She was caught on her cell phone stating POINT-BLANK who the US had selected to be PM of Ukraine.
Posted on 02/18/2018 1:03:53 PM PST by reaganaut1
Bags of cash delivered to a Rome hotel for favored Italian candidates. Scandalous stories leaked to foreign newspapers to swing an election in Nicaragua. Millions of pamphlets, posters and stickers printed to defeat an incumbent in Serbia.
The long arm of Vladimir Putin? No, just a small sample of the United States’ history of intervention in foreign elections.
On Tuesday, American intelligence chiefs warned the Senate Intelligence Committee that Russia appears to be preparing to repeat in the 2018 midterm elections the same full-on chicanery it unleashed in 2016: hacking, leaking, social media manipulation and possibly more. Then on Friday, Robert Mueller, the special counsel, announced the indictments of 13 Russians and three companies, run by a businessman with close Kremlin ties, laying out in astonishing detail a three-year scheme to use social media to attack Hillary Clinton, boost Donald Trump and sow discord.
Most Americans are understandably shocked by what they view as an unprecedented attack on our political system. But intelligence veterans, and scholars who have studied covert operations, have a different, and quite revealing, view.
“If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all,” said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations. The United States “absolutely” has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, “and I hope we keep doing it.”
Loch K. Johnson, the dean of American intelligence scholars, who began his career in the 1970s investigating the C.I.A. as a staff member of the Senate’s Church Committee, says Russia’s 2016 operation was simply the cyber-age version of standard United States practice for decades, whenever American officials were worried about a foreign vote.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Did they do any different than the Brits in the days before WWI and WWII?
She was caught on her cell phone stating POINT-BLANK who the US had selected to be PM of Ukraine.
Did Senator Soebarkah (D-Islamic Indonesia) violate the Hatch Act to campaign for his cousin in Kenya?
Here is the exact point she says it:
https://youtu.be/WV9J6sxCs5k?t=44
She’s Hillary’s right hand b*tch and you can hear here that they’re extravagantly comfortable with handing down edicts to the rest of the world.
Later the set up their own pop-up CIA for the Libya matter, the repurcussions for which continue to this very day.
But he said it was just his opinion.
Flashback: That Time The Obama Administration Spent Hundreds Of Thousands Of Dollars To Defeat Benjamin Netanyahu
We have plenty of foreign nationals meddling in our elections. I believe Latino and Muslim groups do the most but there seems to be no interest in investigating them.
“We should punish Russia in some way for meddling, but what they did is not unprecedented.”
Now what do we do when Russia decides to set up a witch hunt and finds our ‘cheating’ in their election and a need to punish Americans? It feels like we have set a bad precedent here for the sake of trying to sooth the nerves of those who can’t figure out why Hildabeast lost.
Because Russians are white and Christian. That makes them easy targets.
Obummer spent a small fortune in tax payer dollars trying to boot Bibi Netanyahu from office. Nice.
We can no longer ask, but I'd be interested in hearing Fidel Castro's ideas concerning the American response to his achieving power.
We are meddlers of the first rank in the affairs of other countries. This whole thing is a kerfuffle over Hillary being denied the throne.
We can no longer ask, but I’d be interested in hearing Fidel Castro’s ideas concerning the American response to his achieving power.
It was a while after Castro got into power that we began to realize what a fox had been loosed in the hen house.
Meet the new boss, Same as the old boss.
Carlos Slim, a Mexican national, owns the New York Times .
The NY Times did more to try to influence the election than ten thousand Russians.
and
Tens of thousands of illegal immigrants marched for Hillary and attended her rallies and protested against Trump.
Concrete evidence of Foreign influence.
from the headline: “We Do It, Too.”
silly me. I thought NYT were admitting they interfere in elections...especially US presidential elections, whereby they SELECT the winner, and then expect to influence the public to go along with their choice - often described as a “rock star”.
they start early and keep the meme going forever:
Sept 2006: NYT: For This Red Meat Crowd, Obama’s ’08 Choice Is Clear
The crowd rushed Mr. Obama when he arrived, then mobbed him for hours as other politicians wandered the fairgrounds introducing themselves and shaking hands...
Mr. Harkin, a legendary political figure and the sponsor of the event, seemed amused by the Obama phenomenon. “Honestly, tell you the truth — I really tried to get Bono this weekend,” Mr. Harkin said in his introduction. “I couldn’t get him, so I settled for the second biggest rock star in America today.”
For all of Mr. Obama’s star appeal — a recent Newsweek article compared his arrival in Kenya to the second coming of the Messiah -
May 2017: NYT: Trump and Obama Visited Europe. One Got a Warm Welcome
Mr. Obama was in Berlin to help celebrate 500 years since Martin Luther’s Reformation, and received a rock-star welcome from tens of thousands at the Brandenburg Gate.
Mueller should be inditing illegals and other Mexican nationals.
Israel should be inditing the Obama administration.
OMG... America tries to influence foreign elections. I guess that’s why the Democrats and Obama supplied Trudeau with a bunch of help to get elected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.