“An FBI source … volunteered highly politically sensitive information … on Russian influence efforts aimed at the US presidential election. The source is an executive of a private business intelligence firm and a former employee of a friendly intelligence service who has been compensated for previous reporting over the past three years. The source maintains and collects information from a layered network of identified and unidentified subsources, some of which has been corroborated in the past. The source collected this information on behalf of private clients and was not compensated for it by the FBI. The source’s reporting appears to have been acquired by multiple Western press organizations starting in October.”
This was how the dossier was sold to President Trump by James Comey, which of course is not too dissimilar to how the dossier was sold to the FICA courts to garner warrants to spy on Trump campaign workers.
Not only does the explanation fail to even suggest the source was a former British operative, but it completely brushes by the fact that he was hired by the DNC and Hillary campaign.
I also believe that it's ironic to note this information was out in the public and reported by "multiple Western press organizations" starting in October. This means those press reports were using information gathered through the collusion of one campaign in association with non-American sources to influence the results of the election.
Yes, open evidence of one campaign in collusion with foreign entities to influence our American election. I may be otherwise missing something here, but most liberals have been arguing that such collusion between a candidate and foreigners to influence the election is a bad thing?
39 comments:
foreigners to influence the election
Is Unconstitutional
I don't know if lying to the president is unconstitutional or illegal but it's certainly improper.
Roger
Richard Steele is a foreigner. That makes his participation illegal. It would also make the payment to him by the DNC an Hillary campaigns illegal.
On top of that, they failed to report the payment to Steele as a campaign contribution. I heard somewhere that this is a crime?
A REAL scandal is the one sided coverage, hour by hour, of networks like NBC & Democrat spin machines like Saturday Night Live. It is all nothing less than unfair news coverage and Dem commercials. Should be tested in courts, can’t be legal? Only defame & belittle! Collusion?
Does this sound like a reasonable comment of a President of the United States of America, a free speech land?
------------------
Trump Says Unfair Coverage Should Be Tested In Courts
President Trump ripped “one sided” and “unfair” media coverage, saying it should be tested in courts, The Hill reports.
Said Trump: “A REAL scandal is the one sided coverage, hour by hour, of networks like NBC & Democrat spin machines like Saturday Night Live.”
He added: "It is all nothing less than unfair news coverage and Dem commercials. Should be tested in courts, can’t be legal? Only defame & belittle! Collusion?”
_____________
They made vicious fun of Lincoln, Donald. Yet he is now considered our greatest President. And you?
Yes, it does beg the question of when journalism and comedy crosses the line to political advocacy? And when this advocacy becomes an in-kind political contribution.
My advice to SNL. Find something funny to say about Democrats.
This should be on the top of the blog. Censorship is his desire.
During a series of Sunday morning tweets attacking everyone from his former attorney Michael Cohen to Hillary Clinton, the President slipped in the suggestion that NBC’s long-running comedy skit program should be “tested in courts,” seemingly for its alleged “collusion” with Democratic party interests.
“A REAL scandal is the one sided coverage, hour by hour, of networks like NBC & Democrat spin machines like Saturday Night Live. It is all nothing less than unfair news coverage and Dem commercials. Should be tested in courts, can’t be legal? Only defame & belittle! Collusion?” the President wrote.
The previous night, “Saturday Night Live” opened their weekly program with a segment inspired by “It’s a Wonderful Life” in which the cast wonders what the world might have been like had Trump not been elected president.
In the skit, Alec Baldwin reprised his role as Trump and was joined onstage by Matt Damon, playing Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who never made it to the highest court in the land. Robert De Niro appears as special investigator Robert Mueller. Marc Ronson and Miley Cyrus were the musical guests.
Trump has repeatedly undermined investigations into his campaign staff’s possible involvement in electoral misconduct as “a witch hunt.” He’s insisted the process should be brought to an end.
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
A REAL scandal is the one sided coverage, hour by hour, of networks like NBC & Democrat spin machines like Saturday Night Live. It is all nothing less than unfair news coverage and Dem commercials. Should be tested in courts, can’t be legal? Only defame & belittle! Collusion?
63.8K
5:58 AM - Dec 16, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy
59.4K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Donald Trump, wife Melania Trump, and Actor Alec Baldwin (R) arrive at the NBC/Universal Golden Globe After Party held at the Beverly Hilton on January 15, 2007.
Most Think Trump Is Not Honest About Russia Probe
A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds a robust 62% majority say President Trump has not been honest about the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign, up from 56% in August.
A 46% plurality says guilty pleas by Trump associates suggest wrongdoing by the president as well, up from 40% in August and 36% a year ago. Half the public say the investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller has given them more doubts about Trump’s presidency.
Also important: Just 38% say they would probably or definitely vote for the president if he seeks a second term, while 52% say they’d probably or definitely vote for the Democratic candidate.
Well he doesn't want to regulate speech like Ted Leau does.
I'm sure old Ted would love to regulate Fox News out of existence.
Commonsense said...
I don't know if lying to the "CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES" is unconstitutional or illegal but it's certainly improper.
Fixed it for you cramps.....but you buy all his BS 24/7/365 without waver.....so sad that the willfully stupid are so easily manipulated by the liar in chief....
You mean like Democrats who say they are really not for open borders and unlimited immigration?
You call me mentally ill.
You are not concerned about the President who wants to censor comedy.
President Donald Trump woke up in a bad mood Sunday morning and knew just where to aim his ire: his good old friends in the media. Mere hours after Saturday Night Live aired a sketch in which it imagined a magical world in which Trump was never president, the commander in chief blasted his critics in the media and wondered why criticizing him was legal in the first place. We know he was mad at Saturday Night Live because he specifically mentioned the show in his tweet.
ADVERTISEMENT
inRead invented by Teads
Popular in News & Politics
The Trump Organization Tried to Massively Overcharge Trump’s Own Inaugural Committee for Hotel Space, LOL
Why Nancy Pelosi’s Quiet Trump Burn Was Uniquely Satisfying
New Jersey Democrats’ Diabolical Gerrymandering Scheme Is an Affront to Democracy
Trump Tweets Misleading Claim About FBI Agents’ Missing Texts to Discredit Russia Probe
“A REAL scandal is the one sided coverage, hour by hour, of networks like NBC & Democrat spin machines like Saturday Night Live,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “It is all nothing less than unfair news coverage and Dem commercials. Should be tested in courts, can’t be legal? Only defame & belittle! Collusion?”
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
A REAL scandal is the one sided coverage, hour by hour, of networks like NBC & Democrat spin machines like Saturday Night Live. It is all nothing less than unfair news coverage and Dem commercials. Should be tested in courts, can’t be legal? Only defame & belittle! Collusion?
65.1K
5:58 AM - Dec 16, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy
60.9K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Trump has never been shy about criticizing the media, of course. In October, for example, shortly after 11 people were killed at a Pittsburgh synagogue, the president said that the “great anger in our Country” was caused at least “in part by inaccurate, and even fraudulent, reporting of the news.” He went on to call the “Fake News Media” the “true Enemy of the People.”
Get off the wagon to hell.
Not one Democrat is for open borders and unlimited immigration.
Menstra is losing his mind.
You just reposted the same tweet for the fourth time how can you not be mentally ill.
I'm sure old Ted would love to regulate Fox News out of existence.
The country would be a better place without the likes of Hannity and Tucker.....but, short of killing them, they do have an abnormal amount of BS being spread by their network, BS you absorb like the good little trump sucker you are...
Not one Democrat is for open borders and unlimited immigration.
Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez.
It's Roger who's gone off the deep end.
One first term congresswoman does not represent the entire Democratic party.
Keith Ellison, Cynthia Nixon would be two more
The San Francisco chronicle reported earlier this year that California's senators want dedafacto open borders.
Anonymous Myballs said...
The San Francisco chronicle reported earlier this year that California's senators want dedafacto open borders.
You really should take he 5 minutes and actually read the SF piece.....asshole yer such a douche and just went with the headline....no wonder why I think you are an idiot...
https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/article/California-s-senators-want-de-facto-open-borders-13018760.php
Anonymous Myballs said...
Keith Ellison, Cynthia Nixon would be two more
SO FUCKING WHAT!!!!! And you would like to throw every mexican out of the country.....
A report prepared for the Senate that provides the most sweeping analysis yet of Russia’s disinformation campaign around the 2016 election found the operation used every major social media platform to deliver words, images and videos tailored to voters’ interests to help elect President Trump -- and worked even harder to support him while in office.
The report, a draft of which was obtained by The Washington Post, is the first to study the millions of posts provided by major technology firms to the Senate Intelligence Committee, led by Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), its chairman, and Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), its ranking Democrat. The bipartisan panel hasn’t said if it endorses the findings. It plans to release it publicly along with another study later this week.
The research -- by Oxford University’s Computational Propaganda Project and Graphika, a network analysis firm -- offers new details on how Russians working at the Internet Research Agency, which U.S. officials have charged with criminal offenses for meddling in the 2016 campaign, sliced Americans into key interest groups for the purpose of targeting messages. These efforts shifted over time, peaking at key political moments, such as presidential debates or party conventions, the report found.
The data sets used by the researchers were provided by Facebook, Twitter and Google and covered several years up to mid-2017, when the social media companies cracked down on the known Russian accounts. The report, which also analyzed data separately provided to House intelligence committee members, contains no information on more recent political moments, such as November’s midterm election.
“What is clear is that all of the messaging clearly sought to benefit the Republican Party--and specifically Donald Trump,” the report says. “Trump is mentioned most in campaigns targeting conservatives and right-wing voters, where the messaging encouraged these groups to support his campaign. The main groups that could challenge Trump were then provided messaging that sought to confuse, distract and ultimately discourage members from voting.”
Representatives for Burr and Warner declined to comment.
The new report offers the latest evidence that Russian agents sought to help Trump win the White House. Democrats and Republicans on the panel previously studied the U.S. intelligence community’s 2017 finding that Moscow aimed to assist Trump, and in July, they said investigators had come to the correct conclusion. Despite their work, some Republicans on Capitol Hill continue to doubt the nature of Russia’s meddling in the last presidential election.
The Russians aimed particular energy at activating conservatives on issues such as gun rights and immigration, while sapping the political clout of left-leaning African American voters by undermining their faith in elections and spreading misleading information about how to vote. Many other groups -- Latinos, Muslims, Christians, gay men and women, liberals, southerners, veterans -- got at least some attention from Russians operating thousands of social media accounts.
The report also offered some of the first detailed analyses of the role played by YouTube, which belongs to Google, and Instagram in the Russian campaign, as well as anecdotes on how Russians used other social media platforms -- Google+, Tumblr and Pinterest -- that have gotten relatively little scrutiny. The Russian effort also used email accounts from Yahoo, Microsoft’s Hotmail service and Google’s Gmail.
The authors, while reliant on data provided by technology companies, also highlighted their “belated and uncoordinated response” to the disinformation campaign and, once it was discovered, for not sharing more with investigators. The authors urged the companies in the future to provide data in “meaningful and constructive” ways.
Facebook, for example, provided the Senate with copies of posts from 81 Facebook “Pages” and information on 76 accounts used to purchase ads, but did not share the posts from other user accounts run by the IRA, the report says. Twitter, meanwhile, has made it challenging for outside researchers to collect and analyze data on its platform through its public feed, the researchers said.
Google submitted information in an especially difficult way for the researchers to handle, providing content such as YouTube videos but not the related data that would have allowed a full analysis. The YouTube information was so hard for the researchers to study, they wrote, they instead tracked the links to its videos from other sites in hopes of better understanding YouTube’s role in the Russian effort.
Facebook, Google and Twitter didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.
Fake News?
Facebook, Google and Twitter first disclosed last year that they had identified Russian meddling on their sites. Critics previously said it took too long to come to an understanding of the disinformation campaign, and that Russian strategies have likely shifted since then. The companies have awakened to the threat — Facebook in particular created a “war room” this fall to combat interference around elections — but none have revealed any major meddling around the midterm elections last month.
The report expressed concern about the overall threat social media poses to political discourse within nations and between them, warning that companies once viewed as tools for liberation in the Arab world and elsewhere are now threats to democracy.
“Social media have gone from being the natural infrastructure for sharing collective grievances and coordinating civic engagement to being a computational tool for social control, manipulated by canny political consultants and available to politicians in democracies and dictatorships alike.”
Researchers also noted that the data includes evidence of sloppiness by the Russians that could have led to earlier detection, including the use of Russia’s currency, the ruble, to buy ads and Russian phone numbers for contact information. The operatives also left behind technical signatures in computerized logs, such as Internet addresses in St. Petersburg, where the IRA was based.
Many of the findings track in general terms work by other researchers and testimony previously provided by the companies to lawmakers investigating the Russian effort. But the fuller data available to the researchers offered new insights on many aspects of the Russian campaign.
The report traces the origins of Russian online influence operations to Russian domestic politics in 2009 and says that ambitions shifted to include U.S. politics as early as 2013 over Twitter. Of the tweets the company provided to the Senate, 57 percent are in Russian, with 36 percent in English and smaller amounts in other languages.
The efforts to manipulate Americans grew sharply in 2014 and every year after, as teams of operatives spread their work across more platforms and accounts, in order to target larger swaths of U.S. voters by geography, political interests, race, religion and other factors. The Russians started with accounts on Twitter, then added YouTube and Instagram before finally bringing Facebook into the mix, the report said.
Facebook was particularly effective at targeting conservatives and African Americans, the report found. More than 99 percent of all engagement -- meaning likes, shares and other reactions -- came from 20 “Pages” controlled by the IRA, including “Being Patriotic,” “Heart of Texas,” “Blacktivist” and “Army of Jesus.”
Together the 20 most popular pages generated 39 million likes, 31 million shares, 5.4 million reactions and 3.4 million comments. Company officials told Congress that the Russian campaign reached 126 million people on Facebook and 20 million more on Instagram.
The Russians operated 133 accounts on Instagram, a photo-sharing subsidiary of Facebook, that focused mainly on race, ethnicity or other forms of personal identity. The most successful Instagram posts targeted African American cultural issues and black pride and were not explicitly political.
While the overall intensity of posting across platforms grew year by year -- with a particular spike during the six months after election day -- this growth was particularly pronounced on Instagram, which went from roughly 2,600 posts a month in 2016 to nearly 6,000 in 2017, when the accounts were shut down. Across all three years covered by the report, Russian Instagram posts generated 185 million likes and 4 million user comments.
Foriegn influence is ok with Scott.
Roger...
I am against it.
Both Richard Steele and the Russians.
Any American proven to have colluded with either Steele or Russia should be indicted.
Wouldn't you agree, Rog?
Faults on it face.
"Foriegn influence is ok with Scott."
2nd Generation Alky
You're not paying attention, so closed minded.
Steele did not intend to alter the outcome of the election.
The Russians did and it worked.
2,366 days kput'z.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Foriegn influence is ok with Scott.
foreign influence on fakebook and fucking instagram???
geezus alky, you really are pathetic. you really should read what you copy before you paste it. you're telling us a third of america was manipulated less than 150 pages on instagram???
so what you're saying is that a significant swath of the american electorate are fucking morons. well duh. where i come from we call it the democrat party.
the chief googler just testified to congress that russia spent $4700 on google ads.
$4700.
that wouldn't have covered your bar tab when you were in your peak liver destruction mode.
russia didn't influence much and what you plagiarized hardly proves that they had ANY influence outside of those with a room temp. IQ.
you ran the worst fucking candidate in the history of the republic, alky.
and she lost.
even AFTER she got in bed with richard steele and fabricated a bunch of lies about trump, and even after she had robby mook and jennifer palmieri fabricate all this russia bullshit to cover for her pathetic showing.
what this really is alky is psychological projection on steroids. everything that you clowns accuse trump and the russians of doing team clinton and 0linsky actually DID.
you're a fool and a fraud, alky. and no amount of copy/paste plagiarism on your part is going to obscure that fact.
Any American proven to have colluded with either Steele or Russia should be indicted.
which is exactly why we're fretting over $$$ paid to whores...
...because we have all these folks lined up waiting to be indicted for the non-existent crime of collusion.
the more absurd this shitshow gets the harder the alky works to justify it.
Roger Amick said...
Steele did not intend to alter the outcome of the election.
alky,
paid-for opposition research is, by fucking design, purchased with the intent of collecting information to alter the outcome of an election.
if it wasn't, it would have no fucking value.
our illustrious teachers unions churn out morons by the millions, and we piss and moan when millions of morons who know how to fakebook get duped by ivan and boris...
"Adulting" classes teach millennials basic skills like sewing, cooking and changing a tire
https://www.10tv.com/article/adulting-classes-teach-millennials-basic-skills-sewing-cooking-and-changing-tire
and all it took was 133 instagram pages.
sounds about right.
but hey, just as long as the teachers get their tenure and guaranteed raises, what could go wrong?
He went on to call the “Fake News Media” the “true Enemy of the People.”
well he's not wrong about that alky.
the collective MSM took a tragic story about a 7 year old girl who died at the border, completely lied about the whole thing, blamed everyone from ICE to the GOP, and peddled their lies as facts.
they knowingly lied.
intentionally, knowingly and deliberately lied.
lied about the death of a child, all because they hate this president.
that's fucked up, and it is exactly why they are the enemy of the people.
paid-for opposition research is, by fucking design, purchased with the intent of collecting information to alter the outcome of an election.
To Roger... all his cognitive dissonance allows is "Wah wah wah wah wah".
The idea that the DNC and Clinton camps hired Richard Steele for reasons "other" than to dig up dirt and alter the election... is quite literally so absurd that I almost want to believe that Rog is trolling us?
But I actually believe that Rog's cognitive dissonance is so strong that all he has to do is "type something" that sounds good to him, and it magically becomes "true"!
Your hatred and anger is your own problem. Not mine.
Your inability to control your own reactions and behavior is your own fault. Blaming someone else is a copout."
Roger explained since Bush Soars Yahoo boards.
The idea that the DNC and Clinton camps hired Richard Steele for reasons "other" than to dig up dirt and alter the election... is quite literally so absurd that I almost want to believe that Rog is trolling us?
with anyone else we could be inclined to think it was a troll, or at least give him the benefit of the doubt. but with roger, what you see is what you get, and what you see is a galactic level of sheer, unadulterated stupidity.
it's an occam's razor thing.
Excellent article on Comey and Flynn and the 302. btw The author thinks the original 302 was filed under seal...
Here’s What’s Weird About Robert Mueller’s Latest Michael Flynn Filing
Second, even seven months after the fact, Strzok maintained in the 302 that he and the second agent who had interviewed Flynn “both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”
This fact conflicts with former FBI director James Comey’s recent testimony before the House judiciary and oversight committees. In discussing the agents’ view of the Flynn interview, Comey testified that “the agents observed no indicia of deception, physical manifestations, shiftiness, that sort of thing,” but the former FBI director added that his “recollection was [Flynn] was—the conclusion of the investigators was he was obviously lying, but they saw none of the normal common indicia of deception: that is, hesitancy to answer, shifting in seat, sweating, all the things that you might associate with someone who is conscious and manifesting that they are being—they’re telling falsehoods. There’s no doubt he was lying, but that those indicators weren’t there.”
The conflict between Comey’s testimony and Strzok’s 302 raises several concerns. First, which statement is accurate?
Rep. Trey Gowdy pushed Comey on this point, asking him where he would have gotten this information if he was not present for the interview. Comey responded: “From someone at the FBI, who either spoke to—I don’t think I spoke to the interviewing agents but got the report from the interviewing agents.”
The conflict between Comey’s testimony and Strzok’s 302 raises several concerns. First, which statement is accurate? Did agents at the time believe Flynn was lying or not? Here, it is important to note that, going into the interview, the agents knew the truth—they knew what Flynn had said in his telephone conversation with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.
This point is clear from Strzok’s 302, which states that during their interview with Flynn, the agents planned to “refresh his recollection” by using “the exact words Flynn used.” So, the agents’ view on whether Flynn was lying would be based on their assessment of whether Flynn had merely forgotten aspects of his conversation with Kislyak or was intentionally misrepresenting the content of the conversation.
Second, the conflict between Comey’s testimony and Strzok’s 302 raises the question of whether, following the Flynn interview, Comey was told that the investigators believed Flynn was “obviously lying.” Did the original 302, which Comey indicated he had reviewed, contain that claim? If not, did someone tell Comey that the agents thought Flynn was “obviously lying?” And if so, who?
entire article (good read) at:
thefederalist.com/2018/12/17/heres-whats-weird-robert-muellers-latest-michael-flynn-filing/
Post a Comment