The pseudonym "Philo Vaihinger" has been abandoned. All posts have been and are written by me, Joseph Auclair.

Friday, June 14, 2019

From Russia with Love

Wikipedia says:

The Russian government interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election with the goal of harming the campaign of Hillary Clinton, boosting the candidacy of Donald Trump, and increasing political or social discord in the United States.

The Internet Research Agency, based in Saint Petersburg and described as a troll farm, created thousands of social media accounts that purported to be Americans supporting radical political groups, and planned or promoted events in support of Trump and against Clinton; they reached millions of social media users between 2013 and 2017. 


Fabricated articles and disinformation were spread from Russian government-controlled media, and promoted on social media. 

Additionally, computer hackersaffiliated with the Russian military intelligence service (GRU) infiltrated information systems of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), and Clinton campaign officials, notably chairman John Podesta, and publicly released stolen files and emails through DCLeaks, Guccifer 2.0 and Wikileaks during the election campaign. 

Finally, several individuals connected to Russia contacted various Trump campaign associates, offering business opportunities to the Trump Organization and damaging information on Clinton.

The Russian hackings during the campaign of 2016 of Podesta as well as Russian efforts to hack voting systems and databases in various states were illegal and there have been indictments.

. . . .

The FBI's work was taken over in May 2017 by former FBI director Robert Mueller, who led a Special Counsel investigation until March 2019.

Mueller concluded that Russian interference "violated U.S. criminal law", and he indicted twenty-six Russian citizens and three Russian organizations.

The investigation also led to indictments and convictions of Trump campaign officials and associated Americans, for unrelated charges.

The Special Counsel's report, made public on April 18, 2019, examined numerous contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials but concluded that there was insufficient evidence to bring any conspiracy or coordination charges against Trump or his associates.


Was Russian dissemination of fake news via pseudonymous social media accounts seeking to increase polarization and mistrust, fear, and loathing of our political institutions to the advantage of the anti-NATO, anti-EU demagogue illegal per se?

Apparently not.

Was acceptance of that help and cooperation in it by the Duce and his campaign illegal per se?

Apparently not.

Would such acceptance of help and cooperation in it by the Duce and his campaign right now, in his campaign for reelection, be illegal per se?

Maybe a little murkier.

But Trump will certainly not have been the first American politician or president to accept foreign meddling in our politics to advance his own fortunes or the success of his agenda.

'I think I’d take it': In exclusive interview, Trump says he would listen if foreigners offered dirt on opponents

President Donald Trump may not alert the FBI if foreign governments offered damaging information against his 2020 rivals during the upcoming presidential race, he said, despite the deluge of investigations stemming from his campaign's interactions with Russians during the 2016 campaign.

Asked by ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos in the Oval Office on Wednesday whether his campaign would accept such information from foreigners -- such as China or Russia -- or hand it over the FBI, Trump said, "I think maybe you do both."

"I think you might want to listen, there isn't anything wrong with listening," Trump continued. 

"If somebody called from a country, Norway, [and said] ‘we have information on your opponent' -- oh, I think I'd want to hear it."

. . . .

Trump disputed the idea that if a foreign government provided information on a political opponent, it would be considered interference in our election process.

"It's not an interference, they have information -- I think I'd take it," Trump said. 

"If I thought there was something wrong, I'd go maybe to the FBI -- if I thought there was something wrong. 

"But when somebody comes up with oppo research, right, they come up with oppo research, 'oh let's call the FBI.' 

"The FBI doesn't have enough agents to take care of it. When you go and talk, honestly, to congressman, they all do it, they always have, and that's the way it is. It's called oppo research."

Trump smashed months of FBI work to thwart election interference

Nearly two years ago, FBI Director Chris Wray set up an office tasked solely with stopping the type of Russian interference efforts that infected the 2016 campaign.

On Wednesday night, President Donald Trump undercut the whole operation in a matter of seconds.

In an ABC News interview, the president first proclaimed he would have no problem accepting dirt on his opponents from a foreign power, then said Wray was “wrong” to suggest the FBI needs to know about such offers.

The comments, according to interviews with nearly a dozen law enforcement veterans, have undone months of work, essentially inviting foreign spies to meddle with 2020 presidential campaigns and demoralizing the agents trying to stop them. 

And it has backed Wray into a corner, they added, putting him in a position where he might have to either publicly chastise the president and risk getting fired, or resign in protest.

Trump Is Assailed for Saying He Would Take Campaign Help From Russia

Mr. Trump’s defiant declaration that “I’d take it” if Russia again offered campaign help and his assertion that he would not necessarily tell the F.B.I. about it drew bipartisan condemnation on Thursday, fueling calls for legislation requiring candidates to report such offers to the authorities and emboldening Democrats seeking his impeachment.

The furor shifted the discussion in Washington away from obstruction of justice and back to the original issue that had dogged Mr. Trump since his election in 2016. 


Although the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, found no illegal conspiracy between Mr. Trump’s campaign and Russia, the president’s comments renewed questions about his willingness to profit from the aid of a hostile foreign power.

Lindsey Graham appears to have renewed a strand of criticism now about two years old that acceptance of information or other aid is either a violation of the campaign finance laws [a prohibited in-kind contribution] or a violation of the emoluments clause.

But then many of his critics taking this line seem to think his hotels getting paid by foreigners who stay in them is a violation of the emoluments clause.

And his golf courses?

“If a public official is approached by a foreign government offering anything of value, the answer is no — whether it be money, opposition research,” said Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a close ally of the president who said he spoke with Mr. Trump on Thursday about the matter.

But most Republicans seem to be fine with accepting campaign aid, even from Russia.

At least when this president does it.

[But see also Napolitano quoted at C&L.]

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats used the moment to advance legislation to require candidates to report to the authorities any effort by foreign governments to influence American elections. 

But when Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, sought to pass such a bill by unanimous consent Thursday afternoon, Republicans blocked it.

. . . .

Other Democratic presidential candidates pounced on Mr. Trump as well. 


Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. said a president should not “abet those who seek to undermine democracy.”

Senators Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Cory Booker of New Jersey each called Mr. Trump’s comments “disgraceful.” 

And Senator Kamala Harris of California said the president was “a national security threat.”

The outpouring of criticism was touched off Wednesday when Mr. Trump said in an interview with ABC News that he would gladly take incriminating information about a campaign opponent from adversaries like Russia and saw no reason to call the F.B.I., as the bureau’s director, Christopher A. Wray, a Trump appointee, said campaigns should do.

“I think I’d take it,” Mr. Trump told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos

He scoffed at the idea of calling the F.B.I. “Give me a break — life doesn’t work that way,” he said. 

When Mr. Stephanopoulos noted that the F.B.I. director said a candidate should inform the bureau, Mr. Trump snapped, “The F.B.I. director is wrong.”

No comments:

Post a Comment