Well, that certainly settles that! I surely have no further questions, how about you, Tony?
No, I’m good. Thanks to Okie, I now realize he was appointed, so obviously it doesn’t count. I had assumed they shoved ten guys into a room with three knives on the floor, and the survivor got the job. Isn’t that the way our FBI and CIA directors get their jobs?
The Russian intelligence services have always been models of openness and clarity, so if the record shows that the guy who has been successfully running Russia and all its political intrigues for over a decade was just some random schlub, it must be so.
If you’re implying that Trump pushes those issues because Russia tells him to, then you almost certainly have the causality backwards. Much more likely that Russia tries to exacerbate already existing tensions. They don’t care what they stab the US with as long as it cuts. The goal is division, not an actual issue.
I agree. That was initially the main reason I was skeptical of all these claims. (This was discussed at length on this MB - probably in this very thread.) However, the fact is that this is what was being claimed.
I don’t understand this criticism. Trump is both a bigger platform than WikiLeaks, and amplifies the effect of WikiLeaks. It’s much harder to dismiss a conspiracy/foreign intelligence asset if the GOP nominee repeatedly cites them. In addition, collusion with Trump gives you leverage over him, which would be extremely valuable if he wins (obviously) or if he loses. THen you have a continued voice in your attempts to divide America.
Your question is really “why would Russia want the president of the US to be beholden to them” which is obvious on the face of it. Trump can help them achieve their goals better than just going alone.
Not implying that at all and not sure why you thought I was. Obviously Russia would not have the awareness of those divisions. Trump and his team sure do, though.
That’s a ridiculous statement. Are these divisions some kind of hidden super-secret stuff? They are not discussed in the press and by pundits endlessly?
Do you think we in the US, at least on the governmental level, do not have “awareness” of divisions/political undercurrents/societal problems in Russia?
Trump made Rex Tillerson, Prime Minister of Exxon, his Sec State. Exxon had completed a huge deal to exploit Russia’s Arctic oil that got kiboshed by the imposition of sanctions.
I suspect that they very much would like to get that back on track. I’m willing to way out on a limb here and suggest that was a strong motivation. Yeah, I’m a wild man!
Luci, you just stop that crazy talk, RIGHT NOW!
ExxonMobil gave him $27 million on his way “out the door”. I always thought that was intended to be a retainer for future services more than a reward for past ones.
Not likely with the specificity with which it was pushed on our social media sites, in exactly the places where and when it needed to be pushed.
Racism and xenophobia have always been special qualities of Trump. They were on display well before the election, were exactly the divisive issues used by Russia in pushing their social media propaganda and remain Trump’s pet issues today.
Coincidence or…?
Hmmmmmm.
What is it you are implying in that post?
Regarding knowing about divisions within US society: of course Russia would know about them. That’s a really really big part of what their intelligence services study, report on, and act on. I’m sure cables go back every day that talk about that exact sort of thing.
Is it really that obtuse?
You can read my response to Okrahoma for clarification, but if that still isn’t plain enough for you, what I am saying is this:
Of course Russia’s spy network is aware of various schisms in American society. But Russia didn’t just have a passing or general knowledge about schisms such as xenophobia and racism. Russia had very specific knowledge about which voters to target with propaganda over those extremely divisive issues of xenophobia and racism. This extremely specific information about each voter is guarded very closely by companies in the business of gathering it. Companies like Cambridge Analytica. Such specific information about individual voters is not readily available to Russians. Or do you think it is?
Trump’s pet issues are xenophobia and racism. Not the issue of abortion. Not the issue of gay marriage. Brown and black people.
I personally find it an interesting coincidence that the chief divisive issues that Russia chose to disseminate in their widespread efforts to influence voters in our 2016 election just happen to be the exact same divisive issues that Donald Trump has demonstrated over his entire lifetime and even campaigned on. One might even conclude that there was direct and specific coordination between a campaign and the Russians in choosing which issues to push and to which specific voters in which specific states. The Russians had the network. The campaign had the data and the hate.
Clear enough for you?
What’s your source for these claims?
Specifically that the Trump campaign had “very specific knowledge about which voters to target with propaganda over those extremely divisive issues of xenophobia and racism” which the Russians would likely not have been able to access on their own?
Because frankly, to me it sounds like some left wing CT speculation.
The post I quoted did not mention highly specific targeting nor only using Trump’s pet issues. Forgive me for not knowing you were talking about things that you didn’t mention.
If targeting was applied to very specific people that coincided with data the GOP had, and as far as I’m aware it’s only a theory, yes it is very suspicious.
I’m pretty sure the Facebook ads targeting things like gay marriage as well, so I don’t think the implication that Russia only leaned on Trump’s pet issues is true.
The only issues I’ve heard mentioned re Facebook were Black Lives Matter and anti-Muslim stuff, so if they were also using gay marriage, I’m unaware of that. I don’t do Facebook or Twitter so my information is based on what I’ve read through other sources. I’ll take your word for it, though.
Of course it does. 
Cambridge Analytica Involvement in 2016 Election
Microtargeting of Voters by Cambridge Analytica for the Trump Campaign
Google Cambridge Analytica and you’ll find all kinds of interesting information. And with all those Russians flittering about with their offers of assistance, it’s hard to imagine some of that yummy data didn’t find its way into their helpful paws.
Jared Kushner’s company Cambridge Analytica bragged about micro targeting.
[A] young staffer showed off a South Park-style animation he’d created of Clinton delivering the “super predator” line (using audio from her original 1996 sound bite), as cartoon text popped up around her: “Hillary Thinks African Americans are Super Predators.” The animation will be delivered to certain African American voters through Facebook “dark posts” — nonpublic posts whose viewership the campaign controls so that, as Parscale puts it, “only the people we want to see it, see it.”
Cambridge Analytica’s work was based on the database that the RNC spent $100 million and several years developing. It’s highly unlikely Russia has duplicated that. It seems likely that if Russia engaged in similar micro targeting, they would have been aimed by someone, and the only real possibilities are either the RNC or Cambridge Analytica.
Or the Russian intelligence apparatus, which has had the United States as the prime target of its efforts for the last seven decades or so.