AND they picked it up quickly before any other blogger or news organization (some of whom presumably also have google alerts)
AND they sent it quickly to Mr. Trump
AND Trump quickly read this, digested it and incorporated it into his debate performance, even though he shows little propensity to learn or digest Anything else.
Digested it? It had a supposed email excerpt from a Clinton ally saying "we messed up in Benghazi " so he repeated it.
For Trump, it’s a stretch to think he could remember a single sentence for an hour. That would take some serious cramming and memorization on his part.
He didn’t memorize it. He specifically pulled out a piece of paper during the rally (not during the debate, btw). Read the link I edited in after you quoted me.
If possible, that actually makes it sadder for Trump. He could not even remember the talking points that the Russian propaganda outfit had written for him - he had to look at the printout he was sent.
ETA: Trump’s campaign was either sent it directly, or it was sent via a friendly intermediary at Briebart. It make little difference. It came from Russia and was parroted hours later by a presidential candidate. It’s worrying.
Or one of his staffers had a Google alert that pinged just before the rally and he printed it out and handed it to Trump immediately without fact checking.
And from my linked WaPo article:
https://mobile.twitter.com/passantino/status/785692409183150081?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
There are simply too many Russian Connections between Trump and Russia/ Briebart and Russia/ Trump and Briebart to make this a simply mistaken coincidence.
I think the most likely scenario is that Trump is being fed Russian disinformation through a Breibart “friend of Putin”.
No, the most likely explanation is that Trump didn’t give a crap where a piece of bad news for Clinton came from. Again from that article:
With which I agree.
And quit saying “coincidence”. Trump people are actively looking for oppo pieces. It’s not a coincidence when they find some.
But once they have a good idea where the info is coming from and how it is acquired, they have no excuse whatsoever. Along with Trump’s claim that he has no idea who is doing the hacking, or even that any hacking is being done at all, btw-he was fucking briefed on the topic.
I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree;
You are of the opinion that the Trump staffers are clever/strategic enough to get alerts and pay attention to them, and get anti-Clinton articles (that have maybe been created by Russia) and that they are able to feed these to Trump quickly, who is astute enough to use them.
I think that Russia is smart enough to feed these articles directly to their contacts in Briebart, who are told to get these into Trump’s hands as soon as possible.
Both scenarios are certainly possible.
If you think Bannon whom Bloomberg once called “the Most Dangerous Political Operative in America” isn’t clever enough to set up a Google alert then yes, we’ll have to agree to disagree.
That’s just ONE of the steps in the chain. As you well know.
I’ll go for the simpler chain of events. Russia ---- Russia’s pet Breibart staffer ---- Trump.
Really, it boils down to : Trumps’ Breibart staffers - played like chumps by Russia, or in cahoots with Russia?
Not much to choose between.
While it’s not impossible the Russians are handing this stuff right to Trump, it’s very likely they know Trump will repeat any anti-Clinton thing they post, so they post. And he’s out of mud, so he repeats.
Neither is going to stop.
It doesn’t really matter whether Trump is actively seeking Russian help, or merely a good target for Russian disinformation because he’s without “skepticism” (which is putting the case mildly - more like ‘utterly indifferent to truth’).
In both cases, it makes him trivially easy for the Russians to manipulate. In both cases, he ends up doing Russia’s bidding, in pursuit of his own advantage.
No-one alleges he’s doing this out of a genuine love for or loyalty to Putin. He’s doing it because he finds Russian disinformation useful; he’s doing this out of a genuine love for and loyalty to himself.
It’s not simpler, it’s what you want to believe. And do you want to acknowledge that the same info was tweeted earlier in the day?
Agreed. But, when we start going down the road that this piece of data is somehow smoking gun proof that he is being fed information by the Russians, we start sounding like the Trump campaign. It’s possible this is true, but there is another (simpler) explanation that just shows that the Trump campaign is dishonest rather than in cahoots with Putin.
I don’t see how it is any different.
The Russians put out this stuff, knowing (or reasonably suspecting) that Trump will use it; Trump uses it, knowing (or reasonably suspecting) it comes from the Russians.
They don’t have to be directly in “cahoots” for the Russians to play him.
Exactly.
Trump’s Breibart staffers are either actively in cahoots with the Russians, or are stupidly being played by the Russians.
Either way, Trump uses material provided by the Russians, for the benefit of Russia.
GIGObuster, I don’t see anything in your post that I disagree with.
Yes, I would say Glenn Greenwald went a little too easy on “the Russians,” without detracting from his main argument.
Mainly I was arguing against “the Russians” being some unique big villains here, or them being anything like a homogenous adversary.
I pointed out above that this story seems to originally have started from a tweet by @republic2016 who, from a casual perusal, looks like an ordinary Trump supporter.