Slashdot Mirror
Bannon Loses National Security Council Role in Trump Shakeup (bloomberg.com)
Top presidential strategist Steve Bannon has been booted from the National Security Council amid a reshuffling of the key panel, Bloomberg reports Wednesday morning. President Donald Trump reorganized the council, removing Bannon and downgrading the role of his homeland security adviser, Tom Bossert, the report added, citing multiple sources. From the report: Bannon, the former executive chairman of Breitbart News, was elevated to the National Security Council's principals committee at the beginning of Trump's presidency. The move drew criticism from some members of Congress and Washington's foreign policy establishment. A White House official said that Bannon was placed on the committee in part to monitor Trump's first national security adviser, Michael Flynn, and never attended a meeting. He's no longer needed with McMaster in charge of the council, the official said. Trump fired Flynn on Feb. 13 for not disclosing to the president or to Vice President Mike Pence the extent of his conversations with Russia's ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak, before Trump's inauguration.
siphoned off? That's the question we should be asking, along with why someone like him would be allowed anywhere near a national security post.
Because national security policy drives information security policy. (See, for example, the thread about DHS scaling up invasive border procedures, most of the victims of whom will be innocent Americans.)
Stuff that matters, read a few more bytes into the tagline.
Bannon lasted longer than I thought he would. For a time it almost seemed like he might be able to outmaneuver the Kushners, but having Ivanka installed in the White House and having Jared running around as an official messenger and errand boy demonstrates that in the end, the only people Trump will ever really trust is his family.
And that's fine by me. Whatever I think of Trump, I actually think the Kushners are half-way reasonable people, and it's a lot better having them whispering in his ear than that vile racist troll Bannon.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The whole "Susan Rice story" is largely a concoction, an attempt at distraction from the fact that there is growing evidence of significant ties between Trump and Putin. It's almost like a Nixon supporter saying "Clearly Deep Throat broke the law, so Nixon should get off!"
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Bannon appointed himself to the NSC by having Trump signed off on an executive order that he didn't read and didn't find out about until it got mentioned in the media. Your tax dollars at work.
On a related note, Trump had played twice as much golf in two months than Obama did in eight years.
Hillary Clinton was barely tolerated by half of the Democrat voters. That's why Hillary lost. Trump was a barely tolerated candidate among Republicans, but not quite weak enough to be defeated by Hillary Clinton. For example, take a look at her first-amendment positions and you'll see someone who is way to the right of center. When you have a choice between a Republican running as a Democrat and a Libertarian running as a Republican, is it any surprise that the latter wins?
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Name a media outlet that was silent on the Susan Rice story. I'll wait...
CNN? MSNBC? They also have pulled a CNN.
... Unmasking isn't something she can do without asking permission from the relevant intelligence agency.
Then I'm sure you can answer how she was able to unmask without the permission of those agencies then, since the order appears to have come directly from her. Or the fact that she ordered detailed spreadsheets on specific people in the Trump camp. This of course is also while she claimed she didn't do it. I'm going to note that DC isn't the only site that has made this claim either, so has the WSJ and Bloomberg.
Om, nomnomnom...
Yes, it's a big conspiracy to take away your rights and complete the liberal agenda of switching this county into a communist utopia where bookist academic types rule over small businessmen and blue collar workers.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Well you can feel whatever way you want about it, but considering you have multiple agencies stating that there was no evidence or said evidence was circumstantial at best. I'm sure that's working out great for you. I'm guessing you'll be right there in supporting republicans and their demands that she come for an under-oath interview right? That should clean it all up very quickly. It's not like they'd have to subpena her or anything, like several investigative committees did to the current head of the DEA because of bureaucratic stonewalling.
Om, nomnomnom...
The released emails from the Clinton campaign illustrated behavior that many voters can objectionable, and the only response I've ever heard was to accuse the alleged hackers who stole the data and released it.
ie: shoot the messenger.
Amusingly, your Nixon example is actually more relevant when applied to the whole Clinton email thing.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
How much private citizen data has he already
Not as much as Susan Rice.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I just searched CNN.com for "susan rice" and there is -zero- mention of the accusations against her in the first page of the search results. If I click over to the "Stories" tab, the first result is her denying any spying allegations involving the Brits. I'd love to have a non-conservative opinion on this, and their silence speaks volumes.
Fake news is news that is not true, not news you don't like.
No, this is like saying "Deep Throat gave us clues about Nixon, and thus he should be impeached". Rice clearly broke the lie, lied about it, and has implicated most of the previous Administration in breaking privacy laws. But I guess that doesn't matter to you because Trump.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
You want to try that again? I'm sure her word for it, is just as true as when she claimed Benghazi was because of a youtube video. And it came out via wikileaks that this was a deliberate obfuscation of the event.
Om, nomnomnom...
But how come no story on Susan Rice having unmasked multiple people in the Trump camp.
Because /. doesn't cover every non-story put out by the Trump camp.
It should be noted that she stated "she didn't do it, and had no knowledge of it." And of course that was proven untrue.
Citation? My hunch is the usage of this quote doesn't match the context.
And now we're seeing the claims making the rounds of "It wasn't political" but why wasn't the FBI involved then?
Because the US has multiple intelligence agencies.
Why did she do something that was outside of the preview of her job(advise the President and consume intelligence summaries)? Why does this appear to have been a case of her setting a new precedent(the unmasking).
That's not only within the realm of her job, it's a great example of actually doing your job.
People affiliated with an incoming administration are having clandestine meetings with agents for foreign powers who helped decide the election? Some unmasking is warranted.
Why were they unmasked by her, when all 3 letter agencies could do this on their own if they're conducting an investigation.
For the same reason the NSA decided to approve her request, because the unmasking was warranted.
And of course, why are so many of the media silent on this. When they were all over other major events similar to this and licking their chops like a dog seeing a steak. Well you can all have fun now.
Because they recognize it's just another attempt by Trump and his defenders to distract from his completely made-up claims that he was wire-tapped. And to distract from the many, many, unsettling ties from his camp to Russia.
Seriously, you think this was political shenanigans? Then why didn't it come out during the election? Tons of these links were being investigated during the election but it was only the media who actually uncovered anything. The closest thing we saw to a leak from the government was Democratic Legislators complaining that there were incriminating things not being released. Meanwhile, we heard non-stop about the investigation into Clinton and her emails, including leaks. One of the reasons Comey apparently announced the temporary re-opening of the investigation just before the election is that he didn't think he could stop his office from leaking!
If the investigations into Trump were politically motivated you would have heard about them in October.
I stole this Sig
The Civil War already established how that works.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
GOP may end up hating T more than the Dems.
It would be ironic of GOP tries to impeach him out of office, but Dems actually prevent or delay it so that T can finish demolishing GOP and their reputation.
Pence could probably get more of GOP's (traditional) agenda passed than T, which the Dems obviously don't want. T is proving to be an ineffective blabber-mouth (which was predictable in my opinion).
Buckle up for Mr. Toad's wild orange ride...
Table-ized A.I.
. . .which is not information security policy, it's bureaucrats getting their jollies and over-promoted mall cops living out their Dirty Harry fantasies.
All the REAL infosec policy comes out of NIST in Gaithersburg, not DHS on Nebraska Avenue. . .
What does this have to do with computers?
If Trump lasts 8 years civilization will collapse and self-driving cars will need to be work in Mad Max settings.
I stole this Sig
How so? Maybe you could take the time to explain it.
Trump will be getting the same advice from the same people, but one of those people will now have a slightly different title. How is that not important?
Indeed, underlying all of this is the fact that the Obama Administration and the three letter agencies were doing their job. If Trump and his proxies didn't want to be outed playing footsie with the Russians, then, well, they shouldn't have been playing footsie with the Russians. This all comes down to the fact that Trump's minions, like Flynn, are not only of dubious loyalty to US interests, but are astonishingly stupid people. Who in their right mind would think that you could communicate with the fucking Russian fucking ambassador and not have someone in the US intelligence community not know about it? For fuck's sake, the Russian ambassador has probably been constantly and consistently spied on since the Second World War.
The stupidity of Trump's team, the arrogance coupled with ignorance, is just profound. It's stunning to think that such a group could ever achieve such high office, and the fact that Nixon was likely felled by someone in a three letter agency ought to have been a pretty goddamned good education. But one gets the impression that this band of thieves are almost proudly ignorant of how things work, and truly seemed to believe themselves to be untouchable.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I'm just going to leave this right here. Then when you get to the parts where your arguments fall apart you can let me know.
If the investigations into Trump were politically motivated you would have heard about them in October.
Funny thing, we found out about them about a month ago. And it was started right after Trump became the nominee. It *almost* seems like the previous president was hoping someone else was going to win, and they could simply sweep this egregious abuse of power under the rug.
Kinda strange isn't it? How come you didn't hear about previous administrations doing this...
Om, nomnomnom...
True. There is no proof, but we all know for damn sure that it is true.
I normally don't respond to AC's. But the irony, I can taste it through the internet.
Om, nomnomnom...
Generally having a role removed from your list of duties is seen as a demotion, and the timing of this, after Ivanka's official installation in the White House, is highly suggestive that the rumored power struggle between Bannon and the Kushners has resolved itself in the Kushners' favor. Also note that there have been rumors that Bannon and Priebus weren't getting along all that well either. I don't expect Bannon to work for that much longer at the White House.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Hillary was so bad of a candidate that she could only be competitive against an idiot like Donald Trump. Trump was so bad of a candidate that he could only be competitive against a corrupt career politician like Hillary Clinton.
The people are so bought into the cycle of voting for the lesser evil that even with historically polarizing, horrible, and unliked candidates, 3rd parties still barely got 2.5% of the vote...
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
Joke's on you. I'm a registered Republican. (used to be Libertarian but switched when Ron Paul was in the primaries)
As for SJWs, treating people fairly is not really garbage, and has nothing to do with maxism. Most people who are upset by SJWs are upset because they've been called out on their bullshit. That most SJWs are women and are mostly targeting men has a lot to do with the vitriol that is spewed about SJWs. A lot of guys are just too old fashioned to want to here criticism from a woman. I don't care what gender someone is, as long as the criticism is valid and constructive. Usual response to SJWs is: I don't like what you're saying, so I'll mock you to take that power away from you. But that funny thing is you can't win that way (well at least *I* find it funny)
Democrats like Obama and both Clintons are very right leaning. They are no Howard Dean, Ralph Nader or Bernie Sanders. Not that a 1 dimensional scale for measuring political views is a good metric, it lacks nuance. For example, I'm a Republican and believe in small decentralized government and in supporting small business owners, but I'm against the death penalty. Does that make me a liberal? Probably not.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Indeed. Suggestive conjecture about rumors about internal squabbling over relationships is exactly what Slashdot should focus on, because there is nowhere else on the Internet that provides that information.
The US has carried a constant debt since the US Civil War. Debt is literally what makes the world go round.
If by "literally" you mean "figuratively,"
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Uh, are you calling Trump a Libertarian?
LOL.
He's apparently a corporatocrat, which makes him just as much of a libertarian as most of the people who call themselves libertarian. Don't like it? Separate yourself from that label to escape the association with all the crypto-corporatocrats hiding among you. Sometimes a label is too tainted and has to be discarded.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Sir, I think you mean ineffective Twitter-mouth.
I predict there will be an avalanche.
Trump's approval rating drops by the day. He has accomplished nothing of significance. He has deliberately made many enemies. He has filled the swamp with banksters and oil executives. Alienates allies. White house staff fighting each other. Ethics violations. Failed travel ban, twice. Failed health care destruction, twice. Voices in his own party are disagreeing with him. Trump-Russia collusion investigation.
The avalanche. Once his base realizes that they won't get what they wanted, they will flee in droves.
Trump's low approval is starting to reflect on the Republican party's approval. This may come back to bite. Bigly.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
Hillary was a Republican running as a democrat? Huh? Not even close.
Hillary was *all* democrat, lock stock and barrel.. She just hit the general election knowing that radical leftist doesn't win elections so she tried to run as far right as her liberal democratic base would allow w/o howling about it.
You remember the discussions about abortion and the Heller ruling at the last debate? She had no choice but to shore up her base and took the radical liberal leftist positions on these issues at that point because she knew they were not going to show up and vote if she didn't. She's most decidedly a democrat, running as a democrat, unless you think she's just a liar who was going with what she thought was the prevailing winds...
Now if you want to argue Trump was a democrat running as a republican you might have more of a case. He wasn't bound by traditional republican views on social issues, at least during the campaign (and one would argue isn't even now). However, I think he's really what he appeared to be and marketed himself as, which turns out to be a non-politically correct position which is derived from what he thinks is common sense. It's this "common sense" thing that got him elected in the face of the Access Hollywood tapes, being out spent and being the underdog the whole time.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
The Huffington Post said he was a NAZI and that's good enough for me. I don't want NAZIs in the US government and neither should you. And no, I won't bother to research where this information came from, because NAZI.
Have a nice day.
"The released emails from the Clinton campaign illustrated behavior that many voters can objectionable, and the only response I've ever heard was to accuse the alleged hackers who stole the data and released it."
What the emails did NOT illustrate was whether the Republican campaign was doing any better. While the release the emails gave us data, it did not give us information relevant to the choice between Republican and Democrat yet it was claimed to do so.
You are mistaking curators for messengers.
I don't care what gender someone is, as long as the criticism is valid and constructive.
People get sick of "SJW criticisms" because they aren't valid, constructive, or solicited. Attempting to engage with them in dispassionate, rational discussion is a waste of effort because before you've finished your first sentence, they fall back to name-calling. So, for the sake of expediency, people simply respond to "SJW criticisms" with "oh, shut up".
Zero? Under "Everything", it's the first 3 links. Under "Stories", it's the first 4 links.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
That's because nothing in the hacked Hillary emails depicted illegal behavior but the process to obtain and leak them was illegal. The situation is opposite for Trump.
So you're one of those fake 'progressive libertarians.' This is what happened to the term 'liberal.' You're just more of the same really. If you were truly for small government you would not buy into the idea of class warfare that today's social justice requires as a basis. Regardless of what you claim to be, such ideas most definitely have a basis in marxism (eg: "we have nothing to lose but our chains").
I found today's "No True Scotsman" comment.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
I can't think of any definition of "Libertarian" that matches Trump. What are you thinking there?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
The standard of living in the USA is certainly stagnant, and arguably slowly backsliding, but it's not "broken". We are STILL at or near the top of the heap in terms of national power and wealth. Venezuela is a real example of "broken" (because they put all their eggs in the oil basket).
The "break it to start over" suggestion risks losing everything in a bid to try to improve what mostly works. It reminds me of sports teams who come just shy of a championship, and revamp their roster to try to get better next for season, but instead ruin their original chemistry and slide way down in rankings. A lot of teams make that mistake: it fails far more often than it works.
Table-ized A.I.
The US has carried a constant debt since the US Civil War. Debt is literally what makes the world go round.
If by "literally" you mean "figuratively,"
Or by "go round", OP means "function adequately in an economic way".
His approval rating is actually up about 10% this week.
"nothing in the hacked Hillary emails depicted illegal behavior"
It is illegal for a political campaign to coordinate strategy with a PAC. The Hillary e-mails certainly seem to depict a blatant disregard for this law.
https://theintercept.com/2016/...
I can't think of any definition of "Libertarian" that matches Trump. What are you thinking there?
His instincts lean towards scrapping onerous, pointless regulations. Towards government more in its constitutionally described role, rather than as Nanny. He's no classical libertarian, of course. But on many topics he skews more that direction than most of his primary race counterparts, and certainly wildly more so than his Democrat opponent.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Debt is fine, if you can print money in the denomination of the debt.
If you can't, be careful. And that holds whether you are a nation state, a company, or a person.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
There's a lot of noise about the likes of Flynn being outed, but strangely little outrage about what they were doing, at least from Republicans.
There isn't much talk about "what they were doing" because there wasn't much going on at all and that takes all the fun out of the story for the Democrats. There's a reason that even Obama's DNI said that despite having access to everything, he say no evidence of anything out of bounds. There's no there there. All the hype is just the ongoing Democrat theater designed to find some way, any way, to distract from their horrible choice of candidate and idiotic conduct during the election. And the fact that under Obama they lost nearly a thousand legislative seats, most of the governoships, both houses of congress, and now the White House and the Supreme Court. The whole ZOMG RUSSIANS! meme is getting downright hilarious. Meanwhile we have every indication that people in actual power at the time of the election and leading up to it were using intelligence resources for political research.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Oh for fuck's sake - Your lord and master Obama already said in November that there was no Russian influence on the campaign.
No Russian interference on the vote itself, ie, they didn't hack into any of the electronic voting machines.
Everybody but Trump acknowledges that Russia influenced the campaign.
I stole this Sig
Well when you host your own website you can decide what can and cant be posted.
In the mean time, I'll keep reading slashdot and continue to be not surprised about news articles related to major players in major online political movements and how they are fairing in their current role in real world politics.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Look at any pictures from a leftist rally, and there are always communist groups marching with them. Most if not all receive funding from Russia. This has been happening since forever
What part of "US Communist Party suffered a crippling blow with the collapse of the Soviet Union" do you not comprehend?
I find it highly amusing to see leftist marching with groups that supposedly helped Trump get elected. HGHLY amusing.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley