What exactly are we accusing the Russians of doing concerning our election?

Platapus · 05-27-17, 06:27 AM

I think it is important to get down to the base level here. What exactly do we think the Russians did concerning our election and was it illegal?

The press uses/misuses terminology a lot and this does not make it easier for people to keep the issue straight. Whether the press is misusing terminology due to bias or ignorance is not clear. Probably a bit of both.

Are we accusing the Russians of interfering with our elections or are we accusing the Russians of influencing our elections? The two, while related, are quite different.

Interfering with an election is preventing, hindering, or adversely affecting the actual running of the polls, collection of the votes, counting and reporting the votes and other official type activities that ensure the fair and honest running of the polling. This would be an illegal act and would violate both Federal and State laws.

Influencing an election, or more accurately, influencing a campaign is using both legal and illegal methods attempting to change the opinions and ultimately the voting decision of the voter. The concept of influencing a campaign is not intrinsically illegal. After all, the very idea of a campaign is attempting to influence the voter. However, the methods used for this influence can be legal (advertisements) or illegal (voter intimidation).

Countries trying to influence another country's campaigns is not unusual nor illegal. The US spends a lot of money and effort in influencing elections in other countries. There are campaigns and candidates that we want to be elected and those we don't want to be elected. The US is hardly unique in this.

But what exactly are we accusing the Russians of doing? And we need to be clear on the terminology.

If we are accusing the Russians of interfering with the election, then we need to have evidence that the Russians, or their agents, deliberately prevented or hindered election officials in the performance of their duties; or show evidence that the Russians adversely affected the operations of any election machine.

I have not seen such evidence, and as far as my precinct goes, there was no interference either foreign or domestic.

If we are accusing the Russians of influencing the campaigns, we need to look at the methods. Most methods of influencing campaigns are legal. There are federal laws that prevent foreign entities from directly contributing money to a specific campaign, but there are no legal prohibitions against any foreign entity from running or donating money to a Political Action Committee.

We may not like the idea of Russia trying to influence US voters, but I imagine that Russia does not like the idea of the US trying to influence Russian voters either. But not liking something does not mean that something is illegal.

So before we start to invest money into an investigation, we should be clear on what exactly are we investigating? We should not be spending money investigating something we may not like,but is not illegal.

The first step is to bound the issue and define the terms.

Onkel Neal · 05-27-17, 06:50 AM

Good question. I'm not sure anything the Trump campaign did was illegal, but if they were coordinating information releases with Russia, another foreign power, or some hacker group like Wikileaks, it certainly is unethical and not admirable in any way, and that should come to light. I support an investigation, like Vienna said, strong denials have been absent.

u crank · 05-27-17, 07:17 AM

I think this is an excellent question Platapus and one that is not getting a lot of traction in the media. The media seems to be looking for some giant, diabolical scheme planned and carried out by evil people. They are possibly intentionally confusing illegal activity with political wrong doing. It has been pointed out by some pretty good lawyers that there is a difference between illegal activity and political wrong doing. One can get you arrested, charged and put in jail. The other could get you bad press and cost you political points in the next election cycle. But they are two different things. And of course it is possible to do them at the same time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

Interfering with an election is preventing, hindering, or adversely affecting the actual running of the polls, collection of the votes, counting and reporting the votes and other official type activities that ensure the fair and honest running of the polling. This would be an illegal act and would violate both Federal and State laws.

I can't help but think that if this happened on a large scale we would be hearing about it. If there are leaks at the highest levels of government and intel agencies then why not here.

Cybermat47 · 05-27-17, 08:58 AM

The media certainly does have a flair for the dramatic, which has obviously resulted in our mistrust of them.

For example, the media accused the YouTuber known as PewDiePie of being a Nazi. In reality, he was mocking Nazis, as well as other YouTubers who had been openly racist in the past. But saying that YouTube's biggest star was a Nazi was more lucrative for the Wall Street Journal.

Did Russia interfere with the election? With the media's focus on money rather than truth, it's going to take a long time before anyone finds the answer.

ikalugin · 05-27-17, 09:17 AM

Being the red under the bed?

Quote:

but there are no legal prohibitions against any foreign entity from running or donating money to a Political Action Committee.

I mean if we are going into how foreighn powers were influencing the elections, we can look into where HC got her money from and if during her terms as a state official she was known to offer preferential treatment to the countries that sponsored her in any way.

Rockstar · 05-27-17, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

I think it is important to get down to the base level here. What exactly do we think the Russians did concerning our election and was it illegal?

The press uses/misuses terminology a lot and this does not make it easier for people to keep the issue straight. Whether the press is misusing terminology due to bias or ignorance is not clear. Probably a bit of both.

Are we accusing the Russians of interfering with our elections or are we accusing the Russians of influencing our elections? The two, while related, are quite different.

Interfering with an election is preventing, hindering, or adversely affecting the actual running of the polls, collection of the votes, counting and reporting the votes and other official type activities that ensure the fair and honest running of the polling. This would be an illegal act and would violate both Federal and State laws.

Influencing an election, or more accurately, influencing a campaign is using both legal and illegal methods attempting to change the opinions and ultimately the voting decision of the voter. The concept of influencing a campaign is not intrinsically illegal. After all, the very idea of a campaign is attempting to influence the voter. However, the methods used for this influence can be legal (advertisements) or illegal (voter intimidation).

Countries trying to influence another country's campaigns is not unusual nor illegal. The US spends a lot of money and effort in influencing elections in other countries. There are campaigns and candidates that we want to be elected and those we don't want to be elected. The US is hardly unique in this.

But what exactly are we accusing the Russians of doing? And we need to be clear on the terminology.

If we are accusing the Russians of interfering with the election, then we need to have evidence that the Russians, or their agents, deliberately prevented or hindered election officials in the performance of their duties; or show evidence that the Russians adversely affected the operations of any election machine.

I have not seen such evidence, and as far as my precinct goes, there was no interference either foreign or domestic.

If we are accusing the Russians of influencing the campaigns, we need to look at the methods. Most methods of influencing campaigns are legal. There are federal laws that prevent foreign entities from directly contributing money to a specific campaign, but there are no legal prohibitions against any foreign entity from running or donating money to a Political Action Committee.

We may not like the idea of Russia trying to influence US voters, but I imagine that Russia does not like the idea of the US trying to influence Russian voters either. But not liking something does not mean that something is illegal.

So before we start to invest money into an investigation, we should be clear on what exactly are we investigating? We should not be spending money investigating something we may not like,but is not illegal.

The first step is to bound the issue and define the terms.

Of course this doenst even come close to answering your question. But when I lived in the Panama Canal Zone. Soviet ships bristling with antennas were thought by many to be transiting the canal just to gather ELINT. Word about town was why do we let them do that? As one Navy puke once said "its all a game, we do the same to them".

Platapus · 05-27-17, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Of course this doenst even come close to answering your question. But when I lived in the Panama Canal Zone. Soviet ships bristling with antennas were thought by many to be transiting the canal just to gather ELINT. Word about town was why do we let them do that? As one Navy puke once said "its all a game, we do the same to them".

The Intel version of

I am shocked! Shocked I tell you!

Skybird · 05-27-17, 10:40 AM

The German peace movement durign the cold war has been fundamentally manipoulated and dircted by the StaSi and the KGB. One cna take it for granted that somethign similiar is beign done today woth Wetsenr socieites, including the American. The infleunce might be subtle and not as coarse as all to allow pointing finghers at the one traitor with the smoking gun. Its more about supporting people to gain positions and accesses that are holdign views or are likely to care less for strategies, plans, Russian actions and events that are in Russian interests, amongst these interests is to weaken the will to resist to Russian goals, and to divide America and the European nations. This could include to bring somebody into the WH that holds no basic principles and tends to see politics as something that compares to business deals exclusively, without visions or ideals. Such people could be baited with giving them what thy want - money, profit, income, a trophy, in return for them not caring if Russia does soemthignt hat it wants and that does not threaten the profane profit goals of these people.

This is not about a Russian James Bond being sent to America. Its about preventing more Russia-critical personnel to raise in the hierarchy and gaining influence in decision making, and instead have people climbing up the ladder that are more uncaring and desinterested in Russia as long as they gain what they want.

Also, and htis was the case in Germany, Greece, France and elsewhere during the cold war already, it is about to increase the possibilities that Western societies gets destabilised from within their middle by inviting conflicts being carried into these societies, or unsettling their fundaments of these societies that before were stable. Feeding the media, encoruaging social conflicts, anti-Americanism - all this and mroe were tools form the KGB text book and it got practiced, and in parts still gets practiced, or gets practiced again, on the german battleground.

And you can bet the same stuff is done on the American battlefield as well.

Again, all this, like the tactics tried out on the VCrimean, are not new, they derive from KGB operational plans and textbopoks dating back to the 60s or 70s. Delaying enemy reacitons by speading doubt. Allowing the enemy to grow false hopes delaying him further. Smoke screens in the media. Contradicting news. Not allowing to get identified in the media. Sprreading more doiubt. Dementing, and then even dementing the dementi (what Trump does for the same purpose, too, btw.). Intimidation. Threatening. Raising what-if? speculations to have the enmy getting distracted by these. And so on and on.

Nothing new under the sun - except what the West lazily and carelessly allowed itself to forget.

Rockstar · 05-27-17, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Also, and htis was the case in Germany, Greece, France and elsewhere during the cold war already, it is about to increase the possibilities that Western societies gets destabilised from within their middle by inviting conflicts being carried into these societies, or unsettling their fundaments of these societies that before were stable. Feeding the media, encoruaging social conflicts, anti-Americanism - all this and mroe were tools form the KGB text book and it got practiced, and in parts still gets practiced, or gets practiced again, on the german battleground.

Kinda like what I percieve to be some of the problem with our own social media and news agencies now. They may not be the direct cause of certain strife within. But they do, to me atleast, appear to be so easily given over or manipulated by others to write whatever comes across their desk just increase their own political clout, notoriety and subscription sales. I wish they would think about the damge they can cause before they spout off sometimes. Personally I dont see much of anything news worthy ever reported. Just heresay, drama and innuendo and oh how the masses do love it so.

vienna · 05-27-17, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Kinda like what I percieve to be some of the problem with our own social media and news agencies now. They may not be the direct cause of certain strife within. But they do, to me atleast, appear to be so easily given over or manipulated by others to write whatever comes across their desk just increase their own political clout, notoriety and subscription sales. I wish they would think about the damge they can cause before they spout off sometimes. Personally I dont see much of anything news worthy ever reported. Just heresay, drama and innuendo and oh how the masses do love it so.

[Bold mine]

Odd...

...sounds very much like what has been said about Fox News, Breitbart, Infowars, et al ...

<O>

Rockstar · 05-27-17, 03:01 PM

It sure does. Though rest assure my thoughts are directed at media outlets in general and how divisive it all has become. Well, except the best and most reliable intel rag The Onion of course.

Mr Quatro · 05-27-17, 05:27 PM

This is simply the new world order ... an international chess match that is trying to prove that their side is more inteligent than our side. Planes, ships, rockets, tanks, men and machines are no longer enough to prove anything, after all you would have to use those items to prove anything. Nothing will not
stop nor will they admit that they are less intelligent than we are ... they are leading the way for countries like China and North Korea to enter this international battle for the minds of men and women every where. The media must change it's ways first and stop being a highway of misguided information that plants seed thoughts that taint the mind into believing a lie.

em2nought · 05-27-17, 05:51 PM

It's obvious what Russia did wrong in the media's eyes, they are old "white" men from a culture that isn't metrosexual. Russians were ok by the media's standards, until they gave up that communism thing that is.

The idea of them becoming an ally? Absolutely intolerable now. We wouldn't want to win you know, well the media wouldn't want us to.

...and that is absolutely my favorite scene from Casablanca and very apropo!

daft · 06-03-17, 04:37 AM

Ehhh... The media wants to sell stories and they've taken the Russia story hook, line and sinker. I'm neither Trump nor Clinton, Republican or Democrat, I'm not even American, but I would trust the US Intelligence services to take Trump, or any President really, down if it turns out illegal collusion, espionage or whatever really happened. That trust might indeed be misplaced as I suspect that the intelligence community itself isn't entirely a-political all the time. What worries me though is that the media seem to lack both expertise, time and interest in putting the powers at be in the spotlight and report what's really going on rather than package everything in neat little slanted reports and pre-chewed analyses for the public to consume. This isn't specifically an American problem only. We see it here as well.

ikalugin · 06-03-17, 09:41 AM

http://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentar...ssia_want_7297
This article may be of interest.

05-27-17, 06:27 AM	#1
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,360 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	What exactly are we accusing the Russians of doing concerning our election? I think it is important to get down to the base level here. What exactly do we think the Russians did concerning our election and was it illegal? The press uses/misuses terminology a lot and this does not make it easier for people to keep the issue straight. Whether the press is misusing terminology due to bias or ignorance is not clear. Probably a bit of both. Are we accusing the Russians of interfering with our elections or are we accusing the Russians of influencing our elections? The two, while related, are quite different. Interfering with an election is preventing, hindering, or adversely affecting the actual running of the polls, collection of the votes, counting and reporting the votes and other official type activities that ensure the fair and honest running of the polling. This would be an illegal act and would violate both Federal and State laws. Influencing an election, or more accurately, influencing a campaign is using both legal and illegal methods attempting to change the opinions and ultimately the voting decision of the voter. The concept of influencing a campaign is not intrinsically illegal. After all, the very idea of a campaign is attempting to influence the voter. However, the methods used for this influence can be legal (advertisements) or illegal (voter intimidation). Countries trying to influence another country's campaigns is not unusual nor illegal. The US spends a lot of money and effort in influencing elections in other countries. There are campaigns and candidates that we want to be elected and those we don't want to be elected. The US is hardly unique in this. But what exactly are we accusing the Russians of doing? And we need to be clear on the terminology. If we are accusing the Russians of interfering with the election, then we need to have evidence that the Russians, or their agents, deliberately prevented or hindered election officials in the performance of their duties; or show evidence that the Russians adversely affected the operations of any election machine. I have not seen such evidence, and as far as my precinct goes, there was no interference either foreign or domestic. If we are accusing the Russians of influencing the campaigns, we need to look at the methods. Most methods of influencing campaigns are legal. There are federal laws that prevent foreign entities from directly contributing money to a specific campaign, but there are no legal prohibitions against any foreign entity from running or donating money to a Political Action Committee. We may not like the idea of Russia trying to influence US voters, but I imagine that Russia does not like the idea of the US trying to influence Russian voters either. But not liking something does not mean that something is illegal. So before we start to invest money into an investigation, we should be clear on what exactly are we investigating? We should not be spending money investigating something we may not like,but is not illegal. The first step is to bound the issue and define the terms. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

05-27-17, 06:50 AM	#2
Onkel Neal Born to Run Silent Join Date: Jan 1997 Location: Cougar Trap, Texas Posts: 21,383 Downloads: 541 Uploads: 224	Good question. I'm not sure anything the Trump campaign did was illegal, but if they were coordinating information releases with Russia, another foreign power, or some hacker group like Wikileaks, it certainly is unethical and not admirable in any way, and that should come to light. I support an investigation, like Vienna said, strong denials have been absent. __________________ SUBSIM - 26 Years on the Web

05-27-17, 08:58 AM	#4
Cybermat47 Willing Webfooted Beast Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Australia Posts: 5,408 Downloads: 300 Uploads: 23	The media certainly does have a flair for the dramatic, which has obviously resulted in our mistrust of them. For example, the media accused the YouTuber known as PewDiePie of being a Nazi. In reality, he was mocking Nazis, as well as other YouTubers who had been openly racist in the past. But saying that YouTube's biggest star was a Nazi was more lucrative for the Wall Street Journal. Did Russia interfere with the election? With the media's focus on money rather than truth, it's going to take a long time before anyone finds the answer. __________________ Historical TWoS Gameplay Guide: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2572620 Historical FotRSU Gameplay Guide: https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/sho....php?p=2713394

05-27-17, 10:40 AM	#8
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,602 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	The German peace movement durign the cold war has been fundamentally manipoulated and dircted by the StaSi and the KGB. One cna take it for granted that somethign similiar is beign done today woth Wetsenr socieites, including the American. The infleunce might be subtle and not as coarse as all to allow pointing finghers at the one traitor with the smoking gun. Its more about supporting people to gain positions and accesses that are holdign views or are likely to care less for strategies, plans, Russian actions and events that are in Russian interests, amongst these interests is to weaken the will to resist to Russian goals, and to divide America and the European nations. This could include to bring somebody into the WH that holds no basic principles and tends to see politics as something that compares to business deals exclusively, without visions or ideals. Such people could be baited with giving them what thy want - money, profit, income, a trophy, in return for them not caring if Russia does soemthignt hat it wants and that does not threaten the profane profit goals of these people. This is not about a Russian James Bond being sent to America. Its about preventing more Russia-critical personnel to raise in the hierarchy and gaining influence in decision making, and instead have people climbing up the ladder that are more uncaring and desinterested in Russia as long as they gain what they want. Also, and htis was the case in Germany, Greece, France and elsewhere during the cold war already, it is about to increase the possibilities that Western societies gets destabilised from within their middle by inviting conflicts being carried into these societies, or unsettling their fundaments of these societies that before were stable. Feeding the media, encoruaging social conflicts, anti-Americanism - all this and mroe were tools form the KGB text book and it got practiced, and in parts still gets practiced, or gets practiced again, on the german battleground. And you can bet the same stuff is done on the American battlefield as well. Again, all this, like the tactics tried out on the VCrimean, are not new, they derive from KGB operational plans and textbopoks dating back to the 60s or 70s. Delaying enemy reacitons by speading doubt. Allowing the enemy to grow false hopes delaying him further. Smoke screens in the media. Contradicting news. Not allowing to get identified in the media. Sprreading more doiubt. Dementing, and then even dementing the dementi (what Trump does for the same purpose, too, btw.). Intimidation. Threatening. Raising what-if? speculations to have the enmy getting distracted by these. And so on and on. Nothing new under the sun - except what the West lazily and carelessly allowed itself to forget. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

05-27-17, 05:27 PM	#12
Mr Quatro Navy Seal Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 6,772 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	This is simply the new world order ... an international chess match that is trying to prove that their side is more inteligent than our side. Planes, ships, rockets, tanks, men and machines are no longer enough to prove anything, after all you would have to use those items to prove anything. Nothing will not stop nor will they admit that they are less intelligent than we are ... they are leading the way for countries like China and North Korea to enter this international battle for the minds of men and women every where. The media must change it's ways first and stop being a highway of misguided information that plants seed thoughts that taint the mind into believing a lie. __________________ pla•teau noun a relatively stable level, period, or condition a level of attainment or achievement Lord help me get to the next plateau ..

05-27-17, 03:01 PM	#11
Rockstar In the Brig Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Zendia Bar & Grill Posts: 12,614 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	It sure does. Though rest assure my thoughts are directed at media outlets in general and how divisive it all has become. Well, except the best and most reliable intel rag The Onion of course.

05-27-17, 05:51 PM	#13
em2nought Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 3,485 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	It's obvious what Russia did wrong in the media's eyes, they are old "white" men from a culture that isn't metrosexual. Russians were ok by the media's standards, until they gave up that communism thing that is. The idea of them becoming an ally? Absolutely intolerable now. We wouldn't want to win you know, well the media wouldn't want us to. ...and that is absolutely my favorite scene from Casablanca and very apropo! __________________ em2nought is ecstatic garbage! Last edited by em2nought; 05-27-17 at 06:02 PM. Reason: Round up the usual suspects

06-03-17, 04:37 AM	#14
daft Captain Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 493 Downloads: 15 Uploads: 0	Ehhh... The media wants to sell stories and they've taken the Russia story hook, line and sinker. I'm neither Trump nor Clinton, Republican or Democrat, I'm not even American, but I would trust the US Intelligence services to take Trump, or any President really, down if it turns out illegal collusion, espionage or whatever really happened. That trust might indeed be misplaced as I suspect that the intelligence community itself isn't entirely a-political all the time. What worries me though is that the media seem to lack both expertise, time and interest in putting the powers at be in the spotlight and report what's really going on rather than package everything in neat little slanted reports and pre-chewed analyses for the public to consume. This isn't specifically an American problem only. We see it here as well. __________________ And God said: \"Let there be Narrowband!\"

06-03-17, 09:41 AM	#15
ikalugin Ocean Warrior Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Moscow, Russia Posts: 3,212 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 0	http://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentar...ssia_want_7297 This article may be of interest. __________________ Grumpy as always.