The 2016 US Election (Part III)

[The Romulan Republic]

Actually, I think this could work out in Clinton and the Democrats' favour. Not only because it has drawn attention to the very disturbing connections between Trump and the Republicans and Putin and the Russian Mafia, but because the Democratic Convention illustrates profoundly the difference in the quality of the two major parties' leadership.

The Republican convention was a divisive, ugly, bigoted mess.

The Democrats, by contrast, have had every major party figure united behind the nominee, an overall positive tone (a disruptive minority aside), and, when thrown one of the worst possible curve balls right before the convention, went into overdrive to do damage control.

Moreover, while Republicans dance to Putin's tune, the Democrats refused to be divided by an apparent attempt at disruption by the Russian government.

That, to me, speaks volumes about which party is more fit to govern.

[Mr Bean]

RR that makes two pretty big assumptions
1. That people will draw those conclusions between Trump and Russia (Unlikely, the chatter is all about democratic dirty laundry not villainous Russians)

2. That the damage control worked (So far it's mixed, there's just so much dirty laundry)

How exactly are the Republicans "dance to Putin's tune"? Should they have not taken advantage of this hack? It's not a fake opo news story the Russians are playing rather it's "Russian hackers" releasing the contents of the Democratic parties private communication which contains many interesting future news stories about how they talk behind close doors and who did what when.

For example the next thing Trump will likely highlight is the tidbit that the Trump violence rallies months ago was engineered along by the DNC. They did not cause the violence rather they payed for people to show up and try and cause a scene at Trump rallies. Is that true? Probably not, but there's enough talk in the emails about doing just that it will take on the mantle of truth and be used as such in future Trump speeches.

[Broomstick]

RR that makes two pretty big assumptions
1. That people will draw those conclusions between Trump and Russia (Unlikely, the chatter is all about democratic dirty laundry not villainous Russians)

Really? Because this morning's TV news broadcast was talking about Russia hackers and not DWS being a shithead.

The Dems should try to spin this in their favor.

[The Romulan Republic]

RR that makes two pretty big assumptions
1. That people will draw those conclusions between Trump and Russia (Unlikely, the chatter is all about democratic dirty laundry not villainous Russians)

I assume nothing (if this election has shown anything, its that assumptions are for fools), but I think that their are some grounds for optimism.

The Democratic Party dirt is getting coverage, sure. But so are Trump's ties to Russia. And I think that while the former will get talked about for a while and fade, the latter will likely have more staying power, because short of it being completely discredited by subsequent evidence, its too damn big and too damn serious in its potential implications to forget about or brush under the rug, and thanks to this development, its now getting serious coverage.

2. That the damage control worked (So far it's mixed, there's just so much dirty laundry)

The only really bad move that I can recall was Clinton hiring on Schultz as honorary campaign chair. Although I've seen speculation (unconfirmed) that a deal was cut to throw Schultz a bone so she would resign quietly rather than having to hold a vote to kick her out on the convention floor. If so, I can understand that, even if I don't like it.

How exactly are the Republicans "dance to Putin's tune"? Should they have not taken advantage of this hack? It's not a fake opo news story the Russians are playing rather it's "Russian hackers" releasing the contents of the Democratic parties private communication which contains many interesting future news stories about how they talk behind close doors and who did what when.

Oh, taking advantage of the information is fair game.

Its more the fact that their are indications of disturbing ties between Trump and the Republicans and Putin's government which have also come to light of late, while some of Trump's policy positions (such as they are), like abandoning NATO allies, are directly beneficial to Russian interests.

For example the next thing Trump will likely highlight is the tidbit that the Trump violence rallies months ago was engineered along by the DNC. They did not cause the violence rather they payed for people to show up and try and cause a scene at Trump rallies. Is that true? Probably not, but there's enough talk in the emails about doing just that it will take on the mantle of truth and be used as such in future Trump speeches.

Source?

Also, what do you mean by "...violence... was engineered along by the DNC."?

If they organized protests, I don't have a problem with that. Trump should be protested.

If they deliberately organized/incited violence, that's a fucking crime and the parties responsible should go to prison.

[Mr Bean]

RR that makes two pretty big assumptions
1. That people will draw those conclusions between Trump and Russia (Unlikely, the chatter is all about democratic dirty laundry not villainous Russians)

Really? Because this morning's TV news broadcast was talking about Russia hackers and not DWS being a shithead.

The Dems should try to spin this in their favor.

Depends on the morning news I suppose, for example my morning news feed kicked this story to the top

US News & World Report

The Democratic National Committee attempted to conceal details of a fundraising arrangement with Hillary Clinton that channeled money out of state Democratic parties, according to the most recent batch of leaked emails roiling the national party.

Politico reports that during one three-month period while Democratic primaries were still going on, state parties got to keep less than one half of one percent of the $82 million raised through the arrangement.

Bernie Sanders, Clinton's principal Democratic rival, and his allies were concerned about the arrangement as they saw it as skewing the process in Clinton's favor, as well as hurting local Democratic parties.


"Bernie 2016 is particularly concerned that these extremely large-dollar individual contributions have been used by the Hillary Victory Fund to pay for more than $7.8 million in direct mail efforts and over $8.6 million in online advertising, both of which appear to benefit only [Hillary For America] by generating low dollar contributions that flow only to HFA, rather than to the DNC or any of the participating state party committees," a Sanders campaign letter from April reads.

The leaked emails show officials working to get their stories straight, and complaining that the Sanders campaign was putting the party in a tough position by complaining about this.

One official criticized Sanders for putting the DNC between "a real rock vs hard place, "because he was pushing "a fight in the media with the party bosses over big money fundraising."

The funding controversy is part of a larger scandal within the Democratic Party about the behavior of the DNC during the primary campaign. The Wikileaks-published emails forced DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz to announce her imminent resignation as party head Sunday, on the eve of the Democratic National Convention.

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has pounced on the controversies, attacking the DNC and Clinton on ethical grounds, and attempting to court Sanders supporters.

"Here we go again with another Clinton scandal, and e-mails yet (can you believe). Crooked Hillary knew the fix was in, B never had a chance!" Trump tweeted Monday.

Depends on your sources as the news checking Reuters/CNN/MSNC/FOX and the other usual suspects shows about 60% it's a historic day woman secures nomination stories and 40% Here's something from the DNC email leak that's bad as the top story in the politics section.

[Mr Bean]

RR that makes two pretty big assumptions
1. That people will draw those conclusions between Trump and Russia (Unlikely, the chatter is all about democratic dirty laundry not villainous Russians)

I assume nothing (if this election has shown anything, its that assumptions are for fools), but I think that their are some grounds for optimism.

The Democratic Party dirt is getting coverage, sure. But so are Trump's ties to Russia. And I think that while the former will get talked about for a while and fade, the latter will likely have more staying power, because short of it being completely discredited by subsequent evidence, its too damn big and too damn serious in its potential implications to forget about or brush under the rug, and thanks to this development, its now getting serious coverage.

This is where I disagree with you because
A. Secretary Clinton also has ties to Russian oligarchs (Hello half million dollar speeches to Russian banks with ties to Uranium One)
B. He's got a ready made defense, Trump Inc is an international business I make money everywhere I make yuuge sums of money in Russia to. Did you think you can do business in Russian without ever talking to Russians? These reports are nonsense and I'm a great businessman Trump 2016

B is a exaggeration but it's a good example of a Trump line he can feed the media and shut that story down. Now he could swiftboat himself and hand it terribly but B is typical of his method of handling previous scandals.

2. That the damage control worked (So far it's mixed, there's just so much dirty laundry)

The only really bad move that I can recall was Clinton hiring on Schultz as honorary campaign chair. Although I've seen speculation (unconfirmed) that a deal was cut to throw Schultz a bone so she would resign quietly rather than having to hold a vote to kick her out on the convention floor. If so, I can understand that, even if I don't like it.

I don't, kicking her out on the floor would have been far more healthy and better long term for Secretary Clinton because now there's months of material for Trump surrogates to use to remind people that Clinton "stole" the nomination from Bernie with Schultz's support. Note the air quotes around stole, politics is perception not reality.

How exactly are the Republicans "dance to Putin's tune"? Should they have not taken advantage of this hack? It's not a fake opo news story the Russians are playing rather it's "Russian hackers" releasing the contents of the Democratic parties private communication which contains many interesting future news stories about how they talk behind close doors and who did what when.

Oh, taking advantage of the information is fair game.

Its more the fact that their are indications of disturbing ties between Trump and the Republicans and Putin's government which have also come to light of late, while some of Trump's policy positions (such as they are), like abandoning NATO allies, are directly beneficial to Russian interests.

Again I don't think the "disturbing ties" will get play longer than a few days, the NATO think is a bigger point but I believe if Trump explains himself better or abandons that position all will be forgiven and forgotten by voters.

For example the next thing Trump will likely highlight is the tidbit that the Trump violence rallies months ago was engineered along by the DNC. They did not cause the violence rather they payed for people to show up and try and cause a scene at Trump rallies. Is that true? Probably not, but there's enough talk in the emails about doing just that it will take on the mantle of truth and be used as such in future Trump speeches.

Source?

Also, what do you mean by "...violence... was engineered along by the DNC."?

If they organized protests, I don't have a problem with that. Trump should be protested.

If they deliberately organized/incited violence, that's a fucking crime and the parties responsible should go to prison.

One
Engineered along is a bad turn of phrase I'll admit, better to say the DNC helped ensure that should a crowd be of a violent bent there were people there to be violent towards holding signs and in view of said violent crowd. To say it another way, you can't attack protestors if there's no one protesting. If the media narrative is Trump gets protestors wherever he goes the DNC decided to make it true by ensuring DNC people would be there to protest. And in those instances where the Trump protestors got violent don't think the DNC people did there best to stop it.

Two in reverse order, sad to say the source is the Daily caller about most of the emails but what they are reporting can be verified that of DNC people talking about future Trump events there's also other emails detailing what signs DNC interns should be holding and what to shout as Trump goes by.

The inference is that the DNC was doing agi-prop and again there's enough emails to paint a decent picture that the DNC was sending people to all Trump events in hopes of coordinating the crowd to look good on TV but it can easily be taken that for example when Trump protestors were blocking roads or clashing with police this was ALSO DNC inspired.

Remember this was the DNC getting directly involved with the Republican party nomination process and believe you me, the last thing we want is it to be the new normal for each party to be able to shape the nomination process of the other. It's a bad thing but it happens already, the DNC emails can make it look again good enough for a sinister news cycle and some talking points.

[Flagg]

RR that makes two pretty big assumptions
1. That people will draw those conclusions between Trump and Russia (Unlikely, the chatter is all about democratic dirty laundry not villainous Russians)

Really? Because this morning's TV news broadcast was talking about Russia hackers and not DWS being a shithead.

The Dems should try to spin this in their favor.

Agreed. Whether the Russian government was out to fuck America by "helping" Trump with the hacked emails or not, it's a great way to spin things. "Russia wants Trump to be POTUS because they know Trump would weaken America and NATO" is a damned good way to spin this whether it's true or not. Though I'm not sure that I buy that is what happened.

[Grumman]

"Russia wants Trump to be POTUS because they know Trump would weaken America and NATO" is a damned good way to spin this whether it's true or not. Though I'm not sure that I buy that is what happened.

Russia has a perfectly good excuse for wanting Hillary Clinton to not be POTUS: her vote against the Levin Amendment to the Iraq Resolution. Russia, as a member of the UN Security Council, could have stopped the US waging an illegal war that killed a hundred thousand people, but Clinton and people like her voted it down.

[Flagg]

"Russia wants Trump to be POTUS because they know Trump would weaken America and NATO" is a damned good way to spin this whether it's true or not. Though I'm not sure that I buy that is what happened.

Russia has a perfectly good excuse for wanting Hillary Clinton to not be POTUS: her vote against the Levin Amendment to the Iraq Resolution. Russia, as a member of the UN Security Council, could have stopped the US waging an illegal war that killed a hundred thousand people, but Clinton and people like her voted it down.

The same Russia that illegally invaded and annexed Crimea? Please.

[Crown]

The Russian Bogeyman (TM) didn't work for "Project Fear" during the Brexit debate, and I haven't seen any compelling reason why people think it will here. And say what you want about The Donald; the motherfucker knows how to take control of a narrative. How do you stop this;

https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/7 ... 8986074112

https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/stat ... 1175297024

Watch this; the entire argument of the Democrats is 'ignore that we're corrupt, Russia is helping Trump'. That's what's gonna turn disenfranchised (perceived or otherwise) voters away from a populist demagogue? Do you even understand Trump's appeal?

[Mr Bean]

Well there's the new Trump narrative thanks to a fuckup on Hillary's people's part.

After Donald Trump’s comments at his press conference today, Hillary for America senior policy advisor Jake Sullivan following statement:

“This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent. That’s not hyperbole, those are just the facts. This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue.”

Link to live thread
Which the Trump people prompted jumped on with both feet because per Secretary Clinton many statements these email she deleted have nothing to do with national security. And if hacking her server is a national security issue goly gee doesn't that mean Secretary Clinton was not respecting national security by having her own private server?

Hello future media narrative, still it's Sullivan's fault not Secretary Clinton's but if she embraces it before thinking it through it will look so much worse.

[Patroklos]

He also didn't ask Russia to hack them, he assumed they already had. The FBI assumes the same thing. Anyone who isn't an idiot assumes the same thing.

I should also be remembered that there are apparently more emails. The Russia story plays once, but the emails themselves will play over and over again if there is any meat to Wikileaks claim.

[Tanasinn]

The Russian bogeyman is a laughable play that shows just how old and out of touch Clinton's advisors must be. Americans aren't interested in or scared of Russia in the way they used to be, and not a few are confused why we're bankrolling non-contributing NATO members for a third world war that is never gonna happen - hell, I certainly am. It looks like a thin, desperate attempt to get attention off the DNC emails, which isn't going to work because there are allegedly more leaks coming. If it starts gaining traction, Trump could dredge up Clinton's Saudi ties. Guess who Americans hate more?

Ultimately though, I figure that right now the foreign bogeymen are China and daesh, and daesh is poised to stay in that position as long as they're able to make an attack in Europe nearly every day. The Cold War is over, and I don't expect "THE RUSSIAN MENACE" play to pan out.

[The Romulan Republic]

He also didn't ask Russia to hack them, he assumed they already had. The FBI assumes the same thing. Anyone who isn't an idiot assumes the same thing.

I should also be remembered that there are apparently more emails. The Russia story plays once, but the emails themselves will play over and over again if there is any meat to Wikileaks claim.

He did both.

http://www.npr.org/2016/07/27/487634941 ... ons-emails

Donald Trump urged Russian agents to "find" his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton's emails and release them, an unprecedented move by a candidate for president encouraging such a foreign breach.

"Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing," the GOP presidential nominee said at a news conference in Miami on Wednesday. "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press."

Trump was referring to the ongoing controversy surrounding the private server Clinton used while secretary of state.

Separately, the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia this week was upended by a release of hacked emails from the party committee believed to have been orchestrated by Russia. While the motive for intrusion and release of emails isn't known, many Democrats have speculated that it's a possible attempt to influence the outcome of this year's presidential election.

Pressed by NBC's Katy Tur as to whether he had any "pause about asking a foreign government ... to interfere, to hack into the system of anybody's in this country," Trump dismissed that idea and told Tur to "be quiet."

Clinton's campaign responded in disbelief and outrage to Trump's comments.

"This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent. That's not hyperbole, those are just the facts," Clinton senior policy adviser Jake Sullivan said in a statement. "This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue."

The Trump campaign appeared to try to clean up Trump's comments with a statement from his running mate, Mike Pence.

"The FBI will get to the bottom of who is behind the hacking" of the DNC emails, said Pence. If it was Russia, "I can assure you both parties and the United States government will ensure there are serious consequences."

The Indiana governor called it "outrageous" that Democrats were "singularly focusing on who might be behind" the breach and not the fallout from the leaked emails, which resulted in the ouster of Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz after some revealed the DNC was rooting for Clinton as their nominee and worked to handicap Bernie Sanders.

'I'm not going to tell Putin what to do'

But then Trump, taking to his usual medium of Twitter, doubled down on his comments earlier just minutes later.


Later Wednesday, Trump senior communications adviser Jason Miller maintained that the presidential candidate was simply saying anyone with Clinton's emails should turn them over to federal authorities.



Throughout the campaign, Trump has praised Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose rule has become increasingly authoritarian. In the press conference at his own golf course, the GOP presidential nominee again said he hoped he could work with Putin and threw cold water on the idea that the Russians were behind the DNC hack.

"I'm not going to tell Putin what to do. Why should I tell Putin what to do?" Trump retorted. "He already did something today where he said don't blame them, essentially, for your incompetence."

Former CIA Director Leon Panetta called Trump's comments "totally outrageous" and questioned his loyalty to the United States.

"You've got now a presidential candidate who is in fact asking the Russians to engage in American politics," he told CNN's Christiane Amanpour.

"I just think that that's beyond the pale," Panetta, who is backing Clinton, said. "I think that kind of statement only reflects the fact that he truly is not qualified to be president of the United States."

'Zero' Ties to Russia

Trump repeatedly batted away questions about whether he might have ties to Russia, saying "Zero! I will tell you right now, zero. I have nothing to do with Russia, yes?"

In fact, Trump has courted Russian investors to fund some of his projects and long sought to extend his brand to Russia and other former Soviet states, according to reporting last month from the Washington Post.

On Putin – who has called Trump "bright" and whom Trump has praised as a strong leader – Trump said they've never spoken. Trump said he wants to have "friendly" relations with Russia if he's elected but denied any connection to the Russian government or investors.

"I don't know who Putin is. He said one nice thing about me. He said I'm a genius. I said thank you very much to the newspaper and that was the end of it. I never met Putin," Trump said.

Hack Trump's Taxes?

Former Obama advisor David Axelrod also weighed in on Trump's comments, suggesting on Twitter that Russian hackers should go searching for Trump's tax returns - which he has yet to release, breaking a long tradition among leading presidential candidates.

Trump reiterated that he has no plans to release his tax returns until an audit is completed - which may not be finished until after the November elections.

"It depends on the audit – not a big deal," Trump said. He noted that he's already put out some financial documents, though not the tax forms that are typically released by major presidential candidates, often during the primary season. Trump suggested that's unnecessary: "I built an unbelievable company, tremendous cash, tremendous company with some of the great assets of the world," he said.

As NPR has reported before, there's no legal obstacle to releasing tax returns while an audit is ongoing.

This, frankly, approaches the realm of treason.

And then there's this:

http://www.politico.eu/article/donald-t ... ons-putin/

Trump to look at recognizing Crimea as Russian territory, lifting sanctions
The United States, along with the EU, has refused to recognize the annexation
By TYLER PAGER 7/27/16, 7:38 PM CET
Donald Trump said Wednesday he would consider recognizing Crimea as Russian territory and lifting the sanctions against the country if he’s elected president.

At a wide-ranging news conference, Trump said he “would be looking into that” when asked about his stance on Crimea and Russia. The Crimean Peninsula has been part of Ukraine for decades, but Russian President Vladimir Putin annexed the territory in March 2014 after a popular revolt toppled Kiev’s pro-Russian government.

The United States, along with the European Union, has refused to recognize the annexation or the referendum legitimizing it, and has enforced sanctions on Russian state banks and corporations.

Donald Trump
ALSO ON POLITICO
The 9 most outrageous lines from Trump’s news conference

TYLER PAGER
Crimea, historically a popular tourist destination for Russians seeking out its subtropical climate, formally became part of the Ukrainian satellite state of the Soviet Union in 1954, and joined independent Ukraine after it left the Soviet bloc in 1991.

Trump’s comments on Crimea came during the same news conference that he suggested Russia hack Hillary Clinton’s email server to “find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” The remark has been harshly criticized, and the Clinton campaign said it has now become a national security issue.

Normally I wouldn't make a big deal out of this, but under the circumstances, it stinks to high heaven.

The Russian bogeyman is a laughable play that shows just how old and out of touch Clinton's advisors must be. Americans aren't interested in or scared of Russia in the way they used to be, and not a few are confused why we're bankrolling non-contributing NATO members for a third world war that is never gonna happen - hell, I certainly am. It looks like a thin, desperate attempt to get attention off the DNC emails, which isn't going to work because there are allegedly more leaks coming. If it starts gaining traction, Trump could dredge up Clinton's Saudi ties. Guess who Americans hate more?

Ultimately though, I figure that right now the foreign bogeymen are China and daesh, and daesh is poised to stay in that position as long as they're able to make an attack in Europe nearly every day. The Cold War is over, and I don't expect "THE RUSSIAN MENACE" play to pan out.

I'm not going to speak for anyone else, but to me this is about a broader issue than Russia specifically. Would this be okay if another power had done it? China, North Korea, Iran, Britain, Israel, you name it? A foreign government, it now appears, may be engaging in illegal acts to alter the outcome of the US election, possibly in collusion with one of the candidates.

That is serious shit.

To dismiss this as just Cold Ward fear-mongering is frankly dishonest and irresponsible.

I'm not sure what your motive here is, but it hardly matters. Busters and Republicans hand in hand, happy to let Putin manipulate our elections for the sake of hating Clinton.

I also think you underestimate the public's concerns about Russia, and the legitimate grounds for such concerns. A few years ago you might have been largely right. Then came Ukraine, and Syria, and now this.

Their is a certain mind set which seems to say that "The Cold War is over, its all Sunshine with Russia forever, nothing can ever change." I find that smug, arrogant stupidity. The Cold War may be over, but the idea that Russia could never pose a threat to America or its allies is laughable.

[Mr Bean]

RR your getting worked up again, Trump can dismiss this with a simple "You misquoted me I didn't mean that" but again... the Uranium One scandal literally means both the Democratic and Republican front runners are people who took large sums of money from Russian businessmen with ties to Putin.

More over Trump's exact words note, his EXACT words were as follows

"They probably have her 33,000 emails, too. I hope they do," he said, adding later: "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press."

Note the present tense, they already HAVE the emails please release them not Hey russia go hack Clinton.

Your falling for Trump strategy number 1, say something outrageous sounding and consume the media cycle to suck all the air out of his opponents sails.
Did you know the Democratic Convention is going on today? Look for Trump to have gained more time spent on himself by the media thanks to a combination of DNC speakers talking about him and this little stunt.

[Wild Zontargs]

You can't hack a server that's been wiped, then stuffed in an FBI evidence locker, TRR. If they don't have the emails already, they aren't getting them. And as far as throwing around links to Russia goes, the Clintons have their fair share. That's not a mud-slinging match they want to get into.

---

So, why would Trump even want to get into a shit-posting contest over this issue? Probably because he can make the Clinton campaign say things that make her email issues sound serious, after all the work they did downplaying them:

Donald Trump Just Got Hillary Clinton To Admit Her E-mails Are A ‘National Security Issue’

After taunting Hillary Clinton by asking Russian hackers to release 30,000 e-mails she deleted, Donald Trump finally forced Clinton’s campaign to admit that her unsanctioned e-mail server scheme was a “national security issue.”

Trump’s comments about Russian hacking followed numerous reports this week that Russian hackers compromised the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) servers and then leaked thousands of e-mails sent by top Democratic staffers. DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign her position as a result of the leaks.

On Wednesday morning, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump asked Russia to turn over the tens of thousands of e-mails deleted by Hillary Clinton. The scandal-plagued former Secretary of State maintained for months that the e-mails were personal, not work-related, and that they were in no way classified.

But in a press release issued on Wednesday, Clinton’s top campaign spokesman suddenly declared those e-mails to be a “national security issue”:

This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent. That’s not hyperbole, those are just the facts. This has gone from being a curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security.

Sullivan did not explain how the e-mails, which Clinton said were about nothing more than her “yoga routines” and wedding planning for her daughter, could possibly pose a national security risk to the United States. Sullivan also failed to explain how unclassified e-mails “private personal e-mails” wholly unrelated to her work as Secretary of State — Clinton declared in an infamous 2015 press conference that she “did not email any classified material to anyone on my email” — could compromise American security.

Contrary to Sullivan’s assertion about the unprecedented nature of Russian meddling in U.S. elections, former U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) begged the Soviets to help him get rid of President Ronald Reagan in 1984.

[Mr Bean]

And in other news before I walk the dog
Gallop Clinton/Trump tied for unfavorable

The average American's views of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have converged for the first time in Gallup's yearlong tracking of the images of the two candidates, with Americans giving each exactly the same favorable and unfavorable ratings. The numbers for both candidates, based on interviewing conducted July 18-25, are 37% favorable and 58% unfavorable. In all previous Gallup updates stretching back to last July, Clinton's net favorable has been higher than Trump's.

The current period covers the four days of the Republican convention, but also includes the weekend in which Clinton announced her vice presidential running mate and the first night of the Democratic convention. In fact, when the data from Saturday, Sunday and Monday are isolated, the numbers are even slightly more in Trump's favor -- 37%/58% favorable/unfavorable, compared with Clinton's 36%/59%. In other words, there is no evidence through Monday night that Trump is losing his image gains from his Cleveland convention.

Ladies and gentlemen may I present the Democratic and Republican nominees for President Mr 2/3rds of people think he's crazy and Madem Secretary 2/3rds of people don't trust her.

[The Romulan Republic]

You can't hack a server that's been wiped, then stuffed in an FBI evidence locker, TRR. If they don't have the emails already, they aren't getting them.

Weather what Trump asked for is possible does not change the fact that he said it.

I doubt that he has any understanding of the technicalities.

And even if he's just asking them to release anything they already have, its in poor taste and shows poor judgement, at the least, for a Presidential candidate to ask for presumably illegally obtained information to be leaked by a foreign government on his behalf.

And as far as throwing around links to Russia goes, the Clintons have their fair share. That's not a mud-slinging match they want to get into.

Don't pretend that its in any way comparable to the potential that Trump is openly colluding with a foreign government whose' geopolitical interests he favours to win the election.

Nor would I apply the term "mud-slinging" to a situation where the allegations appear to have actual substances. That's not "mud-slinging", that's "raising serious campaign issues".

And whatever you may feel, its clearly a match the Democrats are happy to have, since they've been all over it the last few days.

---

So, why would Trump even want to get into a shit-posting contest over this issue? Probably because he can make the Clinton campaign say things that make her email issues sound serious, after all the work they did downplaying them:

Donald Trump Just Got Hillary Clinton To Admit Her E-mails Are A ‘National Security Issue’

After taunting Hillary Clinton by asking Russian hackers to release 30,000 e-mails she deleted, Donald Trump finally forced Clinton’s campaign to admit that her unsanctioned e-mail server scheme was a “national security issue.”

Trump’s comments about Russian hacking followed numerous reports this week that Russian hackers compromised the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) servers and then leaked thousands of e-mails sent by top Democratic staffers. DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign her position as a result of the leaks.

On Wednesday morning, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump asked Russia to turn over the tens of thousands of e-mails deleted by Hillary Clinton. The scandal-plagued former Secretary of State maintained for months that the e-mails were personal, not work-related, and that they were in no way classified.

But in a press release issued on Wednesday, Clinton’s top campaign spokesman suddenly declared those e-mails to be a “national security issue”:

This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent. That’s not hyperbole, those are just the facts. This has gone from being a curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security.

Sullivan did not explain how the e-mails, which Clinton said were about nothing more than her “yoga routines” and wedding planning for her daughter, could possibly pose a national security risk to the United States. Sullivan also failed to explain how unclassified e-mails “private personal e-mails” wholly unrelated to her work as Secretary of State — Clinton declared in an infamous 2015 press conference that she “did not email any classified material to anyone on my email” — could compromise American security.

Contrary to Sullivan’s assertion about the unprecedented nature of Russian meddling in U.S. elections, former U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) begged the Soviets to help him get rid of President Ronald Reagan in 1984.

We know about the email shit. We know Clinton lied. The FBI opted not to recommend and indictment. Nothing new here. Its not going to change any votes it hasn't already changed.

And we've reached a sorry state indeed if people are so single-mindedly blinded by their distrust and hatred of Clinton that they are, as a result, prepared to engage in apologetics for Putin potentially directly interfering, illegally, in the US election.

[The Romulan Republic]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/postever ... -machines/

If Russia really is responsible, there's no reason political interference would end with the DNC emails.


By Bruce Schneier July 27 at 3:10 PM
Bruce Schneier is a security technologist and a lecturer at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. His latest book is Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World.
Trump urges Russia to hack Clinton’s emails Play Video1:14
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump says it's "far-fetched" and "ridiculous" to say Russia hacked Democratic Party emails to help him become president. (Reuters)
Russia was behind the hacks into the Democratic National Committee’s computer network that led to the release of thousands of internal emails just before the party’s convention began, U.S. intelligence agencies have reportedly concluded.

The FBI is investigating. WikiLeaks promises there is more data to come. The political nature of this cyberattack means that Democrats and Republicans are trying to spin this as much as possible. Even so, we have to accept that someone is attacking our nation’s computer systems in an apparent attempt to influence a presidential election. This kind of cyberattack targets the very core of our democratic process. And it points to the possibility of an even worse problem in November — that our election systems and our voting machines could be vulnerable to a similar attack.

If the intelligence community has indeed ascertained that Russia is to blame, our government needs to decide what to do in response. This is difficult because the attacks are politically partisan, but it is essential. If foreign governments learn that they can influence our elections with impunity, this opens the door for future manipulations, both document thefts and dumps like this one that we see and more subtle manipulations that we don’t see.

Retaliation is politically fraught and could have serious consequences, but this is an attack against our democracy. We need to confront Russian President Vladimir Putin in some way — politically, economically or in cyberspace — and make it clear that we will not tolerate this kind of interference by any government. Regardless of your political leanings this time, there’s no guarantee the next country that tries to manipulate our elections will share your preferred candidates.

Even more important, we need to secure our election systems before autumn. If Putin’s government has already used a cyberattack to attempt to help Trump win, there’s no reason to believe he won’t do it again — especially now that Trump is inviting the “help.”


Over the years, more and more states have moved to electronic voting machines and have flirted with Internet voting. These systems are insecure and vulnerable to attack.

[Your iPhone just got less secure. Blame the FBI.]

But while computer security experts like me have sounded the alarm for many years, states have largely ignored the threat, and the machine manufacturers have thrown up enough obfuscating babble that election officials are largely mollified.

We no longer have time for that. We must ignore the machine manufacturers’ spurious claims of security, create tiger teams to test the machines’ and systems’ resistance to attack, drastically increase their cyber-defenses and take them offline if we can’t guarantee their security online.

Longer term, we need to return to election systems that are secure from manipulation. This means voting machines with voter-verified paper audit trails, and no Internet voting. I know it’s slower and less convenient to stick to the old-fashioned way, but the security risks are simply too great.

There are other ways to attack our election system on the Internet besides hacking voting machines or changing vote tallies: deleting voter records, hijacking candidate or party websites, targeting and intimidating campaign workers or donors. There have already been multiple instances of political doxing — publishing personal information and documents about a person or organization — and we could easily see more of it in this election cycle. We need to take these risks much more seriously than before.

Government interference with foreign elections isn’t new, and in fact, that’s something the United States itself has repeatedly done in recent history. Using cyberattacks to influence elections is newer but has been done before, too — most notably in Latin America. Hacking of voting machines isn’t new, either. But what is new is a foreign government interfering with a U.S. national election on a large scale. Our democracy cannot tolerate it, and we as citizens cannot accept it.


[Why would Russia try to hack the U.S. election? Because it might work.]

Last April, the Obama administration issued an executive order outlining how we as a nation respond to cyberattacks against our critical infrastructure. While our election technology was not explicitly mentioned, our political process is certainly critical. And while they’re a hodgepodge of separate state-run systems, together their security affects every one of us. After everyone has voted, it is essential that both sides believe the election was fair and the results accurate. Otherwise, the election has no legitimacy.

Election security is now a national security issue; federal officials need to take the lead, and they need to do it quickly.

Edits: Fixed link.

[The Romulan Republic]

Joe Biden's speaking now. Crowd is going wild.

[The Romulan Republic]

A much more stridently and aggressively nationalist close than I would have preferred, although it might be an effective card to play, especially when the opposition appears to be on Putin's leash.

His tribute to his deceased son was quite touching, however.

And he really laid into Trump. Got the whole crowd chanting.

[The Romulan Republic]

President Obama will be speaking soon. This should be good. Obama has never been a poor speech maker, whatever else one may think of him.

[The Romulan Republic]

Independent Michael Bloomberg just on, making the case to independents to vote for Hillary.

[maraxus2]

I'm going to miss Joe Biden so much

Mod Note: This is obvious satire, but just in case anyone did not notice. This is satire. ~AD

Biden Receives Lifetime Ban From Dave & Buster's

DALLAS—Following dozens of complaints from waitstaff and numerous incidents of property damage over the past 10 years, representatives from the Dave & Buster's corporation, a bar-restaurant chain offering a wide variety of arcade games, announced today that Vice President Joe Biden has been permanently banned from all 55 locations nationwide.


Biden refused to leave "without a fight," forcing staff to physically remove the 36-year Senate veteran.
The lifetime ban came after a heavily intoxicated Biden was forcibly ejected from a Bethesda, MD Dave & Buster's earlier this week for destroying a Whac-A-Mole game, which the vice president claimed had been "rigged." According to the ensuing police report, Biden became verbally abusive when asked to leave, calling several employees "a bunch of killjoy cocksuckers."

"We are saddened that such extreme measures had to be taken in regard to the vice president's recent behavior," said Dave & Buster's spokesman David Weldon, adding that posters with Biden's image on them have been distributed to all locations. "However, Mr. Biden has been given many, many chances to act in a responsible and respectful manner while enjoying the great food and fun that Dave & Buster's has to offer. Unfortunately, he has failed to do so time and again."

"In the interests of the safety and well-being of our patrons and staff, we must insist that the vice president never set foot in another Dave & Buster's ever again," Weldon continued.


The nation's second-in-command expressed his displeasure with Spin N Win's "bullshit" ticket payout system.
Though the scope and severity of the ban are unprecedented, Weldon said that several individual Dave & Buster's locations have previously expelled Biden for lengths ranging from six weeks to two years, with the first occurring in Dover, DE in 1990. According to records, Biden visited that location while campaigning for his fourth Senate term, and kicked over a Galaga arcade game after getting into a verbal altercation with a server over a $16 tab.

Bans from Dallas, Minneapolis, and Denver locations followed, with the most notable interdict coming in 2006 at the high-profile Dave & Buster's restaurant in Times Square. Sources said that Biden, attending the grand opening of the establishment, asked several waitresses if they wanted to "get a daisy chain going" and then placed two Skee-Balls down the front of his cutoff jeans.

After being confronted by a manager, Biden reportedly threw several air-hockey disks into the dining area as an ill-conceived distraction and was tackled by a security guard while running toward the exit.

"He was loud but basically not bothering anyone at first," said Miami Dave & Buster's manager Rick Perelson, who was forced to ban Biden from his restaurant in 2002—in part for physically ousting a 14-year-old from a Dance Dance Revolution arcade game. "That is, until he got really drunk and started telling other customers what they should order."

"And after what he did to the bathroom, I was really left with no choice," Perelson continued. "Just disgusting."

According to other Dave & Buster's employees, Biden has not historically respected the bans that have been placed on him. After he was barred from the Tempe, AZ location in 2007, the former senator would reportedly do burnouts in the parking lot with his Trans Am while waiting to pick up a waitress employed there at the time, a woman identified only as "Candi."

Though Biden's problems with the Dave & Buster's company appear to be unique among those who have held his office, he is not the first vice president to run afoul of a business. In a famous case in 1869, Schuyler Colfax was barred from entering any location of the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company in the state of New York after a series of episodes involving the upending of pickle barrels.

And Spiro Agnew was told to "never set foot again" in the Children's National Medical Center of Washington following a 1971 incident.

Despite having described Dave & Buster's as his favorite restaurant dozens of times in the past, Biden is evidently unperturbed by the lifetime ban.

"The vice president wouldn't patronize that glorified Chuck E. Cheese's if it were the last place on earth," Biden aide Jim Tomlin told reporters at a press conference earlier today. "Who gives a crap about that stupid dump?"

"Besides, his 15-year ban from the Hustler Club is up next month, so it doesn't really matter anyway," Tomlin added.

[The Romulan Republic]

Kaine just gave his VP nomination acceptance speech. It was a bit uneven, I thought, but he closed fairly strong, and holy shit, did he lay into Donald Trump, even using the words of Republicans to do it.

I also particularly appreciated his complimentary words for Bernie, and his referencing how the Republican Party was not the party of Lincoln any more, telling Republicans who are looking for the party of Lincoln to come to the Democratic Party (though he worded it better).

Edit: Obama up shortly.