How Exactly Did The Russians Influence The U.S. Elections?

[Underhill]

I expected this.

I gave him your home address.

Go back and read my edit. I quoted your own article. Every single listed possible corruption has a disclaimer saying there is no actual evidence.

 

[Revoltingest]

Go back and read my edit. I quoted your own article. Every single listed possible corruption has a disclaimer saying there is no actual evidence.

Computer is dead.
Using phone.
Must postpone in depth response.

 

[Scuba Pete]

You have made hay over Hillary being corrupt with no evidence.

It's the best evidence we have that he's Republican even though he denies it vehemently. Why else would anyone defend them beyond reason?

The more adamantly they deny the Russians have had any influence in the outcome of this election the more desperate they appear. They aided and abetted the Russian Government in embarrassing the USA. They did a good job and should be proud of their involvement. Not everyone can claim to be a Russian agent provocateur. It'll look good on your resume.

 

[metis]

Isn't it just the height of hypocrisy that those who gullibly voted for Trump, while the latter was repeatedly talking about how "corrupt" the system was, now blindly ignore the evidence accepted by members of both parties that have been briefed that indeed there appears to have been some corruption of the process involved because of the Russian hacking. And then they ignore that Trump actually asked the Russians at one of his rallies to dig and find some more on Hillary to release.

BTW, today Trump finally admitted that he has some "concern" about what might have happened. So, are his gullible groupies now going to tow Comrade Trump's new "company line" or are they going to ignore him as well? Stay tuned.

 

[metis]

Nah, he's all yours[someone else]. (If you need evidence, see above)

I want nothing to do with him.

Yep, if they voted for him, they now "own" him. Like the old saying goes, "if you break it, you bought it".

 

[dust1n]

This is really of no surprise since all one had to do was to connect the dots to get an idea as to why Putin would want the Donald in as pres versus Hillary. So, with all this information coming out from quite a few of our intelligence committees, what recourse do the pro-Trump element have except to deny the validity of the the information that even some of the Republican senators say appears to be valid and resort to blaming everyone except Trump and themselves.

And then they oppose any investigation, whereas even an elementary student well knows that it's always wise to cross-check the math, or in this case the intelligence.

It's also nothing new to what they do in other countries as well.

The Dutch just showed the world how Russia influences Western European elections

 

[dust1n]

The above conflicts with this....
Exclusive: Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking - sources.

"ODNI is not arguing that the agency (CIA) is wrong, only that they can't prove intent," said one of the three U.S. officials. "Of course they can't, absent agents in on the decision-making in Moscow."

This is no different different than what anyone already knew.

"WASHINGTON — American spy and law enforcement agencies were united in the belief, in the weeks before the presidential election, that the Russian government had deployed computer hackers to sow chaos during the campaign. But they had conflicting views about the specific goals of the subterfuge."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/11/us/politics/cia-judgment-intelligence-russia-hacking-evidence.html

Hey, I've been restrained in not flaunting my superior (to the average Democrat) education.

No reason to speak with political correctness when speaking of the poorly educated.

 

[metis]

It's also nothing new to what they do in other countries as well.

The Dutch just showed the world how Russia influences Western European elections

Exactly, and thanks for the link.

Ya know, what really gets to me is the fact that even before the most recent intelligence reports, there was ample reason to suspect that Trump was being aided by the Russians as all one had to do was to connect the dots. We knew earlier this year that someone was supplying Wikileaks with anti-Clinton information but no anti-Trump information, and we knew that Putin and Trump have had this love affair, we knew that Trump had questioned supporting NATO and downplaying the Russian invasions, and we knew the Russians had been hacking in other country's computer systems, etc.

Even though the above certainly isn't rock-solid evidence, there were ample red-flags to indicate that the Russians were doing the same here as they did in Europe, and yet the gullible groupies were still willing to blindly follow the lead lemming into the sea. And now we have these same lemmings are swallowing the Trump/Putin lone while pooh-poohing our own intelligence agencies.

Whatever has happened to what used to be a respectable Republican Party?

 

[dust1n]

Hmmm, do you consider yourself one of the liberal elite
Sanders: Trump Won Because Democrats Focused Too Much On Wealthy "Liberal Elite"

or you still trying to understand the country has rejected the current Democrats platform
Democrats Breaking Records: Control Fewest State Legislatures in History

I'm not sure how elite having a Bachelor's education in accounting is, but I definitely considering better than plenty of people I've known, especially including the self-righteous who condemn activities that they themselves participate in.

Also, between gerrymandering, the fact that the Dems win more popular votes here yet get unequal representation, it's enough for me personally to leave the country in the long term, while being slightly humored as the GOP ruins the economy for anyone who isn' tmaking half a million a year.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Comrade Trump

I love it. Consider this stolen.

 

[dust1n]

Revoltingest saved me the trouble in post #259

And yet he failed to make any significant contribution to your point.

At least that is what some in the media claimed, the smart money will vote for (insert candidate name) and the less educated will vote for (insert candidate name)- it's nothing new.

Well, you probably got both at this point. Smart money will be winning plenty, while the less educated get more of the same.

 

[dust1n]

Whatever has happened to what used to be a respectable Republican Party?

Full of political opportunists and moneyed interests. I'm trying to think how far I'd have to go before respectable and Republican party could apply to one another...

 

[Revoltingest]

Also, between gerrymandering......

How are the states gerrymandered?
Altering state boundaries?
Apportioning electors in a partisan fashion?

The simpler explanation is that Trump campaigned to win the electoral college
vote, while Hillary focused upon the popular vote. In this case, it's her error.

 

[dust1n]

How are the states gerrymandered?
Altering state boundaries?
Apportioning electors in a partisan fashion?

The simpler explanation is that Trump campaigned to win the electoral college
vote, while Hillary focused upon the popular vote. In this case, it's her error.

"Daley takes us through the story of how this all happened. Once Obama was in the White House, a group of wily Republicans doubled down on state and local politics. Chris Jankowski, a tactician for the Republican State Leadership Committee, and his allies came up with an audacious plan to target campaign money toward gaining control of state governments, where reapportionment would take place. The operation, called REDMAP (Redistricting Majority Project), was never a secret. Karl Rove outlined what they planned to do in the Wall Street Journal.

In a local race in Pennsylvania in 2010, Democrat David Levdansky, a 13-term state representative, found himself under assault. He faced a barrage of advertising, financed by national Republican organizations, claiming in misleading television spots and mailers that he had voted to spend $600 million on a library in honor of Arlen Specter, the controversial U.S. senator who had left the Republicans to join the Democrats. This didn’t sit well with constituents in a recession. He paid the price: Republican Rick Saccone narrowly defeated him. “The f---ing Arlen Specter library,” Levdansky recalled after he lost. Once national Republicans flipped his seat, they gained control of the state’s lower chamber.

The first stage of the plan worked beautifully. Republicans won majorities in 10 out of the 15 states that would be redrawing their districts.

With control of many state governments in place, Republicans launched the second phase. Using sophisticated software such as Maptitude, GOP operatives crafted favorable districts filled with conservative white voters, based on the kind of data available to corporations. The book is brimming with fascinating portraits of wunderkinds who integrated micro-targeting, computer mapmaking and gerrymandering. Democrats were clustered into a handful of districts while the rest were packed with conservative voters."

The power that gerrymandering has brought to Republicans

Here's one example of state level gerrymandering:

"After Republicans won control of the Texas state legislature in 2002 for the first time in 130 years, they intended to work toward establishing a majority of House of Representatives seats from Texas held by their party. After the 2002 election, Democrats had a 17–15 edge in House seats representing Texas, although the state's voters voted for Republicans in congressional races by a 55–45 margin.[1] After a protracted partisan struggle, the legislature enacted a new congressional districting map, Plan 1374C, introduced in the Texas House by Representative Phil King of Weatherford. In the 2004 congressional elections, Republicans won 21 seats to the Democrats' 11.[2]

On June 28, 2006, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an opinion that threw out one of the districts in the plan as a violation of the 1965 Voting Rights Act and ordered the lower court to produce a remedial plan, which it did in Plan 1440C. The Supreme Court ruling was not seen as seriously threatening Republican gains from the 2004 elections.[3]"

2003 Texas redistricting - Wikipedia

 

[YmirGF]

"Daley takes us through the story of how this all happened. Once Obama was in the White House, a group of wily Republicans doubled down on state and local politics. Chris Jankowski, a tactician for the Republican State Leadership Committee, and his allies came up with an audacious plan to target campaign money toward gaining control of state governments, where reapportionment would take place. The operation, called REDMAP (Redistricting Majority Project), was never a secret. Karl Rove outlined what they planned to do in the Wall Street Journal.

In a local race in Pennsylvania in 2010, Democrat David Levdansky, a 13-term state representative, found himself under assault. He faced a barrage of advertising, financed by national Republican organizations, claiming in misleading television spots and mailers that he had voted to spend $600 million on a library in honor of Arlen Specter, the controversial U.S. senator who had left the Republicans to join the Democrats. This didn’t sit well with constituents in a recession. He paid the price: Republican Rick Saccone narrowly defeated him. “The f---ing Arlen Specter library,” Levdansky recalled after he lost. Once national Republicans flipped his seat, they gained control of the state’s lower chamber.

The first stage of the plan worked beautifully. Republicans won majorities in 10 out of the 15 states that would be redrawing their districts.

With control of many state governments in place, Republicans launched the second phase. Using sophisticated software such as Maptitude, GOP operatives crafted favorable districts filled with conservative white voters, based on the kind of data available to corporations. The book is brimming with fascinating portraits of wunderkinds who integrated micro-targeting, computer mapmaking and gerrymandering. Democrats were clustered into a handful of districts while the rest were packed with conservative voters."

The power that gerrymandering has brought to Republicans

Here's one example of state level gerrymandering:

"After Republicans won control of the Texas state legislature in 2002 for the first time in 130 years, they intended to work toward establishing a majority of House of Representatives seats from Texas held by their party. After the 2002 election, Democrats had a 17–15 edge in House seats representing Texas, although the state's voters voted for Republicans in congressional races by a 55–45 margin.[1] After a protracted partisan struggle, the legislature enacted a new congressional districting map, Plan 1374C, introduced in the Texas House by Representative Phil King of Weatherford. In the 2004 congressional elections, Republicans won 21 seats to the Democrats' 11.[2]

On June 28, 2006, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an opinion that threw out one of the districts in the plan as a violation of the 1965 Voting Rights Act and ordered the lower court to produce a remedial plan, which it did in Plan 1440C. The Supreme Court ruling was not seen as seriously threatening Republican gains from the 2004 elections.[3]"

2003 Texas redistricting - Wikipedia

One thing I don't understand is I was under the impression that the Republicans were a bunch of low information inbred idiots, but your little expose here seems to indicate they are brilliant Machiavellian tacticians. Which is it? That they were able to pull off this coup in plain sight in front of the Dems is hardly flattering to the Dems own strategic planning efforts.

 

[dust1n]

One thing I don't understand is I was under the impression that the Republicans were a bunch of low information inbred idiots, but your little expose here seems to indicate they are brilliant Machiavellian tacticians. Which is it? That they were able to pull off this coup in plain sight in front of the Dems is hardly flattering to the Dems own strategic planning efforts.

I don't consider Mitch McConnell an idiot. Just a Machiavellian player who answers to the companies that fund his campaign.

But I can see that I've inadvertently triggered you for pointing out the fact that Trump voters were more likely to not possess a college education; I will defuse.

 

[Parchment]

It's also nothing new to what they do in other countries as well.
The Dutch just showed the world how Russia influences Western European elections

Speaking of Propaganda, the Washington Post is about the same to the left as Fox news is to the right according to the Pew Research Center.

From the article you linked to:

"In a vague sort of way, many people are aware that the Russian government provides material and moral support to extremist political groups in Europe. Chancellor Angela Merkel has asked her security officials to look into Russian influence in German online media. Marine Le Pen, the leader of France’s far-right National Front, has taken loans from a Russian bank to fund her party, and is asking for more."

The Washington Post goes no further into this matter because telling the full story would negate the slant they were peddling, the reason that the FN borrowed money from a Russian bank is because French and European banks refused to lend any money to the FN or it's candidates:

Le Pen borrowed €9mn from Kremlin-linked bank

 

[dust1n]

Speaking of Propaganda, the Washington Post is about the same to the left as Fox news is to the right according to the Pew Research Center.

If you are talking about this:

https://images.washingtonpost.com/?...ogs/the-fix/files/2014/10/PewNew2.gif&op=noop

Then nothing about what Pew implicates Washington Post to the same level of "propaganda" as Fox News.

From the article you linked to:

"In a vague sort of way, many people are aware that the Russian government provides material and moral support to extremist political groups in Europe. Chancellor Angela Merkel has asked her security officials to look into Russian influence in German online media. Marine Le Pen, the leader of France’s far-right National Front, has taken loans from a Russian bank to fund her party, and is asking for more."

The Washington Post goes no further into this matter because telling the full story would negate the slant they were peddling, the reason that the FN borrowed money from a Russian bank is because French and European banks refused to lend any money to the FN or it's candidates:

Le Pen borrowed €9mn from Kremlin-linked bank

Ignoring the fact that nothing about the original article goes into full detail about that once sentence, is probably because the story isn't about Le Penn, but a larger trend.

Also, from your source:

"She dismissed as “ridiculous” the question whether the FCRB millions came with strings attached.

“That kind of insinuation is injurious and outlandish. Just because we got a loan, that’ll determine our international position? We’ve had the same [pro-Russian] line for a long time”, she said.

Le Pen has praised Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s actions in Ukraine and blamed the West for causing the crisis.

Her deputies vote against Russia-critical resolutions in the EU parliament.

Schaffhauser was also one of a handful of MEPs who went to monitor "elections" in the Russia-controlled Donetsk and Luhansk “republics” in east Ukraine on 2 November.

Aymeric Chauprade, Le Pen’s advisor on foreign policy, went to monitor the Crimea "referendum" on independence in March.

Le Monde reported earlier this year that Chauprade also met with Kremlin envoys in Vienna in May, along with other far-right European politicians, to discuss how to combat “European liberalism and homosexuality”...

Meanwhile, Moscow's links to the far right are not limited to France.

Hungarian authorities have asked the EU parliament to lift the immunity of Bela Kovacs, an MEP from the far-right Jobbik party, after accusing him of taking money from Russian intelligence services.

Kovacs, who denies the allegations, like Chauprade monitored the Crimea "referendum".

Tatjana Zdanoka, a Latvian MEP from the pro-Russian Latvijas Krievu savieniba party, who also went to observe the Crimea poll, is under a similar investigation at home."

 

[David1967]

The question I want to know is why are all the Satanists so happy that Trump won the election, is it something to do with their agenda????

 

[habiru]

No, the NSA hacking is not what I am talking about. And technically what the NSA is doing is not hacking. It's intelligence gathering. We may not like it, but it is not hacking.

Oh, that is what it is called, intelligence gathering or monitoring. Well, when we do it, that it is called monitoring. But when everyone else does it, that it is referred as hacking or espionage.
Don't you just love it! We are gods, that we makes the rules, not them.