www.nytimes.co
In September, as the first detailed evidence surfaced of Russia’s hijacking of social media in the 2016 election, Irina V. Kaverzina, one of about 80 Russians working on the project in St. Petersburg, emailed a family member with some news.
“We
had a slight crisis here at work: the F.B.I. busted our activity (not a
joke),” she wrote of the project in Russia. “So, I got preoccupied with
covering tracks together with the colleagues.” She added, “I created
all these pictures and posts, and the Americans believed that it was
written by their people.”
A
37-page indictment, handed up on Friday by a Washington grand jury and
charging Ms. Kaverzina and 12 other people with an elaborate conspiracy,
showed that she and her colleagues did not, in fact, hide their tracks
so well from United States investigators. The charges, brought by Robert
S. Mueller III, the special counsel, introduced hard facts to a
polarized political debate over Russia’s intervention in American
democracy, while not yet implicating President Trump or his associates.
The
indictment presented in astonishing detail a carefully planned,
three-year Russian scheme to incite political discord in the United
States, damage Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and later bolster
the candidacy of Donald J. Trump, along with those of Bernie Sanders
and Jill Stein. The precise description of the operation suggested that
F.B.I. investigators had intercepted communications, found a cooperating
insider or both.
The
Russians overseeing the operation, which they named the Translator
Project, had a goal to “spread distrust toward the candidates and the
political system in general.” They used a cluster of companies linked to
one called the Internet Research Agency, and called their campaign “information warfare.”
The
field research to guide the attack appears to have begun in earnest in
June 2014. Two Russian women, Aleksandra Y. Krylova and Anna V.
Bogacheva, obtained visas for what turned out to be a three-week
reconnaissance tour of the United States, including to key electoral
states like Colorado, Michigan, Nevada and New Mexico. The visa
application of a third Russian, Robert S. Bovda, was rejected.
The
two women bought cameras, SIM cards and disposable cellphones for the
trip and devised “evacuation scenarios” in case their real purpose was
detected. In all, they visited nine states — California, Illinois,
Louisiana, New York and Texas, in addition to the others — “to gather
intelligence” on American politics, the indictment says. Ms. Krylova
sent a report about their findings to one of her bosses in St.
Petersburg.
Another
Russian operative visited Atlanta in November 2014 on a similar
mission, the indictment says. It does not name that operative, a
possible indication that he or she is cooperating with the
investigation, legal experts said.
President
Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has repeatedly denied any government role
in hacking and disinformation aimed at the United States.
Credit
Maxim Shemetov/Reuters Foto de: Maxim Shemetov/Reuters
The
operation also included the creation of hundreds of email, PayPal and
bank accounts and even fraudulent drivers’ licenses issued to fictitious
Americans. The Russians also used the identities of real Americans from
stolen Social Security numbers.
At
the height of the 2016 campaign, the effort employed more than 80
people, who used secure virtual private network connections to computer
servers leased in the United States to hide the fact that they were in
Russia. From there, they posed as American activists, emailing, advising
and making payments to real Americans who were duped into believing
that they were part of the same cause.
The
playing field was mainly social media, where the Russians splashed
catchy memes and hash tags. Facebook has estimated that the fraudulent
Russian posts reached 126 million Americans on its platforms alone.
The
Russian operatives contacted, among others, a real Texas activist who,
evidently assuming they were Americans, advised them to focus on “purple
states like Colorado, Virginia & Florida.” After that, F.B.I.
agents found that the phrase “purple states” became a mantra for the
Russian operation.
Clinton
Watts, a former F.B.I. agent who has tracked the Russian campaign
closely, said that he had no doubt that President Vladimir V. Putin of
Russia was behind the effort, which was carried out by companies
controlled by his friend and ally, Yevgeny V. Prigozhin.
But he noted that the so-called trolls employed by Mr. Prigozhin took
elaborate steps to obscure their identities and locations and to avoid
leaving government fingerprints.
“From
the beginning, they built this so it could be plausibly denied,” Mr.
Watts said. Mr. Putin has repeatedly denied any government role in
hacking and disinformation aimed at the United States, while coyly
allowing that patriotic Russians may have carried out such attacks on
their own.
Andrew
S. Weiss, a Russia specialist at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, called the reported origin of the effort in April
2014 “crucially important.”
“That’s
a little more than a month after the annexation of Crimea and the
launch of Russia’s covert war in eastern Ukraine,” Mr. Weiss said. The
resulting crisis “vaporized U.S.-Russian relations overnight,” he said,
setting off multiple Russian efforts “to undermine the United States,
both in terms of our leading role in the world, but also via our own
domestic political vulnerabilities.”
Mr.
Weiss said the fact that private companies conducted the social media
campaign simply made it cheaper and more difficult to trace.
Mr.
Putin has been angry with Mrs. Clinton since at least 2011, when she
was secretary of state and he accused her of inciting unrest in Russia
as he faced large-scale political protests. Mrs. Clinton, he said, had
sent “a signal” to “some actors in our country” after elections that
were condemned as fraudulent by both international and Russian
observers.
Mr.
Mueller’s indictment does not present evidence that the campaign
overseen by Mr. Prigozhin was ordered by Mr. Putin. American officials
have traced other elements of the Russian meddling, notably the hacking
and leaking of leading Democrats’ emails, to Russian intelligence
agencies carrying out Mr. Putin’s orders.
While
the indictment certainly undermines Mr. Trump’s blanket assertions that
the Russian interference is a political “hoax,” it does not accuse
anyone from his campaign or any other American of knowingly aiding in
the effort.
By
the beginning of 2016, the Russian strategy was in place, and the
conspirators began their campaign to sow conflict. An internal message
circulated through the Internet Research Agency telling operatives to
post content online that focused on “politics in the USA.”
“Use any opportunity to criticize Hillary and the rest (except Sanders and Trump—we support them),” the message read.
The
scope of the operation was sweeping. The Russians assumed their fake
identifies to communicate with campaign volunteers for Mr. Trump and
grass-roots groups supporting his candidacy. They bought pro-Trump and
anti-Clinton political advertisements on Facebook and other social
media. They used an Instagram account to try to suppress turnout of
minority voters and campaign for Ms. Stein, the Green Party candidate.
Applying
nearly two years’ worth of political research, the Russians used all of
these tactics to target voters in swing states, notably Florida,
according to the indictment.
The Internet Research Agency, in St. Petersburg, Russia, was said to be the hub of the operation.
Credit
Dmitry Lovetsky/Associated Press Foto de: Dmitry Lovetsky/Associated Press
By
summer 2016, the Russian operatives were mobilizing efforts for coming
“Florida Goes Trump” rallies across the state, all planned for Aug. 20.
Using false identities, they contacted Trump campaign staff in Florida
to offer their services. One operative sent a message to a campaign
official saying that the group Being Patriotic was organizing a
statewide rally “to support Mr. Trump.”
“You
know, simple yelling on the internet is not enough,” the message read,
according to the indictment. “There should be real action. We organized
rallies in New York before. Now we’re focusing on purple states such as
Florida.”
Taking
to Facebook, the Russians used the pseudonym Matt Skiber to advertise
the rally. “If we lose Florida, we lose America. We can’t let it happen,
right? What about organizing a YUGE pro-Trump flash mob in every
Florida town?” the message read, using one of Mr. Trump’s favorite
verbal flourishes.
They reached out to local organizations to build momentum for the coming rallies and assign specific tasks.
They
paid one unwitting Trump supporter to build a cage on a flatbed truck
that housed another person wearing a costume that portrayed Mrs. Clinton
in a prison uniform.
After the rallies in Florida, the group applied similar tactics to organize rallies in Pennsylvania, New York and elsewhere.
Weeks before the election, the Russians ratcheted up social media activity aimed at dampening support for Mrs. Clinton.
In
mid-October, Woke Blacks, an Instagram account run by the Internet
Research Agency, carried the message “hatred for Trump is misleading the
people and forcing Blacks to vote Killary. We cannot resort to the
lesser of two devils. Then we’d surely be better off without voting AT
ALL.”
Then,
just days before Americans went to the polls, another Instagram account
controlled by the Russians — called Blacktivist — urged its followers
to “choose peace” and vote for Ms. Stein, who was expected to siphon
support from Mrs. Clinton’s campaign.
“Trust me,” the message read, “it’s not a wasted vote.”
No comments:
Post a Comment