Russian and alt-right Interference in democracies.

ligerdub

rossie1977 wrote:

Yes I am sure if boot was on the other foot and it was discovered that the Russians released Republican info in order to get Hillary elected I am sure everyone on the right would have been fine with it..

But that's not the situation so that's a moot point.

The Democrats have gone way overboard on Russia recently. I get it that they don't like Putin, but they have been wrong a lot and Putin has exposed them quite a lot.

They seem to be willing on a proper conflict with them again. Hopefully when Donald gets in he can start about thawing out the frost between both nations, because believe it or not that's the preferred outcome for everyone.

Kitsunegari

Interestingly, Milo was supposed to be giving a talk at UC Davis. The students stopped him from speaking with anti-fascist signs, which they couldn't even spell correctly. I don't support the alt-right but there is an element of the left that want to go around suppressing free speech while calling people fascists. I hope the irony isn't lost on them.

demfad

Let's just recap: The only people who now believe the Russians did not hack and interfere with the election is Assange and Russia.
The IC thought that information received re Trump was so disturbing that it was presented to Obama/trump in a meeting with classified material.
The FBI received this info in the summer. It appears that there is a FISA investigation into at least 4 members of Team Trump for espionage/treason.
The Federal Election Comission has sent a letter to Trump to explain 250 pages of irregular/illegal donations for his campaign.
The IC has leaked that Flynn made 5 calls to Russian ambassador on day of Obama sanctions. Those calls would be recorded.
It is also claimed from a prominent BBC journalist that his high level source in the CIA knows of more tapes. Audio and audio and video.
One sexual. The other a conversation between a Trump man and a member of Russuan intelligence.
Oh yes. One of the sources in the dossier was reported very close to 'Sechin' who is CEO of Russuas biggest Oil company Rosfeln. The second in command in that company was found dead in the back seat of his car in December. Heart attack according to the Russians. Trump will be impeached, at least

ligerdub

Put money on it then if you're so confident, I'm sure bookies will take your bet.

Billy86

ligerdub wrote: »

Put money on it then if you're so confident, I'm sure bookies will take your bet.

Indeed they will, but they're not willing to exactly give great odds on it.

Kitsunegari

Let's just re-cap and be clear. Donald Trump won the US presidential election. There is absolutely no proof that Russia interfered in voting whatsoever.

Can anyone actually explain how Russia interfered in the democratic process with evidence? No?

ligerdub

Billy86 wrote: »

Indeed they will, but they're not willing to exactly give great odds on it.

Yes, but you all seem certain of it.

Those odds actually suggest that it's less likely he will be impeached or resignation than otherwise.

Let's see betting slips.

Billy86

ligerdub wrote: »

Yes, but you all seem certain of it.

Those odds actually suggest that it's less likely he will be impeached or resignation than otherwise.

Let's see betting slips.

Can you go and find where I said Trump is certainly be impeached? And if you can't, do you think you could try to stop making straw man arguments?

Though if you are certain he won't be, I look forward to seeing your betting slip for him to serve his full term any moment now.

demfad

Billy86 wrote: »

Indeed they will, but they're not willing to exactly give great odds on it.

There are several investigative journalists saying that the leaking of info is systematic case building by the intelligence forces. One guy, John Schindler, is ex NSA and CIA agent. He writes in the observer (USA). He says he has talked with half a dozen intelligence agencies and all swapping dirt on Trump.
He is gone. I don't know if before or after inauguration though.

demfad

Kitsunegari wrote: »

Let's just re-cap and be clear. Donald Trump won the US presidential election. There is absolutely no proof that Russia interfered in voting whatsoever.

Can anyone actually explain how Russia interfered in the democratic process with evidence? No?

We know St Petersburg trolls were trolling Clinton supporters and amplifying disinformation and fake news on social media. We know Russia used automated bits to trend pro-trump/anti-Clinton on social media. We know there was a vast architecture there to spread fake news with 100s of pro Russian sites repeating and amplifying all American related stories from Russian media and leaked gave news. We know that Russia hacked the DNC server and gave the imformation to Wikileaks. We know that Wikileaks did daily dumps of these emails which caused the Clinton campaign embarrassment. This focused the media on Clinton and crucially away from Trumps conflicts of interests and dodgy financial past. E.g a $250 million money laundering lawsuit Against his partners bayrock (ex soviet) who built Trump soho when he couldn't get American finance. All the other Russuan money that bailed him out when no American money would touch him. It stopped the media from spotting that his Casino the trump tazmahal had a $ 10 million suit for laundering. In fact it tied up the media completely.
So yes, this interference lost Clinton the election in such a tight race no doubt.

This does not even include the covert espionage/treason ties now being investigated.

ligerdub

Billy86 wrote: »

Can you go and find where I said Trump is certainly be impeached? And if you can't, do you think you could try to stop making straw man arguments?

Though if you are certain he won't be, I look forward to seeing your betting slip for him to serve his full term any moment now.

Why did you respond then? There also was a person, I believe in this very page that said outright that he would be. It's no straw man, it's actual people, and you won't have to go very far yourself to find them.

I don't want to wait 4 years to collect, and also because I can't find a market for a bet that he will serve the term, presumably because the bookies don't fancy the almost certain payout! The impeach/resign squad don't have the burden of having to wait that long. They'll surely be collecting in the next few weeks, it's like buying money if one follows their views. It's 7/4 on Paddypower by the way.

Best of luck.

KingBrian2

demfad wrote: »

We know St Petersburg trolls were trolling Clinton supporters and amplifying disinformation and fake news on social media. We know Russia used automated bits to trend pro-trump/anti-Clinton on social media. We know there was a vast architecture there to spread fake news with 100s of pro Russian sites repeating and amplifying all American related stories from Russian media and leaked gave news. We know that Russia hacked the DNC server and gave the imformation to Wikileaks. We know that Wikileaks did daily dumps of these emails which caused the Clinton campaign embarrassment. This focused the media on Clinton and crucially away from Trumps conflicts of interests and dodgy financial past. E.g a $250 million money laundering lawsuit Against his partners bayrock (ex soviet) who built Trump soho when he couldn't get American finance. All the other Russuan money that bailed him out when no American money would touch him. It stopped the media from spotting that his Casino the trump tazmahal had a $ 10 million suit for laundering. In fact it tied up the media completely.
So yes, this interference lost Clinton the election in such a tight race no doubt.

This does not even include the covert espionage/treason ties now being investigated.

We know fake news came from Macedonia as reported by Channel 4 news and we know the US election was full of propaganda outlets spewed out by both sides in the election. Stories with no truth and never verified.

ligerdub

demfad wrote: »

There are several investigative journalists saying that the leaking of info is systematic case building by the intelligence forces. One guy, John Schindler, is ex NSA and CIA agent. He writes in the observer (USA). He says he has talked with half a dozen intelligence agencies and all swapping dirt on Trump.
He is gone. I don't know if before or after inauguration though.

You understand that those claims and credentials do not make them credible. There are vested interests, vendettas and self-preservation all over this story.

So and so said such and such, as told in XXXX newspaper/publication doesn't hold water, especially adding the tags of who they worked for. It's about as likely that they are entirely spurious as anything else with that in mind.

The only thing that matters is hard proof. Until that comes out in the open then this stays in the "don't rush to judgment" pile.

Trump will be inaugurated on Friday, 100% guaranteed. The only way he won't be is if he is suddenly stricken with illness or other unfortunate accident or malicious act. He will also almost certainly serve a full term, possibly, but much less likely two.

Kitsunegari

What is also crazy is that the top democrat in the country, Senator Shrumer, implied that the intelligence community could get back at Trump.

demfad

KingBrian2 wrote: »

We know fake news came from Macedonia as reported by Channel 4 news and we know the US election was full of propaganda outlets spewed out by both sides in the election. Stories with no truth and never verified.

Any propaganda has been massively in Trumps favour. Earlier in this thread I have linked where Russian US cyber activity on Internet and sOcial media was analysed since 2014. No comparison. The tools used, the overall methodology ha been used in several countries including Indonesia interestingly enough.

demfad

Here's a link to where Estonians have picked up that it's their secret service who recorded a Trump man and a leading member of the Duma in Orague. The other day Trump declared that his lawyer Cohen was not in Prague as per dossier. If the Estonians provide the U.S. media with a pick this will now wide open

http://news.err.ee/v/news/df22cea3-1c2e-4139-92ea-08f029af9f07/newsweek-estonian-foreign-intelligence-eavesdropped-on-russian-official-meeting-trump-associate

KingBrian2

demfad wrote: »

Any propaganda has been massively in Trumps favour. Earlier in this thread I have linked where Russian US cyber activity on Internet and sOcial media was analysed since 2014. No comparison. The tools used, the overall methodology ha been used in several countries including Indonesia interestingly enough.

Hardly the Democrats placed all the evils of the world onto Trump when he was running for office. The news outlets ran article after article about Trump with wild claims about his personal life, financial misdeeds & his various views on globalization, jobs, immigration, terrorism & his feud with Clinton. Nothing was off limits and yet the voters still voted Trump. By comparison the media left Clinton alone and allowed her campaign to get away with outright lies. Don't you believe the public have a right to know of the unethical conduct of the Clinton administration?

Kitsunegari

demfad wrote: »

Here's a link to where Estonians have picked up that it's their secret service who recorded a Trump man and a leading member of the Duma in Orague. The other day Trump declared that his lawyer Cohen was not in Prague as per dossier. If the Estonians provide the U.S. media with a pick this will now wide open

http://news.err.ee/v/news/df22cea3-1c2e-4139-92ea-08f029af9f07/newsweek-estonian-foreign-intelligence-eavesdropped-on-russian-official-meeting-trump-associate

Very little material information is provided and it states in the article that Trump had no knowledge of the meeting. If Putin and Russia are so bad then you have to wonder why the Obama administration sold them uranium. I don't support Putin but you have to wonder what the problem is in 'getting along' with Putin in the same way the US gets along with the Saudis and Chinese who could equally be accused as being as aggressive and oppressive as Putin. There is no point in continually demonising Russia while ignoring the abuses of US allies. If politics must be played then surely trying to work with Putin instead of demonising him is the best option.

demfad

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Hardly the Democrats placed all the evils of the world onto Trump when he was running for office. The news outlets ran article after article about Trump with wild claims about his personal life, financial misdeeds & his various views on globalization, jobs, immigration, terrorism & his feud with Clinton. Nothing was off limits and yet the voters still voted Trump. By comparison the media left Clinton alone and allowed her campaign to get away with outright lies. Don't you believe the public have a right to know of the unethical conduct of the Clinton administration?

Trump
Mentioned Wikileaks over 160 times in the last month before the election. There was nothing to affect her integrity in any of those emails.
Most of the election coverage was negative. On Trumps side he brought on himself by not declaring taxes and by boasting about sexually assaulting women. He was also up for a rape charge of a girl who was 13 when the alleged repeated take happened with Triump and his pal convicted child molestor Epstein.
If the media has not been preoccupied with her emails they would have discovered his connections to criminals, oligarchs and ex soviet agents from ex soviet countries. He dealt with dozens of those.
Bill clintons administration has nothing to do with Hilary Clinton. The Clinton Cash documentary was funded and helped by Bannon and his cronies.
Remember also that Trump WA helped in the primaries also. Russian interference is since 2014

KingBrian2

Kitsunegari wrote: »

Very little material information is provided and it states in the article that Trump had no knowledge of the meeting. If Putin and Russia are so bad then you have to wonder why the Obama administration sold them uranium. I don't support Putin but you have to wonder what the problem is in 'getting along' with Putin in the same way the US gets along with the Saudis and Chinese who could equally be accused as being as aggressive and oppressive as Putin. There is no point in continually demonising Russia while ignoring the abuses of US allies. If politics must be played then surely trying to work with Putin instead of demonising him is the best option.

Some are more interested in fighting wars than engaging in diplomacy. Pres Assad said from the onset he was willing to talk with no preconditions whereas the US backed proxies were never going to stop fighting their war. The same can also apply to other incidences of US duplicity. Only a short while back the US was embroiled in a tax row with Europe over corporate profit now that has only left the news headlines and we see reports of NATO maneuvers in the Baltics, Scandinavian and North Atlantic air demonstrations & Russian mobilization in the Ukraine. War is a big industry and the rich far richer than Trump want to keep this rivalry between Washington & Kremlin going whereas both sides can come together and cooperate to reduce the various hot spots around the world and deal with the looming environmental crisis which is plaguing the southern hemisphere.

KingBrian2

demfad wrote: »

Trump
Mentioned Wikileaks over 160 times in the last month before the election. There was nothing to affect her integrity in any of those emails.
Most of the election coverage was negative. On Trumps side he brought on himself by not declaring taxes and by boasting about sexually assaulting women. He was also up for a rape charge of a girl who was 13 when the alleged repeated take happened with Triump and his pal convicted child molestor Epstein.
If the media has not been preoccupied with her emails they would have discovered his connections to criminals, oligarchs and ex soviet agents from ex soviet countries. He dealt with dozens of those.
Bill clintons administration has nothing to do with Hilary Clinton. The Clinton Cash documentary was funded and helped by Bannon and his cronies.
Remember also that Trump WA helped in the primaries also. Russian interference is since 2014

Edward Snowden is a fugitive wanting by US security for treason and Julian Assange is held up in the Ecuadorian embassy as he is facing allegations of rape in Sweden. Trump's references to Wikileaks has been due to the negligence of the US media who misinformed and refused to air stories that would harm America's standing in the world. The US did that itself by have a media colluding with one party during the election. Wikileaks has shown itself to be a truly independent news outlet and they even provide material to the so called free media from time to time. This is who your buddy Clinton wanted gone. Effectively gutting the free press of the entire world.

We would know very little without Wikileaks and Trump was correct to reference Wikileaks in his speeches. He has already made it abundantly clear that he does not believe a word the free press in America says. We must make a distinction between the various news outlets. Some were obviously more biased than others. Most were very much out to silence Trump and spread fear. The amount of articles relating to a scary Pres Trump was breathtaking. That is just the newspapers but in terms of the News Channels they went even further and of course they saw it all as a joke and never ever wanted to report actual news.

ligerdub

He also didn't "not declare taxes" nor did he sexually assault anyone. Christ sake so much rubbish being spouted against the man.

Yourself isit

demfad wrote: »

Any propaganda has been massively in Trumps favour. Earlier in this thread I have linked where Russian US cyber activity on Internet and sOcial media was analysed since 2014. No comparison. The tools used, the overall methodology ha been used in several countries including Indonesia interestingly enough.

Most of the talking points you are making are themselves propaganda .

Count Dooku

demfad wrote: »

If the media has not been preoccupied with her emails they would have discovered his connections to criminals, oligarchs and ex soviet agents from ex soviet countries. He dealt with dozens of those.

Are you serious?
During October it was massive hysteria in liberal MSM about Trump business connections with Russians and his servers sending secret information to Russian bank
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/10/was_a_server_registered_to_the_trump_organization_communicating_with_russia.html
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/302216-how-much-money-does-the-trump-organization-owe
http://www.vox.com/world/2016/11/1/13487322/donald-trump-russia-agent-hack
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harlan-green/why-is-trump-is-acting-li_b_12785948.html
http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/10/31/october-surprise-abc-uncovers-millions-payments-russia-trump/
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/donald-trumps-very-weird-russia-thing
Even Hillary tried to attack Trump with his Russian links
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/793234169576947712?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Didn't work well because it was looking innocent in comparison with Saudi donations to Clinton foundations.
Liberals still cannot accept fact that Clinton was the worst possible candidate for the White House and only reason for her nomination was that it been promised by Obama and sore losers are still looking for excuses instead of trying to understand why people don't buy liberal propaganda anymore

Yourself isit

What we are asked to believe is that a few years ago the dastardly Russians somehow cultivated Trump, a man who most people thought had exactly 0% chance of winning the presidency a mere 8 months ago (being as he is a buffoon).

They "controlled" wikileaks and broke into an email server (denied by wikileaks who said it was an internal DNC leak) but got little except some internal DNC shenanigans which actually helped the Sanders campaign. The leaks were months before the election. There was little incriminating in the emails anyway.

Then there's this fabulist nonsense. It's amateur hour.

Billy86

ligerdub wrote: »

Why did you respond then? There also was a person, I believe in this very page that said outright that he would be. It's no straw man, it's actual people, and you won't have to go very far yourself to find them.

I responded to show the odds were very low for something like an impeachment, 11/10 for something that has happened to two of 45 presidents is pretty startling don't you think?

I don't want to wait 4 years to collect, and also because I can't find a market for a bet that he will serve the term, presumably because the bookies don't fancy the almost certain payout! The impeach/resign squad don't have the burden of having to wait that long. They'll surely be collecting in the next few weeks, it's like buying money if one follows their views. It's 7/4 on Paddypower by the way.

Best of luck.

Oh, so a Trump fan is expecting something from others that they're not willing to do themselves? Well I'm just shocked really, completely shocked . If an impeachment does happen, it could easily take up to 4 years also, or even by the other posters' estimation, six months is a long time and the proceedings could take quite a while - wasn't it about a year for Clinton's?

Either way, I wouldn't in the least bit be surprised if he were impeached but a lot of it depends on how his deep connections to Russia really have run, something his mounting hill of lies is throwing a lot of red flags up over. One thing is certain, it's going to be a very interesting few months/years.

ligerdub

Sure, don't read my post then.

Count Dooku

Sore losers still cannot accept that "The Democracy" doesn't mean rule of Democrats
Remedy for Russian meddling should be new election - The Hill

Billy86

ligerdub wrote: »

Sure, don't read my post then.

A non sequitur answer if ever I saw one, it's like there's a Trump fan checklist or something?

ligerdub

You popped up to answer to question then when challenged you suggested it had nothing to do with you and used the standard "strawman" bolloxology. It's either relevant to you or it isn't. I made the point to those who claimed clearly he would be impeached, so if that's not you then feel free to sit this one out.

As I said in my post, which I suggested you didn't read, "I couldn't find a market for the bet". I've made my money on a Trump win already, although I only had to wait a few weeks for that one. Nice one Donald.

Additionally, I don't fancy waiting for 4 years. If it's clear he will be impeached then it will happen sooner, I'd imagine if it will happen it will be within 2 years (and I'm throwing a bone there), a big difference in time.