Intelligence agencies of the United States have just published a booklet, “Intelligence Community Assessment”, which sets forth evidence that Russia, and the television network Russia Today (RT), intervened in the United States presidential elections of 2012 and 2016. The publication is from the “Intelligence Community”, including the CIA, FBI, and NSA. Here is a link to the booklet.
Annex A, in the second half of the report, on page six, says, “In an effort to highlight the alleged ‘lack of democracy’ in the United States, RT broadcast, hosted, and advertised third-party candidate debates and ran reporting supportive of the political agenda of these candidates. The RT hosts asserted that the U.S. two-party system does not represent the views of at least one-third of the population and is a ‘sham.'”
In 2012 RT carried the general election presidential debate between Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, Virgil Goode, and Rocky Anderson. In 2016, during the primary season in the first half of the year, RT broadcast a debate between various candidates for the Green Party nomination. It also carried a debate between some of the candidates for the Libertarian nomination. Thanks to antiwar.com for the link. See this antiwar commentary about the report.
One of the companies that normally sponsors the Commission on Presidential Debates is Anheuser-Busch, which is owned by Anheuser-Busch InBev. It’s headquarters is in Belgium. I wonder if the “intelligence” agencies would think Russia was trying to influence the US elections if it moved its headquarters to Moscow.
“Alleged”? . . .
How much of a U.S. viewership does FT have compared to C-SPAN which also hosted the minor parties?
“asserted that the U.S. two-party system does not represent the views of at least one-third of the population and is a ‘sham.’”
It’s not election meddling if true, then its just a public service.
Looks like the Establishment has dropped all pretense now. It’s going to get ugly in the next few years.
SO now, if a foreign news agency gives publicity to minor party candidates, they are “interfering” in US elections? So, then, they must have to file FEC reports to report their “in-kind” donations of air time to such candidates, especially if their reports are posted in web sites accessible in the US? But then, being foreigners, they cannot make any such donations legally. So, in order to prevent foreign “interference” in US elections, the US must bar any reporting of the election by foreigners, and only allow them to accept news feeds and interviews from US sources.
They also are seemly trying censoring third parties/opposition smaller parties as well in social media for means keeping broken corrupted old establishment alive for decades by One guy who probably member of one of two parties.
@Brandon L: I suppose there are some to whom distributing the truth IS intervening in the election — or interfering with it.
Oh, and about that one-third unrepresented figure . . . does that mean pollsters who occasionally survey party affiliation are interfering too? For example:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/Party-Affiliation.aspx
Did Mexico also interfere in our elections when they hosted minor party presidential candidates for appearances on their station? How about British Broadcasting Company? So ridiculous.
I’m referring to Univision. I believe that’s a Mexico station.
Univision is actually American-owned and headquartered in New York City, with its main studios in Florida.
When did the BBC broadcast a debate?
I wonder if I got Univision mixed up with Telemundo. Anyway, presidential candidates have made appearances on various foreign television stations. It seems strange to single out Russia Today.
@Lee: Not so strange for those who yearn for the golden days of McCarthyism . . . and I don’t mean Melissa McCarthy.
I would bet that Australian Rupert Murdock “interfered” with the elections far more than Russia Today could even dream of.
I still can’t believe those snowflakes had the chutzpah to try this. It deserves decades of mockery.