At this point, they don't actually have to do anything because half of the country is convinced that the Russians interfered enough to get Trump elected. Thus every time that they make these statements they're just rubbing salt in the wounds of the 2016 election. I personally don't believe that the Russians are or ever were capable of running such a sophisticated operation based on how poorly their military has performed in Ukraine. Now, China on the other hand....
‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections
91–100 of 275 posts
Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections
#92Fun fact, many, many other foreign governments have "interfered" in our elections also. In addition the US has interfered in their elections as well. Its been happening for a very long time.
I would care lot more about if everyone who ever meddled in foreign elections in USA would be on death row or at least extradited to those countries.
Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections
#93> 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…
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…
[deleted]
Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections
#94> 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…
I hope more people understand this.
Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections
#95The news is that a country tried to influence the affairs of another country? Or is it because it is Russia or because it is a chef?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_electoral_interventi...
Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections
#96The timing of this information suggests that while it may be true, its very disclosure may also be meddling in foreign elections -- i.e. casting doubt on their legitimacy helps many within the US who are actively trying to propagate that narrative. EDIT: A word
Russian interference is a pretty one sided thing. If it happened, it was to Trump benefit. Such declaration will be dismissed by conservatives as Democrat narrative. And democrats will just get comforted in their position. Russia would be stupid to say anything that would help democrats. They would be much better off with a republican house and senate. I think there are smarter things to say if they wanted to muddy t…
It is already well documented that while part of what you say is true (favouring maga gop) that sowing the divisions in any way, shape or form is a goal is also true.
Source : actual kgb agents who did this[0]
Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections
#97$100k in Facebook ads, in 2016. Soros has donated $126M for midterms tomorrow. [1] But, you know, mean tweets, Putin's puppet, etc, etc. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/03/us/politics/midterm-money...
Soros is an American citizen. Thanks to a conservative SCOTUS decision, he apparently has every right to exercise political free speech via cold hard cash. Are you going to say anything similarly conspiratorial about Robert Mercer? Robert Uihlein? The Koch brothers?
Soros is spending serious coin on influencing election in countries other than USA too.
Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections
#98> 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…
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.
Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Recently the CIA pressured Brazil's president to accept the election results before they even happened. Even US media took issue with that.
Yes, you should say you will accept the results of an election before you know whether you will win it. This is the basis of the peaceful transfer of power. It shouldn't be hard to accept this. To accept only those elections you win is to deny the legitimacy of democratic governance altogether. If there is evidence the election wasn't fair, you should object. But your evidence that it was unfair shouldn't be your own…
> If there is evidence the election wasn't fair, you should object.
Obviously.
> But your evidence that it was unfair shouldn't be your own hurt feelings and propaganda.
Of course not. I have some real reasons for doubting the results.
Three days ago, an argentinian man streamed a video where he analyzed our election's official data set. He found that the older models of our voting machines, less thoroughly audited, displayed a clear advantage to the winning left-wing candidate, something between 8% and 15%.
After I watched this, I went to the government website and downloaded the entire election dataset and attempted to reproduce his analysis.
Then I saw the website go down for hours.
An API for data set changes notifications remained up though. I monitored that API and saw them pushing changes to the 2022 and 2018 elections datasets. I saved that data too.
Then I witnessed that API go down.
Next day, it was back up, the data was modified and there was a bullshit note on the website explaining it went down due maintenance.
Then this supreme court judge started censoring everyone who even so much as asked if he was going to investigate any of this. Last weekend I counted at least 10 influential people censored, including a doctor in economics, elected politicians and policemen. It got to the point people on Twitter got Elon Musk to look at it.
I'm very worried about this. If it's so false, why can't they just refute it? It seems to me like they're all in damage control mode. Media is pretending nothing's going on.
Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure why everyone assumes this. It seems like he'd have much more ability to shape the future of Russia and protect those close to him if he chooses a successor and oversees the succession. He could also ensure better conditions for himself (i.e. not being executed) in case he ends up being unable to continue ruling due to sickness/old age.
Do we have any examples of this actually happening in the Soviet times until now? He's going to be worried about the groomed successor doing him in earlier than natural death. That paranoia is what keeps them from doing what you suggest.
The odds of a full on anti-Putinist purge seem a lot higher with a disorderly succession compared to one that Putin orchestrates himself. There are risks either way of course, but it doesn't seem like such an obvious choice for him as many imply.