Post inauguration Trump:

[pietillidie]

[Jezza]

^ Damn those evil Russians.

[Wokko]

So because the Russians told the American people the truth about the Democrats they lost the election?

Righto, maybe the Dems shouldn't be such shady pricks then

[Wokko]

I'd add to that the Democrats paid foreign agents to create a fake dossier on Trump and disseminated THAT through mainstream media. Is this really the hill they want to die on?

Sounds like they're coming up with a coping mechanism for their insane followers when Trump wins again so they can scream at the sky and blame Russia for another 4 years.

[pietillidie]

Of course it serves the Dems right. But that means even more so, the legal impeachment of Trump and investigations into his activities, including the exposure of his lies, manipulations, and criminal associates, serves him right.

The astonishing thing is that we can agree it serves the Dems right to be exposed even if through espionage, yet you shed tears for the completely legal exposure of Trump's activities. That's just laughable.

But Russia is still clearly and plainly interfering in elections; this is basic world knowledge. No one in cybersecurity has ever doubted it for a second.

But the foulest stench of all will always be this: Trump encouraged them to do so, rather than defending the integrity of his nation. Just as he avoided his responsibilities to the nation through 'bone spurs'. Once a self-serving disreputable coward, always a self-serving disreputable coward.

[swoop42]

It makes me laugh how many rusted on Trump supporters would consider themselves patriots and yet the President they support was all to willing to encourage the former cold war enemy to dig up dirt on a political rival.

That he looked to do it again with Biden makes it even more delicious.

[David]

[pietillidie]

[David]

But isn’t your position and language here more or less identical? CNN, MSNBC and the various liberal news outlets and talking heads have been pursuing this line since the beginning of Trump’s presidency, if not his candidacy. I trust it’s clear that it’s not him I have any interest in defending; my concern is when an opportunity to nail him ends up rehashing age-old imperialist tropes (either because this is seen as an opportunity to fight the right on their own territory, or else an expression of sincere commitment to the language of empire). Whether you agree with me on that or not, surely you must concede that “responsibilities to the nation” was an ill-chosen phrase to describe Trump’s draft avoidance. I still remember when actual war criminal George W Bush won a second term partially off the back of painting his opponent as a Vietnam draft evader, so it’s not like these language choices have no consequences.

[pietillidie]

^If that satisfies you. But spend some time looking at the cybersecurity reports rather than worrying about which bit of third-hand talk has angled in the preferred way.

[David]

I read the New York Times article at the top of the page, and mostly it just seemed like the same old vague CIA warnings about Russian hackers with some contextualising press gallery dramas thrown in. I’m sure there are some groups in Russia, perhaps government-aligned, invested in trying to run interference in elections; what I remain sceptical about is how much real-world impact they are actually capable of achieving, and thus how much emotional energy we – as observers somewhat invested in the integrity of the US democratic process – should devote to it.

[pietillidie]

The actual cybersecurity analysis and commentary.

On the influence of such interference, propaganda's an old business for a reason. But you can't answer your question intuitively from 100 paces; you need to know the research and techniques, and actually have hands-on experience with this stuff. Yes, of course it works.

Do you think corps, PACs and sovereign security arms are spending hundreds of millions on this for nothing? Have you seen Facebook's revenue of late? Run some calculations as if you were trying to influence people as a marketing department in a firm in a marginal two-horse race.

FWIW, Sanders has started addressing Russia with more concern than yourself:

[David]

Good thing Michael Bloomberg isn’t Russian:

https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/story/2020-02-21/twitter-suspends-bloomberg-accounts

[pietillidie]

Trump's management as paranoid socialist satire:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/22/us/politics/trump-disloyalty-turnover.html

As expected, Trump's a flailing loon when it comes to people management and organisation building. You can see exactly where all the bankruptcies come from; as soon as things get too complex and require something more than communist command-and-control, he can't cope and goes on a paranoid purge.

Serious business needs serious organisation, but the instinct of the clinical narcissist is to threaten people, not empower them. As soon as things get too difficult and he's no longer the centre of everything, he lashes out at the talent he's just developed to gain a sense of control again, even if it results in isolation and bankruptcy. In his deranged mind, that's a 'win', and it's exactly what he means when he says he 'gets things done'. It's also why he runs a shonky used car yard built around a theatre act and shady deals with conmen rather than a serious corporation.

There's only one real fasco-protectionist getting about, and it isn't Bernie Sanders. Has Trump got any relatives left to hire? Because Friendless Freddy's certainly got no mates.

[Wokko]

The guy's a billionaire, are you high?