Mediaboss Marketing

National Intelligence Director John Ratcliffe on Tuesday declassified documents about a claim Hillary Clinton ordered a campaign plan to stir up a scandal by linking President Trump to Russia in 2016 and that indicate then-President Barack Obama knew about her possible role.

Ratcliffe provided to Fox News an undated set of notes from then-CIA Director John Brennan about a briefing for Obama that touched on the allegation, and an investigative referral from the CIA to the FBI describing the claim.

Today, at the direction of President Trump, I declassified additional documents relevant to ongoing Congressional oversight and investigative activities, Ratcliffe told Fox News Tuesday.

Most of the unredacted content in the documents was released by Ratcliffe last week, though minor new details cast doubt on former FBI Director James Comeys declaration last week that he could not recall the claim, which Clinton allies deny as baseless potential Russian disinformation.

The newly released notes from Brennan, who now is a fiery anti-Trump commentator, indicate that Brennan briefed Obama on alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 28 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.

Ratcliffes initial disclosure said that, according to Brennans notes, Clinton allegedly approved the scheme on July 26. The minor inaccuracy shortens the window of time between Clintons alleged approval of the plot and the FBI opening its investigation of possible Trump-Russia collusion on July 31, 2016.

A previously undisclosed annotation in Brennans notes appears to attribute to Obama an interest in any evidence of collaboration between Trump campaign + Russia.

The initials JC also are on the briefing notes, implying that Comey attended the meeting where Brennan discussed the theory with Obama.

In the margins are also references to Denis and Susan, which could refer to former national security adviser Susan Rice and Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough.

Most of the document was redacted by Ratcliffes office, making it impossible to understand the full context of the meeting or when exactly it occurred.

The investigative referral from the CIA to the FBI, meanwhile, contains the previously disclosed passage noting an allegation about Clintons approval of a plan concerning US Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering US elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.

The actual referral is mostly redacted, but additionally states that the document was sent per FBI verbal request. It was addressed to Comey, but to the attention of then-FBI Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok, who notoriously traded anti-Trump text message on work phones with his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page.

In his initial disclosure last week, Ratcliffe said the claim against Clinton was unproven and could be an exaggeration or fabrication.

A Clinton spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said last week the claim was baseless bullst.

But the Trump campaign boosted the latest release. It is imperative that the American people now learn what then-Vice President Joe Biden knew about this conspiracy and when he knew it, campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh said in a statement.

At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday, Comey said he could not recall the allegations that Clinton decided to falsely allege Trump was in cahoots with Russia.

I do not remember the referral, Comey told Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) during the hearing.

That doesnt ring a bell with me, Comey confirmed when Graham read aloud from Ratcliffes initial disclosure.

Trump mocked Comeys memory and accused him at a Minnesota rally that night of being among the crooks who he said tried for a coup against his presidency. Special counsel Robert Mueller last year found no evidence of a criminal conspiracy between Trump and Russia.

I watched Comey, he couldnt remember anything, but hes writing all these books. Theyre guilty as hell, Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity in a Thursday interview.

Read the rest here:
Spy chief releases docs on claim Hillary Clinton cooked up ...

One of the biggest questions everyone asks about fake news is whether it actually affected the 2016 US Presidential election. Congress and the FBI have been investigating this, and concluded (so far) that fake news was intended for that purpose. No one has suggested that people didnt vote their minds, so without a doubt, the election was legitimate. But did fake news change peoples minds?

This question is harder to answer. To try, we need to find out two things: First, how many people have been exposed to fake news and, second, how many of them changed their opinions in reaction to it?

We know from its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, himself, that 126 million Americans were shown Russian-backed, politically-oriented fake news stories via Facebook during the 2016 US presidential election campaign. Not everyone who was presented with fake news headlines on Facebook necessarily read the stories, or consciously perceived them, or was affected by them. However, even if only a fraction of those who were shown the stories saw them and even if an even smaller fraction opened the stories, and if some of those people were influenced by them, thenbecause the election was so close in some of the swing statesit could have changed the voting choice of enough people to affect the election. All hypothetical, but a real potential.

It wasnt just Russians paying for Facebook users to see fake news that could have played a role. Another figure that raises cause for concern is that leading up to the 2016 Presidential election, the 20 most popular fake news stories received more shares, reactions, and comments (8.7 million engagements) than the most popular 20 real news stories (7.3 million engagements) [1]. Again, these numbers have to be taken with caution. The top 20 stories are only a small fraction of all new stories. Moreover, most of the engagement with fake news stories came from a small fraction of Americans: 10% of Americans accounted for 60% of the traffic on fake news sites.

To sum up the answer to our first question: Many people were exposed to fake news just before the 2016 election but it is difficult to estimate how many people actually saw it and whether they were influenced by it.

In the aftermath of the 2016 elections as the extent of fake news became clear, three scientists from the Ohio State UniversityGunther, Beck, and Nisbetexplored whether people who might have changed their votes from Democrat to Republican were affected by fake news [2]. Why these particular people? The scientists reasoned that, like most people, those who voted for Obama in 2012 would probably have voted for Clinton in 2016 unless something changed their minds. So they found a group of voters who voted for Obama in 2012. Of these Obama voters, only 77% of them voted for Clinton in 2016; 10% voted for Trump, and the others didnt vote or voted for someone else.

The researchers asked the voters how much they believed in three statements, each of which, according to independent analysis, had been promoted by fake news but were actually false: that Hillary Clinton was in poor health due to a serious illness, that Pope Francis endorsed Donald Trump, and that, during her time as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton approved weapon sales to Islamic jihadists including ISIS.

Although most people didnt think that these statements were true, there was a very strong link between the belief that they were true and the way people voted:

Among those who believed none of the three fake news stories, 89 percent cast ballots for Hillary Clinton in 2016; among those who believed one fake news item, this level of electoral support fell to 61 percent; but among those who had voted for Obama in 2012 and believed two or all three of these false assertions, only 17 percent voted for Clinton.

And if these percentages of voterseven 17% of former Obama supportershad voted for Clinton in the states that went from Blue to Red in 2016, instead, it would have changed the outcome of the election.

Again, its important to be cautious interpreting these results. Just because these people said that they thought these statements were likely to be true doesnt mean they actually saw the fake news stories before the election. So, it doesnt prove that they crossed sides because theyd been exposed to fake news. But it may be as close as we can get to identifying if fake news affected voters.

But theres also reason to believe that it wasnt fake news, but good old fashioned clickbait, that helped sway voters. A WIRED article by Antonio Martinez explains how the Trump campaign got more ads on Facebook, cheaper, than the Clinton campaign did [3]. Facebook charges advertisers different rates depending on (a) the location of and competition for users, so that urban Facebook users (primary targets for the Clinton campaign) cost more to advertise to than do rural voters (who the Trump campaign sought), and (b) Facebook also prioritizes bids for ads that are seem more likely to generate a click, a like, or a comment. Because Trump used provocative content to stoke social media buzz, according to Martinez, his campaign was able to win the bidding contest to place more ads for more people online. This explanation seems to have merit, too. Look at the section of our website about the way analytics help target ads to reach certain types of social media users, and how humans and bots pass along certain messages, you can see how powerful these strategies may have been.

There are several important take-aways here. First, its hard to say how big the impact of fake news was on the 2016 election. The Ohio State study strongly indicates that when people believe fake news, it affects their votes. So when elections are close, fake news can impact who ultimately wins and who loses. Finally, whether it was through fake news or provocative advertising, the use of social media seems to be able to affect elections differently than were used to seeing. The economics, computer algorithms, and social dynamics that make up social media platforms are doing things to politics that traditional media cannot.

References

[1] D. Kurtzleben, Did Fake News On Facebook Help Elect Trump? Heres What We Know, NPR.org, 11-Apr-2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.npr.org/2018/04/11/601323233/6-facts-we-know-about-fake-news.... [Accessed: 03-Aug-2018].

[2] R. Gunther, P. A. Beck, and E. C. Nisbet, Fake News Piece for The Conversation with Methodological Appendix, 15-Feb-2018. [Online]. Available: https://cpb-us-west-2-juc1ugur1qwqqqo4.stackpathdns.com/u.osu.edu/dist/d.... [Accessed: 03-Aug-2018].

[3] A. G. Martnez, How Trump Conquered Facebook Without Russian Ads, Wired, 23-Feb-2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.wired.com/story/how-trump-conquered-facebookwithout-russian-.... [Accessed: 02-Aug-2018].

More:
The Danger of Fake News to Our Election | Center for ...

Reuters Videos

The Saudi-led coalition battling the Houthis in Yemen said on Friday it destroyed three drones launched towards southern Saudi Arabia and a fourth over Yemen.It said the group "failed to launch two ballistic missiles" and they fell inside Yemen.Saudi Aramco, the state oil firm, said when contacted by Reuters that it would respond at the earliest opportunity.The Houthi military spokesman Yahya Sarea said in a televised press conference that the group had attacked Aramco's refineries in Jeddah as well as military targets in Riyadh, Jeddah, Abha, Jizan and Najran.Sarea's statement contained inaccuracies. It mentioned the wrong name for the international airport in Jeddah and the wrong location for King Khalid base, saying it was in Riyadh when it is actually in the south of the kingdom.The Saudi-led coalition said later on Saturday it has attacked 13 targets during a military operation against the Houthis in Yemen.The operation hit weapons depots, air defense systems and drones' communication systems in Sanaa, Saada, and Marib provinces, the coalition said.Aramco's refinery in Jeddah was decommissioned in 2017 but it has a petroleum products distribution plant there that the Houthis had previously targeted in March.The Houthis have repeatedly launched cross border attacks on Saudi Arabia using drones and missiles since the coalition intervened in Yemen in March 2015 after the movement ousted the Saudi-backed government from the capital, Sanaa.Efforts led by the United Nations and the United States to engineer a ceasefire in Yemen have stalled.The conflict, seen as a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran, has been in military stalemate for years. The Houthis are pressing an offensive in Marib, the internationally recognized government's last northern stronghold, as well as in other areas in Yemen.

Original post:
Hillary Clinton Trolls Steve Bannon With Just 5 Words

Hillary Clinton and Chelsea Clinton have outlined the strategy behind their nascent film and TV company HiddenLight Productions, revealing that they have optioned a number of books, including Jacqueline Winspears Maisie Dobbs series.

Speaking at the Royal Television Society conference in Cambridge on Wednesday, the Clintons appeared via a virtual live-link, in conversation with British historian and presenter Mary Beard.

Hillary Clinton appeared to be very much in her element while discussing her production companys goals within the content landscape, and what she and daughter Chelsea hoped to accomplish.

Its exciting because we believe passionately in bringing these stories to light, said Hillary Clinton. For too long, attention has been paid to the loudest voices in the room, but generations of tastemakers around the globe are making a difference. Today particularly, theres a hunger for people to figure out how to make sense of our world. We want to make a big contribution to that.

The Maisie Dobbs books mark HiddenLights inaugural fiction option. The series covers 16 books and follows Dobbs, a psychologist and investigator, on a series of missions that span both World Wars and the Spanish Civil War.

The company is also in the early stages of adapting PBS reporter Gayle Tzemach Lemmons The Daughters of Kobani, which tells the story of the female soldiers of the Kurdish militia who are fighting to stop ISIS in Syria.

We are working closely with the Kurdish creative community to write a [film] that brings that story to life in the most authentic way possible, said Hillary Clinton.

Also on the slate is the previously announced Apple TV Plus docuseries Gutsy Women, which is based on the duos book The Book of Gutsy Women: Favorite Stories of Courage and Resilience.

Set up in December 2020, the Clintons describe Hidden Light as a U.S.-U.K. outfit set up in collaboration with British producer Sam Branson thats looking for broad-appeal, cross-generational content with a mission of bringing untold stories to light.

When I was young, I watched a number of documentaries and movies with my mum and grandmother, said Chelsea Clinton, before noting that not enough current programming was accessible to multi-generational audiences.

Things are just for mature audiences or just for kids. We want to break down those silos. We want to have common conversations, she said.

Added Hillary Clinton: I think the pandemic has really brought this home for people. When everyone was at home, it was a struggle to find content that was interesting to everyone and would capture the attention of teens, kids and adults. This may have run a bit against the current of what was seen as bankable and producible over the past 10 to 20 years, but theres a growing desire and interest to have more platforms with content that can cross generations.

The former U.S. presidential candidate and Secretary of State highlighted, as well, that not only [does the] U.K. have great production expertise, but its a great jumping-off point to reach Africa and the Middle East.

Read the rest here:
Hillary Clinton, Chelsea Clinton Outline Strategy for ...

Some in Ms Harris' circle have privately suggested the recent wave of negative briefings have been a "petty" attempt to distract attention away from Mr Biden.

On top of being advised to ignore the "palace intrigue" and stay "focused" on the job at hand, her supporters are also starting to more publically call out attacks in a bid to stop her political career being tainted in the same way as Mrs Clintons.

"When you have these articles come out, it puts a lot of us in a defensive posture, because we see that a lot of people are treating Kamala Harris the same way they treated Hillary Clinton, which is attempting to end her political career in a death by a million cuts," Bakari Sellers, a former Democratic congressman who backed Ms Harris' 2020 presidential bid, told CNN.

"This is something women running for office face - these gendered attacks, because they are ascending to roles that have traditionally been held by men, defined by men," Karen Finney, a former senior aide to Mrs Clinton and who is close to the vice president, told the Telegraph.

Ms Finney gave the example of Ms Harris - the first woman, first black and Asian vice president - using her platform to address the "very real crisis of black maternal mortality".

"Some in Washington won't look at those things and recognise how important that actually is in saving lives," she said, drawing a comparison with the White House press corps' response to Mrs Clinton's initiatives as First Lady.

Tracy Sefl, a former adviser to Mrs Clinton's campaign, said she believed some of the scrutiny around Ms Harris stemmed from being a "trailblazer".

"There is so much intrigue around well, could she do more? Forgetting how much she has done and is doing and that's a function of being the second person, if you will," she said.

Link:
Kamala Harris must hit the road to win hearts and avoid same fate as Hillary Clinton - Telegraph.co.uk