Trump - Clown Genius

[Ego]

If the Dems are manipulating the media, and write emails about it, and then those emails get hacked/released by the Russians, it's really the Russians you are upset with in that chain of events? Really?

Both the DNC and the RNC got hacked. Only the DNC data was released. For some strange reason they withheld the RNC data.

So, we've got a foreign government meddling with our elections. Why does this matter? Is it the actual meddling that is important or the perception of meddling?

Listen for two and a half minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVx3lt8 ... u.be&t=27s

Now ask yourself... what happened just after that period? What happened when people stopped accepting the collective 'normal'? Harari talks about the importance of these socially agreed upon constructs in Sapiens. What happens when distrust takes over? And why might a foreign government want to foment that distrust?

Right now the US is not even close to being like 1980s Russia. Things here are not perfect, but they are pretty damn good. So good, in fact, that we sit here pondering early retirement. Or, to say it another way, things can get much, much worse. We don't have to look far to see how bad things can be.

Bannon quote: "Darkness is good. Dick Cheney. Darth Vader. Satan. That's power. It only helps us when they (liberals) get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psycholog ... ed_States)

is Ego positive that ffj is a Tump voter?

That isn't the reason I voted for Trump, but I understand why others would. My main reason is that my son would have the privilege of being drafted to fight a senseless war Clinton was well on her way to starting. That and she's a criminal, but I digress.

[BRUTE]

that's that

[Chad]

It's the total series of events that looks terrible:

1. Russia hacks RNC and DNC. Only releases DNC.
2. Russia probably spread fake news.
3. Russian Dumas applauds Trump's election (Just odd. Obviously, not definitive. I couldn't find where they applauded Obama's, but it could exist.)
4. Trump criticizes CIA not Russia? WTF?
5. Trump never releases financial information. (Again, odd, but not definitive.)
6. Tillerson seems to have the inside track to Sec State with loads of Russian connections:
"In 2011, Mr. Tillerson struck a deal giving Exxon access to prized Arctic resources in Russia as well as allowing Russia’s state oil company, OAO Rosneft, to invest in Exxon concessions all over the world. The following year, the Kremlin bestowed the country’s Order of Friendship decoration on Mr. Tillerson."
http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trum ... 1481033938

Other than #1 and #2, none of this is definitive. But, it's not good.

I completely agree that the Democrats lost the election, but this is not sour grapes. This is a real concern, as the US not responding appropriately invites this to happen again and on a larger scale.

[RealPerson]

Russia hacks RNC and DNC. Only releases DNC.

I don't know what was found in the RNC emails, but if they show that the RNC tried to manipulate the primaries the RNC was a total failure. The Republican establishment would have picked anybody over Trump.

Much as I try to stay out of politics and was very dubious about both candidates, a total outsider like Trump winning the presidency gives me hope. I am not in favor of the 2 political machines picking their favorites and then following the traditional recipe of getting their candidate elected. It is just so fake and manufactured. Kind of like the Academy Awards of Motion Pictures. Trump winning the R. nomination against all odds and then winning the election against the establishment candidate herself tells me that democracy still means something. Whether the voters were right or wrong remains to be determined, but they certainly made a choice against the wishes of the entire political establishment. Isn't that democracy in action? I have been amazed at the unhappiness of people with the win of democracy over vested interest politics. I am also disappointed at people explaining the Trump win away as those dumb rural voters casting ballots against their own interest. How condescending and prejudiced.

The fact that Hillary outspent Trump 2 to 1 and still lost, shows that money doesn't always have the final say in politics. Now that is refreshing. In spite of presumably being very wealthy, Trump did not use his own money to buy this election.

I hope that the Democrats stop blaming the Russians or what not and clean up their own house. I want open and honest primaries on both sides, and vibrant political parties setting up a real and meaningful debate on the issues. Then let the voters decide in genuinely competitive elections. We still need to get rid of gerrymandering so that voters pick candidates, not the other way around. But that is a whole other discussion.

[black_son_of_gray]

Both the DNC and the RNC got hacked. Only the DNC data was released. For some strange reason they withheld the RNC data.

I was thinking about that yesterday. Here's my thought: If 1) I had dirt on both DNC and RNC, and 2) wanted to influence control, I would first leak one side to tip the election... I would still have my dirt on the winner, who takes over. Then once the winner assumes office, I blackmail them with the remainder of the dirt.

Two step process, doesn't really matter which way you go with it, although choosing to blackmail the politically naive one would be easier.

[TimeTravel]

The first moment of truth opportunity and Trump chooses Russia over the CIA. Mind boggling, but somehow not totally shocking.

[George the original one]

Trump & skipping the daily intel briefing: Okay, the headlines on this issue are a bit over the top.

I have to agree with Mr. Trump on this one as he said the appropriate thing (though you have to dig through 3-4 paragraphs before find it), "You have my permission to call me immediately when the situation changes." That is indeed smart delegation.

[Campitor]

Real questions for Trump voters on this thread:

• Is his Cabinet shaping up the way you expected it to be?
• Are there particular policies you are optimistic he will make progress on?
• Do you have any concerns about his administration? If so, what are they?
• Is there anything he and/or the Republican Congress can do that would cause you to not vote, vote third party, or (gasp) swing to Dems next cycle?
• Is there anything Dems can do that might cause you to swing Dem?

I didn't vote for Trump or Hillary but here is my take on these questions:

• Still reading up on his cabinet picks but his NSA and Homeland Security choices seem okay. I don't like his pick for EPA Scott Pruitt since he seems biased against the agency he will oversee.
• My concern regarding his administration is his lack of government experience and his plans for boosting the american economy which I believe will only add to the deficit.
• If Trump presidency balances the budget I'll keep voting for him. If he starts ignoring sections of the constitution and claiming "executive privilege" in areas which are clearly not - then I'll swing Democrat as long as the Dem nominee isn't a lying, immoral, "lets keep throwing money at issues with no accountability and lets swing for the fences on ballooning the national debt" candidate.
• I'll vote for any democrat who wants to balance the budget, preaches fiscal responsibility, talks personal accountability, and shrinks the over bloated government.

I think the biggest threat to American citizens is the weakening of the legislative branch and the national debt. I believe the Presidency has grown too powerful because the legislative branch is too busy playing partisan politics which keeps them from properly executing the balance of power they were intended to have.

[Chad]

@ffj
No doubt there is venting. Some it from me. But, there are also valid questions being raised.

I'm kind of concerned that a lot of Republicans are considering Russian interference as a partisan issue. Like, if only to make sure your own cybersecurity practices are improved to make sure it doesn't happen to you next time, wouldn't you want to know the mechanisms and motivations for foreign state interference? Luckily, senior R Senators like John McCain and Lindsey Graham are stepping up.

This is a lot of what I'm getting at with my previous listing. I'm not suggesting Trump is unfit based on the Russian interference or the election is false. I'm suggesting he needs to show his financial interests and we need to know the hacking and other Russian interference measures are identified, mitigated, and receive a very strong response. This is a bigger deal than Russia invading the Ukraine. At this point, I'm not confident any of that occurs after Trump takes over.

How can we trust Trump if it seems he has financial interests related to Russia and he is ok with Russia screwing with the center piece (election) of our government? It just seems like all his supporters are like, "Who cares. My team won. But, Benghazi."

@George the original one
The situation does change daily, which is the problem with Trump's response. These are events, issues, etc. that are built on a thousand little things that add up to the big things. Just knowing the few big things is dangerous, as you aren't seeing the bottom of the iceberg and you are making decisions based on a very incomplete picture.

[Papers of Indenture]

Ego - here's a Rand paper on the Russian propaganda strategy. Ties in with Hypernormalisation nicely. (I see someone else linked it yesterday and gave it it's own thread as well)

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/p ... _PE198.pdf

I've been following this stuff when RT came along. I started to notice some curious tendencies and then took a look at some of the advertising they were doing at urban bus stops. Very interesting and creatively subversive.

Russia is out in front here. Their psyops are very Boydian

Bannon is a huge fan obviously.

All of that being said....I remain agnostic when trying to decode Russia/USA spats. The truth is exceedingly difficult to decipher amidst all of the propaganda from both sides. They've had a lot of practice afterall.

The cyber security world is all about creating it's own realities as well. An actor is rarely working for one interest.

Dept. Of Homeland Secutiry Tied to Hack of State of Georgia's Election

Don't Be So Sure Russia Hacked the Clinton Emails

[Spartan_Warrior]

So Russia "interfered" in this election by... allegedly releasing emails detailing how the DNC actually interfered in this election?

And neoliberals worry that Trump is a Russian-Manchurian candidate because... he refused to release tax returns almost certainly riddled with politically damaging tax deductions? Or is it the stunning fact that Putin/Russia might prefer the candidate that's not saber rattling in their direction and promising escalation of the Syrian proxy war?

What has me feeling sick is the neoliberal sycophants desperately using "Russian fake news" as an impetus to not only continue beating the drum of war with Russia, but to pass censorship laws and create an even more state-run media just in time to hand it over to a neo-fascist regime. Seeing the news organizations that were revealed as propaganda arms of the DNC during this election and newscasters like Brian "my aircraft was shot at" Williams decrying fake news would be pretty hilarious in its irony if the situation weren't so Orwellian in its horror.

Between that, Trump's cabinet picks, and the refusal of neoliberals to learn the lessons of this election, recognize the obsolescence of their ideas and GTFO of the way--as epitomized by the Democrats' choices in "new" leadership--there's plenty to be sick about.

But if you're still able to accept what the American fake news is peddling without any proof, I have some weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to sell you.

[Riggerjack]

we need to know the hacking and other Russian interference measures are identified, mitigated, and receive a very strong response. This is a bigger deal than Russia invading the Ukraine.

Really? Hacked emails is on the same scale as invasion? And you are sure "hysterics" is not an appropriate descriptor of your reaction to the election?

If, despite all reason, you actually believe this, let's count the bodies. 9700 killed in Ukraine, vs. up to one for the leaks, if you believe the DNC tried to plug the leak with the body of a staffer. Let's say that together, 9700:~1.

Ridiculous, overblown reactions like this are why I, a non Trump supporter, just can't take your side seriously.

[Riggerjack]

How can we trust Trump if it seems he has financial interests related to Russia and he is ok with Russia screwing with the center piece (election) of our government?

What, exactly, would you consider an appropriate response?

Go to war with a nuclear power?
Hack the Kremlin, turn down the heat?
A strongly worded press conference?
Invasion of Cuba?
FBI surveillance on the Communist party?

What is it that you think is appropriate, and within the capabilities of the president-elect?

Honestly, I expect foreign interests to take an interest in our elections. I expect we take an active roll in other elections. I just don't see anything worthy of outrage here. Now, if the emails were falsified, that would cause me to be a bit miffed, but since we are talking about politicians, I don't have much faith in any truth being sacred at any level. I expect the truth from political bodies, when it serves their purposes, and only then.

Myself, I'd like to see the hacked RNC emails, but I really don't think there is much there. That would imply effectiveness, and I saw nothing in 2016 to support that idea.

[Chad]

@riggerjack
One could argue it's a bigger deal because it's a direct impact on the US, but I see your point. I was overzealous. I'm not calling for war or anything similar. I am calling for a response, which doesn't appear to be forthcoming. No one seems to care enough to even want to give them a basic verbal rebuke. Instead, Trump rebukes our intelligence agencies for providing the information. That's why I'm worked up.

[Spartan_Warrior]

I didn't see Trump's rebuke, but frankly, if you're still willing to accept what our intelligence agencies are telling you without any further proof, I have some weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to sell you, too.

[Spartan_Warrior]

If election integrity is a concern, why are we not giving equal merit to the content of the Wikileaks emails as much as to whether and for what reason someone obtained them? Are foreign threats to American democracy just more trendy than the domestic ones? Or is this all just partisan scapegoating from the neoliberal wing of the Democratic Party that finds itself in a desperate need to blame everyone and everything for Trump except their own candidate and their own ideology?

It is the fundamental lack of a response to these questions that gets me worked up and also causes me to shrug at those concerns over the general election. Which was the same reaction I received when I had those concerns in the far more consequential primary.

[Chad]

I typed the above before your second post.

What would be appropriate? Not rebuking our intelligence agencies for one. Supporting the investigation of incidents and even suggesting the possibility of a non-defined response would be something.

Potential responses would be hacking back, sanctions, etc. As has been discussed previously, I think in another thread, no one has determined the proportional response, yet.

[Chad]

I didn't see Trump's rebuke, but frankly, if you're still willing to accept what our intelligence agencies are telling you without any further proof, I have some weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to sell you, too.

That is not exactly what the intel agencies said. The initial draft from the CIA, "contained several qualifiers that were dropped ... As the draft NIE went up the intelligence chain of command, the conclusions were treated increasingly definitively."
http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-th ... raq-2015-3

Also, "The intelligence estimate also heavily qualified its evidence of any link between Saddam's regime and al Qaeda, noting that the sources were not entirely reliable."

The administration and those in Congress, including Clinton, either ignored or failed to read this part of the report.

And, valid questions concerning DNC.

[Riggerjack]

DWS resigned

And yet, still holds office. Somehow Democratic rage over media manipulation is all focused on Russians. This rings a bit hollow to those of us not "true blue".

What would be appropriate? Not rebuking our intelligence agencies for one. Supporting the investigation of incidents and even suggesting the possibility of a non-defined response would be something.

Potential responses would be hacking back, sanctions, etc. As has been discussed previously, I think in another thread, no one has determined the proportional response, yet.

If this were 1946, I would expect Russian influence in our elections. Or 1986. In 2016 it in no way surprises me, and I find the lack of alarm comforting. I don't know how old you are, but if this level of election tampering were exposed in the 80's, both parties would be out for blood. Today, it is viewed as a warning to deal with your IT security.

This is a much better reaction, in my opinion. Frankly, I don't think we need more presidential sabber rattling. Particularly from someone who so clearly has boundary and control issues. The last thing I want to see is a Putin/the Douche face-off. 2 wannabe silverbacks, with no de-escalation skills, and nukes? No thanks.

Hacking back may work, sanctions run through congress, and are WAY outside the power of a president elect. If you cannot come up with appropriate retaliation, with no responsibility for the fallout, how can you criticize Trump for not doing more, when he isn't even in power? For lack of an executive response, I would have to say you should be blaming Obama. You know, the President, who is in power now, and back when this came to light?

[Campitor]

@Campitor: A couple of follow up questions, if you will:
1. What do you see as the appropriate scope of presidential executive power?
2. What were the key positive and negative features if the Obama administration in your view?
3. What areas of the government do you believe are bloated and what kind of changes would you make to make big impacts on the deficit?

1) The appropriate scope of presidential power is something that is tempered by oversight of the legislative branch acting in a bipartisan spirit to ensure the president is acting in the country's best interest with the judiciary informing the executive branch to the constitutionality of certain presidential privileges.

2) I believe Obama acted prudently to limit the 2008 financial meltdown impact on our economy. I believe his idea for government sponsored healthcare reform is good but his implementation was bad. His support for the wholesale spying of all the american people is a disgrace and in my opinion and a great threat to liberty. The death of american civilians, labeled enemy-combatants, on foreign soil via drone attacks without any transparency about the due-process involved, is unconstitutional in my opinion.

3) Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, Military Spending, and Welfare are all in need of deep cuts. Our military spends more per year than the 10 next largest armies combined. Too many individuals, who can work, stay on social services too long - there is no real oversight on the number of folks cheating the system. And millionaires shouldn't be getting social security - it was meant as a safety net for those less fortunate. I've seen first hand the cheating of the system: couples claiming separation to get benefits (housing, food, etc) but they still live together, recipients receiving welfare because of a disability but working under-the-table workings jobs as mechanics, housekeepers, janitors, etc. And corporate welfare has to end as well - too much crony-capitalism involved. We will never get to a balanced budget without cutting military and social services spending.