Donald Trump and maga Republicans are hypocrites about Russian agression: Genuflecting to Putin is shameful appeasement

Echo opinion published in the Mississippi Daily Journal by 

Mussolini, Hitler and (interpreter Paul Otto Schmidt) British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain September 29, 1938

Genuflecting to Putin is shameful By Dick Polman 

It comes as no surprise America’s mutation of Neville Chamberlain spit in the face of our national honor during his meetup in Alaska with his Russian master, sucking up so shamelessly that any second I expected him to drop to the carpet and lick the mass murderer’s shoes.

Trump’s been doing this since forever. 

What’s just as detestable is formerly tough-on-Russia Republicans have mutely indulged his perfidies, and that oblivious Americans have rewarded him with ever-higher vote totals in three straight elections.

I hate to write this. I’ve spent the summer boating, biking, and hiking, and the last thing I want to do is stew anew about the Putin appeaser, the consummate fraud, the poster child for weakness. But “we are at a perilous moment without equal in the history of this nation, and Trump is demonstrably incapable of confronting it."

I wrote that seven summers ago, when Trump was preparing to meet Putin at a summit in Helsinki. And when they met, Trump told the world that Putin had more credibility than America’s intelligence agencies. In the end, “Helsinki proved that when the stakes are highest, when the nation’s security is threatened by a seasoned enemy standing a few feet away, Trump cannot bring the requisite A-game. And the Republicans who revered Ronald Reagan as The Great Communicator, as the stalwart foe of an ‘evil empire,’ are saddled with a president who verbally waffles in defense of his country.”

Just as Hillary Clinton did during the final campaign debate nine years ago when she stated that Putin “would rather have a puppet as president of the United States.”

What the puppet did in Alaska – rolling out the red carpet, clapping like a cheerleader with pom poms, surrendering to the war criminal’s stance on Ukraine – was merely consistent with his long-established misbehavior. Like in 2016, when he publicly pleaded for Putin to hack Hillarys’ emails (“Russia, if you’re listening…”). Like in 2018, when he trashed the federal indictments of 12 Russian intelligence agents who’d meddled with our 2016 election on his behalf (he called the indictments a “rigged witch hunt”). Like in 2022, when he praised Putin for invading Ukraine (“This is genius…He’s going to go in and be a peacekeeper”). Like when he lauded Putin’s “great charm” and boasted how much Putin “liked me.” 🙄

We may never know whether Vladimir Putin is blackmailing his pathetic supplicant or whether he’s just masterfully exploiting Trump’s grand canyon of neediness. We’re collateral casualties of his mission to reward Putin for the original sin of waging war on an independent nation.

It’d be nice if Democrats could manage to craft a relentless 24/7 message about his soft-on-Russia weakness and the MAGA GOP’s appeasement. 

But somehow that’s too heavy a lift for the perpetually supine blue team. Suffice it to say that if the situation was reversed — if, say, Barack Obama had ever clapped like a trained seal after luring the murderer to American soil — Republicans would already be screaming about treason and citing Article III of the Constitution, which in part defines “Treason against the United States” as “adhering to (our) Enemies, giving them 

Aid and Comfort.” (Maine Writer: In fact, a "dropped microphone" report put President Obama on the media hot seat when he told Russia about how he would have more leverage after his re-election- that made the news cycle for about a full week see New York Times:  "Microphone Catches a Candid Obama")

And, the Grand Old Party (now extinct) Republicans would’ve been right.

Dick Polman is a veteran national political columnist based in Philadelphia

Donald Trump's evil support for Russian Vladimir Putin risks undermining NATO's alliance

Mississippi Free Press Editor and CEO Donna Ladd said that the newspaper should report on Donald Trump saying he would encourage Russia to attack certain American allies. She was right.

Doanld Trump and Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland on July 16, 2018.

Several major national media outlets were fumbling the ball and either ignoring those remarks or giving them less weight than they deserve. Mississippi Free Press editor said we should set an example for how national media ought to cover such extreme policy declarations. So we did.

"Trump Encourages Russia to Attack American Allies: ‘Do Whatever the Hell They Want’", Mississippi Free Press.

"We may be a local Mississippi outlet, but this is important. It should be leading every newspaper in the country."

North AtlanticTreaty Organization

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said he encourages Russia to attack U.S. allies who he believes does not contribute enough money toward NATO defense costs. 

I can’t express how gratifying it has been to see people around the country, frustrated with many national publications’ treatment of stories like this, embracing our decision.

Although we are a Mississippi publication; local reporting in the Magnolia State is and always will be our primary focus. But, we  believe there is value in ensuring that we’re telling readers about important national stories, too—and drawing attention to news that we believe deserves more attention. 

National stories affect Mississippi, too. “Hell, if a paper called NEW YORK Times 😊can report urgent national news, then a site called MISSISSIPPI Free Press can too,” said our editor.

Donald Trump would encourage Russia to attack U.S. allies whom he claims do not contribute enough to the NATO defense costs, he told a crowd of supporters to (wrongminded❗) cheers at a South Carolina rally.

“One of the presidents of a big country (big country❓) stood up and said, ‘Well sir 😧⍰ 😕, if we don’t pay and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’ I said, ‘You didn’t pay❓ You’re delinquent❓’ He said, ‘Yes, let’s say that happened.’ No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want,” the Republican frontrunner for his party’s 2024, presidential nomination said.

Dismantling the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has been a goal of the evil 😈Russian President Vladimir Putin, who orchestrated efforts in 2016, to help Trump and hurt Clinton’s electoral prospects. Members of NATO—which includes the U.S., Canada and 29 European countries—pledge to defend any other nation that gets attacked. (Dismantling NATO is dangerous.)

Mississipi Free Press plans to report more stories about national and state interest in the future, which may even involve a Washington, D.C.-based reporter or collaboration to help better cover Mississippi’s congressional delegation and the policy decisions that affect Mississippians.

#TrumpIsPutinPuppet

Echo from North Carolina: No longer a Republican

Helsinki, Finland with Vladimir Putin was the turning point...

Echo opinion from Applacian State University in Boone, North Carolina https://www.appstate.edu/
Republican in the past tense:


November's 2020 election will undoubtedly determine the fate of America and, subsequently, the fates of our future generations.

Although we may never fully agree about what this path should be, what we can agree on is fundamental change is desperately needed. Unfortunately, I must take responsibility for my part in contributing to the tumultuous and dangerous political climate originating from Washington. I have been a devoted Republican voter, and I, admittedly, voted for Donald Trump for president. I believed that change, whatever the form, was something we deserved. Today, I declare an end to my identity as a Republican. I proudly commit to voting for all Democratic candidates, including Joe Biden for President.



We Need to Know What Happened When Trump Was Left Alone With Putin

My support for this tyrannical president ended as soon as he stood next to Vladmir Putin in Helsinki and undermined our nation’s top intelligence officials’ findings that Russia interfered in every level of our elections. My support for Donald Trump ended when evidence was presented that, through his privilege and deep connections, he avoided serving in Vietnam and, instead, shafted the people of New York out of millions of dollars in frivolous real estate tax abatements. My support for this president ended when he ordered the Department of Homeland Security to rip migrant children out of the hands of their mothers and fathers at the southern border and put them in cages. My support for this president ended when he failed to denounce the actions of white supremacists in Charlottesville, and instead, sympathized with the likes of Klansmen by calling them “fine people.” My support for this president ended when he falsely asserted that climate change was “fake science” and demanded mentions of one of the world’s most damning issues be removed from online Environmental Protection Agency resources.

My support for Donald Trump ended when he demeaned our nation’s top disease experts, willingly spread disinformation about a drug which he has considerable financial interest in that has been deemed “dangerous” by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and suggested the public put stock in the opinions of “doctors” whose idea of medical advice revolved around the subject of “demon sex.”

My support for Donald Trump ended when he failed to attempt to heal the nation when the atrocities brought on by irresponsible law enforcement toward our Black and brown brothers and sisters, and instead defended a racist criminal justice system that somehow rationalizes cops putting their knees on the necks of black people. My support for this president ended when he decided that the lives of teachers and students did not play a part in his re-election plans. My support for this president is over.

I urge each and every one of you, independents, Republicans, and Democrats — to unite to restore the soul and conscience of our nation. I ask you to stand up for those who are afraid to and who can’t. We defeated the likes of Donald Trump on the beaches of Normandy, in Birmingham, and the Civil War.

Let’s do it again!

From: Colby D. Carr, Economics Major, Class of 2017

Stockholm Syndrome in the Donald Trump administration

Donald Trump's behavior
Echo opinion letter from Missouri published in the Southeast Missourian

The recently published anonymous Op-Ed letter published in the New York Times coupled with Bob Woodward’s book, “Fear,” subtitled “Trump in the White House,” further adds to the “Red lights are blinking”, warning, issued by Dan Coats, director of National Intelligence. 

As Woodward noted, the real threat to America’s security comes not just from Russia, but also from Donald Trump himself.

During the course of the presidential campaign, we witnessed Trump’s erratic and impulsive behaviors; his “volcanic eruptions” and “verbal whacking” of his adversaries. 

Since becoming president, we have witnessed his reckless decisions based on monumental ignorance and his total lack of humanity in his decision to separate innocent little children from immigrant parents.

However, what is even more dangerous is the cowardly behavior of Trump’s cabinet secretaries as well as Republican lawmakers. Every one of them seems to be terrorized by his “verbal whacking.” Sen. McConnell has been compromised by virtue of his wife being a cabinet member. Fearful of being “whacked,” Speaker Paul Ryan simply decided to run away from the political arena.

Trump’s steadfast refusal to criticize Vladimir Putin, and his blatantly obsequious behavior toward him in Helsinki make us suspicious that Putin is blackmailing him. The fact that he convinced a handful of Republican lawmakers to go to Moscow as his surrogates to pay homage to Putin, further supports this suspicion.

It appears as though both Trump and his Republican minions suffer from Stockholm Syndrome, a psychological state of mind in which terrorized victims collude with terrorists.

K.P.S. KAMATH, Cape Girardeau

Trump-Putin duo lie leaders - echo opinion from Kansas

Donald Trump, left, and Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, shake hand at the beginning of a meeting at the Presidential Palace in Helsinki, Finland, Monday, July 16, 2018. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Echo letter from Leavenworth Kansas published in the Leavenworth Times newspaper, from Pat Davidson in Leavenworth.

Two liars in Helsinki

(At the Helsinki news conference) two of the most powerful liars on planet Earth each complemented one another.

One lies because he can. Any disagrees with Russia's Vladimir Putin and you will have an accident or die of some type of bizarre exposure to chemicals or radiation.

The other is our President Donald J. Trump. I don’t know why he lies. He is very successful, very wealthy, has a beautiful wife and is the president of the United States.

That being said, they are both liars, and you have to be some kind of ignorant to continue to believe what a known liar says.

Donald Trump was born wealthy, never had to worry about a roof over his head or where his next meal came from, yet those who work paycheck to paycheck seem to think that he knows what they need.

Donald Trump managed to avoid the draft with college deferments and “bone spurs” yet he is now the commander in chief of our military. Donald Trump has done very little in his life that did not benefit him. When he says that the new tax system will cost him money, he’s lying.

I should get a bigger refund on my taxes, but if I want to buy a car or another product that uses overseas materials, it’ll cost me more due to his trade policies.

He has already attacked my paycheck as a federal retiree by expressing a desire to stop my cost of living raises. He lies so much, I don’t know what I can believe.

Some point to the campaign promises he’s made, and the attempts to fulfill them. Some are being completed to some degree, but there are some that are not.

He appears to need attention to an extent that borders on mania, doing anything or saying anything to get time on television or in newspapers.

I just hope whoever has the football keeps a tight grip on it. As I’m typing this, the news is carrying a story that he is saying that he misspoke yesterday.

Somebody must have broken through his ego shield and convinced him that he made a big mistake with his comments, but again, I’m sorry, I can’t believe this statement either.

Trumpzis - Lies and the liars who vouch for them

President Donald Trump lies to everyone; his supporters lie to themselves

Powerful commentary published in the Arizona Republic AZCentral by E.J. Montini 

E.J. Montini wrote a blog post pointing out that among Trump’s most recent lies is one in which he says his father was born in Germany. That isn’t true. (Trump can't even tell the truth about where his father was born?)

I heard from readers about that post pretty quickly. For example, one supporter of the president wrote: “He ‘lied’ about his dad’s birthplace? That’s the best you got, Eddie? That’s not journalism. That’s desperation.”

Actually, it’s journalism.

Why little lies matter

In fact, it’s vital journalism.

It is vitally important to point out that the president of the United States is willing to tell a lie — more than once — that is so easily disproved.

After his meeting with European Union leaders, Trump said in an interview with CBS News, “Maybe the thing that is most difficult — don’t forget both my parents were born in EU sectors, OK? I mean, my mother was Scotland, my father was Germany. And — you know,I love those countries.”

Actually, no.

His father, Fred, was born in New York City. Like Trump.

Why is that important?

No fear of being caught

First, Trump has to know he’s not telling the truth. 

Second, he has to know how easily the lie can be exposed. 

And third, he clearly doesn’t care.

Donald Trump's lies keep coming, and the people in a position to do something about it — Republicans in Congress — do nothing.

And the people who can do something about the Republicans in Congress — voters — do nothing.

The Republican-controlled government under President Donald Trump has gone full-blown “1984.” Or, as George Orwell wrote in the novel: “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

Recording setting pace of untruths

The Toronto Star and its Washington bureau chief, Daniel Dale, have been unrelenting in cataloging Trump’s lies.

In a recent article, Dale wrote, “The pace of the president’s dishonesty has increased significantly in 2018. After averaging 2.9 false claims per day in 2017, he is averaging 5.1 per day in 2018.”

The New York Times now reports that Trump was provided with “highly classified intelligence indicating that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia had personally ordered complex cyberattacks to sway the 2016 American election” two weeks before he was inaugurated.

The article says the evidence included “texts and emails from Russian military officers and information gleaned from a top-secret source close to Mr. Putin, who had described to the C.I.A. how the Kremlin decided to execute its campaign of hacking and disinformation.”

Even after seeing the evidence...

And yet, a year into his presidency, Trump said of a meeting with Putin, “I don’t know how many times I can ask him if he meddled in the election, but I pressed him again and he denied it, and I believe him.”

He continues to provide cover for Putin. Or is it for himself?

I understand the inclination to turn a blind eye to a bad actor with whom we happen to agree or who’s helping our “team.”

During the worst of the steroid era in baseball, when Barry Bonds was winning games for the San Francisco Giants, the slugging outfielder was booed in every ballpark outside his home field and universally vilified by just about every fan except those in … San Francisco.

There’s the old story as well, explaining American foreign policy, in which President Franklin D. Roosevelt supposedly said (but probably didn’t) about Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza: “He (Somoza) may be a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bitch.”

Imagine if Hillary did this

Maybe you look at Trump that way. But is it worth 5.1 lies per day, some of which may do irreparable harm to national security?
Imagine if Hillary Clinton had won the election.

Imagine if the Russians had hacked into Trump’s campaign to get Clinton elected.

Imagine Clinton then said she didn’t believe the hacking had anything to do with the election and called the reporting of it “fake news.”

Imagine if Clinton had then cozied up to Putin and dissed our oldest and most valued allies in Europe.

Imagine if a special counsel’s investigation into all this netted more than two dozen indictments and numerous guilty pleas, and Clinton called it a “witch hunt.”

Imagine if Clinton went to Helsinki and took the side of the Russian strongman over America’s own intelligence agencies and Department of Justice.

Imagine you then found out that Clinton was provided intelligence-agency proof of the meddling weeks before her inauguration, and proof as well at Putin had ordered it.

Would you still forgive the lies? (Republican overt hypocrisy!)

MaineWriter - The hypocrisy exposed in this Montini opinion is another example of how Republicans who are Trumpzi cultists are intent on destroying American democracy. They are dangerous.

Donald Trump is a crises acceleration machine

It's difficult to understand how many more scandals and indictments can be piled on to the "crises du jour" by the failed Donald Trump administration.  In an interview reported in The Daily Beast, the political cauldron being stirred by Trump and his chaotic management is as bad (and getting worse) as anything in American history.

BE AFRAID ~ echo reported in The Daily Beast reported by Marlow Stern

Ex-CIA Director John Brennan to Bill Maher: Trump Is ‘A Real Threat to Our National Security’

The former CIA director under President Obama—and the architect of the bin Laden raid—sat down with Bill Maher on ‘Real Time’ to discuss Trump revoking his security clearance.

John Brennan is pissed.

John Owen Brennan is an American intelligence official who served as the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency from March 2013 to January 2017

The former CIA director under President Obama, and the architect of the bin Laden raid, sat down with host Bill Maher on Friday night’s Real Time to vent about President Trump, who last week took it upon himself to revoke his security clearance. 

In a statement delivered by press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Trump pointed to Brennan’s “frenzied commentary” and “unfounded and outrageous allegations” as the reason for the revocation—without, of course, getting into any specifics.

Brennan, who is an MSNBC analyst, was very critical of Trump’s cozy relationship with Vladimir Putin, branding the president’s ring-kissing during their (failed!) Helsinki summit “nothing short of treasonous.”

This is what Brennon posted on Twitter: Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of “high crimes & misdemeanors.” It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???

“There are two principal reasons why I used that term,” Brennan explained to Maher of the “treasonous” comment. “One, I think I exhausted all the other adjectives in the English language to describe Donald Trump’s failures to fulfill his responsibilities as president of the United States. And two, I saw him on that stage in Helsinki failing to be able to say to the world and to Vladimir Putin that Russia tried to interfere in our election, that it never should have happened and it never should happen again, and if it does Russia is going to pay some very severe consequences as a result, but he didn’t do that.”

He went on to describe how unique the revocation was. “I didn’t ask to keep my security clearances—former directors don’t do that. We keep those clearances because sometimes, those in government want to avail themselves of our experience, our expertise, our knowledge about certain issues,” Brennan said. “This is the first time in 38 years that I haven’t had a security clearance, and the basis for the revocation is bogus. Mr. Trump and the administration didn’t adhere even to the process that they reaffirmed last year, and the politicization of security clearances, either the granting or the revocation, is a real threat to our national security.”

The 62-year-old Jersey native blamed Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) for being “the one that put this idea in Donald Trump’s head,” even though, according to Brennan, “Rand Paul has never served on the intelligence committee. He knows not of what he speaks, but yet he has this impression that I’m ‘monetizing’ security clearances, so he continues to spout out on these issues.”

“But again,” he continued, “I believe very strongly in the principle that national security is one of the most sacred and solemn professions in this government, and every American citizen deserves to have national security professionals—intelligence professionals—who are not going to be politicized, and no president ever should take that capability away from them.”

Later on, Maher claimed that Trump’s presidency is “the third great crisis in American history” behind the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, before asking Brennan if he agreed with that ranking.

“I would,” said Brennan. “And I think it’s going to get worse before it gets better, because don’t forget: Donald Trump has the authority of the president of the United States in his hands, in terms of what he can do domestically here and as well as what he can do internationally to try to distract attention, whether or not he’s going to try to pursue some type of foreign adventure, military or otherwise. But fundamentally though, what he’s doing to this country: he’s dividing us.”

Marlow Stern

Vladimir Putin's cyber attack on the US resulted in landing the biggest fish of his KGB career- Donald Trump

Weaponized information seeks a new target in cyberspace, being users’ minds. Targeted attacks on Americans' thinking worked on Donald Trump.

 

(Maine Writer:  What boggles my mind is how this cyber weaponry has become so commonplace and easy!)

"Some observers suggest that using internet tools for espionage and as fuel for disinformation campaigns is a new form of “hybrid warfare.” Their idea is that the lines are blurring between the traditional kinetic warfare of bombs, missiles and guns, and the unconventional, stealthy warfare long practiced against foreigners’ “hearts and minds” by intelligence and special forces capabilities." wrote Richard Forno Senior Lecturer, Cybersecurity & Internet Researcher, University of Maryland, Baltimore Count, published in The Conversation, an on-line news source. 

Russian attacks on the 2016 US presidential election and the country’s continuing election-related hacking have happened across all three dimensions of cyberspace – physical, informational and cognitive. The first two are well-known: For years, hackers have exploited hardware and software flaws to gain unauthorized access to computers and networks – and stolen information they’ve found. The third dimension, however, is a newer target – and a more concerning one.

This three-dimensional view of cyberspace comes from my late mentor, Professor Dan Kuehl of the National Defense University, who expressed concern about traditional hacking activities and what they meant for national security. But he also foresaw the potential – now clear to the public at large – that those tools could be used to target people’s perceptions and thought processes, too. 

That’s what the Russians allegedly did, according to federal indictments issued in February and July, laying out evidence that Russian civilians and military personnel used online tools to influence Americans’ political views – and, potentially, their votes. They may be setting up to do it again for the 2018 midterm elections.

Some observers suggest that using internet tools for espionage and as fuel for disinformation campaigns is a new form of “hybrid warfare.” Their idea is that the lines are blurring between the traditional kinetic warfare of bombs, missiles and guns, and the unconventional, stealthy warfare long practiced against foreigners’ “hearts and minds” by intelligence and special forces capabilities.

However, I believe this isn’t a new form of war at all: Rather, it is the same old strategies taking advantage of the latest available technologies. Just as online marketing companies use sponsored content and search engine manipulation to distribute biased information to the public, governments are using internet-based tools to pursue their agendas. In other words, they’re hacking a different kind of system through social engineering on a grand scale.



Old goals, new techniques

More than 2,400 years ago, the Chinese military strategist and philosopher Sun Tzu made it an axiom of war that it’s best to “subdue the enemy without fighting.” Using information – or disinformation, or propaganda – as a weapon can be one way to destabilize a population and disable the target country. In 1984 a former KGB agent who defected to the West discussed this as a long-term process and more or less predicted what’s happening in the U.S. now.

The Russians created false social media accounts to simulate political activists – such as @TEN_GOP, which purported to be associated with the Tennessee Republican Party. Just that one account attracted more than 100,000 followers. The goal was to distribute propaganda, such as captioned photos, posters or short animated graphics, purposely designed to enrage and engage these accounts’ followers. Those people would then pass the information along through their own personal social networks.

Starting from seeds planted by Russian fakers, including some who claimed to be U.S. citizens, those ideas grew and flourished through amplification by real people. Unfortunately, whether originating from Russia or elsewhere, fake information and conspiracy theories can form the basis for discussion at major partisan media outlets.

As ideas with niche online beginnings moved into the traditional mass media landscape, they serve to keep controversies alive by sustaining divisive arguments on both sides. For instance, one Russian troll factory had its online personas host rallies both for and against each of the major candidates in the 2016 presidential election. Though the rallies never took place, the online buzz about them helped inflame divisions in society.

The trolls also set up Twitter accounts purportedly representing local news organizations – including defunct ones – to take advantage of Americans’ greater trust of local news sourcesthan national ones. These accounts operated for several years – one for the Chicago Daily News, closed since 1978, was created in May 2014 and collected 20,000 followers – passing along legitimate local news stories, likely seeking to win followers’ trust ahead of future disinformation campaigns. Shut down before they could fulfill that end, these accounts cleverly aimed to exploit the fact that many Americans’ political views cloud their ability to separate fact from opinion in the news.

These sorts of activities are functions of traditional espionage: Foment discord and then sit back while the target population becomes distracted arguing among themselves.
Fighting digital disinformation is hard

Analyzing, let alone countering, this type of provocative behavior can be difficult. Russia isn’t alone, either: The U.S. tries to influence foreign audiences and global opinions, including through Voice of America online and radio services and intelligence services’ activities. And it’s not just governments that get involved. Companies, advocacy groups and others also can conduct disinformation campaigns.

Unfortunately, laws and regulations are ineffective remedies. Further, social media companies have been fairly slow to respond to this phenomenon. Twitter reportedly suspended more than 70 million fake accounts earlier this summer. That included nearly 50 social media accounts like the fake Chicago Daily News one.

Facebook, too, says it is working to reduce the spread of “fake news” on its platform. Yet both companies make their money from users’ activity on their sites – so they are conflicted, trying to stifle misleading content while also boosting users’ involvement.
Real defense happens in the brain

The best protection against threats to the cognitive dimension of cyberspace depends on users’ own actions and knowledge. Objectively educated, rational citizens should serve as the foundation of a strong democratic society. But that defense fails if people don’t have the skills – or worse, don’t use them – to think critically about what they’re seeing and examine claims of fact before accepting them as true.

American voters expect ongoing Russian interference in U.S. elections. In fact, it appears to have already begun. To help combat that influence, the U.S. Justice Department plans to alert the public when its investigations discover foreign espionage, hacking and disinformation relating to the upcoming 2018 midterm elections. And the National Security Agency has created a task force to counter Russian hacking of election systems and major political parties’ computer networks.

These efforts are a good start, but the real solution will begin when people start realizing they’re being subjected to this sort of cognitive attack and that it’s not all just a hoax.

Maine Writer observation - the biggest "asset" on earth to easily fall victim to Russian disinformation is Donald Trump. As reported in The Hill, "Trump faced widespread push back after the failed Helsinki meeting, following a joint press conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin, during which Trump appeared to cast doubt on the Kremlin's interference in the presidential race. Trump said Putin was 'extremely strong and powerful in his denial' of Russian meddling and added he didn't see a reason why it 'would' be Russia."

"After days of intense criticism, Trump walked back the statement, claiming he meant to say he didn't see a reason why it 'wouldn't' be Russia. Though he said he trusted the intelligence community's conclusion that Russia did interfere, he repeated a claim that other parties could have been involved in the meddling." (And, there was Putin, he stood right alongside of Tump and reeled in the biggest fish he's ever caught!)

Donald Trump has ruined the conservative GOP

In Maine Writer's opinion, Republicans are now the party of Donald Trump and "conservatism" has morphed into right wing radicalism.

Charles J. Sykes writes: "As a conservative, I despair at Republicans' support for Trump. His vision is not conservatism"
(Maine Writer - Donald Trump doesn't even behave like a rational human being let alone "conservative", IMO.)

This echo opinion was published in The Guardian

It is hard to refute those who say Trumpism is a product of conservatism but refute them we must. We are better than this

The fiasco in Helsinki, where Donald Trump openly sided with Vladimir Putin over his own country’s intelligence agencies, was not a one-off for this president but rather an exclamation point on what has happened to the American right.

For me, as an outspoken conservative for the last four decades, the experience has been vertiginous. On one issue after another – from Russia and free trade to corruption and the rule of law – Republicans have adjusted their principles to conform with Trumpism, which often means with Trump’s latest glandular impulse.

I came of age watching Ronald Reagan call on Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall”, as he reasserted America’s role as leader of the free world. Last week we saw Trump insult our allies, undermine our friends and truckle to the Russian autocrat.

Given a chance to hold Russia accountable for its attacks on the American election, its annexation of Crimea, its aggression in Ukraine, its role as an enabler of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, or the murder of journalists and political opponents, Trump chose instead to blame “both sides”:

Yes I do. I hold both countries responsible.

I think that the United States has been foolish. I think we’ve all been foolish …

And I think we’re all to blame.

It is impossible to imagine Reagan or, frankly, any other US president, giving that answer, and it is easy to imagine the outrage among conservatives if Barack Obama had uttered those words. This was not an errant tweet, or one of Trump’s random insults, outrages or assaults on the truth. Trump’s behavior risked undermining the global world order, alienating our friends and emboldening our enemies.

Many Republicans have rationalized their support for Trump by pointing to tax cuts, rollbacks in regulation and Trump’s appointments of conservative judges. But Helsinki reminded us how many of their values they have been willing to surrender. Moral relativism and its cousin, moral equivalency, are not bugs of the Trump presidency; they are central to its diplomatic philosophy. Unfortunately, polls suggest that many conservatives are OK with that, despite the betrayal of what were once deeply held beliefs

For years, Republicans derided what they saw as Obama’s fecklessness on the world stage, including what they called his “apology tour”. Trump, we were told, would change all of that by projecting strength and standing up for American values. Instead, we got last week’s parade of sycophancy and abasement.

This ought to have been a clarifying moment. Trump was supposed to be the Man on the White Horse who promised that he alone could solve all of our problems. 

Instead, he looked like Putin’s caddy.

The problem is that many conservatives have confused the swagger of the schoolyard bully with actual strength; we saw how Trump behaves when he’s confronted by an even bigger bully. He groveled, and then hedged, then tried to walk it all back with the absurdly laughable claim that he confused the word “would” for “wouldn’t”. Depressingly, that was good enough for some Republicans, including the Ohio senator Rob Portman, who said he was willing to take Trump at his word.

But we’ve seen this movie before, as Republicans react to Trump’s outrages by wringing their hands, only to fall back into line.

Understandably, this feeds the impression that we should regard Trumpism as a logical and organic outgrowth of conservatism rather than an existential threat to that tradition. That is, of course, the view from the (Sean) Hannitized right, which insists that opposition to Trump among so-called Never Trumpers is a form of apostasy.

But a similar argument is advanced by a chorus on the left. “Donald Trump Was the Inevitable Result of Republicanism”, declared a recent headline in Esquire. With every passing week, as outrage piles on outrage, that argument admittedly becomes more difficult to refute.

But a few points need to be made about the attempt to equate Trumpism with traditional conservatism. The first is the most obvious: if Trump was the inevitable and predictable outcome of the conservative movement, why did none of those critics predict his coming?

They also need to explain why Trump is more an “authentic” expression of conservatism than previous GOP nominees, like George HW Bush, John McCain or Mitt Romney. 

Distinctions are important here: it is unhealthy and intellectually sloppy to gloss over the fundamental differences between the conservatism of a Milton Friedman and the raw nationalist nativism of a Steve Bannon, just as it is intellectually dishonest to confuse the progressivism of Adlai Stevenson with Che Guevera. Nuance matters.

Obviously, Trump has deftly exploited many of the grievances and attitudes that have festered for decades on the right. But that’s not the whole story. Trump has more in common with populist demagogues like the “Know Nothings”, Father Charles Coughlin, George Wallace and Pat Buchanan than with conservatives like George Will or Ronald Reagan. Until the last election, conservatives had the good taste, sound judgment and wisdom to reject and even marginalize those uglier voices on the right. In that sense, Trump is the exception, rather than the rule.

Perhaps the best way to think about Trump’s nativism and isolationism is to see them as recessive genes in conservatism that had been kept in check for generations. That also suggests another tradition exists, even if it is now in eclipse.

While it’s easy (and tempting) to define a political movement by its worst aspects, it bears noting that modern conservatism also gave rise to Charles Krauthammer, Ross Douthat, Peter Wehner, Ben Sasse and Jeff Flake. In other words, it didn’t have to be this way, and it doesn’t have to continue in the future.

The real danger, however, in seeing Trump as the logical, organic product of conservatism is that it normalizes him. Discounting the peculiarity of his rise ignores the uniqueness of the danger he poses and the urgent need to confront the damage he is doing to the body politic and our political culture. If he is merely another Republican, there no cause for more than the usual alarm.

But Donald Trump reminded us that there is nothing normal about the existential threat he represents. It is long past time for conservatives and Republicans to recognize that.

Charles J Sykes is a contributing editor for the Weekly Standard and the author of How the Right Lost Its Mind.

This is what "treason" means

Echo opinion published in The Washington Post and reprinted in the South Jersey.com news.

The Washington Post By Greg Sargent

Vladimir Putin ~ what hold does he have over Donald Trump and what did the two talk about in Helsinki? This is what "treason" looks like.

Helsinki, Finland ~ The events of the past few days — culminating in President Donald Trump's meeting Monday with Russian President Vladimir Putin — have rendered this interpretation inescapable: Trump is currently in the process of repaying Putin for helping to deliver him the presidency.

The known facts have now established it beyond any reasonable doubt, and the only alternative interpretations of that now-established basic bargain are actually more nefarious than that one.

What we saw *today* in Helsinki was collusion. 

Trump's refusal to treat Russian sabotage of our democracy as the crime that it is encourages Putin to keep it up.

In Helsinki Monday July 16, Trump and Putin spoke to reporters before entering their private meeting. Trump predicted that "I think we will end up having an extraordinary relationship," adding that "getting along with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing." 

But as The Washington Post's write-up puts it: "Trump did not mention Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential campaign as one of the topics to be discussed." 

In blaming only previous U.S. leadership and the current Mueller probe for bad relations with Russia - and not Russia's attack on our democracy, which is particularly galling, now that this attack has been described in great new detail - Trump is not merely spinning in a way that benefits himself. 

Trump is also giving a gift to Putin, by signaling that he will continue to do all he can to delegitimize efforts to establish the full truth about Russian interference, which in turn telegraphs that Russia can continue such efforts in the future (which U.S. intelligence officials have warned will happen in the 2018 elections). In a sense, by doing this, Trump is colluding with such efforts right now.

Why does Trump believe Putin more than U.S. intelligence agencies?

But the point I want to make here is that, even if you do not view those steps by Trump as a kind of reward to Putin for helping swing the election, since they could be motivated by all sorts of other things, it is unavoidably clear — based on the new information and Trumpian conduct we've seen in the last few days — that Trump's ongoing treatment of Russian electoral interference in particular is essentially a reward for doing just that. Even if Trump does end up taking a tougher line with Russia on international affairs, that point stands, as long as he continues to dismiss the seriousness of the sabotage itself.

Alternatively, even if you think Trump should be trying for smoother relations with Russia, he could (and should) pair such an effort with genuine condemnation of Russian interference and a serious effort to ward it off in the future, since, after all, what's at stake is our democracy. Indeed, as the Lawfare team points out, Mueller's indictment basically reveals that Putin has been lying to Trump all along about the scale and scope of its sabotage effort.

(HELLO?) ...And didn't Trump himself ask for Clinton's emails to be hacked?
But Trump is now shrugging at that confirmed lying, and he's still not taking this act of sabotage at all seriously. Remember, Trump himself called on Russia to hack Hillary Clinton's emails.

And according to a tally by Think Progress, Trump publicly drew attention to the material leaked by Wikileaks — which received it from Russia, according to the Mueller indictment — over 100 times during the campaign. We don't know how much influence this sabotage had. But as Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg points out, beyond how many votes were directly moved, the DNC was badly disabled by the cyber subterfuge at a critical moment, which had to have had some kind of serious impact.

So is he rewarding Putin or not? (Putin is throwing vodka shots!)

Trump, who himself used the material funneled through Wikileaks by Russia as a weapon, is in effect now rewarding Russian efforts to supply it, by refusing to treat this sabotage as a crime against our political system.

You can, of course, adopt far worse interpretations of what Trump is giving to Putin as part of this basic bargain, and of his motives for doing it. But even if you don't, this one is now inescapable.

A big win for Putin:
The New York Times reports on all the ways that Vladimir Putin wins simply by getting Trump to show up for their meeting. 

And:

"Deploying hackers, disinformation campaigns and support for far-right populist forces in Europe, Mr. Putin has long sought to fracture the West and upend the established geopolitical order. But Mr. Trump, who routinely attacks European leaders and has started a trade war with some of America's closest allies, is now effectively doing the job for him."

In addition to this meeting, much of what Trump is doing toward our allies is also "winning" . . . for Putin.

Republicans edge away from Trump:

The Washington Post's Dave Weigel has a good report on Republican candidates who are carefully distancing themselves from Trump's agenda, even in the hallowed Midwest:

"Doubts about the ongoing tariff battle and about the administration's agenda on health care, spending and immigration have changed the terrain. Rather than back the president and Republicans, the Midwest has begun to flirt with candidates who would keep them in check. . . . Republican candidates now are . . . unable to fully share in the president's popularity with their own party members but tagged with his least popular moves by general election voters."

But wait, didn't Steve Bannon tell us that Republican candidates should fully embrace Trumpism? Seems they don't agree with the wisdom of that idea.

All the times Trump praised Putin: 

"Trump is drawn to strongmen with a tinge - or more than a tinge - of authoritarianism in their leadership style. There's a part of him that admires Putin's ability to command total fealty - and not have to deal with an adversarial (a.k.a. independent) media . . . What's clear is that Trump isn't going to emerge from Monday's summit . . with much to say about Putin that's negative."

Indeed, it's not that hard to imagine Trump emerging with praise for Putin's relationship with his state media.

Greg Sargent writes The Plum Line blog,