The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
+5
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
Came back to work after Christmas break to find that cyber security at work are considering the same issues/vulnerabilities that were exploited (do I need to bother with "allegedly" here?).
Having glossed over some of the reading, my real takeaway was the personal/spearphishing matter. Yes, we need to lock down access, patch tech at properties, and generally enhance aspects of our online security, but if all it takes is one person clicking the wrong thing (out of ignorance, as a mistake, whatever) or maliciously doing the same, it's going to make my/our lives a lot harder.
I was at a cyber security conference in Vegas last year, and one of the speakers talked about the Russian Hacker angle that is being mentioned more often these days. The notion that Russia could be doing something akin to what they are accused of doing now was something the speaker called out, and while he noted that US actors on the Cyber Security/Warfare stage were among the best, he didn't put Russia that far behind, and the US's internet infrastructure was both vast and something of a glass house.
Bluntly, in retaliation (not under Trump, as someone will point out) the US could mess with things (and has done so in the past), but the US also has more to lose, with more online day by day.
Just a confluence of a variety of at work things that keep tying back to this issue. From his posts elsewhere, I'm under the impression there are a few posters who have a cyber security background that makes mine out to be the well meaning amateur I am (if that), and I look forward to hearing their thoughts on this matter, if they so choose to share.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
One of the risks that goes along with a (nominally) free and open society, is that stuff isn't locked down as much as it could/should be.
Mind you, there's always going to be gaps, exploits, etc, because people are lazy and/or cheap, leave doors propped open and passwords written down, etc etc. But culture (and security culture) plays a factor.
One of the risks that goes along with a (nominally) free and open society, is that stuff isn't locked down as much as it could/should be.
Mind you, there's always going to be gaps, exploits, etc, because people are lazy and/or cheap, leave doors propped open and passwords written down, etc etc. But culture (and security culture) plays a factor.
yeah but most security measures make sure that such a breach would result in maybe an afternoon of downtime for the individual employee. The real danger is when an Admin's account is compromised, then you can do some real damage.
Russia really has found a winning formula here, that we're gonna see a lot more of in the future! It worked like a charm in the US and is a pretty decent destabilizer in Europe too, though not as "insta-win" as it was in the US. Those dastardly hackers could be anyone, you just can't go around flinging international accusations due to some basement nerd's teenage pranks!
And sponsoring and giving support to far-right extremist parties is more of a slow burn here in Europe, but the wind is already blowing that way so you can't just rush these things!
Deniability and intermediaries is key to letting this shit go on. And it will. All the while every far right-wing fuck over here is cheering, Putin is the last great white hope after all.
Its amazing to me that a huge majority of security issues can be fixed with simple and effective password change policy. Yet, a majority of the businesses I've worked with have a ludicrisly lax policy.
Its amazing to me that a huge majority of security issues can be fixed with simple and effective password change policy. Yet, a majority of the businesses I've worked with have a ludicrisly lax policy.
That's because such policies, though effective, are a pain in the ass to the end users, some of whom may have enough power in the corporate structure to say "No, we're not doing that." And those without such power will do the door-propping thing or its equivalent.
Comey just said there was successful penetration of GOP groups/campaigns and on some RNC domains and that he was not aware of any successful cyber penetrations of GOP presidential campaigns.
He also said in response to a question about investigations into Trump's ties and his advisers' ties with Russia, "I would never comment on investigations whether open or not in a public forum." *Eyetwitch.*
Comey just said there was successful penetration of GOP groups/campaigns and on some RNC domains and that he was not aware of any successful cyber penetrations of GOP presidential campaigns.
He also said in response to a question about investigations into Trump's ties and his advisers' ties with Russia, "I would never comment on investigations whether open or not in a public forum." *Eyetwitch.*
Comey just said there was successful penetration of GOP groups/campaigns and on some RNC domains and that he was not aware of any successful cyber penetrations of GOP presidential campaigns.
He also said in response to a question about investigations into Trump's ties and his advisers' ties with Russia, "I would never comment on investigations whether open or not in a public forum." *Eyetwitch.*
How is that not cut and dried perjury?
(Not that I would even want him charged with it, just, come on man. You literally just did. Choose your words better: "Will never comment")
Comey just said there was successful penetration of GOP groups/campaigns and on some RNC domains and that he was not aware of any successful cyber penetrations of GOP presidential campaigns.
He also said in response to a question about investigations into Trump's ties and his advisers' ties with Russia, "I would never comment on investigations whether open or not in a public forum." *Eyetwitch.*
How is that not cut and dried perjury?
(Not that I would even want him charged with it, just, come on man. You literally just did. Choose your words better: "Will never comment")
Maybe in some librul reality. I'm glad we're not living in that wasteland!
Out in the UNSC, US and Russian diplomats are exchanging words.
U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power has lashed out at Russia in the U.N. Security Council for invading and annexing parts of Ukraine and carrying out "a merciless military assault" in Syria.
Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin shot back, accusing the Obama administration of "desperately" looking for scapegoats for its failures in Iraq, Syria and Libya.
Classified documents presented last week to President Obama and President-elect Trump included allegations that Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump, multiple US officials with direct knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.
The allegations were presented in a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. The allegations came, in part, from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative, whose past work US intelligence officials consider credible. The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Mr. Trump.
The two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials.
CNN has reviewed a 35-page compilation of the memos, from which the two-page synopsis was drawn. The memos originated as opposition research, first commissioned by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by Democrats. At this point, CNN is not reporting on details of the memos, as it has not independently corroborated the specific allegations. But, in preparing this story, CNN has spoken to multiple high ranking intelligence, administration, congressional and law enforcement officials, as well as foreign officials and others in the private sector with direct knowledge of the memos.
Some of the memos were circulating as far back as last summer. What has changed since then is that US intelligence agencies have now checked out the former British intelligence operative and his vast network throughout Europe and find him and his sources to be credible enough to include some of the information in the presentations to the President and President-elect a few days ago.
CNN has also learned that on December 9, Senator John McCain gave a full copy of the memos -- dated from June through December, 2016 -- to FBI Director James Comey. McCain became aware of the memos from a former British diplomat who had been posted in Moscow. But the FBI had already been given a set of the memos compiled up to August 2016, when the former MI6 agent presented them to an FBI official in Rome, according to national security officials.
The raw memos on which the synopsis is based were prepared by the former MI6 agent, who was posted in Russia in the 1990s and now runs a private intelligence gathering firm. His investigations related to Mr. Trump were initially funded by groups and donors supporting Republican opponents of Mr. Trump during the GOP primaries, multiple sources confirmed to CNN. Those sources also said that once Mr. Trump became the nominee, further investigation was funded by groups and donors supporting Hillary Clinton.
Well, that is all very convoluted and vague as to the exact allegations.
Couscous on
+2
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Yeah, this could be bad
+2
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
It's amazing how careful everybody is to get the story right when it's Trump.
Classified documents presented last week to President Obama and President-elect Trump included allegations that Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump, multiple US officials with direct knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.
The allegations were presented in a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. The allegations came, in part, from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative, whose past work US intelligence officials consider credible. The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Mr. Trump.
The two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials.
CNN has reviewed a 35-page compilation of the memos, from which the two-page synopsis was drawn. The memos originated as opposition research, first commissioned by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by Democrats. At this point, CNN is not reporting on details of the memos, as it has not independently corroborated the specific allegations. But, in preparing this story, CNN has spoken to multiple high ranking intelligence, administration, congressional and law enforcement officials, as well as foreign officials and others in the private sector with direct knowledge of the memos.
Some of the memos were circulating as far back as last summer. What has changed since then is that US intelligence agencies have now checked out the former British intelligence operative and his vast network throughout Europe and find him and his sources to be credible enough to include some of the information in the presentations to the President and President-elect a few days ago.
CNN has also learned that on December 9, Senator John McCain gave a full copy of the memos -- dated from June through December, 2016 -- to FBI Director James Comey. McCain became aware of the memos from a former British diplomat who had been posted in Moscow. But the FBI had already been given a set of the memos compiled up to August 2016, when the former MI6 agent presented them to an FBI official in Rome, according to national security officials.
The raw memos on which the synopsis is based were prepared by the former MI6 agent, who was posted in Russia in the 1990s and now runs a private intelligence gathering firm. His investigations related to Mr. Trump were initially funded by groups and donors supporting Republican opponents of Mr. Trump during the GOP primaries, multiple sources confirmed to CNN. Those sources also said that once Mr. Trump became the nominee, further investigation was funded by groups and donors supporting Hillary Clinton.
Well, that is all very convoluted and vague as to the exact allegations.
I might be jumping to conclusions, but it kinda sounds like this is the same source from David Corn's October piece.
Came back to work after Christmas break to find that cyber security at work are considering the same issues/vulnerabilities that were exploited (do I need to bother with "allegedly" here?).
Having glossed over some of the reading, my real takeaway was the personal/spearphishing matter. Yes, we need to lock down access, patch tech at properties, and generally enhance aspects of our online security, but if all it takes is one person clicking the wrong thing (out of ignorance, as a mistake, whatever) or maliciously doing the same, it's going to make my/our lives a lot harder.
I was at a cyber security conference in Vegas last year, and one of the speakers talked about the Russian Hacker angle that is being mentioned more often these days. The notion that Russia could be doing something akin to what they are accused of doing now was something the speaker called out, and while he noted that US actors on the Cyber Security/Warfare stage were among the best, he didn't put Russia that far behind, and the US's internet infrastructure was both vast and something of a glass house.
Bluntly, in retaliation (not under Trump, as someone will point out) the US could mess with things (and has done so in the past), but the US also has more to lose, with more online day by day.
Just a confluence of a variety of at work things that keep tying back to this issue. From his posts elsewhere, I'm under the impression there are a few posters who have a cyber security background that makes mine out to be the well meaning amateur I am (if that), and I look forward to hearing their thoughts on this matter, if they so choose to share.
It's amazing how careful everybody is to get the story right when it's Trump.
Thank God an appointed official didn't write a suggestive and vague letter about the allegations a week before the election or it could have affected the election based on what could turn out to be nothing.
Classified documents presented last week to President Obama and President-elect Trump included allegations that Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump, multiple US officials with direct knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.
The allegations were presented in a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. The allegations came, in part, from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative, whose past work US intelligence officials consider credible. The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Mr. Trump.
The two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials.
CNN has reviewed a 35-page compilation of the memos, from which the two-page synopsis was drawn. The memos originated as opposition research, first commissioned by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by Democrats. At this point, CNN is not reporting on details of the memos, as it has not independently corroborated the specific allegations. But, in preparing this story, CNN has spoken to multiple high ranking intelligence, administration, congressional and law enforcement officials, as well as foreign officials and others in the private sector with direct knowledge of the memos.
Some of the memos were circulating as far back as last summer. What has changed since then is that US intelligence agencies have now checked out the former British intelligence operative and his vast network throughout Europe and find him and his sources to be credible enough to include some of the information in the presentations to the President and President-elect a few days ago.
CNN has also learned that on December 9, Senator John McCain gave a full copy of the memos -- dated from June through December, 2016 -- to FBI Director James Comey. McCain became aware of the memos from a former British diplomat who had been posted in Moscow. But the FBI had already been given a set of the memos compiled up to August 2016, when the former MI6 agent presented them to an FBI official in Rome, according to national security officials.
The raw memos on which the synopsis is based were prepared by the former MI6 agent, who was posted in Russia in the 1990s and now runs a private intelligence gathering firm. His investigations related to Mr. Trump were initially funded by groups and donors supporting Republican opponents of Mr. Trump during the GOP primaries, multiple sources confirmed to CNN. Those sources also said that once Mr. Trump became the nominee, further investigation was funded by groups and donors supporting Hillary Clinton.
Well, that is all very convoluted and vague as to the exact allegations.
I might be jumping to conclusions, but it kinda sounds like this is the same source from David Corn's October piece.
Oh, I guess they mention MJ in the piece itself, but not the source.
Some of the allegations were first reported publicly in Mother Jones one week before the election.
The United Kingdom should be cut off from Europe.[1]
Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "“Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.[1]
In Asia:
China, which represents a danger to Russia, "must, to the maximum degree possible, be dismantled". Dugin suggests that Russia start by taking Tibet-Xinjiang-Mongolia-Manchuria as a security belt.[2] Russia should offer China help "in a southern direction – Indochina (except Vietnam), the Philippines, Indonesia, Australia" as geopolitical compensation.[1]
Russia should manipulate Japanese politics by offering the Kuril Islands to Japan and provoking anti-Americanism.[1]
Mongolia should be absorbed into Eurasia-Russia.[1]
The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."
In the United States:
Russia should use its special forces within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics."[1]
The United Kingdom should be cut off from Europe.[1]
Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "“Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.[1]
In Asia:
China, which represents a danger to Russia, "must, to the maximum degree possible, be dismantled". Dugin suggests that Russia start by taking Tibet-Xinjiang-Mongolia-Manchuria as a security belt.[2] Russia should offer China help "in a southern direction – Indochina (except Vietnam), the Philippines, Indonesia, Australia" as geopolitical compensation.[1]
Russia should manipulate Japanese politics by offering the Kuril Islands to Japan and provoking anti-Americanism.[1]
Mongolia should be absorbed into Eurasia-Russia.[1]
The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."
In the United States:
Russia should use its special forces within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics."[1]
Well, shit.
This plan seems to be going well. That is pretty bad.
The United Kingdom should be cut off from Europe.[1]
Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "“Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.[1]
In Asia:
China, which represents a danger to Russia, "must, to the maximum degree possible, be dismantled". Dugin suggests that Russia start by taking Tibet-Xinjiang-Mongolia-Manchuria as a security belt.[2] Russia should offer China help "in a southern direction – Indochina (except Vietnam), the Philippines, Indonesia, Australia" as geopolitical compensation.[1]
Russia should manipulate Japanese politics by offering the Kuril Islands to Japan and provoking anti-Americanism.[1]
Mongolia should be absorbed into Eurasia-Russia.[1]
The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."
In the United States:
Russia should use its special forces within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics."[1]
Fuck. If Russia starts messing in Tibet and Xinjiang they are going to have their own illegal immigration issues - about 2 and a half million han chinese will be moving to Moscow.
0
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
The United Kingdom should be cut off from Europe.[1]
Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "“Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.[1]
In Asia:
China, which represents a danger to Russia, "must, to the maximum degree possible, be dismantled". Dugin suggests that Russia start by taking Tibet-Xinjiang-Mongolia-Manchuria as a security belt.[2] Russia should offer China help "in a southern direction – Indochina (except Vietnam), the Philippines, Indonesia, Australia" as geopolitical compensation.[1]
Russia should manipulate Japanese politics by offering the Kuril Islands to Japan and provoking anti-Americanism.[1]
Mongolia should be absorbed into Eurasia-Russia.[1]
The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."
In the United States:
Russia should use its special forces within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics."[1]
Well, shit.
This plan seems to be going well. That is pretty bad.
Germany, Turkey, and Iran to a lesser degree (Thanks Obama!) are all coming along as well.
These Reports Allege Trump Has Deep Ties To Russia
A dossier, compiled by a person who has claimed to be a former British intelligence official, allege Russia has compromising information on Trump. The allegations are unverified, and the report contains errors.
Posts
the polonium 210 is optional
It fell onto that bullet.
Came back to work after Christmas break to find that cyber security at work are considering the same issues/vulnerabilities that were exploited (do I need to bother with "allegedly" here?).
Having glossed over some of the reading, my real takeaway was the personal/spearphishing matter. Yes, we need to lock down access, patch tech at properties, and generally enhance aspects of our online security, but if all it takes is one person clicking the wrong thing (out of ignorance, as a mistake, whatever) or maliciously doing the same, it's going to make my/our lives a lot harder.
I was at a cyber security conference in Vegas last year, and one of the speakers talked about the Russian Hacker angle that is being mentioned more often these days. The notion that Russia could be doing something akin to what they are accused of doing now was something the speaker called out, and while he noted that US actors on the Cyber Security/Warfare stage were among the best, he didn't put Russia that far behind, and the US's internet infrastructure was both vast and something of a glass house.
Bluntly, in retaliation (not under Trump, as someone will point out) the US could mess with things (and has done so in the past), but the US also has more to lose, with more online day by day.
Just a confluence of a variety of at work things that keep tying back to this issue. From his posts elsewhere, I'm under the impression there are a few posters who have a cyber security background that makes mine out to be the well meaning amateur I am (if that), and I look forward to hearing their thoughts on this matter, if they so choose to share.
Mind you, there's always going to be gaps, exploits, etc, because people are lazy and/or cheap, leave doors propped open and passwords written down, etc etc. But culture (and security culture) plays a factor.
yeah but most security measures make sure that such a breach would result in maybe an afternoon of downtime for the individual employee. The real danger is when an Admin's account is compromised, then you can do some real damage.
And sponsoring and giving support to far-right extremist parties is more of a slow burn here in Europe, but the wind is already blowing that way so you can't just rush these things!
Lets have some background, shall we?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOY4Ka-GBus
Deniability and intermediaries is key to letting this shit go on. And it will. All the while every far right-wing fuck over here is cheering, Putin is the last great white hope after all.
But remember! You can't just miss out on setting the boot down on your neighbors or their citizens when opportunity is tickling your tongue, subterfuge or not. Noone was gonna miss these losers for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eston_Kohver
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadiya_Savchenko
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_Sentsov
That's because such policies, though effective, are a pain in the ass to the end users, some of whom may have enough power in the corporate structure to say "No, we're not doing that." And those without such power will do the door-propping thing or its equivalent.
The trick is to keep annexing parts of Eastern Europe until Europe itself ceases to exist.
He also said in response to a question about investigations into Trump's ties and his advisers' ties with Russia, "I would never comment on investigations whether open or not in a public forum." *Eyetwitch.*
my eyes jsut rolled out of my head
How is that not cut and dried perjury?
(Not that I would even want him charged with it, just, come on man. You literally just did. Choose your words better: "Will never comment")
It fed his endlessly needy ego, and that's what matters.
Borrowed from elsewhere:
so sad
And I believe that was Power's last outing.
Edit: Well, that the IC presented a report to Trump about Russian attempts to compromise him.
... Naah. Russia is best friend, very smart. CNN picking on Russia! Bad ratings! Sad!
Just a guess at the tweet coming in 3... 2....
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html Well, that is all very convoluted and vague as to the exact allegations.
I might be jumping to conclusions, but it kinda sounds like this is the same source from David Corn's October piece.
Why, because we have someone compromised by the Russian government as our president? What the fuck could go wrong there?
Which talk @Forar ?
Thank God an appointed official didn't write a suggestive and vague letter about the allegations a week before the election or it could have affected the election based on what could turn out to be nothing.
Oh, I guess they mention MJ in the piece itself, but not the source.
I'd like to reiterate that this is basically the blueprint they've been following. It's been right there, this whole time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics
Well, shit.
This plan seems to be going well. That is pretty bad.
I wanna see.
Steam: adamjnet
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump
Fuck. If Russia starts messing in Tibet and Xinjiang they are going to have their own illegal immigration issues - about 2 and a half million han chinese will be moving to Moscow.
Germany, Turkey, and Iran to a lesser degree (Thanks Obama!) are all coming along as well.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/kenbensinger/these-reports-allege-trump-has-deep-ties-to-russia