Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex Ingram
this is an example of a bad post. In a vacuum it is not bad, however you clutter this thread with these types of posts all the time. You take any story that has the word "data" and assume they must all be tied together
DISCLAIMER: **** this post got way too long. Oh well, that's ok. Let's hopefully make it the last time I have to defend my posting style for a while.
Rex,
It's not like the post was a brand new concept out of left field. It's a bunch of Trump & Co actions with a similar MO that I've taken issue with in the past. Call them dots. The Flynn news today was a big dot; a hub of sorts, with decent potential to be part of something bigger. Because that's the way the people who make up Trump's agenda operate. Not the bull**** public agenda, but the private agenda that runs concurrently. That's the one to watch IMO, at all times. Because there's been a pattern developing for about 2 months. Unless Trump is lashing out, or unless the team is failing at coordinating with the rest of the government, they are always working some alternate angle that doesn't seem to fail often at all.
With this particular government, I really prefer to view the forest and not the trees. But alas, I think I zoomed out too FAR in this post. Back to the specific topic of data...
Balance that vacuum you mentioned with the fact that I have many previous in depth posts questioning the "data" items listed. I've covered the voting fraud commission and the insecurity of its data a ton. I posted at least 2 or 3 times about my concerns that Trump could have given Putin US government data about citizens/voters, or other serious intel during their insecure G20 meeting (like he did with the Sergeis in the Oval), and lastly I posted the **** out of my concerns with the Nunes interference story, how Flynn's little helper unfireable Ezra brought everyone into the secure room in the White House to look at classified intel from IC files. What they DID retrieve (as revealed by Nunes at his press conferences) shows that they were in an area that should have been off-limits to Trump. This happened on a night that Nunes disappeared without a word, got let into the WH by Flynn's guy Ezra, who nobody would discuss until it was later exposed (sound familiar?), and this event triggering Trump to make WH visitor logs secret from then on. Then there's the Kaspersky Antivirus thing I posted about a few days ago. Banned by the IC because of data vulnerabilities, but still installed on Trump admin computers. This is hugely problematic. Add in that ******ed joint cyber team with Russia or other willful ignorance of cybersecurity gap, and ask why the **** Trump is so happy to share our **** with Putin or hackers (and by "****" I mean "data" of course).
Clearly I didn't pluck the word "data" out of thin air to try and make a false connection. The commonality is there, and if we're being datamined in any way, that's beyond just criminal, it's frightening to think of the implications of such a thing in authoritarian hands.
Also important, I said several times that it's only something to keep an eye on and nothing more (yet) becauset I felt yesterday's Flynn news could wind up being really significant. I didn't issue subpoenas or indictments or anything based on the theory, and it's not like I'm posting from imaginary sources with secret information. All I did was take an existing pattern seems to have expanded by a large amount.
If you're that interested in whether calling my last post "bad" is right or wrong, feel free to look back and see if my thoughts are consistent with the evidence known and presented. In the meantime, I stand by my position that mass data collection on individuals (for authoritarians most likely) is responsible for the parrert we're seeing.