DiscussMormonism.com

The NYT is reporting that spies are listening to the president's calls on his unsecured iPhone. Staff have told him to use secure lines. Staff have told him Russian and Chinese spies are listening. He still insists on using his personal cell phone. Officials defending the president argue that because he doesn't really understand US intelligence, he doesn't know anything important to share.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/24/us/p ... urity.html

Not only is this a fairly serious issue unto itself, it's a much more significant infosec lapse than Clinton's personal server issue that saturated news coverage for months leading into an election as a Watergate level scandal. This much worse situation is, what, a third tier story that people are barely aware of?

notwithstanding your clumsy attempt to diminish and dismiss Hillary Clinton's issue, but remind us what your position was on her "infosec lapse".....

subgenius wrote:notwithstanding your clumsy attempt to diminish and dismiss Hillary Clinton's issue, but remind us what your position was on her "infosec lapse".....

My position was that it was a serious issue that Democrats were overly dismissive of, but also not nearly as serious as the saturation level media coverage implied or right-wing propagandists pretended to believe or care about. I believe I got into several disagreements with Kevin over my harsher take on Clinton for this issue.

What was your view again sub? Because you're not a partisan hack who takes his marching orders from flim-flam artists, I assume that as bad as that was, Trump has got you even more up in arms, right?

EAllusion wrote:

subgenius wrote:notwithstanding your clumsy attempt to diminish and dismiss Hillary Clinton's issue, but remind us what your position was on her "infosec lapse".....

My position was that it was a serious issue that Democrats were overly dismissive of, but also not nearly as serious as the saturation level media coverage implied or right-wing propagandists pretended to believe or care about. I believe I got into several disagreements with Kevin over my harsher take on Clinton for this issue.

What was your view again sub? Because you're not a partisan hack who takes his marching orders from flim-flam artists, I assume that as bad as that was, Trump has got you even more up in arms, right?

Trump also was destroying government documents, which is illegal. Ripping up everything that was handed to him. It got so bad his staff had to hire people and pay them $60k/year to do nothing but dig through the trash and tape together everything he destroyed. Where was the outrage?

Kevin Graham wrote:Trump also was destroying government documents, which is illegal. Ripping up everything that was handed to him. It got so bad his staff had to hire people and pay them $60k/year to do nothing but dig through the trash and tape together everything he destroyed. Where was the outrage?

where was my outrage with Hillary's "infosec lapse", i am having trouble finding that post(s).

nevertheless, I suppose, given the carefully crafted OP, that you guys are of the mind that Hillary's was simply a "lapse"...a simple mistake any high security level person with decades of upper level government experience could make - right?...i mean she was just a govenror's wife, first lady, senator, President candidate, secretary of state, and then President candidate again...how can she be expected to know anything about "infosec"?

EAllusion wrote:The NYT is reporting that spies are listening to the president's calls on his unsecured iPhone. Staff have told him to use secure lines. Staff have told him Russian and Chinese spies are listening. He still insists on using his personal cell phone. Officials defending the president argue that because he doesn't really understand US intelligence, he doesn't know anything important to share.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/24/us/p ... urity.html

Not only is this a fairly serious issue unto itself, it's a much more significant infosec lapse than Clinton's personal server issue that saturated news coverage for months leading into an election as a Watergate level scandal. This much worse situation is, what, a third tier story that people are barely aware of?

Ok, more to the point...Trump has 3 phones...2 secure phones and 1 personal phone...the latter is the topic of your OP and the source for your inference that any/all of his President discussions are exclusive to....I missed the report that confirms your assertion, please note for me.

The "lock her up" chant is really about expressing utter contempt for the legitimacy of political opponents and, in extreme cases, a genuine desire to see the state crush them. But ostensibly it's a call to jail Hillary Clinton for poor infosec and FOIA compliance practices that are simply dwarfed in the Trump admin.

The hypocrisy is frustrating, the disparities in media coverage are unacceptable, and at the end of the day it actually is bad that Trump is doing this and that his handlers defend him by implying he's an uniformed moron who can't do much damage.

EAllusion wrote:The "lock her up" chant is really about expressing utter contempt for the legitimacy of political opponents and, in extreme cases, a genuine desire to see the state crush them. But ostensibly it's a call to jail Hillary Clinton for poor infosec and FOIA compliance practices that are simply dwarfed in the Trump admin.

The hypocrisy is frustrating, the disparities in media coverage are unacceptable, and at the end of the day it actually is bad that Trump is doing this and that his handlers defend him by implying he's an uniformed moron who can't do much damage.

you didn't know about the other 2 phones did ya?

subgenius wrote:the other 2 phones

Oh, so long as the White House staff have got him to carry other phones as well as the insecure one he insists on using to talk to his friends about whatever is on his mind, well, there's nothing to worry about is there?

subgenius wrote:

EAllusion wrote:The "lock her up" chant is really about expressing utter contempt for the legitimacy of political opponents and, in extreme cases, a genuine desire to see the state crush them. But ostensibly it's a call to jail Hillary Clinton for poor infosec and FOIA compliance practices that are simply dwarfed in the Trump admin.

The hypocrisy is frustrating, the disparities in media coverage are unacceptable, and at the end of the day it actually is bad that Trump is doing this and that his handlers defend him by implying he's an uniformed moron who can't do much damage.

you didn't know about the other 2 phones did ya?

Did you read my link?