The gang that coudn't troll straight: Robert Mueller dropped 16 indictments on Russkie heads last Friday. The indictments concern alleged illegal electioneering, not the theft of Democratic emails or possible blackmailing of Donald J. Trump.
How effective was this Russkie electioneering? We can't answer that question, but this strikes us as the strangest paragraph in last week's indictments:
31. In order to collect additional intelligence, Defendants and their co-conspirators posed as U.S. persons and contacted U.S. political and social activists. For example, starting in or around June 2016, Defendants and their co-conspirators, posing online as U.S. persons, communicated with a real U.S. person affiliated with a Texas-based grassroots organization. During the exchange, Defendants and their co-conspirators learned from the real U.S. person that they should focus their activities on "purple states like Colorado, Virginia & Florida." After that exchange, Defendants and their co-conspirators commonly referred to targeting "purple states" in directing their efforts.That seems like a very strange paragraph. Here's what it seems to say:
It seems to say that the Russkie invaders only learned about so-called "purple states" (swing states) in June 2016. That would have been amazingly late on the game. Some such suggestion popped up in the public discourse a few months ago, and we noted its oddness.
That's a very strange paragraph. It seems to identify the Russkie invaders as the gang that couldn't troll straight. If you don't even know how our state-by-state electoral system works, you don't know squat, squadoodle or even squadoosh about our election system. According to this paragraph, the Russkies only learned about this part of the system in June 2016, from an unwitting contact in Texas.
This doesn't mean that these operations had no effect on voters. It seems to suggest that the Russkies got off to a rather slow start in this area, knowing their asps from their elbows-wise.
That strikes us as a very strange paragraph. Tomorrow, we'll mention another semi-puzzling matter.
Somerby says: "It seems to say that the Russkie invaders only learned about so-called "purple states" (swing states) in June 2016."ReplyDelete
It doesn't say that they only learned about purples states in June. It states that the information gained by this misrepresentation of themselves was applied in later situations. It states that the information was useful in directing their later efforts.
Somerby seems to question the ignorance of the Russian operatives about the American political process, but why should we assume them to be knowledgeable? How much would a comparable American know about the Russian system? But this passage does not refer to any assumptions about what they knew. It makes a connection between what they did at point A and what they did at point B in time, where point B was enabled by the actions at point A. It would not matter if they already knew that info or not. They were demonstrably supplied with it via their deception and later used it.
I find it odd that Somerby would consider any paragraph to be strange. He is not an attorney much less a prosecutor. He is largely unfamiliar with events that occurred. He is unfamiliar with the election rules involved and with laws governing what happened. He hasn't been following the election specifics on any local level across the country. He isn't a wonk. On what basis can his judgment of "strangeness" matter?
I think he is just bragging that he read the documents. And demonstrating his ignorance and his knee-jerk tendency to blame the Mueller team and give Trump (Moore, Allen, Polanski) the benefit of the doubt arising solely from his desire to find fault with this investigation, where likely none exists.
Anyone who knows politics would have known long ago that you focus on those states. They don't need someone "from Texas" to tell them this.Delete
So Bob's right.
The MSNBC crowd today is ridiculously trying to credit the Russians for Bernie's success, and the "strife" during the convention-- as if conventions aren't about conflict in general.
I'm curious how effective most of this Russian influence was pre-summer 17 or so.
Joseph Cannon gives a run down on Bernie’s Russian help today.Delete
'I think he is just bragging that he read the documents.'Delete
Doubtless Somerby read the documents so he can nitpick further and defend his God, DJ Trump.
Ex-workers at Russian 'troll farm' trust US indictmentReplyDelete
So now Somerby takes a break from press criticism to Mueller criticism.ReplyDelete
Somerby's interest has not been in media criticism. per se. His focus is to nitpick, attack liberals and defend Trump, Moore and Trump minions. The best way to understand him is to realize that when he refers to his 'tribe', he is now referring to Trumptards, and the Others are liberals.ReplyDelete
"This doesn't mean that these operations had no effect on voters."ReplyDelete
Boo-hoo. If indeed that Inspector Clouseau-like activity had a damaging effect on oh-so-impressionable voters, then perhaps the voters need to be sequestered for the whole election year in a hotel somewhere, where they are brainwashed by liberal-patriotic CNN, WaPo, NYT and nothing else...
Tsk, Tsk 'Mao'. Shouldn't call your co-workers names ...Delete
Our Fearless President Donald The Magnificent needs no defenders.ReplyDelete
He welcomes your hatred, he enjoys your squirming and your foaming at the mouth.
...well, except for the times when it saddens him.
You misspelled Putin when you put the name of your President.ReplyDelete
All the liberal faggots bitching in this thread have no actual substantive reply. They name-call, they distract from the issue, but there's no valid retort the the point Somerby made. The claim in that report is bizarre, and it'd be bizarre that the media isn't generally noticing that, except of course for the fact that the kikes that run the media and the Mueller investigation obviously don't want to point out that this whole thing is a stupid sham.ReplyDelete
Hey mongrel Leonid, which one do you like the best; Petrograd, Leningrad, or St. Petersburg?Delete