The ads were technically illegal because of reporting requirements. Beyond that, they were not an act of war, they are not evidence of collusion with the Trump campaign, and they had nothing to do with the election result.
I wrote more on the indictment yesterday:
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/2018/02/16/todays-indictments-do-not-support-narratives-of-either-republican-or-democratic-partisans-regarding-russia/
I don't even know if they were technically illegal. I would imagine that the courts would have to weigh in on this. Seems like fairly uncharted territory.
Buying an ad as an individual or boosting a post on Social Media is against the law? And the intent seems rather scattershot; like social media marketers trying to make a few bucks.
And I do understand the foreign national part, but it still seems shaky to me. Especially given that China and other countries drop serious coin on our pols and electoral system.
Laws are for little people. BIG "people" have a different track of justice.
And what about Hillary's pilfering of State Party cash? That was a big fear coming out of Citizen's United (or McKutcheon). Of course it was considered conspiracy theory at the time...
And Brooklyn's scrubbing of the voter roles. SO much electoral malfeasance in 2016, and we're pointing the finger at 13 dipshits who tried to use dogs and pokemon to affect the election.
It's completely absurd.
Nice piece... Nice Drupal site.
Nope, but they sure do keep Russia on the brain.
AFTER the election. No FEC requirements, right?
There is the money quote. This has far more to do with hobbling the internet for citizens and yoking it to BIG Money than it does electoral integrity.