Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 62
Thanks Tree17Thanks

Thread: Russian Meddling? Nothing new

  1. #1
    Under Protest excalibur's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    11,527
    Thanks
    3643

    From
    The Milky Way

    Russian Meddling? Nothing new

    And has a decided Democrat Party flavor. Ted Kennedy offering to help the Russians defeat Reagan in 1984. Which seems to be why Øbama did nothing while having been warned, Democrats being chummy with Russia.

    Then after Hillary was defeated, oh happy day! the Democrats panicked and cooked up the Russia / Trump collusion lie, into which they [Democrats] have willfully plunged the nation since November 8, 2016, because they knew the Strzok matter, and much else, would now be revealed. Shameless.


    Russia interfering in your country’s election does not terrify as much as your country becoming Russia. Strzok changing “grossly negligent” to “extreme carelessness” in James Comey’s report on the Hillary Clinton email scandal, his role in securing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrant to spy on an American citizen volunteering for a campaign that he opposed, and his use of a former foreign intelligence agent’s dirt-digging — funded by the Clinton campaign — on Trump to open investigations strike as if not all KGB tactics than at least Banana Republic ones.

    While Strzok never uncovered anything quite so damning as Russian agents vowing to “stop” Hillary Clinton or crafting an “insurance policy” should their interference not succeed, he nevertheless remained convinced in his opening statement Thursday to the joint House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform committee “that Russian interference in our elections constitutes a grave attack on our democracy.”

    Indeed, it does — and has. During the last hundred years, an American agent of the Soviet Union named Earl Browder ran for president numerous times, the Russians bribed Congressman Samuel Dickstein, ironically the founding father of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, into doing their bidding, the Russians infiltrated the administration of Franklin Roosevelt with scores of its agents, and the Russians effectively ran the presidential run of former vice president Henry Wallace. The discipline shown to stop hitting snooze after a century and finally wake up to the fact that Russians meddle seems a welcome development. But acting as though this old news, rather than the FBI using its power to aid a favored candidate, comes as the revelation seems preposterous.




    https://spectator.org/who-kept-putti...zok-in-charge/

  2. #2
    Civis americanus borealis Singularity's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    27,452
    Thanks
    18712

    From
    Kansas
    Russian meddling in our domestic affairs, attempting to influence specific personages, putting out propaganda and stealing information is indeed nothing new, although such tactics have returned to Cold War levels after a notable tapering off.

    What is new are "active measures," as they are called. Examining major U.S. infrastructure, including the voter registration system, for vulnerabilities that would allow them to be majorly disrupted or shut down entirely. Reaching out to the close confidants of a political contender and promising major political assistance, discussing election strategies, etc. Bribing, or attempting to buy off, aides to a given candidate not to merely spy for them, but to enact actual policies. Doing whatever is possible not merely to influence the opponent's society, but to undermine general public confidence in the state. Meanwhile, someone is using some type of device to injure U.S. diplomats overseas in multiple locations and stir suspicion between the U.S. and its host nations.

    Such ideas are not new, but with few exceptions, have not been put into place because of the fear of retaliation, even during the height of the Cold War. Particularly on the matter of injured personnel, spies on both sides understood well that failure to treat diplomats with all dignities due to them, or failure to provide reasonable comfort to captured "official cover" spies, would be met with fierce action against one's own agents and resources. Yet there is no concrete sign the U.S. has retaliated against Russia for its use of active measures in 2016 and since then. The NSA director has testified under oath that he has been given no directive to do so, no guidance.

    These are the times in which we live.
    Thanks from HayJenn, Babba and Blueneck

  3. #3
    Under Protest excalibur's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    11,527
    Thanks
    3643

    From
    The Milky Way
    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    Russian meddling in our domestic affairs, attempting to influence specific personages, putting out propaganda and stealing information is indeed nothing new, although such tactics have returned to Cold War levels after a notable tapering off.

    What is new are "active measures," as they are called. Examining major U.S. infrastructure, including the voter registration system, for vulnerabilities that would allow them to be majorly disrupted or shut down entirely. Reaching out to the close confidants of a political contender and promising major political assistance, discussing election strategies, etc. Bribing, or attempting to buy off, aides to a given candidate not to merely spy for them, but to enact actual policies. Doing whatever is possible not merely to influence the opponent's society, but to undermine general public confidence in the state. Meanwhile, someone is using some type of device to injure U.S. diplomats overseas in multiple locations and stir suspicion between the U.S. and its host nations.

    Such ideas are not new, but with few exceptions, have not been put into place because of the fear of retaliation, even during the height of the Cold War. Particularly on the matter of injured personnel, spies on both sides understood well that failure to treat diplomats with all dignities due to them, or failure to provide reasonable comfort to captured "official cover" spies, would be met with fierce action against one's own agents and resources. Yet there is no concrete sign the U.S. has retaliated against Russia for its use of active measures in 2016 and since then. The NSA director has testified under oath that he has been given no directive to do so, no guidance.

    These are the times in which we live.

    Other than the internet it is business as usual. And why Øbama did nothing is the real story.

    None of this crap about Russia / Trump collusion would be out there had Hillary won. But when she lost they knew all this stuff about spying on the Trump campaign etc., etc., would come out. They then went nuclear and have plunged the nation into this nonsense since November 9, 2016.

  4. #4
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    53,818
    Thanks
    41497

    From
    CA
    Quote Originally Posted by excalibur View Post
    And has a decided Democrat Party flavor. Ted Kennedy offering to help the Russians defeat Reagan in 1984. Which seems to be why Øbama did nothing while having been warned, Democrats being chummy with Russia.

    Then after Hillary was defeated, oh happy day! the Democrats panicked and cooked up the Russia / Trump collusion lie, into which they [Democrats] have willfully plunged the nation since November 8, 2016, because they knew the Strzok matter, and much else, would now be revealed. Shameless.


    Russia interfering in your country’s election does not terrify as much as your country becoming Russia. Strzok changing “grossly negligent” to “extreme carelessness” in James Comey’s report on the Hillary Clinton email scandal, his role in securing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrant to spy on an American citizen volunteering for a campaign that he opposed, and his use of a former foreign intelligence agent’s dirt-digging — funded by the Clinton campaign — on Trump to open investigations strike as if not all KGB tactics than at least Banana Republic ones.

    While Strzok never uncovered anything quite so damning as Russian agents vowing to “stop” Hillary Clinton or crafting an “insurance policy” should their interference not succeed, he nevertheless remained convinced in his opening statement Thursday to the joint House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform committee “that Russian interference in our elections constitutes a grave attack on our democracy.”

    Indeed, it does — and has. During the last hundred years, an American agent of the Soviet Union named Earl Browder ran for president numerous times, the Russians bribed Congressman Samuel Dickstein, ironically the founding father of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, into doing their bidding, the Russians infiltrated the administration of Franklin Roosevelt with scores of its agents, and the Russians effectively ran the presidential run of former vice president Henry Wallace. The discipline shown to stop hitting snooze after a century and finally wake up to the fact that Russians meddle seems a welcome development. But acting as though this old news, rather than the FBI using its power to aid a favored candidate, comes as the revelation seems preposterous.




    https://spectator.org/who-kept-putti...zok-in-charge/
    One of your favorite sources strongly disagrees with you


    Mueller’s Latest Indictments Show That ‘Witches’ Are Very Real
    By DAVID FRENCH
    July 13, 2018 4:09 PM


    Earlier today the Grand Jury for the District of Columbia charged twelve Russian intelligence officers with conspiring “to gain unauthorized access (to ‘hack’) into the computers of U.S. persons and entities involved in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, steal documents from those computers, and stage releases of the stolen documents to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.” The operation was sustained and sophisticated, and it targeted “over 300 individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign, DCCC, and DNC,” according to the indictment.

    Furthermore, the operation was consequential. When, in February, Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office released its indictment of Russians involved in the effort to impact American debate through social media, there was some justified chuckling at the small scale and amateurishness of that effort. The messages were silly, and the spending was a drop in the ocean compared to the massive, sustained, and coordinated social-media spending of American political parties and their allies.

    The hacking scandal was different. The hacking scandal mattered. There’s no way to know if it moved enough votes in key states to swing the election, but the leaks of hacked emails dominated multiple news cycles, embarrassed key Democrats, and sowed a degree of discord within the Democratic party. Republicans, including Donald Trump, exulted in the revelations and sometimes explicitly called for more. “Russia, if you’re listening,” Trump said publicly on July 27, 2016, “I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.”

    Interestingly, it appears the Russians may indeed have been listening. “After hours” on July 27, the conspirators “for the first time” targeted “email accounts at a domain hosted by a third-party provider and used by Clinton’s personal office,” according to Friday’s indictment. There will be much more analysis and dot-connecting in the coming days, some of it valuable and much of it specious. But for now here are four key takeaways:

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/...are-very-real/

  5. #5
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    53,818
    Thanks
    41497

    From
    CA
    Quote Originally Posted by excalibur View Post
    Other than the internet it is business as usual. And why Øbama did nothing is the real story.

    None of this crap about Russia / Trump collusion would be out there had Hillary won. But when she lost they knew all this stuff about spying on the Trump campaign etc., etc., would come out. They then went nuclear and have plunged the nation into this nonsense since November 9, 2016.
    For like the 100th time, McConnell blocked Obama on making a joint statement about Russia

    If Obama had done it by himself - your head would of exploded.

  6. #6
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    27,532
    Thanks
    6987

    From
    midwest
    America has interfered in elections around the world plenty of times, including Obama meddling in Netanyahus re-election.

    And Obama trying to influence the Brexit vote.

    Obama knew about the Russian meddling and did nothing, because he knew Hillary was going to win.

    If only he could go back and do things differently.

    If only...
    Thanks from THOR

  7. #7
    Chaos in fourteen lines Minotaur's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    21,687
    Thanks
    17942

    From
    USA
    Conservatives need to be patient instead of drawing conclusion out of their posterior.

  8. #8
    New Member Redwood Burl's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    127
    Thanks
    132

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by Miller47 View Post
    America has interfered in elections around the world plenty of times, including Obama meddling in Netanyahus re-election.

    And Obama trying to influence the Brexit vote.

    Obama knew about the Russian meddling and did nothing, because he knew Hillary was going to win.

    If only he could go back and do things differently.

    If only...
    Netanyahu? You mean the Zionist leader who directly took on Obama with a speech to Congress?

    And, you've no problem with Trump taking sides on Brexit, but you have a problem with Obama's doing the same?

    The meddling part, you and I both know had Obama opened his mouth about Russian meddling that appeared to favor Trump, Rs would still be talking about how Obama tried to sway the election. Please don't argue 'cause you know I'm right.
    Thanks from Minotaur and Babba

  9. #9
    Chaos in fourteen lines Minotaur's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    21,687
    Thanks
    17942

    From
    USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Redwood Burl View Post
    Netanyahu? You mean the Zionist leader who directly took on Obama with a speech to Congress?

    And, you've no problem with Trump taking sides on Brexit, but you have a problem with Obama's doing the same?

    The meddling part, you and I both know had Obama opened his mouth about Russian meddling that appeared to favor Trump, Rs would still be talking about how Obama tried to sway the election. Please don't argue 'cause you know I'm right.
    Damn! You are a great addition to PH! I love it when a fairly new poster has brains.
    Thanks from Babba and MaryAnne

  10. #10
    Civis americanus borealis Singularity's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    27,452
    Thanks
    18712

    From
    Kansas
    Quote Originally Posted by excalibur View Post
    Other than the internet it is business as usual.
    No, I couldn't have been clearer, we have not seen attempts to understand how to bring down major U.S. infrastructure before and evade its defenses. That's one step below installing some nuclear missiles on Cuba, frankly. It's an entirely new provocation.

    And why Øbama did nothing is the real story.
    How long does Trump need to be in office before we can stop talking about Obama? When does it become Trump's responsibility? When does the buck stop with him? Clearly, you'd prefer for the answers to be "indefinitely" and "never."

    None of this crap about Russia / Trump collusion would be out there had Hillary won. But when she lost they knew all this stuff about spying on the Trump campaign etc., etc., would come out. They then went nuclear and have plunged the nation into this nonsense since November 9, 2016.
    Multiple FBI agents and leaders have testified that they did not aggressively pursue the Russia probe as much as they might have had they believed Trump might win. That doesn't mean the Russia probe is a reaction to Trump's victory, it means that they considered it a lower priority to investigate someone who probably was not going to become President. That's perfectly reasonable. They still kept the probe active throughout summer and fall 2016 and uncovered information. This did not arise out of the blue in November 2016.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 5th March 2018, 03:37 AM
  2. Trump keeps up attacks on Obama over Russian meddling
    By Devil505 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 20th February 2018, 06:19 AM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 2nd April 2017, 11:51 PM
  4. Dick Cheney On Russian Meddling
    By MaryAnne in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28th March 2017, 12:11 AM
  5. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 12th December 2016, 07:43 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed