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

[habiru]

The Russians got Trump elected, its pretty plain and simple. There; someone said it.

That is so funny how they can influence us, but the majority of this nation doesn't speak Russian at all. If they were trying to influence us, that it will be like playing a game of charade with them. And that it will take about a couple of hours just to cipher one word from them.

 

[Lyndon]

I think some posters need to move to Russia if they love Russia so much!!

 

[Revoltingest]

Some posters have been watching Red Dawn (1984),
& now mistakenly believe it's a documentary.

 

[habiru]

Well, one thing is that President Trump is very smart. He sure can put the pieces together quickly. If the CIA had called him an agent of Russia, that I will do the same as what President Trump is doing. And that is ignore them as if they are idiots.

Ex-CIA Boss Calls Trump 'Unwitting Agent' of Russia | Military.com

They are trying to find an excuse to impeach President Trump and his team as being agents of Russia. Thinking if they can get the public to believe this crap, that they will be able to set him up.


5. "The CIA did it"
This is the conspiracy theory that interests Perry the most. "The problem is, of all of them, this is one I can't debunk," he laughs.
"Supposedly Kennedy was fed up with the shenanigans that the CIA was pulling," Perry said. "He found out the CIA was trying to kill (Cuban leader Fidel) Castro, which is a fact. So the argument is that the CIA felt that Kennedy was going to disband them. And as a result of that, they were the ones that ordered the killing of Kennedy."
Perry points out that a former head of the CIA, Allen Dulles, was a member of the Warren Commission, the special Johnson-appointed panel tasked with the official investigation of the assassination. The commission determined that Oswald acted alone.
Oswald was a supporter of Soviet-backed Cuba.
"We know Oswald was in the Russian embassy in Mexico City," Perry said. "We even know who he talked to. But we don't know what was said. Then a few weeks later, he shoots Kennedy."
"It may have been something that they overheard involving him and the Russians. Or, maybe the CIA had Oswald on the payroll. He might have been a double agent."
Is it possible that Russians ordered Oswald to do it?
Not likely, said Perry. The Russians would never have ordered Oswald to kill Kennedy because of his well-known links to Russia and his pro-Cuban sympathies. Russia's leaders knew they would have been the first suspects if they'd engineered an assassination by Oswald. It would have been an act of war, which could have triggered a nuclear attack.
"We need to know what happened in Mexico City," Perry said.
The answer, he said, may be contained in still-classified CIA documents. The U.S. National Archives currently holds a number of unreleased CIA documents related to the assassination. Those papers are scheduled to be made public in 2017 as part of the 1992 Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act. One JFK conspiracy theory that could be true - CNN.com

April 7-8. 2016 -- Was the father of presidential hopeful Cruz involved in the JFK assassination? - Wayne Madsen Report

 

[tytlyf]

Trump and his russian pals have taken advantage of heartland America. Now, russia and Trump are saying they didn't do anything. Sounds like they're trying to hide something.

 

[Revoltingest]

Trump and his russian pals have taken advantage of heartland America. Now, russia and Trump are saying they didn't do anything. Sounds like they're trying to hide something.

As bad as that is, at least we avoided Hillary's selling out the country to the N Koreans & the Illuminati (aka The Clinton Foundation).

 

[tytlyf]

As bad as that is, at least we avoided Hillary's selling out the country to the N Koreans & the Illuminati (aka The Clinton Foundation).

Some people will believe anything and they'll vote based on that information

 

[Revoltingest]

Some people will believe anything and they'll vote based on that information

I know....amazing, ain't it!

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I haven't seen one shred of evidence or heard a good argument that would make me believe that Russians somehow got Trump elected. We do know that the same intelligence agencies that are claiming "the Russians did it!" are the same intelligence agencies that got us into the first Iraq war under false pretenses and have used mass surveillance against it's own people for years and lied about it and now we are supposed to trust them with the claim that somehow Russians manipulated the 2016 U.S. election. I'd say there is probably far more evidence and a better case to be made that many of our own domestic media sources attempted to overtly and covertly manipulate public opinion influencing the election in Clinton's favor rather than Russia in Trumps.

Its pure scapegoating by those who stand to lose their jobs due to the
overwhelming prediction that Hilary would win the election.
Mostly CNN telling one lie to cover-up another lie.
Its gone from neuroses to psychosis.

 

[Revoltingest]

Its pure scapegoating by those who stand to lose their jobs due to the
overwhelming prediction that Hilary would win the election.
Mostly CNN telling one lie to cover-up another lie.
Its gone from neuroses to psychosis.

You're utterly wrong about this.
Having been wrong doesn't matter.
The bottom line is about profitability from attracting many eyeballs.
The media will just move on to the pablum de jour, eg, advancing the Russian conspiracy theory.
And jobs won't be on the line whether if they're right or wrong about that either.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Having been wrong doesn't matter.

So then why do you bother to claim that I am 'wrong'? - if it does not matter to be wrong??

 

[Revoltingest]

So then why do you bother to claim that I am 'wrong'? - if it does not matter to be wrong??

It doesn't matter in context of one's job.
You won't be fired for being wrong.
(Besides, I was just josh'n ya about being wrong.)

 

[tytlyf]

Mostly CNN telling one lie to cover-up another lie.

Got an example?

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

It doesn't matter in context of one's job.
You won't be fired for being wrong.
(Besides, I was just josh'n ya about being wrong.)

Where do you work?

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Got an example?

Select CNN on your remote and see for yourself.

 

[Revoltingest]

Where do you work?

In Revoltistan, of course!

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

In Revoltistan, of course!

And what is your line of work?

 

[Revoltingest]

And what is your line of work?

Real estate investment & antique machinery....semi-retired.
Unlike news broadcasting, errors are punished by the market in what I do.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Real estate investment & antique machinery....semi-retired.
Unlike news broadcasting, errors are punished by the market in what I do.

Well the errors that CNN are making in following up one lie with another will eventually catch up with them, I reckon.
But success breeds complacency. The more money saved means the more errors can be made.
Russia Today will eventually take over from CNN on the international stage.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well the errors that CNN are making in following up one lie with another will eventually catch up with them, I reckon.
But success breeds complacency. The more money saved means the more errors can be made.
Russia Today will eventually take over from CNN on the international stage.

I can't predict who will win the ratings wars.
But I can tell you that accuracy isn't the most important tool.
Example:
The ones who were wrong about predicting Hillary's win had a primary audience of her supporters.
To keep them watching, they need only attack Trump, & pursue the Russian conspiracy theory as
the excuse for her loss. To their audience, the erroneous prediction is excused by this new tack.