Still investigating the extent of Russian influence in the 2016 election, the American press questioned the legitimacy of the election, claiming 71-year-old President Donald Trump was helped by an orchestrated Kremlin propaganda campaign. Citing fake news stories on Facebook, Google and other social media outlets, the Democrat-driven media believes that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton would have won the 2016 presidential election had Russia not meddled in the campaign. When Deputy Atty. Gen. Rod Rosenstein appointed 72-year-old former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Special Counsel May 17, 2017, the Congress demanded that he determine the extent, if any, of Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Yet since starting his probe, Mueller has focused on whether Trump or anyone in his campaign colluded with Russian to win the election.
If you listen to the Democrat-driven media narrative, you’d have to believe that Trump won the election because of a carefully orchestrated Russian propaganda campaign. With Hillary winning nearly 3 million more popular votes than Trump, you’d have to believe that the Kremlin only affected voters in swing states, like Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Florida. Somehow, the alleged Russian propaganda campaign only worked in Florida and the Midwest, not the East or West coasts. Still there are many than believe that Russian propaganda has influenced U.S. elections and certainly in the Ukraine. When Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Crimea March 1, 2014, the Kremlin insisted he was protecting the interests of pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine. Ukrainian officials have now banned any Russian-originated news from Ukrainian airwaves.
Led by 52-year-old Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, Ukraine has banned all Russian news stories, especially those from Kremlin sources. Unlike the U.S. where numerous media outlets exist, Ukraine has limited access to the Internet, cable news and other news outlets, making Kremlin propaganda more influential. U.S. intel agencies insist that Russian meddled in the 2016 election but can’t pinpoint with any certainty where the influence occurred. When it comes to the Wikipedia data dump in July 2016 that exposed corruption at the Democratic National Committee [DNC], including that Hillary took debate questions in advance of presidential debates, there’s zero proof of Russia. Democrats are convinced that Trump’s campaign worked with the Kremlin to sabotage Hillary. Yet there’s no proof that Wikileaks had anything to do with a Kremlin propaganda campaign.
StopFake news cofounder Ruslan Deynychenko blamed a 2014 determined Russian propaganda campaign for splitting off various Russian communities in Crimea and the Donbass region of Southeastern Ukraine. Yet Russian-speaking communities had their issues with the pro-Kremlin government of Viktor Yanukovich before he was chased out of Kiev Feb 22, 2014. While Deynychenko wants to blame Russian propaganda for the April 22, 2014 pro-Western coup, Yanukovich did a poor job managing the Ukrainian economy. Pro-Russian groups recall the good-old-days before 1991 when the now defunct Soviet Union paid generous welfare and pension benefits to Ukrainian citizens. When it comes to Russian influence in the United States, there’s zero evidence that the Kremlin had any impact on the 2016 election, except giving Hillary an excuse to blame Trump.
Deynychenko claims Ukrainians were subjected to relentless fake stories that somehow influenced the eventual coup. Deynychenkoj doesn’t want to admit that the CIA provided support to pro-Democracy rebels led by former Heavyweight Champion Vitale Klitschko, currently the major of Kiev. Putin saw enough while hosting the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics, deciding to invade Crimea only one a week after the games. Divisions in Ukraine between various ethnic groups, certainly Russians, happened since at least 1954 when Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev deeded Crime to Ukraine. Blaming unrest in Ukraine or the U.S. election on Russian propaganda goes beyond anyone’s fantasy, other than clever left-wing propagandists looking to de-legitimize the Trump’s November 4, 2016 presidential election over Hillary, blaming it on the Russians.
Detecting propaganda from legitimate news is no easy matter in today’s politically-driven media. There was once a clear line between journalism and political propaganda. Since losing the election, Democrats have exploited the mainstream media to demonize Trump, hoping to win back the House and Senate in the November 2018 Midterm elections. With the economy steaming along and Trump about to reach a breakthrough, once thoughT unthinkable, with North Korea, Democrats plan of discrediting Trump and taking back Congress are now up in the air. News consumers need to consider the source, especially on social media platforms like Facebook and Google. If news consumers wish to stay clear of propaganda, they need to read only credentialed wire service reports like Associated Press [AP], Reuters, Agence France Presse [AFP], UPI and possibly National Public Radio [NPR].
