• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

US Politics the 2025 trump presidency thread

Didn't FDR do that with the internment camps? That is a pretty sick story. My father told me at that point that was the only action that would quiet people. My wife and I had went to the FDR house and I saw video's as I never knew that history.

I am sickened by anything that treats any human as sub par. Plain and simple. Not a political party thing.

The act has been used 4 times.

  • War of 1812 - against British nationals
  • WW1 - against Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary Ottomans, Bulgaria, amendment expanded beyond just males
  • WW2 - against Japanese, German, and Italian non-citizens. President Roosevelt then used EO to intern the Jap-Amer citizens. Truman proclamtion gave AG authority to determine if they are "dangerous to the public peace and safety of the United States," to order them removed, and to create regulations governing their removal, citing the Alien Enemies Act" from the continental US. Truman then gave Sec State power to remove aliens from Latin American within 30d.
  • Trump against gang members in the US.
Most view the WW2 internment of Jap-Amer citizens as wrong and disgraceful. The first 3 uses of the act were indeed during a war, enforced for the safety and well being of our domestic United States against foreign fighters (to include non-violent, such as spies).

Would you argue it is NOT wise and proper to round up threats domestically and to restrain or remove them? Again, the internment rounded up those who were not obvious threats, it was a mistake. But all the others? I would argue the gang members have proven to be such a domestic threat both through their frequent criminal actions (rapes, murders, etc) and their heavy inflow of drugs (fentanyl) killing hundreds of thousands of Americans. How is this wrong?
 
“Let's say Social Security didn't send out their checks this month. My mother-in-law, who's 94, she wouldn't call and complain. She just wouldn't. She'd think something got messed up and she'll get it next month, A fraudster always makes the loudest noise, screaming, yelling and complaining. Anybody who’s been in the payment system and the processes, who knows the easiest way to find the fraudster is to stop payments and listen, because whoever screams is the one stealing, Because my mother-in-law’s not calling, come on, your mother, 80-year-olds, 90-year-olds, they trust the government. And, if anyone has any trouble getting groceries due to the month without a check, well then let them eat cake”

OK. He did say all but the last sentence.

A few thoughts here. For starters, the statement about old people is absurd and shouldn't have been made. At all. It shows a myopic view of our population. The bit about the fraudsters, spot on. Your last bit is building on the 'old folks' which I find odd is your focus, but I'll run with it for a second. of the older population, how many can even FIND the phone number to call for assistance? I mean, IF they can get on the internet and look it up, maybe they have a shot. But the reallly old ones don't internet and are looking around for the yellow pages (how many on here would even get that reference). I would venture to say anyone not old enough to internet their way to a phone call (and many of those who can) rely on caregivers - at home, family, or through a facility (that absolutely wants to be paid) and would help them get follow up on missing payments. I think the number of people living on their last dollar and NOT having a support network would be pretty small. And I have more faith in our general population that someone would notice and help.

To the main point of your quote, the statement is addressing fraudsters and the fact they are quick to scream when cut off. You don't address that part, the real point of his statement?

Wow I cant believe he said that! The one who is going to call first is the person who doesn't even have a savings to fall back on. That is if they can figure out the automated telephone system to get through since, like you said, some are 90 years old. This is really sad government who really don't give a shit about anyone but themselves.

Some of the patients at the clinic I worked at didn’t even have the $1 they needed to get their medication until the first of the month. This attitude of "let them eat cake" is despicable.

Americans need to wake up fast before all our rights are gone.

brokedownpalace10: "OK. He did say all but the last sentence."
51+dNJQR0iL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg


they are gone already. They admin is blatantly breaking the law and ignoring judges left and right and nobody is left to enforce that law.

It’s already over, ppl just don’t want to admit that and keep going on like this is normal.

It was over before it started though. Americas checks and balances were not designed to be sufficient to withstand this apparently.

Aight, both of ya. Please, please, pretty please - name one right you, or any American citizen, has lost. I'll wait.

And on breaking the law and ignoring judges.....explain to me what law Biden followed with his frequent declarations of eliminating student debt, after being shut down by SCOTUS? I dont recall him having that authority to even begin with, and neither did the Judicial branch.
 
PS - please send me a post card when you get sent to a camp.

Sure just post your address in the signal war plan (renamed attack plan) group chat. I had Tulsi add you this morning but she already forgot she did.

Don’t worry everything on the chat is classified so that’s why the reporter is going to jail for releasing it…but also it’s not classified so it was no big deal and it’s fine that it was released
 
Last edited:
From article -
  • Higher prices warned by Best Buy, Target << Known pain that will come wth tarriffs
  • Sourcing back to US suppliers by Target, Kroger, Costco, Alcoa, HP, and others << will generate more domestic GDP and keep that spending in US.
  • Shifting production << Hyundai ($21b investment), Honda, Pfizer all relocating to US facitlities. Pfizer will keep us more independent on meds should another global (Covid) crisis occur.
  • New investments << Apple ($500b), Eli Lilly ($27b), J&J ($55b),

It's just one person's opinion (which is fine if accepted as such)

Announcing things is EASY - it's the DOING that's harder.
 
^ indeed.

i'll absolutely give trump credit where it's due but the track record here is the same old bullshit and lies i've come to expect.

tlb, you mentioned honda...

well, somebody should tell honda :)

Trump mentions new Indiana Honda plant, but company denies announcement

"INDIANAPOLIS — During his address to Congress on Tuesday night, President Donald Trump expressed optimism regarding growth in the U.S. auto industry, citing Honda's decision to build a new plant in Indiana as a key example.
...
Trump's comments appear to reference a recent Reuters report stating that Honda will produce its next Civic model in Indiana rather than Mexico due to U.S. tariffs.

However, when WRTV reached out to Honda for clarification, the company denied that any new plans had been announced. Currently, the company operates a production plant in Greensburg, Indiana.

"Honda has made no such announcement and will not comment on this report. The Honda Civic has been made in our Indiana Auto Plant since the facility opened in 2008 based on our longstanding approach to build products close to the customer. We have the flexibility to produce products in each region based on customer needs and market conditions," the company said.

Further elaborating on the situation, a Honda spokesperson acknowledged President Trump's recognition of Honda's commitment to American manufacturing. However, they also emphasized that the company did not announce any plans for a new plant in Indiana or elsewhere in the U.S. at this time.
" (my emphasis)

and let's not forget this:

Foxconn plant, once touted by Trump as a 13,000-job juggernaut, will now create just 1,500 jobs

"Taiwan electronics manufacturer Foxconn is drastically scaling back a planned $10 billion factory in Wisconsin, confirming its retreat from a project that former President Donald Trump once called "the eighth wonder of the world."

Under a deal with the state of Wisconsin announced on Tuesday, Foxconn will reduce its planned investment to $672 million from $10 billion and cut the number of new jobs to 1,454 from 13,000.
"

i agree that announcing things is easy...

alasdair
 
He rigged the 2020 election as evidenced by the fake elector convictions. You can bet your ass they are rigging the elections better in order to never lose again. they will do that out in the open and nobody will do anything about it just like all the laws being broken now.

If he 'rigged the 2020 elections' how did he not win? Ah, you mean he 'tried to rig'? Ok.

As for rigging elections going forward....


His EO is pushing for proof of citizenship in order to vote, among other things related to elections. Let us start with that one - does anyone here believe non-citizens should have a vote? I'm curious if anyone holds that position. I know at state and local levels, some areas allow non-citizens to vote, but doing it with federal elections greatly blurs the line on who is/can vote for federal offices.

As mentioned in the article, this will get a LOT of law suits and push back. States hold the majority of control on how they run their elections, including federal ones. Biden leveraged the federal level to register voters, something that certainly had no fraud or bias on which party to register with (Trump has rescinded that Biden EO). Personally, I still agree the States should hold the vast majority of that authority (along with a lot of other things the Feds have taken over through the decades). But, I support a national level requirement such as proof of citizenry, at least for federal offices. Local/state want to allow non-citizens in those elections, I'm fine with it. But federally, you shouldn't have non-citizens voting on something that impacts citizens elsewhere in the country. Locally, do whatever suits you, and be held accountable to it. The kicker to this 'proof of citizenship' is that conservatives don the tinfoil when it comes to national registries (ironic, no?). So, I'm not sure how this would be implemented across the various states in a way that ensures voter security, avoids fraud, and doesn't open a pandora's box on controlling voter registrations.


And there we have it - the USA has it's own Siberia. Better, it's ouride US territory so no US protections appply.

It WILL be used to remove anyone who protests the ceaser or the oligachs.

Our own Siberia, outside US territory. Huh. Ok, but we're not (yet) sending citizens there. Those sent do NOT have US protections to begin with. They were guests, but they will now return outside our country.

What was your position on Big Tech censoring Americans with a differing opinion?

It will start with violent criminals. I've already heard Trumpers praising that. Then, it will be protestors at a level to where there is less public support. They've already demonized the college protests.

They've 'demonized' protestors that have vandalized public (school) property, threatened other students based on ethnicity (Jewish), and declared association/support with terrorist organizations (Hamas) if not outright stated they are part of those organizations. This isn't difficult.

There are plenty of folks eager to be Brown Shirts. This election really was about saving democracy.

Funny you say that. Scandal coming out soon about Air Force Academy and 'purple ropes'. I'd link i fI could, but not out yet. Watch for retired Air Force Brigadier General Christopher Walker, who was assigned to the AFA DEI office where the academy implemented 'purple ropes'. These decorations were considered an honorary position. Their mission? Find and report any and all microagressions, any non-DEI compliance, etc. Your 'brown shirts' at work in the Biden academies. Nice.

I will not deny there are idiots on the right playing online hero by puffing up their e-chest about going after people. Those idiots exist. Compare that to left idiots mobilizing and actually doing harm (BLM, Antifa, Tesla attacks) to enforce their ideology and intimidate others. Now, show me an active area where those idiots on the right are acting out, infringing on other people's rights, intimidating and threatening them in the real world.

That IS exactly what Donald Trump will do. The fact he preached sedition that resulted in a riot only to release the rioters from prison couldn't make it clearer that he sees certain groups within MAGA as his own personal extra-judicial punishment squads.

When someone protests peacefully, while he cannot LEALLY stop them, he is quite prepared to allow such groups to take matters into their own hands.

Face it - there will not be another free and fail election in the USA.

giphy.gif


Preached sedition. Right. Ok, I'll take this to that Jan6 thread or make one. Obviously you feel the Jan6 rioters were violent, but I question their improsonment for YEARS without their rights being preserved or respected. You one of the BLM 'peaceful protest' supporters? Or, you view the Hamas supporters on college campuses as 'peaceful' as they destroy the schools and threaten students?

<cut out the bottom half to make a separte post because even I won't read that wall'o'text. Not that it improved by much>
 
Last edited:
In his 2012 paper "Gödel's Loophole" F. E. Guerra-Pujol speculates that the problem involves Article V, which describes the process by which the Constitution can be amended. The loophole is that Article V's procedures can be applied to Article V itself. It can therefore be altered in a "downward" direction, making it easier to alter the article again in the future. So even if, as is now the case, amending the Constitution is difficult to bring about, once Article V is downwardly amended, the next attempt to do so will be easier, and the one after that easier still.

Interesting view, and logically true. In checking Article V I was shocked to find NATO also outlined alongside changes to the constitution.

In theory, your post is right, Article V could be used to make it easier and easier. The imaginary hurdle posed is that if Party A lowers that threshold so they can make things easier to implement for themselves going forward, they also make is easier for Party B to use the lower threshhold and push things in their desired direction.

I don't see Trump considering this (who knows, the guy is a frequent surprise to us all). What would concern me more is if we start seeing such stepping stones being put in place. For example, Trump's recent EO on voting requirements...taken at a federal level, this could be reshaped under each president, each subsequently doing a legal gerrymandering to control who can vote, ensuring single party control. An individual (Trump) likely won't see that or pursue it if they are fairly self-centered (Trump) as it is laying groundwork for future presidents, and he ain't gonna be one of them. Those that might try to implement such a scheme would be Biden's handlers. It didn't matter to them who the puppet was, as long as it was continuously 'their puppet'. Either side could do it.
 
We have already been witness to Donald Trump poisoning the judicery and now he is openly bribing (via the auspices of Elon Musk) the public to stop 'activist judges'.

What's your position on Soros funded DAs across the country? Or Soros money going into Dem campaigns at all levels? More money, been fed in for a lot longer. You good with that?
 
As a harm reduction reminder - I may no longer mod this thread (though I am still a site mod), I feel that I wanted to just offer a suggestion to all who are following political events whether from within the USA or abroad, and who are concerned about what is happening:

1) Part of the power bloc that has emerged is very 21st-century. It exploits the kind of attention that habituation, dependence, and addiction to social media that has existed for a decade or more in increasingly substantial rates.

2) With any addiction, it's important to consider how the addictive agent is impacting you, your health, your capacity to function, your self esteem, your safety, as well as any possible benefits the agent is having (Maybe you need pain meds to function when living with sickle-cell, or cancer, for example).

3) If use of the agent (in this case social media that is targeting emotional regulation in a very intentional way, through curated political activities, content distributed that evoke strong emotional responses (pride, vengence, fear, confusion, all of the above), and your use continues to maintain or escalate inspite of or in response to these triggers: you do have power to make a change

4) Attention is an established commodity by big tech. Your clicks lead to dollars for the tech oligarchs and those in power. The more upset you are, the longer you'll stay engaged, and the greater their valuation will climb along with ad revenue from sponsorships.

5) Remember the serenity prayer:

'Accept what we cannot change
Change what we can
[Grant me] The wisdom to know the difference'

There may be things that are happening that you have no control over - that's okay. What you do have absolute control over is how much of your focus and attention you are giving to social media, news media, and to politics.

Part of the way this stuff is exploited is that it is presented is both incredibly significant while also being business as usual. Something feels both established and normal, and also completely unhinged and on the brink. This is a model that has been utilized by Putin for over 20 years, even before modern social media had fully evolved. There's a reason that Bezos, Ellison, Zuck, Musk, Pinchar et. al, were there on election day and given Musk's near total control of X, there are now explicit channels of proganda that are entirely controlled by government interests and are curated through moderation and promotion to promote messages that are friendly to the white house and its allies, while taking a broad interpretation of dissent, activism, terrorism, and how these things are defined. Definitions are often applied in an unbalanced way depending on whether the message is pro-party (Jan 6) or anti-party (BLM and its alleged connection to ANTIFA). Similar actions will not be treated based on law or precedent, but will be treated based on favor.

All of this is happening and the only control you have is whether you participate, how long you spend participating, how much attention you give, and what you do to separate yourself from these forces.

Recovery is a robust and multigenerational movement that exists and emerged out of people trying to find social support in overcoming addiction. Recovery meetings exist beyond 12-step meetings and related fellowships and all are welcome to attend any OPEN meeting to learn more about what they offer. While this may not feel like a reason to go to an AA meeting, I have noted and interesting way in which recovery meetings have proven to be helpful for some during these times, as the experience of addiction is easy to relate to others in recovery from drugs, alcohol, or other behaviors.

Moderation of intake: Each morning I try to spend at least an hour waking up, getting my day started with some intentions for the day, even if it's just drinking coffee and watching the sun climb in the sky. I watch the neighborhood, check out birds on our porch, and enter the day with a quiet mind. In the fall, post election, I found myself reaching for my phone as I was opening my eyes, and being met with reddit posts and news stories that were alarming. I found my heart rate raising and feelings of dread washed over me before my first sip of coffee.

After a few weeks of living in a sense of agitated panic without any way to deal with what was happening, I realized that I was allowing this to kick in, and when I'd wake up in 'withdrawal' I'd go back to the dope dealer that lived on my bedside table for another hit of bad drugs. I started limiting my use of my phone and social media - reddit is the major site I use, though I've come to use this site mostly as I"ve been moderating but even this becomes too much some days and I will avoid logging in entirely.

It's good to remain informed, and I recommend analysis by publications like The Atlantic if you'd like thoughtful analysis (with a historically progressive vantage point - it was founded in Boston in the mid-1800s and has high standards for publication as well as a history of offering the perspectives of non-progressives as well. Newsmedia has become more clearly curated by the establishment left and right for some time - it is the model for which our tech infrastructure has participated in and is also following through with.

All of these things can lead to social isolation and loss of relationships, so a big protective factor is social connection, in person.

"The opposite of addiction isn't abstinence, it's human connection".

Taking some time to digest how you are impacted by political theatre and curated news about it as well as the social and other media sources that distribute it - how all of these things are impacting you, and deciding if you have changes you may need to make is healthy and empowering. If you connect with people in new ways in non-political contexts, through service work (charity organizations), hobby interests (meetup.com is good for finding things), athletics or fitness groups, or simply contacting old friends to make plans - these are things that can help to offset and overcome the weaponization of your attention for the benefit of others.

I realize that this was a long post, I have taken some time to consider whether to mention this and how to do so. I've become aware of people online expressing increasing levels of paranoia, distress, despair, anger, and a willingness to take increasingly risky actions because of things that have been going on. Much of this is designed to evoke these exact feelings and causes a helpless state that continues to come back for more, hoping that their attention will help change things.

We need to look out for ourselves and work on our connection outside of online spaces as these are the most important protective factors we as humans have.

If you made it this far, thanks for reading - always feel free to DM me if you want to chat about anything or ask questions about recovery, dependence, mental health etc. It's good to get things off your chest and anything people share with me I keep between us.

Quoting the whole damn thing. Spot on and worth a reminder for all. Regularly. Me included.
 
Coming to these 2 points specifically.

2) With any addiction, it's important to consider how the addictive agent is impacting you, your health, your capacity to function, your self esteem, your safety, as well as any possible benefits the agent is having (Maybe you need pain meds to function when living with sickle-cell, or cancer, for example).

Social media can very easily be an addiction. Strive to be able to turn it off, walk outside and embrace the 'real world' on a regular basis. If you give yourself to the social seas online, you become adrift without a real definition of self, or sense of worth, of principles. I strongly encourage everyone to retain their real world self, apart from online spaces. Particularly from ones that get you fired up or pissed off. Yes, there is merit to hearing other perspectives, but if you're going just to argue for the sake of arguing, or proving someone wrong...well, they'd be wrong if you told them or not; and it isn't likely you'll change their mind, particularly if you start arguing with them. Overall, they aren't worth it, you aren't saving the world. Make sure you save yourself. You are the only you that you have, and we all need that person.

3) If use of the agent (in this case social media that is targeting emotional regulation in a very intentional way, through curated political activities, content distributed that evoke strong emotional responses (pride, vengence, fear, confusion, all of the above), and your use continues to maintain or escalate inspite of or in response to these triggers: you do have power to make a change

Recognize what it takes from you - time, happiness, respect for others. If you are losing those things, even a little bit, is it the right decision?


Self-reflection: Yeah, I'm dropping my big posts in here lately. It does take my time. Am I trying to change anyone's mind? No. But I am trying to share information, that's to give what I am aware of but also to take in other people's views and experiences, what they know that I don't. And at the end, I'm still smiling, in part for the interaction, but mostly because I can accept others being wrong in my opinion (that is their right, and I'll fight for them to have it), but also because I am quite grounded and secure in my own. That doesn't mean I'm closed minded, but it does mean I'm open to hear others and re-evaluate my positions on things based on what I learned.
 
If people wish to read a single book on the history of ancient Rome, 'SPQR' by Mary Beard is the one (it was also made into a BBC television series which is the second best option).

Are you a student perhaps? Maybe studying ancient Rome? With a possible master's thesis defense coming due soon?

;)

Just kidding with you. Wanted to highlight a post that actually wasn't about Rome and give you some kudos, but this is the next post I found.
 

'''if you become a member of the Communist Party, a terrorist organization or any totalitarian party within five years of becoming naturalized, you could be subject to denaturalization."

Who decides if/when MAGA represents a totalatarian party?

I apprecate these are marginal cases, but the axiom 'hard cases make bad law' may apply.
 
Anyone else remember March 5ᵗʰ 2024 the FSB intercepted a conference call between four senior German military officers, including Air Force chief Ingo Gerhartz and Brig Gen Frank Gräfe? They heard discussing the prospect of supplying Ukraine with the long-range cruise missiles and saying the weapons could be used to hit the Kerch Bridge, which links Russia to the illegally-annexed peninsula of Crimea.

I f**king DO because they put British lives at risk.

Doesn't ring a bell. But depending on content, it can absolutely put lives at risk.

ANYONE but ANYONE in a position of such power SHOULD know that they are extremely high-value targets for Russian and Chinese security services. Both have extremely skilled hackers - something you can be 100% certain that the CIA, FBI, NSA and so on will ALL have flagged the fact.

Lest we forget, Donald Trump used his iPhone to take a photograph of an image caught by a US reconnicence sattalite. Within HOURS experts were able to confirm the mirror sizes (three are required to remove spherical, chromatic, and coma aberrations), the practical resoution (10cm/4 inch) and the ultimate theoretical resolution (6cm/2.4 inches). The location being known, the time could be calculated using shadow-length and shadow-direction. Such data would make killing the satellite an easier task.

I'm no security expert BUT a president who either doesn't understand or doesn't care about US security strikes me as someone unfit for government. Until the image, experts roughly knew the capabilities, but now they know in much more detail and may potentially decide to shoot a number of them down after realizing the satellites were more able than thought.

A few points to this on the US fiasco. First, Trump had nothing to do with it. Yeah, we can say the buck stops there, but it was others who gathered that private group, more importantly an underling who added folks to that text group and f'd up by including the Atlantic person. That underling should be fired, or not allowed to touch electronics for the rest of their career.

Second, was there any classified shared openly in that chat? Anything that put lives at risk or may have hindered an operation? All we have is the partial release from the journalist. From what he shared it was all 'do we do this, how do we manage the messaging, man Europe needs to do their share so we don't have to, etc'. No names, not activities, no locations....nada putting anyone or anything at risk, at least from what we've seen, and this is backed up by the guy blamed (note, not the underling, and yes he needs to be covering his ass so take it for what its worth) for including the journalist



The last point to address is to ask - Why? Yes, the obvious why of this journalist being added, but upstream of that why would an underling have this journalist's signal contact in order to add him? Idunno. Then back to why was he added? Accident? Occams razor says yes, but it's still a befuddling reach for this guy to be on the contact list to add by ANYONE in that group (or their underlings). Was it to tip our hand to Europe that we think they aren't doing their share? Possible, but unlikely as Trump/Vance have been out front and very vocal on the matter. Which brings me back to idunno.

I will conclude by noting that security is only as strong as it's weakest link. When the POTUS IS that weak link, I feel confident in stating that there will be hackers assigned purely to gain access to Donald Trump's digital data. I mean, I would!

Again, Trump wasn't involved.
 
A few thoughts here. For starters, the statement about old people is absurd and shouldn't have been made. At all. It shows a myopic view of our population. The bit about the fraudsters, spot on. Your last bit is building on the 'old folks' which I find odd is your focus, but I'll run with it for a second. of the older population, how many can even FIND the phone number to call for assistance? I mean, IF they can get on the internet and look it up, maybe they have a shot. But the reallly old ones don't internet and are looking around for the yellow pages (how many on here would even get that reference). I would venture to say anyone not old enough to internet their way to a phone call (and many of those who can) rely on caregivers - at home, family, or through a facility (that absolutely wants to be paid) and would help them get follow up on missing payments. I think the number of people living on their last dollar and NOT having a support network would be pretty small. And I have more faith in our general population that someone would notice and help.

To the main point of your quote, the statement is addressing fraudsters and the fact they are quick to scream when cut off. You don't address that part, the real point of his statement?
This statement is about typical of these few pages you've posted. You immediately started with the false premise that everyone on SS is a fragile old person and went from there.
I'm nearly 70 and I can tell you that ain't true.

More importantly, you then go on to say that the Commerce Sec's statement was true since the fragile old people can't get to a phone to complain anyway.

Words actually fail me that you would make a statement like that. Not just because of that ridiculous assumption but also because you say that it would be OK for fragile old people to not get a check because they should have a caregiver and if they don't then our general population is altruistic enough to notice someone starving next door and they would swoop in to help.

Wow.

We old fuck's (I'm not an old fart yet, an old fuck indeed) are not all fragile being cared for by relatives, but over 2/3 of us rely on SS for over half our income. Would you complain if over half your paycheck was not delivered?
brokedownpalace10: "OK. He did say all but the last sentence."
51+dNJQR0iL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg
He realizes that. He said "attitude". Are you on meth today?




It's been a Gish Gallop. A well crafted one, but a Gish Gallop, nonetheless.
 
Last edited:
hey tlb, you would kind of expect mike walz to say that wouldn't you? i mean he's the national security advisor for the u.s. and somehow, on his watch, a bunch of high-level administration officials accidentally included a journalist on a secure group chat about a military bombing mission. a chat in which the secretary of defense stated "We are currently clean on OPSEC." (OPSEC is operational security).

yeah, not so much.

of course he's going to downplay it. they all look like incompetent idiots after this.

All we have is the partial release from the journalist.

the atlantic has subsequently published the full text. you need an atlantic subsciption to read but the nyt - among others- has published an annotated version: The Leaked Signal Chat, Annotated

the thread, contrary to mike walz' tweet, contained sources, methods and plans.

and, i'll reiterate, that this issue is especially frustrating because trump spent his entire first campaign pushing the 'lock her up' hillary narrative and repeatedly stressing the importance of correct handling of government information.

and this is on top of the revelation that the trump campaign used an insecure, private email server in the 2020 campaign.

you just can't make it up.

alasdair
 
But surely a government adopts the behaviours of it's leader and Donald Trump has demonstrated his disinterest in security?

While Donald Trump may not have been in that Signal group, it was only because a US journalist was accidently made part of the group that it became public. Was it a one-off? We don't know. That they wern't communicating from a SciF and now people know that, there are MANY other attack vectors. Security is only as strong as it's weakest link. It's arguable that it would be worth using up some zero-day vunrabilities to gain accces. Double Pulsar (for example) used 6.

Signal is used by the US military which shocked me, BUT the key thing is that the US miltary DOES use SKiFs and ensures the hardware and OS are both secure.
 
Signal is used by the US military which shocked me, BUT the key thing is that the US miltary DOES use SKiFs and ensures the hardware and OS are both secure.
There are degrees of use which are allowed or not. In this article, they basically warn against using signal at all (after the fact) since it is vulnerable to Russian hackers.

The 2023 memo I linked above (it's mentioned in this article⬇︎ ) prohibited use of mobile applications like signal for even "controlled unclassified information," which is many degrees less important than information about ongoing military operations.

A degree of use which may have been previously allowed was things like "persons of interest" to foreign powers texting where they are going for dinner, when they are meeting their mistress ( :) ) and the like. Foreign enemies might find such things of interest and even those things were supposed to be at least in an everyday encrypted chat. It's never been OK to have anything at all about operations in such a chat.

 
A few thoughts here. For starters, the statement about old people is absurd and shouldn't have been made. At all. It shows a myopic view of our population. The bit about the fraudsters, spot on. Your last bit is building on the 'old folks' which I find odd is your focus, but I'll run with it for a second. of the older population, how many can even FIND the phone number to call for assistance? I mean, IF they can get on the internet and look it up, maybe they have a shot. But the reallly old ones don't internet and are looking around for the yellow pages (how many on here would even get that reference). I would venture to say anyone not old enough to internet their way to a phone call (and many of those who can) rely on caregivers - at home, family, or through a facility (that absolutely wants to be paid) and would help them get follow up on missing payments. I think the number of people living on their last dollar and NOT having a support network would be pretty small. And I have more faith in our general population that someone would notice and help.

To the main point of your quote, the statement is addressing fraudsters and the fact they are quick to scream when cut off. You don't address that part, the real point of his statement?



brokedownpalace10: "OK. He did say all but the last sentence."
51+dNJQR0iL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg




Aight, both of ya. Please, please, pretty please - name one right you, or any American citizen, has lost. I'll wait.

And on breaking the law and ignoring judges.....explain to me what law Biden followed with his frequent declarations of eliminating student debt, after being shut down by SCOTUS? I dont recall him having that authority to even begin with, and neither did the Judicial branch.

I am really trying to grasp why the comment was made belittling anyone who might call to complain when they didn't receive their social security check. It makes me wonder if the intent was to intimidate people not to call and complain if this happens because they may be investigated for fraud if they do.

I am on social security and I can find a phone number. I can even use the internet. I also rely on my income and would be worried enough if my husband and I didn't receive our checks this month that I would call to see if there was a problem. My step-mother who is 90 would complain also. I have friends who are Trump supporters who are on social security and they would do the same. They also need their income. They can use the internet too, and can even find a phone number.

I have worked with older people and know there are many who do not have relatives in the area who can run right over to help out if they didn't receive their funds.

Let them eat cake?
 
Last edited:
Top