Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 275 posts

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#131

Post by [deleted] »

leothecool wrote: post #98
ethanbond wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, their goal is indeed to have a specific election winner and to foment division. The IC has been quite clear that Russia had a strong preference for a Trump victory at least in 2016. [Removed a section on GOP preference for defunding Ukraine since this is not a party position, just a growing position within the party] Everything else you've said is true though - no reason to stick our heads in the sand about their…

> GOP's stated preferences for defunding Ukraine's defense The voting record shows their preference is to continue funding it. I don't know why your information sources are saying the opposite. Maybe they do it to polarize us.

[deleted]

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#132

Post by Nomentatus »

godelski wrote: post #77

> Russian companies were charged in the U.S. with operating a covert social media campaign aimed at fomenting discord and dividing American public opinion This is key here and I think we should all take note because I see comments here that feed into their tactics. Their goal isn't to have a specific election winner, but to divide us as a nation (not just US but all Westerners and even countries like Japan) and creat…

>>"So the question is how to fight against this."

Let's see, an act of war, and then what would fight mean in that context; hmm, I'm sure I had a dictionary around here somewhere...

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#133

Post by uni_rule »

coldtea wrote: post #69
smt88 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Castro was sick to the point of being unable to function, right?

Quoted post unavailable.

Or his opponent who couldn't run up a flight of stairs without soiling his depends. Fucking ancient bastards.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#134

Post by tim333 »

99_00 wrote: post #79

Obviously Russian interferes in US elections. So do many other countries. And the US interferes in other countries elections. It's always been this way. It's just an issue now, because interference in the 2016 election was spun by domestic political groups to delegitimize an elected president and subvert the democratic process by attempting to remove the president.

There was some odd stuff going on in that election without much need for spinning it.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#135

Post by corytheboyd »

mooneater wrote: post #102
godelski wrote: post #77

> Russian companies were charged in the U.S. with operating a covert social media campaign aimed at fomenting discord and dividing American public opinion This is key here and I think we should all take note because I see comments here that feed into their tactics. Their goal isn't to have a specific election winner, but to divide us as a nation (not just US but all Westerners and even countries like Japan) and creat…

> there are things we the public NEED to do I dont disagree, but my take is relying on public changing its behavior is not exactly a hopeful strategy.

Yeah... I have no faith in the general public either. This is the same public that went full insane by reading grainy jpegs on Facebook and watching obviously terrible "news" networks.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#136

Post by dandanua »

Musk recently posted his "solution" to the war with stamps of russian propaganda (e.g. mentioning "Khrushchev's mistake" and nuclear war threats). Now he urges everyone to vote for republicans, who publicly against helping Ukraine in the genocidal war of Russia. What is it if not interference from the very top?

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#137

Post by sixQuarks »

99_00 wrote: post #79

Obviously Russian interferes in US elections. So do many other countries. And the US interferes in other countries elections. It's always been this way. It's just an issue now, because interference in the 2016 election was spun by domestic political groups to delegitimize an elected president and subvert the democratic process by attempting to remove the president.

You’re talking too much sense dude, that won’t be tolerated here

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#138

Post by yucky »

bell-cot wrote: post #4

My impression (mostly from coverage that I've seen at UnderstandingWar.org ) is that Yevgeny Prigozhin might be happy to admit to quite a few things - whether or not he'd actually done them - so long as doing so advanced his public image (hint - neither "weak" nor "pro-American") and political ambitions. Pass the salt?

    mostly from coverage that I've seen at UnderstandingWar.org
Fair warning, that site is a blog run by a neocon think tank, headed by the King NeoCon himself Bill Kristol. This is the weapons of mass destruction crew, nothing they say should never be taken seriously.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#140

Post by acdha »

xienze wrote: post #50
matthewdgreen wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of these warnings is not to say "oh gosh it happens whatever" or "we need to launch the ICBMs directly at Moscow right now." The point is to gird the public so that they know the manipulation is happening and can try to compensate for it. There is a lot of denial about this interference happening out there (please do not make me link to it, it's five seconds on Google) and people who are in denial about thi…

> There is a lot of denial about this interference happening out there I would argue there’s a lot of creative interpretation of how much “interference” actually happens. Democrats are pretty much starting from the position that, due to demographics, the only way Republicans can gain the upper hand in national elections (or particular state/local elections) is through trickery and the assistance of foreign government…

> Democrats are pretty much starting from the position that, due to demographics, the only way Republicans can gain the upper hand in national elections (or particular state/local elections) is through trickery and the assistance of foreign government meddling.

I’m trying to be generous in my interpretation here but are you using “trickery” to include the gerrymandering and voting restrictions Democrats spend most of their time on? In particular, I’d like some citations about who is saying specifically what about “interference”.

Post reply on HN