-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
This is dirty politics on steroids.. And I am amazed anyone is remotely supporting it.
Just step back and forget partisanship. Do you really want this sort of thing to become normal? Can you imagine the private conversations that all politicians have?
It is a big towards a police state.Flynn wasn't a polititian, he was an ex spook working on a political campaign talking directly to the Russians. You honestly want ex spooks representing major political parties being off limits when talking to direct adversaries of the US?
OK, flip that. Hillary runs again, Jake Sullivan talks to the Iranian ambassador. That should not be monitored by the NSA?
And this isn't in isolation. Manafort & Page already got fired this. Russia hacked the DNC & leaked it. If the NSA wasn't all over this it'd be an outrage.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
This is dirty politics on steroids.. And I am amazed anyone is remotely supporting it.
Just step back and forget partisanship. Do you really want this sort of thing to become normal? Can you imagine the private conversations that all politicians have?
It is a big towards a police state.Who is supporting it?
I think the EO of Reagan's is quite extreme but I think most countries have something similar within legislation regarding counterintelligence and monitoring current and ex employees. I was merely pointing out the legality as there were adamant and incorrect statements on here to the contrary.Where has anyone said politicians private conversations are fair game?
I agree that the leaks from the WH and other govt branches are getting way out of hand but some of the blame for that has to rest on the administration's propensity for promoting lies in contrary to advice they have received and trying to shut down anything and everything negative. This administration simply does not have their (White) house in order.
-
I suspect that the media is going to really go strong on this story and anything associated with it. They even seem to have given up highlighting Trump's outright 'small' lies while they concentrate on this.
Anyone see the press conference with Trudeau?This is what Trump declared without any factual backup.
"Q: Good afternoon, Mr. President and Mr. Prime Minister. And Mr. Prime Minister, could you answer in English and French for us, please?
A little bit of a followup on my American colleague's question. President Trump, you seem to suggest that Syrian refugees are a Trojan horse for potential terrorism, while the prime minister hugs refugees and welcomes them with open arms. So I'd like to know, are you confident the northern border is secure?
Trump: You can never be totally confident. But through the incredible efforts — already I see it happening — of former general Kelly, now Secretary Kelly, we have really done a great job. We're actually taking people that are criminals — very, very hardened criminals in some cases, with a tremendous track record of abuse and problems — and we're getting them out. And that's what I said I would do. I'm just doing what I said I would do when we won by a very, very large electoral college vote.
And I knew that was going to happen. I knew this is what people were wanting. And that wasn't the only reason, that wasn't my only thing that we did so well on. But that was something was very important. And I said we will get the criminals out, the drug lords, the gang members. We're getting them out.
General Kelly, who is sitting right here, is doing a fantastic job. And I said at the beginning we are going to get the bad ones — the really bad ones. We're getting them out. And that's exactly what we're doing.
I think that, in the end, everyone is going to be extremely happy. And I will tell you right now, a lot of people are very, very happy right now."
I'm not even sure he was answering the question about refugees being trojan horses but if he was he is saying that the current refugee program has allowed entry to criminals, gang members, drug lords, and ' very, very hardened criminals in some cases, with a tremendous track record of abuse and problems'
-
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@JC said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback Didn't I read that the wiretap was on the Russian ambassador, not on Flynn? I'd have thought they'd at least attempt to tap every single communication with the Russians that they can, not just official ones.
Edit - sorry, Crucial was way ahead of me. Ignore me.
So? It is still illegal to wiretap a US citizen without going through legal channels.
That boat sailed under Obama. The infrastructure they setup over the past decade makes the recent 1984 bleating seem far too late.
Been watching a doco on SBS. "The United State of Secrets". That boat sailed under GWB.
-
@booboo said in US Politics:
@Kirwan said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@JC said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback Didn't I read that the wiretap was on the Russian ambassador, not on Flynn? I'd have thought they'd at least attempt to tap every single communication with the Russians that they can, not just official ones.
Edit - sorry, Crucial was way ahead of me. Ignore me.
So? It is still illegal to wiretap a US citizen without going through legal channels.
That boat sailed under Obama. The infrastructure they setup over the past decade makes the recent 1984 bleating seem far too late.
Been watching a doco on SBS. "The United State of Secrets". That boat sailed under GWB.
That EO goes back to Reagan. The usage of it has probably been stretched further and further by each successive administration.
-
@booboo said in US Politics:
Been watching a doco on SBS. "The United State of Secrets". That boat sailed under GWB.
Patriot Act (Bush) was a greenlight to do virtually anything if you cited Islamic terror. Still is. And its ramping up -
“What sites do you visit? And give us your passwords.”
That’s what U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly wants foreign visitors to hear before they’re allowed to enter the United States. “If they don’t want to give us that information, then they don’t come,” he said, while testifying in front of the House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday.
The suggestion was met with horror among privacy advocates. “With that kind of access, they can not only see what you’ve publicly posted, but things you haven't posted yet, private messages, private lists, they can impersonate you, and even do these things on accident,” wrote Joseph Lorenzo Hall, the chief technologist at the Center for Democracy and Technology, on his website. “This kind of access is profoundly invasive.”
I agree that the leaks from the WH and other govt branches are getting way out of hand but some of the blame for that has to rest on the administration's propensity for promoting lies in contrary to advice they have received and trying to shut down anything and everything negative. This administration simply does not have their (White) house in order.
The issue with the leaks for me is you have people in the White House actually doing what, under any normal circumstances, would be framed as at worst treason at best a firing offense. And nothing is done. So if you are pretty straight laced you either aide & abet that. Or you leak. And you have a very receptive intelligence setup that is being ignored & tweeted at. Ditto media.
And, most of all, there is actual wrong doing there. Thats the bizare thing, no one is even having to hype this up.
-
The right of request for password access at borders is completely impractical.
People carry work devices with them all the time (or personal devices with work access) and have signed contracts saying they will not allow access to this info.
Govt employees for example have encrypted access apps that they simply will not open for anyone else without clearance.
Given that you have to pass US border control even if just changing planes at a US hub airport this would cause absolute chaos. -
@Crucial said in US Politics:
The right of request for password access at borders is completely impractical.
People carry work devices with them all the time (or personal devices with work access) and have signed contracts saying they will not allow access to this info.
Govt employees for example have encrypted access apps that they simply will not open for anyone else without clearance.
Given that you have to pass US border control even if just changing planes at a US hub airport this would cause absolute chaos.Two weeks ago, Sidd Bikkannavar flew back into the United States after spending a few weeks abroad in South America. An employee of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Bikkannavar had been on a personal trip, pursuing his hobby of racing solar-powered cars. He had recently joined a Chilean team, and spent the last weeks of January at a race in Patagonia.
Bikkannavar is a seasoned international traveler — but his return home to the US this time around was anything but routine. Bikkannavar left for South America on January 15th, under the Obama administration. He flew back from Santiago, Chile to the George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, Texas on Monday, January 30th, just over a week into the Trump administration.
Bikkannavar says he was detained by US Customs and Border Patrol and pressured to give the CBP agents his phone and access PIN. Since the phone was issued by NASA, it may have contained sensitive material that wasn’t supposed to be shared. Bikkannavar’s phone was returned to him after it was searched by CBP, but he doesn’t know exactly what information officials might have taken from the device.*
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@gollum are you referring to the leakers or the administration, or both?
Leakers. Look at Sally Yates. She gets bi-passed to allow an illegal order to go out. She then does her job by saying "thats not legal". She also calls Flynn as a massive issue 2 weeks ago. Ignored & then fired. And smeared on the way out. Would it be a shock if her department leaked? If you were in the DOJ & actually cared about US security & you knew the detail re Flynn don't you.. sort of, have a direct duty to leak?
The leaks re Trump in his bathrobe, those are just political digs. They have come out of every white house ever. There were a huge number of leaks re Hillary in Bills first term as she tried to be second president & it pissed a lot of lifers off. Ditto Nancy Regan. The White House travel shake up under the Clintons leaked like thing that leaks a lot.
The leaks re potential treason, illegal acts, impeachable offences are not normal. Because most administrations do not have the likes of Flynn or Bannon at the core.
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I think a good argument could be put up that the leakers are acting treasonably themselves but thanks for making your point clear
Yep, for me it depends what they leak. If I leak that Trump thinks Teresa May is dumb, thats treason, if I leak that Flynn was videoed by the Russians t-bagging a hooker & yet is still attending top secret briefings I'm actively doing my job as a government official defending the US as he is clearly compromised & should not be anywhere near anything sensitive.
-
@gollum said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I think a good argument could be put up that the leakers are acting treasonably themselves but thanks for making your point clear
Yep, for me it depends what they leak. If I leak that Trump thinks Teresa May is dumb, thats treason, if I leak that Flynn was videoed by the Russians t-bagging a hooker & yet is still attending top secret briefings I'm actively doing my job as a government official defending the US as he is clearly compromised & should not be anywhere near anything sensitive.
The big difference though is not whether it could be defended in court but whether it would be taken to court in the first place.
-
An opinion piece on the NYTimes which despite the anti-Trump bias throughout does, IMO, come to a reasonable conclusion.
"Trump and his senior aides have spent their first weeks in power doing nothing more than telling us how afraid we should be of Muslim immigrants who have not been properly vetted by our intelligence and immigration authorities. Well, Putin was vetted by the F.B.I., C.I.A. and N.S.A., and they concluded that he attacked our country’s most important institution — and Trump has acted as if he could not care less."
-
@gollum
I meant any evidence that has been leaked to reporters so far should be able to be seen by the public so we know the journalists are reporting it fairly.
Naturally I am suspicious of the Wapo and NY Times, and naturally some don't trust Trump's administration. -
@Frank said in US Politics:
@gollum
I meant any evidence that has been leaked to reporters so far should be able to be seen by the public so we know the journalists are reporting it fairly.
Naturally I am suspicious of the Wapo and NY Times, and naturally some don't trust Trump's administration.@Frank I think it would be fair to say that they haven't provided any evidence other than their word and that has been reported on.
They 'leakees' have gone to the press and said that they have seen/ heard that there is evidence of links and conversations. That evidence would currently be classified and if they obtained it and gave it to someone else that would likely be treason.
The fear some in the intel community seem to have is that this stuff will be swept under the carpet just as the evidence against Flynn was. They look to be leaking its existence so that public pressure can be placed.
US Politics