Octopus Overlords

Andrew Wonser wrote:Read a fair amount of the transcript and I'm left wondering if there is an equivalent to throwing up a little but for your brain. Because I just did that, only more than a little. Dammit we're screwed. Everyone that voted for this joke is an idiot.

There's a sucker born every minute - PT Barnum

I hope RIP and his ilk that voted simply to protect their guns and not caring what he burned down as long as he protected the 2nd are pleased when he burns the entire nation down around their ears.

That's when the guns will come in handy, silly.

This is probably a tad overreacting perhaps but I'm rather concerned that in a few days this man will be the sole command authority governing the use of our nuclear arsenal. I don't see him launching any strikes toward China, Russia or even Mexico when they don't pay their fair share for the wall. But a low-yield nuclear bomb detonated over a concentration of ISIS forces as an example of how tough we are? Probably not going to happen...probably...

a tad.

Rip wrote:a tad.

I'll give you that actually. I've always been curious if the military has a "madman" failsafe scenario? Then again having such a thing publicly known would weaken the psychological component of a nuclear deterrence policy.

He's definitely taking a play from Putin's playbook. Sow the seeds of distrust in mainstream media. Refuse to cooperate with media outlets unsympathetic to his cause. Reward media outlets who portray him positively. Control the narrative.

It's bizarro world. We're being told that the fake news generated by Trump is reality, and real news generated by reality is fake. Scary scary times. I hope the press fights back with everything they have. We're quickly entering dictator country.

Holy shit. I'm just sitting here working and listening to REM, and these lyrics just took on a whole new resonance:

Team by team reporters baffled, TRUMPED, tethered, cropped.
Look at that low playing! Fine, then.
Uh oh, overflow, population, common group
But it'll do. Save yourself, serve yourself.
World serves its own needs, listen to your heart bleed,
Dummy, with the rapture and the rev-'rent and the right, right.
You vitriolic, patriotic, slam, fight, bright light
Feeling pretty psyched.

It's the end of the world as we know it.

Captain Caveman wrote:Holy shit. I'm just sitting here working and listening to REM, and these lyrics just took on a whole new resonance:

It seems U2 is doing that with their entire new album. Ready for release, the band is reportedly withholding it while they ponder the content of the songs in light of the Drumpf ascendency.

$iljanus wrote:I'll give you that actually.

I have to believe there are lots and lots of people in Washington today having closed-door meetings after this first press conference, trying to come to terms with just how fuct we all are. And I'm not just talking about the Democrats here either. I can't imagine anyone with half a brain thought it went well by any measure. Between the rambling, the braggadocio and the veiled threats to the media it was a complete circus.

Smoove_B wrote:

$iljanus wrote:I'll give you that actually.

I have to believe there are lots and lots of people in Washington today having closed-door meetings after this first press conference, trying to come to terms with just how fuct we all are. And I'm not just talking about the Democrats here either. I can't imagine anyone with half a brain thought it went well by any measure. Between the rambling, the braggadocio and the veiled threats to the media it was a complete circus.

Republican leaders in Washington have been saying this behind closed doors and off the record for months now. But they hitched their wagon to this a** and now they are stuck with him. The SC was more important than their country.

YellowKing wrote:He's definitely taking a play from Putin's playbook. Sow the seeds of distrust in mainstream media. Refuse to cooperate with media outlets unsympathetic to his cause. Reward media outlets who portray him positively. Control the narrative.

It's bizarro world. We're being told that the fake news generated by Trump is reality, and real news generated by reality is fake. Scary scary times. I hope the press fights back with everything they have. We're quickly entering dictator country.

Gaslighting. He scares me more and more ever day.

I apologize if someone already linked to a Tweet, but I can't see it. I totally missed CNN officially responding to what happened today:

We are fully confident in our reporting. It represents the core of what the First Amendment protects, informing the people of the inner workings of their government; in this case, briefing materials prepared for President Obama and President-elect Trump last week.

We made it clear that we were not publishing any of the details of the 35-page document because we have not corroborated the report's allegations. Given that members of the Trump transition team have so vocally criticized our reporting, we encourage them to identify, specifically, what they believe to be inaccurate.

This is a normal thing for a news agency to say to the President Elect, everything's fine.

Or inaccurately calling that network a purveyor of Fake News and then refuse to let them defend themselves. Acosta (from CNN) actually later said he shut up because he was told he'd be tossed out. Totally normal behavior. We are fuct.

Grifman wrote:

Smoove_B wrote:

$iljanus wrote:I'll give you that actually.

I have to believe there are lots and lots of people in Washington today having closed-door meetings after this first press conference, trying to come to terms with just how fuct we all are. And I'm not just talking about the Democrats here either. I can't imagine anyone with half a brain thought it went well by any measure. Between the rambling, the braggadocio and the veiled threats to the media it was a complete circus.

Republican leaders in Washington have been saying this behind closed doors and off the record for months now. But they hitched their wagon to this a** and now they are stuck with him. The SC was more important than their country.

Meh, they are not even that principled. Power is more important than their country.

Enough wrote:Meh, they are not even that principled. Power is more important than their country.

That's what I originally believed. To be clear, they're still thinking power is more important than anything but I'm guessing today around 11:30am is when they started to come to grips with what was happening - and that Trump (by any measure) is off the goddamn rails.

Smoove_B wrote:

$iljanus wrote:I'll give you that actually.

I have to believe there are lots and lots of people in Washington today having closed-door meetings after this first press conference, trying to come to terms with just how fuct we all are. And I'm not just talking about the Democrats here either. I can't imagine anyone with half a brain thought it went well by any measure. Between the rambling, the braggadocio and the veiled threats to the media it was a complete circus.

I think I voiced my hopefully unfounded fear about Trump and nuclear weapons because the guy's behavior is just utterly batshit insane. Might be valuable in a private businessman but not what I look for in my President regardless of party.

I still think the best case scenario is that Trump continues to go off the rails as much as possible as quickly as possible. We need as many people as possible (particularly in his own party) losing faith in his ability to manage. The quicker that happens, the quicker the damage can be mitigated.

malchior wrote:

Well, they're no National Enquirer, that's for sure.

malchior wrote:Acosta (from CNN) actually later said he shut up because he was told he'd be tossed out. Totally normal behavior. We are fuct.

What do you do when it's the president (elect) pissing orange on the First Amendment and the law does not stand up for it?

LordMortis wrote:

malchior wrote:Acosta (from CNN) actually later said he shut up because he was told he'd be tossed out. Totally normal behavior. We are fuct.

What do you do when it's the president (elect) pissing orange on the First Amendment and the law does not stand up for it?

The POTUS is a private enterprise and can censor speech as he sees fit. Don't like it? Get your own POTUS.

I hope Popehat are exercising extreme caution with their DPRK twitter account.

Enough wrote:

LordMortis wrote:

malchior wrote:Acosta (from CNN) actually later said he shut up because he was told he'd be tossed out. Totally normal behavior. We are fuct.

What do you do when it's the president (elect) pissing orange on the First Amendment and the law does not stand up for it?

The POTUS is a private enterprise and can censor speech as he sees fit. Don't like it? Get your own POTUS.

I seriously wonder if that is going to be the line. "Congress is passing no laws. The president is not preventing CNN from publishing. He is merely refusing to acknowledge them and threatening them with evictions." Technically that's not against the First Amendment.

Well, well, well - looks like someone got caught in a lie:

"I'm also very much of a germaphobe, by the way — believe me," he told reporters at the presser on Wednesday in what could've been an oblique reference to the widely circulated document published by BuzzFeed.

However:

During an August 2015 conversation with The Hollywood Reporter's chief creative officer, Janice Min, he said the opposite.

"I'm not germophobic. I do it. I want to make the country great. I'm going to win. I think I have a very good chance of winning," Trump said at the time. "You probably are starting to feel that too. I go through and shake hands and do what I have to do, and people like me, and I like them. In Iowa, I must have shaken 2,000 hands — and those were only the ones that were next to me."

If only that was the single craziest thing he said today.

$iljanus wrote:

Rip wrote:a tad.

I'll give you that actually. I've always been curious if the military has a "madman" failsafe scenario? Then again having such a thing publicly known would weaken the psychological component of a nuclear deterrence policy.

It's my understanding that POTUS has the sole authority to order a nuclear strike. Presumably the process of becoming POTUS should be the failsafe. That said, IDK how the actual chain of command works or if there is room for a person of conscience to refuse the order -- i.e., does the order go through the Pentagon or directly from White House to bunker?

Hopefully this question is purely academic.

I saw someone on twitter post a terrifying scenario. What if someone hacks Trump's twitter account and writes something like, "To protect the U.S. I've just launched nukes aimed at X" to try to incite a retaliatory strike against us. I hope Trump at least has two-step verification on his account...

Maybe I should feel reassured that I'm probably safe here in Texas because the nukes would much more likely rain down on the east or west coast?

Kraken wrote:

$iljanus wrote:

Rip wrote:a tad.

I'll give you that actually. I've always been curious if the military has a "madman" failsafe scenario? Then again having such a thing publicly known would weaken the psychological component of a nuclear deterrence policy.

It's my understanding that POTUS has the sole authority to order a nuclear strike. Presumably the process of becoming POTUS should be the failsafe. That said, IDK how the actual chain of command works or if there is room for a person of conscience to refuse the order -- i.e., does the order go through the Pentagon or directly from White House to bunker?

Hopefully this question is purely academic.

I've heard (don't have time to look anything up) that the Pentagon temporarily instituted double confirmation for nuclear release under Nixon: a nuke order from the White House would have to be approved by the Secretary of Defense. This was during the period when Nixon's intentional strategy was to scare the communists into believing that he was Crazy Enough To Do It, but some people in the know believed he really was.

This episode has come up again with the idea that the country is explicitly depending on Mattis to stand between Trump and the bomb.

We're already at the point where even late-stage Nixon seems statesmanlike compared to Trump.

Captain Caveman wrote:I saw someone on twitter post a terrifying scenario. What if someone hacks Trump's twitter account and writes something like, "To protect the U.S. I've just launched nukes aimed at X" to try to incite a retaliatory strike against us. I hope Trump at least has two-step verification on his account...

Maybe I should feel reassured that I'm probably safe here in Texas because the nukes would much more likely rain down on the east or west coast?

TX has to be one of the most strategic pieces of ground to pave to glass if we end up there: oil and gas, military assets out the ass and major population centers. Just a cursory look would not comfort me if I were you. I am in no better shape, the entire Front Range of CO is basically a prime target.

Enough wrote:

Captain Caveman wrote:I saw someone on twitter post a terrifying scenario. What if someone hacks Trump's twitter account and writes something like, "To protect the U.S. I've just launched nukes aimed at X" to try to incite a retaliatory strike against us. I hope Trump at least has two-step verification on his account...

Maybe I should feel reassured that I'm probably safe here in Texas because the nukes would much more likely rain down on the east or west coast?

TX has to be one of the most strategic pieces of ground to pave to glass if we end up there: oil and gas, military assets out the ass and major population centers. Just a cursory look would not comfort me if I were you. I am in no better shape, the entire Front Range of CO is basically a prime target.

Interesting. I always assumed D.C. or NYC would be the target, or maybe Hawaii if launched from the far east, but I guess there are other considerations about what would make a "good" target.

Logistically, sending an inter-continental missile to the middle of the country would have to be more logistically and technologically difficult, right?

Enough wrote:

Captain Caveman wrote:I saw someone on twitter post a terrifying scenario. What if someone hacks Trump's twitter account and writes something like, "To protect the U.S. I've just launched nukes aimed at X" to try to incite a retaliatory strike against us. I hope Trump at least has two-step verification on his account...

Maybe I should feel reassured that I'm probably safe here in Texas because the nukes would much more likely rain down on the east or west coast?

TX has to be one of the most strategic pieces of ground to pave to glass if we end up there: oil and gas, military assets out the ass and major population centers. Just a cursory look would not comfort me if I were you. I am in no better shape, the entire Front Range of CO is basically a prime target.

Plus, everyone hates the Cowboys.

Captain Caveman wrote:

Enough wrote:

Captain Caveman wrote:I saw someone on twitter post a terrifying scenario. What if someone hacks Trump's twitter account and writes something like, "To protect the U.S. I've just launched nukes aimed at X" to try to incite a retaliatory strike against us. I hope Trump at least has two-step verification on his account...

Maybe I should feel reassured that I'm probably safe here in Texas because the nukes would much more likely rain down on the east or west coast?

TX has to be one of the most strategic pieces of ground to pave to glass if we end up there: oil and gas, military assets out the ass and major population centers. Just a cursory look would not comfort me if I were you. I am in no better shape, the entire Front Range of CO is basically a prime target.

Interesting. I always assumed D.C. or NYC would be the target, or maybe Hawaii if launched from the far east, but I guess there are other considerations about what would make a "good" target.

Logistically, sending an inter-continental missile to the middle of the country would have to be more logistically and technologically difficult, right?

My understanding is that would be no problem for the US or Russia who have lots of different ways to get nukes a long ways, ranging from bombers to land and sub-based ICBM missiles. Pretty sure the US nukes are a bit more precision-based where the Russians go for brute strength over accuracy. China, France and Israel also have the ability but not quite to the same extreme. And of course North Korea thinks they do and India is working on it.

Captain Caveman wrote:I saw someone on twitter post a terrifying scenario. What if someone hacks Trump's twitter account and writes something like, "To protect the U.S. I've just launched nukes aimed at X" to try to incite a retaliatory strike against us. I hope Trump at least has two-step verification on his account...

Maybe I should feel reassured that I'm probably safe here in Texas because the nukes would much more likely rain down on the east or west coast?

I'd be more concerned about the the reverse scenario, someone spoofing a tweet about a missile launch against the U.S. I have more faith in other nuke capable countries not to react to a tweet than I do ours.

More troubling and plausible game theory

Alefroth wrote:

Captain Caveman wrote:I saw someone on twitter post a terrifying scenario. What if someone hacks Trump's twitter account and writes something like, "To protect the U.S. I've just launched nukes aimed at X" to try to incite a retaliatory strike against us. I hope Trump at least has two-step verification on his account...

Maybe I should feel reassured that I'm probably safe here in Texas because the nukes would much more likely rain down on the east or west coast?

I'd be more concerned about the the reverse scenario, someone spoofing a tweet about a missile launch against the U.S. I have more faith in other nuke capable countries not to react to a tweet than I do ours.

If fake news on social media leads to total nuclear Armageddon, maybe the human race just had it coming. Hoisted by our own petard (wow, I got to use that twice today here, lol).

Here I was thinking that Trump winning might cause the forum to devolve into crazy talk.........

I still am more concerned about loose nukes, limited target terror and loan-wolves by far, but with Trump's antagonistic relationship with our intelligence apparatus and his appetite to be a loose terrorist-recruiting cannon, it's also scary as fuck. Trump may prove to be the greatest terror recruiting tool yet.

Rip wrote:Here I was thinking that Trump winning might cause the forum to devolve into crazy talk.........

What's crazy is that you are not freaked the fuck out on any level apparently, but every single thing Obama did was a HUGE RED FLAG to you. But no, it would be impossible for you to be suffering some confirmation bias here like that ACA Trump voter.