Who is Yuri Chaika, Lulu - is this covered in the Mueller Report? 

I don’t know but should it have been? Should we readers of your link get dizzy when finding the name of a Russian propagandist, another particularly evil genius the likes of which our pure truth-tellers remind us that only the genetically twisted Russians produce to play the game every powerful country engages in? It has become routine for you and a couple others here to proclaim how smart you are or at least how un-dumb you are. Didn't you know that Russia had propagandists before you learned the actual name of one? 

There is so much that is not covered in the Meuller Report because of pertinent strands of information or evidence that were not even investigated. You defend that when it is convenient to make an attack rejoinder and refer to other articles such as your Abramson link which make the same point when that suits your spew. 

Is it possible to read fake AP/Reuters/AFP news and discover a glimpse of the truth?

You know, as well as anyone who read the comments I made on that thread, that I never said that everything or even that very much of the reporting by AP/Reuters/AFP was wrong anymore than AA said everything distributed by social media is wrong when she correctly held, as I acknowledged, that disinformation including deliberate propagandistic bullshit exists on social media and has a big affect.  I said that what the wire services report still has a big affect and that affect has not been totally negated by the great and rising affect of social media. I said that wire services get some first reports wrong and that sometimes disinformation is deliberately fed to the wire services, sometimes by our own intelligent services, just like as happens in social media. Your quoted sentence above is essentially a semi-subtle but deliberate misrepresentation of what I argued so as to start out with a put-down that is completely unsupported. To put a somewhat finer point on it, it is a deliberate lie intended as one more smear.

Mate` says Meuller couches many of his allegations as things that might be true. 

• "The report uses qualified and vague language to describe key events, indicating that Mueller and his investigators do not actually know for certain whether Russian intelligence officers stole Democratic Party emails, or how those emails were transferred to WikiLeaks."

You counter with an article that says,”New study shows Russian propaganda may really have helped Trump. “May” as in could have, but not be proven.  Its author, Damien Ruck,  was among a group of researchers who won a Defense Department grant this year to study Russian disinformation campaigns in Georgia, Ukraine, and Belarus through March 2024. There is too much evidence for anyone to deny that researchers often incorrectly find what they go looking for or what their paymasters wish to hear. But, when Ruck concludes that Russian meddling might have helped Trump win there is no denying that he might be right.   The admittedly, By Ruck, unproven results indicated by his study is an indictment of Russian meddling. It does not address the veracity of or the internal contradictions in Meuller's report or whether Meuller's investigation went everywhere it should have gone or whether criticisms of his investigation and final report are legitimate.  

Who is Yuri Chaika, Lulu - is this covered in the Mueller Report? 

I don’t know. Should it have been? Should we readers of your link then get dizzy when finding the actual name of a Russian propagandist, "The Kremlin's Master of Kompromat", and another particularly evil genius the likes of which, as we are often reminded, only the genetically twisted Russians produce to superbly play the game every powerful country engages in? 

There is so much that is not covered in the Meuller Report because of pertinent strands of information or evidence that were not even investigated. You defend that when it is convenient to make an attack rejoinder and refer to other articles such as the Abramson link which make the same point when that suits your spew. 

You are consistently moving in the direction of being an even more overinflated blowfish, happy to be in a shrinking pond surrounded by mirrors held up by the minnows that reflect what stokes your childish narcissistic bullying ego. To restate that in language you have legitimized for use here at dag, you are an uncontrolled, explosively defecating asshole.

We're not that stupid, Lulu, however many times you post this absolute garbage, I will rebut and refute you.

 An intellectually honest and fair treatment with honest dialog addressing what I say or post is not any part of your intent in your rejoinders. I will continue to post any god damned thing I feel has something to say worth reading and you can deal with it any way you choose.