[RedSpawn]

Winstonm, on 2018-January-01, 08:41, said:

How do you get a party and president who control all aspects of government and who benefited from Russian hacking to act to protect from future hacks, though?

Good question. . .this is where good policy would meet partisan gridlock because we can't expect politicians to act against their own self-interest.

[rmnka447]

RedSpawn, on 2018-January-01, 03:51, said:

I concede here. I didn't differentiate between Russia (formerly USSR) and the Eastern block. Let's look at this world map below:



Czechslovakia used to be a former USSR satellite-state but it was technically its own country. It no longer exists as a unit and is now Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Also, when I said two Russian wives I should have gone in for the jugular and intimated two Russian mail-order brides which typically includes pure Russian women and women of former Eastern block origin like Czech or Slovakia.

I can understand how a mail-order bride salivating over American citizenship would entertain marrying Trump despite his huge character flaws.

Source: http://www.planetrom...-russian-women/

Understand that many of the distinct Slavic ethnic groups don't have extremely large populations. So they've been unwillingly dominated by other groups that are larger and stronger for centuries. Most of the Eastern Bloc countries weren't exactly willing partners with the Soviet Union and still bear a lot of animus towards Russia today. Much of the animosity between some Slavic groups even stems from such causes. You might not remember when Hungary an Eastern Bloc member revolted against the USSR in 1954 and were brutally repressed. (Hungarians aren't Slavs, but were part of the Bloc.) Likewise, Czechoslovakia tried to institute democratic reforms in 1968 which were crushed during the Prague Spring by the USSR. The Poles also had a tough time throwing off domination by the Soviets and finally had the breakthrough that lead to the downfall of the Soviet Union in the '80s.

Lumping all Slavs together is as racially insensitive as being a person who states they can't tell Blacks apart because they all look the same.

In any case, I don't think Ivanka or Melania were "mail order" brides in any typical sense. Both had successful careers before Trump. I suspect one of the things that attracted Trump was that these were strong, independent woman. Maybe that's what he needs to keep him in line.

Frankly, the incessant criticism of and attacks directed at Melania Trump by the MSM have some strong racist overtones to them. Demeaning the intelligence of a person whose 5th language is English for using a script to help make sure she gets the pronunciation right in a speech just isn't right, it's racist.

[RedSpawn]

y66, on 2018-January-01, 11:39, said:

From The case for optimism in 2018 by Gideon Rachman at FT:

The threat of war with North Korea is not real unless and until our economy craters similar or worse to the housing bubble crash of October 2008 or unless or until North Korea attacks us. If our economy has another asset bubble crash and wealth vaporization in our capital markets, we will need a war to distract the masses of the painful fallout of our market collapse.

We will want to demonize someone for our folly and irrational exuberance. And North Korea is the perfect noncompliant Axis of Evil we will blame for our suffering as we pound the war drums and run up the war tab.

[cherdano]

rmnka447, on 2018-January-01, 19:46, said:

Frankly, the incessant criticism of and attacks directed at Melania Trump by the MSM have some strong racist overtones to them. Demeaning the intelligence of a person whose 5th language is English for using a script to help make sure she gets the pronunciation right in a speech just isn't right, it's racist.

Can you give an example of the MSM demeaning the intelligence of Melania Trump?

[awm]

hrothgar, on 2018-January-01, 09:00, said:

More important, the DNC penetration was based on spear-phishing.

Improving your firewall standards ain't gonna help.

A strong 2FA scheme might be a bit more useful, however, most of the end users of these systems are technologically illiterate. (And I am specifically talking about people like Trump, Clinton, Podesta, etc. who absolutely require access to the systems in question)

From my perspective, the most important areas to clean up are

1. Voting machines
2. Voter registration

This answer seems like a bit of a bait-and-switch. While I agree that the various voter suppression tactics being pursued by Republicans are against the spirit of our country, and that it would be good to prevent them... this was not really the topic being discussed, which is interference in our elections by foreign powers, specifically by hacking and obtaining internal memos and strategy documents (and then leaking them to the opposition or to the country as a whole), as well as various uses of bots, advertisements, and "fake news" websites to promote stories which aren't true (but impact the vote).

Much as I'm in favor of free speech, we have election laws for a reason and these laws generally disallow political ads by foreign powers! They also require that political ads be identified with who paid for them (although in recent times this has become fuzzy with the many misnamed PACs running around). I think we need to apply these laws more aggressively to social networks -- Facebook (and Google, and Twitter, etc). It might also help to have stronger libel laws; perhaps if I post a totally untrue political story on my web page I should face some penalties (especially if I should/could have known it was untrue)?

[hrothgar]

awm, on 2018-January-02, 06:43, said:

This answer seems like a bit of a bait-and-switch. While I agree that the various voter suppression tactics being pursued by Republicans are against the spirit of our country, and that it would be good to prevent them... this was not really the topic being discussed, which is interference in our elections by foreign powers, specifically by hacking and obtaining internal memos and strategy documents (and then leaking them to the opposition or to the country as a whole), as well as various uses of bots, advertisements, and "fake news" websites to promote stories which aren't true (but impact the vote).

Much as I'm in favor of free speech, we have election laws for a reason and these laws generally disallow political ads by foreign powers! They also require that political ads be identified with who paid for them (although in recent times this has become fuzzy with the many misnamed PACs running around). I think we need to apply these laws more aggressively to social networks -- Facebook (and Google, and Twitter, etc). It might also help to have stronger libel laws; perhaps if I post a totally untrue political story on my web page I should face some penalties (especially if I should/could have known it was untrue)?

Hi Adam,

I agree that my response changed the focus of the discussion.

This was deliberate because the areas that you are calling attention to strike me as being both

1. Hard to solve
2. Controversial

(I haven't made up my own mind on a lot of this stuff)

In contrast, I would hope that the two areas that I identified could attract some measure of bi-partisan agreement and have technical fixes that seem relatively well understood. As such, if I were trying to address the broad topic of "Security Surrounding Elections", I'd start with the low hanging fruit.

[barmar]

rmnka447, on 2018-January-01, 19:46, said:

In any case, I don't think Ivanka or Melania were "mail order" brides in any typical sense.

Just need to remind you: Ivanka is his daughter, the former wife is Ivana.

[barmar]

cherdano, on 2018-January-02, 01:59, said:

Can you give an example of the MSM demeaning the intelligence of Melania Trump?

Not to mention that practically everyone uses a script when giving a public speech. DT needs to do it more -- when he goes off script, he often produces incomprehensible rambling (is "stream of unconscious" a thing?).

The only time I can remember the MSM giving her a hard time was when they noticed that much of her speech to the RNC seemed to be plagiarized from a Michelle Obama speech. That was more the fault of her speechwriter, IMHO.

There are jokes about a possible strained relationship with Donald, like the time she slapped his hand away while they were walking together, or the pained expression on her face when Donald is speaking and can't see her.

[hrothgar]

barmar, on 2018-January-02, 10:16, said:

The only time I can remember the MSM giving her a hard time was when they noticed that much of her speech to the RNC seemed to be plagiarized from a Michelle Obama speech. That was more the fault of her speechwriter, IMHO.

There were plenty of comments that her Brazilian needs to be touched up before she goes plastering her genitals in any more papers...

[rmnka447]

barmar, on 2018-January-02, 10:10, said:

Just need to remind you: Ivanka is his daughter, the former wife is Ivana.

Excuse me, I meant Ivana throughout my reply.

[cherdano]

cherdano, on 2018-January-02, 01:59, said:

Can you give an example of the MSM demeaning the intelligence of Melania Trump?

Still curiuos whether rmnka can give an example.

[Winstonm]

cherdano, on 2018-January-02, 18:08, said:

Still curiuos whether rmnka can give an example.

And he said he didn't listen to Rush or watch Hannity but did not name the sources he does rely on yet repeats the far right lines so it makes one wonder where he sees, hears, or reads it?

[Winstonm]

Concerning Kim Jung-un, Donald Trump tweeted:

Quote

"Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!"

This was followed by this supportive tweet:

Quote

The Michael Flynn Jr. tweeted:

This is why Trump was elected. A no bullsh#t leader not afraid to stand up for his country...#Trump2020 #MAGA2018

There seems to be a pattern here - the same pattern seen on 4th grade playgrounds at recess or in huddled cliques in middle school.

[ldrews]

Winstonm, on 2018-January-03, 10:40, said:

Concerning Kim Jung-un, Donald Trump tweeted:





There seems to be a pattern here - the same pattern seen on 4th grade playgrounds at recess or in huddled cliques in middle school.

How would you handle North Korea? They seem to have a 25 year history of using negotiations and agreements to stall while continuing their nuclear program. Kim Jong Un is a blustering bully threatening nuclear strikes against the US. He seems to have no incentive or motivation to seek an amicable agreement which removes their nuclear weapon capability.

So what would you do?

[hrothgar]

ldrews, on 2018-January-03, 10:44, said:

So what would you do?

Drews, drews, drews

Multiple people already provided answers to this earlier in the "discussion".

Go back and read what they have to say.
If you have questions, feel free to ask them.

But don't expect people to repost because you are too stupid to be able to follow along with a thread.

[y66]

From today's Times:

Quote

President Trump’s former chief strategist has described a meeting between senior Trump campaign staff and a lawyer linked to the Kremlin as “treasonous” while predicting that the Russia investigation will hit the White House with the force of a “category five” hurricane.

Steve Bannon told an American author that the special counsel investigation into the Trump team’s dealings with Russia would home in on alleged money laundering by campaign staff and on the “greasy” financial dealings of Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law.

Speaking about the investigation being led by Robert Mueller, Mr Bannon said: “You realise where this is going. This is all about money laundering.”

He noted that Mr Mueller has recruited Andrew Weissmann, a prosecutor renowned for his aggressive style and his skill in turning defendants into collaborators.

“Mueller chose Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to f***ed Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr and Jared Kushner … It’s as plain as a hair on your face,” Mr Bannon said.

He predicted: “They’re going to crack Don Junior like an egg on national TV.”

It was reported last month that Mueller prosecutors had demanded documents from Deutsche Bank, which has lent hundreds of millions of dollars to Mr Trump and Mr Kushner’s family business.

Mr Bannon said: “It goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner *****. The Kushner ***** is greasy. They’re going to go right through that. They’re going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me.”

Mr Bannon served as chief executive of the Trump campaign from August 2016 until the election in November 2016. He was the White House chief strategist for seven months before being fired last August.

His remarks are included in a new book by Michael Wolff, Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House, extracts of which have been seen by the Guardian. The book, due to be published next Tuesday and which draws on interviews with Mr Trump and his inner circle, is being billed as an unforgiving portrait of his West Wing as it lurched from crisis to crisis during its first year.

It includes a scathing assessment of the president from one of his closest acquaintances, Tom Barrack, a billionaire private equity tycoon who was a top fundraiser for the Trump campaign and who turned down the offer of a cabinet post. Mr Barrack allegedly says of Mr Trump: “He’s not only crazy, he’s stupid.”

Some of the most explosive remarks come from Mr Bannon and involve a controversial meeting between the president’s eldest son, Donald Jr, and a group of Russians in June of 2016.

Also present for the meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya, a Russian lawyer with links to the Kremlin, were Mr Kushner and Paul Manafort, who at the time was the Trump campaign chairman and is currently under house arrest after being charged by Mr Mueller’s team of laundering millions of dollars derived from pro-Moscow political groups in Ukraine.

Donald Jr agreed to the meeting, which was held at Trump Tower in New York, after being told by an intermediary that the Russians were willing to share incriminating material on Hillary Clinton, his father’s Democrat rival for the White House.

Speaking shortly after the meeting was revealed, last July, Mr Bannon told Wolff: “The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor – with no lawyers. They didn’t have any lawyers.”

“Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad *****, and I happen to think it’s all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately.”

Mr Bannon also shared his thoughts on how such a meeting should have been handled surreptitiously. It should have taken place “in a Holiday Inn in Manchester, New Hampshire, with your lawyers who meet with these people”.

Any dirt on Mrs Clinton could have then been quietly passed “to Breitbart or something like that, or maybe some other more legitimate publication”.

Mr Bannon added: “You never see it, you never know it, because you don’t need to … But that’s the brain trust that they had.”

Since his removal from the West Wing Mr Bannon has returned to Breitbart News, the nationalist website he had previously led. He has also tried to carve out a role as a populist Svengali and has hopes of running anti-establishment challengers to incumbent Republican senators next year.

His political ambitions took a blow last month, however, when the candidate he backed in Alabama was accused of molesting teenage girls and lost what was expected to be a safe Republican senate seat.

While in the White House he clashed with Mr Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, both of whom are Jewish. Wolff quotes Henry Kissinger, the former secretary of state, as describing the feud as “a war between the Jews and the non-Jews”.

[ldrews]

hrothgar, on 2018-January-03, 11:15, said:

Drews, drews, drews

Multiple people already provided answers to this earlier in the "discussion".

Go back and read what they have to say.
If you have questions, feel free to ask them.

But don't expect people to repost because you are too stupid to be able to follow along with a thread.

I wasn't asking multiple people, I was asking winstonm. Are you winstonm?

[ldrews]

Winstonm, on 2018-January-03, 10:40, said:

Concerning Kim Jung-un, Donald Trump tweeted:


This was followed by this supportive tweet:


There seems to be a pattern here - the same pattern seen on 4th grade playgrounds at recess or in huddled cliques in middle school.

In competitive environments one of the most successful strategies is Tit-For-Tat https://en.wikipedia...iki/Tit_for_tat

It would appear that Trump is using such a strategy with North Korea. If Kim Jong Un threatens, then Trump threatens. If Kim Jon Un says nice things, then Trump says nice things.

Can you suggest a better strategy?

And all of a sudden North Korea wants to talk with South Korea. What do you think encouraged such a change? Perhaps Trump knows something about negotiation.

[jjbrr]

ldrews, please get out of this thread. go here.

[ldrews]

jjbrr, on 2018-January-03, 13:35, said:

ldrews, please get out of this thread. go here.

Why? Is this thread not about Trump? Is not one of the current issues Trump's relationship with North Korea/Kim Jong Un?