Slashdot Mirror
Trump Proposes Joint 'Cyber Security Unit' With Russia, Then Quickly Backs Away From It (arstechnica.com)
In a series of tweets yesterday, President Trump proposed "an impenetrable Cyber Security unit" with Putin "so that election hacking, & many other negative things, will be guarded and safe." The news came as a shock to just about everyone who got word of it, including congressional members of his own GOP party. Less than 24 hours later, Trump decided against it, tweeting: "The fact that President Putin and I discussed a Cyber Security unit doesn't mean I think it can happen. It can't-but a ceasefire can,& did!" Ars Technica reports: "It's not the dumbest idea I have ever heard, but it's pretty close," Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican of South Carolina, said of the plan. Senate Republican Marco Rubio of Florida tweeted that "partnering with Putin on a 'Cyber Security Unit' is akin to partnering with [Syrian President Bashar] Assad on a 'Chemical Weapons Unit."' Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said that Trump and the Russian president decided at a meeting during a Group of 20 nations summit in Hamburg, Germany, to embark on a joint "cyber unit to make sure that there was absolutely no interference whatsoever, that they would work on cyber security together." But on Sunday, after it was clear that the plan was going nowhere, Trump took to Twitter and said no deal. That didn't stop Rep. Don Beyer, a Democrat from Virginia, from introducing on Monday an amendment to the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act that would bar a US-Russian cyber accord. He said: "Donald Trump's proposal to form a 'cyber security unit' with Putin is a terrible idea that would immediately jeopardize American cybersecurity... Trump must acknowledge that Russia interfered in the 2016 election and take strong, meaningful action to prevent it from happening again in future elections."
The US and the Soviet Union and now Russia have worked together on a few things.
Moscow–Washington hotline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...–Washington_hotline
Environmental Modification Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Apollo–Soyuz Test Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...–Soyuz_Test_Project
Treaty on Open Skies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Chemical Weapons Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Kennedy-Khruschev Exchanges http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20t...
RD-180 engine imports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
As for cyber security? Why not? Might stop some spam and other evil-doers.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Considering Trump Jr. has admitted he met with a Russian lawyer (along with Kushner) during the campaign to get dirt on Hillary ...
More importantly, that particular news was "leaked" by three White House staffers at pretty much the same time, all of whom stated (unusually, for this administration) they could be attributed as White House staffers... meaning it was an intentional leak, and was likely an attempt to get ahead of something even more damaging that may be coming out soon.
#DeleteChrome
Well, yeah. That's been obvious for a while. Trump is conclusive proof the Peter principal has no upward bound.
What's a problem, though, is thats Trump's supports don't support him for rational reasons. They've attached their identity to him and see any criticism of Trump as criticism of themselves. (For proof, look no further than any Trump supporter in this thread)
GOP's got two big problems. How to save their asses, and how to bring their voter base down off this problem gracefully. If Trump leaves office with a shitstorm things will get ugly.
Yes, the rest of the world is watching as well. In horrified amusement: http://www.volkskrant.nl/foto/...
I believe there are two reasons for this idea of "no evidence" or "giant nothingburger":
1. This is the narrative that the Trump administration has been repeating constantly and daily
2. Much of the evidence is highly classified. It can't be made public because it would most likely reveal how we collected the info, burn overseas agents, and do all sorts of real harm to the US's intelligence gathering capabilities. Publishing the "proof" would be giving all foreign intelligence agencies the exact blueprint of how to not get discovered.
Recently, I've been telling anyone saying "no proof!" that "There is proof, it's just above your security clearance".
I have to disagree there. I have been watching american elections for 20 years and if there is one thing thats reliable, its that its always like 51% to 49%. Between 2% and 10% of the actual electorate is swayed by things like infidelity and war mongering. The rest just vote on party lines. I really don't think trump could ever be bad enough to seriously change that. I mean look at bush. Perhaps the most hated president in recent history and yet obama barely won, 53% to 46%. 46% of americans voted to continue down the road bush was on. And you had a great recession come in at the same time (arguably a gigantic disaster, like you are saying trump may cause) and yet they STILL didn't want to change course!
Face it, 90% of americans are just like this. Its in their nature to support whatever side they believe in no matter what.
As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy