Going to try a new blog type. Rather than droning on about 1 subject, I’m going to try and mix it up with some observations during the week. We’ll see if I have fun with it or not.
- Trump tough talk.
I love it. So do a lot of people. For 2-3 decades, we’ve talked in measured paces – and where has that left us? NK having a nuke, an ICBM, and a miniaturized nuke. Worst is that they constantly threaten to use it. Say what you will about Pakistan or some of the other countries that have nukes – yes, nuclear proliferation sucks, but these countries did not release videos of them nuking D.C.
It’s now at a point where the rhetoric needs to be escalated. There is no more appeasement. The reason for appeasement was for the non-proliferation of nukes. Now, it’s past the red line.
Many of you who are democrats feel Trump is unhinged. He’s crazy. He has temper issues. What I see is a billionaire genius who is playing grandmaster chess while 90% of people are playing entry-level checkers. You are seeing only what is in front of your eyes. What I see is a man who has crafted a persona of a person that cannot be predicted. This persona, in totality, now forces China’s hand to act. The republican motto is “peace through strength”. However, when you add the unpredictability of a United States president – North Korea’s allies MUST act to temper their rhetoric.
Here are the results (so far):
a) China has voted with the other 14 nations on the security council to reduce North Korea’s exports by $1 billion. This essentially takes away 1/3rd of their total income. Not totally crippling, but crippling enough so that they will feel it shortly.
b) China has turned away North Korea’s coal exports for the year.
c) China has recently said, that if North Korea attacks the U.S. – they are ON THEIR OWN in a war. Likewise, if the U.S. attacks, they will back N. Korea.
With Obama’s reign, the diplomacy was normally endless rounds of sanctions that did little and rhetoric like “cut it out”. Under Bush, I think even less was done. Clinton’s reign began the appeasement policies, which have been failing.
Time will tell, but the rhetoric all of you are hearing now is precise language and tone that him and the generals have been crafting.
2) John Kelly.
I see Trump as a pragmatist who allies himself with people who he needs for specific projects/missions. For example, he changed his campaign manager twice. Started with Lewandowski. Then, he needed someone to take home the GOP race, so he switched to a guru of the system and paid off. Finally, he pivoted towards the general election and got Kelly Anne Conway to deliver a female voice to his candidacy.
With the white house, the dems keep talking about chaos. Well, I see an adjustment period of a man who was in the private sector taking control of a political establishment. Going to be some bumps and bruises. Anyone who’s managed more than a taco stand knows there’s idealism versus realism – where there’s proactive management, then crisis management. Reince was the guy who united the republican party behind Trump when he took office. That was what Trump needed, at that time. My guess is some issues with N Korea were coming to a head, and Trump wanted a war-time consigliere. He has tightened up his ship, and now is pivoting towards security.
I believe Trump makes bold moves – weighs risk versus reward, and swings for the fences. He then makes adjustments as necessary. Some of his moves don’t exactly pan out, most of them do. Mooch was a hilarious fail, but I think also was a wake up call for Trump that there can be serious consequences when swinging for the fences.
3) Russia, Russia, Russia.
Well, former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz apparently has had some people on her payroll as IT consultants for a long time that are in trouble with the FBI, as we speak. One of them was fleeing the country after trying to sell off all of his shit rapidly to disappear. The charges, for now, appear to be related towards fraud of some sort – but it seems these guys have been funneling money to ISIS. Also, of interest, is that these guys had access to the DNC’s emails and perhaps had a financial motive to release the emails. Interestingly enough, the DNC would not turn over their server to the FBI to confirm Russia hacked it. Spidey sense tingling.
4) Russia, Russia, Russia, part deux.
I’ve written a few things about Russia before. While I am NOT the foremost expert in computer forensics and have ZERO intel on what actually happened – I do have a master’s degree in cybersecurity, CISSP, and have managed 2 dozen computer network defense professionals for a public entity. I’ve been indirectly in the cybersecurity field for about 9 years. With this, let me convey some of the most basic sentiments I can to you….Republican or Democrat, please, please read:
a) Russia hacks us daily. We hack Russia daily. Everyone hacks each other daily. We’ve all been in shadow wars for well over a decade. The name of the game is collecting intel. In the book “Cyber War”, Richard Clarke mentions that we don’t use cyber ATTACKS like you would think because it’s the same premise as using nukes – Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). So, if we did something to Russia, they would retaliate in some form, and then we would escalate, then they would escalate, etc. The point is, the “uproar” on Russia hacking the DNC server is silly. Because it’s what they do. It’s what France does. It’s what England does.
b) Tracks. People who know what they are doing will not leave tracks. So, assuming this was FSB or some other nation-state, they would first of all not use tools that would point back to them. They would also run these tools from proxy points. For example, if I was in a Russian café, I might first have a bunch of machines in a botnet from spyware, etc. Command and control, if you will. I would then have a proxy endpoint, perhaps in Hawaii, that would be connecting to the DNC server. All communication back and forth would go to the proxy endpoint. This proxy endpoint could then relay communications to its command server – who may be a compromised workstation in Sweden or Estonia. Perhaps then I might access this information from a cyber café in Germany, and save to a USB stick. I most certainly would not use a tool in m native Russian and access it from an IP address registered in Russia. Furthermore – if I did that, it might then also point to perhaps the Iranians, North Koreans, or Chinese using a proxy endpoint in Russia to make it look like the Russians did it. What you have to take away from this is that FBI investigations into these types of things could take months. Furthermore, if the traffic goes through a country we do not have a treaty with, they will not hand over the traffic information, perhaps putting us at a dead stop in the investigation. We do NOT have this treaty with Russia. So if Iran used a Russian workstation as a proxy endpoint, and traffic pointed back to Russia – Russia would not provide us the records pointing to Iran.
Basically, right after they announced the DNC was hacked (it had been hacked for over a year), within a day they came out and said Russia did it, and they have proof through a cyber security firm. They refused to hand the server over to the FBI – who is the only agency who could actually perform that level of a forensic investigation and then get records compelled to connect the dots with the IP.
Hint: if a nation-state like Russia was hacking you, you probably would not know it. Also, if you find it was them within a day, it wasn’t the Russia government, but perhaps some 17 year old idiot using tools you can download from the internet. So, to convincingly tell the world, within a day, that it was Russia…is about the most laughable concept out there. Even if it was true….Russia would not leave tracks, and they sure as hell wouldn’t then release intel that points back to them. So, sorry…these 17 intel agencies who declared it was Russia, within a day, I call bullshit.
The ONLY way they could definitively know this would be through human intelligence, and not forensic intelligence. This would point to someone tapping phones, getting intel in person, etc. Which then leads me to my next point.
c) Russia did it? OK – maybe they did. What your Birkenstock wearing self is also not understanding is that there was this dossier released about Trump smearing him. Something about pissing on Russian hookers. Trump had apparently never been to Russia, but you heard it through CNN, so it must be true. What you haven’t heard on CNN or mainstream media, is that dossier was funded/produced by the Russians. Also, a week or so before the election, you have “pussygate”.
d) Uranium, anyone? What Clinton News Network is also not reporting, but is out there, everywhere, is apparently Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, sold 20% of our uranium to Russia. Within a month, Bill Clinton got a $500,000 speaking fee paid for by…the Russians. This smells a lot like quid pro quo.
e) Hillary’s campaign manager. So he was HACKED! BY THE RUSSIANS!! Well, chuckles, his password….was “password”. So, I’m sorry an FSB agent hacked your password. Or was it the 12-year old who lives next door. Take some accountability for your security. Some. Any. I’m a nobody. Nothing interesting. When you are the campaign manager for the democratic nominee…perhaps you might want to secure your password? Don’t blame the Russians, or French. It’s what they do. We try to stop them. We do it to them. We were bugging Angela Merkel for Christ’s sake. Look that one up.
f) Campaign manager. Ummm..her campaign manager’s brother was on the board of a Russian company, and was paid millions. Nothing to see here folks.
g) Collusion. What you are missing is that the objective of Russia was to disrupt our election system. No matter who won, the narrative would have been the exact same. They did not hack our voting booths. They may have influenced some voters, yeah. But we have done that to just about every country since world war 2. There was no “collusion”. With leaks non-stop from the intelligence community and the white house….after 1 year there’s no leak with any hint of real evidence of collusion.
h) Mr. Trump. As a right winger, their core principles are strong defense with opening up the oil reserves. In 2012, Romney pointed out that the Russians were our biggest enemy, and everyone (including myself), laughed. The GOP has had a platform for 4 years that has identified Russia as our main foe. Trump, as a GOP president, would increase the military presence to challenge Russia geopolitically and decrease energy prices – Russia’s main export – to bankrupt Russia. So, tell me how it’s been advantageous for Putin so far to have Trump in the White House? Again, the goal was to disrupt democracy. If Hillary had won, the script would have been the same and the Dems would be defending her – and there would be no collusion. Again – collusion means they worked together. One year of investigating…and zero evidence. If you want to get “to the bottom of it”, maybe you should have had the DNC turn over their server to the FBI. But you don’t. You want the specter of suspicion to put a stink on the presidency to disrupt any possible agenda. Note: in a democratic republic, sometimes your side wins, sometimes it loses. Just because your side lost, it does not give you the right to destroy our republic. Sure, make arguments. Defend your position. Make better arguments. You have nothing other than calling the republicans names and trying to shame people into your positions and shut down all possible attempts at dialogue.
I) Collusion. It appears, to me, the only collusion that exists are between the mainstream media and the democrats. It is appalling how I watch a speech, then flip on a major news network and hear the rhetoric. There is such a hysterical spin on everything, the idea is to scare the every-living shit out of any viewer, 24×7. I’m running at the gym, and CNN and Fox News are on side-by-side, covering the same thing. It’s just appalling at the level of language used by CNN to spin things to such hysterics. That being said, Trump brought this on himself declaring war on the media – and the media did some of this themselves by doing some really shitty journalism, which earned many of them a “fake news” moniker.
5) Chicago. Sanctuary city. Pensions.
In one of the most gun-regulated areas in the country, Chicago has the most murders of any major city, by a longshot. At the same time, they are harboring illegals who are criminals. Interestingly enough, I just read that there’s a program in Chicago still in the works to present illegal immigrants ID. Ummm…so let me get this straight. A possible criminal from Honduras can come up here, hang out in our cities, then get a free ID with the name John Smith? Does anyone else have a problem with this? Federal law trumps state and local laws. Where federal law does not exist, states then cover it under the 10th amendment. If you don’t like the existing laws, change them. You can’t fucking ignore them. This is why federal funds may be withheld in the future from these cities. They just don’t hand out the money – they usually put strings on it. In the next fiscal year, wait until you see the strings.
Pensions. This isn’t going to end well folks. If I write much about this subject, I get some serious hate mail. Problem is, I used to be pretty good at math, and your math is broken. It doesn’t work. Payments are coming due and they are hiking taxes in Chicago. Lowest credit rating of any major city.
I’m on a nice fitness journey at the moment, but before the city crumbles into a pile of ash, I want to take a pizza vacation and fly out there….eat deep dish pizza for days, then fly back. If you think I’m kidding, you don’t know how serious I take pizza.