- Revelations!! — Russians sow discord . . . use propaganda . . .
PopeCatholic* - Mueller CYA / PR strategy – show all the money is well-spent – indict a ham sandwich
- Still nothing as regards Trump — give it up Mueller you Democrat Deep State operative Torquemada bastard
- Why do US based actions aimed at other countries not rise to indictable offenses using Mueller’s or other countries’ standards?
- How many parts of the indictment would likely survive judicial review under actual election law grounded in the First Amendment?
We think the latter two bullet points are worthy of serious analysis, the others obvious. We suspect the analysis of the techniques, actual money spent and impact would show a grand case of hypocrisy by those “SHOCKED” by news that Russians try to interfere in other countries affairs . . . as if US operatives don’t. Further the Mueller indictments were “easy” — name some foreboding violations by foreigners but with realizations that the perps will never be brought to trial. If they were, the trial platform (including surrounding PR) would be highly embarrassing. R Mall
Related reading from Patriot Post:
The Russian Destabilizing Campaign
On Friday, news broke that Robert Mueller’s special investigation had indicted 13 Russians and three Russian organizations for having engaged in efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. election. In his announcement, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein explained, “The defendants allegedly conducted what they called information warfare against the United States, with the stated goal of spreading distrust towards the candidates and the political system in general.” Rosenstein also pointed out that no Americans were being indicted, saying, “There is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity.” He added, “There is no allegation in the indictment that the charge conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.” However, Rosenstein did note that the investigation remains ongoing.
The indictment states in part, “Some Defendants, posing as U.S. persons and without revealing their Russian association, communicated with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump Campaign and with other political activists to seek to coordinate political activities.” The Russians sought to prop up the candidates who initially looked like outliers, such as Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, while they worked to spread negative information against Hillary Clinton, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. Clearly, the Russians were not allied to any one political party or platform; instead, they sought to sow as much discord within the American political election process as possible. This conclusion is emphasized by post-election activity, when Russian agents engaged in organized efforts to both defend and attack Trump’s presidency. It was a political destabilization campaign that harkens back to Cold War-era espionage. And it serves as a reminder that Russian leadership is just as committed to weakening the U.S. as it ever has been.
Russia is “our number one geopolitical foe,” Mitt Romney said in 2012, to the mockery of Barack Obama and Democrats everywhere. Romney was right.
Following the news, Trump tweeted, “If it was the GOAL of Russia to create discord, disruption and chaos within the U.S. then, with all of the Committee Hearings, Investigations and Party hatred, they have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. They are laughing their a—s off in Moscow. Get smart America!” Trump is right.
Deliberately muddying the message, The Washington Post responded to the news by suggesting that it was Trump who has egg on his face with a story entitled “Trump’s Russia ‘hoax’ turns out to be real.” The piece then spins the Mueller indictment and accuses Trump of being wrong for calling the Russiagate investigation a “witch-hunt” and a “hoax” because Russia did seek to interfere. But the Post obscures the fact that what Trump called a hoax was the Demo/MSM narrative that his campaign supposedly colluded with Russia — a narrative Mueller’s indictment appears to undermine.
It’s interesting to note the immense weight Democrats and the Leftmedia are willing to attribute to 13 Russians in their ability to influence the outcome of an election, while at the same time downplaying as completely inconsequential the impact that millions of illegal aliens living in the U.S. have on our elections. Which party is it that time and again rejects common-sense election fraud protections such as voter ID?
*the Pope Catholic thing used to be a tautology, or a statement of the obvious — not so much as regards the current Pope, in our humble opinion it seems debatable. More later
