You really don't understand the "Russia" thing do you?

a reply to: kurthall

Your source for that is James Clapper, Michael Hayden (current employees of cnn) and Comey.

And you expect to be taken seriously?

I'll readily admit that I can't follow the twists and turns of this Russia business. It involves money and money laundering; the
manipulation of Donald Trump the private citizen and now #45, independent investigations of long standing involving Donald Trump and the Russians and much more. It's a lot to process.

I heard a good analysis of the situation on the radio yesterday. Ian Master interviewed veteran CIA officer Robert Baer on the topic.

Robert Baer by Wikipedia:

Baer worked field assignments, starting in Madras and New Delhi, India; and subsequently in Beirut, Lebanon; Damascus, Syria; Khartoum, Sudan; Paris, France; Dushanbe, Tajikistan; Morocco; the former republic of Yugoslavia, and Salah al-Din in Iraqi Kurdistan during his twenty-one years with the CIA.

During the mid-1990s, Baer was sent to Iraq with the mission of organizing opposition to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein but was recalled and investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation for allegedly conspiring to assassinate the Iraqi leader.

[7][8] While in Salah al-Din, Baer unsuccessfully urged the Clinton administration to back an internal Iraqi attempt to overthrow Hussein (organized by a group of Sunni military officers, the Iraqi National Congress' Ahmad Chalabi, and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan's Jalal Talabani) in March 1995 with covert CIA assistance.

Baer quit the Agency in 1997 and received the CIA's Career Intelligence Medal on March 11, 1998.

You might also enjoy this you tube with Mr. Baer speaking about his service.

www.youtube.com...

The link to the informative and thoughtful interview (July 3, 2018 - Part 1):

archives.ianmasters.com...

PS I totaly forgot about the "Social Media Attack'. Geez it's a tangled web indeed.

originally posted by: Jubei42
The thing to take away here is that Russia has used social media to influence a very large portion of the voting population without them being aware of that.
Normally you would expect the influecing to only take place at key players that are made aware of the fact by making them an offer they can't refuse, or something similar

Interesting. How much influence was there and did it make a difference? Hard to say how many believe what they read on social media. Who used the mainstream press to try to influence voters? Did they have more credibility than social media, at the time?

[Hillary was quoted as saying Democrat voters were stupid and easily maneuvered in a 2005 book.]

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: network dude

Just to give you one source....

The Russian government interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election in order to increase political instability in the United States and to damage Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign by bolstering the candidacies of Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein.[1][2][3] A January 2017 assessment by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) stated that Russian leadership favored presidential candidate Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, and that Russian president Vladimir Putin personally ordered an "influence campaign" to harm Clinton's electoral chances and "undermine public faith in the US democratic process."[3]:7

Where is the evidence for this? There is no proof Putin personally ordered the facebook campaign. Just because somebody in the government says it doesn't make it true.

On October 7, 2016, the ODNI and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) jointly stated that the U.S. Intelligence Community was confident that the Russian Government directed recent hacking of e-mails with the intention of interfering with the U.S. election process.[4] According to the ODNI′s January 6, 2017 report, the Russian military intelligence service (GRU) had hacked the servers of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the personal Google email account of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and forwarded their contents to WikiLeaks.[3]:ii-iii,2[5][6][7] Although Russian officials have repeatedly denied involvement in any DNC hacks or leaks,[8][9][10] there is strong forensic evidence linking the DNC breach to known Russian operations.[11] In January 2017, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testified that Russia also interfered in the elections by disseminating fake news that was promoted on social media.[12]

Again, there is no proof of this. ODNI never saw or investigated the server. They are relying on biased second-hand information. Until evidence can be shown the server was hacked all we have is their word that has no weight.

On the other hand, there is factual data that says the file transfer couldn't have happened over a network and was stolen directly from the machine. The publisher of the DNC data (with a perfect track record of publishing all sorts of dirt over their history, btw) says it wasn't the Russians.

Several investigations about Russian influence on the election have been underway: a counter-intelligence investigation by the FBI,[25] hearings by the Senate Intelligence Committee[26] and the House Intelligence Committee,[27] and inquiries about possible links and financial ties between the Kremlin and Trump associates, notably targeting Paul Manafort, Carter Page and Roger Stone.[28][29] On May 9, 2017, Trump dismissed FBI Director James Comey,[30] citing in part dissatisfaction with the ongoing suspicions of his presidency because of "this Russia thing".[31][32] On May 17, Deputy Attorney General, and Acting Attorney General for this investigation, Rod Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to oversee the investigation.[33]

There was no Russian influence. What looks like Russian influence was actually the Dossier and a meeting that was some sort of setup. This manufactured influence allowed the corrupt top FBI people to do everything they could to ruin Trump and thus the country. Those corrupt FBI agents day is coming.

Comey KNEW the whole Russia thing was manufactured in house. He let it divide and burn as much as he could. Trump was 100% right in fireing Comey over the Russia thing.

Seems Russia did a lot more than you thought...doesn't it? You still wont accept it.
Our intel, was on this back in OCTOBER 2016...….Obama told Russia to "Knock it Off"
There is more on the Wiki.....en.wikipedia.org...
There is a lot of information out there....look into it yourself.

Ya you tell 'em Obama!! I guess he was just doing a good job saving the country some money by not allocating actual resources to defend this 'threat', and will the Russians into submission with the power of his voice..

Russians are free to post whatever memes they want. The freedom of speech Is not only relegated to Americans in the USA. Is it wrong for Mexicans to make memes about Trump? Of course not. The whole world can now 'influence' each other's election and theres nothing we should do about it. Memes and Russians dont vote, CITIZENS vote.

a reply to: Jubei42

I agree that's why I thinks its pertanant to point out who was really influenced. Was it the people that were already opposed to voting Clinton in office, or the ones rampaging in the streets over a democratically elected president?

originally posted by: neo96
Russia did _____NOTHING________________ to the US in order to help Trump win the election in 2016.

Just a false flag from the usual suspects because they ran a snip candidate, and didn't lie well enough. Even after rigging their primary,debates,polls, and having foreign nationals speak at their convention.

You are denying easily verified facts:

www.politifact.com...

www.dni.gov...

www.newyorker.com...

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: network dude


From your response to this Wiki, its clear YOU DID NOT READ IT...…..Hacking Emails, and the DNC, along with personal accounts, is WAY more than posting adds on face book....But okay, like I said, no matter what you wont accept it...why don't you try READING the WIKI.....

OK, lets try this, What from the hacked e-mails was not true?

They were not meant to be made public. It was ILLEGAL! You would have a problem with that of it were trump. You of course don't have a problem when it's on the other side.
There is so much more proof we have not even seen yet. Possibly collusion, before you say know, it is not looking good for him.....literally everyone around him in 2016, were hand in hand with Russia. One way or another.

The problem with that is trump said NO ONE in his camp had ties with Russia, when in fact many did.

originally posted by: Jubei42
The thing to take away here is that Russia has used social media to influence a very large portion of the voting population without them being aware of that.
Normally you would expect the influecing to only take place at key players that are made aware of the fact by making them an offer they can't refuse, or something similar

Any person stupid enough to allow themselves to be influenced by a frakkin' facebook ad...

Well, the rest is kinda obvious.

a reply to: MteWamp

It's impossible to determine the extend to which these ads actively influenced peoples opinion. But as general rule I think its safe to say that ads work, quite well indeed.

I'm loving it, the choice of new generation. Just do it

Obama Tells Trump: Stop ‘Whining’ and Trying to Discredit the Election.

mobile.nytimes.com...

No idea how to embedd.

Speaking at the White House with the Italian prime minister, President Obama responded to a journalist’s question about Donald J. Trump’s claims of a rigged election by saying Mr. Trump should “stop whining.”

Nobody cared until after the election because Trump won.

Russia! Russia!

The don has spoken.

Many foreign national members on social media could be considered guilty of the same with trying to get Clinton elected.
Where is THAT outrage?
If ya get some , "you gotta collect em all..."

I think it is called "opinion".
I can agree or disagree with someone's opinion.
Yet , that is all on me which I do.
Does not affect my opinion at all...

What , now the US is against people forming their own opinion if they are not US citizens ?
Or , is it just Russia ?
Or , if it was anti-Clinton or pro-Trump ?
Both ?

Opinion (including world opinion) is a dangerous thing to deny
Sometimes.

a reply to: schuyler

Yea it's bad when a country tries to influence other countries election illegally, but when the last administration has been close to proven to illegally meddle in their own as well. At the party level and grand scale. How many fair elections do we think or know Obama has been a part of?

a reply to: FyreByrd

Even after rigging their primary,debates,polls, and having foreign nationals speak at their convention.

ALL those are VERIFIABLE FACTS.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Your post reads like something written in the 80''s. Today no one would be surprised the children are being brainwashed. In some inner city areas, it is an accomplishment to even brainwash these behavior disordered crack babies.

Selling ads must have been one of your early jobs. The whole fairness thing is pretty much dead now.
Broadcast Law Blog

I agree with the general point of your post. It's just that things are worse than you indicate. Deteriorating at an accelerating rate.

a reply to: schuyler

Why would you like to know that? I honestly don't care as much about those other elections.

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: network dude


From your response to this Wiki, its clear YOU DID NOT READ IT...…..Hacking Emails, and the DNC, along with personal accounts, is WAY more than posting adds on face book....But okay, like I said, no matter what you wont accept it...why don't you try READING the WIKI.....

Julian Assange claims to have proof that the DNC emails were a leak and not a hack. Evidently James Comey killed that deal. Now isn't that interesting. You care that the DNC was compromised, but seem to stop at why. It doesn't bother you that the DNC shafted democracy? No, you'd rather jump on board with "Russia!"

To paraphrase you: "It really would not matter what anyone said or showed to the GROUP of you. You believe what you do, and NOTHING would change that."

a reply to: network dude

We do not have all the evidence. Only muller does.

All we can do with out all the evidence is wait for the investigation ends.

The watergate investigation took over 3 years and it wasn't a witch hunt.

A lot of people said it was though.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: network dude

We do not have all the evidence. Only muller does.

All we can do with out all the evidence is wait for the investigation ends.

The watergate investigation took over 3 years and it wasn't a witch hunt.

A lot of people said it was though.

This x1000

Anyone to posit a theory must immediately discount that they are without the plethora of classified information available to the same agencies that are making the claim that Russia influenced the election.

The kind of people that can make up their minds so assuredly without having being presented the sum total of facts is a disheartening reality now made more common in the Trump era (vis-a-vis Trump's propaganda train to discredit such assertions).

originally posted by: network dude
If you really, really understand something, you can explain it to a 5 year old and he/she will understand.

This isn't even CLOSE to true. You can understand something better than anyone else in the world and be terrible at explaining it. Understanding a topic and teaching it are two completely different skill sets. Furthermore, you can be skillful at teaching a topic, but that doesn't mean you are able to teach it to a 5 year old. I understand calculus pretty well, but I damn well can't teach it to a 5 year old.

In any case, I was just stopping by to point out that the premise of your request is flawed. Someone failing to explain to you this topic in a way that satisfies you doesn't mean they don't understand it. As for the rest of your OP, I'm not even going to try since I know your posting habits.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

LOL, I didn't think you were up to the challenge. Keep doing you though, it's really fun to watch.

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.” ― Albert Einstein

and look at that, you were spot on. I was off by a year. But that Albert guy wasn't very smart anyway, not like you right?