GG

Maybe Putin's strategy in Syria isn't as foolproof as his defenders like to point out. Open season on diplomats in art galleries.

I think you're simplifying it a bit. This seems to be a typical battle between a coach and a GM, with the team President lurking in the background. And each of them have staff that's loyal to them and not to the coach. These leaks to the media are totally evocative of the Donahoe days when Bills would start feeding information to the media in advance of a big player hitting free agency. Suddenly, the story went, the guy lost a step here or there or had trouble picking up his coverage. Sounds like the same pattern to me, despite all the new blood at OBD. If I'm Pegula, I'm livid that somebody from my staff is having these types of discussions with national rumor mongers.

I don't think it's limited to the guys in charge. It's about the entire organization and who's vying for power. The sense I get is that Wilson's football operation wasn't a well run machine, and that allowed fiefdoms to grow within OBD. Just because the head guys changed doesn't mean that the way the team was run has changed. Have the Pegulas turned the entire operation over, like they eventually did with the Sabres? The answer is a resounding no. So, yes, I am equating the Mularkey & Marrone departures, because there's a good chance the place is still rife with the old power struggles.

Then it's not totally unconnected. The rumors flying out why Marrone left read that he felt he was being sabotaged by Whaley. The current spate of rumors point to Whaley or Brandon. The same palace intrigue and dominions that built up during Wilson's reign are still there, except that the team now has an open check book.

Does it matter? Doesn't that speak more loudly when mediocre coaches decide to walk away and take demotions?

No matter how many times you keep deflecting the topic, the posting history is there for all to see. My views have been consistent on Putin since well before you decided to grace this site. Putin is an authoritarian despot who pines for the return of the Soviet Empire, which by extension means a victory over political and individual freedom and capitalism. Soviet Union has caused more deaths in the history of mankind than any other regime. Putin took advantage of a feckless US foreign policy to reassert itself in places where the Soviets were tossed out, under the pretense that they are welcomed back with open arms. And in the process, Putin also hampered US actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and the fight against ISIS. Obama belatedly recognized Putin for what he is, and was left with very few good options. That's what you get when you gaze at the Nobel Peace Prize and the mirror for 7 years. And no matter what Glenn Greenwald tells you, Putin's main mission in MidEast is to make sure that nobody, nobody returns from MidEast to Daghestan & Chechnya. So he's propping up a zombie Assad regime and building a safe heaven for ISIS. Why doesn't the Intercept report on the retaking of Palmyra by ISIS and Assad nor Russians doing anything to stop it? Could it be because, they're only interested in wiping out Aleppo? And what happens then? Do you think that the resistance to Assad is done?

You're right, you didn't say itching, you just implied it (like everything else) Who said this? "We know the neocon wing of CIA wants regime change in Moscow and aren't afraid to fight a war to get it " Don't think you need to read too much into that statement to infer that you think that neocons are itching to start a war. Syria as a nation has every right to protect itself, and western countries should also look out for their best interests and scrutinize Russia's motivations to be in that region. Russia rarely, if ever acts for humanitarian reasons, so why are they so quick to jump to Syria's defense? Oh yes, that's to make sure that ISIS keeps its stronghold in NE Syria/Iraq and that none of the foreign jihadists return to Dagestan and Chechnya. But I know nuance and parallel thinking isn't a strongsuit of Pravda parrots.

400,000 dead Syrians thank you for their support. Jingoist enough?

By that standard, Turkey is also itching to start a shooting war with Russia, since they actually hit a real Russian jet. love your ongoing leap of logic that US isn't trying to limit more carnage in Syria but is provoking a war with Russia. How's this, if Russia troops don't enter Syria in the first place, there's no fear of their troops getting caught in the cross fire. Who are the neocon leaders calling for regime change, btw?

Proof that neocons are willing to go to war with Russia?

I think Stoli is better represented by sponsoring the parking lots.

I'm guessing that the criticism is there because the rumor is coming from a guy who's been more wrong than right in the past.

In 26's defense Lacanfora is usually way off in his insider scoops.

But how many of those frequent rumors have been even remotely true?

Pats* will also have more games to benefit from Floyd's services.

That's rather obvious:

Same point applies, Snyder may be smart, but he didn't brand or trademark the Redskins name either. He's maximizing the commercial use of the word though, but it's not his term.

Tom may think he's smart, but he did not invent the term "idiot"

And all of this would be plausible if the crux of Russian influence was hammered much more BEFORE the election. What doesn't make sense, if your theory is true, is that the intelligence agencies are doubling down on the allegation AFTER the election. If there's one thing that career DC operatives know very well is not to make waves when they don't have political backing. Why would they start poking Trump in the eye on the eve of his inauguration? If the leak was only by a disgruntled DNC staffer, that's a much easier story to spin than to blame Putin. BTW, if CIA was into killing off known whistleblowers, why are Manning & Snowden still alive? After all, they all leaked information before they were household names, and could have easily been offed by the CIA before they became folk heros.

Assange hinted at it in August and then said nothing afterward. If Rich is the leak, I find it odd that they haven't put more info out there.

It's not an assumption of who you support, but pointing out the lunacy of using terms like national fortune or other feel good metrics that can't be quantified. To me a national fortune is a collective sum of individual fortunes in a country. And yes, in a place with rock solid individual and property rights, the zeal for increasing personal fortunes usually leads to a much better outcome for the collective, than trying to mandate some sort of national outcome by stifling the individual gains.

But if that were the case, doesn't Wikileaks have a bigger story that their source just got killed?

Saw the stories on this, but it doesn't answer why would CIA decide to take this high risk position if it's not true, and then double down today by claiming that Putin was directly involved.

If he was South American, I'd have written Colombia.

Wrongo. I've been drooling about exposing Russia for what it is, for decades, not months. And yes, every time I encounter a Russia apologist, and let's clarify it, an apologist for a ruler who pines for the good old days of the Soviet Union and all the wonderful things that happy union brought to the world, I speak up. It's not like there isn't a 100-year history of Soviet orchestration and its effect on everyone who's been fortunate and blessed enough to be touched by it. If we only listen to the wise and unbiased sages at the Intercept or Consortium News who insist that US is the problem, and Putin is simply misunderstood. But I digress. The real laugher about these exchanges is how your logic must now contort to the outcome of the election. While everyone is validly asking what's Russia's motivation for blatantly interfering with US elections, few people are asking what's CIA's motivation for publicly blaming Russia if they had nothing to do with it? After all, isn't it a lot easier to spin the story and catch the perpetrator if it's an inside leaker? Why in the world would you start an international incident and piss off your incoming boss, if there's absolutely no truth to the possibility that the Russians did the hacking. I imagine there must be another Youtube movie producer who can be the next fall guy. Yet, like all grand conspiracy theories, it can't be the obvious answer. It all must involve a grand orchestration of the global world order.