[US_Politics] Y'know, I think that this really is a legitimate information-security concern ...
GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
[US_Politics] Y'know, I think that this really is a legitimate information-security concern ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/16/remarks-president-trump-press-conference:
You know what I say -- when I was called out on Mexico, I was shocked. Because all this equipment, all this incredible phone equipment. When I was called out on Mexico, I was -- honestly, I was really, really surprised. But I said, you know, it doesn't make sense, that won't happen. But that wasn't that important to call, it was fine. I could show it to the world and he could show it to the world -- the President who is a very fine man, by the way. Same thing with Australia. I said, that's terrible that it was leaked but it wasn't that important. But then I said, what happens when I'm dealing with the problem of North Korea? What happens when I'm dealing with the problems in the Middle East? Are you folks going to be reporting all of that very, very confidential information -- very important, very -- I mean, at the highest level, are you going to be reporting about that too?
So I don't want classified information getting out to the public. And in a way, that was almost a test. So I'm dealing with Mexico. I'm dealing with Argentina. We were dealing on this case with Mike Flynn. All this information gets put into the Washington Post and gets put into the New York Times. And I'm saying, what's going to happen when I'm dealing on the Middle East? What's going to happen when I'm dealing with really, really important subjects like North Korea? We've got to stop it. That's why it's a criminal penalty.
Unfortunately, "The Executive has a perfectly legitimate(!!) concern here.
In spite of "all this equipment, all this incredible phone equipment," he now realizes that 100% percent of his "confidential (sic ...)" exchanges, both with Mexico and with Australia, were in fact word-for-word public.
So, "does the POTUS(?!?!), in fact, actually possess an expectation of privacy with regard to his supposedly-highest-level(!) communications?" Quite understandably, and with apparently very-good reason given the present circumstances, "the POTUS concludes that he does not."
... and, likewise quite-understandably, "the POTUS does not Accept this."
(And, neither would your boss. Fact is, "your a*s would be grass.")
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 02-16-2017 at 07:30 PM.
And "this just in, from the same source," which I would like to be considered together . . .
Quote:
Now, they’ll take this news conference. I’m actually having a very good time, okay? But they’ll take this news conference -- don't forget that's the way I won. Remember, I used to give you a news conference every time I made a speech, which was like every day.
Q (Off mic.)
THE PRESIDENT: No, that's how I won. I won with news conferences and probably speeches. I certainly didn't win by people listening to you people, that's for sure.
But I am having a good time. Tomorrow they will say, Donald Trump rants and raves at the press. I’m not ranting and raving. I’m just telling you, you're dishonest people. But -- but I’m not ranting and raving. I love this. I’m having a good time doing it. But tomorrow the headlines are going to be: Donald Trump Rants and Raves. I’m not ranting and raving.
... but then, the man goes on ... and, waitaminit, perhaps we should actually start listening to him ...
Quote:
THE PRESIDENT: Here’s the thing.
Q Isn’t that important?
THE PRESIDENT: Okay, I understand -- and you're right about that except this. See, I know when I should get good and when I should get bad. And sometimes I’ll say, wow, that's going to be a great story, and I’ll get killed. I know what’s good and bad. I’d be a pretty good reporter -- not as good as you. But I know what’s good. I know what’s bad.
And when they change it and make it really bad -- something that should be positive. Sometimes something that should be very positive, they’ll make okay. They’ll even make it negative. So I understand it because I’m there. I know what was said. I know who is saying it. I’m there. So it’s very important to me.
Look, I want to see an honest press. When I started off today by saying that it’s so important to the public to get an honest press. The press -- the public doesn't believe you people anymore. Now, maybe I had something to do with that, I don't know. But they don't believe you.
If you were straight and really told it like it is, as Howard Cosell used to say, right? Of course, he had some questions also. But if you were straight, I would be your biggest booster, I would be your biggest fan in the world -- including bad stories about me. But if you go -- as an example, you're CNN -- I mean, it’s story after story after story is bad. I won. I won. And the other thing: Chaos. There’s zero chaos. We are running -- this is a fine-tuned machine. And Reince happens to be doing a good job. But half of his job is putting out lies by the press.
I said to him yesterday, this whole Russia scam that you guys are building so that you don't talk about the real subject, which is illegal leaks. But I watched him yesterday working so hard to try and get that story proper. And I’m saying, here’s my Chief of Staff, a really good guy, did a phenomenal job at RNC. I mean, we won the election, right? We won the presidency. We got some senators. We got some -- all over the country, you take a look, he’s done a great job.
And I said to myself, you know -- and I said to somebody that was in the room -- I said, you take a look at Reince, he’s working so hard just putting out fires that are fake fires. They're fake. They're not true. And isn't that a shame, because he'd rather be working on health care. He'd rather be working on tax reform, Jim. I mean that. I would be your biggest fan in the world if you treated me right. I sort of understand there's a certain bias, maybe by Jeff or somebody -- for whatever reason. And I understand that. But you've got to be at least a little bit fair. And that's why the public sees it -- they see it. They see it's not fair. You take a look at some of your shows and you see the bias and the hatred. And the public is smart. They understand it.
Okay, yeah, go ahead.
Q We have no doubt that your latest story is (inaudible). But for those who believe that there is something to it, is there anything that you have learned over these last few weeks that you might be able to reveal that might ease their concerns that this isn't fake news? And secondly --
THE PRESIDENT: I think they don't believe it. I don't think the public would. That's why the Rasmussen poll just has me through the roof. I don't think they believe it. Well, I guess one of the reasons I'm here today is to tell you the whole Russian thing -- that's a ruse. That's a ruse. And, by the way, it would be great if we could get along with Russia, just so you understand that. Now, tomorrow you'll say, Donald Trump wants to get along with Russia, this is terrible. It's not terrible -- it's good.
We had Hillary Clinton try and do a reset. We had Hillary Clinton give Russia 20 percent of the uranium in our country. You know what uranium is, right? It's this thing called nuclear weapons and other things. Like, lots of things are done with uranium, including some bad things. Nobody talks about that. I didn't do anything for Russia. I've done nothing for Russia. Hillary Clinton gave them 20 percent of our uranium. Hillary Clinton did a reset, remember, with the stupid plastic button that made us all look like a bunch of jerks? Here, take a look. He looked at her like, what the hell is she doing with that cheap plastic button? Hillary Clinton -- that was a reset. Remember? It said "reset."
Now, if I do that, oh, I'm a bad guy. If we could get along with Russia, that's a positive thing. We have a very talented man, Rex Tillerson, who is going to be meeting with them shortly. And I told him, I said, I know politically it's probably not good for me. Hey, the greatest thing I could do is shoot that ship that's 30 miles offshore right out of the water. Everyone in this country is going to say, oh, it's so great. That's not great. That's not great. I would love to be able to get along with Russia.
Now, you've had a lot of Presidents that haven't taken that tact. Look where we are now. Look where we are now. So, if I can -- now, I love to negotiate things. I do it really well and all that stuff, but it's possible I won't be able to get along with Putin. Maybe it is. But I want to just tell you, the false reporting by the media, by you people -- the false, horrible, fake reporting makes it much harder to make a deal with Russia. And probably Putin said, you know -- he's sitting behind his desk and he's saying, you know, I see what's going on in the United States, I follow it closely; it's got to be impossible for President Trump to ever get along with Russia because of all the pressure he's got with this fake story. Okay? And that's a shame. Because if we could get along with Russia -- and, by the way, China and Japan and everyone -- if we could get along, it would be a positive thing, not a negative thing.
And then ... (I'm not making this stuff up, folks!)
Quote:
Q Is Putin testing you, do you believe, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I don't think so. I think Putin probably assumes that he can't make a deal with me anymore because politically it would be unpopular for a politician to make a deal. I can't believe I'm saying I'm a politician, but I guess that's what I am now. Because, look, it would be much easier for me to be tough on Russia, but then we're not going to make a deal.
Now, I don't know that we're going to make a deal. I don't know. We might, we might not. But it would be much easier for me to be so tough -- the tougher I am on Russia, the better. But you know what, I want to do the right thing for the American people. And to be honest, secondarily, I want to do the right thing for the world.
If Russia and the United States actually got together and got along -- and don't forget, we're a very powerful nuclear country and so are they. There's no upside. We're a very powerful nuclear country and so are they. I've been briefed. And I can tell you, one thing about a briefing that we're allowed to say because anybody that ever read the most basic book can say it: Nuclear holocaust would be like no other. They're a very powerful nuclear country and so are we.
If we have a good relationship with Russia, believe me, that's a good thing, not a bad thing.
Gentlebeings, I think we need to pause and digest all of this, in a way that "the popular American press" does not seem too keen for us to do.
I mean, "this President truly is ... different!"
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 02-16-2017 at 07:53 PM.
That is why the media controlled by the NSA/CIA is out to get him. The US policy of detente is bad for those inside the government that thrive on every single crisis and war, and if there isn't one, they'll make one if they have to. Right now we just have mainly the democrats behind all this pushing things anyway they can, I am sure though when republicans jump on board, Trump might be doomed and it will be a return to business as usual.
"what happens when I'm dealing with the problem of North Korea?" This has already happened -where privileged info was spread out all over the party table, with waiters and others milling around, taking videos and pictures. So much for the integrity of Trumps' intentions.
And shining 'smart' phone lights on the tables and documents. Flashlight apps have been notorious for turning on the mic and camera and streaming audio and video to remote sites.
Oh well. I guess no situation is so egregious and illegal that it can't be poke fun of:
That is why the media controlled by the NSA/CIA is out to get him. The US policy of detente is bad for those inside the government that thrive on every single crisis and war, and if there isn't one, they'll make one if they have to. Right now we just have mainly the democrats behind all this pushing things anyway they can, I am sure though when republicans jump on board, Trump might be doomed and it will be a return to business as usual.
You know, I can't look beneath the cover-word, ##CLASSIFIED##, but I do know that the amount of money spent on nuclear missiles and nuclear submarines and paying people to sit there "holding that football" and having their hands inches away from the proverbial trigger. Don't those people ever get bored doing that sort of thing? Or, does the thought of being able to vaporize the planet make them feel important instead of impotent?
I don't think we're going to go back to "business as usual" anytime soon. This guy is no push-over (unlike many of his recent predecessors). You don't become a billionaire without a very keen knowledge of human nature, money, and power ... something that "a professional politician" really does not have. A politician makes his living by manipulating other people. A businessman, at least in his direct dealings, seeks to profit other people and, along the way, of course himself as well. If you succeed at doing it ... if you fabulously succeed in doing it ... then you "bring something to the table of pure politics" that hasn't been there before.
"Get along with" Russia? Unthinkable! Or, is it?
I find it rather interesting that Whitehouse.Gov is publishing transcripts of press conferences in their entirety. You can hear the loaded questions being asked. You can hear the reporter trying to steer the response into (Dirty Laundry) "gimme something we can use." Whereas the original source office is publishing the entirety of the source material. A very original idea that is also "very Internet." Simply encouraging the press to stop being "yellow journalism" is also a good thing to be saying in a calm voice from the podium.
If there's anything that I could say about people's present feelings, both in the USA and outside of it, it would be that people want their leadership to think – and to act - differently, and to put their interests and those of their country first in all negotiations and "deals." That is how "real, mutually-beneficial trade" is done.
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 02-17-2017 at 08:05 AM.
You know, I can't look beneath the cover-word, ##CLASSIFIED##, but I do know that the amount of money spent on nuclear missiles and nuclear submarines and paying people to sit there "holding that football" and having their hands inches away from the proverbial trigger. Don't those people ever get bored doing that sort of thing? Or, does the thought of being able to vaporize the planet make them feel important instead of impotent?
I don't think we're going to go back to "business as usual" anytime soon. This guy is no push-over (unlike many of his recent predecessors). You don't become a billionaire without a very keen knowledge of human nature, money, and power ... something that "a professional politician" really does not have. A politician makes his living by manipulating other people. A businessman, at least in his direct dealings, seeks to profit other people and, along the way, of course himself as well. If you succeed at doing it ... if you fabulously succeed in doing it ... then you "bring something to the table of pure politics" that hasn't been there before.
"Get along with" Russia? Unthinkable! Or, is it?
I find it rather interesting that Whitehouse.Gov is publishing transcripts of press conferences in their entirety. You can hear the loaded questions being asked. You can hear the reporter trying to steer the response into (Dirty Laundry) "gimme something we can use." Whereas the original source office is publishing the entirety of the source material. A very original idea that is also "very Internet." Simply encouraging the press to stop being "yellow journalism" is also a good thing to be saying in a calm voice from the podium.
If there's anything that I could say about people's present feelings, both in the USA and outside of it, it would be that people want their leadership to think – and to act - differently, and to put their interests and those of their country first in all negotiations and "deals." That is how "real, mutually-beneficial trade" is done.
Ain't that rich? This dumb broad (yea I'm going to refer to Schultz that way and I make no apologies - and actually I could have used a different adjective) - wants a probe - how about we also probe the DNC itself? Pot calling the kettle black much?
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
