(02-07-2020 06:39 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-06-2020 11:10 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-06-2020 06:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-06-2020 06:32 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-06-2020 04:26 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/06...ort-111388

And your point is...?

I think the current year is 2020, so a report on what should have been done or said in 2016 is hindsight, and hindsight is always...20-20. (There is some of that humor you said you were looking for, Big)

I do hope that in the future security concerns are not overwhelmed by political concerns. I hope that in the case of either Republican or Democratic administrations. That is the takeaway I get from this bipartisan report.

I found it weird that you hyperlinked the article as “Obama.” I wanted to point out that this was a failure on both parties, which the report makes clear.

I agree that it would be best if political concerns did not put weight national security concerns.

Why is that weird? It is just a condensation of the title on the Reuters article, reproduced below:

"Senate report criticizes Obama administration handling of Russia election meddling"

Y'all are so sensitive to anything Obama, as if you think his saintliness might be besmirched.

Yeah, the titles of the articles are pretty bad title once you read the articles written about the document. It unquestionably criticizes the Obama admin, but also clearly criticized McConnell for hamstringing the admin.

I know a lot of people get annoyed at At Ease for doing exactly what you did, posting an article without analysis. I thought you were offering commentary by posting how you did.

It was more of an FYI. I had no position pro or con to offer. I don't see it as a slam on Obama, but more of a rarity, an unbiased look at history.

At Ease offers his links as commentary. I offered this as FYI. I can see how you could mistake one for the other. I offer so little of my opinions here.

I titled it as I did partially to get to people to read it. Worked, didn't it?

I guess I need to read it again, as I missed the part about Mac hamstringing the admin. I remember he was skeptical of the idea, but that is one of the reasons I made the point that this was in 2016. A lot of people were skeptical about Russian interference then. I am still skeptical of the effect or effectiveness of it.