something dark happening in the way we talk about politics — especially on the left, the side that once prided itself on empathy. Once upon a time, compassion was the calling card of the political left. The movement championed empathy, inclusion, and understanding — the belief that even those we disagree with deserve dignity. Yet in recent years, that moral high ground has eroded under a rising tide of contempt. Too often, people who identify with the left now resort to the very language they once condemned — branding their political opposites as monsters, vermin, NAZIs, Hitler or subhuman. Compassion used to mean listening. It used to mean seeing the humanity in someone even when you couldn’t stand their opinion. But lately, it feels like that moral compass has spun out of control. Too many voices that once preached kindness now drip with venom when they speak about anyone to their right. Today I do not see compassion anymore. Just tribal loyalty wearing a halo. This isn’t compassion for the politically misled and unwashed. I see from the left a moral superiority asserted on anyone who disagrees with them. It’s moral self-deception. And it’s spreading. It’s a cruel irony. The same activists who demand tolerance for their paradigm have learned to justify hatred, so long as the target wears the wrong color of ideology. Social media teems with posts that decry “hate” one moment and call for the “eradication” of right-wing thought the next. This isn’t progress; it’s regression in moral disguise. It certainly isn’t moral superiority. The tragedy is that many of these people still believe they’re on the side of good. They think their anger is noble. But the moment you call another person “less than human,” you surrender a piece of your own humanity in the process. Dehumanizing language is not new, but it’s always dangerous. The moment we strip a person’s humanity away, any cruelty toward them begins to feel righteous. It’s the oldest psychological trick in the book — the way all forms of persecution begin. We tell ourselves we’re fighting evil, and in that conviction, we permit ourselves to become what we claim to oppose. Dehumanization is one of the oldest tools of oppression. It’s how we justify cruelty — by convincing ourselves that our target doesn’t deserve empathy. Once you start believing your opponents are monsters, it becomes easy to treat them monstrously. And when that happens, your righteousness curdles into something disgusting and ugly. You can see it everywhere — on social media, in comment sections, even in conversations among friends. Words like vermin, fascist, disease, subhuman are tossed around like punctuation marks. The people who use them often believe they’re defending justice or progress. But if you strip away the moral packaging, it’s just hate dressed in virtue’s clothing. Of course, not everyone on the left engages in this behavior. But when movements built on empathy begin to use “subhuman” rhetoric, they forfeit their own credibility. You cannot build a just world on the foundation of contempt. Political disagreement does not make someone an enemy of humanity. The health of any democratic republic depends on our ability to see the person behind the opinion — to argue fiercely (preferably in facts and logically), yet never forget the shared humanity of those across the aisle. When we fail to do that, our words, no matter how righteous they sound, turn to ash. This isn’t a defense of the right. It’s a defense of decency. A democratic republic dies when conversation turns into excommunication — when debate becomes a blood sport of moral superiority. We can’t claim to fight for justice if our weapons are humiliation and hate. We can’t heal division by demeaning each other. Because in the end, every time we use words to erase someone’s humanity, our words — no matter how righteous they sound — become ignorable.

Great post. Apparently it's quite legal to do. Here's the explanation where Trump tells Beck how the whole process started. It's about halfway down in the transcript. It's actually quite amusing. https://www.glennbeck.com/radio/trump-destroying-the-white-house In summary, President Trump told Beck he asked can he do it. He was told sure he can. He's the man in charge there while he's President. Trump asked how long for all the necessary permits to be completed. He was told he must sign all the permits. He could then proceed to construct. I see all kinds of bloviating going on out there about legality and destroying the entire White House grounds and the sky is falling and people are dying in the streets and stuff like that there. So, I said to myself, "Self, let's go to the White House website and see what kind of 'splaining they're doing over there. They have a historical timeline of what previous Presidents have done with the White House. I had no idea! And a lot of changes were done on the taxpayer's dime! Not good. Even recently before Trump there's been significant changes to the entire area. Trump is apparently getting $ from donations and out of his own pocket. Is good. Even donations from leftist media corporations. https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/the-white-house/ And what about all the gold guiding? From the Beck transcript: BECK: He wants to get rich people to pay for it, go for it. I don't want any of my tax dollars going for it. STU: Right. So my criticism is not how it looks. And that we need it. We actually showed the inside of it. It seems like the facility we should have for these type of events. We're going to have them somewhere. Why not have them there? GLENN: Right. And who better to build it than one of the best builders of all time. STU: Donald Trump. We've had this conversation about how you project American power. GLENN: Yes. STU: And I think Trump's approach to -- particularly in the Middle East. I think it's been effective around the world. Of these trappings actually are effective in diplomatic relations with other nations. Donald Trump has a lot of places that are lined in gold. That can have meetings. It's not like that's what he wants it for. The left tries to portray. Of course, he does. No. It means something to him. And he knows how these people think. GLENN: No. No. Because I asked. I -- I won't tell the whole story. But I really want to, really desperately. STU: Hmm. GLENN: But, you know, he's gilding everything. And that's not necessarily my favorite look. STU: Right. GLENN: And -- and he -- he came in, Tania and I were alone in the Oval for a while. And we were talking about it. And he comes in. He says, you know, I'm doing all of this. You see all the gold? Yes. You can't miss it. You can't miss the gold. And he's like, you know, it's so important. These foreign leaders, they all come from palaces. And they don't understand. And I know, you know, the White House is different. America is different. But they understand power in a different way. And he said, they are coming from these old countries. And these big buildings. And these palaces. And he said, it is important for us to project power. STU: Yes! GLENN: And that's -- and that is why he's doing this. Not because he likes gold. He's doing it to project power and wealth. Notice how many prime ministers. They're all flying in all the time, from all over the world. You know, I've never seen a president meet with so many foreign dignitaries in the White House all the time! STU: Yeah. And the media likes to say, well, that's because he's self-important. And he's -- GLENN: No. He's projecting American power. STU: Yes. I think so too. When I say it's important to him. That's why it's important to him. He believes it's an important tool in that world. GLENN: Correct. It's not him. He knows the language they speak. And not just body language or, you know, spoken language. All of the entire -- that's what protocol is all about. It all means something. As usual, you have to get info from all sides.

If only people would apply their energy to developing the base (local land) for growing food, stomachs would be full, people satisfied and the need to conquer might be reduced. If one could implement the info you've given, a legacy garden would be handed down generations to come. I'm prepping the ground now, spending more time to build a viable growing medium so I can plant and eat rather than performing emergency intervention to save sickly plants. Sage advice. Thanks again!

Spot on. B12 supplements for sure. Getting fats from things like avocado, various nuts and seeds, tofu, edamame, dark choc, etc. Surprising amount of proteins in veggies but can ensure aminos by eating things like Bragg's amino or plant based protein powders you mix with liquid. You are right. It's easy to become malnourished without dairy and meats. I reckon you could eat a small amount of meats like chicken breast or fish to cover the protein necessities. Quinoa is rumored to be complete protein. If I experience anything other than good health from my diet, I will surely post. Amazing how the body will repair itself if given the proper input. Cheers

I was diagnosed with pre diabetes and didn't change anything in my lifestyle. Of course, recently I was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Blood sugar 128. All the other numbers in the type 2 range . My family has heart and stroke history too. I decided get my butt in gear and change. A doctor at the Cleveland Clinic promoted plant based diet to cure what ails you. I tried it and in two months my blood sugar number reduced to 118 as did all the other diabetes indicators. I'm now back to pre diabetic and will work my way out of prediabetes to normal. I make salads with EVERYTHING IN IT! I make my own thousand island dressing, no oil. I eat legumes, dark green leafy veggies, and any other edible plant I can find. B12 supplement, high calcium foods. Hope this helps someone here in LOS. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/departments/wellness/integrative/esselstyn-program

Many thanks. I'm looking for that type of tiller. Looks like it's relatively easy to control. Will make many smaller beds and plant a wide variety of veggies. BTW, I have reversed my diagnosis of type 2 diabetes by switching to a mostly plant based diet. Blood sugar from 128 to 118 in two months. Lost lots of fat, more energy, breathing easier, 40 inch waist to 36 and working on 34 as I type. Dark green leafy vegetables at top of list. If the food has a face or a mom, I don't eat it. Mostly vegan I reckon. B12, supplements, lots of high calcium foods, legumes and lots of kale. Thanks again.

Drtreelove, thanks! Your info more than helps in so many ways. Appreciate it!

Thanks, I forgot about the different types of sand. Could make the soil even worse than it is. Our area is known for two things: coconut trees and back filling land with rocky red colored dirt or black/gray clay from rice paddies. My land has about 30 cm of red rocky dirt dumped on top of another 30 cm of black/gray very sticky rice paddy clay. I plan mixing a new layer of good soil into what I have. I'm not sure what to buy to amend. Rice husks, rice char, coconut coir and other organics. I think you're right about organics because too much will not hold water for very long. I know some types of clay begin as a sticky mess but later break up into almost a loamy consistency. I think I need to investigate available clay types in LOS. Check out some areas where rice paddy clay has become after sitting in the weather for a year. Thanks for your help!

Hi all. Just looking for recommendations on where to buy heirloom veggie seeds. Disappointed a few times now with the genetically altered seeds that give one crop only, if it makes seeds either their seeds are sterile or the new plant doesn'tbred the same parent plant. I'm okay with mail ordering but just don't know who to trust. Any input is greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Hi all. In the U.S., I had an old (1970s) Garden Way Troy-bilt rear tine rototiller that was absolutely awesome. I turned hard pan clay into wonderful soil; breaking ground, adding amendments, weeding and hoeing, hilling and finally tilling under the garden plants after the season finished. I could walk with it guiding by one hand. Our family has 9 rai of fairly decent soil and we'd love to succession plant veggies, increasing number of beds in time. I say all this to ask you folks if you have experience with rototillers available in LOS. I'm looking for recommendations on which tellers are good with parts availability (like replacement tines). I'd appreciate your input. Thanks!

Oh... how did I get dragged into this? Well I sometimes lapse into believing people are naturally kind, human nature is loving until someone reminds me otherwise. Thanks Nick.

Has anyone mixed various media to make a veggie garden soil? I'm hoping to find a mix that best holds water. What materials are you using? What ratios? I'm in Samut Songkhram where everywhere is red rocky dirt or amazingly sticky black rice field clay. Thanks!

Thanks for your reply. I think we're experiencing the foibles of internet texting... meaning it's easy to misunderstand or misinterpret what's being received. The Federalist quotes were posted because after much time and many many fruitless searches, it was the first website that quoted the actual words of FCC's Carr and sure I made a mistake by not finding other sources. My excuse is I had spent a ridiculous amount of time trying to find a quote... any quote... and was happy to find quotes from Carr and posted it. You'll notice that the next source was Chat GTP, a hidden indicator to everyone reading my post that I was very fed up with the difficulty finding info. If I had found accurate Carr quotes on a leftist website, I would have posted from that source. If I comprehend what Occam's razor is about; when you have two or more explanations for the same phenomenon, you should choose the simplest one, requiring the fewest statements that are taken for granted... the resulting explanation should be preferred... then I think Occam's razor isn't applicable here because there's no competing explanation nor a same phenomena. I just search for info, facts wherever I find them to help me understand what's happening. Is it coincidence I search for alternative viewpoints? I think you'd say coincidence isn't a factor. I enjoy AN as I can exercise my ability to think and grow through others, like you, sharing their thoughts with me. I'm going to take a break from AN for a while, wife wants a veggie garden. How about giving our discussion a cordial mai pen lai and choak dee? All the best to you!

Thanks for your reply. I simply wanted to see if there are reasonable explanations that support Trump's decision. I heard from one side's argument and wanted another perspective. I disagree my simple motive of hearing alternative arguments is biased framing. If anything, I wanted to prevent biased framing by selecting Chat GPT 5. Thinking about it, I don't think I posted the actual query in the Chat GPT question box and that might allow for miscommunication. Sorry for that. I see people in the left and the right living in an echo chamber passing the same simple messages that reaffirm their viewpoints; people sitting in an echo chamber, listening only to themselves. Same with politicized websites. Hence I dared to see what Chat GPT 5 may offer hopefully outside the encountered bias I couldn't avoid. I never waved Chat GTP 5 as an authority. I just posted the fresh perspective from Chat GPT 5. Not sure how you can say I had an "illogical appeal to authority by waving ChatGPT like proof — when it only reflects what you feed it, like any other text editor". "If you were really serious, you’d use AI to run a high-level fact-check alongside a logical fallacy and biased framing analysis, and keep going until you have something that holds up." You obviously have much more training in search methods than I and I respect that. "Until then, you’re just quoting yourself." Well, I disagree. I'm guilty of quoting Chat GPT 5. Thanks. All the best to you.

Thanks for your reply. I think understand your meaning. You'll rule your own life thank you very much. I never said the Founding docs are in any way a religion. I'm saying that it is great that most of us agreed on a game plan and some rules to follow when living in a community. I'm very happy the cars at the intersection stop for their red light while I drive through my lane with the green light. Okay, you might say this community rule you'd select because this moral idea keeps you and others safe. What about your moral choices towards your family, neighbors, town, state, etc.? What if your morals clash with theirs? But now you have me curious. Where did you get the ideas to base the foundation for your morality? I learned about ideas about morality that are thousands of years old (secular and religious). In other words, I never created a new moral idea, I chose from the available and proven morals that mankind slowly tested throughout history and found true and workable by all. In other words, I have formed my morals from supreme moral law givers preceding me. You say you make your own morality and pooh pooh the adoption of and participation in a foundational agreed upon set of moral principles. If everyone did that, it would be very problematic. It would be: One man loves his brother. Another man eats his brother. What's your preference? Would you abandon or break laws in place that conflict with your morality? What would you do if the rest of the community sentenced you for not cooperating according to their agreed upon morality? It would tough for everyone living in the absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose. Anarchy is the word I'm thinking of. Thanks for your reply. It got me thinking. All the best to you.

If someone walked up to you and said, "Quckly: For $1,000.00 and no internet (gasp): state what the Amendments of the Bill of Rights are!" Pressing on, when is the last time you've read the Declaration of Independence? Whoa, how about the full text of the Constitution? Please hold your slavery comments. The way the doc was set up allowed and waited for mankind to become a more moral society and live up to the ideals within. It seems to me that when everyone knows what the game plan is (the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights), the people can act together accordingly and achieve great things. But what happens when most of the folks haven't any knowledge of the contents of their game plan? Think of a football team where every player decides in his own mind what the next play should be. Utter embarrassing disarray and interception. Seems like this is an illustration of the division within our country. I agree with the "long game" idea that you can take over a country without firing a shot by infiltrating the schools beginning at kindergarten and deny quality education to a point where they cannot critically think and are taught useless things to prep them for life. Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Speech, and the Press Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Amendment 2 - The Right to Bear Arms A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed. Amendment 3 - The Housing of Soldiers No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war but in a manner to be prescribed by law. Amendment 4 - Protection from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment 5 - Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. Amendment 6 - Rights of Accused Persons in Criminal Cases In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. Amendment 7 - Rights in Civil Cases In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law. Amendment 8 - Excessive Bail, Fines, and Punishments Forbidden Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Amendment 9 - Other Rights Kept by the People The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment 10 - Undelegated Powers Kept by the States and the People The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. https://nccs.net/blogs/americas-founding-documents/bill-of-rights-amendments-1-10 I think life would be better if all of us were on the same game plan.

Footnote links did not work with original post A call to rational discussion. Will try this way. Hope it works. https://apnews.com/article/charlie-kirk-russia-china-disinformation-putin-trump-bce0174644351c70811ae4a847ffa767 https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/17/charlie-kirk-shooting-disinformation-russia-china-iran-00570357?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ai-false-claims-charlie-kirk-death/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://cyabra.com/reports/profiles-of-influence-disinformation-and-the-charlie-kirk-assassination/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.wusf.org/2025-09-18/foreign-influencers-are-doing-their-best-to-spin-the-charlie-kirk-assassination?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/china-rejects-disinformation-in-wake-of-us-conservative-charlie-kirks-assassination/3685848?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.cyfluence-research.org/post/crc-weekly-cyber-based-hostile-influence-campaigns-1st-7th-september?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.22838?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.22686?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Comment: I've nearly given up using left and right leaning websites to search for facts regarding recent news. Looking for nuggets of unbiased truthful reporting or for that matter the actual comments made by people in the news is tough. Feels like I'm searching for Easter eggs in a mine field. So, I'm trying out Chat GPT 5 hoping its programmers haven't infused their politics into the software. Good game, good game. Personally regarding political discussion I trust no one but I RESPECT anyone who has a civil rational discussion with me. I've learned much and changed my way of thinking because of these folks. Chat GPT 5: Are Bots Being Used to Divide the U.S.? Yes — and this is real and well-documented. Social media bots and coordinated disinformation campaigns have been used by both foreign and domestic actors to exploit political and social divisions in the U.S. This has been particularly visible during: Election cycles (e.g. 2016, 2020) Social justice movements (e.g. Black Lives Matter) Pandemic discourse (e.g. vaccines, lockdowns) Major violent events (e.g. mass shootings, protests) 🔍 Examples of Bot Activity: Russian Interference (2016 U.S. Election): The Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian entity, created thousands of fake social media accounts. Bots impersonated both liberal and conservative Americans to amplify division. COVID-19 Disinformation: Bots spread conspiracy theories about the virus's origin, vaccine safety, and government mandates. Racial and Social Tensions: Bot networks amplified both sides of controversial issues (e.g., police violence, immigration), intentionally to sow chaos. Artificial Amplification: Bots inflate the visibility of certain narratives or hashtags, making fringe ideas appear mainstream. 👁️ How Can You Tell? Signs of bot-driven campaigns include: Repetitive, low-effort messages Accounts with high activity but little personal content Coordination across multiple platforms with similar phrasing Sudden spikes in hashtag usage are bots being used to divide the country in the last few weeks? Yes — there is credible reporting that bots (and foreign disinformation campaigns) are being used in recent weeks to deepen political divisions in the U.S., especially following the killing of Charlie Kirk. AP News+1 Here are some specifics: What’s Going On After Charlie Kirk’s death, foreign adversaries including Russia, China, and pro‑Iran groups rapidly pushed false or misleading narratives online, using bots and fake accounts to amplify them. AP News+1 These disinformation campaigns are designed to stoke polarization: they recycle existing conspiracy theories, push false claims (e.g. about who was responsible, what motivations were), and generally aim to worsen distrust and conflict among Americans. Politico+1 Authorities (and experts) are warning that AI‑generated content is making it easier to generate false posts, deepfakes, and other manipulative media, increasing the speed and scale of disinformation. AP News+1 Caveats & Scale These bot‑ and disinformation operations are typically a small portion of total social media content, but their potential impact is magnified by how social media algorithms and human behavior amplify provocative or emotionally charged content. AP News+1 Since much of social media content moderation and detection is imperfect, it's often hard to tell exactly how many accounts are bots vs. humans repeating or amplifying false content. Experts are still investigating and tracking these. Politico If you want, I can pull up some recent data/reports (including estimates) to show how many bot‐accounts are active or how big their reach is. Do you want me to dig that? Here’s a summary of what recent reporting and expert analysis say about bot / disinformation activity in the U.S. in recent weeks (especially related to Charlie Kirk’s killing), along with what is known — and what is still uncertain. ✅ What we do know From credible sources: State‑linked media mentions According to the misinformation tracker NewsGuard, state‑run media in Russia, China, and Iran mentioned Charlie Kirk more than 6,000 times between September 10‑17, 2025. Politico+1 These mentions often included false or misleading narratives (e.g. false claims about the shooter’s motivations or identity) and conspiracy theories. ABC News+3Politico+3News24+3 Bot / disinformation amplification Officials including Utah Gov. Spencer Cox have said there is “a tremendous amount of disinformation,” and assert that bots (from Russia, China, etc.) are being used to “instill disinformation and encourage violence.” WUSF+3Politico+3Anadolu Ajansı+3 AI chatbots and platforms (e.g. Grok on X, Perplexity) were observed generating false info, including misidentifying suspects, spreading incorrect claims like Kirk being alive after his death, etc. These got circulated before corrections. CBS News+2DISA+2 Scale of reach of disinformation Cyabra (a disinformation tracking / analytics firm) claims that four viral posts, amplified by fake accounts, reached over 467 million potential views in under a week following Kirk’s assassination. Cyabra State media mentions (6,200+) from adversarial countries are part of attempts to shape narratives. News24+1 ⚠️ What’s uncertain or not yet confirmed There are several gaps or caveats in what's known so far: It’s not clear how many of those state media mentions / “bots” are actually reaching U.S. audiences, or how many people in the U.S. are being directly influenced by them. Some research says foreign influence campaigns often have more impact abroad or within echo chambers than widespread mass influence. WUSF+1 The degree to which bots (versus real people repeating false content) are responsible for spreading the false narratives is still being investigated. While bots are involved, distinguishing authentic human reposts from bot amplification is technically hard. Substantiation of specific numbers (of bots, or bot accounts) is partial. Some claims are based on potential views (“potential reach”) rather than reliably measured views. “Potential views” often overestimate actual engagement or belief. Cyabra’s 467 million figure is about how many could see content, not how many definitely believed or engaged with it. Cyabra Some adversarial states have denied involvement or rejected accusations. Anadolu Ajansı+1 🎯 Summary Estimate Putting together what is known: At least thousands of disinformation mentions from state media in Russia, China, Iran in the week after the event. (~6,000‑6,200 mentions.) Politico+2News24+2 Several major posts by fake/influenced accounts with potential reach in the hundreds of millions. Cyabra Dozens (if not more) of AI‑generated or AI‑mistaken posts (from bots or chatbots) spreading false information immediately after the event. CBS News+2DISA+2 So overall: yes, there’s strong evidence of bot/influence‑efforts magnifying discord. But in terms of precise metrics (how many bot accounts, how many people influenced, how much actual effect on beliefs or behavior) those are not yet solidly quantified. If you like, I can try to find more technical / academic tracking (e.g. from bot detection firms) that gives ranges (e.g. % of posts, % of traffic) outside the media / initial reports. Do you want that deeper dive? Here’s what I found by digging into more technical / academic sources & tracking‑firms about bot / AI‑driven disinformation activity recently. Some of it is directly about the Charlie Kirk case; more is general but helps understand scale and dynamics. There remain significant uncertainties, but we can outline what’s known, what’s estimated, and what still needs more study. 🔍 What the Tracking / Reports Show Cyabra report: “Profiles of Influence: Disinformation and the Charlie Kirk Assassination” Fake / inauthentic accounts amplified content. Four viral posts reached ~467 million potential views in under a week. Cyabra These posts were spread by accounts judged as fake or inauthentic by the platform / Cyabra. Cyabra The narratives were negative / misleading and designed to inflame division. Cyabra Failures of AI chatbots / generative tools CBS News and other outlets documented multiple errors from AI tools like Grok and Perplexity, including misidentifying the suspect, claiming Kirk was still alive, describing real footage as satire or meme, etc. The Star+3CBS News+3DISA+3 These misstatements often spread before corrections. Once the false content gets reshared, corrections are slower to propagate. CBS News+1 Change in AI false‑information / failure rates NewsGuard found that generative AI tools are repeating false narratives at a higher rate than one year ago. In particular, a cited rate of “failure” (i.e. giving false or misleading information) for news‑related prompts has increased from ~18% in 2024 to ~35% in 2025. CRC This suggests that as AI tools become more “real‑time” and more responsive (pulling from live or semi‑live web content), their vulnerability to disinformation (malicious or erroneous) increases. CRC What proportion of content is fake / bot / inauthentic Cyabra’s data gives some idea of reach (“potential views”) rather than number of accounts or share of total traffic. So it highlights that certain false posts amplified by fake accounts can reach a very large audience. Cyabra But there is no definitive public number yet that says “X% of all posts about Kirk were from bots” or “Y% of engagement was from inauthentic actors” beyond those case studies. General research on bot detection techniques / trends The paper “Social Media Bot Detection Research: Review of Literature” (March 2025) reviews many methods and studies, showing bots are being used to spread political messages, conspiracy theories, rumors etc. It highlights evolving bot concealment techniques, meaning bots are getting better at seeming like real human users. arXiv The meta‑analysis “Truth in Text: A Meta‑Analysis of ML‑Based Cyber Information Influence Detection Approaches” shows many ML‑based disinformation/bot detection systems report accuracies often above ~80%, though with high variance between methods and domains. arXiv ⚠️ Key Limitations / What We Don’t Yet Know Well “Potential views” vs real engagement or belief effects: Many reports measure how many people could see content (reach) rather than how many did see, engage, or believe it. Reach overestimates impact. Bot vs human overlap: Some content is spread by real humans who pick up false narratives (from social media etc.), not just bots. It is hard to disaggregate how much amplification comes from bots/influenced accounts vs regular users. Incomplete detection: Some bot detection tools miss “sophisticated bots” or accounts that are partially automated / human hybrid. Also fringe platforms or less regulated platforms are less studied. Real‑time tracking is hard: In fast‑moving events (breaking news), misinformation and bots are active, but measuring their share quickly is challenging. Delays in detection or correction often mean false narratives get ahead. Bias in datasets: Some studies use datasets skewed toward certain platforms, languages, or types of content. So their findings may not generalize everywhere. 🎯 My Estimate / Synthesis Based on the above, here’s a rough sense of scale (with uncertainty) for the Charlie Kirk case & similar events: A small minority of posts immediately (within hours) are from bots/fake accounts, but those tend to be very visible / viral. A few high‑impact posts (4 or so in this case) had outsized reach (hundreds of millions potential views) because of amplification by fake or poorly moderated accounts. AI‑chatbots contributed measurable falsehoods in early narratives (suspect misID, survival claims) that were then disseminated by human users. The “error / false narrative rate” for AI tools seems to have gone up to ~35% for news‑related prompts (from ~18% previously) in recent audits. Overall, these bot / AI contributions likely represent somewhere between 5‑20% of the most viral or influential content in such a situation (very rough guess), but much more of the noise and false/misleading content ends up being spread by humans once seeded.

Thanks for clarifying about FCC news distortion. Now I have to see why Carr said what he said. Odd he would say anything without solid background. During the show's opening monologue, Kimmel said: "We hit some new lows over the weekend, with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as •anything other than one of them• and doing everything they can to score political points from it." In his monologue Kimmel both implies AND infers that Kirk's assassin was in the" MAGA gang". This is the root of the controversy. I'm 100% 1st Amendment. Kimmel has a right to say but what he said wasn't a joke to so many people. Easily interpreted as a statement reflecting a true story. Not surprised by the response of the MAGA gang. Regarding the Time article, it's superceded by new info that shows the reason, the motivation of the assassin. Twiggs: Why? Robinson: Why did I do it? Twiggs: Yeah. Robinson: I had enough of his hatred. https://www.newsweek.com/tyler-robinson-roommate-lance-twiggs-charlie-kirk-texts-2130798 If you look at the timing you'll find plenty of "their side did it" from leftists and rightists. https://www.newsweek.com/charlie-kirk-murder-tyler-robinson-maga-liberals-2129055 Did Kimmel lie? The only way I see that he couldn't have lied is if he never read, saw or heard any news reports that the assassin was leftist and not of the MAGA gang. Thank you for your post. Thanks for the FCC info. I'm glad you gave me that info. Rational discussion. Gotta love it.