Benjamin Franklin

Doesn't bother you. OK. This would have been news at one time. Curious that the Republicans don't mind that a foreign nation tried to undermine our democratic process and the Dems only mind because they lost. Neither side cares about the foreign actor and instead both parties just continue to feast on each other. And Putin laughs. Back to things that matter: What did Trump grab today?

So how do you rate your level of concern that Russia hacked into our election and released emails, against one side, in an effort to affect our democratic process? You like the educational aspect of Mother Russia teaching us a lesson, I get that. But how about the aspect that another country intentionally tried to disrupt our democracy and our current and next president are seemingly not addressing it. Nor is the media. Nor is Congress. If Rusia hacked into the stock market and executed a few billion in trades, is that OK? Released people's medical data, that OK? Hacked visa accounts and gave them to friends of Russia, that OK? Just trying to gauge where this goes from "really bad" to "really, really bad" for you. I've posted "Putin laughs" in the last few weeks and I mean it. Watching the US, typified by this board, media, and our leaders, chase our balls whining about Trump's Twitter after Russia intentionally tried to (I have no idea if it ulitmately had an effect) affect the election, must make him so happy. Does a dialog about cybersecurity and global state actors vs individual/small actors meddling in the election bother you?

Here, but maybe more importantly, try keeping up on the news for god's sake.

Cybersercuity or "cyber" as our future president awkwardly refers to it, needs to be a yuge priority in the coming years. The ability of the Anonymous's of the world to wreak havoc is real and clear. Against them, security and following through and treating them like terrorists is warranted if/when they meddle. So I am not ignoring your point. Mine was slightly different. In this case, a state actor was meddling in our electoral process, and the US hasn't done anything under Obama except issue a statement, and our next president is giving Russia's leader googley eyes. So my concern is in the case of a state actor, we should be acting like this was an act of borderline war/sabotage/attack. And we're not, which is incredibly weak and troubling.

I quoted the USIC, which is evident from the quote. Not HuffPo or Breitbart. Talk about missing the point.

Amen to your Amen.

You give credit to wIkileaks but the hacking was from Russian intelligence, and assume the dissemination was too. I don't care about the party affected. My concern, and it's one I hope everyone would share, is that foreign intelligence hacked into emails and tried to manipulate our election. I don't believe Russia hacked "because Hillary said so." And 4mer--you're no better than Gator to preface your entire post, which was substantive, by opening with that sort of nonsense. "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities."

Gator comes back and everyone just keeps on feeding him. Does no one remember how nice it's been for the last 6 months?

The recount won't make a difference (I 100% hope because if this count was wrong, we are in trouble), but that doesn't waive the bigger issue: Russia played games in our elections. It hacked officials and disseminated emails in order to do something to our election process. The media gobbled up the leaked and almost entirely unverfied emails as true and factual. Mostly the Republicans benefitted from this and they used the emails as gospel in their campaigns. (I have zero doubt that when the shoes get reversed, the Republicans will cry foul--doubt anyone else here disagrees.) Set aside the 2016 election and outcome and think about this. It's really really bad, and we shouldn't be making deals with the country that did it: We should be on deep freeze diplomatic DEFCON 1 with Russia. I'm with Mitt. Russia needs to be on notice. Would anyone disagree? This is really a massive story coming from this election and instead we're talking about Trump's Twitter.

The last 8 years when Gator responded to every Obama criticism with "Bush Bad." Gator is proud of you and Ryan, his faithful padawans.

And this has what to do with what Trump said? Are you going to go through the next 4 years doing the same thing Obama defenders did? Pointing at Bush whenever Obama screwed up? You're just as whiny as the Liberals!

I can wake you up now and note that the future president just said he thinks people should be jailed for exercising their first amendment rights. Can he actually do it? No. But look what we elected.

Eric Wood, Reggie Ragland, and Aaron Williams do not approve this message.

What to make of KellyAnne Conway. Crazy? Or intentional Trump lightning rod? Hard to run a Twitter campaign and not have it bite you.

Babies grow up to be virgins.

He only gets to drink the blood Tom Donahue passed up.

Now the Republicans and Democrats can argue about who had less faith in the election first. Trump said it first. Hillary said it too. Jill Stein says it's voter fraud. Look what KellyAnne Soundbyte said. Nah nah n-nah nah! Putin laughs.

Trump one-upped the idiocy when he engaged on this topic.

You love you some Trump. He would not have whipped up the people who voted for him with talk of how much he admired the Clintons and didn't want to hurt them. If you think otherwise, your political compass is woefully broken.

The comments coming out of the NY Times meeting are funny. Trump: Not interested in Clinton prosecution. Open to keeping climate accord. Vociferous denunciation of the alt-right. NY Times is a "jewel." The guy who said the above would never have won the presidency, and certainly not the Rep nomination. Now, I don't believe any of what he said because his opinion reflects the group around him at any moment but it's amusing to watch him.

Stretching before practice won't help with hamstrings. Bad injury.

I really liked White Bear. I didn't see the end until It got pretty obvious. The Hamm one was good too. Ugh but good. Good variations on the theme.

That's my take and why I asked our resident Nazi. They play this weird unfunny and creepy (even for them) game where they won't say they are Nazis but they find it cute to avoid it. It's like they are 6 year olds.

It's nice to have you here in a way. In the video, why does that guy not just say he's a Nazi or praise Hitler? He does all this odd wink-wink stuff instead. What's the issue? Free speech allows him to say stuff but instead he hides it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cl7pYs-EC7s

Are you in the now famous video? Can Trump send them out along with the criminal immigrants on the same boat?