Google: evidence of deep state activity is spam

I found evidence of google censoring emails about the false information the FBI used to surveil the Trump campaign and some other memo-related stuff and made an infograph that rigorously proved it. Thoughts or feedback? Can any anons that donated to Trump and use gmail confirm? If it's good, feel free to use the information without attribution. I care more about the information getting out than having coins sent to my address. Circulate this around social media if you can.

Other urls found in this thread:

Pretty sure since they are a private company, Google can do whatever they want with stuff being sent through their services. That's probably some good food for thought.

Sounds like you're saying my graphic thoroughly stumps shills because your sole argument is a dumb line about excusing corruption and censorship because Google provided the platform.

No one is shilling anything. Read what was written, not whatever you imagining what was said.

Do they disclose that in the terms of service? If not, shut up fag.

no, especially when its not in the TOS faggot

I don't know as I have never read them. That's not really the point I'm making, though. It seems if someone doesn't make a post that is nothing but a rah-rah cheerleading rant full of anime pictures that the current, post-campaign user base is unable to see it as anything but a contrarian attack on whatever topic they've decided upon that day.

Let me be more specific: Google owns the service, they run it, they built it, they control it, they amend it, they expand it. The infrastructure and tools to do all of these things are in their hands. Complaining that it violates the TOS os service isn't particularly different than Saddam Hussein deciding to sell oil in Euros. You have to be able to do something about it – hence the "food for thought".

It's good to think about privatization, a solution that is often promoted in these circles post-campaign, and what it actually entails and the myriad of situations where its benefits, detriments, and limitations really shake out.

So, you're saying that since it's muh privat company that are above the law, and further more the Constitution?


What's with the sheckel begging QR codes? You some kind of heeb or something?

More confirmation that kikes can't find anything wrong with my info and methods? Read it over and debate me, chaim. Also, heeb doesn't bite enough when a jew hears it. Please use the word kike in my thread.

I remember an user presented a case once that showed by precedent that what you say isnt entirely true. Some lady was protesting something on a street in a town that was owned by a company. I think they tried to get her to stop but her free speech rights were upheld. Wish I knew more details. I am not a law user. Someone here knew this though.

Something along the lines of a company going out of its way to try to run everything being forced to accomodate the rights of its users or something.

Yea it was like that. This situation would be common law right? Precedent?

I'm sure there are technicalities involved, but a woman staging a garden variety protest on physical private property isn't really the same thing as the Google situation on a functional level. Keep in mind, in case you did not read beyond my first reply in this thread, I'm not endorsing Google.

No rabbi. It is not in the terms of service.
Many third party sites go through gmail, without alerting their customers to it.

OP if you want coverage on alternative media spam that graphic in
One thread is about 700pph
I still think the graphic doxxes you via the sender names, but the point made is clear enough.

That's not what I posted at all.

Thanks for the board suggestion. I think I should be safe from doxxing by anyone aside from Google, which would create a lot more trouble for them than the infographic itself.

what have we learned today?


Read exactly what is written, not what you imagine is being said. Food for thought.

^ kike

Remember, we're treading on Google's toes. It may be an actually competent bot.

When you subscribe to the service you agree to any shit they can do whit the stuff you send through. Clean and simple. You actually signed for it.

If you want to find a bot, look for the red texters. Try also reading beyond the first post of a thread, something bots may not be particularly interested in doing.

Not too many responses to that one.

Alternatives are coming this year. Already, there's been this released:

This is just the beginning. 2018's going to be great!

It's tricky. Who do you trust more and want to do business with? The 2 Big corps (((actually one company))) or the State that flips around erratically like the tail of some snake every 4 and 8 years?

Right. It's a much deeper and structural issue than just "Google is spying on me" or "Google is deciding what is and isn't truth". It's a question of how exactly we got here and what social conventions we keep adhering to that prevent us from effectively mitigating, minimizing, or eliminating these problems.

It probably goes all the way back to corporatism. Even Abraham Lincoln called that this would happen.

Oh, you don't think I'm a bot now?

I said "may", which is true and also not really something that can be disproven. I've seen how well Google's neural networks work.

I believe you're referring to Marsh v. Alabama.

On the off-chance you're being serious: There are plenty of reasons a libertarian would demand limits on Gmail. But rather than list them, let us only observe that, in the hands of a skilled manipulator, the axioms of libertarianism can be used to reach almost any conclusion about the world. Pic related, an example of the same effect at work, albeit with different axioms.

Education is key and it would be great if we could infiltrate the institutions… but you know that historically it doesn't work like that. the so-called right wing isn't built for that nonsense because nonsense like that is what gave birth to us. I don't know what to say except here's a picture

If I seen that stuff come in and I had no idea to expect it or who it was from it would send up spam flags for me. I can see why google thought it was spam based on the subject style alone.