[RD] Comey's "A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership"

[Hrothbern]

Russian interference is just the catalyst that sped up the reactor that is our social and political issues. They didn't directly cause the issues we're dealing with, they just twiddled the nobs expertly to make sure they'd explode all on their own. Notice how in my own post I point out it would only take a minor act by Russia (leaking some information) to cause massive problems over here. We'd mess things up all on our own, which is why the Russian strategy of interference is so brilliant. If they had played a heavier hand the backlash would have been enormous and unified us to the threat. Instead they just nudged us in the right ways to get us all fighting ourselves.

Yes

Russia is using our more open systems to their benefit... probing and poking to max it out
China is doing the same by a slightly other approach
Both have more closed systems
(as such more vulnerable for domestic changes going to fast from human right values and freedom of individual development... the cultural intervention of the West)
Asymmetrical tension up to asymmetrical cold warfare.

I see it as the flu
If you get infected by that kind of a virus and get ill
Do you prevent that by eliminating contact with that kind of a virus ?
Or do you get yourselve a better immune system, by having better health and fitness ?

What happens now is not an Ebola virus that would necessitate strong actions
But if we stay as vulnerable as now, even an ordinary flu can turn bad.

 

[rah]

How are you going to stop others from taking advantage of social media?
(yes we need to protect our actual election systems)
The only way to truly stop it is education. Good luck with that.
Publicity will only do so much. Most won't see they're being yanked.

For using our own social media against us, I wouldn't consider punishing them for that until we as a nation promise and actually stop trying to influence foreign elections.

Now if citizens were collaborating, yeah, then discover, prove, and prosecute to the fullest extent.

 

[El_Machinae]

Buzzfeed has a really good one minute video on deepfakes, making "obama" say weird things. It's good to spread the word on digital fakes soon available.

 

[Hrothbern]

How are you going to stop others from taking advantage of social media?
(yes we need to protect our actual election systems)
The only way to truly stop it is education. Good luck with that.
Publicity will only do so much. Most won't see they're being yanked.

For using our own social media against us, I wouldn't consider punishing them for that until we as a nation promise and actually stop trying to influence foreign elections.

Now if citizens were collaborating, yeah, then discover, prove, and prosecute to the fullest extent.

I have no specific methods... never gave that much thoughts..... the development of fake news influence is also in crescendo mode... it is going so fast.... and fast to more absurd levels
Even without top down or well thought out aimed actions, I guess the pendulum will swing back as well, also for ordinary people

The experts in influence now hired by commercial entities and political groups are like mercenaries: they work for eveyone that pays.
Universities should be the place where knowledge is developed for the society, but they need govn money to fulfill their civil society role. (The current free market money flows to them including appointing the wrong top managers there is giving away those pearls to private entities)
So... use their expertise to protect our open society.
It is also a tech struggle.

Low hanging fruit, as you mention, are election systems and procedures
Social media will see control mechanisms imposed. The realm of regulations and privacy, will be strenghtened, and hopefully not too much from the political angle but more from judges applying existing principles (privacy, sovereignity of individuals, freedom, etc) against commercial purposes. Use those ordinary judges, who by the very nature of their profession, should be allergic to rhetorics and fake info.

But above all
Do fight this fight like your opponent has developed a better military weapon.
Pick the right brains, get resources, and build teams to get your projects developed.
Psycho-sociological is not a hobby, not a backward and soft science, it is as effective as electronics and material technology.

 

[rah]

Actually I think it will get worse. Only education will help. Since it has been successful I see more money being poured into influence peddling. I think it's playing a big role in the polarization of the country. I think the only solution will come from those moderates hahahahahaha.

 

[Kyriakos]

I'm still trying to figure out what you gain from constantly downplaying this.

Sure, anyone probably could have done what Russia did. But Russia actually did it. Our retribution to them is really tertiary to the main thing - figuring out the extent and how to prevent a repeat - and the secondary concern of who, if anyone, in the U.S. aided their effort because they likely committed several serious felonies by doing so.

Are these crimes simply something we ought to look the other way on, or what? Because you seem to think it's not something we should even worry about.

If the trigger is something "anyone could have done" then you won't solve anything. Unless you want to do a McCarthy (spelling?)-type action, which currently will just turn the US into a police-state and isn't sustainable (nor good, obviously) either.
Russia has a different society. It is far more stable than the US one (more homogenous, for starters). The US has a serious issue with polarization, but in such explosive polarization it takes very little to cause anything at all, and election-influencing is routinely done by the US with no tears shed by the US (done when installing some dictator isn't possible), so this isn't any outrage for other observers even if true (russian influence).
Last but not least: polarization makes trying to focus on (either real or not, blown up or not) russian meddling in the US election etc, be impossible to lead to something good. So it looks like a failed strategy due to the same issues which may have allowed it to happen (society being split).

 

[TheMeInTeam]

He voted for the coalition of the radical left, of course.

Anyway, back to Señor Trump: he accuses his accuser of being a leaker and a liar. A leaker is somebody who publishes true information he shouldn't. A liar is somebody who deals in false information. Does anybody else see the contradiction?

You can easily be both, and using some of both makes the lying part more convincing.

I find it pretty hard to trust any party involved in this, including both tribes' media.

 

[Hrothbern]

. I think the only solution will come from those moderates hahahahahaha.

But moderates are less happy than extremists...

at least according to this article: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/...liberals-and-extremists-are-happier-moderates

"people at the farther ends of the political spectrum seem to be much happier than moderates. Brooks speculates: “One possibility is that extremists have the whole world figured out, and sorted into good guys and bad guys. They have the security of knowing what’s wrong, and whom to fight. They are the happy warriors"

 

[metalhead]

If the trigger is something "anyone could have done" then you won't solve anything. Unless you want to do a McCarthy (spelling?)-type action, which currently will just turn the US into a police-state and isn't sustainable (nor good, obviously) either.
Russia has a different society. It is far more stable than the US one (more homogenous, for starters). The US has a serious issue with polarization, but in such explosive polarization it takes very little to cause anything at all, and election-influencing is routinely done by the US with no tears shed by the US (done when installing some dictator isn't possible), so this isn't any outrage for other observers even if true (russian influence).
Last but not least: polarization makes trying to focus on (either real or not, blown up or not) russian meddling in the US election etc, be impossible to lead to something good. So it looks like a failed strategy due to the same issues which may have allowed it to happen (society being split).

There are tons of things we can do. The only reason we don't do them is the current president doesn't want to.

For starters, you mount a cyber counter-offensive and beef up state voting system security. You hit Putin where it hurts by freezing or seizing his oligarchs' wealth. You can both combat future attacks technologically, and deter Putin or anyone else from doing something similar in the future. You of course also need social media platforms to play along and safeguard users from propaganda, and probably legislation and regulations along those lines.

There are many things we ought to be doing. It's stupid to say we can't do anything, or shouldn't. And I still don't know why you keep saying we shouldn't have any response. That's crazy.

 

[innonimatu]

How are you going to stop others from taking advantage of social media?
(yes we need to protect our actual election systems)
The only way to truly stop it is education. Good luck with that.

Good luck trying to influence through "social media" those who neither care not use "social media." Where the reach of propaganda is concerned, ignorance can be better protection than education...

 

[FriendlyFire]

Good luck trying to influence through "social media" those who neither care not use "social media." Where the reach of propaganda is concerned, ignorance can be better protection than education...

Ignorance is strength ?
I suppose it is provided that institutions and government are filled with good honest people

 

[Sommerswerd]

Russia has a different society. It is far more stable than the US one (more homogenous, for starters).

You feel that Russia being homogeneous as you call it... increases stability? What do you mean by "homogeneous"? And are you saying that homogeneous countries tend to be more stable? Is Haiti more stable than the US? Is Haiti more homogeneous? What about Mali? Rwanda? Afghanistan? Do you thing Afghanistan is more homogeneous than the US? Is it more or less stable?

What about Greece? Is Greece more homogeneous than the US? Is Greece more stable than the US?

 

[Takhisis]

Ignorance is strength ?

There is something to be said that every other week the enemy is of Eurasian or East Asian origin.

 

[Миханя]

White men still control the US, and will do so for the foreseeable future. They are under no threat or attack. However, many say that they are, and some even believe that they are. In demographics terms, the US is becoming less white. But that by itself is not what they are talking about. What they are talking about is that white men have always lived in a state of privilege. And that the degree of privilege that they have enjoyed is declining. Think of it this way; there is a race, 100m. White men start at the 50m line, black men at the 100m line. How much better does the black man have to be in order to beat the white man to the finish line? Now move the starting point for the white man back to the 75m line, and the white men start screaming about how oppressed they are being. That's about where we are right now. There is not an oppression of white men, there is an assumption that the natural state of being is that they should have to work half as hard to have the same success. And challenging whether that is a natural state of being is, and whether they are entitled to it, is causing a screaming rage reaction.

Is this why American conservatives like to pretend to be the underdogs and rebels against "the establishment"? (even though it seems that they are "the establishment")

Trump was born to wealth and power, without responsibility. He became the Dear Leader of the rednecks because he is racist and appeals to their baser instincts. He would never live like them.

Why do you say he became the leader of the rednecks, if most of his donors and voters are wealthier than the average? Isn't that line of reasoning blaming poor people and so-called "rednecks" for something they aren't necessarily responsible for?

I saw this article a while ago, and it made me wonder if Trump was simply a desperate vote for some of the poorer people in the USA? Can you explain to me what phenomenon this article describes, since you live in the US? Johnstown Never Believed Trump Would Help. They Still Love Him Anyway.

 

[FriendlyFire]

I saw this article a while ago, and it made me wonder if Trump was simply a desperate vote for some of the poorer people in the USA? Can you explain to me what phenomenon this article describes, since you live in the US? Johnstown Never Believed Trump Would Help. They Still Love Him Anyway.

Thanks for a great share
You can see the answers right here

The first voted for emotional, cultural issues
The second is the Media Fox news is practically Pravada but more sophisticated
Third is that Trump as a con-man manage to tap into the hollowing out of America, desperate people are an easy mark

“I’m not going to blame him,” Schilling said. “Absolutely not.”
Is there anything that could change her mind about Trump?
“Nope,” she said.

Trump’s probably the most diligent, hardest-working president
It’s not like he sleeps in till noon and goes golfing every weekend, like the last president did.”
Ninety-nine percent of the time I watch Fox,”

 

[Sommerswerd]

I saw this article a while ago, and it made me wonder if Trump was simply a desperate vote for some of the poorer people in the USA? Can you explain to me what phenomenon this article describes, since you live in the US? Johnstown Never Believed Trump Would Help. They Still Love Him Anyway.

The very last three lines of the article provide some insight for you. It does seem that overall, the article presents a lot of things that we were already well aware of and discussing on these threads. It was a good read though... hearing peoples individual stories and how they would never stop supporting Trump no matter what.

For me the most important takeaway is that Trump's supporters are not going to be swayed by anything, especially not Comey's book or anything that happens related to the Russia investigation... not when they have NFL protesters to worry about.

 

[rah]

But moderates are less happy than extremists...

at least according to this article: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/...liberals-and-extremists-are-happier-moderates

"people at the farther ends of the political spectrum seem to be much happier than moderates. Brooks speculates: “One possibility is that extremists have the whole world figured out, and sorted into good guys and bad guys. They have the security of knowing what’s wrong, and whom to fight. They are the happy warriors"

Interesting take. I look at it a bit differently. Those on either end seem to want to convince the other side that they're wrong and expend considerable effort in the attempt. (off topic here should offer sufficient ammunition for my theory) On the other hand, those in the middle are open to admitting that they're actually wrong about something so the pressure is really off them. Those on the end can't imagine that they are ever wrong so must be ever vigilant about slipping and appearing to error.

 

[onejayhawk]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the deSantis memo. https://desantis.house.gov/_cache/f...9E830D37CF96376A2.final-criminal-referral.pdf

The part about Comey concludes, "Accordingly, we refer James Comey to DOJ for potential violation(s) of: 18 USC 1621 and 18 USC 1001."

Loretta Lynch, Hillary Clinton, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzock and Lisa Page are also referred by name for criminal investigation. 11 Representatives signed the letter.

J

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the deSantis memo. https://desantis.house.gov/_cache/f...9E830D37CF96376A2.final-criminal-referral.pdf

The part about Comey concludes, "Accordingly, we refer James Comey to DOJ for potential violation(s) of: 18 USC 1621 and 18 USC 1001."

Loretta Lynch, Hillary Clinton, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzock and Lisa Page are also referred by name for criminal investigation. 11 Representatives signed the letter.

J

LOL...out of all the absurd "we need to launch red herring investigations in every direction so Breitbart and Hannity can report on them as the real corruption story and our mindless shills can parrot them" Republicans on the hill they could only come up with ELEVEN willing to give you this nonsense to parrot? How weak is that?

By the way, you aren't a dog so I see no reason anyone should clean up this crap you dragged in other than you.

 

[Zelig]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the deSantis memo. https://desantis.house.gov/_cache/f...9E830D37CF96376A2.final-criminal-referral.pdf

The part about Comey concludes, "Accordingly, we refer James Comey to DOJ for potential violation(s) of: 18 USC 1621 and 18 USC 1001."

Loretta Lynch, Hillary Clinton, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzock and Lisa Page are also referred by name for criminal investigation. 11 Representatives signed the letter.

J

It seems the most newsworthy part of this isn't what you're saying though: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/4/18/17252290/desantis-letter-prosecute-clinton-comey

"But the issue here, to be clear, is not a particular zeal for campaign finance law. It’s a broad request that the full force of the US government be brought to bear against Trump’s political enemies."

"The point here is almost certainly not to generate any actual prosecutions so much as it is to try to muddy the waters in the media — creating a two-sided battle between and his “deep state” enemies rather than the reality that the Trump investigation has been led almost entirely by Republicans and career civil servants."