There are other upsetting images. Perhaps I'm too tender and old to be on Twitter? Swastikas and pictures of rats with Stars of David. Is is possible that this is a minority and not common? Are the photo takers perhaps taking their pictures of the racists and macho gun carriers?
There are other upsetting images. Perhaps I'm too tender and old to be on Twitter? Swastikas and pictures of rats with Stars of David. Is is possible that this is a minority and not common? Are the photo takers perhaps taking their pictures of the racists and macho gun carriers?
As this twitter thread points out Americans who want to "re-open the country" are a small minority, so people who show up at these kinds of events are a self-selecting fringe group. I suspect that the overlap with other fringe positions (fascism, ammosexuals, etc.) is not random but instead correlated.
I suspect that the overlap with other fringe positions (fascism, ammosexuals, etc.) is not random but instead correlated.
Your suspicions seem to be correct.
According to The Washington Post*, "A trio of far-right, pro-gun provocateurs is behind some of the largest Facebook groups calling for anti-quarantine protests around the country, offering the latest illustration that some seemingly organic demonstrations are being engineered by a network of conservative activists."
(*I'm not posting a link since it's behind a pay wall. Sorry.)
Today's London Times carries a photo of two fully-armed lunatics in combat gear, one wearing a gas mask, the other a death's-head mask. Seems a fairy extreme form of protest. In the UK they would both be arrested, or possibly shot if they moved to use their weapons.
The same is true in the U.S., but only if the protestors are non-white.
By "Trump strongholds", you mean states that are likely to go red in November? Because I do note that there seem to be protests in all the rust-belt swing states regarded as pivotal for his re-election, plus swing-state Florida.
If the theory is that DeVos and company are avoiding causing mayhem in red states for fear of alienating their supporters, I would think they also want to avoid it in swing states as well.
By "Trump strongholds", you mean states that are likely to go red in November? Because I do note that there seem to be protests in all the rust-belt swing states regarded as pivotal for his re-election, plus swing-state Florida.
Swing-states or "pivotal" states (i.e. states that could be reasonably expected to "pivot" one way or the other in 2020) Trump won by razor-thin margins in 2016 are, by definition, not "Trump strongholds". Where are the anti-stay-at-home demonstrations in Alabama or South Carolina?
If the theory is that DeVos and company are avoiding causing mayhem in red states for fear of alienating their supporters, I would think they also want to avoid it in swing states as well.
The whole point is to manufacture a false narrative that any economic problems (and even at this late date the Trump campaign/administration* still sees the economy as the key to his re-election*) are the fault of recalcitrant Democratic governors.
It's just now dawning on me that support for Trump from big donors and party leaders is not just because Trump is easily manipulated, it's also because his base is even more easily manipulated, which makes Trump together with his base their dream weapon. I'm horrified to contemplate how firmly ensconced he would be if he were at all competent.
Today's London Times carries a photo of two fully-armed lunatics in combat gear, one wearing a gas mask, the other a death's-head mask. Seems a fairy extreme form of protest. In the UK they would both be arrested, or possibly shot if they moved to use their weapons.
The same is true in the U.S., but only if the protestors are non-white.
By "Trump strongholds", you mean states that are likely to go red in November? Because I do note that there seem to be protests in all the rust-belt swing states regarded as pivotal for his re-election, plus swing-state Florida.
If the theory is that DeVos and company are avoiding causing mayhem in red states for fear of alienating their supporters, I would think they also want to avoid it in swing states as well.
Well, we did have protests here in Kentucky and Ohio. KY is about the farthest thing from a swing state, and some people are saying Ohio isn't one anymore either. It's gone pretty Republican in recent years. The alarming "zombie attack" photo of protesters smushing themselves up against the glass entryway doors is from the Ohio statehouse.
Both Ohio and Kentucky's governors, a Republican and a Democrat respectively, are getting fantastic public-approval ratings for their handling of the virus. Most people are very happy with the way things have been done here, although of course we've had some difficulty with the unemployment claims website and things like that. I imagine our protesters are either the real lunatic fringe, paid minions of the DeVos family, or both.
Edited to add: I forgot that they did find out who had been backing the protests in Kentucky, and it was a minion of our defeated ex-governor Matt Bevin. I can only imagine how many thousands would be dead if Bevin were still in charge. He's like Rand Paul but meaner and dumber, if you can imagine.
The whole point is to manufacture a false narrative that any economic problems (and even at this late date the Trump campaign/administration* still sees the economy as the key to his re-election*) are the fault of recalcitrant Democratic governors.
Here's a report about a protest in Sacramento CA. Interestingly, a permit was given despite the stay home order in force. The Bee reporter is unsure why and nobody was willing to tell them. The protest was organised by the Freedom Angels, who are not a nice group of motorcycle enthusiasts but prominent in CA's anti-vaccer movement.
But the new cases were apparently not among the protesters:
It’s unclear whether the protests had any impact on the surge of deaths reported Sunday in the state. Beshear said at least 13 percent of cases reported in Kentucky have been nursing home residents. Of the 273 new cases, there were 33 patients who were residents of nursing homes and eight more who were staffers, he said.
I have a sickening feeling that the protesters are going to appear to prove themselves right -- that despite all their intermingling and patronizing of newly opened businesses, they will not get sick. Hence it really was all a hoax and a false alarm and a gross overreaction all along. The fartletter-in-chief was right.
It's not a clear incitement to do anything specific because it's so vague. But it was read by its audience as an incitement to protest. How is it an incitement to civil war?
Thanks for posting that article Gramps. I wonder whether the writer has a jaundiced perspective because of his years working in conflict zones. I'm thinking of the types of mildly misanthropic attitudes you can develop as a lawyer. Lawyers who act for individuals see people at their worst, when they are in an unfamiliar situation and under stress. So I'm wondering whether this guy, who has witnessed similar protests in other countries, is downplaying the diffuse centres of authority in the United States and the resilience of its systems.
Trump has hijacked the briefings, turned them into a bizarre substitute for his rallies. They get extensive coverage on the main networks and what his supporters get to hear daily is his narrative plus rubbishing the "fake media".
It's a part of his election campaign.
That is of course grossly irresponsible. But that has never bothered him. It remains to be seen how effective it will be. Not sure about the rest of you but I find his voice increasingly grating. It's not just the dreadful content. The voice itself, the speech cadences, the whine, just get on my nerves.
I'm kind of hoping that this daily exposure to his noise may produce this sort of aversion. Where it reaches the stage that you just want to shout " shut up! Shut up! You're getting on my nerves".
I could be barking up the wrong tree, but effects like that can lead to a loss of popularity. People get tired of the same old, same old, noise. 5% offputs would I think be good enough to defeat a second term.
Anyway, I'd love to see him defeat himself by underestimating the effects of overexposure.
It's not a clear incitement to do anything specific because it's so vague. But it was read by its audience as an incitement to protest. How is it an incitement to civil war?
Well, if he wins he’ll have to own the mess he’s made.
The tragedy is that he never ever does that. It's always someone else to blame.
Yes - I put that wrongly.
He’ll never accept the blame for anything, ever. But he will have to deal with the mess, one way or another. Not many golfing breaks are likely to be on the horizon for him.
Maybe you just weren't hearing it in the right context. Normally I find Trump's voice objectionable, but that video has to be seen with the sound on. It's perfect!
I have a sickening feeling that the protesters are going to appear to prove themselves right -- that despite all their intermingling and patronizing of newly opened businesses, they will not get sick.
Some decent fraction of people who get the virus won't notice. They won't get sick - they'll just wander about the place looking healthy and killing other people. Some suggestions are that that fraction is about 25%, with a further 25% who spend many asymptomatic infectious days before getting sick.
In my vicinity, 1 in 500 people have been confirmed to have covid-19. But most people with mild symptoms aren't getting tests - the real numbers are probably 10 times larger. (Which I think is consistent with the numbers that the people that looked for covid-19 in municipal sewers were getting).
So if 1 person in 50 has it, and 50% are asymptomatic, then that means that 1% of the people in my area are Typhoid Mary.
I'm beginning to be of the mind that businesses that wish to re-open should be allowed to re-open, and that people who wish to patronize them should be allowed to patronize them.
But that any sickness that befalls them as a result is theirs alone to treat, and not the responsibility of the rest of society . . . who will have sensibly kept their own businesses shut and stayed quarantined at home.
Blocking streets to all traffic for hours, including to emergency vehicles. Is this lawful in those states?
You mean more so than any other protest?
I think these protestors are idiots, but I don't see them doing anything that numerous other protests from both ends of the political spectrum have done.
Most protesters who block streets get permits. Did these jackals have permits? I'm thinking no.
Thanks for posting that article Gramps. I wonder whether the writer has a jaundiced perspective because of his years working in conflict zones. I'm thinking of the types of mildly misanthropic attitudes you can develop as a lawyer. Lawyers who act for individuals see people at their worst, when they are in an unfamiliar situation and under stress. So I'm wondering whether this guy, who has witnessed similar protests in other countries, is downplaying the diffuse centres of authority in the United States and the resilience of its systems.
The US's resilient systems are breaking down. The three branches of the government were meant to hold each other accountable in a series of checks and balances. They are now all three wholly owned subsidiaries of the Republican party. So THAT resilient system is down. One of the systems is meant to be the president appointing heads of various departments and subdepartments, and the Senate voting up or down. Trump has left many positions unfilled, and the senate is sitting on a ton of backlogged approvals, the net result being that Trump's unappointed, unapproved cronies are running the executive branch. And on and on it goes.
I'm beginning to be of the mind that businesses that wish to re-open should be allowed to re-open, and that people who wish to patronize them should be allowed to patronize them.
But that any sickness that befalls them as a result is theirs alone to treat, and not the responsibility of the rest of society . . . who will have sensibly kept their own businesses shut and stayed quarantined at home.
I know I'm naughty for thinking that way.
It's impossible to wall off some members of society or to divide ourselves between the sensible and the non-sensible.
The governor of Georgia says a bunch of businesses can re-open Friday. Some owners won't want to re-open because they're not morons, but they'll then have to deal with landlords on May 1 who won't negotiate on the rent because the gyms or salons or whatever could have re-opened and made money. Some owners will re-open, either because of economic pressure or their own stupidity, and their employees will then have to decide what to do - do they go to work and risk their health and possibly their very lives? Or do they stay home and maybe lose their jobs and their eligibility for unemployment funds?
Anything that opens too soon, every person doesn't stay at home when they could have, adds to our collective danger. Individualism is itself dangerous.
The problem with opening and allowing some to patronize is that these irresponsible people will infect others. Personal freedom stops at the point it endangers others.
Thanks for posting that article Gramps. I wonder whether the writer has a jaundiced perspective because of his years working in conflict zones. I'm thinking of the types of mildly misanthropic attitudes you can develop as a lawyer. Lawyers who act for individuals see people at their worst, when they are in an unfamiliar situation and under stress. So I'm wondering whether this guy, who has witnessed similar protests in other countries, is downplaying the diffuse centres of authority in the United States and the resilience of its systems.
The US's resilient systems are breaking down. The three branches of the government were meant to hold each other accountable in a series of checks and balances. They are now all three wholly owned subsidiaries of the Republican party. So THAT resilient system is down. One of the systems is meant to be the president appointing heads of various departments and subdepartments, and the Senate voting up or down. Trump has left many positions unfilled, and the senate is sitting on a ton of backlogged approvals, the net result being that Trump's unappointed, unapproved cronies are running the executive branch. And on and on it goes.
Well, the House has done a pretty good job of making sure that Trump's criminal activities see the light of day. Sure, Trump is being let off the hook in the Senate for now, but people are still doing their jobs. Here's an al-jazeera report, but its all over the news. I'm going for no paywall. That's a Republican controlled committee.
Lets not forget too that in Democratic states people do have the right policy settings in place to combat this. There may well be a shortage of PPE, but Governors are working hard to get around that. So the diffuse centres of power in the USA are working as well as can be expected under a President who is corrupt, probably fair dinkum evil, and who doesn't take advice from anyone.
Re the confirmation that Russia interfered with the American election with preference for Don trump.
If you want to win and that's what's important, why does it matter if Russia funded/interfered? Why is it important? It's the same behaviour as corporations which fund disinformation and prefer specific outcomes.
Isn't it also what America has been doing for many decades re elections is other countries? Isn't this just the way things work? and that we're only becoming aware closer to the time it's happening because of the internet age? Thus outrage is more proximate is all? Subverting democracy for your goals is normal isn't it?
Isn't it also what America has been doing for many decades re elections is other countries?
Is America particularly beloved in the countries where it's installed puppet regimes? I mean, other than to those puppet regimes and their adherents? Since the answer to those questions is an emphatic "no", why would you think Americans are any less resentful about the subversion of their government?
No. Please provide evidence that past American presidents were installed by the Kremlin. Or that the Soviet/Russian government had much of a preference between candidates. This kind of dismissals seems like empty-headed indecisiveness masquerading as world-wise cynicism. Saves the trouble of actually having to think.
For those who are interested the (redacted) Senate Intelligence Committee report can be found here [PDF].
The problem with opening and allowing some to patronize is that these irresponsible people will infect others. Personal freedom stops at the point it endangers others.
Isn't it also what [ people ] have been doing for many decades re [ public health ]? Isn't this just the way things work? and that we're only becoming aware closer to the time it's happening because of the internet age? Thus outrage is more proximate is all? Subverting [ public health ] for your goals is normal isn't it?
Isn't reflexive indifference fun? You can use it to dismiss any outrage as unimportant.
Yeah that's rubbish NP. Its critical. Plus, its unlawful to accept that help, even though Trump has managed to dance on the line of illegality here. Putin wanted Trump, not Clinton.
Yeah that's rubbish NP. Its critical. Plus, its unlawful to accept that help, even though Trump has managed to dance on the line of illegality here. Putin wanted Trump, not Clinton.
I basically have no problem with the Russians doing what they did, and I doubt it made that big a difference in the election(still a GOP victory even with no input from Moscow).
But yes, if anyone in the US helped them do it, that's probably a crime, and they can be investigated and charged.
(Addendum: I think Mr. Assange's contribution might have made a difference to the outcome, whether he got those e-mails from the Russians, I don't know).
I have a sickening feeling that the protesters are going to appear to prove themselves right -- that despite all their intermingling and patronizing of newly opened businesses, they will not get sick. Hence it really was all a hoax and a false alarm and a gross overreaction all along. The fartletter-in-chief was right.
At least not for about a week.
There's a story widely circulating in the last day or so about a 60-year-old man in Ohio, who said on social media that coronavirus was a 'political ploy' and railed against the shutdown of bars and restaurants, and who died from Covid-19 exactly a month later.
--Someone somewhere is going to decide that he was killed to push the pro-vaccine, anti-Trump agenda.
--I really hope this isn't related to the white supremacists that had talked about weaponizing COVID-19 by getting infected themselves and purposely infecting others.
--Someone somewhere is going to decide that he was killed to push the pro-vaccine, anti-Trump agenda.
--I really hope this isn't related to the white supremacists that had talked about weaponizing COVID-19 by getting infected themselves and purposely infecting others.
1. Sigh, probably. The USA's culture is particularly adapted to a minority of people believing that individual freedoms include the right to make up your own facts in your head.
2. First I've heard of any such notion, so I'm saying no.
Yeah well, the reports on this man all basically indicate that he was simply a guy with a very poor capacity to assess the risk, who believed it was all a fuss over nothing but who is now being mourned by his family.
Then of course there's the church pastor who told his congregation how God would protect them all, and God didn't protect him. We love these stories...
Yeah well, the reports on this man all basically indicate that he was simply a guy with a very poor capacity to assess the risk, who believed it was all a fuss over nothing but who is now being mourned by his family.
Our prime minister wasn’t much better in the early days - he’s lucky not to be being mourned by his family now.
Yeah well, the reports on this man all basically indicate that he was simply a guy with a very poor capacity to assess the risk, who believed it was all a fuss over nothing but who is now being mourned by his family.
Our prime minister wasn’t much better in the early days - he’s lucky not to be being mourned by his family now.
You'd think that Boris would be a salutary lesson. But still the siren voices go up, release the economy. They tend not spell out the resultant deaths, or they say it's like a bad flu year.
Yeah that's rubbish NP. Its critical. Plus, its unlawful to accept that help, even though Trump has managed to dance on the line of illegality here. Putin wanted Trump, not Clinton.
I basically have no problem with the Russians doing what they did, and I doubt it made that big a difference in the election(still a GOP victory even with no input from Moscow).
But yes, if anyone in the US helped them do it, that's probably a crime, and they can be investigated and charged.
(Addendum: I think Mr. Assange's contribution might have made a difference to the outcome, whether he got those e-mails from the Russians, I don't know).
yeah, all's fair etc, but when it comes to a response after you've pinged them, you have to go hard, and get all your systems protected. That hasn't happened. Trump has left America's arse hanging out.
There's a story widely circulating in the last day or so about a 60-year-old man in Ohio, who said on social media that coronavirus was a 'political ploy' and railed against the shutdown of bars and restaurants, and who died from Covid-19 exactly a month later.
But yes, if anyone in the US helped them do it, that's probably a crime, and they can be investigated and charged.
Computer hacking is a crime no matter where
Yeah, but if the hackers were Russians working in Russia under the employment of the Russian government, there is almost nothing the US can do about it, even if they do go through the motions of pressing charges in a US court.
So, for all practical purposes, the hacking is legal.
Anyway, I was thinking more of the spreading of fake memes on social media and stuff like that, not hacking computers.
Comments
As this twitter thread points out Americans who want to "re-open the country" are a small minority, so people who show up at these kinds of events are a self-selecting fringe group. I suspect that the overlap with other fringe positions (fascism, ammosexuals, etc.) is not random but instead correlated.
Your suspicions seem to be correct.
According to The Washington Post*, "A trio of far-right, pro-gun provocateurs is behind some of the largest Facebook groups calling for anti-quarantine protests around the country, offering the latest illustration that some seemingly organic demonstrations are being engineered by a network of conservative activists."
(*I'm not posting a link since it's behind a pay wall. Sorry.)
By "Trump strongholds", you mean states that are likely to go red in November? Because I do note that there seem to be protests in all the rust-belt swing states regarded as pivotal for his re-election, plus swing-state Florida.
If the theory is that DeVos and company are avoiding causing mayhem in red states for fear of alienating their supporters, I would think they also want to avoid it in swing states as well.
Swing-states or "pivotal" states (i.e. states that could be reasonably expected to "pivot" one way or the other in 2020) Trump won by razor-thin margins in 2016 are, by definition, not "Trump strongholds". Where are the anti-stay-at-home demonstrations in Alabama or South Carolina?
The whole point is to manufacture a false narrative that any economic problems (and even at this late date the Trump campaign/administration* still sees the economy as the key to his re-election*) are the fault of recalcitrant Democratic governors.
Well, we did have protests here in Kentucky and Ohio. KY is about the farthest thing from a swing state, and some people are saying Ohio isn't one anymore either. It's gone pretty Republican in recent years. The alarming "zombie attack" photo of protesters smushing themselves up against the glass entryway doors is from the Ohio statehouse.
Both Ohio and Kentucky's governors, a Republican and a Democrat respectively, are getting fantastic public-approval ratings for their handling of the virus. Most people are very happy with the way things have been done here, although of course we've had some difficulty with the unemployment claims website and things like that. I imagine our protesters are either the real lunatic fringe, paid minions of the DeVos family, or both.
Edited to add: I forgot that they did find out who had been backing the protests in Kentucky, and it was a minion of our defeated ex-governor Matt Bevin. I can only imagine how many thousands would be dead if Bevin were still in charge. He's like Rand Paul but meaner and dumber, if you can imagine.
Eer . . . what economy?
I have a sickening feeling that the protesters are going to appear to prove themselves right -- that despite all their intermingling and patronizing of newly opened businesses, they will not get sick. Hence it really was all a hoax and a false alarm and a gross overreaction all along. The fartletter-in-chief was right.
At least not for about a week.
I came across this article in the Marine Times "I've Reported on War for Years. I'm More Afraid Now Than I've Ever Been."
Anti-vaccers.
Now that will be an interesting group of people to watch in the next couple of years!
It's a part of his election campaign.
That is of course grossly irresponsible. But that has never bothered him. It remains to be seen how effective it will be. Not sure about the rest of you but I find his voice increasingly grating. It's not just the dreadful content. The voice itself, the speech cadences, the whine, just get on my nerves.
I'm kind of hoping that this daily exposure to his noise may produce this sort of aversion. Where it reaches the stage that you just want to shout " shut up! Shut up! You're getting on my nerves".
I could be barking up the wrong tree, but effects like that can lead to a loss of popularity. People get tired of the same old, same old, noise. 5% offputs would I think be good enough to defeat a second term.
Anyway, I'd love to see him defeat himself by underestimating the effects of overexposure.
Every word he utters is campaigning for the election.
Well, if he wins he’ll have to own the mess he’s made.
That’s heartbreaking
Yes - I put that wrongly.
He’ll never accept the blame for anything, ever. But he will have to deal with the mess, one way or another. Not many golfing breaks are likely to be on the horizon for him.
I've found his voice grating for a long time.
(But I do - B62)
It's his hand gestures that bother me.
Maybe you just weren't hearing it in the right context. Normally I find Trump's voice objectionable, but that video has to be seen with the sound on. It's perfect!
Some decent fraction of people who get the virus won't notice. They won't get sick - they'll just wander about the place looking healthy and killing other people. Some suggestions are that that fraction is about 25%, with a further 25% who spend many asymptomatic infectious days before getting sick.
In my vicinity, 1 in 500 people have been confirmed to have covid-19. But most people with mild symptoms aren't getting tests - the real numbers are probably 10 times larger. (Which I think is consistent with the numbers that the people that looked for covid-19 in municipal sewers were getting).
So if 1 person in 50 has it, and 50% are asymptomatic, then that means that 1% of the people in my area are Typhoid Mary.
Then you should enjoy this.
But that any sickness that befalls them as a result is theirs alone to treat, and not the responsibility of the rest of society . . . who will have sensibly kept their own businesses shut and stayed quarantined at home.
I know I'm naughty for thinking that way.
Most protesters who block streets get permits. Did these jackals have permits? I'm thinking no.
The US's resilient systems are breaking down. The three branches of the government were meant to hold each other accountable in a series of checks and balances. They are now all three wholly owned subsidiaries of the Republican party. So THAT resilient system is down. One of the systems is meant to be the president appointing heads of various departments and subdepartments, and the Senate voting up or down. Trump has left many positions unfilled, and the senate is sitting on a ton of backlogged approvals, the net result being that Trump's unappointed, unapproved cronies are running the executive branch. And on and on it goes.
It's impossible to wall off some members of society or to divide ourselves between the sensible and the non-sensible.
The governor of Georgia says a bunch of businesses can re-open Friday. Some owners won't want to re-open because they're not morons, but they'll then have to deal with landlords on May 1 who won't negotiate on the rent because the gyms or salons or whatever could have re-opened and made money. Some owners will re-open, either because of economic pressure or their own stupidity, and their employees will then have to decide what to do - do they go to work and risk their health and possibly their very lives? Or do they stay home and maybe lose their jobs and their eligibility for unemployment funds?
Anything that opens too soon, every person doesn't stay at home when they could have, adds to our collective danger. Individualism is itself dangerous.
Well, the House has done a pretty good job of making sure that Trump's criminal activities see the light of day. Sure, Trump is being let off the hook in the Senate for now, but people are still doing their jobs. Here's an al-jazeera report, but its all over the news. I'm going for no paywall. That's a Republican controlled committee.
Lets not forget too that in Democratic states people do have the right policy settings in place to combat this. There may well be a shortage of PPE, but Governors are working hard to get around that. So the diffuse centres of power in the USA are working as well as can be expected under a President who is corrupt, probably fair dinkum evil, and who doesn't take advice from anyone.
If you want to win and that's what's important, why does it matter if Russia funded/interfered? Why is it important? It's the same behaviour as corporations which fund disinformation and prefer specific outcomes.
Isn't it also what America has been doing for many decades re elections is other countries? Isn't this just the way things work? and that we're only becoming aware closer to the time it's happening because of the internet age? Thus outrage is more proximate is all? Subverting democracy for your goals is normal isn't it?
Ummmm...we've been down that conversational road before...in about that tone...maybe we could skip it this time? Or modify the tone?
Is America particularly beloved in the countries where it's installed puppet regimes? I mean, other than to those puppet regimes and their adherents? Since the answer to those questions is an emphatic "no", why would you think Americans are any less resentful about the subversion of their government?
No. Please provide evidence that past American presidents were installed by the Kremlin. Or that the Soviet/Russian government had much of a preference between candidates. This kind of dismissals seems like empty-headed indecisiveness masquerading as world-wise cynicism. Saves the trouble of actually having to think.
For those who are interested the (redacted) Senate Intelligence Committee report can be found here [PDF].
Isn't reflexive indifference fun? You can use it to dismiss any outrage as unimportant.
I basically have no problem with the Russians doing what they did, and I doubt it made that big a difference in the election(still a GOP victory even with no input from Moscow).
But yes, if anyone in the US helped them do it, that's probably a crime, and they can be investigated and charged.
(Addendum: I think Mr. Assange's contribution might have made a difference to the outcome, whether he got those e-mails from the Russians, I don't know).
There's a story widely circulating in the last day or so about a 60-year-old man in Ohio, who said on social media that coronavirus was a 'political ploy' and railed against the shutdown of bars and restaurants, and who died from Covid-19 exactly a month later.
In fact he was the first death in his county.
--I really hope this isn't related to the white supremacists that had talked about weaponizing COVID-19 by getting infected themselves and purposely infecting others.
1. Sigh, probably. The USA's culture is particularly adapted to a minority of people believing that individual freedoms include the right to make up your own facts in your head.
2. First I've heard of any such notion, so I'm saying no.
Then of course there's the church pastor who told his congregation how God would protect them all, and God didn't protect him. We love these stories...
Our prime minister wasn’t much better in the early days - he’s lucky not to be being mourned by his family now.
You'd think that Boris would be a salutary lesson. But still the siren voices go up, release the economy. They tend not spell out the resultant deaths, or they say it's like a bad flu year.
yeah, all's fair etc, but when it comes to a response after you've pinged them, you have to go hard, and get all your systems protected. That hasn't happened. Trump has left America's arse hanging out.
Computer hacking is a crime no matter where you're sitting.
Link to a local news account.
Yeah, but if the hackers were Russians working in Russia under the employment of the Russian government, there is almost nothing the US can do about it, even if they do go through the motions of pressing charges in a US court.
So, for all practical purposes, the hacking is legal.
Anyway, I was thinking more of the spreading of fake memes on social media and stuff like that, not hacking computers.