Figure it needs it's own thread.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-cyber-idUSKBN14I1TY

12/29/2016 8:05:04 PM

On the up and up. Authoritarians like authoritarians.

Also, it is so interesting still seeing the vast majority of the GOP calling Obama a pussy for his handling of Putin and then having the GOP president-elect want to be BFFs with him.

12/30/2016 9:13:28 AM

Maybe it was/is the appearance that Obama wasn't actually doing anything about Putin, for better or for worse. The view was that in Obama's eyes, Putin was just there, poking a finger in the occasional eye. They see Trump at least reaching out to Putin in some fashion.

This isn't me saying this is the case. Just saying that might be where they are coming from. I'm sure Obama was doing much behind the scenes, Trump is just making whatever he does public.

[Edited on December 30, 2016 at 9:46 AM. Reason : dff]

12/30/2016 9:45:38 AM

both of those are retarded reasoning

12/30/2016 10:22:36 AM

we've been imposing sanctions on them for years in a very public way

12/30/2016 11:23:50 AM

[Edited on December 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM. Reason : #stillyourpresidentcomrade]

12/31/2016 3:08:46 PM

Quote :

"Authoritarians like authoritarians."

I disagree, and from the 20th century onwards there are plenty of examples of authoritarians not getting along. It's particularly difficult for two authoritarians with competing interests and comparable power to be friendly with each other.

My suspicion is that the Trump/Putin butt party will not survive the term. Any number of things could break it up, but there's insurmountable obstacles on both sides. Historically Russia prefers predictability to amity. Right now Trump is friendly, but he is never predictable. This will lead to a miscalculation, which in turn will lead to conflict (presumably diplomatic or by proxy rather than WWIII).

Meanwhile, Trump's view is not that of the American political establishment in general. I know that the very fact of his presidency means that the establishment isn't what it once was, but it's not completely impotent. It's not going to be steered away from a century of Russia suspicion just like that.

On top of everything else, we just don't have that many shared interests with Russia. We never have, except occasionally when the Germans get frisky.

12/31/2016 3:20:09 PM

Is anybody else paying attention to the complete dump that CNN and the Washington Post have taken all over themselves today?

This is a bit hyperbolic, but the best comparison to what is going on now is the yellow journalism era before the Spanish-American war. This "utility hacking" thing has even less factual evidence to support it than the "USS Maine destroyed by spanish mine" theory.

12/31/2016 3:25:23 PM

So what it sounds like you are saying is that the media isn't really reporting facts of a story as much as they are trying to connect very loosely related bits of information to push a---here it comes---narrative that helps drive ratings, make them look idiotic, and reaches so far to connect this somehow to Trump or someone in his cabinet that their credibility is plummeting even further into the abyss?

Talk about fake news.

12/31/2016 5:23:45 PM

It should sound that way because that's exactly what I'm saying.

12/31/2016 5:39:36 PM

Exactly.

12/31/2016 10:27:42 PM

Somebody say my favorite word?

1/1/2017 2:30:52 PM

So when you three jerk each other off, do you all stand in a triangle and work on the guy to the right, or is it the left?

In the long, long list of problems with CNN, this one ranks pretty low.

1/1/2017 3:25:04 PM

Obviously to the right, duh.

Seriously though, please don't lump me in with those people.

It's not just CNN, it's typical of a lot of media today. The lack of actual reporting and fact checking is a direct result of the "first to post" wins and the need for clicks. The fact that the washington post "corrected" their story with an editors note and not a full retraction says a lot about how interested they are in actually reporting facts.

Confirmation bias and narrative building are SOP for most places now, there are only a handful of places that actually attempt to be unbiased in their reporting now. The biggest difference between Fox News and the NY Times is who they're trying to appeal to. Neither one is actually reporting the news, they're reporting the news as their readers/viewers would like it to be. It's why no one finds anyone else credible and why there's so much distrust from the public in general when it comes to the media.

The way the "hacking" stuff is being presented is just idiotic. When Glenn Greenwald and the Drudge Report agree and both point out what a piss poor job of reporting it was one should take note.

1/1/2017 3:50:56 PM

Quote :

"On top of everything else, we just don't have that many shared interests with Russia. We never have, except occasionally when the Germans get frisky."

We may not, but Donald Trump does. I imagine the love fest will continue as long as Trump is benefiting financially and Putin finds Trump useful.

I understand your point about the establishment not being so easily swayed, but Trump has a lot of domestic issues he can trade for a blind eye.

1/2/2017 10:54:22 AM

Listening to Meet the Press in the background... man, Trump is gonna flip his shit on McCain/Graham.

By the way, both are way too hawkish for my tastes but that may be less dangerous than Trump's naivety. The GOP may as well be two parties at this point. Of course each one of those two is in better shape than the Democrats.

1/8/2017 10:14:35 AM

Welp, looks like Donnie is ready to meet with Putin. Will Tillerson be there to sign Exxon's check to Rosneft?

[Edited on January 27, 2017 at 10:37 AM. Reason : Will they exchange combover techniques? ]

1/27/2017 10:36:46 AM