THE FAKE FACEBOOK RUSSIA HYSTERIA! HALF OF FACEBOOK ADS RAN AFTER ELECTION, 25% NEVER RAN AT ALL…BITTER LOSERS!
Hillary Clinton’s campaign spent $1.2 Billion last year ( the biggest in US history ) and watch it went down in flames but the bitter losers from the left are looking for every excuse why they lost and we are supposed to believe Russia swayed the election with a couple Facebook ads.
Russia Today reported this week that half of the Facbook ads ran after the election and 25% of the ads never ran at all.
Via Russia Today:
More than half of the ‘Russian advertisements’ on Facebook that supposedly influenced the 2016 US elections actually appeared after the vote, the company has revealed. Nobody even saw one-quarter of the ads bought by “inauthentic accounts.”In September, Facebook vowed to deliver Congress some 3,000 ads purchased between 2015 and 2017 and connected to 470 “inauthentic” accounts and pages, which, as it continues to say, “appear to have come from a Russian entity.”However, Moscow has blasted those allegations, while repeatedly stating that it had nothing to do with the 2016 vote.“44% of total ad impressions [number of times ads were displayed] were before the US election on November 8, 2016; 56% were after the election,” the social media giant stated on Monday as it published some “facts” about “Russian ads.”However, over “25% of the ads were never shown to anyone,” the Monday ‘factsheet’ says, adding the posts have reached some 10 million users.
Outlets like the USA Today, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show, and the Associated Press went wild at the Department of Homeland Security’s announcement that they, as Maddow put it, “knew at least by June that 21 states had been targeted by Russian hackers during the election … targeting their election infrastructure.”
In Greenwald’s words, “So what was wrong with this story? Just one small thing: it was false.”
Greenwald goes on to describe the precipitous narrative collapse this entire story suffered Wednesday, as DHS was forced to equivocate and then backtrack on the dubious claim.
Look at that! Russian firm bought more than 3,000 Facebook ads for Hillary Clinton, Black Lives Matter, Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein last 2016 election. Hey, witch hunt counsel Robert Mueller, why don’t you look this way for your Russian collusion?
( Daily Mail ) Alleged serial cannibal Dmitry Baksheev used dating sites to recruit women who he and his wife then killed and ate, it is claimed.
Wife Natalia Baksheeva has told police the gruesome family had at least 30 victims over 18 years, and it is feared she fed human meat to student pilots in the military academy where she was a nurse, according to reports in Russia.
State investigators are seeking to verify the claims about dozens of victims of the sinister pair from Krasnodar who were detained after seven bags of body parts were found in their fridge and freezer.
At least one jar with pickled human remains, and 19 slices of skin were also discovered in the macabre flat.
Many cans with steamed meat were found in their kitchen, a source told Komsomolskaya Pravda.
Today it was claimed that wife Natalia Baksheeva, 42, had taken her 35 year old orphan husband in as a teenager and wed him when he turned 18.
Police fear that Baksheev found victims by setting up meetings on dating websites.
His wife is reported to have been shown the faces of missing women in southern Russia and identified dozens who she claimed were their victims.
A police source said: ‘Going through the photographs, the woman has recognised more than 30 victims that they killed and eaten together with her husband.
‘A psychologist was sent from Nizhny Novgorod to make her talk.’
Robert Mueller & Jeff Sessions are in possession of evidence ‘Debunking Russian Hacking Narrative’.
Patrick Lawrence’s article “A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack” reported on a recently published memo prepared by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) that the theft of the DNC e-mails was not a hack, but some kind of inside leak that did not involve Russia.
This is in addition to published detailed report by mysterious IT specialist named The Forensicator who debunked Russian hoax story using the “estimated speed of transfer (23 MB/s)” at which the documents were copied, showing DNC documents could not have been copied at such speed from a remote location but by a leaker inside their own office.
Disobedient Media reports:
Carter published a new article earlier today, which indicated that authorities including Robert Mueller and Jeff Sessions have been informed of the latest findings and evidence which may dismantle the Russian hacking narrative by VIPS member Skip Folden.
Carter stated in his report: “Since the original report was sent out, Skip Folden, one of the co-authors of the VIPS report, has sent a far more detailed report to the Office of Special Counsel (Robert Mueller), Office of the Attorney-General (Jeff Sessions) and, I believe more recently, to additional parties that will be disclosed in the week ahead (along with further details about the contents of that report). The new report covers more than any of the previous reports (going beyond what Forensicator and myself even have the means to assess).”
According to Carter, critics of the report are ignoring the following evidence:
The framing from most critics recently has done little more than construct a straw-man to attack (typically by making it appear as though confidence of those calling for investigation is solely based on transfer speeds that were mentioned in the 7th conclusion in Forensicator’s analysis).
- inconsistencies and anomalies with Guccifer 2.0’s (G2’s) behavior versus his stated intentions
- the consistent poor quality of G2’s leaks (link)
- predictable outcome in terms of headlines he would generate in the media (link)
- his multi-part Russian-origin deception and that GRU/FSB and allies would not purposefully draw attention to Russia (link)
- associating self to Wikileaks on day #1 and on various dates after that (including the day the DNC emails were published) (link)
- creating a blog and luring in press with the Trump research (the timing of it in relation to CrowdStrike/DNC announcements and the nature of the first documents leaked) (link)
- the linguistic analysis showing no syntactical traits of a Russian communicating in English (link)
- the discredited breach claims (link)
- the fact none of his hacks were verifiable
- the premise of a talented hacker adopting another hacker’s name and sticking “2.0” on the end of it
- that every association between G2 and the APT28/29 malware and infrastructure ended up collapsing under scrutiny (link)
the attempt to fool (with multimedia props) a reporter into thinking G2 was tied to a hacker with root access to DCLeaks (link)
- NBC claimed that Paul Manafort’s notes from the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with White House aide Jared Kushner, Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer included the word “donations” near a reference to the Republican National Committee.
- Politico: Manafort’s notes “are not seen as damaging to the Trump family or campaign officials”
From Daily Caller:
NBC News dropped what the network hyped as a “potential bombshell” last week. “Manafort Notes From Russian Meet Contain Cryptic Reference to ‘Donations,’” the original headline read. The story claimed that Manafort’s notes from the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with White House aide Jared Kushner, Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer included the word “donations” near a reference to the Republican National Committee.
NBC began walking back the “potential bombshell” almost immediately, issuing a correction the same day noting that the word “donation” didn’t actually appear in the notes, but quoting one source who said the word “donor” was in the notes.
But NBC’s corrected story still wasn’t accurate, according to a new Politico report, which said that the word “donor” didn’t appear in Manafort’s notes. Moreover, Manafort’s notes “are not seen as damaging to the Trump family or campaign officials,” Politico reported. The outlet cited several sources who have seen Manafort’s notes, while NBC relied on “two sources briefed on the evidence” to make its claim.
Even before Politico fully debunked NBC’s reporting, the network’s decision to publish the story came under fire. The day after NBC originally published the story, The Washington Post’s Erik Wemple criticized the story, which he said “provides only fodder for innuendo and conspiracy, not for sound conclusions about what happened.”
NBC News’ botched “bombshell” is just the latest anonymously sourced Trump-Russia story to fall apart.
Read more: ‘Innuendo And Conspiracy’
Key details of Donald Trump Jr.’s meeting with Senate investigators have already leaked.
According to the New York Times, Trump Jr. took the ‘Russia meeting’ to gauge Hillary Clinton’s ‘fitness’ for office.
The group that organized the meeting with Trump advisers and the Russian lawyers was the same Democratic group Fusion GPS that was behind the discredited Trump dossier, according to a report from Circa News.
Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Democrat linked Russian lawyer, who met with the Trump team was denied a U.S. visa to enter, however; she received special permission to enter the United States at the time she met with Trump Jr.
During the meeting, instead of dishing out Hillary Clinton dirt, the non-English speaking Veselnitskaya raised the issue of restoring U.S. adoptions inside Russia if the United States would repeal the Magnitsky Act, a law passed in 2012 punishing Moscow for human rights violations in connection with the death of a lawyer who had discovered a massive money laundering scheme inside the country.
New York Times reports:
WASHINGTON — Donald Trump Jr. told Senate investigators on Thursday that he set up a June 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer because he was intrigued that she might have damaging information about Hillary Clinton, saying it was important to learn about Mrs. Clinton’s “fitness” to be president.
But nothing came of the Trump Tower meeting, he said, and he was adamant that he never colluded with the Russian government’s campaign to disrupt last year’s presidential election.
In a prepared statement during an interview with Senate Judiciary Committee investigators, the younger Mr. Trump said he was initially conflicted when he heard that the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, might have damaging information about Mrs. Clinton. Despite his interest, he said, he always intended to consult with his own lawyers about the propriety of using any information that Ms. Veselnitskaya, who has ties to the Kremlin, gave him at the meeting.
A copy of Mr. Trump’s statement was obtained by The New York Times.
…In his statement, Mr. Trump said he had some reservations about the June 2016 proposal from the meeting’s facilitator, Rob Goldstone, whom he described as a “colorful” music promoter he had come to know through the son of a Russian oligarch. Mr. Goldstone asked Mr. Trump to take a meeting that would include potentially damaging information about Mrs. Clinton.
“Since I had no additional information to validate what Rob was saying, I did not quite know what to make of his email. I had no way to gauge the reliability, credibility or accuracy of any of the things he was saying,” he said.
“As it later turned out, my skepticism was justified. The meeting provided no meaningful information and turned out not to be about what had been represented.”