Russians Indicted by FBI for Interference in 2016 Elections

[Ridgerunner]

It wasn’t the DNC who said those things about the Church, it was a bunch of Catholics griping in stolen private emails who just happened to work for the DNC.

It seems to me that peddling in stolen information for partisan purposes must violate some moral dictum. I would avoid doing that.

Stolen or not, they said what they thought. But in any event, “deplorables” “irredeemables” and “bitter clingers” was said right out in public.

And we don’t know whether the Wikileaks information was stolen or not because the DNC never would allow the FBI to examine the supposedly hacked server. Might have been just a disaffected Dem with a jump drive.

 

[ProVobis]

Not because of what these 13 were indicted for, whatever that is. As I understand it though Mueller’s job was not to investigate how many actual voters stayed home or how many attended rallies sponsored by these Russians and the like. Perhaps after the investigation is concluded we might get a better number of how many votes each would have gotten had Russia not committed its crimes. Probably not, though. We can only guess, although it doesn’t take much to sway 80,000 voters in 3 targeted states.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Flannery O’Connor died in 1964 - that’s more than half a century ago. Maybe you should reference someone more recent.

I find it humorous that you are always trying to gaslight me. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out after posting on this forum that Spadaro and Figueroa are spot on. The evidence is right before everyone’s eyes.

Also, you can’t blame everything on progressive Catholics as if that exonerates those on the right. This article specifically calls out right wing Catholics who have gone off the range, but still have the audacity to claim they represent Catholic doctrine. They don’t.

O’Connor was right then, and she’s right now. I know Evangelicals and Fundamentalists (they’re not the same thing, by the way, further proving that these Italians don’t know what they’re talking about). I live in a sea of them, and I do discuss religion with them. They’ll admit their beliefs and Catholic beliefs are the same in many respects, just not in all. Most of our converts here (about 5%/year) come from Fundamentalist churches. There is much more difference between their beliefs and mainline Protestant beliefs, and always has been.

Between “progressive” Catholics who support the abortion agenda and the mainline Protestantism or today, not so much.

A couple of amusing errors in Spadaro and Figueroa’s political article are the simultaneous assertions that American Fundamentalism arise out of the religious movements of Puritanism and the Deep South. A more bizarre fantasy could hardly be imagined, as the two are absolutely opposed. And they don’t seem to be aware of the even larger geographical and cultural segment of the U.S. where religious Fundamentalism is even more pervasive than in the Deep South.

Maybe these two Italians ought to write about Italian Catholics, like why they don’t have children or something, and not slander American Catholics in this way.

 

[Luke6_37]

Luke6_37:

It wasn’t the DNC who said those things about the Church, it was a bunch of Catholics griping in stolen private emails who just happened to work for the DNC.

It seems to me that peddling in stolen information for partisan purposes must violate some moral dictum. I would avoid doing that.

Stolen or not, they said what they thought. But in any event, “deplorables” “irredeemables” and “bitter clingers” was said right out in public.

And we don’t know whether the Wikileaks information was stolen or not because the DNC never would allow the FBI to examine the supposedly hacked server. Might have been just a disaffected Dem with a jump drive.

Of course the emails were stolen. You don’t seriously think the folks who got hacked just turned their private messages over to Wikileaks to publish for all the world to see? Plus, there is nothing wrong with Catholics privately criticizing certain aspects of the Church. It’s not like they meant it to go public. In any event I am sure Mueller is investigating it and more indictments are coming.

As for the name calling, I don’t like it on either side, but its not a crime. Also, the behavior of those Republicans who chanted “lock her up” was deplorable.

 

[Ridgerunner]

At a point, one would think the admissions of non-Trumpers like Clapper, Comey and Rosenstein would convince people that the microscopic Russian “interference” with the election did not have an effect on the election.

I doubt the conclusion of the Mueller investigation will tell us anything more. After all, Mueller works under Rosenstein and Rosenstein admitted “no effect” just the other day.

No, the “Russian interference” tale and the “special prosecution” that grew out of it was a way to deflect from the Russian influences in things like the “Dossier” and “Uranium One” and explain away the fact that the Dems lost because they deserved to lose.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Of course the emails were stolen. You don’t seriously think the folks who got hacked just turned their private messages over to Wikileaks to publish for all the world to see?

In any event I am sure Mueller is investigating it and more indictments are coming.

As for the name calling, I don’t like it on either side, but its not a crime. Also, the behavior of those Republicans who chanted “lock her up” was deplorable.

Depends on whether whoever got the emails was authorized to have them or not. We don’t know, and probably never will because the DNC will almost certainly never allow law enforcement to examine the computer. And even if they did, the DNC has had what now, a year and more, to doctor it.

Clinton did not limit her “deplorable” comment to those who shouted “lock her up”. Nor did Obama limit his “bitter clinger” epithet at all. Nor did the previous poster limit his “kooks” epithet for Trump supporters.
The left ought to just admit that it has utter disdain for all those who don’t follow their agenda. If it did, it might then be able to atone for its rash judgments.

I do, however, believe Mueller will indict more people; likely some other poor saps like Papadopolous.

 

[ProVobis]

Depends on what you mean by microscopic. 80,000 votes is very small compared to 130,000,000.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Depends on what you mean by microscopic. 80,000 votes is very small compared to 130,000,000.

How many of them voted because of anything some Russians did or said? Rosenstein, Clapper and Comey don’t think there were any at all.

The Russian “effort” of course, was the thing that was microscopic. A million tweets during a campaign when there are a half billion tweets DAILY? What kind of an effort is that?

And as we know, some of it was anti-Trump too, so at this point, we really don’t know why the Russians bothered.

 

[ProVobis]

Since when did Comey become your enemy? Didn’t he decide to write a letter to his Republican buddies in Congress that he would be pursuing some Weiner laptop for a possibility of more dirt against Hillary 11 days before the election? What was with that?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Since when did Comey become your enemy? Didn’t he decide to write a letter to his Republican buddies in Congress that he would be pursuing some Weiner laptop for a possibility of more dirt against Hillary 11 days before the election? What was with that?

I wouldn’t say Comey is my “enemy”. I didn’t think about him at all until all the election stuff started happening. When he started waffling about Clinton, I did lose respect for him, but not because he dumped on Clinton. I lost respect because he was getting into an election as a participant himself and seemed to shift with the political currents. I began to believe he was trying to curry favor with whoever won, but couldn’t stick with either candidate as their fortunes seemed to change.

I am probably one of the few who think he probably would have stuck with Trump if Trump hadn’t fired him.

 

[Luke6_37]

I am not sure what you are talking about. Lots of Evangelicals are also Fundamentalists, and in the last few decades there has been a split in the Southern Baptist Convention between the monergists (Calvinists) & synergists (Arminians). You are probably just talking to one side - most likely Arminians since their soteriology is more similar to that of Catholics.

I would agree that there is opposition between the two sides. Calvinists especially have a tendancy to be arrogant, self-righteous & polemical. I think it is this attitude showing up in Catholics that has Spadaro concerned.

 

[HCTC]

One really has to wonder why the Russian government (if it was the government) would bother with such a miniscule effort. Did it really think 13 people (and that’s all we know about)

No one really has to “wonder” about the not at all “miniscule” Russian effort. All one needs to do is read the indictment excerpts below:

Indictment Paragraph 2:
ORGANIZATION refers to “INTERNET RESEARCH AGENCY LLC (“ORGANIZATION”)

Indictment Paragraph 10
Defendants and other co-conspirators carried out their activities to interfere in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

a. The ORGANIZATION employed hundreds of individuals for its online operations, ranging from creators of fictitious personas to technical and administrative support. The ORGANIZATION’s annual budget totaled the equivalent of millions of U.S. dollars.

b. The ORGANIZATION was headed by a management group and organized into departments, including: a graphics department; a data analysis department; a search-engine optimization (“SEO”) department; an information-technology (“IT”) department to maintain the digital infrastructure used in the ORGANIZATION’s
operations; and a finance department to budget and allocate funding.

c. The ORGANIZATION sought, in part, to conduct what it called “information warfare against the United States of America” through fictitious U.S. personas on
social media platforms and other Internet-based media.

d. By in or around April 2014, the ORGANIZATION formed a department that went by various names but was at times referred to as the “translator project.” This project focused on the U.S. population and conducted operations on social media platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. By approximately July 2016, more than eighty ORGANIZATION employees were assigned to the translator project.

e. By in or around May 2014, the ORGANIZATION’s strategy included interfering with the 2016 U.S. presidential election, with the stated goal of “spread[ing] distrust towards the candidates and the political system in general.”

https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

 

[Cruciferi]

Since we’re all Russian now, I found this Soviet Army Fur Military Cossack Ushanka Hat

https://www.amazon.com/Russian-Sovi...tl?_encoding=UTF8&s=sporting-goods&th=1&psc=1

 

[ProVobis]

My point was that one person could sway an election, if not affect the outcome, at least a few votes, maybe up to 5%. One can only imagine how much 13 people with the backing of the Kremlin could do. Is Rosenstein actually saying they couldn’t possibly influence 80,000 people from changing their votes or not vote at all?

 

[MonteRCMS]

Only need to turn a very few voters.

In a few strategic places.

Fortunately, in this case, Hillary Clinton was her own worst enemy.

George Soros is working assiduously at fixing the next election cycle.

And all of the Russians are back in Russia … where they are difficult to reach for trial.

Do you watch “The Americans” … it’s about Russian agents working in the United States.

And there is no telling how many agents of the Peoples Republic of China are at work in the United States.

Chinese agents pumped vast amounts of money into Bill Clinton’s campaigns. Illegally.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I am not sure what you are talking about. Lots of Evangelicals are also Fundamentalists, and in the last few decades there has been a split in the Southern Baptist Convention between the monergists (Calvinists) & synergists (Arminians). You are probably just talking to one side - most likely Arminians since their soteriology is more similar to that of Catholics.
I would agree that there is opposition between the two sides. Calvinists especially have a tendancy to be arrogant, self-righteous & polemical. I think it is this attitude showing up in Catholics that has Spadaro concerned.

As Southern Baptists are wont to say “I don’t belong to any organized religion. I’m a Southern Baptist.”

One could say that there are Calvinists and Arminians among Southern Baptists who are more “creedal” than others, but most southern Baptists wouldn’t know one from the other. And most would reject the idea that they’re Calvinists in any manner.

One really ought to read the Southern Baptists’ creedal statement. It’s about a page long and has almost no content. Southern Baptists are pretty eclectic once one accepts the basic tenets. But despite that eclecticism, they tend to be doctrinally conservative, which is to say that they have not departed as much from their Catholic forbears as have some other denominations.

And, of course, there are worlds of loosely-affiliated Fundamentalist sects that are “sort of” affiliated with acknowledged denominations, and non-denoms as well.

I agree that lots of Fundamentalists are Evangelicals, but not all Evangelicals are Fundamentalists, by a long way.

Again, I don’t think Spadaro knows what he’s talking about. He “dates” modern “Evangelicalism” back to 1910. Your own citation of the existence of Calvinists and Arminians in the Southern Baptist Convention tells us Spadaro is wrong. Both long predated Spadaro’s asserted “founders”.

Spadaro and Figueroa are just garden-variety progressives who want to criticize traditional Catholics by equating them with a fictional version of Evengelicalism. Truth be told, a Catholicism that’s faithful to the teachings of the Church will be around long after “progressive Catholicism” has become a footnote to a footnote in history, and it will be around when most Southern Fundamentalists have (as O’Connor predicted) converted to Catholicism.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Since we’re all Russian now, I found this Soviet Army Fur Military Cossack Ushanka Hat

  amazon.com

Amazon.com: Hat Russian Ushanka Black-62 Soviet Army soldier: Sports & Outdoors

Sizes : 55(XS/21 5/8),56(S/22),57(M/22.5in),58(M/22 7/8),59(L/23.25),60(XL/23 5/8),61(XXL/24inc)

At the stated price, I expect they’re fake fur. But I should probably report here that a real fur Russian hat is, more often than not, made of American coyote fur. Right now, the price of coyote pelts is down, possibly because of sanctions. But it’s true. Personally, I wish the price would go up, as I really hate coyotes.

 

[Ridgerunner]

My point was that one person could sway an election, if not affect the outcome, at least a few votes, maybe up to 5%. One can only imagine how much 13 people with the backing of the Kremlin could do. Is Rosenstein actually saying they couldn’t possibly influence 80,000 people from changing their votes or not vote at all?

No. I think he’s saying there’s no evidence that they actually did.

And I’m skeptical for my own reasons. American voters were absolutely deluged by some of the best-packaged advertising imaginable, and the spending was probably double what is reported because the MSM was free Dem propaganda practically 24/7.

And we’re supposed to think 13 Russians with some kind of “tweet factory” in Russia that appears to have been inept anyway, persuaded American voters of anything? It just doesn’t persuade.

But you know, simply learning from the Wikileaks disclosures how anti-Catholic the Dem party is could have changed a lot more than 80,000 votes all by itself. Despite all the denials by the Dems here on CAF, the DNC and the Clinton organization never directly denied thinking the Catholic Church “medieval” or “backward”. Nor did they ever deny supporting dissident “Catholic” organizations. That disclosure could have changed a lot more than 80,000 votes. The 80,000 might have just been the tip of the iceberg.

 

[HCTC]

Despite all the denials by the Dems here on CAF, the DNC and the Clinton organization never directly denied thinking the Catholic Church “medieval” or “backward”. Nor did they ever deny supporting dissident “Catholic” organizations.

Your statement is beyond ridiculous. No person or group goes around denying something that never occurred to them.

 

[HCTC]

My point was that one person could sway an election, if not affect the outcome, at least a few votes, maybe up to 5%. One can only imagine how much 13 people with the backing of the Kremlin could do. Is Rosenstein actually saying they couldn’t possibly influence 80,000 people from changing their votes or not vote at all?

Again, there were many more than 13 people tweeting.

Indictment Paragraph 2:
ORGANIZATION refers to “INTERNET RESEARCH AGENCY LLC (“ORGANIZATION”)

Indictment Paragraph 10
Defendants and other co-conspirators carried out their activities to interfere in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

a. The ORGANIZATION employed hundreds of individuals for its online operations, ranging from creators of fictitious personas to technical and administrative support. The ORGANIZATION’s annual budget totaled the equivalent of millions of U.S. dollars.
b. The ORGANIZATION was headed by a management group and organized into departments, including: a graphics department; a data analysis department; a search-engine optimization (“SEO”) department; an information-technology (“IT”) department to maintain the digital infrastructure used in the ORGANIZATION’s
operations; and a finance department to budget and allocate funding.
c. The ORGANIZATION sought, in part, to conduct what it called “information warfare against the United States of America” through fictitious U.S. personas on social media platforms and other Internet-based media.
d. By in or around April 2014, the ORGANIZATION formed a department that went by various names but was at times referred to as the “translator project.” This project focused on the U.S. population and conducted operations on social media platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. By approximately July 2016, more than eighty ORGANIZATION employees were assigned to the translator project.

The 13 Russians indicted funded the troll farm, entered the country illegally, stole identities, didn’t register as agents of a foreign country, etc…