DEM SENATOR: RUSSIAN HACKERS DIDN’T FAVOR ONE PARTY OVER ANOTHER

Democratic Sen. Mark Warner said on Wednesday that Russian hackers were not favoring one political party over another.

In the 2016 election their efforts clearly favored Donald Trump, the candidate who was widening divisions as a central part of his campaign strategy. That has been stated by our intelligence community in no uncertain terms. It was the primary reason why Trump repeatedly attacked our own intelligence community, and why he was unwilling to acknowledge that Russian meddling had even taken place.

How? Provide examples and the quantities of the interference that helped Trump as opposed to Hillary.

That would be the conclusion of our nation’s own intelligence community—a conclusion which the Senate Intelligence Committee has investigated and concurs with:

FOX News, July 3, 2018 — Findings that Russia meddled to help Trump beat Clinton were ‘accurate and on point’: Senate intel panel

Maybe you should ask them for examples. No doubt they’ll cite multiple instances of hacking and the carefully timed publication of illegally obtained information that clearly targeted the DNC and attempted to damage the Clinton campaign. No such effort was made against Donald Trump, who Putin has openly acknowledged was his preferred candidate.

Yesterday, Thursday, August 2, all of the administration’s top officials held a collective press conference at which they stated Russia is now mounting an effort to widen and exploit divisions ahead of the 2018 elections. They stated the administration is taking this threat very seriously and making serious efforts to address it—after which, Trump blew the whole thing off at a rally as “the Russian hoax.”

Top officials are warning of Russian hacking. Trump hasn’t joined them.

@Greg:

Maybe you should ask them for examples.

I’ve been asking EVERYONE for examples. To date, not a one. Nothing. The recent posts that were deleted only showed attacks on Trump or conservatives.

I know you like to believe what you WANT to believe, so when you are told that the interference assisted Trump, you don’t care about any verification. Since you support Obama and Hillary, you actually LIKE to be lied to. However, under Obama, the integrity of the IC, DOJ and FBI has been severely undercut. Several people within all those organizations have joined with Obama to turn them into political organizations that attack political opponents instead of doing a job without bias. So, until I see the examples, not only can I not have complete faith in them, but how am I to be aware and vigilant for anything upcoming in the future? THAT should be the most important consideration of all.

No doubt they’ll cite multiple instances of hacking and the carefully timed publication of illegally obtained information that clearly targeted the DNC and attempted to damage the Clinton campaign.

Is THAT it? You think the revelations of FACTS about the DNC and Clinton were used to favor Trump? My GOD! I would think you would appreciate knowing the TRUTH about the people you choose to support, but instead, as stated above, you prefer to be LIED to so you don’t have to confront the facts of your candidates, your party or your ideology.

The Trump administration is acting far more aggressively against foreign interference than the Obama administration, which is not necessarily a resounding achievement since not only did Obama do nothing, but he STOPPED those who WERE acting against interference.

In the 2016 election their efforts clearly favored Donald Trump, the candidate who was widening divisions as a central part of his campaign strategy.

There you go. Greggie Goebbels clearly has more information on this subject than Senator Warner who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

@Mully, #5:

And yet no votes were affected and the Russians spent more money after the election than before.

Votes certainly were affected. The vote count was affected by manipulating voter attitudes and opinions by way of a precisely targeted social media propaganda and false news operation. Here’s how that was done, in a nutshell:

The mechanisms used for targeting purposes were pre-existing social media logarithms originally developed to allow for highly targeted advertising campaigns. Those tools are made available to anyone paying to advertise on Facebook. Remember Cambridge Analytica? The Russians figured out who to target by hacking multiple state voter registration databases, matching voter names and locations against millions of stolen social media user profiles, and studying the electoral college maps and poll results to determine the swing state leverage points. Identified voters and their social media connections in those specific locations were what they focused on. Changing the intentions of a mere 77 thousand out of the 136 million who voted was all it took to change the electoral college outcome.

No claim has been made that voting machines themselves were hacked to alter the vote count. That’s not how the Russian operation worked.

@Greg:

Votes certainly were affected. The vote count was affected by manipulating voter attitudes and opinions by way of a precisely targeted social media propaganda and false news operation.

How about giving the text of those social media messages that were supposed to influence the voters? How about an actual EXAMPLE of a voter than voted due to the social media influence by the Russians?

You see, Greggie, you got nada. Only your misguided hope that someone, some day, will say “Gee, I saw something on social media about Hillary so I voted for Trump.”

You’re not only an idiot, you’re certifiable.

@Greg:

Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee released a trove of screenshots showing Russian-linked ads, events, memes, pages, and petitions that had been disseminated across Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

Oh. So, I guess then it MUST be true? Perhaps if Democrats have not proven themselves to be such consistent liars, it might be worth some consideration. However, this really isn’t.

You think memes change people’s minds? You think meme’s change people’s votes? If anything, they express and reinforce what they already know or think.

Here is what REAL Russian interference that affects elections looks like: A dossier, paid for by Hillary and filled with information from anonymous Russians, peddled by a dubious British spy and used as the basis for an extensive “investigation” replete with hyper-biased investigators, leaks and FBI raids. THAT is the shape and form of REAL interference. I guess you missed it.

Now, since you believe so earnestly that these are Russian mind-altering ads and posts, why don’t you point out the ones that are a) lies, b) might actually CHANGE someone’s mind or vote and c) is actually PROVEN to be of Russian origin. You know, a meme of Hillary’s face calling her “pure evil” doesn’t tell me anything I don’t already know. I’ve followed her for a long, long time and she is the face of evil; a lying, manipulative, corrupt criminal that should never have been allowed to run for office, much less come so close to winning. That would have been a national tragedy.

So, these we have already seen and discussed long ago. There’s nothing there that has the magical power of changing the mind of a Trump or Hillary voter from one side to another. Only a fool would believe it to be so and only an idiot would try to convince someone else that they do.

But, I am at a disadvantage here. I’m conservative and I don’t simply believe what I want to believe. I’m not some mindless drone waiting for Soros to tell me what to think. Perhaps, like the Force, this works only on weak minds. Is this your point?

@kitt: The left simply cannot fathom someone would not want to vote for a spoiled, bitter, bitchy old woman who curses those who HAVE to serve her, who is a famous liar, who proved herself grossly incompetent as Secretary of State and who was PROVEN to have put national security in serious jeopardy for the sake of having the option of destroying evidence of her illegal and illicit activities (which she obviously did), someone that were it not for the bias within the FBI would have been in jail instead of campaigning. It HAD to have been the Russians, damnit!

@Greg:

The DNC wasn’t running a covert, narrowly targeted disinformation and false news campaign utilizing stolen social media user data.

Uh…yeah, they were.

It’s unfortunate that this idiot Greg has to double down on this lie, but it’s also telling that this headline set him off.

Other countries have been affected by this form of disinformation, but the DNC and their vassals (media, and the democrat mob) have used it to hide their own transgressions. We KNOW that the DNC supplanted the democratic process of their own candidates. They got caught doing it. Mix in the utter disbelief that the country is not, in fact, a majority liberal, and you have a delusion that these turds just can’t let go.

The Dems cheated. Trump won anyway.

Deal with it.

@Greg:

The DNC wasn’t running a covert, narrowly targeted disinformation and false news campaign utilizing stolen social media user data.

They WEREN’T? They were advertising Hillary as a viable candidate for President instead of the criminal liar she actually is; that’s pretty covert and targeted narrowly at the blind, deaf and definitely DUMB voter.

Nor did they treat telling lies and telling the truth as entirely equal, or pitch to an audience that doesn’t seem to be capable of telling the difference.

That is EXACTLY what they did, and the liberal media helped them do it. Perhaps they didn’t so much treat lies and the truth as equals; truth does them no good and only lies can make the liberal agenda look attractive and the opposition villainous.

Instead of getting together and solving the problem of foreign governments or hackers trying to influence our elections, if you see that as such a grave threat, the left has decided to do the Russian’s job for them and destroy the integrity of the electoral system and government themselves. What shameful anti-American activity.

@another vet: Well, she did reveal the existence of a secret US base in Pakistan we were using to fight al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, so her loyalties are not surprising.