Have fun but keep it real. Non cabinet but pertinent (e.g. Security Advisor) okay too.
It shouldn't be that bad. The idea of actually getting a high profile job like that outweighs some resentments you had about Trump several months prior when you didn't think he would win anyway. Some of it was just to avoid being tied to Trump after he was gone but now he will be president and not just a guy about to lose an election.
Speaking about US national security, have Western media outlets picked up that Putin's closest stooges are basically openly admitting the DNC hack and being behind Wikileaks in the Russian media?
Markov, Glazyev, even Peskov - in different interviews for Rossiya 1 and Channel 1 stations were behaving like giddy schoolgirls and triumphantly admitting the fact.
The only snippet in US media I could find was from this WPo article:
As for the “we” part, Putin has repeatedly denied that Russia was interfering with the U.S. elections, although he has allowed that leaks of hacked Democratic Party emails benefited the public. (Markov, the unofficial Kremlin adviser, suggested Wednesday that Russia “may have helped” WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy group that published the emails, but he did not specify how he knew or what that meant.)
Putin’s denial didn’t stop Russians from having fun with the idea that their leaders just might have swung the election of the leader of the free world.
“It turns out that the United Russia has won the elections in the United States!” Russian media quoted Viktor Nazarov, governor of the Omsk region, as telling a meeting.
I don't understand the strategic benefit of admitting your country has hacked your main military rival's Presidential election.
Not doubting your revelations to us, but it defies political good sense. It sounds more like a stunt a weaker party would claim to try and get more standing. Similar to a terrorist group claiming every action, whether responsible or not.
There are some Cabinet departments that could be combined, put back into departments they came from, or eliminated.
* Agriculture and Interior combined
* Commerce and Labor combined
* Education eliminated
* Veteran Affairs rolled back into Defense
* Transpotation rolled into one of the others
* Energy rolled into one of the others
Some the quasi Cabinet positions also
* UN ambassador under State
* SBA under Commerce
* EPA under Interior
* Trade under Commerce
"The founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, flatly denied that the Russian government was the source of the ocean of stolen emails from the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party that the anti-secrecy site has been publishing online by the thousands in the lead up to Election Day - despite the U.S. intelligence community seeing Moscow's hands all over the cyber heists."
The founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange Agrees with you. He says the leaks did not come from the Russians. And why would he lie about?
You know Assange wouldn't lie about sex at least
When asked how many women he had slept with, Assange replied: ‘That’s private business. Not only does a gentleman not tell, not only does a gentleman [not] like to talk about his private life, a gentleman certainly does not count.
Quote sounds like the Australian poster that disappeared from here named SexMachine
He has a reason to with sex. In Sweden a woman changes her minds it is rape. And they do not have a presumption of innocence. And he has been charged with that crime. It looks like a set up, but he would be a fool to talk about sex
My God, I understand why @smh_23 was so exasperated around here.
Let's see - why would a person who regularly espoused virulent anti-American beliefs, among other things claiming that the "United States of America are the greatest threat to world security and peace", who was paid exorbitant sums by the Russian government to host a political TV show on Russian state TV, who was a regular on the Russian political media circuit and holds regular meetings with top Russian officials, why would he of all people lie about Russian involvement in Wikileaks?
That Assange works for Moscow is old news in Moscow - here's Nadya Tolokno's direct experience with Assange:
He couldn’t deny it. On the next day after I visited the Ecuadorian Embassy, the head of Russia’s biggest propaganda network, Russia Today, the editor-in-chief came to him and they had a project together. He often works with the Russia propaganda machine, and doesn’t try to hide it. Julian Assange doesn’t try to hide that fact because he hosts at the Ecuadorian Embassy the editor-in-chief of the Russian propaganda team, Russia Today, and has projects with them. Russia Today has nothing to do with truth. They get tons of government money, so instead of that money going to healthcare or education, it serves these propaganda goals—which is disturbing for a lot of Russians because they’re undergoing a huge economic crisis. But Julian Assange, he openly works with [Russia]. It’s not a secret. He’s connected with the Russian government, and I feel that he’s proud of it. And with Julian Assange, I really like a lot of the things that he’s done, too.
In other words you choose to not believe the most direct source. And a man with no reason to lie about it.
4 reputable private cyber security firms and the US intelligence have concluded with high confidence that Russia's GRU and FSB were behind the hacks and subsequent leaks. This is based on computational forensics. The same tools and associated servers were used in a confirmed Russian cyber attack against the Bundestag. There's a broad consensus in the NatSec community that Russia was behind the hacks and they were intended to bolster Trump and sow discord among the American electorate.
SO they know that a Russian IP address got into the system. As stupid as that crew seems I sure a lot of hackers got in. Sorry dude as much as you want it to be true, that does say who gave the emails to Wiki Leaks and they have no reason to lie about it. Is it that hard to get a Gmail password when you are dealing with people who are not careful with security?
Is everyone at the DNC loyal
They haven't picked it up to the degree that one would expect considering a nuclear adversary utilizing its intelligence services to conduct InfoOps that directly impacted the outcome of a US presedential election, no. It's making waves in NatSec forums, however. The NatSec community is very disconcerted.
Assange doesn't want the spigot to be turned off. The four firms in question and the U.S. intelligence community have found the cyber equivalent of the same bloody fingerprints found at several crime scenes.
If they hacked a gmail account, Hillary's much less secure private server must have been the same as their private property. If they were on truth crusade to hurt Hillary, way didn't they release the emails that were so bad that Hillary paid to have them destroyed?
Oh I see. But now you trust some Russians. You seem to believe what supports what you want to be true.
And what matters more. The Russians knew the truth and released it? Or that what was released was true? All options say it is true