Elon Musk's AI chatbot says a 'Russian asset' delivered the State of the Union | Opinion

[ThatRobGuy]

I'd say a 75 percent probability of Trump being a Russian asset is being very conservative.

Keep in mind, being a Russian asset just means he's being manipulated by the Russian state apparatus to act in the interests of Russia. Ex-KGB agents like Yuri Shvets have already admitted that the KGB targeted Trump to groom him as a Russian asset. It has been speculated this was done through compromising material and blackmail, but it could have easily been done through business relationships and flattery, given Trump's massive ego and narcissistic personality, it wouldn't be hard to do.

Did Ex-KGB Spy Say Russia Cultivated Trump as an 'Asset' for 40 Years?

The accusation was made in a book and also in an interview with The Guardian.

www.snopes.com

That casts a pretty wide net for defining "asset", at least in terms of nefarious implications or in the political sense. "Flattery" and "various forms of pressure" mean that 90% of the congress is an "asset" for some entity or another (whether it be a private or public entity).


While I have no doubts that certain Ex-KGB agents would make such statements (the ex-spies willing to talk publicly always seem to convey some...let's just say, slightly exaggerated accounts of happenings). And perhaps conveys a level of precision that may not have existed. That's very reminiscent to the kinds of "spy big talk" that people like Malcolm Nance use when making public statements.


At best, it was perhaps a "cast a wide net/buckshot" approach, with the hopes that maybe something panned out?

Hollywood, Journalists, Professors, and High-profile people were their main targets.

According to historians, during the cold war, at any given time, they'd have thousands of different "cultivation and recruitment" efforts happening simultaneously.

Was Trump one of them? Who knows...I'm certainly not going to take the word of an ex-KGB guy who may be inflating his knowledge base on that.



But it does seem like it would've been a long shot to cultivate one guy to be an asset for 40+ years with any sort of precision, who only then would rise to power under conditions that they couldn't possibly predicted.

If you think about it, that's basically saying
"We got this guy who's very susceptible to flattery, and we've got some dirt on him... so, perhaps one day, 30-40 years from now, the US will have border issues and males will start peeing in the girls room, and that'll make 55% people so mad, that they'll vote this guy in as president, then we've got 'em!"

In order for them to orchestrate all of that while controlling the situation, they would have needed to have a different set of assets in the other party, and in the aforementioned realms of Hollywood, Journalism, and Academia, to push for those kinds of policies, in order to create the backlash they were banking on that would make their guy seem appealing to half of the population.

 

[ozso]

This angle which started in 2016 was already done to death years ago.

Here's an oldie:

 

[durangodawood]

This angle which started in 2016 was already done to death years ago.

It started in 2016 because prior to that: who cares?

And now we can see the tree bearing fruits.

 

[ozso]

It started in 2016 because prior to that: who cares?

And now we can see the tree bearing fruits.

No, there's absolutely nothing new in this. It's just a wash, rinse, repeat recycle. It has more milage than a transcontinental bus built in 1995.

 

[durangodawood]

No, there's absolutely nothing new in this. It's just a wash, rinse, repeat recycle. It has more milage than a transcontinental bus built in 1995.

Its not surprising.... to people who were paying attention.

But the way the asset is paying off, thats been accelerating. We can all see that.

Plus, what does the age of the accusation have to do with reality? If anything it lends credibility. This isnt just ginned up yesterday to suit the latest current events. Theres research going way back.

 

[BPPLEE]

That casts a pretty wide net for defining "asset", at least in terms of nefarious implications or in the political sense. "Flattery" and "various forms of pressure" mean that 90% of the congress is an "asset" for some entity or another (whether it be a private or public entity).


While I have no doubts that certain Ex-KGB agents would make such statements (the ex-spies willing to talk publicly always seem to convey some...let's just say, slightly exaggerated accounts of happenings). And perhaps conveys a level of precision that may not have existed. That's very reminiscent to the kinds of "spy big talk" that people like Malcolm Nance use when making public statements.


At best, it was perhaps a "cast a wide net/buckshot" approach, with the hopes that maybe something panned out?

Hollywood, Journalists, Professors, and High-profile people were their main targets.

According to historians, during the cold war, at any given time, they'd have thousands of different "cultivation and recruitment" efforts happening simultaneously.

Was Trump one of them? Who knows...I'm certainly not going to take the word of an ex-KGB guy who may be inflating his knowledge base on that.



But it does seem like it would've been a long shot to cultivate one guy to be an asset for 40+ years with any sort of precision, who only then would rise to power under conditions that they couldn't possibly predicted.

If you think about it, that's basically saying
"We got this guy who's very susceptible to flattery, and we've got some dirt on him... so, perhaps one day, 30-40 years from now, the US will have border issues and males will start peeing in the girls room, and that'll make 55% people so mad, that they'll vote this guy in as president, then we've got 'em!"

In order for them to orchestrate all of that while controlling the situation, they would have needed to have a different set of assets in the other party, and in the aforementioned realms of Hollywood, Journalism, and Academia, to push for those kinds of policies, in order to create the backlash they were banking on that would make their guy seem appealing to half of the population.

If they were actually able to pull that off seems like they would have went that route in Ukraine instead of going to war

 

[ThatRobGuy]

If they were actually able to pull that off seems like they would have went that route in Ukraine instead of going to war

I'm always a tad skeptical when you hear these interviews with guys who
"Used to be in the KGB"
"Used to be in the Cartel"
"Used to be in the CIA"
etc...

I don't doubt that they were technically in the respective organizations...
But it's one of those things where I would suspect that anyone actually "high up enough" in those organizations, probably would be keeping their mouth shut out of fear of certain "unfortunate accidents" that may occur.

If there was an Ex-KGB guy airing out legit soviet dirty laundry (that exposed something) to the Guardian newspaper, I suspect that would be one of those "hmmm, he was feeling fine yesterday, but then shortly after eating that bowl of soup, he had a heart attack and kicked the bucket...weird coincidence" types of things.

 

[ozso]

Its not surprising.... to people who were paying attention.

But the way the asset is paying off, thats been accelerating. We can all see that.

Plus, what does the age of the accusation have to do with reality? If anything it lends credibility. This isnt just ginned up yesterday to suit the latest current events. Theres research going way back.

What all you're saying has been said already. It's always coming to a head. It has little to do with reality. Flat earth research goes way back too. And there's new proof right around the corner.

 

[Laodicean60]

USAID isn't a CIA front... that's a conspiracy theory.

I think there has been an association between the two since Kennedy

 

[wing2000]

I think there has been an association between the two since Kennedy

There will always be someone who claims US agencies working abroad have an association with the CIA.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

USAID isn't a CIA front... that's a conspiracy theory.

Some confusion arises because while they may not be a CIA front directly, they have engaged in operations that are CIA'ish, for lack of a better term ...and that were undoubtedly orchestrated by some other agency other than their own.

USAID Funded Censorship, Smears of Americans

The controversial agency provides backdoor ways for the American government to finance propaganda against American citizens.

www.leefang.com

ZunZuneo - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

No matter which was you slice it:
- If someone within the USAID organization, directly, was hatching schemes to create Cuban uprisings via a subversion social media app, and deciding to fund foreign journalism outlets to run hit pieces on American and British journalists who are dissenting voices about Ukraine funding, then we can stop the whole "it's only about providing development aid" charade.
or
- USAID is being used as a slush fund for other agencies (perhaps the CIA being one of them) to undertake initiatives that are well outside the scope of "just providing development aid"

In either scenario, it warrants an in-depth auditing.

 

[durangodawood]

What all you're saying has been said already. It's always coming to a head. It has little to do with reality. Flat earth research goes way back too. And there's new proof right around the corner.

Of course its been said already. If the first you heard of this was from me, then yeah it would probably be just my imagination.

Also, Im not saying I know its true. Just that Trump is behaving as if its true.

 

[ozso]

Of course its been said already. If the first you heard of this was from me, then yeah it would probably be just my imagination.

Also, Im not saying I know its true. Just that Trump is behaving as if its true.

No, the first time I heard it was years before I became a member of this forum.

He always has been though ever since he won the first election according to some.

 

[timewerx]

In describing Grok, by the way, Musk said it is a “maximally truth-seeking AI, even if that truth is sometimes at odds with what is politically-correct.”​

I made the same conclusion about Trump during his first term. I even said it here. I did used to think He had Russian blood. It's the face, hair, and behavior.

Musk also looks Eastern European. I suspect a possible conspiracy between Trump, Musk, and the Russian Oligarchs for global domination. This is why I'm starting to root for China as the "equalizer" in this future dynamic.

 

[RileyG]

Elon Musk's AI chatbot says a 'Russian asset' delivered the State of the Union | Opinion

The chatbot Grok scoured available public data and found a '75-85% likelihood' that Donald Trump more or less works for Vladimir Putin.

www.usatoday.com

According to the AI chatbot called Grok, which was developed by Elon Musk’s company xAI, there is a “75-85% likelihood” that the person who delivered the State of the Union address on Tuesday night is a “Putin-compromised” Russian asset.​

​

In describing Grok, by the way, Musk said it is a “maximally truth-seeking AI, even if that truth is sometimes at odds with what is politically-correct.”​

​

There is a very clear pattern.

AI isn’t so intelligent?

Color me shocked

Oh noes!!!