Mueller Indictments for 13 Russian Nationals in US Election Meddling

a reply to: aethertek

More Russian sock puppets?


You realize this was a detachment move right....not implications?

www.washingtonpost.com... well this may be why alot of members dont care because we have been pulling this crap for years

Meanwhile, the threat of foreign meddling in U.S. elections is not restricted to fears of Russian plots. In the late 1990s, the specter of illicit Chinese funds dominated concerns about Democratic campaign financing. But some observers cautioned others not to be too indignant. “If the Chinese indeed tried to influence the election here . . . the United States is only getting a taste of its own medicine,” Peter Kornbluh, director of the National Security Archive, which is affiliated with George Washington University, said in a 1997 interview with the New York Times. “China has done little more than emulate a long pattern of U.S. manipulation, bribery and covert operations to influence the political trajectory of countless countries around the world.”

apparently it didnt matter when the dems were alleged to get money from the chinese so why does it matter now again?

This could potentially lead other 'countries' to start their own 'investigations" and indict people that have engaged in social media influence, "trolling" and "bots", domestic and foreign.

What is now to stop someone from setting up other "special investigations" and domestically indicting people for using bots or "trolling"

a reply to: XAnarchistX

it has already been happening... example is brexit vote.. people already saying was russias fault cause they didnt get the vote they wanted

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The "russians". The only evidence I have seen of Russian state involvement is in the authoring of the Steele dossier.

Oh? Please do tell. Exactly what evidence have you seen in the *Russian state* involvement in the *authoring* of the Steele dossier?

Should I answer that for you? None. There's been zero evidence that the *Russian state* had any involvement with the Steele dossier to begin with. I assume that you're referring to unnamed Russian officials being cited as sources of some information it contains? That's not the same as the *Russian state* though, is it?

That would be like saying that Robert Hanssen was the *American state* when he was passing secrets to the Russians.

And the "authoring" bit? What does that even mean? You have seen evidence that they (the Russian state) *authored* the document that Steele himself authored?

I've read it start to finish.

Then your characterization seems a bit disingenuous.

Yes, it does.

No, it does not mention bots or troll farms. What it does mention could not be fairly described as "posting nonsense on social media." Are physical rallies "posting nonsense on social media?"

Turn off social media and what's left?

I'm not certain what point you're trying to make here. That anything done using social media in any way is the same thing? There's a difference between bots liking/retweeting and real US persons being being paid to voice opinions. There's a difference between trolls posting fake news links and using social media to organize physical rallies.

More generally, you seem unwilling to accept the role that social media has come to play in society — which is pretty ironic considering you spend a lot of time debating foreigners on an Internet forum.

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

When you weigh this against FISA warrants obtained by using solicited material from Russia by an American political party against another....it's just no contest.

a reply to: Wayfarer

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: theantediluvian

Will take a look at the indictment when I have a chance. Very interesting to see how this is all playing out.

At first we heard that the Russians being involved was just a media propaganda lie. Now we have indictments for those involved.

Weird times we live in.

No

At first Obama went on national TV and said the election had not been tampered with and that it was not even possible to rig our elections.

Now we have Russian patsies so the leftists can have something to show for their year long investigation.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer

After this reveal by muller, why would trump even speak with him?

Who knows. I would guess Ego but its a hard toss up between that and just plain legal ignorance.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

well, my first thought was that if any of them were in the country when this came out, they're probably on their way back to russia now... they might end up not being able to travel so freely around the world, but unless they nabbed some of them before this was announce, there won't be any trials even. this is probably more for our educational purposes, to inform us of what was done, how it was done, and why we shouldn't assume that anyone on facebook is who they appear to be. russia may have played this game against us, but it's our bad for being so danged gullible and buying into it. my apologies to the 50% or so that are still buying into it... I guess this indictment might be for you!!!

How are the alt right so stupid. The Russian interference was PRO TRUMP.....


I know that's hard for you to accept, but it's the truth. Any of you STILL in denial are just plain ignorant.

Bots are now people!

Don't let Never Trump give you anymore more snip bout corporations.

a reply to: kurthall

How are the alt right so stupid. The Russian interference was PRO TRUMP.....

Stupid ?

So Russia didn't do anything to get Sanders elected?

Does this indictment mention how they supposedly utilized Pokemon Go?
Or will that be in the next round of indictments?

Rosenstein press conference - about 8 minutes

At the end he takes questions. He states no US citizens / Trump officials any had knowledge of what the Russians were up to.

Sorry Democrats. Your russia narrative is done.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

It's worth repeating, they are not claiming the Russian activity made any difference in the election. Rosenstein specificially said, "There is no allegation in the indictment that the [Russians'] conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election."

How could the FBI allege such a thing? Nobody could reasonably hope to quantify the effects of this influence campaign. That's not the same thing as saying that there was no effect at all.

Rosenstein could also have said, "there's no allegation in the indictment that the [Russians'] conduct didn't alter the outcome of the 2016 election" and it would have equally true.

I'm not really interested in trying to argue either way (not least of which because it's a debate that's impossible for either side to win) but that statement is a pretty weak basis for dismissing the importance of burgeoning strategies for information warfare (and "information warfare" as it turns out is precisely how the Russians described it) exploiting inherent weaknesses of social media.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Sorry Democrats. Your russia narrative is done.

That ain't gonna stop them.

Like the little engines that can't.

Russia,Russia,Russia, All aboard! The train to no where.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
...as it turns out is precisely how the Russians described it) exploiting inherent weaknesses of social media.

...and people's gullibility.

originally posted by: kurthall
How are the alt right so stupid. The Russian interference was PRO TRUMP.....


I know that's hard for you to accept, but it's the truth. Any of you STILL in denial are just plain ignorant.

Did you gloss over that whole Sanders part? My god the dissonance/ignorance is strong.

a reply to: Wayfarer

So basically you are just hoping that trump wants to talk to mueller and wont follow his lawyers advice?
Thats all you have got left?