5 ms·

Here is a 37 page federal indictment of employees of the Internet Research Agency who were deeply involved in Russian-produced propaganda in the 2016 election.

by zzzeek 9y ago

Here is a 37 page federal indictment of employees of the Internet Research Agency who were deeply involved in Russian-produced propaganda in the 2016 election. This is neither a "meme" nor is it a creation of any "media" source. Worth a read: https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

briandear 9y ago
The question that is critical though -> was it with the knowledge and support of Trump or was the agistation designed simply to sow discord by taking out the front runner (Clinton.) My problem with this Russian thing is that they have failed to actually connect Trump to it in any convincing way but certain media outlets keep making the case that Trump is for the Russians, So, some are under the impression that Trump colluded with the Russians while the real story appears to be that Russia wasn’t colluding with Trump but simply trying to create chaos over the election process. There is evidence to this because some of this Russian stuff dates back to 2014 — long before Trump was even thinking about running and far before anyone took him to be a contender. There will be the argument that Trump’s campaign met with Russian officials during the campaign. However, if that’s suspicious, then we must question the Hillary campaign meeting with Chinese officials during the campaign as well (among many other countries.) This Russia thing is real; that Trump was part of it is not. Honestly, Trump wasn't sophisticated enough to run a multinational spy/propaganda operation with the Russians. If he were, then that would necessarily discredit arguments that he isn’t smart or sophisticated enough to be president.
- zzzeek 9y ago
  > My problem with this Russian thing is that they have failed to actually connect Trump to it in any convincing way but certain media outlets keep making the case that Trump is for the Russians That doesn't matter. The Russian government interfered, that's a fact. Also a fact, the president is illegally refusing to enact sanctions against Russia passed overwhelmingly by congress in retaliation for this interference. You should be extremely concerned that the president is actively breaking the law every day by refusing to defend the country against a foreign enemy. https://www.rawstory.com/2018/02/high-ranking-gop-congressman-blasts-trump-failure-enact-russia-sanctions-price-must-paid/ https://www.rawstory.com/2018/02/high-ranking-gop-congressma... > However, if that’s suspicious, then we must question the Hillary campaign meeting with Chinese officials during the campaign as well (among many other countries.) it is not illegal to speak to foreign governments during a political campaign. You should read up on the difference between accepting stolen materials from foreign governments, allowing foreign governments to spend money on a US poltiical campaign, vs. merely speaking to foreign governments. Not to mention that the House Intelligence Committee would be all over a Clinton scandal in the election if they could find one. They tried to fabricate the notion that the Russians were actually working for Clinton. That was a better stream of inquiry, they felt, than whatever this "meeting with Chinese officials" that some right wing blog has told you is important (I can't even find any google results for it).
PeterMikhailov 9y ago
Mueller directly states the he doesn't believe any of this affected the election. I have read that IRA spent about $500 each in ad buys in the 3 borderline blue/red 'purple' states that went to Trump in the Nov 2016 election. Even if we assume the 100k they spent on ad buys went directly to the 3 purple states, and generated a million CPM... ads paid for by the RNC and DNC and the PACs generated several trillion impressions.
- zzzeek 9y ago
  > Mueller directly states the he doesn't believe any of this affected the election. please cite this because that sounds like an extraordinary claim.
  - PeterMikhailov 9y ago
    You know what, I'm Fake News. I was not reading Mueller's remarks. I was reading Deputy Attorney General for the United States Department of Justice Rod Rosenstein's prepared remarks about the indictment. Rosenstein said there was no proof anything covered by the indictment affected the Nov 2016 election. Here is C-SPAN video of Rosenstein announcing the indicment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoAf_I3ULwE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoAf_I3ULwE at 5m 28s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoAf_I3ULwE&t=5m28s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoAf_I3ULwE&t=5m28s Rosenstein, reading from his prepared remarks, says: "There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election." I loathe linking to "real clear politics" but they put up a transcript: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/16/watch_live_deputy_ag_rod_rosenstein_announcement.html https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/16/watch_liv...
    - zzzeek 9y ago
      yes, he did say that, but also that does not say "he does not believe this affected the outcome". It was widely noted that his wording in this statement was extremely careful, and merely stated a true fact: "there is no allegation in the indictment". Which of course there isn't because it is impossible to legally prove the outcome of the election being affected by nearly anything. Having documents like this indictment that are 100% on solid ground is very helpful, as in this discussion it is pointing out how many people here seem unconcerned about foreign interference in an election due to reasons like "people want it to be true" and "you can't prove it changed the outcome". Those aren't good reasons to just let the Russians come in every election and go nuts.

by zzzeek 9y ago

briandear 9y ago

The question that is critical though -> was it with the knowledge and support of Trump or was the agistation designed simply to sow discord by taking out the front runner (Clinton.) My problem with this Russian thing is that they have failed to actually connect Trump to it in any convincing way but certain media outlets keep making the case that Trump is for the Russians, So, some are under the impression that Trump colluded with the Russians while the real story appears to be that Russia wasn’t colluding with Trump but simply trying to create chaos over the election process. There is evidence to this because some of this Russian stuff dates back to 2014 — long before Trump was even thinking about running and far before anyone took him to be a contender. There will be the argument that Trump’s campaign met with Russian officials during the campaign. However, if that’s suspicious, then we must question the Hillary campaign meeting with Chinese officials during the campaign as well (among many other countries.) This Russia thing is real; that Trump was part of it is not. Honestly, Trump wasn't sophisticated enough to run a multinational spy/propaganda operation with the Russians. If he were, then that would necessarily discredit arguments that he isn’t smart or sophisticated enough to be president.

zzzeek 9y ago
> My problem with this Russian thing is that they have failed to actually connect Trump to it in any convincing way but certain media outlets keep making the case that Trump is for the Russians That doesn't matter. The Russian government interfered, that's a fact. Also a fact, the president is illegally refusing to enact sanctions against Russia passed overwhelmingly by congress in retaliation for this interference. You should be extremely concerned that the president is actively breaking the law every day by refusing to defend the country against a foreign enemy. https://www.rawstory.com/2018/02/high-ranking-gop-congressman-blasts-trump-failure-enact-russia-sanctions-price-must-paid/ https://www.rawstory.com/2018/02/high-ranking-gop-congressma... > However, if that’s suspicious, then we must question the Hillary campaign meeting with Chinese officials during the campaign as well (among many other countries.) it is not illegal to speak to foreign governments during a political campaign. You should read up on the difference between accepting stolen materials from foreign governments, allowing foreign governments to spend money on a US poltiical campaign, vs. merely speaking to foreign governments. Not to mention that the House Intelligence Committee would be all over a Clinton scandal in the election if they could find one. They tried to fabricate the notion that the Russians were actually working for Clinton. That was a better stream of inquiry, they felt, than whatever this "meeting with Chinese officials" that some right wing blog has told you is important (I can't even find any google results for it).

PeterMikhailov 9y ago

Mueller directly states the he doesn't believe any of this affected the election. I have read that IRA spent about $500 each in ad buys in the 3 borderline blue/red 'purple' states that went to Trump in the Nov 2016 election. Even if we assume the 100k they spent on ad buys went directly to the 3 purple states, and generated a million CPM... ads paid for by the RNC and DNC and the PACs generated several trillion impressions.

zzzeek 9y ago
> Mueller directly states the he doesn't believe any of this affected the election. please cite this because that sounds like an extraordinary claim.
- PeterMikhailov 9y ago
  You know what, I'm Fake News. I was not reading Mueller's remarks. I was reading Deputy Attorney General for the United States Department of Justice Rod Rosenstein's prepared remarks about the indictment. Rosenstein said there was no proof anything covered by the indictment affected the Nov 2016 election. Here is C-SPAN video of Rosenstein announcing the indicment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoAf_I3ULwE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoAf_I3ULwE at 5m 28s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoAf_I3ULwE&t=5m28s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoAf_I3ULwE&t=5m28s Rosenstein, reading from his prepared remarks, says: "There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election." I loathe linking to "real clear politics" but they put up a transcript: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/16/watch_live_deputy_ag_rod_rosenstein_announcement.html https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/16/watch_liv...
  - zzzeek 9y ago
    yes, he did say that, but also that does not say "he does not believe this affected the outcome". It was widely noted that his wording in this statement was extremely careful, and merely stated a true fact: "there is no allegation in the indictment". Which of course there isn't because it is impossible to legally prove the outcome of the election being affected by nearly anything. Having documents like this indictment that are 100% on solid ground is very helpful, as in this discussion it is pointing out how many people here seem unconcerned about foreign interference in an election due to reasons like "people want it to be true" and "you can't prove it changed the outcome". Those aren't good reasons to just let the Russians come in every election and go nuts.