By a campaign staffer’s admission, Facebook personally told them that what they were doing was not OK so... yes?

> combined with funds illegally collected from a hostile foreign power

Is this a new talking point? Russia financed the Trump campaign now?

If you can prove it, Mueller is all ears.

With so many Russians already indicted over this and clear money flows recorded from investigative journalism, I think it is quite clear what happened with foreign funds being used from Russia -> NRA, Trump orgs, etc prior to, during and after the election.

Edit: I have been banned again from replying to HN comments, I do not understand why but I guess it has to do with a lot of people downvoting me quickly. I don't know. Anyway, here is my reply to the comment below.

> CNN

I don't understand what the entertainment company CNN is doing in this conversation. They have nothing to do with this?

> FUD

I am not spreading FUD. I am merely talking about recent news articles in the New York Times and Washington Post. I'm not sure what you mean by FUD here, but surely if there is FUD about it is the FUD that Trump is the legitimate president and that no outsiders or illegal actors had any influence on democracy in the last number of years. That would be the real FUD of the situation.

It definitely works, meaning it shifts the public opinion, and quite effectively so, but I would rather examine the facts and form my own opinion after such examination. If I ever want to go to the second step without first one, I can always watch some CNN.

I'm not moving any goal posts. User sverige and everyone else has declined to even mention which "it" is being referred to in this whataboutism of "Obama did it too" stuff. My point is and has always been that there is no comparison to be made here, the usage and methods taken by Obama's campaign are totally simple and small and legal compared to the methods taken by Cambridge Analytica/Facebook/Trump et al. recently.