U.S. Politics

[Chindie]

You'd get decent odds, at least.

If by decent you mean long.

Unfortunately, he is going to be President. A position he's stunningly unsuitable for, but he will be.

Perhaps not for long.

[TheAuthority]

2 hours ago, maqroll said:

I predict that by hook or by crook, Trump won't be president.

Care to elaborate? I'm genuinely interested (and hopeful.)

Edited December 10, 2016 by TheAuthority
Dyslexia

[maqroll]

2 hours ago, TheAuthority said:

Care to elaborate? I'm genuinely interested (and hopeful.)

The CIA has said that the Russians helped elect Trump. If it can be determined just how insidious their influence was, Trump could find himself thrown in prison...remember his second campaign manager had to resign over Kremlin ties.

 

[Awol]

43 minutes ago, maqroll said:

The CIA has said that the Russians helped elect Trump. If it can be determined just how insidious their influence was, Trump could find himself thrown in prison...remember his second campaign manager had to resign over Kremlin ties.

 

Let's just say that happens, does Pence then get confirmed or the election re-run with a new Rep' candidate? What do the approx' 50% of the country who voted for Trump do then? 

...and the elephant in the room, what then happens with the US and Russia? Some form of open conflict?

[OutByEaster?]

So far Trump has delighted the US corporate structure by pushing for protectionism for them and a free market for everyone else (a sort of reverse socialism), appointing someone to remove any environmental restrictions on their making profit, appointing someone to remove any pesky social wage based obstacles to them making profit, suggesting they'll be able to bring their money home and he'll turn a blind eye on taxation, ramped up the tensions between the US and China (allowing for the continuation of Obama's policy on truly enormous military spending) and given a special and preferential deal to the only US corporation he's had to deal with - if he can find a way to give the CIA more power to monitor and control global affairs then he's pretty much set. The idea that he won't be President for long is becoming more far fetched by the day. The only group he seems to be upsetting is people and people don't matter.

 

[HanoiVillan]

1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

So far Trump has delighted the US corporate structure by pushing for protectionism for them and a free market for everyone else (a sort of reverse socialism), appointing someone to remove any environmental restrictions on their making profit, appointing someone to remove any pesky social wage based obstacles to them making profit, suggesting they'll be able to bring their money home and he'll turn a blind eye on taxation, ramped up the tensions between the US and China (allowing for the continuation of Obama's policy on truly enormous military spending) and given a special and preferential deal to the only US corporation he's had to deal with - if he can find a way to give the CIA more power to monitor and control global affairs then he's pretty much set. The idea that he won't be President for long is becoming more far fetched by the day. The only group he seems to be upsetting is people and people don't matter.

 

He is, in other words, a deeply conventional Republican after all, which is what some people like Corey Robin were saying all along. The only thing he's done, in your paragraph there, that a normal Rep wouldn't have done, is piss off China, so the open question is whether that was ideology or witlessness. My money is on the latter. 

[OutByEaster?]

It's corporate coup. The banks deciding that removing the middle man altogether would be more efficient.

[maqroll]

9 hours ago, Awol said:

Let's just say that happens, does Pence then get confirmed or the election re-run with a new Rep' candidate? What do the approx' 50% of the country who voted for Trump do then? 

...and the elephant in the room, what then happens with the US and Russia? Some form of open conflict?

This is all unprecedented, but if Trump's collaboration with Putin is deemed treasonous, the Hamilton Electors and/orThe Supreme Court might just hand the election to Clinton, with the Trump ticket having been disqualified. Bizarre and unlikely that we get to that point, but the whole election has been totally surreal, so we'll see...

As for open conflict with Russia, Putin doesn't want that, nobody but people like John Bolton would want open conflict with Russia.

Edited December 10, 2016 by maqroll

[Awol]

18 minutes ago, maqroll said:

This is all unprecedented, but if Trump's collaboration with Putin is deemed treasonous, the Hamilton Electors and/orThe Supreme Court might just hand the election to Clinton, with the Trump ticket having been disqualified. Bizarre and unlikely that we get to that point, but the whole election has been totally surreal, so we'll see...

As for open conflict with Russia, Putin doesn't want that, nobody but people like John Bolton would want open conflict with Russia.

Just a thought but what if there was no collaboration but a unilateral attempt by Russia to support one side by undermining    the opponent?

I don't see how he could legally be disqualified in those circumstances. If he was and it was handed to Clinton I reckon you'd be facing the greatest domestic disorder since the civil war. 

In terms of Russia the US would be compelled to respond dramatically if it was established they had interfered with your domestic elections to this extent. 

Im thinking total financial sanctions, arming the Ukrainians and maybe direct confrontation through a safe area/no fly zone policy in Syria - favoured by HRC. 

For those reasons and more I think you're Trumped for at least four years.

[maqroll]

Remember that over the summer, Trump in effect invited the Russians to hack into Hillary's email accounts. His selection of Rex Tillerman (CEO of Exxon-Mobil and friend of Putin) to be Secretary of State lends more credence to the theory, as does James Comey's actions to tip the balance to Trump in the final weeks. 

Many questions to be asked, and if the electors are convinced that the election result was a massive fraud perpetrated by a foreign state in collaboration with Trump and/or powerful people friendly to Trump, then it could be enough for Clinton to be ratified by the Electoral College on Dec 19th.

[ml1dch]

48 minutes ago, maqroll said:

Many questions to be asked, and if the electors are convinced that the election result was a massive fraud perpetrated by a foreign state in collaboration with Trump and/or powerful people friendly to Trump, then it could be enough for Clinton to be ratified by the Electoral College on Dec 19th.

It could.

But if definitely won't.

[Davkaus]

Quote

“These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,”

That's the president elect, just discrediting his own nation's intelligence service.  

[peterms]

Craig Murray on the email stuff.

Quote

...To complete the chain of dishonesty, the trope of Russian interference in the election is getting a new airing. In a painfully obvious charade, Obama is being “pushed” by his own party to reveal security service information on “Russian interference” in the US election. The focus is particularly on the allegation that the Russian state hacked the Podesta and DNC emails and gave them to WikiLeaks.

The problem is there is no such evidence. There can’t be because both the DNC and Podesta emails were leaked by Washington insiders, to my certain knowledge. I repeat that, to my certain knowledge. Hillary’s pathetic election claim that the security services had information it was the Russians, depended on a statement that the leak was “consistent with Russian methods and objectives”. Look at that statement very carefully. It says “we have no evidence whatsoever, but the President has asked us to blame the Russians”. As I say, I know it wasn’t the Russians. The only “evidence” ever shown to me by those blaming the Russians is that an alleged hacker calling himself “Guccifer” sometimes uses Cyrillic. Which may or may not be true, but as “Guccifer” was neither the source of, nor a conduit for, the leaks it is utterly irrelevant.

 

[HanoiVillan]

THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO BE PARANOID

These Cute Dolls Share Kids’ Information With A Military Contractor

Getty Images/Leon Neal

Two brands of talking dolls, My Friend Cayla and I-Que Intelligent Robot, collect personal information from children and send it to a software company that contracts with military and intelligence agencies, according to a complaint filed with the Federal Trade Commission on Tuesday.

The privacy groups that filed the complaint said the maker of the dolls, Genesis Toys, doesn’t get consent from parents before collecting their children’s voice recordings and personal information. That’s a violation of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, according to the complaint.

“With the growing Internet of Things, American consumers face unprecedented levels of surveillance in their most private spaces, and young children are uniquely vulnerable,” said Claire Gartland, director of EPIC Consumer Privacy Project. “The FTC has an obligation here to step in and safeguard the privacy of young children against toys that spy and companies that exploit their very voices for corporate gain.”

Genesis Toys did not immediately respond to BuzzFeed News’ request for comment.

“Children form friendships with dolls and toys with ‘personalities,’ and confide intimate details about their lives with them,” said Josh Golin, executive director of the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood, in a statement. “It is critical that the sensitive data collected by these toys be subject to the most stringent protections and not be used for manipulative and sneaky marketing.”

youtube.com

The My Friend Cayla doll, which is sold at Walmart for about $60, uses speech recognition technology, a microphone, and speakers to communicate with a child. The doll pairs with a smartphone and app, and when children speak to the toy, it connects to the app to generate an answer.

But to use the doll, a child must first answer several questions, including their name, their parents’ names, their school, their hometown, and their physical location.

I-Que Intelligent Robot, sold for $90 on Amazon, also requires a smartphone app connected to the internet in order to function. But it also requests access to the smartphone’s camera, which, the complaint alleges, “is not necessary to the toy’s functions and is not explained or justified.”

Getty Images/Rob Stothard

It is difficult to find where the company details the information it collects. Cayla’s privacy policy doesn’t mention speech data, nor does it describe the collection, use, or disclosure of such data by third parties. The I-Que privacy policy makes no
reference to such information collection. Genesis also tells consumers that their privacy policy is subject to change and recommends that parents check their website for regular updates.

Once that data is collected, it is stored on a server provided by Nuance Communications, a voice recognition technology company that also contracts with military and intelligence agencies. Cayla’s privacy policy indicates that this
information may also be stored on Google’s server.

“We have adhered to our policy with respect to the voice data collected through the toys referred to in the complaint,” Nuance said in a statement. “Nuance does not share voice data collected from or on behalf of any of our customers with any of our other customers.”

The company’s privacy policy says it “may use the information that we collect for our internal purposes to develop, tune, enhance, and improve our products and services, and for advertising and marketing consistent with this Privacy Policy.”

This isn’t the first time the internet-connected dolls have faced backlash. Several European consumer organizations have also filed formal complaints with EU regulators, and with data protection, consumer protection, and product safety agencies, about the toys in France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Ireland, and Norway.

Getty Images/Rob Stothard

 

https://www.buzzfeed.com/leticiamiranda/the-dolls-are-listening?utm_term=.dazmdRyjx#.dcaMowlqB

[StefanAVFC]

Quote

 

Mr Trump also said in the interview he does not require daily intelligence briefings.

"I'm a smart person, I don't need to be told the same thing in the same way for eight years."

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38282533

[StefanAVFC]

Imagine we were a few weeks away from Hillary being sworn in.

Imagine she had won the electoral college, but Trump had won the popular vote by more than 2 million.

Imagine that Clinton was being told by the CIA that her win might be the product of Russian media manipulation, propaganda, psy-ops, etc. and that her response was to deny any of this happened and if it did who cares.

Imagine her refusing to be briefed and instead touring the country, taking lap of honour, a triumph parade.

Imagine her telling Trump's supporters to suck it up buttercup, you're just sore losers. Move on.

Imagine her doing all this as she appointed several Goldman Sachs top execs to her cabinet, and an Exxon exec with close ties to Russia.

Imagine in came to light that all of this was known about months ago by congressional officials but, for partisan reasons, it was kept from the public and dismissed as mere rumour. Imagine if top Democrat party members, someone like Pelosi, decided to turn a blind eye to Russian intervention in return for positions for their family Clinton's new regime.

There would be blood on the streets. But there isn't. And that's the difference between the parties.

[peterms]

Some interesting figures on the changes in incomes for various groups in the US over the last few decades.  It's useful to look at the change for the bottom 50% of the population (+1%) compared to the top 0.001% of the population (+636%).  That will go a long way to explain the degree of discontent among so many people.

Also useful to look at the last 35 years, compared to the 35 years before that.  Table from here.

[Xela]

20 hours ago, Davkaus said:

That's the president elect, just discrediting his own nation's intelligence service.  

Why are CIA reports being released to the media? That would worry me If I was Trump

[villakram]

The CIA.

Some brief history: Daddy Bush ran the CIA during the Reagan years which included some incredibly shameful behavior in central America, including among other things, importing cocaine into the USA in exchange for $/guns as part of the Iran/Contra scandal. These drugs were landed at an airstrip in a certain southern state that a certain William Clinton was running. The Clinton and Bush clans are famously friendly including the brother from a different mother quips.

Onto the current time and we can look at what has been going on in the middle east. In Syria, the CIA have been running point in the get rid of Assad game, while the Pentagon has been wondering what the hell kind of policy this is, as it's their Troops who'll bear the brunt of any backlash and their generals/reputation that'll take the hit. Additionally, the FBI and the CIA are long time political enemies. The CIA is also in the naughty chair for hacking the Senate in the very recent past leading to the astonishing Pelosi outburst. The CIA is not an any sense whatsoever neutral, and simply represents a constituency of the current establishment fighting back/for their lives.

[Davkaus]

1 hour ago, Xela said:

Why are CIA reports being released to the media? That would worry me If I was Trump

The CIA briefed a selection of senators (which they were required to do).

It's possible it was leaked by the CIA, it's far, far more likely that it was leaked by career politicians.

Edited December 11, 2016 by Davkaus