Pakistani Style
Trump went on to quote a comment by Mrs Clinton during one of their debates, in which she said she was horrified by Mr Trump’s refusal to say that he would accept the outcome of the election. And he noted that in her concession speech, she had urged people to respect the vote results
In assessing Donald Trump’s presidential victory, Americans continue to look away from this election’s most alarming story: the effort by a hostile foreign power to manipulate public opinion before the vote, which may be true. US intelligence agencies determined that the Russian government actively interfered in their elections. Russian state propaganda gave little doubt that this was done to support Republican nominee Trump, repeatedly praised Vladimir Putin despite Pentagon’s notion about Russian president’s foreign aggression and domestic repression. Most significantly, US intelligence agencies have affirmed that the Russian government directed the illegal hacking of private email accounts of the Democratic National Committee and prominent individuals. The emails were then released by WikiLeaks, which used Russian operatives for security and made clear intent to harm the candidacy of Hillary Clinton, and try to create atmosphere favouring Trump.
Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias said that the campaign have received “hundreds of messages, emails, and calls urging them to do something, anything, to investigate claims that the election results were hacked and altered in a way to disadvantage Secretary Clinton, especially in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, where the combined margin of victory for Donald Trump was merely 107,000 votes.”
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign started exploring whether there was any “outside interference” in the election results and have decided to participate in the election recount in Wisconsin initiated by Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein, a Clinton campaign lawyer revealed on 25 November 2016.
Elias said that the campaign had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology. But because of the margin of victory and because of the degree of apparent foreign interference during the campaign possibility of outside interference in the vote tally in these critical battleground states can’t be ruled out. On the other side, President-elect Donald J. Trump said on 26 November 2016 that he had fallen short in the popular vote in the general election only because millions of people had voted illegally, leveling the baseless claim as part of a daylong storm of Twitter posts voicing anger about a three-state recount push. Trump calls recount efforts sad, declares: ‘Nothing will change’ Elias said that the Clinton campaign would participate in the Stein-initiated recount in Wisconsin by having representatives on the ground monitoring the count and having lawyers represent them in court if needed. And if Stein made good on efforts to prompt similar processes in Pennsylvania and Michigan, the Clinton campaign would do so there, as well.
The recount effort is somewhat unusual, Clinton, too, has virtually no chance of altering the result, given that she would have to reverse not just Wisconsin, but also Michigan and Pennsylvania, to become president.
In Wisconsin, Trump leads by 22,177 votes. In Michigan, he has a lead of 10,704 votes, and in Pennsylvania, his advantage is 70,638 votes.
Trump is already facing pressure. Federal law, international pressure and resistance from inside CIA stand in the way of Donald J. Trump using brutal interrogation tactics. And now recount also disturbs his passage to the White House.
The campaign is grateful to all those who have expended time and effort to investigate various claims of abnormalities and irregularities. The effort has not resulted in evidence of manipulation of results, now that a recount is underway. More than 64 million Americans who cast ballots for Hillary Clinton hope that to participate in ongoing proceedings to ensure that an accurate vote count will be reported.
Recounts can change outcomes. Sen Al Franken (D-Minn) famously defeated Norm Coleman for the seat he now holds after a months-long recount and legal battle, even though Coleman seemed initially to have a lead. But the margins are usually in the hundreds, not thousands, and typically, recounts are initiated by candidates in close races refusing to accept defeat.
I don’t think there’s any realistic chance whatsoever that even if recounts are done in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, that’s going to change the outcome in the states, or in the presidential election generally.
Trump furiously called the recount “just a way for Jill Stein to fill her coffers with money”. She received less than one percent of the vote overall and wasn’t even on the ballot in many states.
“The people have spoken and the election is over,” the statement said, “and as Hillary Clinton herself said on election night, in addition to her conceding by congratulating me, ‘We must accept this result and then look to the future.’”
Trump tweeted that the Green Party’s initiative, was a “scam” joined by the badly defeated and demoralised Dems. He added: The Democrats incorrectly thought they were going to win. The series of posts came one day after Hillary Clinton’s campaign said it would participate in a recount effort being undertaken in Wisconsin, and potentially in similar pushes in Michigan and Pennsylvania, by Jill Stein, who was the Green Party candidate. Mr Trump’s statements revived claims he made during the campaign, as polls suggested he was losing to Mrs Clinton, about a rigged and corrupt system.
From the Russian perspective, the success of this operation can hardly be overstated. News stories on the DNC emails released in July served to disrupt the Democratic National Convention, instigate political infighting and suggest for some supporters of Sen Bernie Sanders, without any real proof, that the Democratic primary had been “rigged” against their candidate. On Oct7, WikiLeaks began near daily dumps from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s email account, generating a month of largely negative reporting on Clinton, her campaign staff, her husband and their foundation. With some exceptions, there was little news in the email beyond political gossip and things the media had covered before, now revisited from a seemingly “hidden” viewpoint.
Days after Donald Trump’s election victory, a news agency in the former Soviet republic of Georgia reported that a long-stalled plan for a Trump-branded tower in a seaside Georgian resort town was now back on track.
Russian propaganda has traditionally worked exactly this way: The more you “report” something negatively, the more the negative becomes true. Trump and supportive media outlets adopted the technique and reveled in information gained from the illegal Russian hacking (as well as many “fake news” stories that evidence suggests were generated by Russian intelligence operations) to make exaggerated claims (“Hillary wants to open borders to 600 million people!”) or to accuse Clinton of illegality, corruption and, ironically, treasonous behaviour.
Part of the Russian operation’s success is that we cannot measure the effect. Did the DNC emails depress the Sanders vote for Clinton? Did the Podesta emails turn off independents? Would voters have responded differently if major media had reported the email releases not as legitimate news but as an intelligence operation by a hostile foreign power aimed at undermining the integrity of US elections? There are no clear answers. But there are certainties: The email operation increased negative stories about Clinton, fueled an immense propaganda attack and diminished coverage of actual issues. The large polling lead Clinton gained after the debates slipped significantly under this barrage of negativity — even before FBI Director James B. Comey’s bombshell.
Claims of wide-scale voter fraud have been advanced for years by Republicans, though virtually no evidence of such improprieties has been discovered, especially on the scale of “millions” that Mr Trump claimed. Without providing evidence, he referred in a Twitter post to “serious voter fraud in Virginia, New Hampshire and California.”
A day earlier, Mr Trump’s transition team ridiculed the idea that recounts were needed. “This is a scam by the Green Party for an election that has already been conceded, and the results of this election should be respected instead of being challenged and abused.”
That message runs counter to the one Mr Trump sent with his fraud claims, if millions of people voted illegally, presumably officials across the country would want to pursue large-scale ballot recounts and fraud investigations.
But the Twitter posts could energise some of his supporters, who have claimed online that Mrs Clinton’s two million-vote lead in the popular vote has been faked. Mr Trump at times promoted other conspiracy theories during the campaign, including claiming that Senator Ted Cruz’s father was somehow tied to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
Many of Mrs Clinton’s supporters have been galvanised by the notion that vote recounts in the three states, where Mr Trump leads by a combined total of about 100,000 votes, could somehow overturn Mr Trump’s commanding Electoral College victory. By announcing, three weeks after Mrs Clinton conceded, that it would participate in the Wisconsin recount, her team has helped reignite the contentious atmosphere of the campaign.
Trump went on to quote a comment by Mrs Clinton during one of their debates, in which she said she was horrified by Mr Trump’s refusal to say that he would accept the outcome of the election. And he noted that in her concession speech, she had urged people to respect the vote results.
“We have to accept the results and look to the future, Donald Trump is going to be our president” Trump also reminded, quoting Mrs Clinton.
What’s going to be the outcome of the recount, no one can surely predict. A drastic change of mood is observed in the American public. Washington and the Pentagon have actively been involved in disturbing the peace in every country and region. They for sure are going to face the same situation in their own country which may lead to strikes, violence, civil war and perhaps even disintegration of the United States.
The law of averages is always there.
