News: 1594627328

5 paragraphs of nothinburger.

Well done El'Reg, got to hit that quota I guess.

I don't see anything in there that paints Trump as good or bad. Just digging into the story a little and reporting some possibly unintended side effects (attribution and tradecraft hints). You know. Journalism.

Furthermore, actions like this don't disprove allegations Trump was colluding with the Russians to help him get elected.

Some will argue it provides yet more evidence he's happy to burn anyone who's helped him in the past, if he thinks doing so will boost his own chances. It's not like he hasn't got form for that already - just look at the litanny of past advisors who've taken a metaphorical bullet for him, whom he's then thrown under a bus.

I thought Trump said that's all The Washington Post prints is fake news?

Whenever I read your (The Register) things about the US Trump Administration it is inevitably from a heavily biased viewpoint that they are all bad to the bone.

I am not that interested in American politics so don't care, but it makes me wonder what else you are putting your own spin on that maybe I didn't notice so much and just accepted as fact.

Did someone make you click on the article?

It is, to be fair, an article about technology. It also doesn't seem particularly biased to me.

But then if I didn't even want to SEE the name Trump, I probably wouldn't click on articles that begin with the name...

Not seeing this heavily biased viewpoint you mention. At least, not in this article. Trump made a statement that seems unusual for him, that statement and potential interpretations and side effects are discussed.

Not saying el Reg is unbiased, or indeed is biased in any particular direction, but I'm not seeing bias in this article.

As to your own historical acceptance, perhaps some general critical thinking is in order, regardless of the outlet. Never assume something is unbiased, even from outlets you might normally trust, especially on potentially contentious and/or controversial issues.

> Whenever I read your (The Register) things about the US Trump Administration it is inevitably from a heavily biased viewpoint that they are all bad to the bone.

Out of interest, has it occurred that maybe it's the administration's own actions that lead to that effect of it all being negative?

There isn't _much_ for them to crow about without relying on nuances of language (well, we built *some* of the wall and never said we'd build all of it).

But, I don't really see how your criticism applies to this article in particular:

- Trump revealed he authorized an attack on the troll farm - factual (I assume)

- He's made statements before that hinted action had been taken

- He's repeatedly said they should try to be friendly to Russia - true

- He's been criticised for that position by those who view Russia as an enemy - true

- Revealing the attack will likely help appease some of those who called him soft on Russia

- Russia now know with certainty it was the US

- Russia can analyse the attack to know how the US conducts attacks (because it now knows the US was behind it)

- It contradicts his previous claims that the win was solely due to him being great

Unless you're opposed to the idea that he's said the US should be more friendly towards Russia, or the idea that a troll farm being active (and sufficiently so to warrant counter-attack), it doesn't seem like there's any overt negativity/bias here

Or more likely *Bolton* authorized it. So all that's happened here, is Trump is taking credit for an attack post John Boltons books to make him look less treasonous, at a time when he's pardoning his Russian conduit team.

Here you can see it comes under Bolton, with Bolton taking the lead:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/midterms-2018-election-russia-hacking-cyber-security-trump-john-bolton-putin-trolls-a8598911.html

Bolton would be able to shed more light on whether Trump ordered it, like he claims here, or whether he was told after the fact.

Yeh, look at this, it looks like he was kept out of the loop when it came to Russia:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/15/trump-nyt-report-cyber-attacks-russia-1365852

"President Donald Trump lashed out at The New York Times on Saturday for a report that the United States has been increasing its cyber-intrusions into Russia,....Citing administration officials, the Times also reported Trump WAS NOT BRIEFED in detail on the program out of fear that he might spill secrets to the Russians"

They didn't trust him, and given his response to the leak, you can understand why:

"Trump flatly rejected the Times' story, calling it "a virtual act of Treason by a once great paper so desperate for a story, any story, even if bad for our Country.

" .....ALSO, NOT TRUE! Anything goes with our Corrupt News Media today. They will do, or say, whatever it takes, with not even the slightest thought of consequence! These are true cowards and without doubt, THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 16, 2019

@Joe Harrison

There is no way to hide incompetence, dishonesty and sheer idiocy in the long run.

In the USA it's about Republicans and Democrats too, but in the big world it's only about a repulsive character who should not be in power in a great country like the USA.

When the head is rotten the body will suffer as they say.

The only thing he is brilliant at is contradicting himself from one day to the next - sometimes not even that long.

He has absolutely no medium or long term thoughts. Not only is he incapable of playing chess, he can't even play checkers. A six-year old could beat him without trouble.

Trump is a reactionary. He only says things in reaction to something. At that point, he will say whatever comes to his warped mind, without any thought to his previous declarations on the subject.

Trump is a waste of air and a waste of time.

"Trump is a waste of air and a waste of time."

Certainly a waste of four paragraphs ignoring the tech part of the article

I bet you missed this one, Trump was turning up the crazy to distract, this 'US cyber attack' article, was just one of many such articles launched to distract shortly after the leak came out. 4 days ago.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/bombshell-report-says-trump-ordered-cia-to-share-counterterrorism-intel-with-russia-despite-no-discernible-reward/ar-BB16vb3m

"Donald Trump directed the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to provide the Russian government with U.S. intelligence information concerning terrorist groups in the Middle East—whom Vladimir Putin was likely supplying with weapons...“behind the scenes,” former intel officials said the president “directed the CIA to share intelligence information on counter terrorism with the Kremlin despite no discernible reward.”

As Putin was ordering the killing of US troops in Afghanistan by Taliban groups, at the same time, Traitor-Trump was tipping off Putin as to any intel the US had on those Taliban groups.

I wonder how many body bags Trump needed, how many photo-ops of him pretending to look sad next to coffins of US soldiers, to give him an excuse to withdraw from Afghanistan and handing those bases over to Putin?

It would be a round number, 100, maybe 1000 US troops.

See the Russian mercenary attack on a US base in Syria, at the time it looked like the intention was to cause causalities to give Trump an excuse to withdraw troops then. It failed. No casualties. He waited till the impeachment to withdraw troops and hand those bases over to Putin.

Trump has repeatedly stated a preference for being friendly to Russia to bring it into the fold...

Well that worked so well with China, didn't it?