Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MelissaB

(16,420 posts)
Mon Dec 25, 2017, 04:30 PM Dec 2017

Kremlin trolls burned across the Internet as Washington debated options

Source: Washington Post

The first email arrived in the inbox of CounterPunch, a left-leaning American news and opinion website, at 3:26 a.m. — the middle of the day in Moscow.

“Hello, my name is Alice Donovan and I’m a beginner freelance journalist,” read the Feb. 26, 2016 message.

The FBI was tracking Donovan as part of a months-long counterintelligence operation code-named “NorthernNight.” Internal bureau reports described her as a pseudonymous foot soldier in an army of Kremlin-led trolls seeking to undermine America’s democratic institutions.

Her first articles as a freelancer for CounterPunch and at least 10 other online publications weren’t especially political. As the 2016 presidential election heated up, Donovan’s message shifted. Increasingly, she seemed to be doing the Kremlin’s bidding by stoking discontent toward Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton and touting WikiLeaks, which U.S. officials say was a tool of Russia’s broad influence operation to affect the presidential race.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/kremlin-trolls-burned-across-the-internet-as-washington-debated-options/2017/12/23/e7b9dc92-e403-11e7-ab50-621fe0588340_story.html?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.1366840b1889

21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Kremlin trolls burned across the Internet as Washington debated options (Original Post) MelissaB Dec 2017 OP
More from Eric Garland MelissaB Dec 2017 #1
Not surprised. I think that we're going to find a lot of alt-left sites like Counterpunch, Alternet, Maven Dec 2017 #7
These are likely different things. Igel Dec 2017 #15
Make sure you catch the anecdote about a U.S. intelligence briefing for NATO officials. MelissaB Dec 2017 #2
'The Americans had listened politely but didnt seem particularly alarmed by the threat, elleng Dec 2017 #4
Well, I guess we were warned, but people thought it couldn't happen to us. MelissaB Dec 2017 #5
Yes, we WERE warned, elleng Dec 2017 #6
There is a reason Europeans still use paper ballots dalton99a Dec 2017 #12
Counterpunch is not left-leaning oberliner Dec 2017 #3
How did they allow "Alice" to write in the first place? alp227 Dec 2017 #18
Good question oberliner Dec 2017 #19
There Are a Few Suspicious People Here at DU Leith Dec 2017 #8
If you go down the road jl_theprofessor Dec 2017 #9
Thanks for your "concern." PSPS Dec 2017 #13
It Doesn't Matter If I Agree or Disagree with Someone Leith Dec 2017 #14
LOL Skittles Dec 2017 #17
+1 dalton99a Dec 2017 #11
a few? I believe it is a substantial number Skittles Dec 2017 #16
KnR Hekate Dec 2017 #10
"Gentlemen don't read each other's mail." malthaussen Dec 2017 #20
Part of the problem is... SpankMe Dec 2017 #21

Maven

(10,533 posts)
7. Not surprised. I think that we're going to find a lot of alt-left sites like Counterpunch, Alternet,
Mon Dec 25, 2017, 05:50 PM
Dec 2017

TYT, etc. were infiltrated if not wholly coopted by this influence operation.

And I don't just mean Kremlin imposters like "Alice Donovan". I also mean insiders like Greenwald, Scahill, Cenk, etc. whose fixation on the so-called "corruption" of Democratic politicians and extreme skepticism toward evidence of the Russian interference campaign dovetail oh-so-nicely with the Kremlin's propaganda objectives. Count on it.

Igel

(35,338 posts)
15. These are likely different things.
Mon Dec 25, 2017, 10:01 PM
Dec 2017

Disinformation builds on bad news.

Standard tropes in the Soviet press in the '70s started by citing accurate statistics, then moving off into half-truths and invalid deductions. The lazy thinking person's response would be to check the article, and would find that a lot of the facts were spot-on accurate. Then, when it became harder to verify other facts, there was confidence that since some or even most of the facts were accurate, the rest must be.

In the case of US politics, a lot of progressives didn't like HRC. This was during the primaries, when being anti-HRC was not the same thing as being anti-Democratic. Remember that alternative candidate Sanders?

However, the FSB was anti-HRC, trolled HRC, and both fed and encouraged domestic complaints. Which is also very Soviet. They don't so much create discontent as find it, feed it, channel it and shape it to serve their needs. But like many activists in the US, like those protesting Trump after his election, like many others who disliked HRC, liked Trump, or later hated Trump, their discontent could be fanned and shaped.

Remember this: Just because 30, 40, 50, even 80 or 90% of the facts provided by Russian sources turn out to be completely accurate says *nothing* as to the accuracy of the remaining facts. And the more those remaining facts seem to fit and gibe perfectly with what is wanted to be believed, the more suspicious you should regard them. Because that's how disinformation works, and one can't trumpet, "The FSB is engaging in classic disinformation tactics" and disregard what those tactics are.

MelissaB

(16,420 posts)
2. Make sure you catch the anecdote about a U.S. intelligence briefing for NATO officials.
Mon Dec 25, 2017, 04:42 PM
Dec 2017
The Obama administration had gone through an agonizing learning curve. The Russians, beginning in 2014, had hacked the State Department and the White House before targeting the Democratic National Committee and other political institutions. By the time U.S. officials came to grips with the threat, it was too late to act. Now they wanted to make sure NATO allies didn’t repeat their mistakes.

Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO secretary general, gaveled the closed-door session to order, and the Americans ran through their 30-minute presentation. The Europeans had for years been journeying to Washington to warn senior U.S. officials about Russian meddling in their elections. The Americans had listened politely but didn’t seem particularly alarmed by the threat, reflecting a widely held belief inside the U.S. government that its democratic institutions and society weren’t nearly as vulnerable as those in Europe.

For the first time since the days after 9/11, the American officials in Brussels sounded overwhelmed and humbled, said a European ambassador in the room.

When the briefers finished, the allies made clear to the Americans that little in the presentation surprised them. “This is what we’ve been telling you for some time,” the Europeans said, according to Lute, the NATO ambassador. “This is what we live with. Welcome to our lives.”

elleng

(131,074 posts)
4. 'The Americans had listened politely but didnt seem particularly alarmed by the threat,
Mon Dec 25, 2017, 04:46 PM
Dec 2017

reflecting a widely held belief inside the U.S. government that its democratic institutions and society weren’t nearly as vulnerable as those in Europe.

For the first time since the days after 9/11, the American officials in Brussels sounded overwhelmed and humbled, said a European ambassador in the room.

When the briefers finished, the allies made clear to the Americans that little in the presentation surprised them. “This is what we’ve been telling you for some time,” the Europeans said.'

MelissaB

(16,420 posts)
5. Well, I guess we were warned, but people thought it couldn't happen to us.
Mon Dec 25, 2017, 04:51 PM
Dec 2017

Last edited Mon Dec 25, 2017, 06:04 PM - Edit history (1)

Guess what! We now have a Russian asset in the oval office.

elleng

(131,074 posts)
6. Yes, we WERE warned,
Mon Dec 25, 2017, 04:55 PM
Dec 2017

and 'people' should NOT have thought it couldn't happen to us; it was happening, in front of 'our' eyes.

alp227

(32,047 posts)
18. How did they allow "Alice" to write in the first place?
Tue Dec 26, 2017, 03:23 AM
Dec 2017

Are their standards really as low as American Thinker or Thought Catalog? IMO it's partially on Counterpunch for failing to vet this "Alice Donovan" person before publishing. This is some Jayson Blair or Stephen Glass type of shit.

Why do you not see Counterpunch as "left"?

 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
19. Good question
Tue Dec 26, 2017, 09:33 AM
Dec 2017

Probably because she was writing the kind of crap they like to publish.

The site is not left - it relentlessly attacked both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders and is generally hostile to Democrats.

It is fringe-kook-extremist type stuff - publishing the hate-mongers and the dubious.

 

jl_theprofessor

(95 posts)
9. If you go down the road
Mon Dec 25, 2017, 08:03 PM
Dec 2017

of accusing everyone you disagree with of being a Russian shill, it makes it impossible to have honest dialogue with anyone.

Leith

(7,813 posts)
14. It Doesn't Matter If I Agree or Disagree with Someone
Mon Dec 25, 2017, 09:10 PM
Dec 2017

I rather like reading different points of view and different ways of looking at things, issues, events, and people.

There are other signs more noticeable than strobe lights if you know what to look for. THAT is what I'm talking about.


SpankMe

(2,965 posts)
21. Part of the problem is...
Tue Dec 26, 2017, 12:11 PM
Dec 2017

...the Editor from Veterans Today, Gordon Duff. He's quoted as saying: "“I don’t edit what people do. If it’s original, I’ll publish it. I don’t decide what’s real and not real.”

THIS is the real problem. "I don't care if it's real or not."

This is why the US is doomed.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Kremlin trolls burned acr...