Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

951–960 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#951

Post by poulsbohemian »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #680
cjohnson318 wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn't punishment or prosecution be suggested. I've worked with classified information, and I would have been held accountable for my actions, why shouldn't they? I'm tired of this Too Important To Have Consequences business. It defeats the whole purpose of having qualifications, and security, and rules of any kind.

Do you honestly think that (a) Trump's Justice Department would prosecute any of these offenses, and (b) even if so, that Trump wouldn't just pardon anyone involved?

We all know this is the likely outcome, but Congress should use its powers to force the Trump administration to be public in not prosecuting and in pardoning, for the purposes of upholding rule of law to the extent possible. And the forth estate needs to throw both in their face to ensure the public understands both how everything about both what they did, and how the Trump administration will respond, is both unlawful and harmful to our country.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#952

Post by __turbobrew__ »

deepsun wrote: post #675
jimbokun wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s Trump’s one true talent. He got the Supreme Court and the judiciary leaning his way in his first term. Congress is controlled by either his Republican primary candidates, or Republicans who are too afraid to cross him. Now he’s purging from the federal branch anyone who is not completely ideologically loyal to him. That is the true purpose of Doge.

For years I've been taught that US political system is based on checks and balances. Now I see that just like in any other country it was based on morals of people: voters, elected, and appointed.

You forgot the last check, a disgruntled person with a gun.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#953

Post by whiplash451 »

jkbyc wrote: post #879
whiplash451 wrote: post #790

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europe suffers from another kind of "corruption", more akin to a corrupted file system: absurd, rigid and unpredictable regulation makes life very hard for businesses, which drives large private capital away. I am European, and every time I open one of those stupid locked-on bottle caps, I feel pain for my country, for Europe (and for my face).

One EU AI startup even named itself after these bottle caps:) https://www.bottlecapai.com/

With Tomas Mikolov in it? Holy cow! :)

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#954

Post by noboostforyou »

AStonesThrow wrote: post #946
noboostforyou wrote: post #928

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo! And the sadder part is this isn't even anything new, but it's all come to a head now. “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” ― Isaac Asimov, 1980

> The strain of anti-intellectualism Perhaps part of the problem is that snooty intellectual elitists want everyone to be geopolitical geniuses and socially activist and fight for their hobby horses, when every nation, especially large ones, are in desperate need of people who mind their own business, keep their heads down, and contribute humbly to the common good. Rather than being pushed through university and havi…

> are in desperate need of people who mind their own business, keep their heads down, and contribute humbly to the common good.

What do you even mean by this? Unless I'm misunderstanding, your comment sounds like you are advocating for a "let them eat cake" ideology.

Do you think our current administration exemplifies the three things you say we are in desperate need of?

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#955

Post by GVIrish »

bobtheborg wrote: post #679
GVIrish wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using Signal in this case is wrong and foolish full stop, and the extremely likely reason they did so is so they could escape standard government record keeping compliance (NARA). To start with, classified information is ONLY supposed to viewed in a SCIF. Secondly, it should never be loaded onto private devices. The private phones of national security leadership would be prime targets for every hostile intelligence a…

"classified information is ONLY supposed to viewed in a SCIF" No. No, no, no. Most classified information is NOT designated SCI. When classified info was mostly paper, it was placed in GSA approved safes in regular 'ole office buildings. You'd get to work, open your safe, and do your work. Most SIPRNet computers are not in SCIFs. Heck, you can even mail classified documents via USPS. Confidential and secret documents…

SCIFs are for viewing TS materials, whether or not they are SCI. Even then, SCIFs are often employed for processing things that are only marked Secret or systems only handling Secret. But yes, if we want to be specific, Secret has a lower bar and can be worked on outside of SCIFs but still not in public or at home.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#956

Post by dang »

heartbreak wrote: post #886
dang wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't do this here, regardless of how wrong someone is or you think they are.

I honestly don’t think my comment warranted your attention, let alone your feedback. Nonetheless, point taken.

The overtone of personal attack is the thing that made me respond. It's easy to fall into that without intending to.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#957

Post by Galanwe »

chrisco255 wrote: post #833
Galanwe wrote: post #751

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well once you've stated that the president is immune and can pardon whoever for whatever, there's really not much to do. The US needs a new constitution to enforce this, otherwise the very concept of justice cannot exist.

The U.S. doesn't need a new constitution. If you don't like the current president, you vote for a new one in 4 years. That's how it works.

If there is anything to learn from the current situation IMHO, it's that 1) the US needs a stronger constitution to prevent a take over, and 2) it needs a new election system to avoid binary elections, which lead to extreme policy turnover and candidate fatigue.

There's nothing wrong with writing a new constitution. France is at its 5th iteration, and some candidates propose a 6th republic, nothing dictates that you're supposed to get it right on the first try.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#958

Post by [deleted] »

dragonwriter wrote: post #654
refurb wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's a pretty big false dichotomy to present "people directly opposed to their policy platforms " as the sole alternative to people "picked on the premise of just one qualification: they'd be Yes Man/Woman".

[deleted]

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#959

Post by unethical_ban »

ctrlp wrote: post #543
analog31 wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are being spied upon, by the future, on purpose. That's why we have laws regarding records retention, open meetings, etc.

Lincoln famously suspended the law of habeas corpus (due process) for the purposes of preserving the Union and his ability to govern, and many consider him to be one of our greatest statesmen. There is no government on earth that can function "in the open". Secrecy is a requirement. Go ahead and try to plan an office party without some "need to know" organizers and see what kind of trouble and interference you stir u…

You missed the part about "spied on by the future".

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#960

Post by arbitrary_name »

riehwvfbk wrote: post #691
chris_wot wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Trump Whitehouse, not only do you believe the rules don't apply to you, but actually the rules don't apply to you.

Use Signal, an encrypted platform from the CIA with a charismatic public persona: the horror! Use an unencrypted email server in a closet for years: that's nothing.

>charismatic public persona

You have weird taste in men.

Post reply on HN