'Wish I Had The Power' To Hack Enemies' Emails, Says Man Very Close To Having Such Power
from the maybe-time-to-pull-back-nsa-powers dept
This weird presidential election continues to get weirder. Donald Trump, perhaps upset about being overshadowed this week by the Democratic Convention, held a press conference on Wednesday morning where he said a whole bunch of completely nutty stuff. A lot of the attention is being placed on his weird possibly half-joking request that Russia hack into Hillary Clinton’s emails and reveal the 33,000 that were deleted (or maybe just give them to the FBI, as he later said in a tweet). That was bizarre on a number of levels, including coming right after denying he had any connection to Russia and the possibility that they had hacked the Democratic National Committee’s computer system.
But it was his follow up comment that should be a hell of a lot more terrifying. He claimed that he “wished” he had the power to hack her emails:
“Honestly, I wish I had that power,” Trump responded. “I?d love to have that power.”
Now, again, there’s an argument that this comment was sarcastic in the same manner as the “please, Russia” comment that everyone’s been focusing on.
But here’s the thing: in just a few months he very well might have that power. The NSA certainly has the ability to hack into just about anyone’s emails should they want to. And no matter what we feel about whether or not the NSA has or is currently abusing that power, at the very least the level of abuses aren’t nearly as bad as they could be in the hands of someone who just doesn’t seem to give a fuck about the Constitution or the law.
As we noted a few months ago, surveillance powers should be designed as if the person you least trust in the world had control over the systems. Whether — to you — that’s Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton or someone else entirely doesn’t really matter. It’s a pretty clear reason that we should be massively curtailing the surveillance powers granted by the US government to both the intelligence community and the law enforcement community.
Here we have the nominated presidential candidate joking that he’d make use of the power — which he’d have — to hack into the communications of political enemies. And while some will argue this is yet another on the long checklist of reasons why Trump is not fit for the job, it’s even more a condemnation of our surveillance powers today. Whatever people think of the candidates, it seems like the one thing we should agree on is vastly limiting the surveillance powers.
Filed Under: donald trump, emails, hacking, hillary clinton, nsa, power, russia, surveillance
Comments on “'Wish I Had The Power' To Hack Enemies' Emails, Says Man Very Close To Having Such Power”
Frankly I think we need to have a constitutional amendment about eligibility for any elected government office. The amendment would be as follows:
If a candidate either while campaigning for office or while in office advocates any activity that is in violation of the constitution, that person is immediately disqualified for any elected government office for the rest of their life.
That would put some teeth in their oath of office.
Re: immediately disqualified
That would disqualify all major party candidates of the last 100 years (and a majority before that).
I find the whole thing ironic – for decades I’ve been told not to worry about excessive government power, because in our democracy the leaders will always be reasonable, civilized people who won’t abuse them.
Not some kind of crazies like the people who led [nightmarish dictatorship of your choice].
Then comes Mr. Trump…
Re: Re: immediately disqualified
I’m sure Trump will be rather sensible with all the power the position of president of U.S. regime has.
Re: Re: Re: immediately disqualified
That WAS sarcastic, right?
Don the Con is an immature, vindictive child who would misuse any power he couls get his stubby little orange fingers on.
Re: Re: Re:2 immediately disqualified
Isn’t the point of government to not let a peoples “bad” human nature be free… but rather controlled / restricted by the State??? How can it be that the person elected would have that much impact??? What did Obama do that Bush did not? same-same… but different. We are all slaves unless we are all not slaves… human minds make the decision in what to believe but reality exists none the less.
Re: Re: immediately disqualified
Your bias is showing.
Hillary and Trump are cut from the same cloth, trashing one without the other reveals intellectual dissonance.
Re: Re: Re: immediately disqualified
Perhaps YOU can’t discern the difference between, but those who are superior to you can. You should probably sit down, shut up, and attempt to learn from your intellectual masters — if you can manage that.
Re: Re: Re:2 immediately disqualified
LOL! They’re both awful in different ways, but the takeaway here is that they’re both awful.
Re: Re: Re:3 immediately disqualified
I am not sure the venerable AC understands these things. So not much of an intellectual master.
The way another person trashes another candidate reveals much about their politics.
Re: Re: Re: immediately disqualified
I’ll trash whom I please, thank you.
FWIW, in my view Trump and Clinton are both horrible, but in very different ways.
Clinton is horrible in the normal way that Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Barack Obama were horrible.
Which is, in my book, pretty bad.
But Trump is a whole different class of horrible.
I can’t in good conscience vote for either of them.
My vote will go to Gary Johnson and Bill Weld. They’re far from perfect too, but they are not corrupt, obviously incompetent, or insane, and will respect the Constitution.
That’s something – more than I can say for Clinton and Trump.
Re: Re: immediately disqualified
I must have missed the part where that would be a bad thing?
Re: Re:
I’d be happy with a constitutional amendment requiring presidential candidates to have prior political service, preferably as a Senator or state governor.
And, no, a CEO is not the same as a governor since a CEO tells people what to do, but a governor has to compromise with the legislature.
Re: Re:
only if you can make it retroactive for those already in office
Is he trying to get himself fired?
It’s the only rational explanation I can think of at this point.
Did he not say at one point that he might one day just decide he didn’t want to be President? Maybe he’s bored.
Not saying who I’d druther be elected dogcatcher, but if I had a dog I cared about, I’d be very worried.
Maybe this is what we need...
Maybe the only way we’ll reign in the potentially-irresponsible governmental powers that we’ve granted to our elected officials – is if we have a blatantly irresponsible elected official using them.
At least then the legislative and judicial branches have zero excuse to allow it to continue – lest they be outed as blatantly irresponsible as well.
As crazy as it would be to have Trump as president – I suspect it would demonstrate very quickly just how fucked up our government has become.
Re: Maybe this is what we need...
I’ve run across that idea before, and it never ceases to confuse and/or horrify me. It strikes me as similar to someone saying that the only way to demonstrate how bad car crashes are is to deliberately get in one, while they are in the car.
The USG is already a huge steaming pile of bad(among other things), I really don’t need some narcissistic nutjob elected to what is supposed to be the highest office in the country to demonstrate this to me.
Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
I didn’t say i liked it or approved of it…
But damn, we’ve got some seriously stupid people in congress who need a serious wakeup call.
Re: Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
I think the problem is that shit keeps getting crazier and more extreme, and it is just accepted as the new normal. I would hate to keep running this experiment of “let’s see who (or what policies) is so over the top that we as a nation “wake up”. And I am not sure who it is in Congress who would get this wakeup call. Most just punch their time cards, or they have already been as extreme as Trump for ages. Any serious departure from this trend is what is seen as radical. The “compromise center” has shifted way too far into bizarroland already.
Re: Re: Re:2 Maybe this is what we need...
The partisanship and Red Scare nonsense that currently divides US society has erased the middle. You have to pick a side or you’re a dirty _______.
Result: D. Trump for president; the ultimate protest vote.
You’re already radical, that’s the problem. America needs to stop being afraid, stop seeing violence as a shortcut to security and justice and start respecting common sense. When that happens you’ll stop getting candidates like Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton in the front row of presidential candidates and start getting the safe pairs of hands you actually want on the helm of the good ship USA.
Re: Re: Re:3 Maybe this is what we need...
Had you an wisdom you would know this one simple truth.
Might makes right, violence unfortunately is the ONLY tool to ensure security and justice.
Sadly this same tool can also be used to ensure chaos and tyranny as well. Let’s stop treating tools as default evil or good, they are just fucking tools! Their usage defines their nature and only in that moment. The inability of people who cannot understand this is a great peril and evil that facilitates the rotting away of wisdom and benevolence!
The real problem in America is multi-faceted. The existence of Political Parties in a voting system created to ensure their life blood. The apathy of an entire electorate that bitches and moans without actually doing anything. The corruption of 3 branches of government to the point where Government Believes IT is the USA and NOT ITS CITIZENS!!!
Congress is apathetic and unconstitutionally gives away regulatory powers to agencies. They do not have this power. The only duties regulatory agencies can constitutionally perform are the enforcement of laws created by Congress, not themselves.
SCOTUS no longer understands the English language and intentionally perverts the Bill of Rights for political and judicial activism. They have intentionally corrupted the Constitution.
The Executive Branch believes itself to be Royalty, and is unrestrained by a Congress that has more allegiance to Party than to Nation.
The electorate, a cacophonous group of ignorant and sycophantic dregs, clamoring to destroy themselves each time the opportunity arises. Boasting and Bragging about themselves while Disparaging and Insulting the others never once realizing or understanding their hypocrisy.
We currently are fulfilling the Prophecy handed down to us by George Washington, the First and Greatest President to have ever served the US.
Re: Re: Re:4 Maybe this is what we need...
I vote anonymous coward for President of the USA 2016***
Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
So you would rather have Hillary who has a long and terribly disturbing record of failure? Now you want her to captain the ship? Guess you want a repeat of the Titanic.
Re: Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
Do you like chocolate? No? You must like vanilla then.
Dogs? No? Oh then you must like cats then.
Black? No? Then you must like white.
This may surprise you but it’s entirely possible to believe that both are terrible choices, to believe that just because putting one is in charge is a terrible idea doesn’t mean that you believe that putting the other in charge would be any better.
When I see people saying that they want to see Trump in office specifically because they think he’ll make things worse in the hopes that that will be the tipping point… yeah, that’s a stupid idea, and a stupid reason to vote for someone for the reason I noted above.
Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
“It strikes me as similar to someone saying that the only way to demonstrate how bad car crashes are is to deliberately get in one, while they are in the car.”
Good analogy.
Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
More like, we’re stuck in a car that’s got uncontrolled acceleration and the brakes aren’t working. There’s only one way that’s going to end, so you might as well crash it deliberately in a manner of your choosing, instead of letting it happen in a way that you’re unprepared for.
(Not saying I agree, but I can understand the sentiment without having to agree with it.)
Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
If you are on a train and you know it will crash soon with no chance at all of preventing the crash, would you rather it crash as fast as possible or drag it out as long as you can?
Re: Maybe this is what we need...
you rein in the wild horses who wish to reign…
One wonders if any of this has broken through the bubble around Congress. A man who behaves like an angry toddler, might end up with the power to get YOUR communications. There isn’t anything stopping your data from being scooped and used against you, so he can ‘win’.
You created a system without limits, refuse to provide oversight, keep pushing for more powers because you think it applies to everyone else but not you. Now consider President Trump able to pick up a phone and have your entire life on his desk in 2 hours tops…
I guess the one redeeming thing is, they’ve cultivated a society that thinks to try to stop this sort of thing means you love terrorists & hate america… How many of you will end up in Trumps control? At least the lobbists pay you.
Libertarian the Election
The only candidate willing to take a stand against these types of government overreach is Gary Johnson… (Destruction of 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th amendments and so forth) The other two candidates will only keep ratcheting until the constitution is a thing of the past…
Re: Libertarian the Election
And he has absolutely no chance of winning. All he’ll do i bleed votes away from Clinton and increase Trump’s chances of winning. If he actually cared about the country, he would withdraw IMMEDIATELY, endorse Clinton, and save the fight for after the election.
Same for Stein, by the way. Remaining a third-party candidate at this point is an act of selfish ego and risks the future of the country.
Do recall that the votes for Nader in 2000 gave us 8 years of The Shrub — the man principally responsible for the increase in terrorist attacks around the world, the man responsible for the financial meltdown, the man responsible for much of the surveillance state, and most certainly the worst president in the history of the US. And as bad as that was, Trump would be far worse.
Re: Re: Libertarian the Election
If he actually cared about the country, he would withdraw IMMEDIATELY, endorse Clinton
For a second there I thought you were joking. If he cared about the country he would do anything but endorse Clinton.
Re: Re: Re: Libertarian the Election
This is the kind of thing I rail against. Voting third party might let either one or the other of the main party contenders in… or let the third party contender in if enough people voted for them. Has nobody considered that? Stop living in fear!
Re: Re: Re:2 Libertarian the Election
If you think that ANY third-party candidate has ANY chance in the presidential election at this point in US history, then you’re a delusional moron.
I’m not saying that’s a good thing: it’s not. But it’s reality, and if you can’t grasp that, then you have zero concept of the two-party system is operating. You need to do some remedial reading. In fact, you need to do a LOT of remedial reading.
Voting libertarian or green in THIS election is voting for Trump. Period. If you want to piss away your vote like that as some selfish act of protest, I suppose you can. Enjoy your self-righteousness as President Trump wrecks the country.
I backed Bernie (not entirely, but he was the candidate close enough to my views to merit my support). And now I’m going to work for the Clinton campaign, not because I’m enthralled with her, but because someone who voted with Sanders 89% of the time is the closest I’m going to get, and because the absolute highest priority, at all costs, is to stop Trump — who would be a disaster for latinx, blacks, Muslims, women and just about everyone else who isn’t a rich white straight racist male.
You want to grow a third party? Sure. So do I. Maybe one of the nascent efforts will do that. But AFTER this election. Because if Trump becomes president, there may not BE a next election.
Re: Re: Re:3 Libertarian the Election
You are insane.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing you have always been doing but expecting different results.
If you backed Bernie as self proclaimed Socialist then you deserve every last ounce of Shit Trump brings to the table, because whether you know it or not, your actions have birthed the likes of Trump. Don’t feel bad, many others like you have done the same so you are certainly not alone.
Voting for a 3rd party makes your vote into a political statement about the Party system. In order for it to be destroyed, you have to start somewhere. People with attitudes like yours never go anywhere because you cannot take the first step, the ultimate act of a loser… FEAR of getting started. So instead out of chagrin you berate others for doing something you are too cowardly to do.
Besides, Bernie just left the Democratic Party… you gonna vote for your man now loser?
Re: Re: Re:4 Libertarian the Election
As my link says, authoritarianism is everybody’s problem.
https://medium.com/@wendycockcroft/authoritarianism-is-everybodys-problem-3d9c12d29694#.lq9v31sq0
Trump’s is less subtle than Hillary’s but they’re both authoritarian. Voting third party in BIG ENOUGH NUMBERS will get a third party candidate in. It’s a numbers game. Get the numbers in, get the candidate in.
Re: Re: Re:5 Libertarian the Election
Yes, agree, both are most certainly authoritarian. Both sided with the FBI against Apple over an All Writs FARCE. Even the “self proclaimed Constitutionalists” like Cruz fucked that one up as well.
Both parties clearly want to mercilessly destroy the constitution, they just differ on which specific items in the Bill of Rights to start with. For the left its the 1st and 2nd, for the right its the 4th and 5th.
But in reality both wish to suppress all of them when it suits their political agendas, they just have particular ones they hate more than the others.
Re: Re: Re:3 Libertarian the Election (think that ANY third-party candidate)
Actually this electoral cycle has more chance of a third party becoming a major player than any election in the past 50 years.
At this point it is mostly about who the American people hate the least. Gary Johnson is certainly less hate-able than either of the other two.
If I were to put odds on violent civil revolt in this country, the lowest probability is with Johnson. I don’t think there is any question about that.
Trump = complete batshit chaos.
Hillary = SCOTUS whimpers in the corner while the corporate oligarchy wipes its dick on the Constitution.
Johnson = The establishment would have NO fucking idea what to do with this guy.
Johnson is west coast likable. I think he has a real shot in CA, FL, VA, most of the northwest and midwest. TX will probably go Trump because it’s TX. The northeast and the deep south will go HRC.
If you regard the unholy trinity of cabal news as the propagandist douche squeeze that they are, then maybe Johnson may have a better chance right now than Trump.
NONE of the data that comes out of the trinity is reliable. If you aren’t completely ignoring them at this point, you are conceding your mind to the system.
Re: Re: Re:3 Libertarian the Election
both hilary and trump will wreck the country, would it not be better to show your support for someone that cares about protecting your rights than to endorse a candidate that clearly does not solely to deny the other side their votes?
Re: Re: Re:2 Libertarian the Election
Voting third party might let either one or the other of the main party contenders in…
Don’t vote 3rd party and let one of the 2 main parties win. Vote for one of the 2 main parties and ensure it!
Yeah, I see how that works.
Re: Libertarian the Election
I’ve gone this way too.
Gary Johnson is closer to an Eisenhower Republican than Trump. His thoughts on switching over to a VAT style tax system is a little nuts, but it would never pass Congress, and I think he is aware of that.
Trump is dangerous because Congress is vindictive enough to give him running room. HRC is dangerous because she would ride the country down in a flaming ball of shit if that is what was required for her to be the most important person in the room. Her corporate benefactors are counting on that fact.
Gary Johnson isn’t that dangerous at all. There is a lot of stuff in his platform that Congress won’t let him do, and the stuff that they MIGHT let him do is fairly progressive.
At the very least he will be asking a lot of the right questions. And he certainly has the stamina for the job. The guys runs triathlon.
See now I thought that was the most bizarre part. Him saying how he’d love to have that power. Hopefully the electorate is going to understand they’re voting to give him that power and I’m sure some people close to him have broken the news that he could her that with a little cash.
Sure he was sort of asking Russia to get Hillary’s lost emails but I didn’t find that nearly as damming as the part you highlighted
Bigly
Re: Re:
“I didn’t find that nearly as damming as the part you highlighted”
Yeah, me too.
Re: Re:
Really? I don’t think that is what is being highlighted.
Mr. Trumpery said ‘completely nutty stuff’?!
Does anyone else know about this?
Perspective
Not focusing on the person for a second.
It kind of feels like he’s just following the public perception that our current and past government think about citizens email privacy.
Seriously, how many stories in the past few years have we read? From Microsoft suing to at least tell folks that they are being spied on to overseas datacenters center our own government fights tooth and nail to access to trusted employees abusing collection database information to look up ex wives or potential girlfriends…
While the guy may be saying things off the cuff, the precedent is that our own government has been very focused on doing exactly what he’s suggesting.
— What frightens me more, as he’s just one person, is that entire agencies with thousands of people and resources are perceived to be doing just what he’s calling for on all of us.
Irony.
This is part of what I call the Trump Genius. The Formula is simple; you point out what the government is doing by making broad claims about how and on whom you’d use the power you’d be granted if you were in office today to do completely inappropriate and frankly, insane things.
When the media freaks out and calls you Hitler then asks you for a statement, you point out this is business as usual, and people go absolutely nuclear when they realize the existing commander in chief has already done this on a broad scale (IRS targeting of tea-party protesters with tax audits and getting in bed with foreign intelligence agencies to name two sins he’s saying he’ll commit here. Also, isn’t it funny how we have two political parties that kinda push the same agenda’s?).
Even if you lose the election, you’ve got the public in such a flurry about what the commander in chief can do, that they won’t be able to do anything for the next 2 generations.
Russia and China are fully aware of how destructive psychological and economic warfare is and given the last 20 years of US dominance in this field, I think they very much so prefer to give the American People any kind of chance they can get given the alternative dominance from multinational corporations or the destabilization of the United States.
Re: Irony.
I still think it is 1 party with 2 public faces
Re: Re: Irony.
You walk down the street and see somebody loudly winning a game of three card monty. Then you walk back an hour later, the winner is the dealer and the dealer is now the winner. Would you play?
Have you ever had something sold at you this hard that ended up being worth the sticker price?
Have you ever been given the stick and carrot to encourage you to pick between two undesirable options, when all the while there was a third option you would have seen if you’d hadn’t been under pressure?
Have you ever been patronized with the phrase “I hear you”, or received another quaint platitude from someone who clearly disrespects everything about you?
Have you ever been asked to “join us” at a card table looking for a sucker?
It isn’t that you win, it is what you win. If there is no integrity, there is no reasonable expectation of fulfillment. And even if the worst is the result, then at least the next time around we will all be more compelled in our duty to the electoral process.
Another Nixon. What …..gate will Trump get caught with?
Re: Re:
It’ll be Email-Gate most likely.
Trump is so Nixon 2.0 in a lot of ways.
Re: Re: Re:
Except Nixon actually had policies. Some good, some bad, some indeterminate because the experiments were never run.
Trump’s policy is Trump. That’s it. In terms of megalomania, Nixon was an amateur compared to him.
I keep waiting for Trump’s long slide into dipshittery to hit bottom, but amazingly he’s still going.
And hacking is the least of my worries with him as president, though I wonder if he’ll give our nuclear launch codes to the Russians, too. I can only imagine the level of incompetence and fuckwittery with him as a sitting president.
Re: Re:
That’s what popcorn is for.
Trade ya a paradigms for 4 nickles....
I call this a paradigm of the innocent, My wife has it, there are just some things that some people cannot understand, like stealing, and lying, and not being upfront and honest.
She asks me how some people can sleep at night.
I sleep well, just by trying to be the man she wants me to be.
Just like Turdegon
Fellow Americans just have to look to Turkey to see how far a megalomaniac will go to destroy any perceived enemies of themselves.
Or look to Russia where a powerful & rich politician can make or break anyone on their whim of the day.
Soon the USA will be the “Home of the dictator & land of the enslaved”.
Unfortunately not even God will save the USA.
Re: Just like Turdegon
Soon the USA will be the “Home of the dictator & land of the enslaved”.
‘Soon’?
Re: Re: Just like Turdegon
Yeah .. opps
Too late
Just like any other fascist, Trump would like to control the internet.
This comment was held for moderation for at least 24 hours
Kinda fun watching a ‘bagger get his panties in a twist because, well, Trump.
Enjoy the results!
Trump Hacking E-mails
I listened to his news conference. He never asked Russia to hack into Hillary’s e-mails. What he requested was that if Russia had found the 30,000 missing e-mails to turn these over to the FBI. Hillary and her co-conspirator (the President) are trying to move the discussion away from the DNC violation of our federal election regulations.
Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
Are you really that stupid? It must be difficult to survive with such a tiny, inferior mind.
If Russia acquires those emails, it’s ESPIONAGE. Period. And if you’re so blindly by your misogynistic hate for Clinton that you think it’s acceptable for a presidential candidate to request that another country conduct espionage against the United States, then you’re a worthless, traitorous piece of filth.
Re: Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
If Russia acquires those emails, it’s ESPIONAGE.
Are you stupid, Russia is already into espionage and so is the good ole US of A! Just ask Angela Merckel if she enjoyed the US spying on her? You guys defending Hillary are amazing. Obama has been killing American citizens with drone strikes. He has gone after whistle blower like no other before him. Hillary will be more of the same and most likely worse. You can see the tyrant in her if you just open your eyes.
Re: Re: Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
Have you seen Hillary? The very picture will burn your eyes out… and I am not talking about physical looks. For people that can see the aura of evil on that bitch…
Lets just say… Hillary lovers burned their sight out a long time ago and only cling to Hillary because that is the last thing they ever saw! They cannot see anything else!
Re: Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
Remember the server has already been wiped (with a cloth), so the Russia gets those emails then they have already been out there for a while.
The DNC is trying to make it a matter of National Security, which would mean those emails could possibly contain classified materials – which we were told wasn’t the case.
Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
I listened to his news conference. He never asked Russia to hack into Hillary’s e-mails. What he requested was that if Russia had found the 30,000 missing e-mails to turn these over to the FBI.
To be clear that’s NOT what he said at the actual press conference. At the conference he asked Russia to get the emails (though, it’s pretty clear he was being somewhat sarcastic).
AFTER the conference, he did a tweet where he changed what he said slightly, and THEN asked Russia, if they found those emails, to turn them over to the FBI. You’re confusing what he said at the conference with what he tweeted after.
Re: Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
Here was the Tweet:
If Russia or any other country or person has Hillary Clinton’s 33,000 illegally deleted emails, perhaps they should share them with the FBI!
This is from the conference:
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said during a news conference here in an apparent reference to Mrs. Clinton’s deleted emails. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Twisting this to him asking is nothing but FUD.
It’s funny that Billary supporters care more about words than the illegal actions of their candidate of choice.
Re: Re: Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
So what you’re essentially saying is that Russia might/would have copies of the emails without having to have done any hacking?
If you’re so sure that via hacking isn’t what he meant, can you elaborate on how the Russians would have come across these emails?
You know, just so we can be FUD-free.
It’s sad that man like him can be even considered for presidential candidate and now he is one. I really hope that he won’t win this elections. He is a disaster on so many levels.
In Australia our (compulsory) national census has just changed from being deidentified to permanently retaining names and addresses.
Australia has no bill of rights or human rights act. We already have far worse than snoopers charter and patriot act combined here – and there is no legal mechanism for challenging it.
Personal data is like crack to the motherfuckers. No amount is ever enough.
Maybe we need a big scandal like Trump using the surveillance machine against his political enemies for this decent into the abyss to finally be reconsidered.
I can’t see it stopping any other way. For any of us.
It’s hilariously sad how some people contort themselves into rationalizations of what Trump says/does. Some feel compelled to defend the indefensible, I’m not sure why.
Again
Oh here is again. Someone fretting over Trump wanting some power the Obama administration ALREADY HAS AND IS ALREADY USING!
Re: Again
Remember, the very platform of the left is rights and power for me, but not for thee.
The people that scream of equality the most are the ones visiting the most inequality of all! It is quite the situation to have discovered that they hide their own racism and bigotry under the guise of calling others racists and bigots…. no wait… I keep forgetting, this is history 101!
The politicians that spend most of their time attacking other politicians are very shallow and incompetent. Better to turn your followers against the other citizens to ensure your victory.
I tried to remind all of the Bush lovers that whatever power you give that ass clown the other party will gain as well then they make it into office! But no… refused to listen, just like every other worthless Party before country fucktard.
Let's look at the facts.
So far as we know,
Hillary’s email server is long gone — unless her lawyers are lying and they kept copies in defiance of the FBI.
So we aren’t talking about hacking currently, but merely going through old stuff that Russia may have picked up a few years ago.
So all that Trump is asking is for the Russians to look through their old stuff & turn it over — if they have it.
All of the hyperbole and spin comes from people in the tank for Hillary.
Re: Let's look at the facts.
“So all that Trump is asking is for the Russians to [fill-in-the-blank]”
When words fall out of Trump’s mouth, you might think that obviously he’s being sarcastic or joking, but he is heard WORLD-WIDE. And what people hear is that if he is serious he is encouraging espionage against the US. And if he is joking, then other countries will think that joking about such matters is shocking and, at the very least, irresponsibly trivialising hacking and surveillance by the country that the US’s last Republican presidential candidate (Romney) called the US’s number one foe.
He’s already talked about possibly not supporting Nato allies, about pulling out of the WTO, about how at least Putin is ‘a leader unlike what we have here’ just as 3 recent instances of inflammatory rhetoric – are they all jokes and sarcasm? Is that how he will run the country – as a reality TV freakshow special?
Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
I wonder how much more you would freak out if you knew the real truth. Hillary’s emails are next to nothing compared to what other spying the other countries have done to each other… you probably cannot even fathom a quarter of it all.
Trump did not call for espionage. He is just asking to take advantage of potential espionage that “may” have already occurred. And since it is clear out own government is corrupt, it is more sad that there is a call to a foreign power to do a justice that our own refused to perform because “political favors and corruption”
Trump worded things very specifically to out idiots like you. It’s working.
Re: Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
“Trump did not call for espionage. He is just asking to take advantage of potential espionage that “may” have already occurred.”
Let’s say the Russians hand over a bunch of emails to the FBI, or to whoever you like. And Russia swears, hand on heart, Scout’s Honor, that the information dump is absolutely 100% genuine and real. Why, specifically, do YOU want to believe the Russians? What proof could YOU offer that the Russian offer is not real instersed with fake, in other words a disinformation operation. You want the US electorate to take the word of the Russians? Hello?
Re: Re: Re:2 Let's look at the facts.
O no, you misunderstand, the verification if it is real or not is less of a problem here.
I have no intention of believing anything that a government says. Anyone dumb enough to just believe this shit is an idiot.
The data contained in the emails do not have to directly corroborated to start a backlash. You know as well as I do that the unwashed masses just love them some good ole political soap operas and will go gaga over them. Plus the fact that it would piss off a few politicians… it might get them to take nation security more seriously than hand stomping a pulpit as they lie to the people about their intentions.
There is a lot more value in this story than just who is right or wrong, lies or truth.
Re: Re: Re:3 Let's look at the facts.
Not to mention the fact that at least 150,000,000 people think someone running for president should be in prison.
Re: Re: Re:4 Let's look at the facts.
This is another good point. People have literally gone to prison for less, but because she is a Celebrity, a lot of eyes go blind.
The Damage that Party sycophants have caused to this nation cannot be calculated by human means. Hillary is Trash, all the party had to do was present a decent candidate, but it is not possible because Hillary has paid her dues and she is OWED this!
I would feel sorry for the Bernie idiots if they didn’t hate America so much they want to see it destroyed! I saw all of this going down from the get go and they just held on to false hope. This is not hard to understand in the least either. These political games have been going on for centuries and they will not be stopping until a Superior being stops it or we are all dead!
Re: Re: Re:4 Let's look at the facts.
You think 47% of the US population thinks that one of the presidential candidates should be in prison? That sounds extremely dubious. Can you support that?
Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
It’s surreal, isn’t it? There is nothing going on by these folks that is mindless happenstance. Nothing with them or their actions happens by sheer coincidence. They are anxiously analyzing all this data of America’s chicken shit reactions to their every move.
Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
“then other countries will think that joking about such matters is shocking”
You mean the uptight twist-words-into-something-they-are-not crowd. FTFY.
Most normal human beings should see it for what it was.
Re: Let's look at the facts.
I wouldn’t doubt if it turned out they kept the emails.
GO TRUMP!!! That cheese doodle orange headed maniac has all the lefties in a state of absolute panic.. while the righties sit in ignorant bliss to all his asshattery.. … meanwhile.. the rest of us are on the edge of our seats waiting to see what kind of stupid shit Trump will say,.. or what kind of lying thievery will spew from that crooked ass Clinton crew. This is an entertainment gold mine, you couldn’t make this shit up if you wanted too!!!…. crap, running low on popcorn.. Mike REALLY needs to sell popcorn on this site!!
/s
Re: Re:
Ditto.
Re: Re: Re:
Ditto!
Re: Re: Re: Re:Ditto
ad infinitum
it’s turtles all the way down
Consider this. What does a president actually do? What power do they have? Obamacare? Written and funded by congress. Close Guantanamo? Seems it is still open. Appoint Supreme Court Justices? Seems the last nominee is still waiting with nothing at all happening to get him confirmed. Besides sending out drones to kill people (which is pretty cool) Congress is where the power is. Immigration? Laws written by congress, hell, we don’t need new laws if you want to stop illegal immigration, we just need to enforce the laws that are already on the books. What is Congress’ approval rating? Pretty much lower than anyone else.
I think this whole campaign was designed to have the American people’s eyes off what really matters, and that is Congress. Trump could be president and nothing will change.
Re: Re:
Signing statements.
“If it is Russia, which it’s probably not, nobody knows who it is, But if it is Russia, it’s really bad for a different reason, because it shows how little respect they have for our country. When they would hack into a major party and get everything, but it would be interesting. I will tell you this. Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you find the thirty thousand emails that are missing. I think you’ll probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let’s see if that happens next.”
You idiots, it was a clearly sarcastic comment. It was quite funny, actually.
Besides, according to Clinton there’s nothing classified in those 30k emails, right?
Re: Re:
Hillary was spectacularly trolled by Trump, and her little mutton chop followers can’t stand it.
I am no fan of Trump but I have to give the clown props for putting on a Hillaryious show.
(yes, the misspeeling was intentional internet gramma and speelin nazis.)
Does anyone doubt Hillary wants that power?
She may not say it out-right, but does anyone doubt it?
Re: Does anyone doubt Hillary wants that power?
She wants it, and wants it bad, just like Trump.
Anyone that wants that power, is pretty much the very definition of unqualified for that power.
Re: Re: Does anyone doubt Hillary wants that power?
“Anyone that wants that power, is pretty much the very definition of unqualified for that power.”
And yet that’s the caliber of individual that wants that power. The ultimate catch-22.
Re: Re: Re: Does anyone doubt Hillary wants that power?
We need candidates that do not want the power, but desire to help America. I would be such a candidate myself, but I think my desire to avoid the shit tons of stupid that is the American people would ensure that I would never run for such a position ever.
I could not even serve as a Judge in trial because the laws are so fucked up and require a judge to become corrupt to now serve. The best and only thing I can do is serve as a juror and help ensure that the government is not fucking my fellow citizens over. If I could just get a few more million citizens to see the light, no one would need to run for office for the power, but to make sure things operate smoothly as possible, because the corrupted will not be able to consume power nearly as easily that way.
There was a 3rd party candidate here that had a chance. The DNC made sure he didn’t win the primary election. WikiLeaks will soon release emails that show that the vote during the primaries had been subverted.
A party subverts the vote and you want me to support their candidate? Not a chance.
Skunk world order
Is he buddy buddy with the skunks running this great nation into oblivion? What if he’s really a Clinton ally? No matter America is fucked.
Re: Skunk world order
No idiot, he is just allies with the people Hillary is allies with. They both hate each other.
There is certainly a very dark corner in government that is pulling a lot of strings on things, and they like to keep it that way by getting all of the stupid people to fight over the Party in power.
In reality the Democrats and Republicans are after the same thing. Tyranny, they just disagree on how to accomplish that goal, so the people you see giving to both parties are likely the worst of them all, because it does not matter which party wins, the shadow-players with all of the money and power win either way.
Re: Re: Skunk world order
…the shadow-players with all of the money and power win either way.
So true.
What about this?
Why doesn’t someone just make a citizen’s arrest of Clinton and Trump up the charges. Fling it all against the wall and see what sticks.
Re: What about this?
They have bodyguards.
“Why doesn’t someone just ..”
You’re someone, why ask someone else to do it? Please let us know how it goes.
Re: Re: What about this?
Ha funny. Maybe one of her body guards needs to step up and be a real man/ or woman. They can’t possibly have blinders on. They are just as possibly guilty of whatever she may be guilty of.
Re: Re: Re: What about this?
I think you’ll find, when you carry out your own suggestion, that they’re Secret Service. So you can add that to your conspiracy theory.
Re: Re: Re:2 What about this?
Yes, that’s right they are on OUR payroll. And that is one of the first things they did was to come up with that symantic expression, ‘conspiracy theory.’ That won’t cover them forever.
Re: Re: What about this?
If those bodyguards attempt to stop someone from executing a legal citizen’s arrest of her, they would be obstructing justice and would also have to be arrested. Do they think they are going to get away with fucking up America forever?
What is in those emails that Hillary and the DNC are so concerned about?
50/50
This 50/50 dichotomy is going to be the death of us all. They throw up two diametrically opposed factions to choose from, who both ultimately want the same things with different window dressing, and then watch the populace fight over which one gets to implement their version of dominance and submission.
I am an uninterested bystander at this point.
Re: 50/50
They are not diametrically opposed you toon. This is a farce only idiots believe in.
Right now the ONLY opposition between Trump and the rest is essentially immigration or if we sell out our local communities to the rich and powerful. Trump is still a fucking liberal just not as much of a cocksukking liberal as hillary.
The destruction of the Constitution, American Principles, and the Operation of the US Government is assured with both candidates and parties… just as George Washington said it would.
You just won the solid gold Kewpie doll prize… the one for idiots falling for the stupid shit that get spewed by lamestream media?
Re: Re: 50/50
…my point exactly
Re: 50/50
They throw up two diametrically opposed factions to choose from, who both ultimately want the same things with different window dressing, and then watch the populace fight over which one gets to implement their version of dominance and submission.
Do you actually think the New World Order lets the populace decide who is going to be their new voice for another eight years?
Trump: I want attention!
Let me summarize the past 2 weeks:
Last week, Trump got all the attention in the world because he was nominated as the Republican candidate.
This week, the attention is on Hillary Clinton as she becomes the Democratic candidate.
So OF COURSE Trump has to make another outrageous statement to get the attention back on him. Is he really such an egotistical narcissist that he can’t let other people have some attention for one week?
C'mon Mike
“half-joking request” Um… are you pushing for a job at CNN or Fox “News” Mike? I posted his comment yesterday and any half-wit SHOULD see it was a joke.
“Russia hack into Hillary Clinton’s emails” Tsk tsk Mike.
““Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said at a press conference in Doral, Florida, Wednesday morning after the second night of the Democratic convention. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let’s see if that happens.””
But yet… the idiots are out in force claiming he said something he didnt:
““This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent. That’s not hyperbole, those are just the facts. This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue.””
LOL… I just love to watch propaganda unfold.
So Trumps “call for a hack” were on an email server that has already been taken down. I guess it’s easier for anti-Trumpers to make stuff up for a sensational headline.
Funny the focus is on this rather than prosecuting Billary for compromising national security by running her own email server.
I personally would have called out to the NSA.
Greenwald: "That is such unmitigated bullshit."
Glenn Greenwald:
So, literally, the lead story in the New York Times today suggests, and other people have similarly suggested it, that Trump was literally putting in a request to Putin for the Russians to cyberattack the FBI, the United States government, or get Hillary Clinton’s emails.
***That is such unmitigated bullshit.***
What that was was an offhanded, trolling comment designed to make some kind of snide reference to the need to find Hillary’s emails.
He wasn’t directing the Russians, in some genuine, literal way, to go on some cybermission to find Hillary’s emails.
If he wanted to request the Russians to do that, why would he do it in some offhanded way in a press conference?
It was a stupid, reckless comment that he made elevated into treason.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2016/07/glenn_greenwald_on_donald_trump_the_dnc_hack_and_a_new_mccarthyism.html
So Trumps “call for a hack” were on an email server that has already been taken down. I guess it’s easier for anti-Trumpers to make stuff up for a sensational headline.
Perhaps HE doesn’t know the email server has already been taken down. I mean, let’s face it…Trump IS something of a retard when it comes to the comments he makes.
Re: Re:
Trump never called for a hack.
He said, jokingly, that if the Russians were the ones that were responsible for the DNC hack that maybe they were smart enough to also have hacked her personal email server, and if so, if they have the 30,000 missing emails, that they should disclose those to the media, and that the media would reward them greatly.
Trump was calling for Russia to release 30K emails that Hillary could not produce for the FBI. If Hillary knew she was under investigation, isn’t that tampering with evidence?
Oh why yes, it is.
A person commits the crime of tampering with evidence when he or she knowingly:
•alters, conceals, falsifies, or destroys
•any record, document, or tangible object
•with the intent to interfere with an investigation, possible investigation, or other proceeding by the federal government.
Note the “possible”
If convicted, can face a prison sentence of not more than 20 years and/or a fine.
This sort of thing is why I want trump to win. he will force people to sit up and take notice what their country has become instead of the continuous slow decline that would happen under hillary, trump will remove everyone rights way too fast that people will rise up against him.
Hahaha, Republicans think Hillary should be in prison and Democrats think Trump should be in prison.
No matter who wins, people be moving to Canada.
Re: Re:
we can use the influx of american refugees. we only have about 30 million people living in canada
“…could be in the hands of someone…”
Yet another who believes the POTUS actually “runs” the country. He would no more be running it then, than Obama does now, and that is to say – not at all. PRESIDENTS DO NOT RUN THE COUNTRY. THEY REMAIN (A CURRENT) SPOKESMAN FOR A REGIME BEHIND THE SCENES. THAT REGIME DOESN’T CHANGE. THE PRESIDENTS INTERFACE TO SAID REGIME MANIFESTS ITSELF AS A SET OF “ADVISORS” (SUPPOSEDLY “CHOSEN” BY THE POTUS ITSELF!).
Re: Re:
“PRESIDENTS DO NOT RUN THE COUNTRY”
No need to shout. But ASK TRUMP about that. He is the ONLY ONE who can fix things – he SAYS SO.
Can’t wait for the almighty Twitter Tantrum if/when he finds out he isn’t allowed to be THE ONLY ONE who can fix things.
I have a feeling that, one day, they’ll find Mike in a bag of excised hemeroids thrown out be Hillary’s proctologist.
Hillary Clinton’s entire election pitch seems to be
“I’m Hillary Clinton. Yes, I’m a terrible terrible candidate. I’m a dishonest corrupt crook who will sell out the American people. But what’s the alternative …”
and, sadly, it’s a compelling argument to vote for her.
Hillary speaks nutty stuff through her campaign
Hillary ONLY speaks talking points.
Hillary really says nothing that hasn’t been vetted by the DNC. That doesn’t mean that what has been vetted isn’t nutty. In fact, a lot of what we hear recently is batshit crazy. I heard an audio clip where someone superimposed two “far separated by time” statements that Hillary made about the email scandal. It was amazing to hear and proved she had been coached to say exactly the same thing every time.
Russians helping Trump? If Hillary looses then blame it on the Russians? Russians interfering with the election process by leaking emails? Assange influencing the election process? Assange hates Hillary so he’s doing this to damage her? The DNC parroting claims by Yahoo that it was the RSAs that hacked an underling’s email so it must be these same people that hacked the DNC? The DNC parroting claims that because a Russian keyboard was used by someone at least once that it was RSAs that hacked the DNC? No one else that uses a Russian keyboard uses these commonly used hacking tool sets? That Wikileaks is distributing malware to catch more DNC members in their trap so they can get more on them? Claims that Trump is encouraging more hacks on Hillary? This shit is rich and it goes on.
Wikileaks is a whistleblower site. They only expose the crimes, they don’t perpetrate the hacks.
Re: Hillary speaks nutty stuff through her campaign
RSA = Russian State Actors.
…and of course, on cue, the Clinton campaign got hacked, likely by Russians. Good job Trump!