Facebook and Twitter Admit Russians Ran Ads Against Donald Trump

For well over a year now, Democrats have chanted the Russian collusion myth while failing to produce a single shred of evidence against President Trump.  But there has been a lot of evidence against Hillary and the DNC.  Trump didn’t win, the Russians did, or so we are supposed to believe.  But according to the lawyers representing Facebook and Twitter, Russia ran ads after the election, trying to call Trump’s presidency illegitimate.

So, why would Russia run these ads if they supported Trump in the election?  That doesn’t make any sense, however, since money from Hillary’s campaign and the DNC allegedly found its way into the pockets of people in the Kremlin.  They supplied Steele and Fusion GPS with outlandish false claims pertaining to Trump.  Let’s face it, Vladimir Putin is Russia and anyone in the Kremlin who would dare go against Putin would probably have a short life span.

From Breitbart News

Politico reports that lawyers from Facebook and Twitter told a Senate Judiciary panel on Tuesday that Russian-linked agents on their social networks following election day in November 2016 attempted to undermine President Trump’s victory. Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch outlined to the Senate Judiciary panel how a Russian trolling group known as the Internet Research Agency generated content after November 8th focusing on “fomenting discord about the validity of [Trump’s] election.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked at the hearing, “During the election, they were trying to create discord between Americans, most of it directed against Clinton. After the election you saw Russian-tied groups and organizations trying to undermine President Trump’s legitimacy. Is that what you saw on Facebook?”

Stretch and Twitter general counsel Sean Edgette confirmed that Graham’s description was “accurate.”

James Lewis, an international cyber policy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, believes that Russians’ anti-Trump misinformation campaign fits with the Kremlin’s information warfare strategy.

take our poll - story continues below

Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?

  • Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Conservative Firing Line updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: CNN propagandist Jim Acosta responds to mild teasing from former White House official: ‘F**k you’

Considering the fact that the Russians pumped $145 million into the Clinton Foundation and then paid Bill Clinton half a million dollars to deliver a twenty minute speech, it’s highly unlikely that they would try to buy Trump when they already owned Hillary Clinton, who was projected to win by historic margins.  And the fact that their ads depicting President Trump as illegitimate is part and parcel of the Democratic and Hillary playbook attests to the Russian’s alliance with the failed leftist party.

So, when is Congress going to investigate Hillary’s collusion with the Russians and why hasn’t timid Jeff Sessions appointed a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary’s crimes?

Related:

If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so.  And be sure to check out our new MeWe page here.

If you appreciate independent conservative reports like this, please go here and support us on Patreon.

And if you’re as concerned about online censorship as we are, go here and order this book (Remember, half of what we earn will be donated to Hurricane Harvey relief):

Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad
Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad – Source: Author (used with permission)

 

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.