General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJane Mayer was very busy this weekend - yes, the Russians stole the election for Trump
How Russia Helped Swing the Election for TrumpA meticulous analysis of online activity during the 2016 campaign makes a powerful case that targeted cyberattacks by hackers and trolls were decisive.
Jane Mayer
September 24, 2018 5:00 AM
...................
Jamieson argues that the impact of the Russian cyberwar was likely enhanced by its consistency with messaging from Trumps campaign, and by its strategic alignment with the campaigns geographic and demographic objectives. Had the Kremlin tried to push voters in a new direction, its effort might have failed. But, Jamieson concluded, the Russian saboteurs nimbly amplified Trumps divisive rhetoric on immigrants, minorities, and Muslims, among other signature topics, and targeted constituencies that he needed to reach. She noted that Russian trolls had created social-media posts clearly aimed at winning support for Trump from churchgoers and military familieskey Republican voters who seemed likely to lack enthusiasm for a thrice-married nominee who had boasted of groping women, obtained multiple military deferments, mocked Gold Star parents and a former prisoner of war, and described the threat of venereal disease as his personal equivalent of the Vietcong. Russian trolls pretended to have the same religious convictions as targeted users, and often promoted Biblical memes, including one that showed Clinton as Satan, with budding horns, arm-wrestling with Jesus, alongside the message Like if you want Jesus to win! One Instagram post, portraying Clinton as uncaring about the 2012 tragedy in Benghazi, depicted a young American widow resting her head on a flag-draped coffin. Another post displayed contrasting images of a thin homeless veteran and a heavyset, swarthy man wearing an undocumented unafraid unapologetic T-shirt, and asked why this veteran gets nothing and this illegal gets everything. It concluded, Like and share if you think this is a disgrace. On Election Day, according to CNN exit polls, Trump, despite his political baggage, outperformed Clinton by twenty-six points among veterans; he also did better among evangelicals than both of the previous Republican nominees, Mitt Romney and John McCain.
In her Post article, Jamieson wrote that it was hard to know if Russian propaganda and dirty tricksincluding the steady release of hacked e-mails, starting with Democratic National Committee correspondence that was leaked just before the Partys conventionhad made a decisive difference in 2016. Nevertheless, she argued, the wide distribution of the trolls disinformation increases the likelihood that it changed the outcome.
After the articles publication, she returned to her sabbatical project on the debates, with a newly keen eye for Russian trolls and hackers. After reviewing the debate transcripts, scrutinizing press coverage, and eliminating other possibilities, Jamieson concluded that there was only one credible explanation for the diminishing impression among debate viewers that Clinton was forthright: just before the second debate, WikiLeaks had released a cache of e-mails, obtained by Russian hackers, that, it said, were taken from the Gmail account of Clintons campaign chairman, John Podesta. They included excerpts from speeches that Clinton had given to banks, for high fees, and had refused to release during the campaign. The speeches could be used by detractors to show that, despite her liberal rhetoric, she was aligned with Wall Street. The hacked content permeated the discourse of the debates, informing both the moderators questions and the candidates answers. All this, Jamieson writes, gave legitimacy to the idea that Clinton said one thing in public and another in private.
During the second debate, on October 9th, before 66.5 million viewers, one of the moderators, Martha Raddatz, relayed a question submitted by a voter: Did Clinton think that it was acceptable for a politician to be two-faced? The question referred to a leaked passage from one of Clintons previously unreleased paid speeches; Russian hackers had given the passage to WikiLeaks, which posted it two days before the debate. In the speech, Clinton had cited Steven Spielbergs film Lincoln as an example of how politicians sometimes need to adopt different public and private negotiating stances. The point was scarcely novel, but the debate questionwhich took her words out of context, omitted her reference to the movie, and didnt mention that Russian operatives had obtained the speech illegallymade Clinton sound like a sneaky hypocrite. When Clinton cited Lincoln in order to defend the statement, Trump pounced.
She got caught in a total lie! Trump said. Her papers went out to all her friends at the banksGoldman Sachs and everybody else. And she said things, WikiLeaks, that just came out. And she lied. Now shes blaming the lie on the late, great Abraham Lincoln!
The dynamic recurred in the third debate, on October 19th, which 71.6 million people watched. When Trump accused Clinton of favoring open borders, she denied it, but the moderator, Chris Wallace, challenged her by citing a snippet from a speech that she had given, in 2013, to a Brazilian bank: My dream is a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders. Again, there was no mention of the fact that the speech had been stolen by a hostile foreign power; Wallace said that the quotation had come from WikiLeaks. The clear implication of Wallaces question was that Clinton had been hiding her true beliefs, and Trump said to him, Thank you! His supporters in the audience laughed. Clinton said that the phrase had been taken out of context: shed been referring not to immigrants but to an open-bordered electric grid with Latin America. She tried to draw attention to Russias role in hacking the speech, but Trump mocked her for accusing Putin, and joked, That was a great pivot off the fact that she wants open borders. He then warned the audience that, if Clinton were elected, Syrians and other immigrants would pour into our country.
The fact-checking organization PolitiFact later concluded that Trump had incorrectly characterized Clintons speech, but the damage had been done. Jamiesons research indicated that viewers who watched the second and third debates subsequently saw Clinton as less forthright, and Trump as more forthright. Among people who did not watch the debates, Clintons reputation was not damaged in this way. During the weeks that the debates took place, the moderators and the media became consumed by an anti-Clinton narrative driven by Russian hackers. In Cyberwar, Jamieson writes, The stolen goods lent credibility to those moderator queries.
As Jamieson reviewed the record further, she concluded that the Russian hackers had also been alarmingly successful in reframing the American political narrative in the crucial period leading up to the second debate. On Friday, October 7th, two days before it took place, three major stories landed in rapid succession. At 12:40 p.m., the Obama Administration released a stunning statement, by the Department of Homeland Security and the director of National Intelligence, accusing the Russian government of interfering in the election through hacking. This seemed certain to dominate the weekend news, but at 4:03 p.m. the Washington Post published a report, by David Fahrenthold, on an Access Hollywood tape that captured Trump, on a hot mike, boasting about grabbing women by the pussy. Then, less than half an hour later, WikiLeaks released its first tranche of e-mails that Russian hackers had stolen from Podestas account. The tranche contained some two thousand messages, along with excerpts from the paid speeches that Clinton had tried to conceal, including those that would be mentioned in the subsequent debates. (Julian Assange, the head of WikiLeaks, has denied working with the Russian government, but he manifestly despises Clinton, and, in a leaked Twitter direct message, he said that in the 2016 election it would be much better for GOP to win.)
.....................
TONS MORE:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/01/how-russia-helped-to-swing-the-election-for-trump/amp?__twitter_impression=true
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
Pachamama
(16,887 posts)...so he is part of the Oct 1st Supreme Court convening....
Trump and GOP know that they will lose the house and that both Impeachment and also Mueller's indictments are coming soon and they need Kavanaugh on the court....
And I have long believed that Grassley, Hatch, Cornyn, Graham and many others in the Senate (and also many in Congress - Nunes, Rohrbacher etc.) are all involved in deep with money and ties to Russia and have long known their days are numbered if they don't protect Trump.
This is the battlefront right now for our democracy whether we realize it or not....
lastlib
(23,222 posts)I think you are right on all counts, and especially your last comment; Democracy truly IS on the line!
Pachamama
(16,887 posts)....very, very clear to me.
Soon, I hope, it will become very clear to everyone. I just am praying that Robert Mueller and others will be able to do it first....
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)That is the one and only reason they want a Royalist on SCOTUS. They don't give a rat's ass whether he's a gang-rapist or not, hell, that just makes him "one of the boys."
mcar
(42,307 posts)Thanks.
Cha
(297,180 posts)Jane Mayer's findings.. even though it doesn't fit in with his narrative.
There he is with his buddy now.. wonder when that was taken?
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11169836
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Cha
(297,180 posts)I just had to do it, though.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)There's a very well-known photo from Donald Trump's wedding to Melania, in which they're pictured with Bill and Hillary Clinton, big smiles all around. Do you find that photo disgusting?
There's a less widely publicized photo that hit me much harder -- Hillary Clinton hobnobbing with Henry Kissinger, who IMO is a war criminal under the standards set at Nuremberg. Do you find that photo disgusting?
I'll be glad to provide my answer: None of these three photos is disgusting. People, especially celebrities who move in similar circles, pose for photos at various times for all sorts of reasons. You can't read very much into it.
If you nevertheless insist on doing political analysis based on such a minor and transitory factor, well, I'd say that Julian Assange is the least objectionable of the three. I'd have a hard time choosing between Trump and Kissinger for the most objectionable, but either of them is far worse than Assange.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Both individuals are disgusting. Therefore, the photo is disgusting. This isn't about Hillary or any other "celebrity"... I'm not as dumb as people think I am.
oasis
(49,379 posts)These days we need people who are 100% with us. All others need to take a hike.
Thanks for the pic, Cha.
Cha
(297,180 posts)We do need people who are with us for the win.. not a bitter divider.
You're Welcome, oasis
People like Michelle and Barack.. GOTV!
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
oasis
(49,379 posts)Cha
(297,180 posts)marble falls
(57,079 posts)Cha
(297,180 posts)pandr32
(11,581 posts)While he did it with Heston because he interviewed him to expose his extreme views on guns, I wonder what the point of having his picture taken with Assange is. Moore used to really like him but said to Bill Maher he thought Assange had drifted. My question would be "from where?" He has always been a dirt bag out to grab some limelight and democracy be damned.
Aloha, Cha, and much mahalo for this.
Cha
(297,180 posts)I've been wanting to ask how you are? Were you affected by the Volcano or the Rains from Hurricane Lane?
pandr32
(11,581 posts)Our patch of land doesn't flood (runs off to lower spots) and the rain just makes everything brilliant emerald. We are a little north of the rift zone, too. Air quality has been good all through the eruptions. We feel pretty darn lucky!
Let's hope that is it for hurricanes this year, and please--no tsunamis!
Hope you are well in Kauai. Much aloha!
Cha
(297,180 posts)You Are Lucky! I'm so happy for you!
We're good, too!
WhiteTara
(29,704 posts)He's been a tool for the right ever since 2000.
Cha
(297,180 posts)lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Cha
(297,180 posts)talking about Moore and the article had Assange right there, and I remembered that pic on the other thread.
Yes it is disgustingly YUCK.
Roy Rolling
(6,915 posts)The worst thing about this is how military people were 26 points higher for Trump than Clinton.
Those with guns to protect the USA were the most gullible to Russian propaganda.
Don't they teach soldiers how to spot Russian/foreign propaganda?
watoos
(7,142 posts)Military people vote Republican. eom. George W. Bush went AWOL from his Guard duty and still got their votes.
JI7
(89,247 posts)KelleyKramer
(8,958 posts)Thank you for posting this
brooklynite
(94,513 posts)I find it hard to believe that a committed Clinton voter shifted to Trump because of a Facebook meme. Russian involvement merely reinforced beliefs/fears/hatred about Clinton that Trump voters already had.
underpants
(182,788 posts)They got meme after meme after meme that reinforced the 25 year campaign against her.
"Trust" was the theme of the GOP campaign and for those not completely decided seeing enough of these nurtured the seed that was already planted.
Many people actually think the "News Feed" (I didn't realize that little blue icon was called that) is actual news. In the 90's I remember a study/poll that said a lot of people thought "Entertainment Tonight" was actually THE news. About this time I had a co-worker who would refer to ET as that.
Lastly, the coincidence of the timing of the cyber attacks and words literally coming out of Trump's mouth, or from his campaign, are too obvious to ignore.
Botany
(70,501 posts).... disinformation campaign.
Botany
(70,501 posts).... and it has been going on for years. I have old friend from college who the last time
we talked went on and on about how Hillary's email server was really a problem and
to me it soon became apparent that he had been reading Russian/Republican propaganda
on Facebook.
Putin and company have declared war on America and their weapons have been
disinformation and sewing discourse in America along class, racial, and religious lines.
JHan
(10,173 posts)Washington Post devoted an article examining the claims, concluding there was no evidence, but this was only after the election.
Media houses also republished or referenced uncurated data from hacked emails. Snippets of emails were weaponized and stitched into false narratives and now I'm having flashbacks. It was so exhausting having to debunk all the bullshit.
Botany
(70,501 posts)... about Trump stealiong money from the widows of the US Military personal who were
killed in Iraq and Afghanistan with his phony baloney Trump U. or that Trump's military
prep school was reform school for rich kids?
NRaleighLiberal
(60,014 posts)to see it.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)judesedit
(4,438 posts)judesedit
(4,438 posts)[
mythology
(9,527 posts)Fortunately any claim that votes were changed is unsupported by any evidence. In fact between the polls being highly accurate (substantially more so than in 2012 for example), and recounts in Wisconsin and Michigan showing no votes were changed.
questionseverything
(9,653 posts)The highest error rate was in the City of Racines Ward 26, where election officials failed to count 6.1% of the votes, even during the recount. More than 1 in every 17 voters were disenfranchised in that ward. Detailed results are here, for each candidate and ward.
Wisconsin Elections Commission officials believe the voting machines failed to detect the votes because voters had marked ballots with types of ink that the machines could not detect. After other counties hand-counted the recount and discovered the high rates of missed votes, the WEC decertified the machines (prohibited their future use in Wisconsin) in late September.
County Clerk Wendy Christensen has not yet publicly explained why the county board of canvassers chose twice to certify the results as 'correct and true' without checking, despite the obviously suspicious number of missing votes.
"We needed the manual count to get the truth, said Village of Pleasant Prairie voter Liz Whitlock, who was among the recount observers who could see the voting machines missing votes.
lastlib
(23,222 posts)This is an important read! We all need to understand what happened here! Clearly tRumpski and Putin were in league for criminal purpose--theft of our election. We have a crime syndicate working out of our White House, and we need to kick it OUT!! November 6th. We seriously need to re-take both houses of Congress and start the investigations. GET OUT THE VOTE!!
malaise
(268,960 posts)czarjak
(11,269 posts)Rigged just enough?
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)They worked side by side with the Russians. They helped them. These people are traitors.
Amaryllis
(9,524 posts)asking why and noone seems to have figured it out even MSNBC anchors like Rachel and Lawrence who are good at dot connecting.
underpants
(182,788 posts)Have to read this later. It's not easy waiting to start a new job you know.
BigmanPigman
(51,585 posts)we were attacked by Russia, was it an act of war and she said "Yes, a cyber war and that is how we should be treating this whole thing...an act of war to disrupt our elections, a cornerstone of our democracy".
Achilleaze
(15,543 posts)by news of republican sexual depravity and predation.
GoCubsGo
(32,080 posts)underpants
(182,788 posts),or from his campaign, are too obvious to ignore.
Maybe it's covered in one of their books.
Great read. Again perhaps the books cover the coordinated efforts of the cyber attack to manipulate search engines to present pro-Trump/anti-Hillary in specific areas in the swing states and in the Blue Wall is discussed. That was in the first Senate report released after their half assed investigation. That was stated on TV at the initial press conference by Warner I believe.
Still I think the media's endless full coverage of Trump and but-her-emails both for ratings and to make it a horse race was at least 50% of the explanation.
Amaryllis
(9,524 posts)stop a repeat performance in Nov.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Hermit-The-Prog
(33,328 posts)The Russian operations amplified existing feelings, aided by the gigantic megaphone of a press chasing after money from sensationalism. See, e.g., Les Moonves.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)I wish we had a Russia or Mueller forum to keep track of articles like this.