Archive 2017-2019 Political Thread

[Matt]

It is second hand knowledge.

 

[KoD]

Are you kidding ? He's the one that started this episode.

So what? What does the WB have to do with this "episode" now, other than being a strawman for people who want to distract from substance of the impeachment inquiry?

 

[Evan]

Evan, it allowed them to spread terrorism through out the region.

So? You think allowing Russia to have a freehand in Ukraine isn't analogous?

Either the President is allowed to do whatever the hell he wants, without any oversight, or he's not.

You sure preached a different message about Congress' power of the purse and oversight responsibilities when Obama was POTUS. Like I said, you want to ride the comet go right ahead. Just don't expect me to keep a straight face or ignore the abject hypocrisy of it.

I'm not upset with you, Matt. Neither do I dislike you. If anything, I'm just disappointed. You used to be self-aware and possessed a modicum of shame unlike a certain former-member here who overdosed on the Flavor-Aid long ago.

Now you're here chanting silly slogans just like Trump. As if that does anything other than make you appear to be chasing Hale Bopp. Snap out of it. This isn't a game, Matt. There's no need act like you're practicing for the coming white nights.

 

[gangstonc]

Are you kidding ? He's the one that started this episode.

Trump is the one that started it with his “perfect” phone call that he still won’t release the transcript of or let anybody talk about.

 

[gangstonc]

I think people aren’t understanding that we haven’t seen any evidence that Biden’s son was doing something corrupt.
We also have to understand that it doesn’t matter how guilty Hunter is, it is illegal for trump to tie aid to investigating him.

 

[Evan]

So what? What does the WB have to do with this "episode" now, other than being a strawman for people who want to distract from substance of the impeachment inquiry?

And it's so utterly transparent. I don't for one minute believe the vast majority of the GOP or their media allies believe it is a legitimate area of criticism. Lindsey Graham isn't stupid. It's not about attempting to propose a good-faith critique or legitimate questions about process.

Just like the faux outrage of the Elise Stefanik stunt, it's simply red meat for the rubes.

I always find it amazing how an elite New York liberal Billionaire became the hero of everyday rural Americans. Then I'm reminded of Pol Pot. He attended the finest schools in Cambodia, and had family with ties to the ruling monarchy of Cambodia. He spent his youth and early adulthood in the uppercrust of Cambodian society among the elite in their urban enclaves of luxury. He was even sent to Paris, the most cosmopolitan of places, to study. Prior to leaving for France he even was a Buddhist monk in a monastery for awhile.

Who did Pol Pot end up painting as the enemy? Those who lived in urban areas. The elite. The wealthy. The educated. Landowners. Oh, and Buddhists -- especially monks. His followers believed that Pol Pot must know the rich, urban, elite and the educated classes better than anyone because he was one of them. They surmised that if he said they were all evil then they must be because who would know better than Pol Pot? They didn't know of any other members of the elite that talked to them and offered them solutions to their problems.

I'd imagine the Never Pol-Poters didn't meet a happy end.

There's something sociological about this phenomenon of one of the rich elite (*cough* Castro) embracing an ostensibly revolutionary way of viewing society where their former peers are the enemy. The people want to believe. They wanted to believe Castro. They wanted to believe Pol Pot. They want to believe Trump. All three of them neatly carved up clear internal and external enemies for their followers to focus on. Castro had America and the Capitalists. Pol Pot had Vietnam and the Buddhists. Trump has China and immigrants.

By no means am I alleging that Trump is a monster like Castro or Pol Pot. I'm simply talking about how all three managed to influence the rural countryside of their countries, and indoctrinate rubes by giving them clear enemies to fight. We could solve X in Cuba quite easily if it wasn't for the evil Americans/wealthy landowners. In Cambodia, it was the evil Vietnamese & their Buddhist allies and those treacherous educated elites. In the United States of today, our modern external evil is China and the deepstate/elites of American government/society represent the internal enemy. As does the educated elite & colleges/Universities -- a "scourge" Pol Pot also hated on.

The ironic thing is Trump really hasn't actually lashed out at the truly wealthy elites very much outside of Jeff Bezos. Instead, he's painted the governmental bureaucracy and the upper-middle professional class as the scourge his followers must bitterly oppose. And, of course, the snowflakes attending college and the crazed libs of Academia.

I think most historians will see the parallels of Trump's own rise as having much in common with other similar authoritarian regimes. Thankfully, Trump has zero self-discipline, is an incredibly weak leader, and is much too consumed with his own personal battles to actually foment a revolution. Therefore, so far, he's been a lot more hot air than anything else. The real danger comes from Trump winning a second term or a potential successor that doesn't have all the weaknesses that Trump has.

People like having a common enemy. They always have and they always will. Sometimes this is even a good thing. Again, by no means am I implying or even suggesting that Trump is anything like Pol Pot, Castro, or any other of a dozen other brutal authoritarians. As I said, we're quite fortunate that Trump is undisciplined and rather lazy, and that his own personal battles consumes all the oxygen and provides little space for people like Stephen Miller who actually possess the cunning and discipline to actually achieve things.

The American middle class is restive and rural America feels left behind. Even after Trump is gone we're still going to wrestle with how our modern politics have devolved into catering to the rubes and the extremes of both parties. The Democrats are far from blameless in the race to the bottom, but a good chunk of them seem to lack the complete shamelessness that Trump and much of the modern GOP possess, and that's a good thing.

I say all that to say...of course it's a strawman meant to distract the rubes from anything of substance. This thread should be evidence it's actually quite effective.

 

[Evan]

Good luck Evan. Hope you are ready for the crap show heading your way. Mark Zaid Evan is a hack. He is not apolitical.

Is Bill Barr apolitical? Is Trump? What relevance does that have to what is right and what is wrong? The truth is the truth irrespective of how partisan you believe the messenger to be.

 

[skelly]

I would love to hear an explanation of this. How, exactly, was Seth Rich at the heart of Russia's compromise of the DNC's network. There is concrete and specific evidence that Russia, and only Russia, was the one behind the compromise of the DNC's network and removal of the data that was then linked to Wikileaks.

I refer you to pages 36 - 50 of the Mueller report.

We know EXACTLY how Russia gained access to the DNC's network including specific dates/times, credentials used, the exact malware they used to sniff for and exfiltrate data, and how they initially vectored into the DNC network from the DCCC's network. Russia's military intelligence agency, the GRU, spearfished the credentials of a DCCC employee, and once they had those creds and access to the DCCC's network, they used malware and keyloggers to suck up more credentials including that of IT administrators who had full access to the DCCC network. Once they had full access to the DCCC'S network, they located a direct VPN connection that connected to the DNC's network. Once they had access to the DNC's network, they deployed the same malware they used on the DCCC and began to harvest more user credentials and every bit of data they could find.

Not only does the United States have server logs, user activity logs, etc, but allied intelligence agencies compromised several GRU units themselves and gained access to their internal chat logs, activity logs, and further evidence that shows from A-Z exactly how the GRU pulled off their attacks. Oh, and we also have public records a researcher uncovered because the GRU was lazy/sloppy and used the same link-shortening service several times consecutively for their spearfishing attacks, so we know exactly who they targeted in their spearfishing attacks.

This is some vague assertion that "the Russians probably did this." We know the exact GRU units that did it, their location, IPs used, intermediate servers used for data exfil, the names of the personnel in each unit and what they individually did, and we have full logs and data of everything they did in those times periods -- not just their attacks on the DCCC, DNC, Clinton campaign, and other groups both inside and outside the United States. That's why Mueller won indictments for a significant number of INDIVIDUAL GRU employees who participated in these operations.

We also have one of the intermediary servers the GRU leased in an Arizona data center. Did I mention we also have the full logs from the AWS servers the DNC used that the GRU gained access to after stealing the necessary credentials? And that those logs show the GRU snapshotting over 300gb worth of data the DNC had stored on AWS?

But, yeah, I guess it makes more sense to think a guy with zero known hacking or INFOSEC ability somehow managed to gain access to and deploy custom developed malware and rootkits that only the GRU has been known to use.

See here for a discussion of the purpose built malware the GRU used and why we positively know the GRU is the source (one main reason being one of their agents created it and used his own name in the repo).

Did I forget to mention that we also have the logs and rental agreements from dozens of servers the GRU used all over the world, and that their IPs match back to the IPs used to exfiltrate the data that was stolen from the DCCC and DNC? Apparently Seth Rich was literally rich because we're talking a huge amount of funds required for custom malware, dozens of servers throughout the world, and man hours far beyond what a single person (or even a small team with significant experience) would be capable of.

There's simply zero rationality or evidence behind the Seth Rich conspiracy. We don't just have a smoking gun that says it was the GRU. We have hundreds of incontrovertible and indisputable pieces of DIRECT evidence that show every single action the GRU took, who was involved, how they did it, what tools they used, etc. This isn't just soup to nuts. This is a 75 course buffet of the most damning computer and tech evidence possible.

I realize some people think the DNC had just some kind of old unpatched Windows Server 2012 r2 box in their basement, but that's not at all how their infrastructure was setup. There were multiple servers. There were also cloud-based servers and data-storage. They had enterprise level IT, servers, and networks. This wasn't an easy task even if a person had in-person physical access. This was a sophisticated attack that took place over an extended period of time, and we have full visibility into exactly what took place.

He didn’t have to be an expert on the malware or anything else. Any updates on the investigation into his murder? That’s the point. That’s what will stand out as phishy about his case long after. Unless his murderers are caught and prosecuted. But I concede there’s no current case that he was at the heart of anything.

 

[JayF]

I think people aren’t understanding that we haven’t seen any evidence that Biden’s son was doing something corrupt.
We also have to understand that it doesn’t matter how guilty Hunter is, it is illegal for trump to tie aid to investigating him.

I do not think Hunter Biden was doing anything corrupt. I think he was holding a job at the request of Joe Biden. When the company that was paying Hunter came under investigation, that is when Joe jumped in. I think it is Joe Biden that should be prosecuted not Hunter.

Until the Democrats and Republicans both agree that Joe Biden should be prosecuted his actions. If they do not, then what they are saying that Joe Biden's actions were not illegal and therefore neither can be what they are accusing Donald Trump over regardless of facts or no facts.

 

[WesL]

I do not think Hunter Biden was doing anything corrupt. I think he was holding a job at the request of Joe Biden. When the company that was paying Hunter came under investigation, that is when Joe jumped in. I think it is Joe Biden that should be prosecuted not Hunter.

Until the Democrats and Republicans both agree that Joe Biden should be prosecuted his actions. If they do not, then what they are saying that Joe Biden's actions were not illegal and therefore neither can be what they are accusing Donald Trump over regardless of facts or no facts.

This is one of the more sane theories I've heard. If anything should be investigated it should be that contact from Joe Biden. I hate to say it but people get paid to sit on boards of companies they don't understand or play an active role in. There is nothing illegal about that unless it was done as a larger scheme that involved his father and could be conceived as use of office for personal gain.

For the record I like Joe Biden. He seems like a good guy and I see him on the McCain level of people that try to work out solutions. However, I am having a hard time seeing him as President. At this point I'm voting for the Giant Meteor.

 

[gangstonc]

This is one of the more sane theories I've heard. If anything should be investigated it should be that contact from Joe Biden. I hate to say it but people get paid to sit on boards of companies they don't understand or play an active role in. There is nothing illegal about that unless it was done as a larger scheme that involved his father and could be conceived as use of office for personal gain.

For the record I like Joe Biden. He seems like a good guy and I see him on the McCain level of people that try to work out solutions. However, I am having a hard time seeing him as President. At this point I'm voting for the Giant Meteor.

As somebody who sits on boards, it is very common practice to bring in people from other backgrounds. I'm unsure of Hunter's resume, but the whole thing still seems a bit suspicious.

I'm tired of really old people being president. They are just too out of touch with what is going on.

 

[JayF]

As somebody who sits on boards, it is very common practice to bring in people from other backgrounds. I'm unsure of Hunter's resume, but the whole thing still seems a bit suspicious.

I'm tired of really old people being president. They are just too out of touch with what is going on.

Can you be more specific on out of touch? What is it they do not understand?

 

[gangstonc]

Can you be more specific on out of touch? What is it they do not understand?

I don't think they understand (or want to understand) technology like they should, or the issues of the average American under the age of 40. They have too many rich cronies they want to please.

 

[WesL]

I don't think they understand (or want to understand) technology like they should, or the issues of the average American under the age of 40. They have too many rich cronies they want to please.

I don't know... Trump seems to have a firm understanding of Twitter

 

[gangstonc]

I don't know... Trump seems to have a firm understanding of Twitter

Haaa. Seriously though, look at his former director of cybersecurity.

 

[Matt]

This sounds like an apolitical lawyer to me. I believe the guy is not impartial nor unbiased.

'Coup has started,' whistleblower's attorney said in 2017 posts calling for impeachment

Mark Zaid, one of the attorneys representing the whistleblower at the center of the Democrats' ongoing impeachment inquiry, tweeted conspicuously in January 2017 that a "coup has started" and that "impeachment will follow ultimately."

www.foxnews.com

 

[gangstonc]

This sounds like an apolitical lawyer to me. I believe the guy is not impartial nor unbiased.

'Coup has started,' whistleblower's attorney said in 2017 posts calling for impeachment

Mark Zaid, one of the attorneys representing the whistleblower at the center of the Democrats' ongoing impeachment inquiry, tweeted conspicuously in January 2017 that a "coup has started" and that "impeachment will follow ultimately."

www.foxnews.com

Again, why would it matter if he is biased? He is supposed to do what is best for his client anyway. He's a private attorney.

Bill Barr is the one that is supposed to be apolitical. Not a private attorney.

 

[JayF]

Haaa. Seriously though, look at his former director of cybersecurity.

Are you saying I am to old to be the director of Cybersecurity?

 

[gangstonc]

Are you saying I am to old to be the director of Cybersecurity?

Are you a politician? Are you Rudy Giuliani?

It's largely the age combined with the career.

But, having hired many people in the cybersecurity and technology realm, I have had better luck with people under the age of 70, with a few notable exceptions. One of my brightest and most motivated people is 77.

 

[JayF]

Are you a politician? Are you Rudy Giuliani?

It's largely the age combined with the career.

But, having hired many people in the cybersecurity and technology realm, I have had better luck with people under the age of 70, with a few notable exceptions. One of my brightest and most motivated people is 77.

I don't know. My Grandfather is 92 and I think he would be great at Cybersecurity if he wanted to get back in the workforce.