December 30, 2018
Psy-ops at Home and Abroad
Timothy Birdnow
A stopped clock is right twice a day, so the saying goes. Well, the left-wing Talking Points Memo gets at least some of it right when discussing foreign media influence in American elections.
From the article:
End excerpt.
And indeed the author is right; most governments try to influence our elections to a degree as indeed we do with them. The whole point of Voice of America was to influence the old Warsaw Pact, for instance. And we've indulged in numerous open campaigns to change the outcome of elections; Barack Obama pumped money into the elections in Kenya, for instance, in an attempt to get his tribal kinsman Raila Odinga elected. He also interfered in elections in Israel, in Germany, in France, in Honduras, and even in Mexico. And that is just what is available in the public record; how many regimes have the CIA overthrown? America has filthy hands in that regard, and yet we complain because the Russians spent a few thousand dollars to roil the last election. Amazing. The Russians spent maybe a hundred grand on Facebook ads, in a campaign where Trump's opponent spent $768 million in direct money (we don't know how much soft money went in her favor) which was nearly twice what the Trump camp spent ($398 million). Is there any cause whatsoever to worry about a hundred thousand spent on dubious Facebook ads?
Shoot; even Robert Mueller engaged in election tampering in Russia.
And even if it is foreign intervention, does that make what was said in those ads any less true? It seems to me Hillary's problems were her own bad behavior, not some dark Russian conspiracy.
Now the WaPo article references "free media" which estimates how much free coverage each candidate received, and linked to MediaQuant. But what did THEY do to ascertain this? How much of Trump''s free media was positive? I guarantee you Hillary profited more from Trump's "free media" as most of the free press Mr. Trump received was negative (after he had the primaries sewn up.)
Question; why would the Russians want Trump and not Hillary? SHE was the one who cut the deal with the Russians for Uranium One. It was Bill Clinton who made speeches in Russia for half a million bucks a pop. It was Hillary who opposed hydraulic fracturing in the U.S., something that has made America energy independent and strangled the Russian oil industry. Hillary was a dream come true for Russia; a corruptible left-wing ideologue who has also shown gross incompetence and is extremely careless with classified information. Trump offered - not a lot. If nothing else Trump is the kind of guy who will alter a deal if he thinks he can get a better one.He had no reason to sell out to Russia.
Hillary opposed sanctions on Russia after the Clinton Foundation received money from Putin and his cronies.
And it was Hillary who paid for the Steele Dossier, the genesis of the entire Mueller probe. Hillary was setting the table for these insurgency even before she was beaten in the election. This is a case of accusing others of that which you are most guilty. If you want to find the real Russian collusion go to Chappaqua.
This whole thing is a psy-op on the American People.
A stopped clock is right twice a day, so the saying goes. Well, the left-wing Talking Points Memo gets at least some of it right when discussing foreign media influence in American elections.
From the article:
If you’ve followed the Trump/Russia story closely you’ll no doubt have seen that there are a number of these companies hovering in the background of the story. They are in most cases private digital surveillance and propaganda/influence services, usually staffed or founded by ex-intelligence officers selling their services to the highest bidder.
Rick Gates got a proposal from an Israeli company for such a campaign in 2016. The same company, Psy-Group, was part of an offer of election assistance from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, via their intermediary George Nader later in the fall of 2016. The Saudis meanwhile had already been hoovering up expertise in cyberwarfare from various private companies to use in their own operations, many of which targeted people like Jamal Khashoggi. Then of course there was Cambridge Analytica, which in addition to its campaign work and social media shenanigans was, at least in other developing countries, doing similar, often illegal, work.
Rick Gates got a proposal from an Israeli company for such a campaign in 2016. The same company, Psy-Group, was part of an offer of election assistance from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, via their intermediary George Nader later in the fall of 2016. The Saudis meanwhile had already been hoovering up expertise in cyberwarfare from various private companies to use in their own operations, many of which targeted people like Jamal Khashoggi. Then of course there was Cambridge Analytica, which in addition to its campaign work and social media shenanigans was, at least in other developing countries, doing similar, often illegal, work.
End excerpt.
And indeed the author is right; most governments try to influence our elections to a degree as indeed we do with them. The whole point of Voice of America was to influence the old Warsaw Pact, for instance. And we've indulged in numerous open campaigns to change the outcome of elections; Barack Obama pumped money into the elections in Kenya, for instance, in an attempt to get his tribal kinsman Raila Odinga elected. He also interfered in elections in Israel, in Germany, in France, in Honduras, and even in Mexico. And that is just what is available in the public record; how many regimes have the CIA overthrown? America has filthy hands in that regard, and yet we complain because the Russians spent a few thousand dollars to roil the last election. Amazing. The Russians spent maybe a hundred grand on Facebook ads, in a campaign where Trump's opponent spent $768 million in direct money (we don't know how much soft money went in her favor) which was nearly twice what the Trump camp spent ($398 million). Is there any cause whatsoever to worry about a hundred thousand spent on dubious Facebook ads?
Shoot; even Robert Mueller engaged in election tampering in Russia.
And even if it is foreign intervention, does that make what was said in those ads any less true? It seems to me Hillary's problems were her own bad behavior, not some dark Russian conspiracy.
Now the WaPo article references "free media" which estimates how much free coverage each candidate received, and linked to MediaQuant. But what did THEY do to ascertain this? How much of Trump''s free media was positive? I guarantee you Hillary profited more from Trump's "free media" as most of the free press Mr. Trump received was negative (after he had the primaries sewn up.)
Question; why would the Russians want Trump and not Hillary? SHE was the one who cut the deal with the Russians for Uranium One. It was Bill Clinton who made speeches in Russia for half a million bucks a pop. It was Hillary who opposed hydraulic fracturing in the U.S., something that has made America energy independent and strangled the Russian oil industry. Hillary was a dream come true for Russia; a corruptible left-wing ideologue who has also shown gross incompetence and is extremely careless with classified information. Trump offered - not a lot. If nothing else Trump is the kind of guy who will alter a deal if he thinks he can get a better one.He had no reason to sell out to Russia.
Hillary opposed sanctions on Russia after the Clinton Foundation received money from Putin and his cronies.
And it was Hillary who paid for the Steele Dossier, the genesis of the entire Mueller probe. Hillary was setting the table for these insurgency even before she was beaten in the election. This is a case of accusing others of that which you are most guilty. If you want to find the real Russian collusion go to Chappaqua.
This whole thing is a psy-op on the American People.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
01:15 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 714 words, total size 5 kb.
1
I really like the way that you have expressed yourself. There is a lot to be admired from this post. You might want to click on
Maya Stern Pink Coat Fool Me Once
Posted by: Mike Rooney at January 20, 2024 05:12 AM (KfKbF)
23kb generated in CPU 0.0468, elapsed 0.2284 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.2222 seconds, 159 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.2222 seconds, 159 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
