Why not run a story on how the American electorate made it SO easy for Putin to cloud the election and manipulate the results. Consider a "democrary" where more people watch "Entertainment tonight" or "dancing with the Stars" than read newspapers or THINK for five minutes about what a candidate really said. How about an electorate that has decided to let the internet make up its mind. I have a very hard time with stories that blame others for our own weaknesses and failings--abetted by a national media that reports every idiotic comment Trump makes and numbs society to the reality of what he doing to us and the rest of the world. Bear in mind that voters in free elections usually get what they choose--idiots beget idiots.
Having "that kind of slouch" is all you need to hear. It defines a man, "the bored man in the back of the room", a preordained agenda. Wont be bothered with debate, its all set in stone, I'll shake hands with the "tan" man from America, and be on with my agenda
Is there an element of hypocrisy in all this - have the US/UK governments and the establishment media never "interfered" in the internal affairs of other countries. Was the never a British Empire? The Democrats should look inward and discover why Hilary Clinton failed to motivate the American people - her hostile foreign policy towards Russia and China did not help her cause. Sensible people want peace and friendship in the world - foreign policy should reflect this longing.
Bernie Sanders and several enlightened female democratic candidates are aware of this - they may not oust Trump in 2020 but their time will come.
a geopolitical foe is now embraced ... as a bastion of Christianity and traditional values.
-----
This hankering for cultural unity with European civilization as a whole and Russia in particular is quite legitimate and if pulled off, certainly a worthwhile objective. President Obama also tried for Russian reset twice.
But what is not evident that President Putin also aspires to reciprocate this heartfelt unity or his agenda is to undermine USA and keep her hopelessly divided. The stakes are very very big here.
At one side is weaning Russia away from its steep dependence on China for economic sustenance, that a reset would have achieved. On the flip side is hopelessly divided US that can not find true reconciliation for generations ahead. The only winner in that case would be China.
Any miscalculation by Republican think tank, that is betting big on culture over everything else, would be catastrophic.
Think it is far safer for all of us to let truth prevail over political expediency and wait out President Putin as well, to enable cultural affinity be expressed in future by other leaders.
Upon Hillary Clinton's humiliating defeat, John Podesta got together with the Democratic establishment and decided at that point that they would do everything they could to use the media to blame Russia. That is a fact we know from Shattered. What is truly mind blowing is to see how effective that strategy has been. Just in case anyone here cares about a competing point of view:
https://consortiumnews.com/2018/09/21/the-new-york-times-as-judge-and-jury/
7
More Russiagate? There must be such a strong conviction that if you keep printing the same old story somehow more people will eventually buy into it, not just sore loser Clintonites who still cannot get over the fact that a lethal clown beat their standard-bearer. All this serves as a diversion from the corrupt policies shared by Republicans and Democrats. In the meantime, the whole Russiagate narrative is less and less believed in, and would have been rejected by its fabricators and media servants if, as Twain said its easier to fool someone than get him to admit he was fooled. That much Clintonites are the same as people who voted for Trump because they thought he would drain the swamp instead of filling it to the limit (ad beyond.)
4
Wow, you guys. I hope your team gets a Pulitzer for this. Brilliant! Share, share, and share again, everyone...
6
I'm truly astounded that there are only 449 comments (after 2 days of publication). I do hope that the number of comments is not reflective of the number of reads.
These articles represent an extraordinary compendium of crimes committed by foreign and national actors that can be defined by no other word than: invasion. They should elicit outrage, anger, fear and disgust. Yet, only a few hundred comments...
What will it take?
The article is long. It is detailed. It does take effort and time to get through.
7
It is known from charging documents for the Russian hackers that the plot to do this began virtually the day after Victor Yanukovych was chased out of Ukraine.
You did not include Maria Butina's "foreign policy" question in your timeline. Had you done so, the time between Trump saying, "I don't think we need sanctions," and Agalarov reaching out to him for the first time with the ubiquitous Trump-Putin meeting offer is 11 days.
We may assume that nothing the Russians did after Spring 2014 on this timeline is not premeditated. But the Trump campaign? Donald Trump, who in 2016 gaffs to a reporter about the Russians didn't invade Ukraine, somehow before he has a single person in his foreign policy team knows that we don't need sanctions on Russia?
I have long since stopped believing in coincidence in this timeline. Trump's personal communications to the Russians are his public comments made in speeches. "I don't think we need sanctions," or, "Russia, if you're listening...". And, if necessary, a Russian spy in the audience to prompt the comment needed to move to the next step is provided. Everyone around him does the indictable email load, his confirmation is verbal and in public and can't be traced because it doesn't look like anything more than a comment or joke.
This never was an American presidential campaign, it was a Russian hack from July 11, 2015 at least.
5
It took me a while to go through your timeline. What I was looking for was a timeline on Paul Manafort, since I had started notes on such while reading his plea papers. I had had Manafort still working actively for the Russians on Ukraine up to November 2014 (last payment to "The Hapsburg Group.") At the end of your timeline, is the entry about Sam Patten's plea, which linked out to your article, containing this:
[8/31/18 NYT] "Forced into the opposition, the oligarchs formed a political party called Opposition Bloc, which worked with Mr. Manafort and Mr. Gates in 2014, before largely shifting its political consulting and lobbying business to a company started by Mr. Patten and Konstantin V. Kilimnik."
And that they, "...formed a company called Begemot Ventures International with Mr. Patten in February 2015, according to corporate records filed in Washington."
When combined with the following, also your reporting,
[8/4/2017 NYT] "On Feb. 29, 2016, Mr. Manafort, the former lobbyist and Republican operative who now sits at the nexus of investigations into Russia’s meddling in the presidential election, reached out to Mr. Trump with a slick, carefully calibrated offer that appealed to the candidate’s need for professional guidance, thirst for political payback — and parsimony."
So the answer to how long between Manafort working directly for the Russians and signing up to work with Trump is, "A week or two." The malware and go-betweens go live almost immediately.
4
Great piece of work!!! One critical item is 'missing' in the timeline - Trump's meeting in the Oval office with Russians following his firing of Comey. As I recall, this meeting wasn't on the White House schedule and only became public after Russian state media posted pictures. Trump seemed quite happy and relieved that Comey was now gone.
5
Creepiest visuals I have EVER seen in a non sci fi format! Excellent and on point, but CREEPY. Well done!
6
There are other countries and entities that have greater ability in the cyber realm. Think hard. You will come up with several that have blatantly attempted to alter our elections and wanted Trump to win. Oh, but don't mention them because the arms business with them is just too good.
5
There most certainly was a plot to subvert the 2016 elections, but it was entirely on the part of the FBI, CIA, British intelligence, the Democratic party and the corporate, CIA controlled mass media. Everyone complicit in this treasonous hoax must go to jail for a long, long time. Thank God the truth is coming out. The country may survive this coup attempt.
7
Just the facts, please. The editorializing in this article undermines its claim to the truth.
10
Russia is an enemy of freedom and democracy.
6
Reading this article I am once again shown that sexism sexism sexism is why we are here. I am so sick of the ridiculous macho man braggadocio of Putin and Trump. Trump and his team have trampled our democracy under their "little boy throwing a tantrum" feet. Russian interference plus sexism have delivered us to this precipice. And now we watch as republicans senators and trump try to belittle Kavanaugh's accuser. Oh Hillary - how I miss your stolen chance!
7
Here is what I just don't understand - which is the superpower? And, if it is the US, is that easy to bring it to his knees?
2
This is what passes for journalism these days? It reads more like propaganda. And no I'm not pro-Trump.
12
The New York Times view, as expressed in this article:
"...shortly after Donald J. Trump eked out a victory..."
The facts:
Trump won with 304 electoral votes, as compared to Clintons 227. Does that look like an "ek" to you?
Trump can not be defeated in 2020 by people who have lost the ability to see things as they are. If you deny it, you can't fix it.
5
Reading these articles just makes me realize even more clearly how much at risk the 2018 elections are. All of this interference worked so well for Trump and the GOP in 2016 that I can't imagine they would help put a stop to it now. Our last free and fair election may be long behind us at this point. Trump's Russian/Putin agenda has been all too clear in his administration to this point. I'm glad that the New York Times has investigated this interference so fully and is presenting it to America, but isn't it too little and way too late? Russia has already achieved it's primary goal--Trump is in the White House and tearing America apart piece by piece. Just look at the rest of your news section today for concrete proof of that.
4
Yes, Trump got elected because Putin interfered .. definitely .. 100% certain ..
It does not matter that there was an actual election on Nov 2016.
2
Frightening, well documented account of Putin's revenge. Experts have been warning about cyber attacks and strategies for a long time, but our country has paid a heavy price for our leaderships' trust and naivete. It certainly doesn't help that we have a commander-in-chief who believes in fake news, that climate change is a hoax, and that Russian has no ill-intent toward us. This article is also one of the best accounts on tracking the Putin-Trump connection, and it is very convincing.
4
This is important work, but a substantial part of the story appears to be missing. What about the money-laundering connection between the Russian mafia and Donald Trump's real estate assets?
5
"Mr. Trump has flipped the script in the party of Reagan: A country that was once seen as a geopolitical foe is now embraced by many Republicans as a bastion of Christianity and traditional values." You mean a bastion of WHITENESS. thats basically all it is to them. They dont know anything about Christian values.
4
FISA, FISA, FISA..... That's all everyone hears it's all a smoke screen. Few of you fail to understand FISA was designed to prevent exactly what has happened. Warrantless surveillance of US citizens. I've been screaming this from the start. They lied to the FISA judge to get the warrant. If an "emergent" situation requiring granting a FISA judge approval any Deputy Director of any of the intelligence services can request emergency approval by a judge by swearing to and signing an affidavit that the evidence is probably going to be disclosed. It has to be renewed. We need to see the FBI 302's the, affidavit, and renewal applications. The key thing to look for now is was there ever a FISA Warrant even issued? A FISA Warrant is a big deal, evidential requirements and documentation is required before a judge is going to sign off on it. If I were those judges I'd be concerned but we never hear them mentioned.
2
Now that we are in this mess, what do we do to get out of it? I'd sure like to read that article.
2
Hang a banner on a bridge that says “Enough!” That will fix everything. It’s just that simple.
Let's say the Russians tried to help Republicans do you really think the American people are so stupid that it was because of false Facebook and Twitter posts that Trump won the election?
All this drama over the Russians was an effort by Democrats to make his election appear illegitimate and to undermine and "resist" the Republican administration.
12
"do you really think the American people are so stupid that it was because of false Facebook and Twitter posts".....What I know is that many of the people who were opposed to Obamacare thought that it was an expensive government program that the country couldn't afford. In fact, Obamacare was designed to be revenue neutral and every time Congress voted to end Obamacare the CBO reported it would cost the government $10 billion dollars over the next ten years to eliminate it. Yes, they are that stupid.
10
"...do you really think the American people are so stupid that it was because of false Facebook and Twitter posts that Trump won the election?"
Well, not all of them, but that's a definite YUP.
4
Wasn't this secretive hanging of banners a form of terrorism ?
I can't say - I didn't hear about it then - didn't see it reported either in Oct or Nov 2016. And, probably, not many people (voters?) in "red state" "flyover" middle America knew about these banners either. Not like the way people saw media coverage of George W Bush exiting the cockpit of a fighter jet on a carrier in 2003 (where? I got fooled- thought he was in the Persian Gulf) with a banner hung from the carrier tower: "Mission Accomplished". Any one else remember that ? Sure we do - wonderful bit of propaganda. And, sadly at this point, a fairy tale richly cloaked in Patriotism that whole chunks of our citizenry still want to believe.
2
It's hard sometimes to admit that the other guy has a point, but Putin isn't wrong. The U.S. has indeed meddled in Russian affairs and they've been doing it for years. The American attitude toward Russia is much the same as it is in other parts of the world: "We're America and we do what we want." I can see where Putin's nose might be pushed out of joint confronted with an attitude like that. He watched as we reneged on a promise and pushed NATO up to his frontier; he watched as our own corrupt capitalists moved in and helped their corrupt oligarchs loot the Russian treasury; he watched us lend direct support to stir up trouble in former Soviet republics. If he wanted payback, well, the man has a case.
That said, Russian interference hardly handed the election to Trump. Does anyone seriously think that some Ohio ironworker was persuaded by a few phony Facebook stories or the release of Clinton's emails (which, by the way, weren't fakes). That 60-odd million Americans saw fit to vote for Trump says more about the failure of this society than it does about any nefarious Russian plot. Face it. We're a mess.
8
If it looks like a troll, and talks like a troll......
7
Are you one of those who worships at the feet of Russian dissidents, but is horrified when US citizens do not believe all the anti-Russia propaganda, as in this article?
Neither the US or Russia, or any other country is perfect, but if the US had leadership that emphasized common interests and worked to bring out the best in other heads of government, the world would have a better future.
US citizens have little knowledge of the world and its history. There would be more understanding and less hysteria if media included a larger context in world affairs articles. But the powers-that-be may prefer hysteria.
The blatant triumphalism that led to the expansion of NATO to Russia's western border is a real provocation, and broke an agreement with the GHW Bush administration and Gorbechev.
Having moved NATO eastward,the US now has bases encircling Russia. It is not Russia that has moved close to threaten those US military bases.
For the Allies to win WWll, the Soviet resistance to Hitler was crucial, and the Soviet Union had some 24 million civilian and military casualties. The US had 418,500 civilian and military casualties.
Putin’s parents survived the 872 day siege of Leningrad, though a brother was among the 1.5 million who died.
These facts contribute to the context of Putin/Russia being unwilling to accept a belligerent NATO on its border.
Russia is not challenging the US, but it is challenging the US as King, Judge and Executioner for the World.
3
In the last seven presidential elections since 1992 the republican candidate has won the popular vote exactly once - in 2004. Twice in that time a republican won due to the undemocratic Constitutional relic of an accommodation to the slave states called the electoral college. In 2016 this distortion allowed the votes of about 70,000 people in three states to invalidate those of almost 3 million other Americans.
3 million is more than population of Chicago or Houston. It's more people than live in the entire state of Nebraska, or Kansas, or both the Dakotas and Alaska - combined.
Thanks to the electoral college, extreme gerrymandering, partisan voter suppression, an almost completely unregulated campaign finance system, and the fact that 50% of the Senate represents 18% of the population. calling ourselves a democracy or even a 'democratic republic' is laughable.
And on 11/10/2016 I'll bet Putin was laughing the hardest.
72
Russia certainly plowed the rows as they say, but what's left out here and all too often when analyzing trump's win, is that right behind Putin came Fox and right-wing talk radio megaphones sowing the seed that grew him.
8
I continue to read that people are of the belief that Russia is not to blame for our tyrant in chief, Donald Trump; This is an omission in a very significant history of the 2016 election. If there was one thing the MAGA crowd was chanting, it was "lock her up!". This is significant, because it was Russia who hacked her emails, and identified that Hillary had a private email server.
You can't claim with intellectual honesty that those who supported Trump did so solely on the basis that Hillary's emails were hacked, and that she had a private email server; However, you can say that it added jet fuel to the grease fire that was Hillary's already troubled campaign. Trump's rally cries for her imprisonment and accusations of treason were more than helpful in convincing his brainwashed fans that his cause was the just and righteous one.
There are still people to this day with a dirty taste in their mouth when they consider voting for Hillary. I know many friends who didn't vote at all, because both candidates were awful. I continue to remind my friends that the world would be much better off with a President who has decades of experience in politics at the highest levels, traversing the turbulent seas that are the relationships between the governments of the world.
We must remember this as a point of reflection, where we look inward at ourselves and choose better over worse. Hillary would have been better. United we stand, divided we fall.
5
Well organized, credibly and necessarily lengthy summary of linked events. Conscious readers will have similar conclusions, be understandably alarmed and continue to call implicated leaders accountable. Unfortunately, this piece of journalism will fall on many "deaf" eyes, and for some, who favor perpetuation of the current political status quo, denial of this most disturbing force. Translation in forms digestible by the US electorate must be advanced to inform and motivate citizens to vote, not just in November 2018, but in all future local, state and national elections.
4
Was there Putin influence, direct or indirect, on GOP mega donors? I would like to see a study of that including partying and travel. I cannot forget that picture of Ivanka Trump with Wendy Murdock in Croatia. Lots of back channels or just coincidence?
3
Such a sad state of affairs we Americans are in right now, obsessively blaming Russia and its leader for what are ills of our own making. Yes, Trump’s election was a planetary disaster and we should do our utmost to undermine him and the politics he represents, but using “Russia-gate” as the cudgel to beat him with is just wrong. And frankly stupid. The hive mind is not known for its intelligence.
No matter what the Russians did or didn’t do, it is *we* who elected this clown. In the end we chose. Whoever was responsible for Wikileaks’ having obtained the material demonstrating the corruption of Clinton and the DNC, we should be grateful to them. Surely it is better that we have such facts in hand when picking a candidate. Perhaps the information drove some or even many to vote against Clinton. That we wound up with Trump and not someone better is not the fault of Wikileaks or its sources but rather that the Republicans had vomited up Trump as their candidate in the first place, and that third-party candidates are marginalized in our system.
If some dim-witted people were fooled by “fake news” planted by trolls and cluckbaiters, still they themselves are largely responsible for their own actions and should not solely blame the trolls.
But perhaps the most tragic thing about “Russia-gate” is that out of hatred for Trump well-meaning people have chosen to trust the word of the intelligence agencies. This does not bode well for the nation’s intellectual health.
4
RE: "they themselves are largely responsible for their own actions and should not solely blame the trolls."
The point is valid. All the trolling and fake news wouldn't matter to an aware and educated population. In the past education wasn't the exclusive purview of the "urban elite". People from cities to the most rural areas wanted their children to be educated. The evidence is everywhere! Look around you will still find the old small school houses and local public libraries that used to dot the countryside. They are still there for us to see.
It is no secret that the Russian trolling and fake news was abetted by the Republican hostility toward public education defunding of our schools. That the GOP wanted a less well educated public willing to accept their dogma was exploited by the Russians.
To have a functioning democracy/republic and protect ourselves from false information and unqualified people able whip a crowd into a frenzy we need an enlightened and educated population.
Who is/was for education and who is against it? That's your answer.
5
I no longer pretend to "get" this impasse. Just read the title once. Read it again slowly. Is there really any sentient person in the world who doesn't grasp that that litany IS the crime? How can anyone make the case that collusion did not happen? That DJT wasn't involved?
That's why this is the best graphic ever for an article. The man's head is stuffed with the men who put him there. Only Putin's is wholly his.
It is one thing for a shabby, corrupt, uninformed, inept, colossally ignorant man to be played. But it is a crying shame when an entire nation is on the line. Ten years ago (if not more) Putin set the bait. He didn't just catch the world's most gullible patsy. He caught a country.
The "but but but there's no there there!" crowd was served the day the meeting in T. Towers was revealed; as numerous former Watergate prosecutors have pointed out repeatedly, just that meeting was prima facie evidence of criminal wrongdoing.
Everything since has been noise, amplifying and edifying for sure, but still noise. It's time to cut the line and free this nation of its criminal ties to Putin's crime cartel. Those who continue to fall for risible, transparent lies and excuses are in the same net.
8
Non - BrightWings - Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified before a House committee on Wed that no evidence had yet been found to support collusion.
This entire article is all supposition.
>And there is a plausible case that Mr. Putin succeeded in delivering the presidency to his admirer, Mr. Trump, though it cannot be proved or disproved.
> the now infamous June 2016 approach to Donald Trump Jr. - What exactly transpired during the meeting is still a mystery
>But none of the convictions to date involve conspiracy.
2
The Russians undoubtedly "meddled" in the U.S. election and why wouldn't they. The U.S meddles in Russian (and others) politics all the time even to the point of advocating insurrection. So let's give up the tone of moral outrage. It would be better if this newspaper tried to look at things as a Russian might see them. While I suppose that wouldn't be viewed as being patriotic, it might help produce more positive outcomes for the future. Rather than the U.S. trying to lead by the skill in which their own dirty tricks and bully boy tactics are brought to bear, maybe leading by setting a virtuous example is the better path(?).
8
What scares me even more than Putin is FOX News because without FOX Trump could not have won. FOX is continuing to brainwash its viewers who do not hear the truth of what the Russians did, who do not read The NY Times, and who still believe that Trump is being unfairly investigated by the Justice Dept. FOX does most of Putin's work every day by promoting Trump and his pro-Russian views.
9
Excellent point. How will we save our democracy and fact-based reality when we have propaganda machines like FOX news.
2
The graphics accompanying this article are absolutely brilliant--and absolutely terrifying.
9
the plot unfolded under Obama's zero-deterrence policy term. Uggh. We had zero response as enemies hacked our defense electronics firms, our emails, our NSA files, and our lives. Meanwhile, russia subverted our trust in democracy itself. Shall we let them win? or shall we come together and believe in rule of law and democracy? By "resisting" and announcing "not my President',some of my friends have rejected democracy, thus becoming Russian accomplices, unwittingly. Democracy works.
3
Please stop referring to this man Trump by his title. Downgrade him to his name only. He is not deserving of the title of "President"
Other than that, justifiably or not, Russia is paying back for the decades of US meddling and involvement in its own political and social history. However, it did not mean that we had to fall for it. So rather than blame Putin for his shenanigans, for there is plenty wrong with the US as well, let us take a look at ourselves to see what we have become due mostly to an over reliance on social media outlets. When you arm a country with low college graduation rates with plenty of unverifiable news and tens of media outlets that can instantly beam them on to our laps, then you are going to have problem. When Twitter becomes a validating tool for the New Yorker, then we have a problem on our hands. Lets go fix that first and other things will fix themselves.
This is a great article. Incredible journalism. It lays out the whole story in a way that helps one reconstruct a single, factual narrative from all the fractured pieces of data seen in the news over months.
Two things:
The comments are hidden in the fancy visuals. At first I thought none were allowed.
Can a similar piece be done on why their constituents tolerate and even support Congressional Republicans flagrant disregard of their Constitutional responsibilities to protect our country from foreign interference?
5
The timelines in this excellent report leaves an important question unanswered: were foreign of domestic resources used to unfairly influence the nominating process? How was social media used to that end? Mainstream media, like Fox "News"? Voting for convention "delegates" does not have the security of a general election, and "caucus" states have even less. Your report talks of how Trump "steamrolled" over other qualified Republican candidates to win the nomination. How did this happen? Who was involved?
4
Well researched and written: Chapeau!
It shows how dangerous social media is, when ethics is no londer a consideration.
2
Roughly 16 paragraphs from the end of this long piece we see:
"Mr. Trump’s frustration with the Russian investigation is not surprising. He is right that no public evidence has emerged showing that his campaign conspired with Russia in the election interference or accepted Russian money."
How many readers found this?
5
The thing is Bartolo the Republicans act as if that is the only thing that matters. And if there was no direct conspiracy or money that the rest is no never mind. Oh, and all that is predicated on "yet" at this point. There is no evidence yet.
As Americans we should be very concerned about what happened, the affect, and and how to deal with it (and anyone involved) regardless of whether Trump is directly implicated.
4
"no public evidence has emerged showing that his campaign conspired with Russia".....No public evidence has emerged; I want to see Trump's tax returns.
3
Bartolo, I found that sentence, but I'm puzzled as to why you pointed it out. What of it? The various investigations are far from over.
1
Not a political post but the illustrations for this article were superb.
4
Look, I'm as Conservative as it gets: I voted for every Bush I've seen on a ballot, I've made sure my kids didn't learn liberal propaganda like evolution or history, or go to college, or sponge off government welfare like roads. Heck I even had a grandpappy who fought in WWII (German side, obviously), and even I can see that Russia clearly carried out an extensive campaign to influence the US election to benefit Donald Trump.
2
Claiming the Russians' intent was to assist Trump assumes the Russians wouldn't have interfered if Trump weren't running. This is a stretch. What if, instead of hurting Trump the Russians were interested in discrediting Hillary, just as she attempted to discredit Putin's win? This is a much more plausible reason for their interference. The problem is it doesn't fit the "collusion" narrative.
3
AACNY.....Your posit that the Russian effort was more likely anti Clinton than pro Trump is probably accurate. And while there is no direct public evidence of "collusion" (I think we should wait for the Mueller report)), there is evidence that the Trump campaign was approached by Russian operatives at several levels, and that none of this was reported to the FBI by the Trump campaign. Maybe not collusion but certainly not the kind of behavior we should hope for.
1
AACNY, I think the intelligence agencies have evidence of the Russians' intent to assist Trump. And Putin did say in Helsinki that he had hoped Trump would win. Stating that Russia supported Trump does not in any way assume that they wouldn't have interfered if Trump hadn't run; they just got lucky.
2
"Glenn Greenwald, a founder of the left-leaning news site The Intercept and a champion of government whistle-blowers, has appeared regularly to dismiss revelations about the investigation and decry officials “willing to leak, even at the expense of committing crimes,” in order to damage Mr. Trump."
Glenn Greenwald certainly has his nerve complaining about people "willing to leak" after the part he played in leaking Edward Snowden's hacked documents in order to damage a former president.
6
In an election decided not by the popular vote, but in the Electoral College there are many factors that led to Hillary Clinton's defeat by a mere 70,000 plus votes in three upper Midwest states--Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Certainly, Russian interference was a factor, but so was James Comey, and most importantly so was Hillary Clinton herself with her tainted, uninspiring candidacy with establishment Wall Street credentials and her incredibly poor judgment in choosing a Southern centrist in Sen. Tim Kaine thereby alienating the progressive base of her barely defeated competitor, Bernie Sanders. All these factors doomed her candidacy as did her active support of her husband in attacking women, like Monica Lewinsky, he'd had affairs with and thereby blunting her ability to capitalize on Trump's women issue. As a lifelong Democrat, she must take the full blame for being the worst Democratic candidate in my lifetime (and I'm 78) and putting the very survival of our democracy at risk. This was an election that it took an effort for Sec. Clinton to lose and somehow it happened.
6
Thank you. The situation makes a little more sense now. I do support Mueller. I read comments on newspaper websites and I now understand Russian Trolls. They are out there. At a minimum, Trump's people were duped.
4
Having been born after the purported end of the Cold War, I once wondered what it felt like during the period. You can study it all you want but you can't ever really get a sense of what it was like to live during that period. What people thought and felt; how their fears were toyed with and used against them; how the newspapers reported the events and were complicit in the charade; and just how much propaganda got shoved down the throats of the respective peoples on the opposing sides.
I no longer feel like I need to imagine or wonder what it was like. I'm living it on a day-to-day basis. It's clear we learned nothing from the previous Cold War, and it's embarrassing to see all the same mistakes being repeated. The demonization and the ignorance masquerading as enlightenment. The inconvenient truths ignored for the sake of pushing a narrative that justifies said demonization and ignorance.
We will all look back on this era with profound shame in the years to come, not least of all, those whose jobs it was to enlighten and ask questions being willing accomplices. This is sad.
4
What Russia did was outrageous -- but not unexpected. Putin -- once head of KGB who apprenticed at the East German STASSI, the most sinister of Soviet-era spy agencies -- understands that subterfuge and sabotage are more viable weapons than a suicidal exchange of nuclear missiles.
The dummy Facebook and websites that trashed Hillary relentlessly, the direct organizing of Trump campaign events, the hacking of Podesta and the DNC, the release of stolen documents by WikiLeaks, are just the tip of the iceberg. Below the surface lurks the Megadon of Putin's attack: the actual manipulation of digital voting machines and final vote counts.
It's no surprise that GOP Secretaries of State -- responsible for managing elections and certifying final vote counts -- have shown zero alacrity about falsified votes or rigged machines.
Two companies -- Diebold (rebranded Premiere Election Systems) and Election Systems and Software (founded by the former CEO of Diebold who also is the brother of the current VP of Diebold/PES) -- count 80% of all votes cast. The software used by both PES and ESS machines is based on Microsoft Access Database, a notoriously easy program to hack even by amateurs. Both firms are led by activist GOP ideologues and major donors. Both companies are pushing touchscreen voting, which leaves no paper trail to audit.
2 of the last 4 elections were closely contested.
Between Putin and GOP state election officials, Red states take on a whole new meaning.
11
I trust the timeline goes back further than 2015 on Trump and Russian connections. Of course there is the 2013 beauty booty show where somehow the red carpet was rolled out for Trump, but it seems he already was convenient given the number of Russians holding Trump Tower units through shell companies.
A money laundering haven for those in need. It is apparent that not all the connections have been made at this time. It is highly likely there is a prelude to the events described and I trust the reporters are leaning in to it.
5
The power of this article is in laying out specifically and with great detail the grand story of basically what amounts to a calculated Russian invasion of our country, an attack on our sovereignty. By the last page, I was cringing and looking up (I was on the train to work) at everyone around me who was basically going about their day as if nothing happened. I feel that when 9/11 happened, everyone was aware, everyone was united in acknowledging the extent of the physical assault that had occurred. This "cyber hit," this "attack on our psyche," and "manipulations of our communities" is so strange I don't think we can wrap our heads around it. Reading this article was both terrifying and infuriating. No one--especially members of our government-- is truly acknowledging what has happened.
5
Mr. Putin quoted by Yuval Weber, a Russia scholar, “found for the first time since the collapse of the U.S.S.R. that he has a prospective president of the United States who fundamentally views international issues from the Russian point of view.”
The above quote says it all to us as Americans. Its a matter of fiction becoming reality as Trump with no doubt is the embodiment of the "Manchurian Candidate" who is now President of our country. Both scary and profound for its effect on our National security which seems to be trampled upon by Trump daily.
4
A Consumers Guide to Detecting Russian Trolls.
1. If the comment says the U.S. interferes in lots of elections so it is ok if Russia does it - It is probably a Russian Troll
2. If the comment tries to deflect by blaming Hillary Clinton - it is probably a probably a Russian Troll; and if they blame Obama, it is definitely a Russian Troll.
3. If the comment says that it doesn't matter because no votes were actually changed by the Russians - than you should be on alert.
4. Any suggestion that Putin is not a thug should cause serious concern.
15
So anyone who disagrees with your views or uses an argument which you don't want to hear is a troll? Let's hope the real troll spotters do better than that.
4
Also be on alert if the comment starts with "I'm no fan of Trump, but..."
Trump and Russia have a long history that this article omits. The simple reason for his love for Putin is the well documented fact that Russian oligarchs have been saving Trumps bacon since the 80's. When the banks quit lending, Russian money flowed into Trumps operations and saved him from bankruptcy on multiple occasions, as Jr stated in 2013. Trump's historical dependency on money from Russian kleptocrats constitutes a conflict of interest that the emoluments clause of the constitution was clearly intended to thwart yet has been subverted by a compromised justice department and judiciary in order to protect the radical agenda of the American oligarchs that now control the GOP. Voter registration purges, voter suppression, cuts to Social Security & Medicare, rewriting state constitutions as well as the US constitution and the privatization of everything, this will be the triumph of the oligarchy if the GOP retains its majority. In fact, the flood of dark money into US politics has become so extreme that it has even given pause to the supreme court's conservative activists who have now closed the disclosure loophole. Again, the old adage 'follow the money' is key to understanding the politics of the moment.
21
SLB - Oh boy you really hit all The Democratic Party talking points, Voter registration purges and voter suppression, you will be amply rewarded by your local Democratic Party chairman.
You even threw in rewriting state constitutions as well as the US constitution.
Hmm, State Constitutions are always undergoing slight revisions, even those have to be approved by a state-wide vote. The US Constitution, hmm, what revision are you referring to? The US Constitution has not been amended for many years.
Enlighten me?
The Democrats are the Russian's useful idiots, just like during Soviet times, except this time they are unwitting useful idiots. Russian agents fed Christopher Steele the dossier who fed it to the DNC and the Obama Admin's FBI. It fit Trump to a T, and so they swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. It had to be true, except it wasn't. The objective of the Russians was to sow political discord. They were successful beyond their wildest dreams. The Russian agents that fed the dossier to Christopher Steele have been laughing their you-know-whats off ever since.
6
I hope the readership views few critical flaws in the reporting...
-It is completely dishonest to assume that Jack & Jill from Nebraska, Mich, TX, etc voted for Trump because they viewed Facebook posts, or due to any Russian influence other than their own opinion of Trump vs Clinton
- Russian hacking campaign started long before Trump was a being a candidate leave alone President...
- Russians hacked DNC... with complete impunity and with actually order not to counter from Obama Admin...
- Russians hacked DNC... the content revealed total disrespect & corruption of DNC towards their own voters...
- More than a year of Investigation brought zero collusion factual info... None of the conviction even relate to campaign as known today...
- Article is implying in not so few words that Trump was actually receptive of the overtures, again without facts but just as result of his puzzling behavior towards Putin...
- Article disregarding Trumps measures taking against Russia by far exceeding anything Obama Admin done, including lethal arms to Ukraine...
All being said, Trump's positioning at Helsinki meeting is completely disheartening from the merits of the meeting to its closing press conference... His not mincing words with anyone including own security services but intentionally avoiding calling Russia what it deserves shows that he's likely owned by them on some level...
Implying suppositions for facts gives basis to calling the Left media Fake News....
6
One of the things a young con artist learns early is that the last people likely to turn them in are the people who bought in on the scam in the first place. Weather it's ignorance, embarrassment, an obsession with wealth or reward or a combination of these, the scammer will walk away and be free to perpetrate his con on someone else again and again. The rare wistle blower will be outnumbered by those who still want to believe that they get drowned out. Con men pick their mark carefully and manipulate circumstances for success. Mr Trump learned these lessons well and has built a career and an empire on them. Sure he got caught some times and paid some fines but he manages to walk away and continues the scam. Sadly the trump voter is all that a con man would look for as a mark. Ignorant, obsessessed with wealth that is eluding them and embarrassed that they have wound up many rungs below what they thought they deserved in life. As defeat knocked them down they looked for a savior and when trump came along, telling them how unfair the system was to them, how he was going to right those wrongs. Well the hook was setm the con was on and they got realed in. Now, even though life has not gotten any better for them, their savior continues to be exposed as a con man, they cling to the hope that their savior will pull them up. They will be the last ones who will get that they have been conned and the last to admit it. The rest of us must get that and move on without them.
88
Even in Nixon's most exposed and darkest hour, 20% of Americans thought he was just dandy. He didn't even attempt to pull the big con Trump did. So yes, we should move on without these lost boys, but we still have to contend with the disaster that is our media environment, which generates more chickens for the plucking every day.
1
I found this reporting to be breathtaking. If there has been a more thorough piecing together and documentation of the Russian's successful attempt to upset our democratic process, I haven't seen it. Kudos!
The Russian Cyber Invasion is a fait accompli. But that's not the only story in town. Corruption at the highest levels will be what brings this administration to its knees. Corruption and a misguided notion that the president is king which leads that idiot to attempt to obstruct justice virtually every time he opens his mouth.
Trumps supporters will never give up on him. Our attention needs to be (as it always needed to be) on Mitch McConnell and the rest of the unrepentant Republican evil-doers in Congress. This would not have happened so successfully had they not shown themselves to be willing to ignore our own constitution during President Obama's two terms.
We were ripe for the picking. And they are still at it.
18
Is it death of Democracy in USA? I have been trying to wrap my mind around all this Putin/Trump love stories or scandal whichever way you would like to see it, if it is true then Putin's Russia "hacked" US presidential election and got his puppet planted as the POTUS. Trump of course everyone knew wanted badly to be Billionaire all his life would naturally have idolized the multi billionaire like Putin, but regardless of the that if all the allegations are true wasn't actually elected the President in all fairness and has committed big time treason.
Regardless if you are democrat or republican, conservative or liberal wether you voted FOR or AGAINST Trump, shouldn't every American citizen be concerned with this, being witness to murder of very Democracy.
6
Why enforce laws in US if a foreign entity is your ally? Is the real enemy of our nation Putin or Republicans? Just look at what Senator Heller said about the charge of attempted rape, it's just a "hiccup". Well Senator Heller ,may someone hiccup on you. And Republicans, may justice have vengeance on the GOP. If Senator Collins votes for Kavanaughs elevation to the highest court,It be traitorous to her gender. Let all those who do not adhere to due process of the law ,suffer from the the twisted justice they have created.
5
Ask yourself, "What are the odds that Trump behaved well while in Moscow?"
Trump's shameless behavior within the US has cost him six-figure sums in hush money paid to porn stars and playmates -- but who thinks that Putin would take payments in cash?
3
Unbelievable that the New York Times would pass off this opinion piece as reporting. For one thing, Donald Trump was joking when he invited Russia to provide the missing emails. Unbiased reporting would say that. These "reporters" did not.
8
The NY Times provides lots of hyperbolic assertions and stylish panache, but little evidence. Stylish assertions that provide no evidence is the hallmark of a postmodern education. Therefore it is no surprise that the NY Times and the "educated" left so easily falls for this rhetoric.
They never thought she would lose...
5
And as if to prove the point of this article, the troll comments are running hot and heavy trying to attack this extremely well-researched and documented article. Democracy is still under assault and we are not prepared to meet it.
21
The only people interested in this speculation are the people that did not vote for Trump. The losers.
2
Wonderful photo illustration in the banner. How many other Matryoshka dolls are there in the Trump Russia scandal?
2
"He is right that no public evidence has emerged showing that his campaign conspired with Russia in the election interference or accepted Russian money."
You're, uh.... You're joking, right?
This extends beyond lazy journalism; this is just a blatant lie.
3
Careful - Of course Lisa Page (FBI Lawyer) said investigators still could not say whether there was collusion. This is from an interview before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees in mid-July.
1
The "President" is a Russian asset and no one cares. End of story.
5
Based on what evidence?
4
“The ‘mountain of evidence’ claimed in paragraph 5 turns out to be "no public evidence" in paragraph 183 near the end of the piece. But 99% of the readers will not walk through the whole mess and the 1% that do will likely miss the contradiction.”
Moon of A
8
Those two statements are referring to different things, though. The "mountain" of evidence contradicts Trump's claim that the investigation is a hoax or witch hunt. The investigation is manifestly, obviously not a hoax or a witch hunt. The proof that the investigation is genuine and justified is found in the numerous guilty pleas, guilty verdicts, and well-supported indictments handed down so far.
2
Has anyone done an in-depth interview with Jill Stein about her involvement with Russia? The votes she siphoned off of Hillary in the rust belt are what really made a difference in the 2016 election. Why was she dining with Putin, Flynn and others? Did she get any help, too?
16
This is a sordid and yet extremely sad tale of how the most powerful country in the world fell for the VERY SIMPLE tricks of a thug!
For a VERY small, and yet very safe, investment of resources, the return has been stunning!!
What he has achieved would have been IMPOSSIBLE with any kind of an overt belligerent confrontation - let alone a military one - that would have been FAR more dangerous and costly to him in terms of men and materials! This was pretty much risk-free!
Putin MUST be wallowing in the mud of joy so cheerfully that NO other US adversary in history - EVER - had been able to emulate in the past!
He can simply sit back and enjoy - perhaps in one of his several luxurious dachas or yachts - while sipping from a glass of cognac (vodka will not do), the fruits of his negligible investment! Almost certainly there will be his trademark smirk on his face while he watches Americans engrossed in an endless fratricide!
His handiwork was simply a catalyst. To this unbiased observer, the majority of Republican lawmakers are only too eager to improve upon what Putin started.
Regardless of the above what is even MORE remarkable is that a LARGE number of Americans STILL do NOT believe what happened to them.
Go figure!!!
8
This piece is excellent. But for some reason, it wants to conclude that this massive deployment of resources, this mighty flexing of tech, psych warfare, and espionage muscle, has as it aim the 2016 election. Why so narrow a purpose? These and all other Russian foreign policy assets, clandestine or overt, fully formed or in beta testing, governmental or privatized, are aimed at subverting the West and breaking its alliances. It is much bigger than one election or even all elections. It is much bigger than Trump. The only important question is this: are we doing anything at all about it?
13
doesn't it almost always boil down to power
brokers wanting to "stick it" to each other?
haven't enemies needed each other, since time immemorial,
to justify their own existence [and a well-equipped military]?
djt's predecessor made the mistake of reducing russia
to the position of a mere "regional power". offending?
ever since then, vladimir putin has been trying EVERYthing
in his power to prove to the united states: he can untie them.
1
With such an out of touch with reality platform, I'm only surprised Trump didn't win with an even larger electoral vote. This reminds me of the 1972 election of President Nixon burying George McGovern.
The Russians could not have changed anyone's mind on either candidate.
Show this article to any Trump voter and they'll either dismiss it as lies or dismiss the importance of caring about foreign election interference. The sad truth is that 40% of Americans don't really care that Trump was elected illegitimately with the help of the Russians. They don't care that he is corrupt. All they care about is getting their vicarious "white victory" even while Trump is exploiting them economically.
14
This is one extraordinary piece of reporting. I hope every single person in congress is made to read this.
11
The Trump family did not realize, obvious to everyone else on the planet, that when they went from the world of business to the world of politics the rules were completely different. Yes, they were accustomed to working with Russians on their building projects/scams, and yes, they were newbies to the high stakes political games of an imminent party nominee. Both of these are true.
However, I have always heard that ignorance of the law is no excuse. Someone in the Trump family, probably Don Jr. and Jared, should be in serious legal jeopardy and ultimately be punished or we will know we now live in a true kleptocracy. And ignorance of this stature has no business operating out of our White House. Ever.
5
So still no evidence that Russia subverted the election, but we get the unsupported claims about Russia hacking the DNC. Didn't happen. And very strong evidence points to the Wikileaks source being a DNC insider who simply gave the emails to Wikileaks or an intermediary.
But now we're supposed to be scared by a banner on a bridge? Lots of people of unfurled banners from East River (NYC) bridges over the last 50 years. Have any of them taken over the USA?
5
Though there is no concrete evidence of it so far, I am convinced that the Russians hacked into voting machines and changed the totals to favor Trump. We need to make sure that there is a paper backup of every ballot that is cast in the next election.
4
This subversion by the Russians all took place under the watchful eye of Obama and his top-notch FBI at the time. Regardless of the outcome of the election, the only place to put the blame for outside interference is on the government at the time that it took place. End of story.
It's not so much the plot that bothers me as it is knowing that ~40% of the American electorate either don't believe such a plot existed or don't care.
Even more dispiriting, however, is knowing that ~1% of the American voters will knowingly profit from the plot.
9
what we have is book after book after book with more forthcoming.. all with more or less the same portrayal from differing perspectives [a recent one, House of Trump, suggests an ongoing Trump-Russian association dating back decades, enveloping nearly everyone, with a ? of kompromat dating to 1986.. hello?]. In context, this then is one strand in a web; a facet, actually an outgrowth of that association. It's interesting too that the 'i' word.. impeachment.. has crept in from the far fringes to more considered discussion. Trump will continue with the 'playbook', Trash Comey, Mueller, the FBI, 'the press', the Judiciary. and frankly is likely to become louder, and likely too, more dangerous. If we need 'adults in the room', maybe we need to put the baby up for adoption, you know?
2
If I was Trump and I wanted free notoriety, and I hadn't colluded with the Russians, and there's zero chance that I could be incriminated, you know what I would do? I would interfere with the investigation to the fullest extent, I would kick up a huge fuss, I would fraternize with the Russians, I would misbehave in every possible way. In short I would behave exactly as Trump had, and all for the free publicity and the free lulz.
It's because name-recognition is a huge asset in the upcoming 2020 election, and why pay for ads if you don't have to?
1
This article (and most other reporting) totally misses another important Trump-Russia connection: St. Petersburg to Cambridge Analytica to Trump's digital group and Facebook working together in Austin.
12
The illustrations (art/photography) are outstanding--as is the article. Thank you NYT again.
9
I suggest an important missing component was the effect of sanctions on Russia following the murder of 297 passengers of MH-17 by a Russian missile fired from a Russian BUK manned by Russian soldiers masquerading as civilians.
After the sanctions the Russian GDP collapsed by 40% from 2013 to 2016 $2.2 trillion to $1.3 trillion. For a comparison, the US GPD shrunk 8%. Even today, the Russian GDP is only $1.75 trillion. Putin's wealth continues to growth.
I'm working with a couple startup teams to reduce the ease and velocity with which disinformation can be dispersed in media.
There are several problems, not the least of which is that there is a profit motive in the US thanks to advertising and product sales. The Nazis and Soviet propagandists would be incredulous about the possibilities for ads subsidizing disinformation.
As the reporter notes, a mark who has been conned is loathe to admit he's been conned. Whether the mark is an investor in Ponzi or Madoff, or a Floridian supporter of Trump, they are certain that if only the con can continue everything will be revealed to prove them right.
5
Memo to those who get their new from the likes of Facebook: Stop reading Facebook for the news! I am "nominally" on Facebook (I have an account and follow some friends and family) but when I read the news I go to legitimate sources. The Wall Street Journal, for one.
I am constantly astounded that this Facebook issue really matters (at least in the minds of the Media and such. Anyone who doesn't pick up a newspaper or even go to some websites that provide news (other than the obvious overtly partisan ones) learns nothing.
Read folks! Real news!
3
One overriding question: how to minimise the brainwashing of the ordinary masses by the self-centered, irresponsible, manipulative "leaders"?
Is this a global issue for the whole mankind--especially, in view of the power of the "Information Age and Culture"?
3
ASTOUNDING, AMAZING DETAIL: Thank you, America, for a free press today. The full scale graphics tell the story in a most undeniable manner. Please allow other papers to reprint this today, tomorrow and forever.
8
Our government and Silicon Valley have to get serious about this threat.
We seem to be behind when it comes to protecting our country from such attacks via the internet. Instead of a Space Force, we need a Cyber Security Force.
7
Reading this piece, and the Times over the past two years, I wonder if it will ever be able to recover from this debacle. Reporting like this is so extraordinarily myopic and gullible, trying so hard to exaggerate Russian trolling efforts, trying even harder to whitewash federal and Democrat wrongdoing. How can you do a piece on election malfeasance and not mention Steele one time? Strzok only mentioned once, in reference to being a target of Sean Hannity rather than multiple federal investigations.
My only question at this point is whether they're really this gullible, or they're actually complicit to some extent.
2
I was as excited to see this story, as I was disappointed to learn what it contained.
To me, I felt as if I was being told what to conclude--what to think--well before much of anything had been "unraveled."
Isn't good reporting about helping readers reach their own conclusions, rather than selling them a point-of-view? That's what made Fox News. It looks to me that the Times is sadly following suit.
5
There WAS a plot to subvert the election ... only it wasn't the Russians. It was the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and corrupt officials in the Obama IC, DOJ, and FBI.
That's the REAL story, replete with spies, entrapment, illegal searches, leaking classified information, abuse of power, and fraud committed on the FISA court to spy on American citizens, sedition. Makes Watergate look like Romper Room.
But alas ... NYT is willfully blind to the biggest political scandal in American History, choosing instead to flak for the conspiracy. What a shame.
5
Countries are an illusion, there are no countries, only powerful organizations that cross borders and steal profits unchallenged.
2
Now Trump insists on the FBI providing specifics of the investigation and will get away with it. And Kavanagh will be voted in by the crooked Republicans. So hoping the news keeps up the pressure like this. Disgusting about the banner, the proof of the connection between the Russian involvement in our election and their connection to Putin. This disgusting behavior by politicians is inexcusable. The voters are worse who keep supporting them. Thanks to the New York Times for pursuing this corruption.
3
It surprises me that we give Russia this much credit. Hillary Clinton has now lost the Presidency to a one term Senator and a Television Celebrity with absolutely no political experience. The DNC used a public gmail address which can be hacked with software you can download for free.
Her husband was the Rhodes Scholar. She was not. If it wasn't for Bill Clinton she would not have been considered at all. The reality is the average American has read about 8 public scandals the Clintons have been involved since 1992. 8 is too many when most people since 2009 have lost almost all of their wealth and the Clinton's have made $120 Million since Bill has left office. I think it is time for everyone to accept that Hillary Clinton is not the type of personality that the average American trusts when she is seen on TV and presenting herself. The book, "Clinton Cash", if even 20% is true, highlights what these two people have turned politics into in this country. You can sell policy through public speaking and enrich yourselves if you align with the right dictators. "Catastrophe Capitalism" is the modern day Grave Robbery of the 1800's and these two have perfected it. In an election you choose the lesser of two evils if able and the American public made that choice. Losing is losing whether graciously or not. Obviously this newspaper and Democrats in general have been the most ungracious. Instead of complaining who is your next candidate?
5
Back in 2016 many of Trump’s aides weren’t convinced that he would win. But they “were happy to meet the Russians because they thought it might lead to moneymaking deals after the election.” As the indictments and guilty pleas of four former advisers show, greed proved their undoing and they were not careful.
Trump for some years, “attracted attention from Russian conservatives with Kremlin ties." A Putin ally named Konstantin Rykov began promoting Trump “as a future president in 2012” and created a Russian-language website in 2015 to support his candidacy.
Surely Russia must have known that Trump had been flirting with the presidency since 1987 when he joked about asking Oprah Winfrey to be his running mate for the 1988 race. Although he didn’t run, it couldn’t have escaped the Kremlin’s scutiny, when he travelled to Moscow in 2013 to hold the Miss Universe contest. Nobody knows what happened then. Perhaps it could explain why he is so beholden to Putin.
6
How can anyone not believe this? Readers here wonder.
Well, there is a story today that Bob Woodward just said he was unable to find evidence to confirm this, in two years of trying hard to find it.
That is what the other side is hearing today. That is the sort of thing that explains why they don't accept this.
Did he say it? Is it true? That isn't my point here. My point is that there are reasons we don't understand each other.
This is dangerous.
Not to worry. Most of the negative posts here are from paid Russian Trolls.
5
This is a wonderful article about an extraordinarily dispiriting topic for those of us who still care about our democracy. Thank you. It is correct that we cannot prove that Russia gave the election to Trump. On the other hand, we can and should consider the probabilities. Given what has been described here, the probability is significant, i.e., greater than 50%, that the Russians pushed Trump over the line in what was, after all, a very close election. For example, the steady and prolonged release of the damaging emails over the final months and weeks of the election was very effective. If we also take into account the other events that were peripherally related to Russia--e.g., the last minute, inappropriate Comey announcements vis-à-vis the Clinton email investigation, with no corresponding announcement about the Trump Russia conspiracy investigation--then the likelihood that Russia elected Trump is almost certainly much higher than 50%.
8
Nina L. Khrushcheva, great-granddaughter of the Soviet premier Nikita S. Khrushchev, said that Putin’s successful meddling in the 2016 election must be “the envy” of his predecessors, making their “dream” come true, which “will be studied by the K.G.B.’s successors for a very long time.”
She fails to mention what her great-grandfather said on October 16, 1960. Nikita Khrushchev addressed the UN before he returned to the Soviet Union. In closing his speech, he made the famous proclamation that the US would one day be defeated without a shot being fired. Unfortunately he had been proven right, 56 years later – Putin installed a Kremlin stooge on November 8, 2016.
16
Thanks to the New York Times for this fabulous, easy-to-understand accounting of Russian interference and Con Don/republican cooperation. The corruption is breathtaking and VERY frightening. It's hard to believe that OUR elected leaders of all persuasions have allowed OUR United States of America to deteriorate this far. However, WE THE PEOPLE must get and keep our heads out of the sand and refuse to be lulled by any supposed "good" news by The Con Don, Robber Baron republicans and/or their operatives and news organizations that try to stay on the fence to protect their "ratings".
Now NYT, please run the same kind of article on all the social goods that have been undone and that the corrupt operatives plan to undo to destroy true democracy in America. They are attacking every single social good 24/7. They are following a 40+ year plan to take over.
WE THE PEOPLE - together - are the only ones who can/will stop them and NOW is the time.
8
This is a marvelous work of connecting dots and giving readers a narrative of all that has happened since the summer of 2016. However, two comments:
1. The article does not touch upon Trump's business links to Russian oligarchs, notably that nation's banks. I think many Americans believe that Trump is deeply in debt to these operators, which helps explain his attitude towards V. Putin. Is the absence of any reporting on this angle because it isn't true, or because it hasn't yet been factually nailed down? And in that regard, does not Mueller's portfolio allow him to search where he might -- including Trump's tax returns? That, to me, will be the thunderclap.
2. If Manafort, et al, joined the Trump campaign in order to drum up prospective new Russian business, then surely they must have had some assurances -- verbal or otherwise -- that "doing deals" was going to become the accepted norm in the Trump White House. It suggests that people around Trump (Don, Jr. comes to mind) were either tacitly or openly courting people with extensive business contacts in authoritarian states -- not just Russia. After all, Trump is still operating his business out of the Oval Office, knowing full well that there is no one to hold truth to power.
I've long believed that Trump was stunned that he won the Presidency, but smart enough to realize that he had just won access to do enriching deals without limitations via his family and friendly Russian lenders. That's what is still going on.
16
CNN and MSNBC both reported on this today.
Please, Good People, forward this to everyone you know, post on facebook and other social media and take a tweet viral.
WE THE PEOPLE - whose lives and democracy are being destroyed 24/7 under this corrupt regime - must wake up and wake up our friends, co-workers and relatives.
NOW. While we still have a democracy to protect. NOW. Before they can start WW3.
17
By the way, did you notice that the Dow Jones supposedly hit a new record since January today?
Yes, of course it did. The Russian, American and other International Mafia Robber Barons are moving their stolen wealth around to try to lull people into thinking the economy is great. Just remember, those roughly 1500 people around the world can take the global financial system down in a heartbeat, too.
Do not be fooled - again.
10
Good reporting and federal and state governments need to take measures to block foreign meddling future elections.
What about the continuance of the electoral college system, though? Hillary Clinton won nearly 3 million more popular votes than Donald Trump, yet still lost the election. Power to the people, anyone?
14
Ohh look! Shiny pictures of Putin face eyeball inside Donald head. More undeniable proof the Russians stole the election from Hillary.
3
This article is deeply disturbing. More disturbing are some of the comments posted by diehard Trump supporters -- and a few useful idiots on the left. Deplorable indeed. These willing dupes deserve Trump and all the fallout from the most successful intelligence operation ever conducted against the United States. Most of us don't. Come November, we can start taking our country back; we can take first steps toward draining the swamp and making America great again.
24
I'm not a trump supporter, and I don't think of myself as an "idiot" or a "dupe". I didn't make any of those comments you didn't like, but if I had, and I didn't happen to agree with you, I would not like to be called an idiot. I find your attitude frighteningly reminiscent of McCarthyism. Why does all debate and critical thought about this issue need to be shut down?
Czar Nicholas funded the anarchist cell that assassinated Arch Duke Ferdinand, precipitating WW1. The Czar's plan succeeded, throwing Europe into turmoil but in the end it didn't save the Russian monarchy. If Czar Nicholas had spent his energies modernizing the Russian economy his family may not have wound up dead. I see sad parallels to Putin's obsessive inferiority complex, his rancor and Russia's corrupt antiquated economy today. Making the rest of the world look and feel bad does little to help the Russian people, but Putin is an angry little man with one clear unwavering goal: Getting even.
10
don't forget to follow the money (Trump finances)
7
Putin is deathly afraid of Hillary Clinton. As Secretary of State under Obama Clinton knew all the weaknesses of Putin, his tenuous hold on power and his ability to wage war. Putin only got his power from the oligarchs. He promised them they could make billions more for them by letting him be President of Russia. But he also knew that if Clinton became President she would apply so many sanctions against Russia that it would be almost impossible for the oligarchs to make and keep any monies. If that were to happen Putin knew that would end his reign in Russia. That's the only reason Putin interfered with the U.S. election.
7
Dr. Jill Stein's role in all this is still odd............
16
This article does not mention Fusion GPS, and leaves out Glen Simpson's meetings with Veselnitskaya before & after she met with DT Jr.. Why?
5
Operant paralogisms for trump supporters:
A. I am not a Russian stooge. B. I support Trump. C. Therefore trump cannot be a Russian stooge, Despite all evidence to the contrary.
A. I love America, and only can love what is good for America B. I love Tump. C. Trump likes Putin D. Therefore, Putin is good for America, Despite all evidence to the contrary.
A. I love Jesus, and godly folks like me only support other godly men B. I support Trump C. Therefore, trump must be a godly man DESPITE all evidence to the contrary. (else how could I support him?)
and so on.
These paralogisms parlay initial support into existential battles and make Trump supporters believe that all evidence that undermines trump's godliness, patriotism, strength, veracity, etc, actually challenges their godliness, patriotism, strength, veracity, which they know to be beyond question. Thus, this 'evidence' must be false. This false evidence is a sign of a conspiracy; in the media, in the fbi, by the democrats, etc.
How to lead others out of this logic trap? Especially when these are the paralogisms that are being carefully fed and channeled by the right wing media, evangelicals on a Supreme Court hunt, and other interested parties and politicians.
17
This is great reporting. This info would have been more helpful in 2016, but instead the NYT chose to relentlessly remind the public about HRC's email server.
5
Putin is a vicious, thin-skinned kleptocrat, and history will record the damage he's done to his own country as well as ours. He wouldn't have to be so constantly furious if he weren't so constantly doing rotten things.
9
This piece is a gift to what remains of our democracy.
We get a daily shard of disturbing news, each a revelation of something more corrupt than the last, until we cannot help but feel wearied by it all. Numb.
But here, the constant barrage of alarming news---
each disparate piece like a sharp fragment from a broken vase--
has been carefully swept up and reassembled;
each jagged fragment put back in place to reveal
the pattern in the whole.
And what an ugly whole it is.
Reporting like this in-depth Times piece
can't replace an informed populace,
it can only inform it.
These reporters, and this institution,
have performed a critical and patriotic duty.
I'm hoping the rest of us also take our turn,
with whatever tools each has to work with.
If Trump continues his march toward fascism,
we won't be able to say we didn't know.
We may yet get out from under this giant, orange thumb,
And if we do, it will be in no small part due to the courageous
assembling of facts carried out by institutions like the paper you are reading,
At the moment, these institutions are under the most sustained and vicious of attacks. They are not perfect institutions by any means,
but they are doing right by us at this difficult time.
Thank you for doing your work, guys and gals.
Pieces like this are like a pair of glasses;
a critical gift toward a defense of the greater good.
10
I am always fascinated when articles like this one appear in the times. As we beat the drum on Russian interference (which may very well have happened, and should be met with a very meaningful response, if it did), I pay attention to Russian claims of perceived American meddling in its affairs. I am not saying this has happened, but if it has, shouldn't that be acknowledged, so we can both try to move on, and start anew? Perhaps this cannot happen with Putin in power, but my point is, running around making it appear that America is always in the right, and never engages in any activities to sway political processes in other countries is comical. We have had agreements over the years to limit nuclear arsenals. How about a cyber warfare convention that begins an international process of limiting and regulating cyber incursions? Perhaps we are not ready to cede our activities in this area because we like having having cyber warfare as a tool in our chest. Imagine a world in which America reclaims its moral leadership on many fronts, including the rules of cyber engagement.
These facts already show the extensive conspiracy been between Trump and staff with Russia.
At the same time this outlines the outrageous lies and denials by Trump himself and staff.
What strikes me is that Mueller’s investigation will surely reveal even more facts of the Trump / Russia conspiracy.
The light of truth will shine brightly, and the dark cloud of shame will hang over these individuals while they rot in jail.
Absolutely, reprehensible that an American would sacrifice our great country to such an extent for their own personal gain.
4
Agreed. And yet it seems there's something more than personal gain alone motivating the Trump Family and their underlings. It's almost an anti-American spite, a vicious sort of screw-you attitude toward the very government that Trump was seeking to lead. It's the reason some Trump supporters wear shirts saying they'd rather be Russians than Democrats. The top goal seems to be harming liberals, even if it means harming the country.
Just a small criticism concerning translation accuracy...I believe your reporters made a mistake here: "He also applied to the candidate the Russian word yarkii, which means “colorful” or “flamboyant” but which some reports mistranslated as “brilliant,” an assessment that Mr. Trump immediately began repeating." If you look up "yarkii" (якрий in any Russian/English dictionary--I'm using Katzner's, based on American English) you'll find that the first definition is indeed "bright" or "brilliant". The Russian Wiktionary, curated by Russians for Russians, defines it thusly: "1. giving a strong light and therefore very noticeable. 2. (about color) light and saturated 3. very noticeable, extraordinary, outstanding, making a strong impression." While it may be possible that context allows for a different interpretation, your link to the ABC news source doesn't provide that context. It seems more likely that everyone else got the translation right and ABC got it wrong. And of course, this makes all the difference, because "colorful" can be interpreted as derisive, while "bright" or "brilliant" could only be interpreted positively unless the context of sarcasm is present. It's pretty obvious that Putin wasn't being sarcastic, but highly complementary.
1
I made a typo with my Cyrillic spelling: it should read "яркий" not "акрий".
1
...and the cyberwar continues. Fake accounts and news and divisive campaigns continue to plague Facebook, Twitter and other social platforms. The US Gov't can't or won't do anything about it.
The GOP lies back and lets Putin's puppet do as he wishes, and the only hope of checks and balances is an engaged electorate to take control of the House and Senate away from them.
"...but her emails."
13
Bernie Sanders could well have won the election as I feel he would have siphoned away many unhappy republicans and kept a majority of democrats. I wonder if the dems shot themselves in the foot or if there was a massive social media campaign helping her unbeknownst to her as it was obvious how divided us dems became.
3
Bob Woodward who cannot be suspected of being a Trump dupe and who has exposed so many flaws and foibles in the WH argued that he saw no signs of collusion. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/09/14/woodward_no_evidence_... or as Peter Strozk of the FBI said to his (maybe) lover Lisa Page, both of the FBI "there's no big there, there". Does it mean Trump is clean? No he lies, cheats and does not know much about anything, he's a sociopath and dangerous for the US and the world. But the collusion story does not hold water, it is, as Chomsky says a joke for those who do intervene in US elections are well-known (US business & a few foreign lobbies). Robert Parry, a well-respected journalist, deconstructed a lot of what is said in this article before his death and three academics have convincingly shown the result of the election was not the result of Russian intervention or Comey's shady dealings: Thomas Ferguson, Paul Jorgensen, and Jie Chen, “Industrial Structure and Party Competition in an Age of Hunger Games: Donald Trump and the 2016 Presidential Election,” Institute for New Economic Thinking, Working Paper 66, January 2018.
1
"argued that he saw no signs of collusion."......Which is rather different than saying there was no collusion.
1
What is missing from this incredibly biased and ridiculous narrative are the actual important facts - that were of course purposefully omitted:
1. The undisputed fact that the hacked documents were genuine and showed that the DNC colluded with the liberal media and the HRC campaign to rig the primary in favor of the anointed candidate. You would think a story on election meddling would include this undisputed fact.
2. The undisputed facts surrounding agent Strzok and the manufacturing of false information to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. Again you would think an honest discussion on election meddling would include these facts.
4
1. The DNC has the right to select their candidates however they decide, as does the RNC. Bernie Saunders is an Independent, not a Democrat.
2. What false information was used to obtain a FISA warrant? Please elaborate, or are you using Fox News fabricated talking points.
7
I think it's wise to stay off any kind of social media until after November, and possibly forever. The best approach at this point is to leave the whole add based model to die and hope something better comes in its place. For the time being, I'll cast my lot with quality long form journalism like this piece.
4
A gift horse for the Republicans, a Trojan horse for the Republic. Trump will never be able to cast aside his ego and look this creature in the mouth. The rest of the Republican leadership failed to live up to their moment and deserve to be swept away this November. Don't wait for history to judge this moment. Time present and time past are both present in time future. Judge for yourself in the voting booth.
6
What's clear is that the Republicans, either wittingly or unwittingly, have become a tool for the Russians to undermine our democracy. That they are not doing their utmost to repel this act of war on us is a betrayal of their sworn oaths to uphold and defend the United States, and should be considered treason.
It's a shameful irony that so many who voted for and support Trump and the Republicans call themselves patriots and "proud Americans", when their support is propping up a Russian puppet state. In their zeal for their "tribe" to win, they've sold themselves out to our enemy.
18
The hysteria over the silly bit of Russian meddling in the US election has been engineered to mask a soft coup by the intelligence and military industrial complex and the foreign policy establishment.
As most know, US meddling in foreign elections is huge.
And Israel routinely interfere in US elections, as the US does in theirs.
Us elections are traditionally bought by the highest bidder. The money spent by US political parties, candidates and special interest groups makes whatever Russians spent look below paltry.
There has been a “soft coup”. The Generals, the Foreign Policy Establishment, Intelligence and Military Industrial Complex RULE in Washington.
GWBush, Obama and Trump campaigned on less military intervention and no regime change. They all caved to the “deep state” forces that see military action as necessary to further the national interest of the global elite.
That military action is taking the revenue needed for solving very real domestic problems and making the US less safe, the world more unstable and creating much more hate.
The NYT is selling Russia hysteria just like they sold the public on Iraqi WMD.
If the US public continues to be so gullible, there will never be a president able to control his foreign policy agenda.
I did not vote for the warmongering, Wall Street supporting Hillary.
I was a Bernie fan who voted for Jill Stein.
And now I say "Go Trump!"
Trump is the wrench thrown into the gears of the deep state machine that is killing the future.
5
The rest is connecting the dots, gathering evidence, and process.
Another example of public service by the NYT (and hopefully soon by Mr. Mueller and his team)....thank you.
7
This is great investigative reporting BUT the sad fact is that republicans continue and will continue to refute or minimize the facts. Our democracy is devolving (already has) to system that is run (and benefits) by big money interests. At the same time, our beautiful republican senators (I'm talking to you Shelby) (trying to sound like Trump here) visit and get their picture made with Vladimir...totally disgusting.
2
Thank you, NYT, for the painstaking work of putting all this information together. So much of what has happened the past few years has seemed like a jumble. The clarity and context of this article is so important.
8
Outstanding reporting but heartbreaking. Mr. Putin didn't use an economics argument as often cited to support the Trump candidacy but race,religion and misogyny. How sad that Putin was able to identified America Achilles' heels but Trump voters could not.
8
I fail to understand why we (and especially the press) continue to talk about all of this in past tense, or as if it was a singular event. It is ongoing and it is worldwide. It is now omnipresent.
That is all excluding the fact that the Russian Czar has his puppet in the White House whom is hacking Democracy itself.
17
I haven't brought myself to read the article yet - the truths that we already know at the surface level (without this detailed investigative piece) are so disturbing and damning.
However, I wanted to laud the incredible graphic artistry of the minds and talents behind the two main illustrations accompanying the text. The old adage about a picture telling a thousand words really fits here: the images are chilling and symbolically precise.
8
What I find peculiar is in the 5th paragraph it is stated that there was mountains of evidence that there was collusion but in Lisa Pages testimony to Congress a few weeks ago she said that there wasn't any evidence and Peter Strozck in a text when considering joining the Mueller team thought it would be a waste of time because there really wasn't any there there. If this is true, then didn't Rosenstein initiate a special counsel investigation with no evidence? No wonder there is confusion. Who are we to believe?
6
Lost in all of this Russia paranoia is the fact that we continue to undermine our democracy ourselves by maintaining institutions like the electoral college (to say nothing of gerrymandering and access-limiting measures like photo ID checks and Tuesday voting). For the second time in only 16 years, we've had a wildly incompetent person ascend to the presidency after decisively losing the popular vote to his opponent. We look ridiculous.
8
If Americans could easily register and vote (in person, over the course of several days, by mail), and they turned out, it would be impossible for an info war, even one as sophisticated as the Russians ran, to sway an election.
3
Incredible detail, power and information in this comprehensive piece, but the lasting sentiment - that the country is undoubtedly divided in its attitude towards Russia, the credibility of Mueller's investigation and the effectiveness of the current President - is concerning. Above all, the "New Red Scare" the article speaks of truly feels disturbingly reminiscent of a time in America that we would much rather forget.
My hope is that we find our way before we realize that we are a part of reoccurring history.
2
Congratulations on an outstanding, well-researched piece of journalism, accessible to those with a Times subscription and the desire to read and assess things in an objective manner. Over the coming years, as we distance ourselves from the "noise" of the current crises, it will be vitally important to make this information - and lessons derived from it - more readily accessible to the broader voting population. I'm hoping that a well-prepared narrative from the Mueller investigation will positively contribute to that too.
12
Not on this timeline was the strange popularity of Putin at the CPAC meeting in 2014. Putin was frequently being praised as a model leader, which seemed really weird at the time. But in retrospect, that was probably the time that Russia started to groom the top figures in the rights echo chamber.
1
Do the reporters mention the NYT article, "Investigating Trump, FBI Sees no Clear Ties to Russia"?
8
You mean this story from October 2016: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donal...
That was nearly 2 years ago, and further investigation, by both the media and federal law enforcement has developed the story. Or do you think Flynn, Manfort, Papadopoulos et al pleaded guilty to nonexistent crimes?
8
This is hysterical. Christopher Steele leaked the fake Russian dossier to CNN. Buzz Feed and the NYTs and they fell for it and reported it as true for 2 years. The deep state even used the fake Russian lies to obtain FISA warrants. The Obama administration was told way before the election that Russia was trying to interfere and the US director of communication was preparing countermeasures but was told to stand-down and do nothing by the Obama administration.
8
You must admit that saying that something is "only partially verified" is not the same as saying that it's all "true." No responsible journalist has stated that the dossier is unequivocally accurate. And when you say it's "fake," what exactly do you mean? I think there actually is a real document, printed on real paper, that Steele handed over to U.S. intelligence. Are you saying that some of the information in it was invented out of thin air? Or that some of the informants whom Steele used were misinformed or misleading in their statements? That's what intelligence is all about, isn't it? Any raw source material has to be read in context. Yet the overall picture, including those portions of the dossier that have been verified, is a dark one indeed for Donald Trump and his effort to halt the investigation into his conspiracy with Russia.
1
Some incredible time and effort went into this chronology. However, the chronology is only as good as the data put into it. Data is missing, that gives the impression of one sidedness. Where is any of the timeline related to Peter Strzok/ Lisa Page interactions? This is very comprehensive work, why not include everything?
4
The Russian collusion narrative never ends from The Times and their disgruntled Democrat, liberal and progressive followers. Yet where is the proof of their assertions? Sure, Mueller is good at slapping down some of Trump's staff with criminal charges that have absolutely nothing to do with the election. but proof of Russian collusion is still nowhere to be found, a full 18 months after Mueller was authorized to start his investigation.
But you can bet your life savings that even when Mueller vindicates Trump of all charges, these same Democrat, liberal and progressive Trump haters will not accept his findings. They will then turn on Mueller in a heartbeat, after singing his praises while he conducted his witch hunt.
13
What is it that you don't like about a thorough investigation?
14
What is it that you and all the Trump haters like about an investigation created, plotted and carried out for the express purpose of taking down Trump. An investigation which by now, even the most deranged of Trump haters still retaining minimal brain function must acknowledge, has only exposed the treachery and deceit of some within the FBI and intelligence agencies and ex-Obama officials in manufacturing this hoax. Something at which they have failed miserably.
We need transparency. Lets see the un-redacted FISA documents and text messages. Let the people decide. We'll never get through this if we have to trust the media or the government for information. Let's end this.
Hilklary's business cooperation with the Russians has been so lucrative for thm that most of a billlion dollars has found its way into the so-called Clinton Family charities, the ones that don't give anything much away to real charities.
But don't tell us about this, NY Times, it will mess up the party narrative you've worked so hard on.
6
You mean THIS debunked story?
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/16/vladimir...
Now tell us the one about how Kavanagh's mom foreclosed on her victim's family home. (Also debunked, for the sarcasm impaired).
6
Thank You. Thank You. Thank You. So far the lies have won. Wondering if truth will have it's day and the americans who conspired with Russia , are held accountable.
12
This story is so dead it is almost not worth the ink. When the NYT can tell me that the Kremlin hacked in and changed the final tally I'll be more than happy to listen.
If Americans want to get their news from Facebook and the like that is an American Problem.
The USA has been messing with foreign elections for as long as I have been alive.
When Russian hackers broke in to the Power Grid in Illinois, they did us a favor - Big Wake Up Call! When they broke into the RNC & the DNC, they did both parties a service: Wake Up. The Republicans got the message. The Democrats are getting the message. Cyber - Security is very important.
9
The timeline accompanying this article starts way too late (June 2015). Trump's dealings with Russia go back much further than that. There is credible reporting about business dealings and money laundering as far back as the '80's, and Trump's sons talked about the disproportionate amount of money coming in from Russia to their companies in the wake of Trump's bankruptcies and having difficulty borrowing from American banks. Not to mention the events of the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow, which figured in Steele's investigation. Steele's report can't be dismissed easily given his credentials as an investigator and intelligence officer, despite Republican attempts to discredit it. There is good reason to believe that Putin saw Trump as an easily manipulable and subvertible target years ago, cultivated him, likely has compromising financial and other information on him to keep him in line, and then worked to put him in place when he saw the chance. The champagne and caviar are flowing in the Kremlin as they toast Putin: "Vlad, you are a genius!". Meanwhile, Trump engineeers the decline of American democracy and the nation suffers.
9
And, as discussed recently, Manafort was involved in a Hillary Clinton smear as far back as 2012.
3
The thesis of the article is that 'Putin is angry.' But it is far more compelling that the sanctions (Magnitsky Act and others) that have frozen the assets of Putin supporters are the motive. Trump's own wealth is based on access. Follow the money.
4
The Democratic establishment all but crowned Hillary as the party's candidate even before the first primary. But she brought too much political baggage to the campaign for my liking. Candidates like former Senator Jim Webb could not get their campaigns off the ground and dropped out of the race. But Hillary still could have won if all of Obama's black supporters had also turned out to vote for her. But many stayed home. This was especially true in Detroit.
I don't have an account on Facebook or Twitter and never have. So I wasn't influenced by any Russian efforts on those web sites to sway voters. I gave serious consideration to voting for Trump because he appeared to be less anxious to get the US involved in more wars in the Middle East and in Ukraine. But at the 2016 AIPAC convention he promised its members to be the best president that Israel ever had. That cost him my vote but brought him millions of dollars of campaign dollars from Sheldon Adelson. If the Republicans retain control of the House and Senate after the November elections, we can expect to see further cuts to the country's safety net. I guess the deplorables will just have to learn to live with those cuts.
4
Re: "...still could have won if all of Obama's black supporters had also turned out to vote for her. But many stayed home. This was especially true in Detroit."
It's pretty common knowledge that there was widespread voter suppression in 2016. Detroit is a prime example.
Read "The Real Voting Scandal of 2016" from The New Yorker for more info.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/12/12/the-real-voting-scandal-of...
4
In Wayne County, MI (mostly the heavily black city of Detroit), only 58.6% of registered voters bothered to vote in 2016, 37,364 fewer than in 2012. Go to: https://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/11/see_how_every_michigan_coun...
Encrypt your internal communications, all you Democrats who are thinking of running in 2020, and make sure no outsider has the key, or your entire campaign will be used against you by sleazy hackers whose only mission is to destroy you. And by all means, avoid email at every turn, which we have known for decades is utterly insecure.
2
The emotionally-trained dolts on the eft fringe don't even know that the Russian Facebook ads were anti-Trump until the election was over. They've not even reading the part of the news that the NY Times puts out, much less the independent media.
4
For those who claim that Russian propaganda couldn't possibly change anyone's vote, I suggest you scroll down to the story about the untruths being told about Dr. Blasey on social media. Things that are patently false are retweeted thousands of times, repeated on various websites and given credence on FOX News and the Drudge Report. The outrage is, not only, that Russia produced lies and misinformation but that gullible Americans will, seemingly, believe anything. I remember having heated discussions with one man who was convinced that HRC had killed up to 18 people because they A: died and B: worked for her and C: "I don't know 18 people who have died and I work with a lot of people". I don't blame Russia for trying it's best to destabilize my country as much as I blame the Americans who play the willing dupes.
15
The Times should start a series on all the elections this country has subverted, and all the democratically elected leaders we have overthrown, since the end of World War Two. It would be a long-running series.
9
That would be interesting reading. But many of us are focused on self-preservation at the moment.
4
Our political system pushes divisive issues to the forefront. There's no way outsiders can interfere in any meaningful way. All the wedge issues and sleeper issues are mined and refined continually by our politicians.
I once read a political analysis that said every congressman has nightmares of losing by a dozen votes, so every pressure group with a dozen voters can get their attention. There is literally nothing for outsiders to exploit. Our politicians are already there.
Okay, maybe the establishment had been ignoring voter concerns about immigration, terrorism, and the opiod crisis, but Trump was working those issues from when first entered.
The banners are a good example. "Goodbye Murderer" and "Putin Peacemaker" aren't even electioneering. Neither Obama nor Putin were on any ballot, and both appeared in heavily Democratic areas -- New York and the Washington DC area.
1
If the Russians were able to subvert the choice of the people in the Presidential election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, it can only get easier should they decide to go down ballot to the legislative races. Just imagine, say, should they decide, for whatever reason, to subvert the sacrosanct franchise of the people of New Jersey in their Senate choice between the two Bobs, Menendez and Hugin. This threat to our vibrant democracy is too urgent to ignore.
2
Disenfranchising black voters by Republicans in key swing states took away a few hundred thousand votes, and swung the election. Koch brothers, the Mercer family proxies, and others paid many millions to get aa Republican result. I can even guess that some of these US conservative operatives employed foreign disruptors-- don't you? The return on from Koch brothers investment netted $1,200,000,000, 1.2 billion in tax breaks, so their "ideology" is really about getting paid. Democracy for sale-foreign or domestic-- taking all offers.
1
Many black voters who had voted supported Obama chose to stay home on election day in 2016. It may have cost Hillary the state of Michigan and a few other close states. FYI, the Koch brothers are good at bundling the donations of other rich Republicans but are not nearly as generous with their own money as you think they are. My guess is that Sheldon Adelson is by far the largest the largest Republican donor this year ($50 million so far).
1
I can't find this version of history convincing. Russia was just returning the favor of what the US has been doing for a long time inside Russia: supporting a variety of trouble makers. Trump was just another trouble maker. And if he said nice things about Russia: the more reason to support him.
I see little reason to believe that Putin really believed that Trump had any chance of winning the elections. I also doubt that he had much hope that Trump would bring much improvement in the US-Russian relationship. US presidents have a history of saying peace-loving things during their campaign and then to fall in line with the military-industrial complex once they are in power. There was little reason to expect that an intellectual lightweight like Trump would be different. But it was good to have him say all those nice Russia loving things during the campaign.
1
I think this paper is ill. Perhaps terminally ill. The Russians have been at it for decades, as we have as well. What is the nature of this paper's illness? Compromising all reason, all values, and just plain common sense on the idea that Donald J. Trump isn't supposed to be president. The whole festering underbelly of the administration of the FBI and DOJ, you hardly report on -- and that's because you are not a newspaper anymore. You've just become the media arm of the dirty democrats. Everyone (who thinks) knows this. And that already large population is growing day by day.
6
I know you are wrong, because I am somebody who thinks and I believe the New York Times is a reliable source of the news. I suspect you are a Trump supporter and have been given an earful of why you shouldn't trust news organizations that point out his faults. Will you also find fault with the judicial system as they continue to prosecute and convict the criminals who Mr. Trump surrounded himself with? When I criticize a person or paper, I use my full name.
10
Joe Barnett...."I suspect you are a Trump supporter".....Maybe he is a Russian Troll.
5
Joe, thanks for the laugh and proving, once more, delusion is common amongst those calling themselves Liberal-Left.
I do not use Facebook and only use Twitter once a month or so to contact reporters who publish no email addresses but have Twitter presences. So, the Russians did not affect me. But, this is all very old news.
Russia has been meddling in US poltics since the 1930s. In the 1930s it had substantial control in labor unions and promoted strikes. U.S. Rep. Samuel Dickstein (D-NY) was on the Russian (NKVD) payroll in the late 1930s. Dickstein took bribes from foreigners to get them visas.
FDR's adminstration was filthy with Russian Communist sympathizers.
Soviet Communist operatives were always influential in America's political left and thereby influenced poltics in big cities with leftist & athoritarian governance like NYC, Chicago, and San Francisco.
When Russia was supporting the American left, including, as now, the leftist Main Stream Media, the MSM was happy to get the support, as in the case of McCarthy, who was right about Communists in America.
1
"...there is a plausible case that Mr. Putin succeeded in delivering the presidency to his admirer, Mr. Trump, though it cannot be proved or disproved."
The two parties have always gotten an approval bump from their conventions. The more successful the convention, the higher the bump. The more unity displayed, the stronger the team effort going forward.
Watching the convention a day or two after the wiki leaked emails, I saw and heard the loud, visceral, angry reaction from Sanders supporters. I saw Sanders trying to bring the convention together after a divisive race - clearly warning that Trump would be a disaster, but he did not succeed with many of his supporters. They were too angry. They stayed home or voted for Trump of Jill Stein.
Those sausage-making, hacked emails from the DNC? I liked Hillary. I thought she was wonderful and still do. That is why I voted for her. I don't believe for one minute that bias at the DNC cost Sanders the nomination but a lot of his supporters still see it differently.
5
Democrat for 42 years here. Voted Democratically up and down ballot for my entire life. Until 2016. Only it wasn't the Russians who changed my mind, it was the unending misrepresentation and bashing of Bernie Sanders by media, especially the NYT. The constant Bernie `Splainin' that he was a racist (based on the fact that Vermont is mostly white. Yikes), that he wasn't a real Democrat (a Hillary talking point), that he didn't understand his own policies (just in time to rescue Hillary from the damning Wall Street speeches), and on and on, world with out end, Amen. No, it wasn't the Russians that led me to leave my vote for president blank for the first time in 40 years. It was you, NYT.
And after the recent 97-3 Senate vote to increase the defense budget for the Madman-in-Chief, it's confirmed. He's not a real Democrat, for all the real Democrats voted to give the most dangerous president in history more money to wage unlimited wars. That's called assistance, not resistance.
I think I'll stick with Bernie, thank you very much.
But... if the past is prologue, this will never be printed anyway...
12:35 CDT 20 September, 2018
6
Thanks for helping give us Trumpistan. You can hug your conspiracy theories to your heart, and hate all you like, but in the end other people exist and this is not helping. I like almost everything Bernie supports, but I don't like the way he subtly encourages his fans to cannibalize their allies and support the opposition.
I hope you will at least support Beto O'Rourke. Ted Cruz is a vicious monstrous liar, and the planet is groaning.
18
Ah, yes. I forgot. Voting caveats are required to prove your loyalty to the Republic and to the Democrats. As you can see, I voted in Texas where a Hillary loss was inevitable, so my non-vote meant nothing, freeing me to actually vote my conscience.
To satisfy your loyalty requirements, I voted appropriately down ballot, and yes, I support Beto.
4
Yes, even if the media unfairly bashed Bernie Sanders, why is helping elect Trump an appropriate response?
(I also particularly liked his claim that it was a "Hillary talking point" that Sanders is not "a real Democrat." Perhaps he should check out the Senate website.)
WOW! And the only way Trump and Giuliani can respond to this well documented time-line is to call Mueller's Russia Investigation a "Hoax" and a "Witch Hunt". Indeed this is a witch hunt and many witches have already been exposed. The only question is when Trump, and his supporters in the Republican Party, will stop lambasting the special counsel and end their treasonous attempts to shut down the Special Counsel's investigation into foreign attempts to subvert the American electoral system? These Republican members of Congress who are trying to shut down this investigation will be seen as traitors if they persist in their continued attempts to undermine the "Russia Investigation".
6
What's interesting is that the Times would publish this piece (which enforces its longstanding collusion narrative) when it appears the Mueller probe is winding down with no signs of any collusion, just dirty political lobby from Manafort and friends (and soon to be some Dems). Do you really think that our previous elections have gone untouched by outside interference? Bottom line is that 63 million Americans didn't vote for Trump because of Russians...they voted Trump because they were tired of Hillary and the Dems left leaning progressive politics. End of story.
3
"it appears the Mueller probe is winding down with no signs of any collusion,"....Just wait until the indictments on Kushner and Trump Jr. come down.
3
Matt writes that "63 million Americans didn't vote for Trump." That figure is incorrect. It was actually 73.6 million Americans who didn't vote for Trump. Only 62,979,636 people, a minority of the voters, voted for Trump. Trump was elected in spite of his unpopularity.
Sickening traitors, from McConnell to Trump who I hope is exiled via USPS in a box to his master putin with no postage required.
4
No matter what the subject, it's about the lies and the cheating. Across the board, Republicans in office have been collaborating to hide the fact that they are the minority and the only way they can stay in office and bully the rest of us is to lie, cheat, steal and deceive.
Russian attempts to manufacture chaos and put a selfish greedy cowardly bully in the highest office of the land is just one of many things Republicans are willing to look away from in order to keep power. As long as they are able, they will continue to reward themselves and the wealthy and powerful bullies who seem not to realize they are harming their own children as well as the rest of us.
The stink of evil is all over them.
10
Incredible overview, very well-written, exactly what is needed right now. Thank you. I wish we could we make it required reading for everyone who watches (or works at) Fox, CNN, MSNBC, etc. We need perspective, we need this bird's-eye view; we don't need the constant, contrived, micro-issue partisan bickering.
2
Bob Woodward stating that he did not find any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/50297.htm
1
“Putin fulfilled the dream of every Soviet leader — to stick it to the United States.": I'm wondering if some of the Russians are just jealous of us. ;)
"And there is a plausible case that Mr. Putin succeeded in delivering the presidency to his admirer, Mr. Trump, though it cannot be proved or disproved."
In other words, there's no proof that any of the Russians' clumsy attempts at influencing the election actually had any effect on the outcome. And even if they did, the US has been subverting elections all over the globe, including Russia, so unless you're unable to grasp the simple concept of hypocrisy, your response should be, "so what?"
The liberal establishment, for the most part, would rather you focus on unsupported theories of Russia tipping the scales against HRC than to admit that she ran a horrible campaign, and that the Democratic Party's embrace of the corporatist, "third way" strategy, led ironically by HRC's husband a few decades ago, led to a large swath of the working class - including former Obama 2012 voters (so much for the deplorable racist theory) - to switch to the Republican party.
Blame the deplorables all you want. The truth is, the Democrat's inept strategizing tilled the soil, and the corporate-media's relentless campaign season free media exposure of Trump planted the seed that has turned the White House into a big dumpster fire.
The sad part is, the Democratic Party bosses and the liberal establishment are determined to stick to the corporatist "third way" and stamping out the progressive movement within the party.
5
Your first paragraph and the next sentence are faulty logic. If there is no proof Putin succeeded does not mean there were no attempts. I think I will wait for Mr. Mueller to see what proof actually exists. Don't you wonder why the Republicans are refusing to improve voter machine security?
7
Joe, OMG! I acknowledged the attempts in my very first sentence.
Ed, please stop focusing on the actual results of the Russian attack. Please stop with the "no harm, no foul" argument. Donald Trump appears to have conspired with a hostile foreign adversary in its attacks on the United States of America. That's a big deal, and it's enough. Let's stop attaching conditions and qualifiers. The U.S. was attacked and Trump, if not a conspirator ("Russiar, if you're listening..."), has gone out of his way to excuse Russia's attacks and halt the investigation into his participation in them. That's bad enough.
31
Re: figure where "Each box represents one Trump tweet calling the Russia investigation a “hoax,” or a “witch hunt,” or disputes any notion of “collusion.”" -- why lump these together? The first two are Trumpist absurdities, but the last one may well be fair. As you note, "none of the convictions to date involve conspiracy." Sad that the NYT is not above such misleading tricks.
1
Who would have ever thought ~40% of Americans and some 90% of Republicans would align themselves with a corrupt, opportunistic, pro-Russian traitor like Trump? The evidence is all around us and yet Trump's supporters dig their heels in and refuse to admit it, for that would mean having to admit they put themselves and their party before country and as such are effectively traitors. Brexit in the UK, Trump in the USA... social media has made too many of us ignorant dupes, and for Russia it's been like taking candy from a baby.
9
You ask: Whoever would have thought the GOP would align with Trump and Russia?
Answer: Anyone who paid attention the past three decades. It's not like they've been hiding their hypocrisy and total corruption.
This was a great read. Missing though? The incredible effort on behalf of US journalists to help Russia's operation. You do mention it in the article, briefly. This means that journalists know that they had a massive hand in the disinformation campaign orchestrated by the Russians, but you're not willing to openly admit it. It's a tough thing to admit you were wrong. I don't believe for a second that the US media was duped though. You're going to tell me that internationally acclaimed journalists that have traveled to war zones and covered politics for decades were too naive to see that Russia was actively manipulating the US presidential election? I too have been to war zones, and have more than a little common sense. Asking me to believe that US journalists were just "babes in the woods" is the equivalent of asking me to believe that Paul Manafort didn't know he was lying on IRS forms.
I've been around a long time. The journalists that covered the 2016 election had ALSO been around a long time. Bob Costa, Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer, Dean Baquet, Wolf Blitzer, Chris Wallace, and the list goes on, and on, and on. The fact of the matter is, US media hasn't learned their lesson. I predict that if this happened again & a political candidate in the US was exposed by a foreign adversary, US journalists would duplicate their behavior of 2016 on behalf of that foreign adversary. I bet my life they'd hide behind the same excuses too. "Well, it IS newsworthy, even if it is stolen."
2
Expecting anything approaching insightful self-examination from our hapless corporate-media is unrealistic. If there were no constant Trump media barrage in 2016, the less awful candidate would be in the White House.
4
What's missing from this story is how often the CIA plants stories in the WP and NYT, ignoring, of course, the constant hate-Trump propaganda and drumbeat--this piece--in our Sovietized New York City mass-media.
Really, it wasn't the Constitution and the heartland that put Trump in the White House?
How else to explain Hillary's incompetence and the DNC Politburo's claim that the White House was stolen from the entitled one? Putin did it?
Sorry, he's just a man, not the god the CIA wishes him to be, so it goes in the deep swamp.
But here's the real story--Obama, Comey, NSA, and Lynch were fully aware of the "hacking"--so they said--yet they lost their 93% sure thing--NYT front page, above the fold--to the White House. Pain continues.
3
you people in the USA live in a bubble...
https://consortiumnews.com/2018/08/27/the-real-russian-interference-in-u...
2
I totally get that the NY Times is completely obsessed with this theme, even with scant hard evidence. But what is lacking is context, in any event -- something the NY Times used to be unequalled at providing, but now no longer gives the slightest consideration to, alas. Let's think of all the many times the U.S. has intervened in governments abroad -- Chile, Iran, Iraq, to name but a puny few, via our CiA and its undermining and dismantling of, in the case of Chile, an emerging democracy. And let's look at its refusal to intervene in Honduras, at a time when it would've made all the difference in continuing to emerge as a genuine democracy -- and leading to the untold deaths of so many innocents, in all cases. My question is: why do I have to provide this sorely needed context, and why isn't the NY Times????
5
Why would CIA efforts in 1950s Iran be "context" for Trump's conspiracy with Russia? Wouldn't a better "context" be provided by recounting the history of the Cold War, with its decades of Soviet assaults on the West and its history of American turncoats, quislings, and KGB-employed spies?
This article is historic.
5
you people in the US corporate media....Hard to believe that you are still pushing the narrative that Trump won because of Russia's intervention...I guess anything is better that acknowledging the real reasons of Clinton's loss.
3
Thanks NYT. I just renewed my subscription yesterday and already I have my subscription worth.
When the non-democratic leader of a totalitarian state use the tools of our free, open and democratically elected governments to bring them down he is a master of the game (for which there are no game rules). Letting the dictator in with open arms while singing high praises is tantamount to treason.
Had, and I emphasize "had", there been an opposition party to Putin who were even thought to have helped an outside president win his election he/she would have been beheaded on the Red Square.
The game might be called Trump, but the house of cards will come down.
3
Many players acting in several different ways during the 2016 election. Seeing graphically the overlaps of Russian influencers, a pliant voter base, Trump team's ongoing relations with the Russians, as well as a strong anti-Hillary, anti-Obama thread is eye-opening. Thanks for creating this timeline, and reference to all the players.
Hard not to think that Trump needed to have the Russians influencing his campaign, and his constant denials of any participation will have their day in court when Mueller finalizes his report.
Great job in reporting this.
2
This is fascinating!
But I have often wondered how the rest of the world sees America's attempts at influencing (interference?) in their elections and political movements. Just to make sure that this interest is not misconstrued - it is purely an intellectual curiosity, not an anti-American sentiment at all.
Our local paper, the Syracuse post standard, has adopted a very useful, in my view, practice: on almost every national issue, e.g., the current supreme court justice case, they publish two opinions on the two sides of the editorial page: one by an obvious left-leaning journalist (pundit?) and the other one by an obvious right-leaning journalist. This gives me a wonderful opportunity to see how contrasting the two almost radically different thought processes are.
Just the other day, BBC had a piece on how the US/CIA was involved in the Solidarity movement in Poland. I really learnt some new details.
I know there are many books written on all these subjects, both pro and con - but we don't always get to read those as often as we read stuff in our favourit papers.
Could NYT, from time-to-time, publish something on the 'other' side's view of our attempts to 'democratize' their countries, i.e., regime change, etc.?
1
Whatever it is that Russia allegedly plotted to do failed to influence a single American to vote a certain way. It was a victory for American democracy in the 2016 presidential election when a person who was never elected to public office before, manged to win an election to the highest office of the land with half the campaign spending than his opponent. Whatever character flaws prior to being president that those who with Trump derangement syndrome or just dislike Trump for whatever reason would like to point to,, American is better off now than at any time in the previous years in this century. Russia has woken up a sleeping giant that will be forever and ever more vigilant to medding by any foreign powers in the future. The democracy for the people, by the people and of the people will will be stronger than ever before and for that we should be grateful. As far as the threat to our democracy, it is much more toxic when Americans are not ready to accept the outcome of a fair election and try to undermine the duly elected leader of the free world. Finally, democracy has consequences but we should embrace those consequences as part of a democratic change and if those consequences are not to ones liking then there is always a next election to vote for a change until we get it right.
2
This issue would be important to me and other Americans if the Russians, or whoever else, actually manipulated the vote count, then and only then, would it be a serious national cyber-security problem. Otherwise, it is only an attempt by the Establishment to explain why Hillary Rodham Clinton lost the 2016 presidential election, which supposedly was her's to win, even President Trump has said as much. But the American people, at least in those states that matter, thought otherwise. As for Russian meddling, foreign actors have meddled one way or another in past elections, just click on the excellent online New York Times archive, TimesMachine, and read all about it. If anybody was influenced by phony social media postings by notorious Russian spies, well that only shows their gullibility. To paraphrase P.T. Barnum, a fool is born every minute. Finally, with whatever happened, many Americans are pleased with the result: the defeat of Hillary Rodham Clinton and the triumph of Donald J. Trump. Thank you.
4
Imagine your entire life exists within the confines of a Dostoevsky novel.
That wasn't so hard, was it?
2
NY Times - please do not insist on claiming that Podesta's email was "hacked" - it was not. Somebody called him on the phone and Podesta gave them his password. That is called stupidity, not hacking.
Hacking is taking advantage of flaws in computer software, not asking people for their password over the phone.
The only frightening thing, is that our country has high level political operatives that are stupid.
4
"NY Times - please do not insist on claiming that Podesta's email was "hacked" - it was not. Somebody called him on the phone and Podesta gave them his password. That is called stupidity, not hacking."......If I leave my front door open and you walk in and take my computer, you are still a thief. My stupidity for leaving my door open does not mean if you take something that doesn't belong to you that you did not commit a crime.
6
What? Nobody called Podesta for his password. He responded to a spearphishing attack in his email, a prompt to visit a website and change his password.
1
@ W.A. Spitzer
What you are saying is, in effect, that there is an equivalence between burglary and armed robbery because a persons property is being taken in both cases. But the nature of the crime is very different in each case, as it is in the Podesta situation.
What I was trying to point out, is that there is no evidence that that highly skilled hacking operations, like those run by Russia, China, North Korea, Great Brittan, and, of course, the United States, would have been required to obtain Podesta's email.
Certainly, I was not, as your comment seems to imply, suggesting that a crime had not taken place. What I was suggesting, is that the fraudulent access, could have been achieved by any one of a very wide array of "bad actors".
This collation of all the evidence into one coherent story is very helpful . . .
What is now needed is a companion piece collecting all the bits and pieces of evidence that the Trump organization is --and has been over a period of years-- fueled by cash flow from Russia.
3
If we the people are so fast asleep drooling and gurgling over our inane electronic toys showing sms messages and social media pictures, we deserve to be taken over by a hostile nation.
2
We need to vote the Republicans out first. Then we can tackle the Russia problem. Democracy and America is at stake. Vote like America depended on it; because it does. Ray Sipe
3
This misses the region by focusing on one forest. The bigger picture is that white supremacists, about 30-40% of our country, will use any means necessary to seize and maintain power of the Federal, states, and local governments. Russia recognized this and offered to aid their undemocratic aims in 2016 and now in 2018.
The NYT must headline an article tracing the Confederacy after the Civil War, how it ended Reconstruction prematurely and successfully created a white supremacist society under Jim Crow, that it suffered a blow in the 1960s under the Civil Rts Movt and adopted the GOP as its party after '68, and that under a Putin-allied Trump admin the white supremacists and capitalist oligarchs have made an unholy union in post-2016 America. This Russia story is the Confederacy and Robber Baron class joining teams and getting revenge on their enemies: non-racist people and those who believe in economic/social justice.
4
Reading this one is strongly reminded of RT's best effusions and makes me chuckle that as Russian propaganda gets more sophisticated western propaganda gets less so. The Clinton Project and their masters seem to have been airbrushed out of all this. Pitiful.
At least for the time being most comments of criticism are allowed in the west. On RT this would disappear in a puff.
"Donald J. Trump eked out a victory that Moscow had worked to assist."
Cleverly phrased. It implies that Moscow actually had an effect on the election without actually saying it. There's no real evidence for this, but it's part of Resistance doctrine that is often found in purportedly unbiased journalism.
4
But the article expressly acknowledges that it's impossible to prove that Russia influenced the outcome or didn't influence the outcome (which seems to be your unfounded assumption). And your line seems to be a common Russian argument: no harm, no foul. As if no attack on the U.S. matters unless it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have changed the outcome of the election. Anything less, well, just forget about it. Conspire away.
1
Yes, we must talk about, speculate, wring our hands and finally DO something about the people perpetrating or allowing this to happen, but why don't we do something simple to thwart the potential for fraud first? And so, why have we not chucked hackable voting for this round and returned to the olden days of marking one's vote with pen on a piece of paper?
1
Republicans thwart every attempt to abandon electronic voting and return to paper ballots. The reasons for this should be obvious to every informed voter.
3
A fourth area of Russian input to US media wasn't mentioned in this article, namely their barrage of responses in comments sections to online newspaper stories, including the NYT. You could sometimes tell the Russian origin of a comment by the combination of an anodyne name and location in the US, the Russian grammar (notably the poor use or non-use of articles such as "a" and "the" which is common mistake made by Russians speaking English to the point that it is pretty much a a dead giveaway), and of course the argument being advanced. I will not be surprised to spot some of these in the comments section here.
6
@ John Brinkley, wow and thanks, I have noticed those kinds of comments, and I thought they were paid for by the GOP. and sadly I responded to them.
1
"What exactly transpired during the meeting is still a mystery, but it appears that the Russians pulled a bait-and-switch. They used the session to push for an end to the crippling economic sanctions that Mr. Obama had imposed on Russia."
This is naive or misleading. Not a bait and switch. An obvious quid pro quo that was swiftly executed, with Flynn and others pushing for sanctions relief as soon as Trump was elected, including in monitored communications that led to Flynn's resignation and eventual guilty plea.
You also ignore that, shortly before the Trump Tower meeting, Trump promised that there would soon be revelations about the Clintons. You'd have to be an idiot or a Vichy collaborator to believe this is coincidence.
Useful article, but only a partial telling of an even more rancid and traitorous story.
2
David -
No, I am not an idiot or Vichy collaborator. The facts in evidence do not support your version of truth.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/us/politics/michael-flynn-guilty-russ...
(Michael T. Flynn pleaded guilty) "to lying to the F.B.I. about conversations with the Russian ambassador..." "The (plea) documents do not disclose what Mr. Trump knew about Mr. Flynn’s discussions."
Show us the 'monitored communications'!
Renegade, David is right, this part of the article was particularly weak. The conversations with Kislyak were themselves the "monitored communications," and the fact of the monitoring has been widely reported.
"In St. Petersburg, shift workers posted on Facebook and Twitter at a feverish pace, posing as Americans"....They also posted on the opinion pages of NYT. They were/are often pretty obvious. I wonder what we will see on this page?
2
If anything, the US political machinery hates competition. They weren't able to install their own propaganda as well as the Russians did. So we lost this one.
The US has to be faster to the propaganda punch. And if you don't think we have similar strategies and tomes, think again. Who was supposed to win by a landslide?
2
I don't doubt for a minute the Russians interfered. They've done it for decades...and with each election they get more sophisticated. Why I want to see is evidence that something they did changed peoples minds. The people I know...no matter what...they were NEVER going to vote for Mrs. Clinton, OR, no matter what...they were NEVER going to vote for Trump. So how did this interference change any results? That's been my question from the beginning and I've not seen a direct answer anywhere.
1
Here are two direct answers for you why the results could have been changed even tho most folks minds were made up already:
(1) while it's true that most folks had their minds made up, there are always a few who don't until the end, and for them the confirmation they are getting from "people like themselves" can be a force that finally tips the balance; when they have received a Facebook repost of one of these Russian posts from a friend, that can do it and no doubt did in some cases. It was only a few votes in three states that tipped the balance.
(2), and probably more important, it's not how you feel about the candidates, it's whether you actually take the trouble to get out and vote -- no doubt the hate campaign against Hillary orchestrated by the Russians fired up a few more Trump voters to go out and vote, and a few fewer Clinton supporters to stay home. Same result. But we can never know the true numbers for sure.
5
Why do you demand evidence that Russian propaganda changed people's minds? Do you only want to catch the mugger if he actually gets the money? Do you only want to punish the murderer if his victim actually dies? Sort of "no harm, no foul" for Russian espionage?
1
This is indeed a remarkable article, detailed and containing very specific information I did not realise was actually out in the public domain. Cudos for the research. However, only in the last part does it address the shift in Republicans favourable views of Russia. Has there been any research into how or how much the russians have succeeded in influencing republican representatives in congress and the senate? It also does not address the NRA in any depth. Are these stories for a future date, I hope?
196
In the eyes of Americans conservatives, and this includes Evangelical Christians, Putin's Russia is seen as the last bastion of white Christian power. Putin has been cultivating this base for some time. Anti-gay laws, and promotion of the Russian Orthodox Church by Putin's government, has endeared him to American religious conservatives. Franklin Graham has had nothing but effusive praise for Putin. And he is not alone. I would suggest that you read Malcolm Nance's the Plot to Destroy Democracy, or David Korn's book Russian Roulette. Additionally, this information is not new, as Chris Hedges exposed the Christian right's fascist leanings and their hero worship of Putin in his book of American Fascists published in 2007. I don't know whether we're seeing the culmination of these efforts, but I certainly hope that enough of this information has been exposed to cause us to take a long skeptical look at American conservatives and where their movement come to.
1
This detailed article should be widely circulated and become
the foundational basis for a rational (and very urgent) civic discussion about
election integrity and vulnerability. Unfortunately, the distracted nature of
life in the country at present makes doing so quite difficult. But, still, one should try (over and over again).
It would also help a lot if all 50 state boards of elections were forced to digest its contents by a groundswell of citizen activism, and adopt all practical safeguards against hacking of the weak points and vulnerabilities in its networked servers and databases. Here a large role can also be played by
city newspapers and regional news web sites.
It is, however, far from clear that there are enough resources coming from
the trumpicans in congress who have clearly been greatly reluctant to release needed funding to harden states' networks. Their rationales for not doing
so are laughably weak (as in "what? we need to worry but do we really need to pay for it?") ) but there has not been sufficient pressure from
states and concerned third parties to overcome this resistance by indifference. So, I don't know how effective
will be states' efforts to keep as much integrity as possible in the vote count
come November.
This all fits in nicely with our morphing into an authoritarian pseudo representative democracy, dominated by the one percent and corporate interests, where cynicism/indifference gnaw away at the efficacy of citizen pushback.
1
Putin punched every American in the gut, and every American just laid there and bled out. We go on with our lives like nothing happened. We take our kids to school. We shop. We have parties. We go on vacations. We sit at home and watch TV and ignore one moral outrage after another. Our environment is under direct attack. The alliances our grandfathers designed and built have been weakened. Our allies no longer trust us. The whole concept of a shining city on a hill has been subverted and turned into something that steals children from their parents, while a substantial minority of Americans cheer it on. The truth will come out. Whether a majority of Americans will believe the truth when they see it and demand action is in doubt. We have Americans that like Russians more than Democrats. How do you fix that? The enemy from within is always the most dangerous enemy.
3
The United States sent money and weapons to Libya and Syria to influence, overthrow, their governments. We are constantly intervening both politically and militarily in foreign countries. What is Russia accused of? Hacking computer servers and releasing embarrassing files which were real. Also, paying for advertising on Facebook. How can anyone with a straight face compare what Russia is accused of doing with what America does on a regular basis. We are active in Russia supporting opposition groups. And why the focus on Russia only? If Russia did this, it is no different than actions taken by Britain, France, Germany, Greece, Mexico, Japan, China, Canada, and a host of other countries. Saudi Arabia which was literally bribing the Bush family with cash and business deals is ignored. Why is the Times promoting this myopic narrative.
7
"How can anyone with a straight face compare what Russia is accused of doing with what America does......It is real easy. When was the last time America sent operatives to poison defectors in foreign countries. Duh.
3
Mike, the Russia sabotage is objectionable not because it's "wrong" (though it is that) but because it's anti-American, an attack on our country with help from the inside. Trump's conspiracy with Russia is a national security threat, not a pecadillo at which we should all frown moralistically. If we followed your rule, we'd be inviting the Russian military to invade the U.S. -- because we "deserve" it, after the Bay of Pigs. That's not how we defend our country against attacks by a foreign adversary.
1
Trump's tax returns over ten years or more might be more interesting, especially in the hands of a forensic accountant looking for money laundering. Putin's puppet. Add in a few in the GOP circles. It is all about money and manipulating the U.S. populace who from now on are pockets to be picked by the corporate 1% GOP puppet masters. Our infrastructure is not safe from massive attack while we spend billions on non digital weapons. Trump's actions represent a clear and present danger. That needs to be the basis for his removal, sooner rather than later.
1
Interesting that Professor Khrushcheva said that this was Putin's successful attempt to "stick it to the United States."
My guess is that is what many Trump voters also felt like they were doing -- their one way to strike back at "the system" that has left so many struggling and behind economically.
Sadly, they have only stuck it to themselves, since the president who promised to fight for the common man (if not common woman) really only meant to fight for himself and his family and those like them.
171
According to a poll this week by NPR/Marist, a third of voters believe it is likely that a foreign country will change the vote in the midterm elections.
Here's NPR/Marist's take on those results:
"The finding comes even as there is no evidence Russia or any other country manipulated or tried to manipulate the vote count in 2016 or at any other point in American history."
"The results give credence to what election officials have been worried about since at least the summer of 2016: that the intense focus by the media and the federal government on Russia's election interference efforts could be eroding voters' confidence in democratic institutions."
https://www.npr.org/2018/09/17/647420970/npr-marist-poll-1-in-3-american...
3
There can only be one possible explanation and it goes without saying.
The Russian plot is so obvious that it takes 30 browser pages to explain?
Are the Russians still at it? https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/23/us/politics/republican-voters-trump.html says that "Mr. Trump’s approval rating among Republicans is now about 90 percent." This is nearly 2 years following the election. If the idea that Donald Trump would make a better president than Hillary Clinton exists only because of Russian actions during 2016, how is it that tens of millions of people continue to hold this view in 2018?
6
“And there is a plausible case that Mr. Putin succeeded in delivering the presidency to his admirer, Mr. Trump, though it cannot be proved or disproved.” Who wrote this line; Roy Cohen? This is McCarthyism wrote plain. It is an equally accurate statement to say the Russians had no effect on the 2016 election, though it cannot be proved or disproved. As is, the weak and ineffective President Obama sat by idly while Russia determined his successor, though that cannot be proved or disproved.
There is a plausible case that the NYT provided it services to Mr. Putin as a force multiplier to break down American institutions, though it cannot be proved or disproved.
6
This is journalism. There is enough criminal evidence in this article to take down the Trump administration. It is alarming that Mueller has this and obviously much, more.
6
It's sad to have seen Greenwald in particular sink from revealing an American hero, in Snowden, to revealing an American enemy and Russian stooge (and Fox News-Entertainment attention-seeker), in himself.
Seeing his string of articles with a compulsive focus on debunking media claims about Russia, while fellow TI writers wrote non-bizarre articles about actual issues, tested my dam of patience and suspicion; seeing him claim (which I can only paraphrase, as I've long forgotten the article with the claim) that any thought that Russia would retaliate against people by killing them was not supported by reality cracked that dam.
Then TI's hit piece on Callimachi, who heroically helped rescue ISIS papers from a home country where they would STILL be wildly unsafe to preserve, demolished it like a Chicxulub to the Hoover's face.
The increasingly woo wrong-wing commenters below their line didn't help.
What's with the grotesquely altered photos - eyeball in the middle of head, heads nested in one another? Not the kind of art needed to illustrate factual information on this topic.
1
I am no trump fan, I think he is profoundly ignorant and narcissistic, and I believe it's a shame that this is the president the american people elected.
But, even with all this, and after reading the article, I don't really think that focusing on Russia is the right move. Tump did not win because of Russian collusion. All of the american media complex was attacking him during the primaries (democrats and conservative media together). And even after that, a lot of conservative politicians and thinkers took the "never trumper" stance.
What I'm trying to say is that the people that voted for Trump, resisted all of this media brain-washing, and even unspoken rules of society, where Trump supporters were shamed by their peers.
Russian collusion is of no importance to these people. If they don't listen to their beloved hollywood stars or talk show hosts, why would they listen to this foreign and distant influence?
45
But they did. It was the constant barrage of lies fed to the gullible via social media and biased "news" outlets that fueled the racism and feelings of victimhood. People led by emotions rather than rational thought are easy to manipulate. Support of Trump proves the point.
4
The problem with your analysis is that the Trump supporters *did* listen to the media brain-washing; from Fox and the other right-wing propaganda machines. You can't isolate the NY Times and CBS/NBC/ABC as the only sources of garbled information. The one remaining, important question is: how much of this was coincidental, and how much of it was planned, coordinated and criminal? sorting it out does matter, because that will determine whether the current President of the United States committed serious crimes, or was simply a stooge.
5
The vast majority of all media coverage was devoted to Trump, Trump unvarnished, Trump unopposed. Even the NYT made the error of featuring his "family leave plan" on the front page, after ignoring Clinton's from a year earlier, and let him get away with saying that Hillary had no plan. Come on, one of the major networks was overjoyed with the Trump presence because it meant viewers and clicks on their websites. Just as a lot of bloggers on the so called left were sad when Michelle Bachmann retired... they miss the clicks.
Only 19% of all news coverage of the campaign talked about issues and policies; the rest were jumping on a word here or there, usually Hillary's (like her basketful of deplorables"--how right was she?) while highlighting every word Trump said as if it were headline gold.
4
Does the EB not give "Russian hackers" credit for having some understanding of our politics, and knowing that to unfurl 2 banners in NYC in a state that was in the bag for HRC anyway was counter productive?Revealing interview with ROB REINER who has put out a video informing us that we are WAR with Russia, w/o mentioning first, that it is not a conflict decided on the battlefield, but a cyberwar. Interviewer asked Mr. Reiner why was that distinction not made clear in the video, and why the opponent was Russia and not China, which poses a much more dangerous threat in terms of cyber insecurity, and conclusion drawn by interviewer is that Hollywood sells far more movies to China than to Russia, and cardinal sin from standpoint of Hollywood moguls would be to endanger such a profitable market! Hence, Putin by default!
1
An historic report that will be read for decades to come.
5
To paraphrase President Truman; never trust a man who learns history by reading the Newspaper.
1
Just like Ford said that history is bunk, what these people fail to understand that history is like a society's DNA, and newspapers are the like the genetic mapping of life.
1
“We agree.” Game. Set. Match. All to Mother Russia, courtesy of American stupidity, gullibility, laziness and ripeness for exploitation by a hostile foreign superpower that cunningly preyed upon this or that explosive aspect of the ongoing, continuing, non-stop divisive culture wars. Particularly susceptible to this growing interference from Russia are Republicans, especially those on Capitol Hill and their countless willing satellites all across America.
The minds behind the successful appropriation and acquisition of the American electoral apparatus were prescient in identifying and describing the disaffected American: anti-immigration; anti-integration; hostility to minority rights, especially voter suppression; misogynistic in their social/family outlook; deeply and actively entrenched in their belief in “guns, God and gays,” a total rejection of forward-looking values, buttressed by a severe and unrelentingly “Christian” outlook but dismissive of Russia’s lack of “religiosity.”
The Republican establishment has all but embraced the Russian belief system as its very own: a determined and aggressive attack that seeks to complete a hegemonic suppression of diversity and inclusion and the permanent installation of a plutocracy in which the wealthy few govern the many with an iron fist, all hallmarks of the nationalist Russian state.
With Donald Trump’s election, Russia’s victory is not at hand; we’re living it.
240
please add the clincher:GREED
1
The American demographic that Putin finds so easy to manipulate has a lot in common with their Russian counterparts. He didn't have to change his message very much to suck them in.
1
We're not living Russia's victory, but the results of the overweening arrogance of those who promoted the Clinton Project, sabotaged the only statesman on the hustings, (who, polls showed in the spring of the election year, could have wiped the floor with Trump), and sent America to the polls holding its nose to vote for narcissism in preference.
What may be the biggest success in influencing the election remains hidden: The pruning of votes from certain heavily Democratic precincts in a few crucial swing states. In contrast to the ballot-box stuffing of the past, which would add ballots for a certain candidate, modern day vote tampering can succeed by wiping out a bloc of random ballots in a precinct that heavily favors one candidate.
For example, Trump ‘won’ Michigan by 10,704 votes. In Wayne County, MI, there were 775,022 total votes reported of which Clinton received 67%. Therefore, simple math shows that stealing the election in Michigan would just be a matter of ‘misplacing’ 5% of all votes cast in Wayne county, without needing to target ballots cast for specific candidates.
This type of election meddling could easily remain hidden because on the surface it simply looks like low turnout in heavily Democratic precincts and can be explained away as "lack of enthusiasm" for the Democratic candidate.
Further, a number of states use electronic voting machines which are programmed, deployed and maintained by companies with strong ties to the Republican Party, like Diebold and Election Systems & Software, and which leave no paper trail and could easily be hacked to randomly eliminate ballots.
5
"The pruning of votes from certain heavily Democratic precincts in a few crucial swing states.".....Whether it was through measures like requiring voter ID it was successful. In Wisconsin Romney lost to Obama in 2012, but Romney got more votes in his loss than Trump did when Trump won the state in 2016.
YES! Voter ID, purging voter registrations, et al, can have the same effect.
The Russians have been masters of duplicity, disinformation, and manipulation since the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ under the Czar through the Soviet-funded ‘peace’ groups in Europe in the 1980s right through the 2016 election. What they need to succeed are willing dupes ready to be manipulated with just a kernel of truth and a massive amount of lies.
Just look at how many Americans actually believe that the Kremlin installed the appalling DJT in the White House. You know, it’s as if those malevolent Russians planted a tin-eared, unlikable, duplicitous and venal candidate at the top of a major party ticket, told her to call many of her potential voters ‘deplorable,’ and had her campaign in states she was sure to lose instead of those she might win.
1
How stupid of me. A first glance of this headline, "The Plot to Subvert an Election" lead me to believe this was a piece about the Deep State--FBI an Justice Department's attempt to deny Trump the presidency--and then later to dirty him up with Russia collusion allegations.
But then reality hit: this is the NY Times--the nation's largest echo-chamber of liberal bias and left-wing machination. There is no way, the editors would have any interest in covering the behind-the-scenes scheming of U.S. Government employees--who misused their power and influence, then leaked stories to the media in an attempt to trip up the Trump Campaign.
In other words: when it comes to illegality in election meddling, the NY Times is only interested in covering alleged Russian collusion with Trump--not with Deep State malfeasance to deny him the presidency. Where are the Deep State stories, by the way?
6
RE: "Where are the Deep State stories, by the way?"
In the land of made up news - where they originated and belong.
The "misuse of their power and influence" is the same "misuse" that 3,000,000 more people used than Trump supporters did: the power of the vote. It wasn't enough.
4
Jesse, since you believe that this "Deep State" exists (presumably separate and apart from the thousands of career civil servants who are doing their best to do a good job in Washington), could you tell us more about it? For example, if it's independent of and opposed to the Presidency, why didn't it hamper President Obama just as much as it is supposedly causing Trump to make all the terrible decisions he's making (or preventing him from making terrible decisions? I'm not clear on that either). Or would you say that the Deep State was co-opted over time by Obama? If so, why can't Trump do it? Or would you say that the Deep State is permanently "liberal," and that that's why it got along so well with Obama? If so, why didn't Bush have any problem with it? Are you confusing "Deep State" with "Pizzagate"?
2
Excellent writing. Every American should read this. It informs practically every aspect of this administration's moves, including its rush to get Judge Kavanaugh into the Supreme Court.
6
Every American should read this, especially those who get their info from the Internet. How will Fox News' talking heads respond to this article?
Let's see those Trump tax returns. I suspect that everything about his behavior will then make sense. Perhaps even his base will pay attention and realize how badly they have been duped.
8
What a disheartening and all-too-believable perspective of the integration of the Trump campaign with Putin's cyber warriors. This is not, and never was, a hoax. It is instead an indictment of the corruption and frank treason at the highest levels of our national political process.
Trump and his administration can reasonably be thought of as incompetent but willing conspirators here. Perhaps it's true that they didn't seek out the Russian alliance and were instead unknowing victims of a massive co-option campaign by Putin. Be that as it may, it is undeniably clear that the Trump cabal now in the White House is the product of anti-American efforts from Russia, and must be expunged from existence if our country is to survive.
In one respect, though, this has been goodness for America. Exposing Russia and the Republican Party as collective enemies of the state will launch the political catharsis America has needed since Nixon. Parties and their candidates will be under such increased scrutiny by voters that their self-serving power politics will be radically constrained. We will see a lessening of the type of tyrannical force that the Republicans are now using in the Kavanaugh nomination process. It will be a long-term correction, but ultimately it will help restore America to electoral sanity and integrity. And in that sense, yes, America will be great once again.
5
"Republican operatives working on congressional campaigns emailed “Guccifer” and received hacked documents relevant to their races."
Who are they? Which congressional Republicans were they working for? I have a distinct feeling that the obsequious behavior of Republicans toward Donald Trump is about more than just tax cuts and judges. It appears that there are Republicans in congress who are directly involved in the Russian conspiracy. I sincerely hope that the Mueller team is investigating them as well. This is inexcusable and horrifying.
26
@Dominic If true these are treasonous acts and should be prosecuted as such.
This "story" proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the NYT is no longer engaged in journalism. The NYT is merely a media mouthpiece for the DNC. Funny how there was not even a mention of the undisputed truth that the "hacked" documents were genuine and revealed the DNC's efforts to collude with the liberal media and the HRC campaign to rig the primary in favor of the anointed candidate. The DNC was busted cold and they are still in full spin mode lost in their desperate denial and fueled by Trump rage. This is simply the sad reality of leftie politics. So go ahead, take another gulp of the Russia Conspiracy Kool-Aid.
8
The accidental president and perhaps some of his criminal family and cabal will go to jail.
You know it, I know it and anyone with a critical mind knows it.
In due time, in due time this cabal will be exposed for all the world to see.
Conspiracy? Rubbish. The real conspiracy is all the Trumpanzees following the criminal in the White House and turning a blind eye to it.
5
You don't seem to understand what "collusion" means.
It means collaborating with a FOREIGN FOE, in order to win the elections.
Obviously, liberal media are neither foreign nor enemies of the US, remember?
THAT is why this isn't included in this piece, which is about collusion with Russia (and by the way, it CONFIRMS that for the moment, it has not been proven that Trump himself colluded).
The problem with GOP voters today is that they seem to have become totally lost, when it comes to distinguishing normal and even crucial political debates and disagreements INSIDE a democracy, and using foreign enemy governments in order to distort American elections.
That's how all of a sudden an outstanding and detailed report about what has been PROVEN to be true today is rejected by people like you as not even being journalism, ONLY because you're merely interested in whether it shares your own subjective political preferences or not.
That's NOT what journalism is supposed to be about, remember?
5
I'm not sure what you're talking about. There was no suggestion at all that the emails were not genuine.
3
Who were the voters that were influenced by the Russians and how many?
1
Perhaps you're missing the bigger point that Russians attacked our democracy on multiple fronts and we have a president unwilling to do anything about it, let alone acknowledge it.
3
@Mr. Slater The answer to "Who were the voters that were influenced by the Russians and how many?" is very simple to all who have watched the Trump reality show for the past 18 months. Answer is...... Anyone who voted for Trump.
1
Russian motives are so well articulated and documented in this research. Now aware, it's perfectly haunting how blind we all were to the history and consequences of Russo-US relations. They see us differently than they way we think they see us. Americans think those who would annoy us are jealous of our lifestyle. The article shows how humiliation, not jealousy, is the motive. Jealousy is not something we can do anything about. However, causing a nation to feel humiliation, as World War II showed us, is not a very effective way to serve anybody's best interests. Thank you.
1
"For two years, Americans have tried to absorb the details of the 2016 attack: hacked emails, social media fraud, suspected spies"
Says it all, doesn't it?
Except one important qualifier is missing: the factual truth.
So let me rewrite the sentence, so that it reflects reality.
"For two years, Americans have been exposed to the ever-growing web of accusations, insinuations, unverified allegations, all part of a concerted effort by the media to overturn and invalidate by any means possible the outcome of the 2016 election, blaming all ills of society on a convenient external bogeyman."
I might also add, that all this is an insult to the intelligence of the average American voter, perceived and made out to be a gullible, bumbling idiot, ready to accept the most egregious lie.
7
So you don't trust our intelligence agencies? Because this "ever-growing web of accusations" was uncovered by them.
4
@Waldo "I might also add, that all this is an insult to the intelligence of the average American voter, perceived and made out to be a gullible, bumbling idiot, ready to accept the most egregious lie."
This is exactly the mentality of the average american voter. No perception - truth.
2
A new low for the New York Times. Numerous unsupported assumptions. The Russian-influence propaganda fully accepted and expanded. Numerous technology experts have demonstrated that the DNC emails were not hacked from afar. I am forever grateful that Hillary Clinton was kept away from the White House. I don't think I need to thank Putin.
6
Your comment reminds me that Russian trolls frequently post in the NYT opinion section.
4
A wonderful piece of propaganda. I used to respect Scott Shane's writing on intelligence and national security issues but no more. He should become a writer of spy fiction and intrigue. Thank you.
7
It is a byzantine story, and at the same time very simple
Putin wants to weaken the US and the EU. He has subverted and hacked elections to do it.
Brexit was Russian.
And so was selecting the singularly worst and most easily manipulated foreign asset he could find to install as a puppet head of state in the USA.
5
A brilliant summary of the acts of war committed by Russian military officers against the United States, with the witless help from the NRA and Republican congress.
A compelling argument for the Remaining elected officials, who have not committed treason against the US, to go above their conspirator Republican colleagues to the US media (NYT, Washington Post, 60 Minutes/CBS) to reach out to the orphan American citizens, who have watched these endless acts of treason.
7
A remarkable article in many ways. It shows, finally, that, in the sense that England won the Battle of Britain, the United States has won the Battle of America.
Until now it has been a desperate defensive effort by U.S. citizens stiffened with the knowledge that this is the decisive battle to preserve American democracy. There have been cyber bombs and bullets upon American citadels by the cocky and sneaky Russians. Some of these continue, and will continue until Trump and other Russian plants are removed.
Yet Fighter Command, led by Mueller and a few other courageous and persistent and smart and patriotic people, has blunted the Russian cyber bombers.
While the battles may not cease for months or even years, the day is here when Americans are beginning to take the offensive and repay its oppressors more destruction than it suffered - a counterattack that will not rest until unconditional surrender or death brings total victory.
No mercy!
6
This summary is a real public service. Thanks for the work putting it together. I can only hope that it gets read widely throughout the US, and that those predisposed to seeing the Times as a purveyor of fake news will read it with an open mind and reconsider their loyalty to the GOP's Manchurian candidate.
8
It is unequivocally safe to imply that given the narrow margins of Trumps victory the legitimacy of his election is very questionable. What is really chilling is that the GOP itself seems to find value in the Russian assisted process as long as it benefits them. The GOP it seems is more than willing to shove patriotism aside if it means victory for them. These are no longer Americans which can make any claim to exceptionalism. They are traitors of the worst order.
83
An extensive article on Russian ‘meddling’ that doesn’t mention the most successful Russian effort? Referring, of course, to the infamous Steele Dossier. Ordered and paid for by DNC and Hillary campaign, it is a collection of unverified rumors and innuendos submitted by ‘sources’ within Russia, almost certainly highly placed military and political figures. And it has roiled American politics for two years now.
Who needs Facebook when you have the Steele Dossier?
5
"Foolishness and stupidity", willful attributes of our current vulgar bully in the Oval Office, can be possible only when the people stop thinking for themselves, and keeping up to date, so a professional liar and demagogue can fool them for his own narrow interests...and to the decline of the nation's democracy.
4
Well done. I especially like your thoughts on the timing and method (a sustained dribble) of the October 2016 WikiLeaks release of documents. Wisely, you do not overstate the case. But it is implicit that it was directed by Russia.
4
Once again, the mainstream media tries to turn the glorious election of Resident Trump into a pig waste lagoon. This is all FACT NEWS!
2
The last three American Presidents have been baffled and befuddled by Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.
In the beginning George Walker Bush imagined that Putin has a honest humble humane empathetic soul. In the middle Barack Hussein Obama dreamed of a reset in America's relationship with a Russia which he believed had accepted it's diminuaton from a world superpower to a regional superpower.. While Donald John Trump, Sr. accepted/ sought Putin's help to become President of the United States in order to enhance the Trump Organization's profit from him being President.
The failure of America's national defense intelligence security apparatus to deter and defeat Russian hacking and meddling in the 2016 election is one of the greatest failures of our divided limited power constitutional republic of united states where the people are sovereign to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, Thie is a continuing fundamental existential threat in the 2018 midterm election and beyond.
3
The fact that you guys are still spending this much time and energy on this subject is not helpful. Of course they tried to influence our election, just as we have tried to influence a great number of elections over the past 50 years. All kinds of social media shenanigans went on and a great deal of them on behalf of Hillarys campaign to try to subvert Trump. What is VERY clear is that there was no criminal activity - so its time to leave it alone for the good of the country. Grow ups and move on. Your ideas lost. The agenda you have been trying to ram down Americas throat was rejected. You lost the election fair and square.
8
"Of course they tried to influence our election, just as we have tried to influence a great number of elections over the past 50 years."....The it's ok because every one does it argument is typically employed by Russian Trolls.
4
Johnny, it was Hillary's agenda that got more votes. Trump's agenda was the one that was "rejected." And why would you say that there was no criminal activity when dozens of people and institutions have been charged with crimes related to the election? Have you not been following the Mueller investigation?
2
This is a very painful read. The Russians rolled the dice and won the lottery. They are still winning 2 years later. And the one man who could stop this, Donald J. Trump, is too arrogant and ignorant to recognize what has happened. He is indeed Putin's tool, and he is also President of the United States.
336
OMG!
WHY do people add all this up in the heads, with the massive preponderance of daily mounting evidence of conspiracy and STILL manage to roll out "he one man who could stop this, Donald J. Trump, is too arrogant and ignorant to recognize what has happened"?? WHAT is it going to take for people to realize that he is NOT a dupe, but rather a conspirator. It's as plain as the nose on your face. He is NOT "ignorant", rather he is doing the stuff he wants to do: coalesce power and wealth to the detriment of the United States of America. What you would call him "ignorant" about is merely stuff that he doesn't, um, give a "care" about. It's not important to him or relevant to him.
We need to start quickly understanding what a precarious situation we are in. I would suggest people turn the "Putin's tool" meme around and begin to realize that they are, at the least, reciprocal partners in crime. It's extremely likely Individual-1 contracted with Russia to steal the election in a pre-meditated attack on our federal government.
3
Proof? Mueller has none, but perhaps you have your own sources?
1
The NYT boasts of its coverage of the ALLEGED Russian interference in the 2016 election, yet offers no verifiable evidence to support the basic proposition that these alleged interferences affected the result in any way -- in fact, senior intelligence officials have testified in Congress that no effect was detected.
What is Vladimir Putin's political-business model and modus operandi ?
Oligarchy, staged elections, authoritarian power, widespread corruption, weak civil rights, a sham judiciary, white Christian nationalism, dirty tricks, secrecy, propaganda, petro-statism, divide and conquer.
The exact same political business model as America's Grand Old Phony-Greed Over People-Gas Oil Pollution-Grand One Percent-Grand Old Putinista Party.
When you vote Republican, you're voting for the Russian political-business model.....and you are voting against the United States of America.
Swallow your treasonous Republican pride, Republican voters, and vote for the only patriotic party on the ballot, the Democratic Party.
Russian-Republicanism is no way to run the country....except into the ground.
November 6 2018
D for democracy; R for Russian-Republicanism.
178
" .. What is Vladimir Putin's political-business model and modus operandi ? Oligarchy, staged elections, authoritarian power, widespread corruption, weak civil rights, a sham judiciary .."
Hey, just like NYC, Chicago, Detroit, and L.A.! Stop being so one-sided! Shame! We're melting!
/tee, hee, hee/
1
We are at the beginning of the Russians' subversion of our elections. Putin will continue because it is cheap and there are many willing participants in our system who seek power at all costs.
6
When Trump claims it's a hoax, he's saying that it's blown out of proportion and not the reason why he won - a plausible view.
It's a classic case of the MSM taking Trump's words literally but not seriously. Whereas his supporters delivered him his win by taking his words seriously but not literally. Come on - no one actually believed Mexico would pay for the Wall, but we thought it was hilarious that it would work Libs to hysterics.
A 50 year old autoworker out of a job in Michigan didn't vote for Trump after 30 years of voting Democrat because he saw a Facebook message. And to the extent stuff with leaked, all the leaked information was TRUE, so I appreciate knowing about it - e.g. Clinton receiving questions from CNN ahead of interviews, her open borders position, her "private v. public" position viewpoint.
So look, we all know Russians are bad, Republicans most of all. But in a real sense, it's all a hoax and meaningless in the context of Trump's win (and inevitable reelection).
5
Now that the wall to be paid for by Mexico hasn’t materialized....oh I see it was all so libs would go “hysterical”. Please. Know your audience; Trump did!
3
How do the Russian efforts stack up in comparison to the efforts of the two parties and their PACS? By my calculations, and I appeal to others to calculate, the Russians spent a total of .01% of the $2.4 billion that Americans spent to influence the American electorate. How do the American professionals who raised all that money to spend it on 4-color magazine advertisements and 10-second to 60-second television spots and 30-minute infomercials and volunteer parties for door-to-door campaigning justify all of their efforts and enormous spending IF the Russian's .01% spending determined or influenced to an extent greater than .01% the outcome of election 2016? Isn't Mueller really investigating a molehill and isn't the media including this New York Times article creating a mountain that it has made out of Mueller's molehill?
3
"And there is a plausible case that Mr. Putin succeeded in delivering the presidency to his admirer, Mr. Trump, though it cannot be proved or disproved."
"Plausible"? 10% or 90%. Do you mean to say that the NYT doesn't have the statistical wherewithal to quantify this.
I, for one, would like to know how likely it is that Putin put Trump in the White House.
4
This is exactly what the Soviet Union would have done if it had survived into the Digital Information Age. That has been the success of Putin -- dragging the rotting body of the USSR into the 21st Century -- not to try to revive the ideology, but to further the aims of his current kleptocracy.
If you ask most Americans in a flash quiz, they would probably say that Donald Trump was President in 2016. In fact, though, it was Barack Obama. It was on his watch, the watch of his security agencies and DOJ, that this interference took place. At the time, President Obama denied that there could be any such interference. Let's hope President Trump and his Administration does better in 2018 and 2020.
3
Putin is trying to restore the USSR, at least as much as possible. NATO, the EU, and USA stand in the way.
4
In the end, the true responsibility rests with the American electorate who has gone out of its way to reward pig-headed obstructionists in every congressional election since 2010 and then handed them the WH in addition to Congress in 2016. They'll pay for a generation now that this has resulted into handing them the SCOTUS too. It's hard to feel any sympathy.
3
I'm afraid you are correct.
The real election meddling came from Comey, McCabe, Bruce Orr, Nellie Orr, Strozk, Paige and the complicit media. Together they created a fake story with a fake dossier that the media reported on for two years. Their deep state story is slowly unfolding but the media will not publish it as they all practice censorship through omission.
4
Exactly! I saw all of those people eating lunch with the complicit media at the Panera on Connecticut Avenue in the fall of 2016. They were in a booth and looking at a "dossier" (I don't know if it was real or fake) while giggling. It seemed like they were plotting something. Thanks so much for enlightening us about this conspiracy.
1
One thing still evades me - what is Russia's end game ? Did they really want Trump as POTUS? Or were they just interfering to show that they could? Casting doubt on the whole process?
how about how we destroyed the soviet union and now putin wants to destroy us? he is a vendictive killer whose agenda Trump has obediently followed
Republicans are willing send thousands of lives and billions of dollars to fight oil wars in the mideast but refuse to spend a little more money on protecting our actual votes. Is that because they believe they benefit from the Russian invasion of our polling places?
6
The argument that the Trump campaign was a bunch of novices who didn't know they couldn't get help from a foreign government is nonsense. The campaign was told during the primaries that their outreach to other nations for their support was a crime.
The Australians even tweeted to the NYT asking you to tell Trump to stop begging for help from them, it is illegal. That was in June 2016. The Trump campaign knew it was illegal, yet it appears they kept right at it with the Russians anyways.
To say that the Russians didn't effect the election is also nonsense. Propaganda is how authoritarians hold onto power, if it didn't work there would be no authoritarian leaders. Add to that the theft and distribution of DNC private communications (makes the Watergate break-in look like a bunch of amateurs) and the millions of dollars of cash contributions from the Russians to support the Trump campaign, again if cash contributions didn't influence elections American Billionaires would keep their money not invest it in political candidates.
It is clear the Russians got the man they wanted into the White House and America is now paying the price.
5
Congratulations on this amazing work and all the work done to get here! Keep it up!!!
4
America elected a man ill equipped to be president. He is intellectually shallow, morally empty and possess the temperament of a 9 year old bully. Putin is a vengeful man with the ambition to rule Russia in the old way of the Soviet era. He has expansionist plans that see his personal power and wealth rule his universe.
Americans need to take back control of their own nation and elections. The best way to do that is to get out and vote. But before they vote they need to get informed on the issues that affect them - health care, the economy, jobs, education, civil rights, immigration and bunch of other policies that affect them.
Republican voters need to stop listening to slogans and making political decisions based solely on slogans. The MAGA nonsense is not policy. It is a way for politicians to appeal to the less educated who do not read and get their news from Fox. Fox is a Republican ultra right wing conservative tool dedicated to the propagation of a highly partisan agenda that favours the rich of the nation.
When you add the fact that the Republican led congress and senate are completely without any possible level of courage to stand up to outside influence of the election process. And why would they when Putin and Fox is helping them achieve their objectives of robbing the treasury of the nation and giving all the money to their rich friends.
Democrats have to go vote this time. They stayed home in the last election and helped cause this mess.
6
Lew~have you forgotten Dems won the vote by approx. 3 million? we did get out and vote. it was the electoral that won Trump; and my guess Russia & Manafort pushed him over the finish
But the Republicans do not object to Putin, do they? And aren’t they lucky? They have Donald Trump.
Grandchildren, forgive them (Trump supporters), they know not what they do.
But the elected Republicans who could do something to save us, do know what they do, and they do nothing.
7
Thanks for this article. And thank you even more for the timeline, which I have saved.
This is a complex web and it is hard to keep the various strands in mind and to figure out how they are connected.
Putin, as an ex-KGB spook, seems to have set this up so that uncovering one strand would not necessarily lead to the others. Instead of one big smoking gun, there are multiple smoking guns.
The similarities between the techniques Manafort used in promoting the Putin Puppet in Ukraine and the Russians used in their Trump Campaign are startling and disquieting. Was this a template created by Manafort or by Putin?
Finally, Clinton’s loss and Putin’s interference are connected. First, more than just emails from the DNC were stolen. The DNC playbook for the election was also stolen. This is akin to the NE Patriots stealing the Eagles’ playbook before the Super Bowl. Secondly, there is usually not just one reason, the “but for” , for a political loss. Rather, there are a several reasons. Having to fight both the candidate and Putin put Clinton at an unfair disadvantage. More so because she didn’t know about Putin’s efforts. . Even with that unfair fight Clinton won the popular vote decisively.
23
We await a companion piece that will explain why Congressional Republicans travel to Russia on America's Independence Day for closed-door meetings with Russians. And why they refuse to take precautions against Russian meddling in upcoming elections. It's almost as if they want the Russians to continue their interference in our democracy.
307
Well, my goodness, I wonder why...? Do you think maybe because their allegiance is to the conspiracy and the Trump-Putin deal? This is not "interference" in our democracy (federal republic), this is wholesale destruction of institutions, norms, protections, and rule of law. This is an attack on our republic. An attack aided and abetted and endorsed by republicans everywhere.
This is a lot bigger than people think and a lot more dangerous. Don't be fooled by "Trump" playing the idiot.
3
what the foolish congressmen do not realize is simply this : put yourself in OUR shoes (well you really should do that anyway as you are OUR representatives, I heard thta somewhere)
hw does it look from the outside?
with your money grubbing blinders on, it;s no wonder you;ll be swept out of office even in gerrymandered districts.
Enough is enough Dana Rohtrbacher and Co.
1
The only conclusion I have been able to come up with to explain Congressional Republican apparent acceptance of Russian intervention in our elections is that most Republicans (with the exception of the late Senator McCain) believe that Putin is at heart a Republican and shares their values.
Excellent summary, but misses the opportunity to explain how weaponizing 140 million profiles would be perceived by marketers, advertisers, and Russian operatives focused on destroying Clinton and electing Trump. Ask statisticians how many voters would be influenced by this level of personalized ads? Would it exceed the 80K that cost Clinton the election.
Cambridge Analytica is ignored? Why?
AMI, The National Enquirer, and David Pecker displayed truly nasty front pages wherein Hillary Clinton was on death’s door, stroked, obese, tumor ridden, a killer for years at the checkout counter of every supermarket in America. Then became a propaganda arm for Trump and Putin:(https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/tabloid-newspapers-trump... but did not get a mention?
Putin’s reach extended to feeding the National Enquirer and collaborated with Cambridge Analytica but fail to get the notoriety that they have earned.
36
You are right...the exponential effect of all the other moving parts must be explored and exposed!
Everyone reading Shane & Mazetti's eye opening report should also read David Unger's "House of Trump, House of Putin" which is even more frightening. The Putin flags hanging from the NYC bridges just reinforce in my mind how infested America has become with Russians who are hard core Putin admirers. The Russian/KGB mafia has a freehand in America and not one of them has ever been deported. I wish Shane & Mazetti's next investigative report explores the reasons why the Russian/KGB mob of Brooklyn seems immune from prosecution.
30
I agree! The information in "House of Trump, House of Putin is actually scary!
@JAB. Agree; there is also a community of them in Queens!! Of tremendous concern to me, along with Brooklyn! Frightening!
My heart is heavy and I feel a sense of loss reading this. How on earth we gave a "victory," a monumental one, to a country (Russia, that is) that is built on failed ideology just a century ago? It took a century and innumerable amount of lives and resources to topple what was started with so-called Bolshevik revolution. But it only took a narcissist who has no sense of history to give it all up. Yet, the real traitors are the ones who have facilitated such a puppet.
Is SC majority and a tax cut worth it? Republicans, don't you have any decency left?
57
Is SC majority and a tax cut worth it?
Sure. Totally.
SCOTUS is, for the moment, the true power in this country. You get that stacked and you can do anything you want. It's the big prize. A lifetime appointment to run roughshod over rights. You get that locked down - including the federal courts - you don't even NEED to care about controlling Congress.
If Individual-1 succeeds in radically transforming the federal republic and subverting the constitution, then SCOTUS and Congress both will be moot.
3
WE already know the answer to your final question. A resounding NO!
Decency, patriotism, love of country, respect for our institutions, all out the window under the reign of Mitch McConnell (and Paul Ryan): as evil a pair as has ever darkened the halls of congress.
1
And here it is:
" the party’s national security luminaries vowed publicly to try to stop the election of a candidate 'so utterly unfitted to the office.'"
These are the same GOP players who now hail every move Trump makes, proving once again that the GOP cares about the 1%, and not about America
4
The Russians interfered, but Hillary Clinton lost the election all by herself-- and a media that was captivated by Trump and gave Clinton, according to the 10/18/2018 NYTimes, a "91% Chance of winning." Or did the Russians "Hack" the NYTimes poll- causing folks to get complacent and not vote?
And where's the part where the Russians made Clinton call folks who voted for Obama and were considering Trump a "Basket of Deplorable's"? Or how the Russian make her not campaign in Wisconsin and Michigan? Even President Obama criticized that decision.
So while this is fascinating and troubling, the reason Clinton lost is rather ordinary and simple. It's the same reason Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won- even without the help of the NYTimes- candidates cannot take voters for granted.
89
@profwilliams ~
Even though your comment is a NYT pick, it is an over simplification of what happened during election 2016.
You write: "Or did the Russians "Hack" the NYTimes poll- causing folks to get complacent and not vote?" No, but the NYT poll that gave her a huge lead probably convinced some people that they did not need to vote.
The Russians did hack the DNC and probably other sites of which we are unaware. There really was a lot of hateful fake news generated online about Hillary Clinton.
There was voter suppression in Detroit, suppression of voters likely to vote for Hillary Clinton. Many people find it curious that just 77,000+ votes in MI, WI and PA tipped the Electoral College to trump. Are we absolutely sure there was no vote tampering or hacking in those states? I say there may well have been.
Don't forget Comey's actions that turned the momentum Hillary had built!
The breadth and depth of the forces that aligned against Hillary Clinton gave us the worst and most ill qualified man as president.
116
Found within profwilliams comment is at least part of the answer to how and why Clinton lost: people willingly lying or misrepresenting what she said.
Such as calling all Trump supporters rather than half a "Basket of Deplorable's" or those who voted for Obama but were considering Trump a "Basket of Deplorable's".
At the LGBT for Hillary Gala where she was speaking to a diverse audience of Americans whose rights were and are being threatened by Republicans who want to label basic human rights that they expect as "special rights" for other people she said "You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up." There is no denying that many supporters were in fact misogynistic, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic. Hardly Obama supporters.
What they leave out is what she went on to say: "But the other basket -- and I know this because I see friends from all over America here... but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they're just desperate for change... Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well."
35
To Marie ~ They leave out what she went on to say intentionally so they can have that nasty soundbite that misrepresents Hillary Clinton.
Thank you for the clarification. The truth bears repeating.
16
This week, a Federal judge in Atlanta who recognized the vulnerability of the state's touch screen voting system (demonstrated by scientists appearing before her as easy to hack), refused to void the procedure and replace it with safe paper ballots. The lame excuse was costs and "chaos" , and this was done despite the uncontradicted evidence that two Russian operatives had "visited" the state in 2016 with a burning interest in state elections.
The 2016 elections and the upcoming midterms are totally under the supervision and control of Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, the Republican nominee for governor and a man who grovels in the presence of Donald Trump and has refused to relinquish his election supervisory powers.
Stakes are high but hopes are slim when a judge places the costs of having an honest election process over the fundamental rights of voters. Chalk this one up for Trump and his Russian buddies.
133
There has always been a question as to why the Russians did it -- no clear, sort of unambiguous and easily understood answers. What does he get?
It seems like there is one here ... Putin backed..., like large number of US voters voted for... the person running against Hillary Clinton.
I know it's not that simple, but it still seems like an important factor
Maybe you missed this line in this piece of fiction -
"And there is a plausible case that Mr. Putin succeeded in delivering the presidency to his admirer, Mr. Trump, though it cannot be proved or disproved."
Even the author admits that he made up dozens of false statements in this article.
2
Trump was really a dark horse primary candidate. So how did he win THE PRIMARIES? the Russians hacked all 50 primaries in 50 states?
Trump was widely predicted to make a fool of himself, as he was just an abrasive reality show host and failed real estate mogul. He was expected to be the first to drop out.
The WIDELY held GOP "favorite" was ... Jeb(!) Bush, brother of W and son of 41. In fact, one of the reasons HIllary lost was her campaign spent 2 years planning how to run against JEB(!). When that did not transpire, they could not reconfigure and recalculate fast enough.
Likewise, Rubio and Kasich and others fell by the wayside, one after another -- and I notice the NYT never asked "why", though this is critical. (Would Rubio -- a Cuban -- or Cruz -- ditto -- have worked with Russians? Would Kasich?)
They lost because they said they wanted to let illegal aliens get amnesty and a path to citizenship -- REWARDED for their illegal actions and job stealing. In fact, all 16 losing GOP candidates believed in accepting illegal immigration and DACA. EVERY ONE OF THEM.
Except Trump.
WINNER: TRUMP!
ON TO 2020!
1
So, in retrospect, how smart was it for HRC to use her own email server?
5
Considering there is no evidence of the emails on her server getting hacked, very smart. The State Department had been hacked, some staff using public servers were, but not Hillary.
4
@ Karl, that's the only question you come away with after reading this article? (Especially when there's not even an indication that Hillary's server was ever hacked?)
1
Rather than feeling used or chagrined by the means and ease in which they were conned and manipulated by the Russians, Trump and the Republicans have no choice but denial to save face and having to admit they were pawns and duped by Putin & Co. Admitting to be conned and used is hard for anyone but hardest for Trump who is accustomed to being the one scheming and using people to advance his interests.
7
Great article.The most important takeaway is how clueless the FBI was in not knowing this was going on.Unreal.
4
You gotta put Trump right up their with Pres. Buchanan before the Civil War.
He said it was illegal but there was nothing he could do about.
Trump says it is illegal (hacking of election), but there is nothing he can do about it too so why not aid and abet Putin and make money off of it.
24
If this article and the general editorial thrust of the Times over the last year is not a campaign to influence (not to mention reinterpret) the election I don't know what is.
9
I am not sure what you are saying Daphne. Are you saying that the Times should suppress the truth (a very Russian thing to do by the way and why Putin was upset with the US because it revealed the truth that he didn't want to people to know) or that the information in the article is incorrect and made up for the sole purpose of misdirecting people's votes this fall?
16
She's saying that the editorial side of the Times, like most of the country with some brains and patriotism left, are anti-Russian, and anti-Trump. Daphne, the Times is an American paper. Putin is not.
9
You mean detailed, sourced reporting on events that happened? While the Times is not Bretibart or the Drudge Report, it does have some folks who know how to research and write a story.
5
Finally, we begin to understand what happened in 2016. I pray everyone reads this and the fog lifts, and we stop fighting amongst ourselves, which only makes our enemies stronger. All the partisan fighting and mistrust is exactly what our enemies want. A house divided against itself cannot stand. Let's put aside the hysteria and have the strength to remember how to be patriots and reject those who have taken advantage of the Russian attack on our country for their own greedy interests. Then we can really put America first and restore and rededicate our Republic to the ideals upon which it was founded.
20
Ignorance and greed without bounds. Leveraging our democracy or our sustainability on the planet is really just the same thing--maximizing power and wealth for the entitled few at any cost.
10
Only a fool wants to run an empire, and only a fool gloats at hurting America.
I don't want Putin as my leader, and I don't want the Russian government to ever again think that they can manipulate our open electoral system to hurt America to weaken our country.
That means a substantial payback...this illuminating article does help but still, one needs to assess just what Putin and his oligarchs fear the most, like American free press outlets, and once Putin's creature is out of the White House, that hammer must fall. I am told that our cyberwar capability has been hamstrung by Trump, but certainly the gloves need to come off.
I hope that when the Dems retake the White House from the Russians, they find a way to make someone like Hillary Clinton the American Ambassador, or maybe Michael McFaul, the former ambassador who the Kremlin seems to hate almost as much as Mrs. Clinton.
Democrats have little taste for the kind of war that is coming, so I hope they unleash those who do, people who have worked for decades in intelligence.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
33
I thought it was completely normal and legal in US Capitalist Democracy to take money and help from campaign donors and then do their bidding once in office? Is that not what the US constitution enshrined in 1776??
1
The real problem here is that Trump who's a tool of Putin will not use all the resources we have to combat the Russian cyber invasion.
Our 2018 midterms and the 2020 elections will continue to be targeted until the GOP wakes up and tells Trump to do his job or get out.
The internet is both the greatest and the worst thing ever created.
247
OMG.
Republicans are co-conspirators. They are PART of the deal. They are not opposed to it. They love it and they want more of it. This is a coup. This is an illegitimate "administration".
PEOPLE need to wake UP!
2
Matthew, you need to judge people by the content of their character and not by a label, other then that your part of the problem and not the solution.
That's EXACTLY what I am doing, BTO. I am judging republicans by their char..., no, strike, that, by their ACTIONS. By what they are saying and doing. If that does not concern you given where we are at, then I dunno what to say. Would only have to assume you like what you are seeing.
1
Some of this I never even knew about, like the banners. Some I found out as part of the investigation. None of it had any effect on my decision making process, so I doubt it had much on any informed and educated person. The president has been keeping his promises and being somewhat harsh on Russians in actions if not in words. So this is basically nothing. What is something is the portions of the government who to this day are attempting to overturn the results of this election, that being their power being restrained or rolled back. Both political individuals and employees of the federal government obstructing this administration's promises. That is effecting elections much more than most of these simple Russian actions. Not to say that improvements are not required. No voting process should be connected to any network, surely not the internet. The DNC needs better passwords and less corruption in their emails. Citizens need to be informed so that foolish facebook ads don't influence them.
7
While I must accept, with respect for our Democratic Republic and our system of government, that your guy won, I do not, nor ever will accept your's or Republican's tacit acceptance of direct interference into our elections by any foreign influence, or otherwise. You may enjoy riding on the back of Mr. Miller's truck, but we never will. The next generation of Americans will be wary of this subtle subterfuge and we shall immunize our electorate by truthful education on what really happened in the election of 2016. Thanks for such an enlightening article as this one. The Russian's may have warped minds and our past election---NEVER AGAIN!!!
8
Well written vulcanalex, although I disagree on degree.
Yes, democrats were careless in their email security, certainly can go to the left extreme on politics, and can be just as violent as right wing extremists and have as much social media mis information as the right but it ends there with Trump.
Trump is a bigot, rabble rouser, pathological liar, philanderer, admitted sexual predator, de facto Russian spy, ego maniac demagogue.
There is no other president in modern history than can come close to this shameful behavior.
Yes, cheer that he cut back on regs, cut corporate taxes and will probably get at least two conservative Supreme Court justices if you wish but any number of republicans could have gotten it without being a disgrace like Trump,
4
There is no place actually named "Tennessee", Vulcanalex. That is a made-up name, inserted into atlases and internet maps to trick Russian hacksters.
We're having lots of rain over here, Vulcanalex. How's the weather in Moscow?
3
What about the Russian hacking of state voter rolls?
What about the allegations of Mario Rubio and others that the Russians supported Trump and spread false propaganda against his fellow Republicans during the primary election season?
Was Paul Manafort hired as campaign manager in large part as a conduit to foreign money and influence in the general election?
What about Trump's close affiliation with many oligarchs who bought his properties at inflated prices? Were some of them Russian agents? Did any work in the Trump campaign?
6
How about a detailed report like this on the activities at the justice department and FBI where compelling evidence seems to exist that efforts were made to influence the election outcome as well.It appears that Russia has better disinformation people than we have at justice and the FBI.
5
And the continuing obstruction by employees of the administration?
4
Why don't you present the 'compelling evidence'?
What we do know is that if Comey had been trying to get Clinton elected he couldn't have done better than publicly announce he was reopening the investigation into Clinton a month before the elections while keeping the Trump investigation secret.
8
This article recounts the opening, and with our strength as a nation brought to bear, the closing battles for the soul, perhaps the spine, of America.
Freedom doesn't come like a bird on a win.
You must live for it, fight for it,
and every generation must win it again on its own.
(loosely remembered as the theme song from the mid-20th Century movie, The Inheritance)
34
Anyone who thinks the Chinese, Europeans, and many M.I.T./CalTech I.T. students aren't hacking computers, s/he has to be either a child or fool.
And Web adverts? Like adverts work 100%? Talk to Eric Cantor (R) and Joe Crowley (D) about that -- prepare for gales of laughter.
The working class is so much smarter than the lifetime political class, it isn't funny. It is time for them to go, they've been paid, 2x. Leave .. now. Thanks, we'll clean up your messes.
1
@Bang Ding Ow: I worked many years in advertising. You can spend millions on ad campaigns and have your product fail miserably. Advertising barely works, that's the amazing thing -- yet companies, desperate for sales, continue to believe in it!
In fact....often advertising backfires. Hillary spent $1.5 BILLION on her campaign, much of it for TV ads and yet it was all undone in a few seconds when she mocked half of the potential voters in the country as "deplorables in a basket".
I live in Ohio, which is a hugely contested state. We are inundated with TV and radio ads in every major election -- more than other states I am sure -- plus now email ads and solicitations and social media. I saw probably thousands of Hillary ads. They were terrible, all of them attack ads against Trump -- often simply making fun of his looks. They never explained why Hillary was a good choice.
Trump put out maybe 1 ad for every 10 of hers, and if you look them up....they were quiet, classy and similar to the Reagan "morning in America" ads.
Russians had nothing to do with any of this.
1
@ Concerned, if you've got evidence of your claim that "Russians had nothing to do with any of this" election sabotage and cultivation of Donald Trump as a Russian agent, then please show it to us.
2
A nation as superficial and self-involved, wrapped up in childish narcissism like social media, deserves to be taken over. As in a hostile corporate takeover. And for the same reason. Complacency is always fatal in the business and political worlds. At least the Russians will improve our scientific and mathematical education...
5
Your perceptions are based on a highly biased view of the population of the US. Most of us are not as you describe, we need to go to work so we don't have time for such, and are mostly smarter than to be influenced by stupid stuff like in this article.
4
RE: Stupid stuff.
Is it stupid because it is untrue, inconveniently true, or just plain true?
One thing for sure the nation is led by one who is "superficial and self-involved, wrapped up in childish narcissism like social media" even if most American's aren't. But I'd say that heeding a warning of complacency wouldn't be stupid and that there are still patriots left in this country. At least there are here, where it began.
3
So when you develop a chronic health condition due to the all the pesticides in the soil which has transferred to your food, and the air is filled with smoke and has a yellow tinge, AND you are unable to get the healthcare that you need, remember what you have written. You created this for yourself.
2