Please explain to me "Russian meddling"
4 responses | 0 likes
Started by GunterK - July 19, 2018, 1:57 p.m.

Please explain to me, what is “Russian meddling”.

For almost 2 years now, our daily news is consumed by “Russian meddling”. Every week, new angles to “Russian meddling” are revealed. And this week, it reached a fever pitch after the Trump/Putin meeting.

Please show me, how did the Russians manage to "get Trump into office"????

We had 2 candidates…

One was a “narcissistic, islamophobic,xenophobic, racist, rich bigot”, as he is often called on this forum.. Half the country hated him because of these attributes, and he wasn’t even a “real”, life-long Republican. The other half of the People liked what he had to say…..securing our borders, reducing the deficit, reducing unemployment, questioning our excessive contribution to NATO, questioning our trade agreements with various nations and regions, questioning the financial implications of the Paris deal, questioning the Iran deal, etc.

So far, no sign of meddling. Trump’s own campaign speeches, quite obviously, were not ”Russian meddling”

The other candidate was a person thoroughly familiar with life in the WH, personally acquainted with most world leaders… an accomplished and smooth politician. There was solid “name recognition". She was a Democrat, and she was a woman (big deal for the female voters). She was for open borders, increasing the numbers of refugees coming into this country, and otherwise, basically an extension of the status quo. She also stated that she wouldn’t hesitate to make a pre-emptive nuclear strike on any country that deserved so.

Since she had been on the political scene for decades, many voters also remembered various scandals of her past, such as the mysterious death of Vince Foster, just to mention one example.

Up to this point of this discussion, we don’t see any influence of “Russian meddling”. Voters like either candidate A or candidate B… and that’s it.

So, where is the Russian meddling??? Did any Russian approach a Democrat in the Supermarket and threatened him, or convinced him to abandon Hillary and vote for Trump?.

Nonsense, you say….the Russians manipulated our news media, which in turn then influenced the voters. Now how is this? Take for example the issue of the Clinton “charitable” foundation….a depository of huge sums of money which were not used for “charity. How did this money get there? It certainly smelled of big-time corruption. And near the end of the campaign, when people startedsaying “lock her up, lock her up”. she suddenly moved 1.8 billion of the Foundation’s funds to Qatar… we all can guess why that was done. This was reported by the WSJ, an arm of Russian meddling?

And then there was the infamous Comey interview by a Congressional Committee. Comey accused Hillary of various serious crimes, but then recommended not to charge her. This sure smelled dirty. This was seen on CSPAN.Is CSPAN a Russian news outlet?

By now, just about all the voters had made up their mind, one way or another….not by Russian meddling, but simply by the voters taking a good look at who the candidates were, and what they said.

On top of this, there was some incredible mud-slinging, which only the most gullible people could take seriously…. Such as the incident in Moscow involving Trump, or the child abduction center in that pizza joint.

Some people say that Wikileaks was to blame, but it seems to me, if wikileaks had not existed, the election outcome would have been exactly the same. In addition, the owner of Wikileaks has made it quite clear that his info had not come from the Russians, but from “inside” sources

No matter, how carefully I re-examine the campaign days, I simply see no Russian meddling…Ionly see ugly campaign speeches… I see voters gravitating to their favorite, by the candidates’ actions and words…. not by some subtle subliminal programming the Russians might have done on us. Hillary lost to a very unlikely candidate, not because of outside influences, but because of who she was.

Sure, the Russians hacked our computers…. I have no doubt about that. They have done it for years, and we hack theirs….well, every country probably hacks our computers, and we hack theirs. However, hacking a computer is not necessarily “influencing an election”.

If you want me to believe that Russia meddled in our election, don't show me proof that they hacked our computers..... show me proof that Russia managed to convince a large number of Hillary voters, to switch to Trump

This circus we are witnessing right now, is getting a bit boring and annoying, whether you are pro or  against Trump.

....and, I am thoroughly convinced, this current hysteria over "Russian meddling" does not stem from members of the Democratic party. 

The hysteria already started before the trip to Helsinki. It's the Deep State that is frightened of Trump making nice with Russia. They need Russia to be the enemy, rather than a "competitor".... the welfare of the People be damned.... and the MSM is their mouth piece.

Comments
By mcfarm - July 19, 2018, 2:25 p.m.
Like Reply

well done gunter......sure they tried to meddle just  to screw with small minds. we actually tried to meddle in Israel's election and our media never gave a crap because the lib the did it is the same lib who tried to meddle in the last US election


PS did anyone anywhere verify the death of the cia agent at the big Putin summit? And was he really Trumps taster? Now how about CIA meddling?

By TimNew - July 20, 2018, 3:25 a.m.
Like Reply

The only thing I have seen conclusively is that some Russians set up some "Fake" accounts on Facebook and posted some "misleading" memes.  


Two things here.


1.) If you are voting based on Facebook memes,  please don't vote.

2.) I am certain this could have influenced some potential dem voters.

By Lacey - July 20, 2018, 7:51 p.m.
Like Reply

Great job Gunter. You really summed it up.  The deep state doesn't  want peace.  It threatens their entire reason for their existence.  The only thing they have found is Hillary's rackettering foundation and Obama's complicit knowledge of the Uranium One deal.with Meuller physically transporting a sample  for quality inspection.  You can't make this up. Certainly not helping the democrates.

By carlberky - July 20, 2018, 8:58 p.m.
Like Reply

Wow, Gunter, I bet it felt good to get that off your chest.
Opinion ... I won't make a pithy comment on the rest.