Slashdot Mirror


Trump Is Looking at Plans For a Global Network of Private Spies (vice.com)

David Gilbert, writing for Vice: The White House is reportedly looking at a proposal to create a ghost network of private spies in hostile countries -- a way of bypassing the intelligence community's "deep state," which Donald Trump believes is a threat to his administration. The network would report directly to the president and CIA Director Mike Pompeo, and would be developed by Blackwater founder Erik Prince, according to multiple current and former officials speaking to The Intercept. "Pompeo can't trust the CIA bureaucracy, so we need to create this thing that reports just directly to him," a former senior U.S. intelligence official with firsthand knowledge of the proposals told the website. Described as "totally off the books," the network would be run by intelligence contractor Amyntor Group and would not share any data with the traditional intelligence community.

481 comments

  1. trump dat bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    build da wall not spies

    1. Re:trump dat bitch by swimboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What could possibly go wrong?

      --
      Ask me how the Heisenberg Principle may or may not have saved my life.
    2. Re:trump dat bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Hitler had something like this, no? Should I be afraid for even posting this? Is someone going to "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" me?

    3. Re:trump dat bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      make a wall o' spies!

    4. Re: trump dat bitch by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      No, you're just an idiot A.C. crapflooding Slashdot.

      Why is this even a topic on Slashdot? More clickbait from mishmash? I looked at the article and it appears to be a spun up fabricated nothing-burger. Not even credible enough to be buzzfeed fodder.

      Have you really sunk this low, slashdot owners?

    5. Re:trump dat bitch by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      What could possibly go wrong?

      Plenty could go wrong. But there is also a lot wrong with the existing system.

      The CIA/DIA/NSA are notoriously weak in HUMINT.

      There are also benefits to not depending too much on one channel, or you may end up with another Kim Philby situation.

    6. Re:trump dat bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I think Hitler had something like this, no?"

      So did Woodrow Wilson.

    7. Re:trump dat bitch by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I think Hitler had something like this, no?

      Yes. He had Garbo, who provided him with detailed information about the upcoming Allied invasion of Calais.

    8. Re:trump dat bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Hitler was an untranationalist conservative faggot vegetarian who killed his bitch self rather than face the music - like all Republicans will eventually.

    9. Re:trump dat bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      which Donald Trump believes is a threat to ALL AMERICANS.
      Starve the Beast.

    10. Re:trump dat bitch by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 2

      PRIVATE spies who report only to tRump and cronies?
      The problem isn't a Philby, the problem is tRump!!!
      He wants another gov't paid spy system?
      Use the CIVIL SERVICE TO HIRE THEM and make them report to Congress!

    11. Re: trump dat bitch by zieroh · · Score: 1

      Have you really sunk this low, slashdot owners?

      I think we all know the answer.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    12. Re:trump dat bitch by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Second term for one thing.

    13. Re: trump dat bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With Trump and Asswater (or whatever they're called this year) in charge, the end result will be more akin to the Keystone Kops.

    14. Re:trump dat bitch by ranton · · Score: 1

      I think Hitler had something like this, no?

      So did Woodrow Wilson.

      Yes, and I would hope most Americans would think laws such as the Sedition Act of 1918 would be considered appalling by modern standards as well. I hope no one mentions to Trump what the Sedition Act was because he would love it.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    15. Re:trump dat bitch by eliphalet · · Score: 1

      The secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions.

    16. Re: trump dat bitch by Canbot · · Score: 1

      We already have the CIA, NSA, etc. The president changes, these guys stay the same. They are far more dangerous than anything Trump can do in his 4 years.

    17. Re: trump dat bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Challenge accepted....

    18. Re: trump dat bitch by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Hold my beer!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    19. Re:trump dat bitch by Locke2005 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Off the books"?!? In other words, they can spend as much as they want, and congress cannot cut off the funds, even if they are used explicitly for espionage on businesses competing with businesses owned by the Trump mob family?

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    20. Re: trump dat bitch by negRo_slim · · Score: 1

      Goodwin's Law strikes fast with the Drumphf! rubes.

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    21. Re: trump dat bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Giving direct power to the president and CIA director. Surely there is no way that could be exploited? Surely, the US citizens see no problem with it, given its tradition for checks and balances as well as the constitutional right to overthrow the government/president should they amass to much power?

    22. Re:trump dat bitch by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I suppose I was naive for hoping that "off the books" meant that the government wasn't paying for it. Fooled by that "private" designation.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    23. Re:trump dat bitch by NewYork · · Score: 1

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire

    24. Re:trump dat bitch by KingBenny · · Score: 1

      i think every dictatorship had something like this : the "duty" to report your fellow citizens :)
      they once had a masterplan here in the police state of belgium too, they wanted to enlist the mailmen to alert at the first sign of anything suspicious since (back then) they got to see into peoples houses as they delivered the cheques and pension funds and stuff
      privacy in hellgium is a somewhat flexible concept ... they have "neighbourhood information networks", they got popo propaganda on tv trying to make them look sympa, and i see they recently got a series of comic books on the neighbourhood police. They dont seem to understand for some reason NO ONE likes to see them coming
      and me ... well .. "for looking at a car and stuff" ... i dont trust them, they're legalized militia, not to serve anything but the lawmakers
      GET ME OUT OF HERE before i make like half of antwerp and join IS

      --
      Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
    25. Re: trump dat bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah it was called the Gestapo

  2. People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The U.S. government is becoming more and more corrupt.

    1. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, the stink of corruption rises form the attempt to disassemble the US government, parcel the things of value out to private enterprises and shove the cost of paying for this theft off on to the middle-class

    2. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What part of the government have the Democrats been trying to sell off? You are confused by all the people that say they are the same when what they really mean is that they both have problems. The two parties are quite a bit different, one believes in my government while the other seemingly believes in no government anymore.

      The reality is that we already have the CIA doing this, Trump would just rather pay a private company to do it for profit rather than a government agency doing it for the country with no profit motive to take them off their mission.

    3. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a pile of crap

      Basic goper response is like when a 10 year old gets caught doing something bad, "But... they do it too"

      fuck off

    4. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds exactly like what Putin did to Russia...sound familiar?

    5. Re:People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Allow me to quote President Regan: "Government IS the problem".

      President Trump already has a private spy network, he just doesn't know it. Americans that spy to protect the U.S. Constitution and freedoms of which our nation was founded, will actively spy on corporate and government entities around the world, and will ignore any "laws" created by traitors in Congress.

      The who concept is the fact that a cabal, a bunch of criminals have too much control within our government especially Congress.

    6. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by tbannist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. And once you realize that both parties do it relentlessly, in coordinated lockstep, and that partisan idiots give their own party a complete pass when they do it, you will see how impossible it is to stop.

      This is obviously and poignantly wrong. We have a huge counter-example right here. The Democratic party supports net neutrality, the Republican party does not. How is that co-ordinated lock step?

      You are right that your elected officials don't (usually) hate one another but they aren't in this together, either. The Republicans and the Democrats are competing for the same positions, they may have gentlemen's agreements on what is acceptable behaviour, but they are still die-hard competitors for the same positions. I think, in general, their relationship could be summarised as frenemies, though I think with the introduction of Tea Party and Alt-Right candidates the legislature is moving away from friendships and towards partisan enemies.

      This means that government can get away with anything. You don't think the parties start with what they want to achieve and work backwards from there? You don't think that they divide up the unpopular positions to push down the throats of their own supporters?

      Yes, I don't think that and I don't think any sane person would. Politicians are political, they have views and beliefs and while they may compromise those beliefs for the sake of winning an election, they are not working together towards a single unified goal. Beyond that, keeping a conspiracy of that sort secret would require levels discretion that clearly the average elected official is not capable of maintaining. You can imagine that everyone running for office in America is secretly a super-villain, but I don't think that delusion is going to help you understand anything.

      Yeah, keep telling yourself that elected republicans hate democrats, and vice versa. You silly child. Hate is only good for manipulating stupid people. "Our" elected officials are all in it together.

      There's a middle ground between those extremes, and that's where sanity lies. Republican and Democratic officials, generally speaking, don't hate each other, but they aren't working towards the same goals either. There are consistent differences between the positions of the two parties over multiple election cycles. It is true, that there is a lot of similarity between the two parties, but that's because they operate in the same country, solicit money from the same donors and fight for the votes from the same people.

      Basically you are arguing that competing tool manufacturers are secretly working together because they produce tools that look very similar. No, the tools look the same to the untrained eye because they have been produced to do the same job with similar technology and similar materials. An expert, however, will be able to tell you if one company produces a better quality tool than the other for the job you want to get done. And just like in construction, in every election you should be trying to pick the best tool for the job.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    7. Re:People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Republicans are traitors. Let's face it, call a traitor a traitor. They want to undermine the Constitution and replace the parts they don't agree with, say out loud that the law doesn't apply to them. Period.

      Gallows / Firing squad.

    8. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Canbot · · Score: 1

      The government is too big and grows bigger every election cycle as the new guy pays off his voters with government handouts. There is nothing wrong with shrinking the government.

    9. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sad you're so pathetic and can't stop sucking on the teat of government. But you won't be needed in the new order.

    10. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Dread_ed · · Score: 0, Troll

      During the Obama administration Google had more visits to the White House than any other entity or party. More than one a week, over 8 years. You think this is completely innocent?

      Even better, remember all of the news stories about insurance and pharmaceutical company profits and injustice concerning their pricing leading up to the debate and ultimately vote for the Affordable Care Act? Have you realized that the Affordable Care Act did not address any of those underlying problems with insurance and pharmaceutical companies? Have you acknowledged to yourself that what it did was leave in place all of the injustices, abuses, and avarice and just shift the responsibility for making sure these companies' shareholders get even wealthier directly to the backs of the middle class?

      You are blind and stupid only because you have internalized someone else's world view. You hide the truth from yourself because to look at it you would have to incriminate yourself due to how often you have lied to yourself, compromised your principles, attacked others for their pure motivations because they were ideologically opposed to your party. There is a price to pay for giving away your voice and power to an entity that has it's own agenda contrary to yours. You pay on the way out.

      Think for yourself.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    11. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      State Department. $450 million gets you 20% of US Uranium production, even if you are Russia.

      Oh, you didn't expect an actual example while not having an example of the GOP doing it? You must be an idiot liberal.

    12. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Dread_ed · · Score: 0

      You poor sheep. There are two parties in the US political system. The elected and the electorate.

      Your head is so far into the partisan mind game you can't even imagine anything but the current paradigm. I say imagine a world where the current two party system is replaced with a system that isn't dependent on our elected officials constantly setting up divisions between classes, races, and nationalities and that doesn't result in scared and angry people begging the government to take their rights away and abuse them.

      Your response is "Yeah, I can't do that, I'm a democrat." Understood. You are too far gone. You have taken on the idea of partisan politics and linked it to your identity. Whichever brand of political fuckery you identify with is now who you are. You can't even see that I am pointing to something that is orthogonal to your idea of government. Why? Because you are a product of the system. You internalized it and now think it is you and as a result you will continue to eat the shit from your political leader's asses and regurgitate it all over everyone around you. You poor shit spewing sheep.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    13. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, and what sort of fuckery does it take to convince people to waste their votes on minor parties when they have absolutely ZERO ability to do anything because the US does not have a parliamentary system?

      FWIW, I have, on a global view, fairly conservative leanings, but I live in a country where those beliefs (fiscal conservatism, no god in government, personal responsibility over their own home and body) are completely ignored by the 'conservative' party and substantially supported by the 'liberal' party.

      So, pray tell where you come from that you feel so compelled to tell me how to spend my vote?

    14. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fear you lack the intellectual standing to participate in the conversation.

      There is no way you don't own a trenchcoat and waifu pillow.

    15. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol, what a fucktard comment, sometimes the unpopular (contrarian) position is just being lazy and intentionally obtuse.

    16. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to add to this that your writing style is convoluted and unclear. It's obvious that you go out of your way to use big words, despite this you're still using an 8th grade vocabulary

      You're probably pretty stupid and autistic. When people tell you that you're smart, they mean smart (for a sped) "you silly child"

      Are you Matthew Moulton? I know he likes to hang out on tech sites talking at people like a Saturday morning cartoon caricature of an evil genius.

    17. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's obvious that you go out of your way to use big words, despite this you're still using an 8th grade vocabulary

      You're probably pretty stupid and autistic. When people tell you that you're smart, they mean smart (for a sped) "you silly child"

      Are you Matthew Moulton? I know he likes to hang out on tech sites talking at people like a Saturday morning cartoon caricature of an evil genius.

    18. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, yes the 4chan is strong in this one

    19. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you George HW's fluffer?

    20. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is obviously and poignantly wrong. We have a huge counter-example right here. The Democratic party supports net neutrality, the Republican party does not. How is that co-ordinated lock step?

      Oh, bullshit. Everything the Democrats are doing right now is to try and win back voters. They know they're in absolutely no danger of setting policy. If they tables were turned, Democrats would be dismantling net neutrality while trying to pass massive tax cuts for their donors.

      There is no difference between the two parties when it comes to what they actually do. The entire difference is in what they claim to support.

    21. Re:People at the top are not mentally stable. by silvergeek · · Score: 1

      Why? Because We the People vote the psychopaths, liars, and greedy rich into office. The peoples's vote could, in theory, (except for the gerrymandering, phony news, and other big-dollar manipulation schemes) put descent people into office if the voters cared enough to keep themselves educated and aware. So, who is ultimately at fault for us ending up with mentally unstable, greedy, sociopathic leaders?

    22. Re:People at the top are not mentally stable. by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Nahh, he's not being corrupt, he's just copying the style of President Clark.

    23. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by zkiwi34 · · Score: 0

      You mistakenly think that net neutrality can save you, or if you're on the other side of the fence that getting rid of it will save you. That's the lock step.

    24. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Maritz · · Score: 1

      You forgot to put in anything that would indicate you're right. Lots of claims, bizarrely phrased as questions. Accusations of stupidity.

      Twat, I suppose.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    25. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Taking the unpopular position is a tactic, not proof that tactics are not used. I mention this specifically in the fourth paragraphette of my post.

      I fear you lack the intellectual standing to participate in the conversation.

      lol. What a dickhead.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    26. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Maritz · · Score: 1

      First sentence, accusation of being sheep. Last sentence, accusation of being a sheep. You're a boring pseudo-intellectual cunt, mate. The whole "I've seen behind the curtain" routine is old as fuck.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    27. Re:People at the top are not mentally stable. by DougDot · · Score: 1

      The people who elected them are the real problem. As of today, 37.3% of adult Americans still approve of Trump, and the trend line is going up.

      https://projects.fivethirtyeig...

    28. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

      Restatement is a literary device. Thank you for the critique.

      There is no curtain. Just a bunch of people pushing ideological agendas that don't benefit them or society. Tantamount to ideologically working for the man.

      Are you, perchance, one of the partisan? Methinks thou doth protest too much.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    29. Re: People at the top are not mentally stable. by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

      No, the stink of corruption rises form the attempt to disassemble the US government, parcel the things of value out to private enterprises and shove the cost of paying for this theft off on to the middle-class

      IMHO government corruption is a side effect, perhaps an illusion. Yet corruption does exist. Where?

      Looking objectively, the government is extremely troubled, like a car stuck in deep snow. There's a lot of thrashing and inner panic. There's desperation to deal with numerous problems but not enough ability to get anywhere.

      For sure, there are a lot of corrupt people in power, and power corrupts. Yet with so many corrupt people, the government has failed to implode generations ago, over and over, leaving mankind to pick through the ruins of armageddon, so deep down there is still a desire to make things work.

      The corruption isn't there all that much at the aggregate level (though micro levels could be rife with it), but at the aggregate level we seem to be going farther into the woods, not working our way out.

      Many people have the freedoms to change things, try things, etc. Indeed, there are enormous opportunities for people to better themselves, counter to the idea that government is corrupt. In these circumstances, and by sheer proximity of people, there is a lot of friction and pain. This is unavoidable.

      Indeed, people have the means to gather more and more information about other people, and it becomes inevitable that people will do so perhaps unwittingly or effortlessly. Is it natural for government (good or bad) to leverage this? Corporations are most likely to leverage it anyways, and if you are looking for corrupt entities, corporations are more likely to be incredibly corrupt. Is there anything in that Trump has a business background? It's doubtful - he could have stayed in the corporate world and probably would have become better off faster.

      The only thing left for people to do is to handle the situation. There are cycles where technology makes life scarier. Then some technology might emerge to alleviate the problem, but one is always vulnerable in new ways.

      --
      Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
  3. Oooooh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How much does it pay? Sign me up.

  4. CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Destined+Soul · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Then he's not really doing a good job of directing it, is he?

    1. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Osgeld · · Score: 5, Insightful

      don't worry, he will do much better this time with no accountability

    2. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by UdoKeir · · Score: 5, Funny

      He was left over with a mess

      Ivan, this is poor English grammar. Will you be beaten and sent to a gulag for this mistake?

    3. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the CIA that's going to be putting Trump and his whole family and all his associates in prison, so I don't see what Trump's problem with them is...

    4. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why is it whenever Benghazi is mentioned no one ever looks at the fact that a Republican controlled Congress slashed the security budget for the State Department?

    5. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey Ivan. News flash. Russians aren't a race. I believe the word you're looking for is xenophobic...but the Trump administration has that one covered with their travel ban.

    6. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by MooseTick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "which is why we also don't have the truth about things like Benghazi"

      How do you know "we" don't know the truth?

    7. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Kyudosha · · Score: 5, Insightful

      New FSB directive: co-opt liberal and social justice terminology in an attempt to sow dissent. When called out for your shit, make sure to call it "racism" and say you are "deeply offended". If possible, say "so much for the tolerant left".

      --
      ç
    8. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but racism is the wrong word, no Comrade?
      I always lump Russian into the hole European white category, if I'm being racist that is.

    9. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So now liberals get to define what's racist and what isn't? That's evidence that liberals are more interested in using racism to their political advantage than in ending it. That's unfortunate, but not surprising considering their longstanding support of slavery and Jim Crow laws.

    10. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Muslims were behind the 9/11 attacks. Liberals defend Islam at all costs.

      Russians meddled in the 2016 elections with trolling that didn't kill anyone. Liberals act horrified.

      Got it.

    11. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It seems to be a requirement in order to run a department for Trump. The head of the EPA didn't think it should exist because it hurt business too much. The head of the housing department came out with a bunch of statements against social housing. So not trusting your department would make you qualified to run it.

    12. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by lactose99 · · Score: 1

      lol wut

      --
      Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
    13. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "which is why we also don't have the truth about things like Benghazi."
      She lost. Get over it.

    14. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is the CIA is showing that most of these conspiracies are not real. So this doesn't fit Trump narrative. I honestly think that Trump just wanted to get into office, just to see all the real dirt that is going on, only to realize there was no grand conspiracy, just normal paper pushing, and a few good ideas and a few bad ideas. Trump being a Conspiracy theorist, and not getting the information that he knows in his heart to be true, figures the CIA is against him, purposely hiding information.

      Trumps main chip on his shoulder is because he feels like the upper crust is always rejecting him. Hence his appeal to the middle class, who also have the same feeling that the upper class folks are trying to lock these people out. So no matter how rich he is, or powerful of a position he is in, the fact that he isn't accepted as one of them bugs him.

      This man really is unfit for the position, and is more or less controlled by others, just as long as they keep his tweeter running.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    15. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being a Russian troll is not a race, asshat.

    16. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Huh? He had accountability?

    17. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by lgw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Since I believe in democracy, I'm all for Trump being able to trash any and all federal departments - that's the power the Constitution gives him.

      What I object to is the Byzantine palace intrigue bullshit. Don't trust the CIA? Fine - fire everyone, bar them from future government work, and start over. That's very transparent, very open, and sends a clear message to both voters and other departments. This double-secret probation stuff is just the worst.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    18. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 0

      Once you start throwing the baby out with the bathwater to the cries of "DEEEP STATE!!11!!", you lose a little perspective. He probably thinks the USPS are part of it at this point.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    19. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you please fuck off the Internet and discuss your US politics somewhere else? Your politics has always been boring and bizarre to the rest of the world but now you stupid idiots don't even make any sense any longer.

    20. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to the eurotrash that gave us dictators like Hitler. Fuck off back to your own country.

    21. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Again you confuse dixiecrats with the modern democratic party. Terrible work Ivan, you need to re-read US history books and less Pravda!

    22. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Christians were behind most cruel wars, terror and suffering the past two millenia and continues so today. Americans are behind majority of wars and conflicts the last 60 years with 60+ wars and counting not including numerous conflicts.

      Let's blame all white, christians, americans for what ignorant uneducated u.s. voters do.

    23. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Article about an action by the current US President
      > Gets mad comments are about "US politics"

    24. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh eat a dick. More like very few good ideas and a lot of bad ideas.

    25. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Fake news?

    26. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      It seems to be a requirement in order to run a department for Trump. The head of the EPA didn't think it should exist because it hurt business too much. The head of the housing department came out with a bunch of statements against social housing. So not trusting your department would make you qualified to run it.

      There are a LOT of federal agencies and red tape I'd like to see be done away with, those are two of them.

      The best way to destroy them, is to put someone in there and have them begin dismantling them from the inside.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    27. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool, can you start posting the insurance bonds to cover the environmental liability? No? The piss off.

    28. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by TimothyHollins · · Score: 1

      Ivan, calm down, drink your vodka and eat whatever the Russian equivalent of a Snickers is. Maybe a stale old potato?

    29. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL you have no idea how divided and powerful the CIA is. They have various "departments" that have accumulated large reserves of cash and power. After all if someone comes after them they will fight back. You may even need to send in the military! Or did you miss the news about that?

    30. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by mbkennel · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Since I believe in democracy, I'm all for Trump being able to trash any and all federal departments - that's the power the Constitution gives him."

      No it doesn't. The establishment and authority of those departments is law passed by Congress. The President is not a dictator.

    31. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      U mad bro

    32. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 2

      > Don't trust the CIA? Fine - fire everyone

      Problem is that's impossible. The whole structure relies on a lot of people who have been doing the same thing for years. Here's a good writeup on the topic:

      "But there was another reason. During and after the Civil War, government laws and policies had become far more complex with more long-lasting effects on society. A presidential term lasted four years; policies could last for generations. If administrators were replaced every time a president left office, as previously had been the case, there would be no continuity in government. New administrators would constantly have to learn the complexities of their jobs, and by the time they mastered it, they would have to leave. Government operations had outgrown a president’s term."

      https://geopoliticalfutures.co...

    33. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since I believe in democracy, I'm all for Trump being able to trash any and all federal departments - that's the power the Constitution gives him.

      Will the last intelligent person to read slashdot please turn off the lights when you leave? I can't believe that we have people who type out this crap.

    34. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'm all for Trump being able to trash any and all federal departments - that's the power the Constitution gives him." WRONG, FAGGOT.

    35. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by kqs · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Islamic terrorists were behind 9/11. Liberals are fine going after Islamic terrorists, but not all Muslims. Conservatives seem to want to go after all Muslims, or at least treat all Muslims poorly. Or, to put it another way: "White gun owners were behind the attack in Las Vegas. Conservatives defend white gun owners at all costs."

      The Russian government meddled in the 2016 elections with trolling that didn't kill anyone but which may have changed a presidential election. Liberals are horrified, conservatives defend Russians at all costs.

      Bigotry is a better word than racism. Bigotry is hating all Muslims for the acts of a few, or all Russians for the acts of their government, or all white gun owners for the acts of a few. Bigotry is not really a conservative or liberal trait, though recently conservatives have chosen bigots as their leaders for some reason. There are certainly liberal bigots, but liberals try to not elect them.

    36. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And staffing/running the agency is up to the Executive.

    37. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by lgw · · Score: 1

      The job of the Congress is to say "make a spy agency, you have $X to work with". The implementation details belong to the Executive branch. If Trump wants to say "out with the CIA, in with the CIB", that's fine and all, he gets to pick who works for him. But we don't need redundant agencies with duplicate charters (and budgets).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    38. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by lgw · · Score: 2

      New administrators would constantly have to learn the complexities of their jobs, and by the time they mastered it, they would have to leave.

      You say that like it's a bad thing. The more complex the government, the less I want it to be able to do. It isn't acting in our interests, after all.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    39. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Comboman · · Score: 1

      The best way to destroy them, is to put someone in there and have them begin dismantling them from the inside.

      You mean the Republican incompetence at running government is intentional? They may be smarter than I gave them credit for.

      --
      Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    40. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by gtall · · Score: 1

      Trump isn't so much controlled by others except the Russians. He's just an impressionable 15 year old. There are two things to remember about Trump: he does everything for himself and he destroys everything he touches. Good luck, America, nice knowing ya.

    41. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're talking about the CIA. It's not a conspiracy to point out all the times they've worked to destabilize countries, assassinate leaders, etc.

      One of the most recent presidents to pick a fight with them was Kennedy...

    42. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Informative
      It doesn't really work that way: for the high up roles, he generally needs the consent of the senate to appoint "who works for him". For the lower roles, he doesn't get a say at all. That's why you see Senate hearings on everything from Cabinet roles to the CIA director. From Wikipedia (which is sourced if you really want to go down that rabbit hole):

      The Director is a civilian or a general/flag officer of the armed forces nominated by the President, with the concurring or nonconcurring recommendation from the DNI, and must be confirmed by a majority vote of the Senate. [My emphasis]

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    43. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by squiggleslash · · Score: 0

      You say that like it's a bad thing. The more complex the government, the less I want it to be able to do. It isn't acting in our interests, after all.

      That's great, but given most of us want a government that does act in our interests, and recognize the need for any effective government to execute long term policies, I'd rather fix the accountability issues, and I suspect most people feel that way.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    44. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Kierthos · · Score: 1

      I honestly think that Trump just wanted to get into office,

      See, that's a point we have to differ on. I don't think Trump actually wanted to win. Did he want the attention he got by running for the nomination? Sure. He loves being in the spotlight. I think he enjoyed all the free press he got while he was running for the nomination. But I don't think he ever planned on winning the election.

      And the responsibilities of being President? I think we can safely say, not even eleven months into his term, that he really doesn't like the responsibilities. He doesn't like that he can't snap his fingers and get things done like he might be used to. He can't fire Senators and Representatives.

      And he flat out hates the criticism. I mean, it was fine for him to criticize Obama. Because Trump is never wrong, just ask him. But how dare anyone criticize him? I mean, he got some back when he was just a real estate mogul. But he could ignore it, then. And then when he was the host of "The Apprentice", he could always blame an episode's ratings on someone else.

      Now? Hell, even Fox News drags him on occasion. (The last Fox News job approval poll on Trump had him at -19 points, that is to say, 38% approval, 57% disapproval.)

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    45. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 0

      I can imagine not being able to renew my car registration because the DMV didn't send you the sticker due to massive personnel changes but the police still stopping me for not having the sticker -- that's not fun. (Not a great example since it's state but still.) Civil service doing its work to implement current laws is acting in the interest of the nation.

      I think by replacing the leadership of the civil service organizations with quality people who are at least not against the current administration the things would go back to normal.

    46. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are lots of ways of fixing the issues you see with the EPA without dismantling them. You really should keep an eye on why Nixon of all Presidents actually created it. It serves a very needed purpose and there is no argument you can make otherwise. Capitalism is not perfect, businesses will do everything they can to make as much profit as they can.

      Not all businesses will behave badly of course but a non-significant portion will and they have a tendency time and time again to ruin it for everyone else. That is the problem with capitalism, it only works if greed is kept in check. Like all economic models though it has its pros and cons, pretending otherwise doesn't help anyone.

      The same can be said for the housing department, seriously, look at your history and see what events lead to its creation. If you have a better idea by all means speak up! I'm fairly certain you don't though and would just rather keep your hard earned tax dollars because heaven forbid it actually help someone that is not you.

    47. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by tbannist · · Score: 2

      Actually, Al-Qaeda was behind the 9/11 attacks. Al-Qaeda was a terrorist organization that used propaganda and religious zealots to wage a political campaign of terrorist attacks against the United States and western democracies. It was estimated that there were between 200 and 1,000 members of Al-Qaeda. There are about 1.6 billion Muslims in the world. Do you think it's right to condemn a group based on the actions of 0.0625% of it's membership?

      You should also be further aware that part of the goal of Al-Qaeda and later DAESH was to incite the western world into attacking innocent Muslims, so that they could gain power in the Muslim world. Conservatives who blame all Muslims for the actions of a small group of murderous criminals play right into the hands of those same criminals.

      Russians meddled in the 2016 elections with trolling that didn't kill anyone. Liberals act horrified.

      The Russian government meddled in the 2016 elections and liberals are horrified at the results of that meddling. Conservatives, however, are ok with it because they won. Way to sell out your own country for a bit of fleeting power.

      Got it.

      Nope.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    48. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by tbannist · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, if this is true, it's not about trusting or not trusting the CIA. It's about creating a spy organization that doesn't report to anyone but the leader. It would be about having spies, and probably assassins, that are free from oversight and regulation. It would be about creating a secure and loyal power base like the one that Putin has, that can eliminate anyone who challenges the leader's position.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    49. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be a mind reader.

    50. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by show+me+altoids · · Score: 1

      The President is not a dictator.

      He's trying his best, just give him time.

      --
      I feel sorry for people that don't drink, because when they get up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel
    51. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the President finds that a law passed by Congress extends beyond the very limited scope of powers given to Congress by the states in the Constitution then he has a duty to void the law. Practically every government department assumes powers that go far beyond the powers that congress has (the IRS taxing people's income being a classic example). Frankly, Trump is failing to do his job by not shutting down the intelligence apparatus.

    52. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please.

      His former Campaign Chairman specializes in putting and keeping dictators in power, and Trump is no different. He believes that he is above us all, and above all law, and I'm convinced that he is trying to establish a nepotist dictatorship with his family in charge. Any department with power is being systematically dismantled, to be replaced by people that work directly for him in the private industry space, outside of Congress oversight. The EPA is being lead by a person that wanted to eliminate it. The State department is missing *hundreds* of diplomatic personnel who have not been appointed. We've already seen the problems that private military contracts brought in Afghanistan and Iraq - billions of dollars disappearing and atrocities such as Abu Graib. We can expect to see much more of the same. When political power, military power and financial power are all held by the same person, bad things usually get worse for the populace.

      At least we have the Supreme Court, with its direction perverted for the next 3-4 decades at least. Any 4-3 decision with Gorsuch prevailing will be a literal travesty of justice. Mitch McConnell can burn in hell for his utter disregard for tradition, rules and protocol. At least he still likes child molesters though.

      That just leaves Congress, with its 16%-approved gerrymandered safe seats being steam-rolled by a party that scribbles secret bills in secret chambers in the middle of the night.

      If Ludlum or Grisham had written this plot back in the '90s, they'd have been laughed out of their publisher's office for its absurdity. Face it, if the Democrats don't win the House back next year, we're fucked.

    53. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Canbot · · Score: 1

      That would really be throwing the baby out with the bath water. When people say the CIA is corrupt, or can't be trusted it doesn't mean that they are all comic book villains. It is enough that bad actors have enough sway within the organization to do terrible things. Just like a cop won't cross the blue line a spook won't blow a whistle.

    54. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nixon's downfall as well was his constant sense that the ivy leaguers in government were laughing at him.

    55. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by lgw · · Score: 2

      Yes, but assuming the confirmed director of the CIA and Trump are working together (as seems to be the case here), they should be able to fire anyone or everyone in the agency, and hire replacements at their pleasure (well, conformant with EEOC rules etc).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    56. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by lgw · · Score: 2

      That's a fair point, but just as replacing everyone every election would be bad, never cleaning house is bad. Large institutions become gradually more corrupt over time, and humanity has never found a fix for that, beyond the bigger hammer approach.

      For the same reason, I think we should go back to state-appointment of senators (and then switch back again in 50 years or so) - the corruption is so firmly in place that simply switching the system will disrupt the finely-tune lobbying machine for decades. Both ways are vulnerable to corruption, but there's a win in switching.

      Similarly, replacing government agencies with new people (but a similar charter) every 50-100 would be very beneficial. And they're really bad now.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    57. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, this is has always been a problem with no good solution. The spoils system was replaced by a civil service acts, but it was and still is bullshit. Reagan era people hated the Clintons and functioned indifferent to them (maybe for the betterment of the USA). However, twenty some years of political BS and anyone who is in government hates Trump for one reason or another. He isn't really a Republican, he isn't a neoconservative, he isn't a Democrat, isn't female, etc..

      The problem is that the citizens elected him and it is his government. The government must bend to his and the citizen's will or get the fuck out.

    58. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, dont ever think he is a mindless figurehead.
      He has an agenda.

      This is the beginning of a dictatorship. Which is done in a very formulaic manner.
      1. Replace all the heads of departments with loyalists in the party.
      2. Reorganize those departments to pursue only the party goals.
      3. Disband any group that has any autonomy or freedom from oversight.
      4. Create an elite group of overseers to ensure compliance with party goals.
      5. Implement a policy of fear and harsh punishment to any dissidents.

      If you dont think this can happen in the US, think again.
      Just look how the senate and congress have fallen in line to defund the civillian government and pump money into the military.

    59. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, we invented the internet so you fuck off!

    60. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 1

      Well if you are saying that from time to time the area of low-lying, uncultivated ground where water collects should be emptied out of said water, I agree.

    61. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by ghoul · · Score: 1

      The solution is obvious. Elect Presidents for a single 20 year term. Make the minimum age to be President 40 and mandatory retirement age 65. Since a 65 year old President will not have a 40 year old Son/Daughter power will still have to move away from a single dynasty.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    62. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 2

      I can't believe I didn't see it coming. I wondered out loud last year "Once Trump is the Government how will he justify all of his bat shit government conspiracies?!" ...one year later: "I'm being attacked by the DEEP STATE, which is a parallel government where Obama and Hillary are co-presidents. I'm not president of that government, so if it's bad, it's them."

      Fuck me.

    63. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by zkiwi34 · · Score: 1

      Ok, so Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Napoleon down to Genghis Khan, Attila the Hun, various Caesars, Alexander the Great etc (not forgetting a raft of near east and asian nut jobs. Yup, they're all down to being Christian, or not.

    64. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But a lawyer and "community organizer" with zero legislative or military record was an amazing choice as president. You don't have a leg to stand on bro.

    65. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The reality is Trump is pretty dim. You do not need private spies, you just need private analysts and demand you spies provide unfiltered evidence, no evidence, tell them to go back to work. Don't worry about fake evidence, you have good analysts and they will punch holes right through it. Don't trust contractors ever, they are bound by the demands of profit, to tell you what ever generates the most profit, just like they already do and hence the chaos. The corporation have corrupted a lot of people via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... A filtering project, where corrupt corporate executives establish contacts with the readily corruptible and via lobbyists and corrupt politicians they make sure the corrupted get promoted (then act as double agents against the government to serve the interests of corporations). There are plenty within FBI/NSA/CIA that are fully aware of the corruption but are afraid to do something about it, shame to live in fear and really rather pathetic, when it is corrupt who should truly fear your courage, especially when you display it publicly. Trump was a fool that hired those who could never really ever be friends, just acquaintances always looking to stab you in the back for their personal advantage, rather than the best people for the job.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    66. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When someone posts something you disagree with here->,< you accuse them of being Russian.

      In a Slavic language this comma would be reasonable, however no American would ever put it in. Just sayin.

    67. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1

      Remember, you can't spell "Benghazi" without "AHHHHHHHH!!!!!!"

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
    68. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      If Trump wants to stiff the upper class and make the middle class like him, he's really doing a bad job of it.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    69. Re: CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Are you claiming Napoleon wasn't Christian? Frederick the Great? King Leopold?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    70. Re:CIA Director doesn't trust the CIA? by lgw · · Score: 1

      Indeed; the trick seems to be getting the outflow higher than the inflow!

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  5. Person of Interest Parody? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know.. If I wasn't a fan of the show. I would swear this has all the makings of the private intelligence agency that john greer started up.. So how long till we can expect samaritan and decima technologies?

  6. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice deflection there Ivan

    I identify as an American, most of my views are central-right, but I have found the US gop to have abandoned my values in an attempt to create a russian-like oligarchy class

    So, please take you deceptive spin and propaganda back to 4chan or wherever the hell you came from

  7. That sounds familiar... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Uh, isn't this the same reasoning that led to the creation of the SS in the 20s?

    1. Re:That sounds familiar... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the same reasoning used to create the death squads and paramilitary in South America. Trump Global Death Squads, inc. has a pleasant ring to it, don't you think?

    2. Re:That sounds familiar... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much.

      Anyone wanna guess how long before you get ambushed in the middle of the night due to some "national security" fabrication without any possibility of suing, fighting, etc?

      Looks like a page from Putin's book.

      This is no joke folks. If USA is going this route it is a done deal. There is no going back. Smart people will flee, taking the value IP with them and good luck competing with the rest of the world then.

      Libertards and Trumptards (joking :) unite on this one (serious)!

  8. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello comrade! How's Siberia?

  9. Holy shit by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Trump continues to go down the hole to hell further and faster.
    America NEEDS mueller to really get on this probe. There is little doubt that Trump committed treason, but now, he is going off the deep end.
    THis is exactly how dictators operate and need to be stopped.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Lets be real here. Trump could shoot people in the streets, and without a 2/3 majority in the Senate, there is no way he would ever see any consequences for the action, barring his cabinet certifying him as insane, which will not happen.

      Sit tight, we have ~7 years to go (and, yes, I say seven, because the Dems are still whining about Hillary and her loss, as opposed to regrouping and getting people on board who might get them to win again. Hint: The same gun control crap will only ensure a trump win. Focus on issues; the guns can come later when you actually have a usable foothold in Congress.

    2. Re:Holy shit by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 1

      Trump continues to go down the hole to hell further and faster. America NEEDS mueller to really get on this probe. There is little doubt that Trump committed treason, but now, he is going off the deep end. THis is exactly how dictators operate and need to be stopped.

      Demonstrating that conspiracy theories can get up mods on /., if you're promoting the right conspiracy theory...

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    3. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What laws did Trump break to commit Treason? I don't think you can name any.

    4. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mueller can be fired by Trump at any time.

    5. Re:Holy shit by thaylin · · Score: 1
      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    6. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For your own sanity, stop reading these clickbait news. It's a Vice article that uses sources like Politico, Buzzfeed. It doesn't get much more bottom of the barrel.

      The article itself is just a long serious of "reportedly", "according to anonymous sources" and random Trump quotes. All these "scandals" work like that: sensational accusations based off something someone allegedly said, and nothing ever comes from it because it's just unverified clickbait.

    7. Re: Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump did not give nuclear secrets to the Russians. What a lie. So name what laws Trump broke to commit treason. Nobody can name one. I challenge anyone.

    8. Re:Holy shit by laxguy · · Score: 1

      also known as Fake News.

    9. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Source of article is VICE, liberal left-leaning garbage site. Take with aspirin and common sense.

    10. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let this be a lesson to all you wanna-be trolls
      1. Lie Big, the bigger the better. A small lie will be challenged, but most people will fail to challenge a truly YUGE lie
      2. Never back down, never admit to lying, only provide BIGGER lies
      3. Attack your enemies and never, ever let up on them. People will see the consistency of your lies and cling to them as the truth

    11. Re:Holy shit by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      The problem is there are too many people willing to look the other way, or make excuses for such a behavior. The problem is for many of the Republicans who are in Power if they target Trump, they could loose the 30% of their voters. We are not seeing anyone brave enough to stand up against him, and be willing to run again.

      For the long term, this will be bad for the Republican Party, espectially after the Democrats can regroup.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    12. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      List of senate & house who have dual-citizenship with Israel below. Somehow this isn't treason but having russia expose emails of foul play in our government is? Dual-citizenship is dual-loyalty. So tired of hearing that Russia somehow ruined our government by leaking some emails when there are plenty of other countries that are actively involved in undermining us from within.

      THE US SENATE [13]

      Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
      Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
      Benjamin Cardin (D-MD)
      Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
      Al Franken (D-MN)
      Herb Kohl (D-WI)
      Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
      Joseph Lieberman (Independent-CT)
      Carl Levin (D-MI)
      Bernard Sanders (Independent-VT)
      Charles Schumer (D-NY)
      Ron Wyden (D-OR)
      Michael Bennet (D-CO)

      HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES [27]

      Gary Ackerman (D-NY)
      Shelley Berkley (D-NV)
      Howard Berman (D-CA)
      Eric Cantor (R-VA)
      David Cicilline (D-RI)
      Stephen Cohen (D-TN)
      Susan Davis (D-CA)
      Ted Deutch (D-FL)
      Eliot Engel (D-NY)
      Bob Filner (D-CA)
      Barney Frank (D-MA)
      Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ)
      Jane Harman (D-CA)
      Steve Israel (D-NY)
      Sander Levin (D-MI)
      Nita Lowey (D-NY)
      Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)
      Jared Polis (D-CO)
      Steve Rothman (D-NJ)
      Jan Schakowsky (D-IL)
      Allyson Schwartz (D-PA)
      Adam Schiff (D-CA)
      Brad Sherman (D-CA)
      Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL)
      Henry Waxman (D-CA)
      Anthony Weiner (D-NY)
      John Yarmuth (D-KY)

    13. Re:Holy shit by kqs · · Score: 1

      If there must be investigations, they should be conducted by impartial parties, not political gamesters.

      I too would like an impartial investigator, but we're stuck with a conservative republican. Though I suspect that you were fine with political gamesters for the 25+ years of Clinton investigations.

      Actually, comparing the Clinton and Trump investigations is informative. They investigated the Clintons for 25 years and found that one of them lied about a blow job and the other one is incompetent at email security. LOCK HER UP! They investigated Trump for less than a year and have already found that many people in Trumps campaign and administration lied under oath about talking to Russians, and have already filed charges. Yup, multiple people lying under oath about the same thing seems legit.

    14. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump will never be impeached, the GOP won't allow it, and he won't resign. Buckle up, we are all in this for another 3 years. If the Democrats don't get their act together, it will be 7 years of Trump.

    15. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is little doubt that Trump committed treason

      Citation needed. Your rabid hatred of Trump is not evidence he did anything wrong. If people keep shouting "Treason!!!" with no evidence, no one will believe you if/when there is actual evidence he did something illegal.

      THis is exactly how dictators operate and need to be stopped.

      Dude, you are the one pushing conspiracy theories, with no evidence, to advance the idea that the guy who won an election shoudl be deposed by any means necessary. The idea that you think *he* is the one acting like a dictator tells me you are off your meds.

    16. Re:Holy shit by Kierthos · · Score: 1

      So, normally, I don't respond to the blindingly stupid (like you), but you do realize that a number of people on your list aren't in Congress any more, right?

      For fuck's sake, you list Eric Cantor on there, and he resigned in 2014. So, if you can't even manage to have a list that is current, how much else are you wrong about?

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    17. Re:Holy shit by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      You have a strange definition of "conspiracy theory". Hint: It takes more that just being ignored by MSNBC.

      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/05/fired-fbi-official-at-center-flynn-clinton-dossier-controversies-revealed.html

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    18. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tI don't care about the conspiracy theory that may or may not be fake, Not at all.

      However, I do care about the real issue, that you are either refusing to see or trying to hide: This is exactly how dictatorships start! Any US president - whether called Trump or not - who even *thinks* about doing something like this is an extremely dangerous madman who must be stopped at all cost!!!

    19. Re: Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is the same law that parent cited. Trump did divulge classified information to the Russians. That alone would be okay if it was information from our Government but it from info from an ally which he did not have permission to share with the Russians and compromised operational security. Trump even admitted to this.

      That is just one law, accepting campaign contributions from foreign governments is another but he hasn't yet confessed to that so that is up to Mueller to prove true or false. The evidence publicly sure makes him look guilty especially when combined with his actions but so far at least, we do enjoy innocent until proven guilty.

      He also has repeated violated the emoluments clause since he didn't divest himself of his property. Not too long ago that was a big deal with Jimmy Carter but now that Trump is doing it on a whole new level its perfectly okay apparently despite being clearly against the law.

      His properties in Florida, Washington, and New York have seen tremendous influxes of cash as a result of him being President. His constant visits to almost exclusively his properties while on U.S. soil also present a conflict of interest and is supposed to be prohibited.

    20. Re:Holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and then get his ass impeached if not much worse with PMITA prison time replacing his multi-million dollar vacations

    21. Re:Holy shit by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You're being overly optimistic here. Read the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. Pence and the Cabinet can declare Trump incompetent, but Trump can file a written claim that he is so competent, and that stands unless two-thirds of both houses agree with Pence. The Democrats could wind up with two-thirds of the House in 2018, but they can't possibly get more than a small majority in the Senate.

      There's still plenty of time for Democrats you never heard of to show up, run for President, and run competent campaigns. It's three years to the next Presidential election.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  10. There's no good that can come of this by Baron_Yam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You cannot tolerate your president trying to build a power structure outside the one constrained by your Constitution unless you WANT a dictatorship.

    He's already tried to bring the FBI and court system to heel (including at least twice now declaring himself above the law), he's expressed an interest in controlling the media to ensure it aligns with his wishes (and taken a few practical steps in that direction), and now he's going to create a new intelligence service that is under his direct control?

    Just how far does this guy have to go before he lacks the support to continue?

    1. Re:There's no good that can come of this by sl3xd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just how far does this guy have to go before he lacks the support to continue?

      I've heard Trump voters saying things along the lines of "If Jesus Christ gets down off the cross and told me Trump is with Russia, I would tell him, hold on a second, I need to check with the president if it is true. That is how confident I feel in the president."

      We have a pretty long way to go if ostensibly Christian voters will choose to believe Trump rather than their God.

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    2. Re: There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, even if 90% of the country lost all faith in the sitting president the folks who are benefiting would not allow a change of leadership.

    3. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

      Just how far does this guy have to go before he lacks the support to continue?

      We'll likely found out at the conclusion of the Mueller investigation.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    4. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Republicans are traitors now. That's the actual news headline. They welcome a dictatorship run by an obese orange moron, literally and without exaggeration.

    5. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He doesn't go far enough! Everything he does is the right thing and it's just FAKE NEWS if it is thought to be bad! MAGA!

    6. Re:There's no good that can come of this by lkcl · · Score: 1

      You cannot tolerate your president trying to build a power structure outside the one constrained by your Constitution unless you WANT a dictatorship.

      well... according to the system utilised - known to be THE weakest form of government ever invented (democracy) - the citizens of the united states *do* want him in and thus *have* trusted him to make the right decisions for the four years of his term of office and thus *do* want a dictatorship oh hang on... https://politics.slashdot.org/... https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... https://news.slashdot.org/stor... https://yro.slashdot.org/story... https://politics.slashdot.org/...

    7. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We have a pretty long way to go if ostensibly Christian voters will choose to believe Trump rather than their God.

      Trump is their god.

    8. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just so you know the FBI, CIA and all intelligence agencies are all under the Presidents control as part of hist duties.

    9. Re:There's no good that can come of this by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just ask them if they want this system in place the next time a democrat president sits in the whitehouse?

      Even if they trust trump to the end of the world (which is batshit crazy all on its own), their rabid distrust of everyone else should slap them back down to earth.

      Give the whitehouse a private army / spy network / whatever else controlled exclusively by the president, and it will still be there for the next president.

      No matter what happens, whether it's 3 or 7 years, the next president will *not* be Trump.

      We have a pretty long way to go if ostensibly Christian voters will choose to believe Trump rather than their God.

      key word being 'ostensibly Christian'; they're not Christian... at most they're just 'team Christian', and only when it suits. We're about to watch "ostensible Christians" in Alabama elect a pedophile because he's on the same team as the sexual predator in chief.

    10. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 2

      Just how far does this guy have to go before he lacks the support to continue?

      I came to the conclusion months ago that he can't do anything that will cause his hardcore supporters to stop supporting him. We're getting reports of people in places like Alabama saying if Jesus came back and ran as a Democrat they'd still vote for Trump. We need to admit in America that for about 80-90% of the population the only thing that matters is whether there is a D or an R by a candidate's name and all other issues are negotiable. Assuming he can avoid doing something illegal that gets him removed from office or makes him resign, he's going to be re-elected in 2020. The economy is good and in almost every case of a sitting president losing a re-election bid, a bad economy was in play. Heck, GW Bush and Obama both ran for re-election with kind of crummy economies and both won easily. Trump has everything in his favor. The damage will be immense and his successor will have to do a lot of repair work in 2024 to fix the messes he'll cause in 2 terms, but angry white people love him and there's sadly still enough of them to decide the election in 2020 for Trump.

    11. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Baron_Yam · · Score: 4, Interesting

      >Just ask them if they want this system in place the next time a democrat president sits in the whitehouse?

      "It's OK to cheat to win, when you're right." Both sides are guilty of that, though I'm not going to argue whether it's an evenly divided guilt or not.

      However, given that for Trump's base 'their guy' is in power, I doubt they're worried much about keeping him there - the rules can be bent to make a 2nd term happen, and then you have another 4 years to work on making a Republican dynasty a thing.

      I mean... look at gerrymandering. It's not exactly an obscure attempt to manipulate democracy to ensure a win, and it's not a great long-term method for achieving that end repeatedly.

    12. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Freischutz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just how far does this guy have to go before he lacks the support to continue?

      I've heard Trump voters saying things along the lines of "If Jesus Christ gets down off the cross and told me Trump is with Russia, I would tell him, hold on a second, I need to check with the president if it is true. That is how confident I feel in the president."

      We have a pretty long way to go if ostensibly Christian voters will choose to believe Trump rather than their God.

      I heard a (female) Trumpkin and self confessed eveangelical say that: "...he must walk with god, if you are that rich god must love you". It is fascinating how Americans have managed to turn Jesus who stormed into the temple in Jerusalem and toppled the moneylender's tables into a modern day god of money and greed.

    13. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just ask them if they want this system in place the next time a democrat president sits in the whitehouse?

      You seem to be overlooking the possibility that the very purpose of this system may be to ensure there will never be a democrat president again.

    14. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you mention that Hitler was pretty wealthy? So was Sadam. So is Kim Jung Un. So is George Soros. How stupid do you have to be to think wealth is a sign of god's favor? Was Bernie Madoff besties with god and then accidentally pissed him off one day and ended up with a life sentence? How about the Menendez brothers?

    15. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You assume there will be more "elections". That is an assumption.

    16. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just ask them if they want this system in place the next time a democrat president sits in the whitehouse?

      They were asked. Trump and his supporters are intent on burning everything the fuck down, because that question, asked during the reign of your slick asshole over the past eight years, were met with derision.

    17. Re:There's no good that can come of this by gtall · · Score: 1

      And he's attempting to get several new courts authorized claiming the current ones are overburdened. Guess who get to appoint the sycophantic new judges. We'll get more dimbulbs like Gorsuch...

      Impeaching that moron is not good either, we'd get that Bible thumping idiot, Pence, who will have a seance...errr...prayer service before every decision...."Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition."

    18. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just how far does this guy have to go before he lacks the support to continue?

      I don't know, he could probably be revealed as a space alien and his supporters would endorse him, but in this case, the idea isn't even original, he's just stealing the idea fromTom Clancy.

    19. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask her if she's a fan of Joel Osteen. If she says "yes" then run for the hills.

    20. Re:There's no good that can come of this by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      The majority of the citizens of the United States did not actually come down in favor of any specific person being President at the last election. In terms of share of vote, Clinton came first (though with fewer votes than 50%); Trump was in second place.

      Trump won because the system we have is based upon the support of states, not the support of citizens.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    21. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "There won't ever be another Democrat president after Trump declares himself King and has his private security forces kill anyone who protests."

        - How the average Trump supporter would respond to your question.

    22. Re:There's no good that can come of this by jbengt · · Score: 2

      You misspelled misspelled.
      And if it's a "fishing expedition" (it's not), Mueller at least knows where they're biting, as he's already gotten Guilty pleas.

    23. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You cannot tolerate your president trying to build a power structure outside the one constrained by your Constitution unless you WANT a dictatorship.

      Agreed. But note that almost every president has done this on one level or another. This is not a defense of Trump but an observation that a constitutionally restrained government is a fantasy. If you reject the fantasy and you reject this power building then you must reject the US Government, Constitution and all.

    24. Re:There's no good that can come of this by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Nice try to change the subject with more fake news. FYI many of those that complaining the loudest about drone strikes are those complaining about Trump. The Republicans were the ones with the greatest support for drone strikes during both previous administrations. And the Trump administration hasn't quit killing people with Predator drones.

    25. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure.... Hitler was democratically elected as well.

    26. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just ask them if they want this system in place the next time a democrat president sits in the whitehouse?

      Even if they trust trump to the end of the world (which is batshit crazy all on its own), their rabid distrust of everyone else should slap them back down to earth.

      No, that is logic. This does not work with many of Trump's supporters. Because they'll feel like the good folk will be able to stop those mean old democrats from corupting their system.

    27. Re:There's no good that can come of this by tbannist · · Score: 2

      Just ask them if they want this system in place the next time a democrat president sits in the whitehouse?

      Some of them are secretly hoping that there won't be a "next time a democrat president sits in the White House", which is one potential consequence of giving the President his own secret army of spies and assassins...

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    28. Re:There's no good that can come of this by tbannist · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's the prosperity gospel. The basic premise is that there is an all-good, interventionist, God, therefore the people that good things happen to must be good people, and the people that bad things happen to must be bad people. Unless, of course, bad things are happening to you or me, then it's God testing our greatness. The corollary is, of course, that taxes on rich people are inherently unjust because rich people are doing good while taxes on the poor are just what those sick depraved perverts deserve.

      It's a truly sickening perversion of Christianity.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    29. Re:There's no good that can come of this by tbannist · · Score: 1

      well... according to the system utilised - known to be THE weakest form of government ever invented (democracy) - the citizens of the united states *do* want him in and thus *have* trusted him to make the right decisions for the four years of his term of office and thus *do* want a dictatorship oh hang on...

      Oh no. Trump was elected by the electoral college, not by the democratic will of Americans, always remember Trump lost the popular vote. In an actual Democracy, Trump would still be claiming the election was rigged.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    30. Re:There's no good that can come of this by tbannist · · Score: 1

      I came to the conclusion months ago that he can't do anything that will cause his hardcore supporters to stop supporting him.

      There are a probably a few things Trump could do that would cause him to lose his hard core supporters, but they are very few. The only one that I'm reasonably sure would absolutely lose him the next election is raising taxes.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    31. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the next president will *not* be Trump"

      Are you sure? Trump floated the idea of postponing the next PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION until he is sure it is not hacked/compromised.

      In other words, he's already mentally exploring what would be necessary to continue his power position without asking for the consent of the American citizens.

      You can call me "sky is falling" or tinfoil hat or whatever. Or, you can read history books and see that this type of behavior usually precedes the implementation of a dictatorship. That doesn't mean it will happen. But I think he WANTS it to happen....

    32. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just ask them if they want this system in place the next time a democrat president sits in the whitehouse?

      I agree, the complete and utter destruction of the Democrat Party is essential to the continued safety and prosperity of the American people.

    33. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it was okay when Obama was doing it?

      Without double standards, liberals would have no standards at all.

    34. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You cannot tolerate your president trying to build a power structure outside the one constrained by your Constitution unless you WANT a dictatorship.

      He's already tried to bring the FBI and court system to heel (including at least twice now declaring himself above the law), he's expressed an interest in controlling the media to ensure it aligns with his wishes (and taken a few practical steps in that direction), and now he's going to create a new intelligence service that is under his direct control?

      Just how far does this guy have to go before he lacks the support to continue?

      When I see the FBI act with honor, justice, and without political influence, then my respect will return.

      When I see them act so unlawfully, and with so much bias regarding the Hillary email scandal, they could fire every FBI agent, and disassemble it, and I wouldn't give a shit.

      They made their bed, now they lie in it.

    35. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's plenty wrong with dating teenagers when you're in your 30s, and Moore is reprehensible for a long list of reasons, but it's stupid to refer to it as pedophilia. Pedophilia means liking prepubescents, as in 11 and under.

    36. Re:There's no good that can come of this by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      >It's a truly sickening perversion of Christianity.

      Well, you could always ask the Pope to start preaching the virtues of charity and an austere lifestyle... from his palace, on his throne, surrounded by treasures and with servants ensuring he doesn't get dirt on his gold-encrusted robes.

  11. Re:Vice reports from an anonymous source by cloud.pt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yet they have been corroborated a gazillion times and are, unusually, one of the most trusted sources of relevant information these days. Gonzo style journalism sux at first, but it has a "raison d'etre" that sinks in pretty damn fast.

  12. For use after being President? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A nation-state capable private intelligence force? It isn't blackwater, but it sounds like a great way to keep presidential-scale power after the term-limits are done.

  13. Dangerous and terrifying... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is the making of a secret police agency that doesn't have any oversight from lawful civil authority (courts, Congress). This idea needs to be shut down. Hard.

    1. Re:Dangerous and terrifying... by sl3xd · · Score: 1

      Private spy agencies would work for anybody who pays them.

      Including any oligarch on the planet. Is it any wonder a rich guy would want that?

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    2. Re:Dangerous and terrifying... by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      This is the making of a secret police agency that doesn't have any oversight from lawful civil authority (courts, Congress). This idea needs to be shut down. Hard.

      Makings? This already exists: get arrested and you'll find out how much you miss your one phone call.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    3. Re:Dangerous and terrifying... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a lot of dumb in this thread. First, the CIA isn't a police force. Second, the CIA already gives a lot of money to private organizations and citizens to do their work for them. Third, this is still subject to congressional orversight, which itself isn't a constitutional requirement. Fourth, the primary goal here is not to cut out the leadership from their roles and responsibilities; it is to route around the functionaries which seem to do stupid shit like, say, tweet their girlfriends how much they hate Trump while investigating him.

      I don't know if what he plans to do will work or is a good use of money, but I do know the mindless screeching about anything Trump's name on it is retarded.

  14. Dumbest Idea Ever by EndlessNameless · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So Trump wants us to run two completely independent intelligence networks? How is this not insanely wasteful? What happened to those small government principles?

    And here is the kicker:

    The group reportedly brought in former Marine Corps Lt. Col. Oliver North to sell the idea to Trump.

    Their salesman is going to be the poster boy for corruption in the military. The only reason he's not a felon is a technicality, and he admitted his wrongdoing in front of Congress.

    I want to believe this is total bullshit. It's coming from Vice, so maybe it's safe to ignore it for the time being.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    1. Re:Dumbest Idea Ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully Vice will tread carefully to verify and not fall into a trap like the one that was set for the Washington Post (which, to their great credit, they didn't fall for):

        http://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/27/woman-approached-washington-post-false-tale-roy-moore-sting

    2. Re:Dumbest Idea Ever by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      There are 17 members in the US intelligence community. Not all of them perform intelligence gathering as this one would however there is the CIA and the DIA (Defence Intelligence Agency). I left out the FBI because it is supposed to be national but if this new private network of spies is true then they would probably work within the US too. And there would probably be some overlap with the NSA so you would be looking at it competing with possibly four departments.

    3. Re:Dumbest Idea Ever by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's a common play for leaders to develop parallel, privately controlled security and even military apparatuses where institutional or national loyalties may outweigh personal loyalty to the leader (Hitler's Waffen-SS), or where legalities restrain the leader prompting him to find ways to exercise power covertly and without restriction (Nixon's Plumbers).

      It's not dumb, it's treacherous.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:Dumbest Idea Ever by StormReaver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What happened to those small government principles?

      The Republicans only want small government when some other party is in control. When Republicans are in control, they want an all-powerful government.

    5. Re:Dumbest Idea Ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >I want to believe this is total bullshit. It's coming from Vice, so maybe it's safe to ignore it for the time being.

      Jesus, wake the fuck up. This is exactly in line with everything going on.

      Decimation of the state dept, stacking courts with incompetent ultra-right judges and all the rest. The list goes on and on and on.

      Your partisanship is blinding you to some serious shit.

    6. Re: Dumbest Idea Ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not just treacherous, treasonous!!

  15. Everyone but trump by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who would be stupid enough to do something like this?

    Trump can't even keep his mouth shut long enough to save himself from criminal liability or resist to the urge to give Russian government the location of U.S. nuclear submarines.

    Any spy who reports directly to trump is a dead man walking.

    1. Re:Everyone but trump by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 0

      Nobody would be this stupid. That's why it's made-up bullshit.

      Slashdot has become the digital National Enquirer. What a shame.

    2. Re:Everyone but trump by postbigbang · · Score: 2

      Keep trying. Go ahead. Are you actually hired for Trump media damage control?

      The sheer number of credible media sources gives this madness, this Trump SS idea, a lot of believability. Everyone has dirt, and by gosh, he'll distract the media with what he finds.... and not necessarily within the lawful confines of his office.

      Don Quixote couldn't have done better. You, either.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    3. Re:Everyone but trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One year ago, nobody thought Americans would be stupid enough to elect Donald Fucking Trump, of all people in the universe, as President of the United States.

      And yet, here we are.

      NEVER underestimate human stupidity. Never.

    4. Re:Everyone but trump by quantaman · · Score: 3, Informative

      Who would be stupid enough to do something like this?

      Trump can't even keep his mouth shut long enough to save himself from criminal liability or resist to the urge to give Russian government the location of U.S. nuclear submarines.

      Any spy who reports directly to trump is a dead man walking.

      You're assuming these spies would be spying on governments hostile to the administration.

      I think a more likely purpose for these spies is to collect dirt on domestic political actors and to provide back-channels to foreign governments that are secure from monitoring from the US government.

      Both of these might put the spies at risk of criminal liability in the US, but the people and institutions they'll piss off are generally not the ones that go around ordering hits.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    5. Re:Everyone but trump by Shotgun · · Score: 0

      I think a more likely purpose for these spies is to collect dirt on domestic political actors and to provide back-channels to foreign governments that are secure from monitoring from the US government.

      You mean, like the Clinton Foundation?

      Both of these might put the spies at risk of criminal liability in the US, but the people and institutions they'll piss off are generally not the ones that go around ordering hits.

      Nope. Definitely not like the Clinton Foundation.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    6. Re:Everyone but trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah whataboutery again, you forgot to mention emails. No actual facts to back up your claim, just the same old tired debunked alt fact lies.
      Hows it feel to be a world wide laughing stock?

    7. Re:Everyone but trump by zkiwi34 · · Score: 1

      This word credible, I do not think you know what it means...

  16. Exactly. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is basically a private secret police agency with no lawful oversight from the courts and Congress. Awful idea.

    1. Re:Exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is basically a private secret police agency with no lawful oversight from the courts and Congress. Awful idea.

      Bu-but... they'll finally be able to deal with the libtard threat?!? The second amendment way!!!

    2. Re:Exactly. by lgw · · Score: 1

      Doesn't it report into the same CIA director? So not private. And we know about it? So not secret. And it's a spy agency? So not police. So, yeah, every word in "private secret police" is wrong.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    3. Re:Exactly. by mbkennel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Doesn't it report into the same CIA director? So not private

      No, that's baloney. "not private" means "authorized by Congressional law and, usually funded by appropriation, and subject to Congressional & judicial oversight".

    4. Re:Exactly. by lgw · · Score: 1

      Congress holds the purse strings, so this agency won't be funded unless they want it to be, meaning whatever oversight they desire. Personally, I don't see the point in having both this new thing and the CIA at the same time - if the CIA isn't working, and can't be fixed, get rid of it.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:Exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're an excellent mental gymnast.

      Now do a backflip for me, clown.

    6. Re:Exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I kinda hope that the CIA - the real CIA - will take it as a declaration of war, and simply murder everyone involved. At every level.

    7. Re:Exactly. by tbannist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Doesn't it report into the same CIA director? So not private. And we know about it? So not secret. And it's a spy agency? So not police. So, yeah, every word in "private secret police" is wrong.

      Here's a hint: Secret police aren't police, they're spies. Otherwise they'd just be "police". The "secret police" part just means they have the power to make you disappear, permanently.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    8. Re:Exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, because the "secret service" is still "secret", despite being publicly known. It operates out of sight for good reasons. The Nazis also had the Gestapo (GEheime STAatsPOlizei = SEcrete STAte POlice). All of Germany knew that it existed - that explicitly was part of the terror plan - but when you found out that a Gestapo man was on your trail it usually was too late.

      No, because "private" does not have to mean "involving a single person". I could start my private secrete army and it would be very private as long as in the end all its members - include the second in command - work for me. In the case of Trump, the CIA Director is just working for him as a member of the private secret service.

      Anyway, the point is irrelevant, because something much worse is happening here. As the older post says: This is exactly how the SS started.out in Nazi Germany. OK, they were not secret, but the "I don't trust anyone who does not exclusively work for me - not even in my own party" reasoning was exactly the same. What started as AH's personal security ring, evolved into a parallel army of butchers.

  17. What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Intelligence gathered by private spies financed by Trump donors, targeting areas like Iran and North Korea

    The best "intelligence" money can buy. Would be a shame if the intelligence leads us into an unnecessary war. A real $hame.

  18. Trump is the world's DUMBEST traitor. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This shit is getting absurd, what's next, he's going to try to AirBNB the WH? This idiot needs the gallows. Sorry, no private spy network you dumb orange cunt. GTFO off to prison.

  19. How is this legal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How is this legal? No really, how could this even begin to work. Let's take a simple argument avoiding Constitutional law on which I am no expert but I can't see this passing the sniff test there either... spies like to get paid. The Executive Branch requests a budget and Congress funds what they want. The CIA, NSA, NRO etc have been authorized as expenses by Congress. But a private spy network that is outside Congressional oversight? Does Trump really think that will pass? Remember they need 60 votes in the Senate for that. And I think some Republicans (Rand Paul) might chafe at that.

    1. Re: How is this legal? by kainewynd2 · · Score: 1

      Iâ(TM)m pretty sure itâ(TM)s not legal. Iâ(TM)d have to guess that if this is real, theyâ(TM)re relying on the fact that Congress and the Senate are pretty much giving the administration a pass on damn near everything. (At least they forced Russian sanctions down his throat).

      --
      I just don't get... eh, ugh... never mind. This post wasn't worth the research I put into it.
    2. Re:How is this legal? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      It's legal to make up whatever you want and slap it as an article on a website. Especially if it's highly partisan and will bring in lots of ad impressions.

      Or did you mean the made-up bullshit? The legality of that is really kind of irrelevant, since it's just Trump Derangement Syndrome ranting. Fools can gibber, it's even sometimes therapeutic.

    3. Re:How is this legal? by ghoul · · Score: 1

      The Agency could self fund through Civil Forfeiture, Gun running, drug running , balckmail/extortion and corporate espionage.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
  20. Forgive me if I wait until a credible source by wfrazee2004 · · Score: 2

    Both the linked article and its in turn linked source are of dubious integrity, and have highly questionable histories of independent/original reporting. The presentation here at minimum smacks of over-reach and speculation. Our intelligence services - and those of every other country - already do exactly this. So does wikileaks, which is frankly a private intelligence service in all but name. So if the simple story here is "Erik Prince to run privately funded PatriotLeaks" that's a far cry from a US government sponsored "replace the CIA" initiative.

    1. Re: Forgive me if I wait until a credible source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess, you want the Fox News angle, the rest are liars, amiright?

  21. Re: Great idea by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

    You have been trolled, bro.

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  22. First rule of spying by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Don't announce your spying plans in public!
    But, well, I guess it is a trick ... hm, he wants us to believe he is founding a new spy company ... hm ...

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    1. Re:First rule of spying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the info was leaked. shows how good this new private squad of trumpette spies is gonna be.. at least as good as trump himself is at his own job. in other words, we're all fucked.

    2. Re:First rule of spying by Purity+Of+Essence · · Score: 1

      That's actually the second rule. The first rule is not to discuss the rules.

      --
      +0 Meh
    3. Re:First rule of spying by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      Announce your spying plans in public! Get everybody hot and bothered about them! And in the background, where people might not notice, do something else that really matters. Have you noticed that there's a tempest in a teapot about something stupid EVERY F'ING TIME something major goes down a few days later?

  23. Re:You guys break me up by PmanAce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why are you bringing in the left when it has nothing to do with the article? Deflecting blame is not a valid counterpoint strategy.

    --
    Tired of my customary (Score:1)
  24. So wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The nation with the most powerful army in the world needs to hire mercenaries. The nation with the biggest spy network and arguably the most shady shit in the clandestine operations needs a ghost network of contracted spies. What the hell is going on here? How does this Make America Great Again? Generally there's a hard enough time rooting out double agents in traditional spy networks, why won't this happen here? Why would they report to the CIA boss who has a perfectly good agency working underneath him? Anybody else think this is a terrible idea?

    1. Re:So wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the exact same reasons that the SS, SD and all the other pure Nazi organisations came to be. The army and the intelligence services simply weren't Nazi enough and contained elements which were considered "unreliable" or even hostile to the Nazis, so they established an end run around them.

      This is exactly the same. It's a horrific idea from a democratic standpoint, but an excellent one if you're aiming to set up a dictatorship in a former democracy.

  25. Re:You guys break me up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So your "solution" is a private spy network with even less accountability? YOU ARE A RETARDED CUNT.

  26. This just keeps getting weirder by orgelspieler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How am I just now learning that Betsy DeVoss's brother is the Blackwater guy?! Erik Prince has a soul of pure, black, unadulterated evil. This whole thing is so fucking strange. If they think the CIA is that bad, why not fire everybody and hire new people? Is it even legal for the president to have a personal, private spying apparatus? No congressional oversight? No judicial review? Sure seems like a unconstitutional and unconscionable idea to me!

    1. Re:This just keeps getting weirder by hey! · · Score: 1

      What you are looking at is the emergence of a politically dominant hereditary aristocracy.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:This just keeps getting weirder by Gilgaron · · Score: 2

      Ah, but a hefty estate tax and heterodox media would prevent that... ! :(

    3. Re: This just keeps getting weirder by ody · · Score: 1

      We have lots of Congressional oversight! The problem seems more that the "oversight" in question is currently done by a group of plutocrats who recently declared the crimes of pedophilia, sexual assault, obstruction of justice and treason (although NEVER abortion) are actually pretty okay as long as they further their agenda.

    4. Re:This just keeps getting weirder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erik Prince has a soul of pure, black, unadulterated evil.

      Shit. Black is not the problem. Black did fine in office. Whitey and his whitey-white army is the enemy.

    5. Re:This just keeps getting weirder by Eldaar · · Score: 1

      There is definitely a connection between Trump, Prince, and DeVoss (https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/18/scahill_blackwater_founder_erik_prince_the). It is Robert Mercer, who, as I understand, stepped in to fund a major pro-Trump PAC late in the general election. Mercer has had ties to Prince for some time, as well as a number of other people Trump has brought into his administration (formally or otherwise).

      As best as I can tell, Trump is in part doing the bidding of Mercer and his allies.

    6. Re:This just keeps getting weirder by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      How am I just now learning that Betsy DeVoss's brother is the Blackwater guy?!

      Because you took your eye off what's been going on in politics. Seriously, almost anyone who isn't a low-information voter knew this long ago.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    7. Re:This just keeps getting weirder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are a racist piece of shit.

    8. Re:This just keeps getting weirder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed! How is that? Have you been lying under a rock? Erik Prince is practically a deep-pocketed Saudi sponsored mercenary now waging multiple private wars in different countries - Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria etc.. His ambition is to have an army that can challenge the US military. He is worse than Richard Roper in The NightManager. He is apparently contemplating a Bannon-backed primary challenge to Republican Senator John Barrasso in Wyoming. This is corruption at the highest degree and a private spying network would be the 1st step to the fall of a democracy.

    9. Re:This just keeps getting weirder by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Lets move to a wealth tax system and abolish income tax. Charge a 5% wealth tax on net worth. Watch the billionaire rats run for the exit and then close the exit with a an expatriation tax of also 5%.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
  27. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol, then the whole freaking country has been trolled and it is time to do something about it beyond dismissing it is harmless

  28. Re:You guys break me up by Baron_Yam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > Deflecting blame is not a valid counterpoint strategy

    It is not valid, but it's been pretty effective for about a year so far.

  29. Re:You guys break me up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Communism and free gender reassignment surgeries for children starting at age 5.

  30. Re:You guys break me up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well the CIA did kill 10,000s of people, not soldiers, but women, children and elderly in Vietnam. They wiped out entire villages in the middle of the night.

    This isn't a right or left thing, this is fact. The CIA has their own worldly agenda, apart from the US.

  31. Re:You guys break me up by orgelspieler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This isn't reform. This is privatization. This is taking an apparatus that is already basically beyond oversight, and putting it under the direct control of an unstable dictator who cannot tell fact from fiction. Just because we think the CIA is bad doesn't mean it can't get worse.

  32. Re:Great idea by MooseTick · · Score: 1

    "If the liberals weren't so racist against Russians"

    When did being Russian become a definable race?

  33. Problem:out of control spies Solution:less control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What could possibly go wrong? While some of the behaviour of the major 5 eyes agencies has been more than just concerning (black sites total surveillance etc), this is worse. In fact this solution displays fractal wrongness, the more you examine it the more levels of wrong you find, the idea is wrong in principle since it removes so many protections against abuse, the implementation looks bad, and anything involving the management of Bacon-bullets Blackwater (now with drugs! and Jesus!) is just going to come out terrible.

    I'd ask what he was thinking but he doesn't, lets hope it fails fast.

  34. "Deep State"? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    Everytime I hear that my ears perk up. It's the kind of crazy conspiracy stuff that crazy dictators have used for years to breed distrust in Democracy so they can 'temporarily' supplement it.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:"Deep State"? by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1, Insightful

      IMHO, the "deep state" is really the "normal government" of the USA. The reason Trump and friends are always droning on about it is because many of the ideas Trumps wants to do (or at least the way he thinks these ideas should be done) are mostly illegal, or at least highly unethical and so far outside the bounds of civilized discourse it's ridiculous. Trump is so used to being the "CEO", saying "get this done now" and it just happens; not needing to care who is financing what, or whom he is actually employing...he just can't adapt to the idea of "checks and balances" and "procedures".

      Erik Prince is treading on some very dangerous ground going up against the CIA like this. His overseas contractors will be open-season targets, outside of any Geneva Convention protections, and he himself might end up being a target for some type of "accident". "Edge of the knife" and all.

    2. Re:"Deep State"? by hey! · · Score: 1

      Well, the concept of a "state within a state" or a "military-industrial complex" didn't originate with the conspiracy theorists, they just picked it up and applied it selectively to state officials they don't agree with.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:"Deep State"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everytime I hear that my ears perk up. It's the kind of crazy conspiracy stuff that crazy dictators have used for years to breed distrust in Democracy so they can 'temporarily' supplement it.

      But the US is no longer a democracy, it's an oligarchy. So says the experts.

  35. hostile countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is the US included in those hostile countries?

    I really don't know who to believe here - the Vice News source is less than reputable, but this sort of thing is consistent with Trump's outlook and past actions. Blackwater is demonstrably available to the highest bidder. That this scenario can be reported and not be an obvious fake is truly scary.

  36. Lots of ACs by kainewynd2 · · Score: 0

    I havenâ(TM)t done any actual statistical work on this, but it seems like anyone who supports this or starts going ape-shit on âoethe leftâ is posting as an AC. Now why on earth would they do that? Hm...

    --
    I just don't get... eh, ugh... never mind. This post wasn't worth the research I put into it.
    1. Re:Lots of ACs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People see what they want to see...

    2. Re:Lots of ACs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one am greatly enjoying the increasing displays of paranoia. Your post is exemplary.

    3. Re:Lots of ACs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're really shit at collecting data and/or guessing. Should I take a picture of all the top posts here so you can't walk back from your shitty AstroTurf talking points?

    4. Re:Lots of ACs by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

      So run an automatic UserScript to purge the discussion threads of AC's - in today's age of information overload - there's almost no reason to waste time "listening" to anyone that isn't at least willing to post behind a pseudonym.

  37. SS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    trumps SS will they put the jews in camps?

    1. Re:SS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Mexicans this time. Jews would be too obvious, so they swapped out the scapegoats. Do try to keep up.

    2. Re:SS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like FDR did in WWII to the Japanese?

    3. Re:SS by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Wrong persecuted minority (which is not to say many of Trump's more extreme supporters wouldn't push for that.) Trump has focused on Mexican immigrants and Muslim refugees as the go-to scapegoats to be demonized.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    4. Re:SS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "trumps SS will they put the jews in camps?"

      Hopefully just wipe Israel off the map and start the process towards world peace.

  38. Re:Vice reports from an anonymous source by orgelspieler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This has been reported in other, more reputable sources. I don't know why /. went with Vice. Basically, the official line from Trump's people is that there is no way in hell he would agree to this. Seeing as how the guy's sister in in the cabinet, I bet there will be more of this story coming out. My guess is that Trump will tweet about what a great guy Erik Prince is, and what a true patriot Ollie North is, and that the CIA cannot be trusted. I guess we can't really guess what the Angry Cheeto will tweet until Fox and Friends comes out with their version of the story, though.

  39. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The same time Mexicans and Muslims did.

  40. Re:You guys break me up by EndlessNameless · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You don't have to be liberal to have a moral problem with assassination of foreign leaders.

    Any sane person who complains about American intelligence agencies is going to focus on the the lack of oversight and accountability. The transparency and accountability will be far, far worse for private intelligence service that reports only to the President.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  41. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russian isn't a race.

  42. Re:Great idea by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

    His english not so good. They have him training on Slashdot because of high vocabulary nerds and nobody else goes now there.

  43. FARK is a paid shill safe space! by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

    I am most definitely not Russian, but I find your comments highly offensive.

    Just because slashdot is full of liberals doesn't mean it's a place for politically correct snowflakes like yourself.

    Have you tried FARK? That's another dying 2000s website and they go well out of their way to accommodate emotionally handicapped paid posters. Be they Slav, Indian, Chinese, or Pinoy. FARK is a safe and inclusive place for paid shills of all colors and nationalities!

  44. Maybe just have that civil war already by swb · · Score: 1

    It seems like it would be cheaper and we'd settle a lot of this shit for at least 50 years, maybe longer.

    1. Re:Maybe just have that civil war already by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      >It seems like it would be cheaper and we'd settle a lot of this shit for at least 50 years

      It's not impossible that it'll come to that, but I hope it's unlikely. War is nasty business, and a lot of innocent people generally get traumatized, maimed, or dead... and it really only solves the problem if one side is obliterated. I mean, c'mon, you still have people who resent losing the previous civil war and I think it's safe to say enough time has passed that shouldn't be a thing anymore.

      On the other hand, with every additional bit of crazy the POTUS does without being stopped because of an 'R'... it seems that much more likely that eventually blood will need to be shed to remove the entrenched powers. Keep in mind, it's the right that tends to be more fanatical about their guns and going to organized war while the left tends to sporadically breed terrorists. It absolutely would not be pretty or short if the USA fell into civil war, and I think you're still well within range of correcting things with the legal system and the ballot box.

    2. Re:Maybe just have that civil war already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's all in your head. All it takes is a little trust on both sides.

    3. Re:Maybe just have that civil war already by swb · · Score: 1

      I'm not convinced it's about which "side" would win, but about the catharsis that would result.

      Unfortunately I think that we're so far down the road of mistrust and hatred that it would probably have to get pretty close to actual civil war for people on both sides to see how far off the deep end they really are and what the consequences of continuing that path might mean.

  45. Re:Great idea by mnemotronic · · Score: 2

    ...If the liberals weren't so racist against Russians

    "Russian" in this context is a nationality. While "Race" was once used to distinguish people by language, location or politics, that custom disappeared several hundred years ago. Perhaps the gulag's educational system has not kept up?

    Sidenote: when I was a kid I was bombarded with talk about them "Ruskies" and "Commies" from hard-core Republican adults. They wished that General George Patton had continued fighting at the end of WW II and leveled Moscow.

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  46. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when did NeoConservative NAZI-Republican TRAITORS give a fuck-all about RACISM, lest of all RUSSIANS? Did these idiots forgot who they were pretending to be AGAIN? Wow simple bitches.

  47. Impeach. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    Impeach impeach impeach! Get that crazy fucker outta there! 8-(

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re: Impeach. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For what crimes? You can't even name any to support what you are saying. Just because you don't like the results of a fair and Democratic election doesn't mean you get to shout impeach.

    2. Re: Impeach. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Well right now there's violation of the emoluments clause, soon there might be obstruction of justice, and we'll have to see if there's anything criminal about colluding with a foreign government to influence an election. He doesn't even need to have committed a crime, he could be impeached for mental incompetence.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    3. Re: Impeach. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Oh one more thing, while many Americans would happily tell you that the US is not a democracy but a democratic republic, I would now argue that the US is not even partially democratic since fewer people voted for the winner of the last election than a losing candidate. The US is more timocratic than democratic since the value of a person's vote is weighted by the amount of unused land around them.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    4. Re: Impeach. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      all lies

    5. Re: Impeach. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      story for you. It was Clinton and the DNC that colluded with Russia to influence an election, not Trump.

      You are a denier, I bet you also support sexual abusers like Frankin and Conyers.

    6. Re: Impeach. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a denier, I bet you also support sexual abusers like Frankin and Conyers.

      No, and unlike you, we don't elect them President either.

      Scumbag Trump schill.

    7. Re:Impeach. by ghoul · · Score: 1

      He is not going to be impeached as long as the Republicans need him to sign the Tax bill. BTW I think he will keep delaying it to protect his position.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    8. Re:Impeach. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      That makes sense, but is Trump smart enough to realize that the promise of the tax bill is his lifeline?

      On the topic of that tax bill, it seems the Republicans are getting ready for the endgame of capitalism. You don't put a tax bill like that through if you expect society to keep running for another 10~20 years. It's a final attempt to rake as much money into the pockets of the 1% as possible before the shit hits the fan.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  48. Re: Vice reports from an anonymous source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "angry Cheetos guy" - This :))) This is why I wish I had mod points right now. But no, I don't follow Trump's Twitter account and I certainly don't want to hear Fox News version of this: Life's too short to follow everything batshit billionaires say.

  49. DO NOT BE RACIST TO PAID SHILLS! by i286NiNJA · · Score: 2

    I think it's very racist of them to assume you're a slav when all we know for certain is that you're posting from a smoky internet cafe for peanuts in order to support your starving family.

  50. CIA isn't supposed to operate in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who will hold this super-secret agency accountable?

  51. Re:You guys break me up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because whataboutism is one of the first tactics that the Russian backed trolls use.

  52. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Neither are Mexicans or Muslims.

  53. Ah yes, the "Deep State." by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    "I want unlimited power as if I was a king, and there are all these checks and balances! I'm just going to call it the Deep State when I'm not given total power."People with jobs don't like it when I appoint superiors with the directive to shut down their department! Wah wah."

    1. Re:Ah yes, the "Deep State." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like a Derp state.

  54. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the Russian government started paying people to spread false information globally on the internet.

  55. Uber secret service? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dead on arrival.

  56. No chance. by WolfgangVL · · Score: 1, Insightful

    No way in hell will something like this fly in the USA.

    I imagine trump sits in his bed at night, under the covers with his smartphone, and dreams up things just like this as ways to troll the media, so he can point fingers and cry fake news later.

    But then again, the more I think about it, the more it seems like this might have been the plan all along. Suddenly all the bananas bullshit of the past year and half starts to make sense when viewed through a "spin up the secret police" filter.

    Seriously, if this comes to pass, it's time to start looking at the 2nd amendment solution.... and I don't say this lightly. Once something like this is a thing, people start falling into unmarked vans and black bags.

    How far we have fallen.

    --
    You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
    1. Re:No chance. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Once something like this is a thing, people start falling into unmarked vans and black bags.

      You might be the first if the regular secret service doesn't get around to giving you an interview before Trump's unaccountable network of mercenary spies is in place!

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:No chance. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, if this comes to pass, it's time to start looking at the 2nd amendment solution....

      The same 2nd Amendment the Democrats have been systematically dismantling for years? That same 2nd Amendment?

    3. Re:No chance. by WolfgangVL · · Score: 1

      The ability to be critical of government power in public is pretty important in the this country, and has been so since 11/15/1791. So important in fact, that we wrote it down just the the right of the number one.

      You might be the first if the regular secret service doesn't get around to giving you an interview before Trump's unaccountable network of mercenary spies is in place!

      Just the sort of thing I would expect a private government goon to say. I don't expect the secret service would be very interested in my constitutionally protected criticisms unless I start printing money.

      I'm no frothing 2nd amendment screamer, and I suppose my above post may come off like that, so maybe yours is the typical media conditioned knee-jerk reaction, and not the threat of government retribution that it reads as?

      I do flex my rights as written pretty often, including my right to free speech, and have sworn an oath to defend the constitution, which kind of makes it my duty to speak up on things like this.

      Comments like yours are the very definition of "FUD" Please find some perspective from outside your moms basement. You may find some things are worth speaking up for, and others are worth fighting for.

      When you stop seeing uncomfortable discussions and comments following such scary and repugnant news, it's really time to start looking over your shoulder.

      --
      You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
    4. Re:No chance. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I was half-joking...but I was serious that you may get an interview from the Secret Service specifically, as one of their duties is to protect the President. It's been done over milder statements.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  57. trust the private spies by Kludge · · Score: 1

    Yes, I'm sure all those "private spies" in that network will be totally trustworthy and only take $$ that they have earned...

    1. Re:trust the private spies by jbengt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes. You remember the Iraqi "asset" going by the code name "Curveball", and the information he provided about weapons of mass destruction, and how useful he was to our efforts at making the middle east more stable peaceful. This will work out just as well for our new paid informants.

    2. Re:trust the private spies by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It wasn't the informant's fault, his masters had already decided they wanted a war and were just looking for someone to give them the intel they needed. They were not mislead, they mislead the UN and their citizens.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  58. How Dare You ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here at the FSB we have a thorough Equal Employment Opportunity Policy. Dont you belittle us !

  59. Ah, a Gestapo! by lylefile · · Score: 1

    That's what's been missing in the plan for global domination!

  60. Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Saudis pay billions to further their cause of Mohammedizing the world.

    Last time they started killing Russians, though, Putin razed Grozny. Russians are not naive tools like Americans.

  61. There's fascism that can come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just how far does this guy have to go before he lacks the support to continue?

    When all of his supporters are too afraid of him and his secret police to speak out against him.

  62. Re:Great idea by jedidiah · · Score: 0

    Oligarchy class? Don't kid yourself. Both major parties are run for the benefit of billionaires. They only difference is which particular billionaires benefit.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  63. Being With Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... is much better than being with the enemies of your civilization, who have sworn to smoke your out - the Mohammedists.

    But alas, you Anglos are corrupt beings and all your values can be bought with a serious amount of Shekels from Riad.

    They bought GWB and could kill 4000 Americans without punishment. Instead, GWB dropped their neighbouring nation into the abyss of civil war. Iraq was not Islamist at all. But Iraq once offended Israel and the Saudis.

  64. People are voting for known sexual predators... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    rather than the 'other party' or even better, a third party.

    The badge next to a person's name is more important than either their stated policies or character. Although the policies on both sides tend towards extremism as well, rather than focusing on bipartisan bulletpoints and letting the social movement stuff be decided by the people when they are ready (or not.)

    As to this private spy army: Look at who is involved in it Blackwater, Amyntor, the CIA director. This isn't spinning up a new spy network, this is simply taking an existing off the books intelligence network and placing it on the books. Giving legitimacy to an illegitimate network that has probably existed for 10-20 years, perhaps longer. The US has maintained extra-legal military assets outside of the country for 30-50 years, if not longer. Go look up 'Sandwind' I believe they used to be called... based out of Bermuda or the Bahamas. They were a primarily US ex-military mercenary unit that was incorporated off-shore to avoid US legal issues surrounding mercenaries while still being close enough to provide rapid deployment under covert US led and financed orders.

  65. Is it April 1st by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... already?

    1. Re:Is it April 1st by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Every day is April 1st now, and all the jokes are real!

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:Is it April 1st by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It really is April Fools Day everyday.

      The point of private corporations is to make money. Can you imagine how much BS would be generated by the private spies just to make more coin? It would be like web ads, lots and lots of volume and very little information.

      The grifters are taking over.

  66. Wow! by budsetr · · Score: 1

    What could possibly go wrong? While we are at it how about setup a network of privately funded nuclear weapons? We can't trust the bureaucracy in the Pentagon with WMD's.

  67. He can call it "KGB" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russia isn't using the name any more.

  68. And when Trump leaves office by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    these spies will still be loyal to him. Perhaps he can call them the Republican Guard.

  69. Sociopaths are going to put this guy on a pedestal by BadTuna · · Score: 2

    17 spy depts that we pay for and he want to create yet another one? That answers only to him?

      How far is the batshit allowed to go before he is removed? How many definitions of the word narcissist need to be explained?
    How long before he wants to change 'President' to 'Utmost Supreme Leader"?

    --
    Your sig here!
  70. Re: Great idea by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 4, Informative

    You don't think maybe they call Trump a racist because he declared there were many very nice white supremacists?

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  71. Re:Great idea by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    > "Russian" in this context is a nationality

    This never stops liberals when they want to call someone a racist.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  72. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why I voted straight ticket libertarian. Get some new billionaires in power.

    Russia is playing both sides. The Republican party is being destroyed from within by Trump and his redhatters, meanwhile intersectionality is being used to great effect in order to divide the Democrats into smaller and weaker pieces that will fail to come together when it comes time to elect someone who doesn't "represent" their othersexual transracial angelkinness. Stay home, Bernie Bros, wymyn power will win the vote without you!

  73. Re:You guys break me up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Honestly, I don't think so. There's a lot of people who have the feeling of "we'll just wait n more years and it'll be over" where n maxes out at 8. And "if it's truly bad enough, he'll be kicked out of office because the system works". Everything else comes across as squabbling as Presidents obviously are insulated from having a lot of effect on the vast majority of peoples lives. Even the effects that are most likely are a byproduct of Congressional action, and Congress is incredibly ineffectual (some would argue by design).

    In short, Trump lacks the power to do much of anything by design, and its clear he's being effectively reigned in. Until Trump is doing more than just talking out of his ass--again--there's little reason for most people to really give a shit.

  74. Re:Great idea by jbengt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's a false equivalency. It used to be true that both parties helped the rich donors while placating their voters, but they had core sets of values that they would more-or-less adhere to when push came to shove. There's a huge difference between Trump's "Republican" party and the old Republican and Democratic parties, and it's not and improvement to abandon all sense of truth and decency, eliminate as many checks and balances as possible, call reality "fake news", and lie so much and so blatantly that it almost becomes normalized..

  75. Re:Great idea by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 2

    Did you cash your Putin check today, apparatchnik?

  76. Re: Great idea by jbengt · · Score: 4, Informative

    there's no shortage of Americans calling Trump "racist" because he purposed a ban on Muslim immigration from certain countries, or because he wants to build a wall between the US and Mexico.

    That's not why people know him to be a racist.

  77. Can't trust the CIA? by Heebie · · Score: 2

    Of course Dump and his administration cannot trust the CIA. The CIA's mission is to take out enemies of the United States of America. Dump and his entire administration *ARE* enemies of the United States of America. There is no way in hell that a PRIVATE army of spies should ever represent the interests of the U.S. or any other nation on the planet. PRIVATE spies CAN BE BOUGHT... at least, if not more, easily than ones that legitimately work for the government. This idea should be killed by congress and the courts before it gets off the ground... but it probably won't be. :(

  78. Setup for a great movie plot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ten years for now, a civil war erupts in the USA, a secret war fought in the shadows. A spy war between the CIA and Trump's GRU. Chaos, confusion, collateral damage. John Powell is a solid American patriot, but he starts to question just who it is he is working for.

  79. And there is is .... King Trump the 1st ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump's naked plans for a dictatorship, whereby people and agencies swear allegiance to him, bypasses the checks and balances in the system, and does whatever he wants.

    Trump wants his own Stazi/KGB system, and doesn't give a fuck about the law or the Constitution.

    No wonder he spends so much time sucking up to dictators and other assholes -- he seems to be of the belief he's now the king.

    This can't be defended as anything other than a power grab, done by a crooked narcissist. Trump thinks he is the first king of America.

    Be afraid of shit like this. He's decided the Constitution doesn't apply to him..

  80. Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An organization kinda like Sector 7 from the Transformers movies! Maybe they will find NBEs here on Earth.

  81. Whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Creepy Clown also wants to move the capital of the terrorist, rogue state of Israel to Jerusalem. Trump is a Zionist stooge who is creating conflict in the world instead of alleviating it. I don't know who is worse, Trump or Bush. Neither worked for America's best interests. Come to think of it, neither did O'bummer. The world is going to hell in a handbasket.

  82. Easy Fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a Trump supporter, It's really more like, if the news media told me the sky was blue, I'd have to go outside and check for myself.

    If you want to be able to trust the media again, stop watching Fox News and reading Breitbart.

  83. Catch and Execute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully all the "spies" are caught and executed. On Free-per-View TV.

    This would teach those immoral American bastards to think twice before acting in such a fashion, and in any event apply the appropriate "cleaning" of which the gene pool is in such desperate need ...

  84. What Subpoena's are for by Arzaboa · · Score: 1

    The spy agencies were created, because we as a group needed a way to get information from other groups for our common causes.

    Subpoena's are supposed to cover this gap whereas you can subpoena a private company, get private data and turn them into your spies for a minute.

    --
    "Throw all of the tea over" - Samual Adams

  85. I could stand on fifth avenue and shoot someone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot someone, and people would still vote for me."

    Yes, Trump fuckers, that's the kind of people that you are: Fucking morons. But don't take my word for it. Your Lord Trump himself says so, unambiguously.

    How you digusting pieces of trash can still look your children in the eyes, knowing what you've done, is beyond me.

  86. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They wished that General George Patton had continued fighting at the end of WW II and leveled Moscow.

    Guess they weren't paying attention when the Germans tried that?

  87. Re:Great idea by greenwow · · Score: 0

    Well you certainly do sound like one of those Russians. They object to being called Russian. They seem ashamed of admitting what they be.

  88. Re:You guys break me up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not even doing that, because it leaves the CIA intact. I wonder who would approve a budget for it? We already know about the corrupt people and thought processes going into this idea.

  89. And Which Hostile Countries Might Those Be? by newbie_fantod · · Score: 1

    The White House is reportedly looking at a proposal to create a ghost network of private spies in hostile countries

    Since +/- 65% of Americans are hostile to The White House, I'm guessing that The U.S.A. is high on the list

  90. The comments here are TERRIFYING by slshdtisctrldbysjws · · Score: 0

    This thread is actually very scary. Half of the population believes in a reality that's completely different from the reality the other half believes in. And they have absolutely no evidence, references, or rationale for believing it. They are just fatalists. It seems the nihilism instilled by our society's materialistic and superficial substance is actually causing mass mental illness.

    Why exactly is Trump supposed to be evil, again? Because of a complicated tax reform that no one in the general public really understands?

    We really need a new type of forum, for the sanity of humanity. We need facts and arguments laid out for all to see and discuss without a psychotic majority censoring the dissenters. Hopefully AI can give us a chance at this: objectively mapping out ideas and translating them into terms everyone can understand. Imagine a completely neutral moderator that encourages a logical discussion.
    Most people would piss on it for being boring. But it's exactly what we need to give birth to the leader class of the future.

    --
    My karma was manually wiped by site staff https://slashdot.org/~slshdtisctrldbysjws 18 mod up, 10 mod down = bad karma
    1. Re:The comments here are TERRIFYING by caseih · · Score: 2

      Yes, but what is truly terrifying is that there's a non-zero chance that the fatalists are right. Everything *has* changed with Trump, and not for the better. Even the most far-fetched conspiracy theories are now a tiny bit plausible. I for one have no doubt that Trump actually talked with some people about this idea. I do not believe, however, that it came to anything or will come to anything.

      Before Trump there was a certain decorum, gravitas, and respect with which the president acted, both before fellow citizens, and with nations and leaders abroad. The US was respected and feared because of this, despite the rapid changing of power between the major parties over the last 100 years. Conspiracy theories had no weight, because of this respect. Despite party politics, the US could be depended on to act in ways that were beneficial to US interests, but also benefited the rest of the world. That has all changed now, and no one knows from moment to moment what Trump might do or say. This breeds intense anxiety in the world and at home.

      Trump has also given license to people to express freely their baser natures, to the detriment of all. And this is actually what the evil is.

      As a moderate I'm very disturbed by the affects of Trump's presidency on the nation. Seems like everyone is being forced to take an extreme side. The middle is getting quite lonely and increasingly under scorn.

      Also what disturbs me is that otherwise rational American citizens would rather vote for men of dubious reputation and open allegations of sexual assault, than vote for someone of the other party. This ties directly back to Trump and what he's started.

    2. Re: The comments here are TERRIFYING by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no middle, there never was, you're delusional thinking any middle is a better place

    3. Re: The comments here are TERRIFYING by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In politics, the only thing you find in the middle of the road is roadkill. That said, it isn't necessary for us to be as far apart as we now are. I'm truly afraid that another war between (and within) the states is not inconceivable.

      The best and most boring times economically since WW2 were during the Cold War, when society was in fact pretty boring. Stuff the hippies did in the 60s-70s was really pretty tame compared to kinky stuff now, and the vast majority though it was cute and went on with working and doing things. Upsets to the down side have almost all been during Rep administrations unless caused by outside interests (the 70s oil problems, for instance).

      The key point was that boring is good: nobody in power greatly upset the applecart. Trump and, for a few years preceding, the Rep-dominated Congress have clearly upset things in ways that don't have any recent precedent.

    4. Re:The comments here are TERRIFYING by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the summary said so, so we talk about it accordingly. It what is proposed, not what is actually going to happen. We don't want US to start assassinating people like Israel does using false passports and tennis rackets, do we?

    5. Re:The comments here are TERRIFYING by slshdtisctrldbysjws · · Score: 1

      You don't get to say "the fatalists are right" when YOU ARE A FATALIST. Do you refer to yourself in the third person usually?

      You are literally blaming Trump for turning society upside down singlehandedly.
      You are blaming the one spark for the forest fire, as if hundreds of sparks weren't coming within days of the start of the fire.

      But where is the evidence of the fire? Your subjective interpretations that are really just reflections from a media narrative?

      You are severely, severely mentally ill. You have been drinking out of the media toilet far too long. You have left your humanity behind you. Bad dog!

      --
      My karma was manually wiped by site staff https://slashdot.org/~slshdtisctrldbysjws 18 mod up, 10 mod down = bad karma
  91. ... because two Santa Clauses ... by Freischutz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    why is it whenever Benghazi is mentioned no one ever looks at the fact that a Republican controlled Congress slashed the security budget for the State Department?

    I don't know if this applies to Benghazi but what the Republicans normally do is make sure that any spending cuts manifest themselves on the Democrat's watch. They are doing the same thing with the current tax cut. I believe it is called the "Two Santa Clause" strategy. Both parties have a Santa Claus, Republican Santa and Democrat Santa. What the Republicans must do is send in Republican Santa Claus, run up a huge deficit by having Republican Santa promise people massive and popular tax cuts, then defer the financing of those tax cuts until the democrats are in power and force them to shoot their Santa Claus to pay for Republican Santa's largesse. This theory was popularised by a guy called Jude Wanniski back in the late 1970s and the American electorate and the Democrat party are still falling for it, with Obama being the latest victim. Remember how the Republicans screamed their heads off over Obama's policies causing deficits that he actually inherited from the Bush administration? ... that was the Republicans forcing Obama to shoot Democrat Santa to pay for the presents handed out by Republican Santa (and if you don't believe me get a Republican strategy lesson straight from the horse's mouth). Apart from defeating Republican tax cut bills, the only way out of this would seem to be for the Democrats to become just as fiscally irresponsible as the Republicans and continue deferring the spending cuts in some way and dump them in the lap of the next Republican administration. Either that or mount a grass roots revolution, dump their current leadership, read Machiavelli and the Republican playbook, fight back and get massively better at communicating with the electorate but that seems about as likely to happen as a dog laying an egg and that egg hatching into a unicorn.

    1. Re:... because two Santa Clauses ... by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      I think history shows that the Democrats chose the path of not passing any budget at all. Nothing beats plausible deniability in politics. "Nobody knows who shot Santa. Here's a toy, kid."

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    2. Re:... because two Santa Clauses ... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      History shows that Democratic Presidents run smaller deficits than Republicans, and least since 1981.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  92. Re: I could stand on fifth avenue and shoot someon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rich white republicans don't have a conscious.

  93. In Open Source Terms by boudie2 · · Score: 1

    Trump just forked the CIA. Sort of like LibreOffice and OpenOffice but with guns.

  94. Re: Great idea by tbannist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not just the Gulag; there's no shortage of Americans calling Trump "racist" because he purposed a ban on Muslim immigration from certain countries, or because he wants to build a wall between the US and Mexico. This wanton abuse of the word "racist" is quite common.

    Or maybe they're not-subtly saying that he's racist and proposing a ban on Muslim immigration because Muslims are predominantly Arab, and proposing to build an ineffectual and costly wall between the US and Mexico to tap into anti-Latino racism?

    Seriously, it should be transparently obvious to everyone that Trump is racist because of the things he says and does, but it's not entirely his fault. He did grow up during the era of segregation. It's pretty likely that he was taught at an early age that blacks were inferior to white people. That type of mental damage can be hard to unlearn, and Trump doesn't like ever admitting that he was wrong, so fat chance of a sincere change of heart on his part, especially at his age.

    --
    Fanatically anti-fanatical
  95. Trump the First by TiggertheMad · · Score: 2

    Give the white house a private army / spy network / whatever else controlled exclusively by the president, and it will still be there for the next president.

    If you give Trump a private army / spy network / whatever, there would be no next president. Do you for one second think that Trump would step down from power if he had a private army? He has been attacking established intelligence agencies, The FBI, the free press, and grabbing power where ever he can. Even Nixon, one of the most arguably corrupt presidents we have ever had took six years to come to a point where he stated that a president cannot break the law because he is above it. Trump is defending his actions in under a year. You give this guy an inch and you will have America's first dictator.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:Trump the First by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Facts not in evidence.

      We've seen Trump devolve more power BACK to Congress than any President in recent history (if ever). The whole DACA thing. Listen to what the President actually said, and not what Rachel keeps whispering in your ear. He said that is a rule for Congress to make. It is not a power that the President has to implement.

      The Waters of the United States issue was a clear power grab by Obama. It doesn't matter where you stand on the EPA. That was clearly a power grab. Trump has been trying to reverse that and push any decision back to Congress.

      There are plenty of other examples, described by writers more eloquent than I, but, they don't fit your agenda...so, there's that.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    2. Re:Trump the First by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Sure, give him a private army. That way, when the real army steps in to defend the Constitution, which it will, lots of Trump fans will get killed.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  96. Make Cheka Great Again by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

    someone has to say it

  97. Re: Great idea by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Or maybe they're not-subtly saying that he's racist and proposing a ban on Muslim immigration because Muslims are predominantly Arab

    Only about 15% of Muslims are Arab.

    Also Arab isn't a race, either, so that's a double fail there.

    and proposing to build an ineffectual and costly wall between the US and Mexico to tap into anti-Latino racism?

    "Latino" also isn't a race. Neither is "Hispanic", any more than "Anglo" is.

    Seriously, it should be transparently obvious to everyone that Trump is racist because of the things he says and does

    When you have no clue what the words "race" and "racist" mean, I suppose it is. It's also wrong.

  98. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's using Racist in the same context as the liberal anti wallers.
    If you want a wall for security you must be a racist because Mexican is a race now.

  99. Seems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The CIA sure has a lot of friends here. I wonder why that is.

    1. Re:Seems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's because, as a government agency, they are still ultimately subject to the Constitution. Congress, if it chose to, could alter the agency's mission and funding, While this scheme is as advertised a private spy service subject only to the person of the President, operating above the usual laws related to security and privacy (as poorly written and implemented as they may be). For instance, they wouldn't subject to any more limits than Google and the advertising spy networks when it comes to obtaining personal information.

      OTOH, if Hizzoner weren't so mean to The Press, they would happily serve the private spy function. It's their business after all.

  100. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Women, blacks, Muslims, Mexicans, Democrats, Republicans, Congress, his own appointees, the FBI, ... The white racists are just about the only group he hasn't insulted which in Trump's world means they're best buddies.

  101. Re:Great idea by sysrammer · · Score: 1

    Yeah, reminds me of someone who was a proponent of something called "The Big Lie".

    --
    His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
  102. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No Russians here, my dude. We all are Americans being!

  103. Natural consequence of recent developments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You cannot have the development of a "deep state" of permanent career government types who think themselves more in-charge than the people elected by the voters.

    Trump and his team have been repeatedly attacked and undermined by these people for 1/4 of his 1st presidential term with people leaking everything up to and including the contents of his phone calls and the very parts of the government responsible for his security and protecting administration communications are instead working to protect the bureaucracy from this president they never wanted and any of the changes he was sent to the White House to implement.

    Consider:

    The deputy atty gen Rod Rosenstein is still an Obama appointee since the Democrats have delayed confirmantion hearings for Trump appointees for longer than the appointees of any previous president have ever been delayed - this was no accident, it is part of the rejectionism of the political party most-identified with big government.

    In response to all the complaints that he was involved as a "surrogate" in the Trump campaign (just like Holder was for Obama), Trump's atty gen Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Trump/Russia investigation, thus leaving the Obama guy (Rosentein) in the driver's seat at justice. No Obama atty gen ever recused despite similar conflicts and Eric Holder was even found in contempt of congress for witholding documents from and lying to the congress to shield Obama in the Fast & Furious scandal (the document hidden have still never surfaced even though under subpoena - they have been smuggled out to the Obama library archives).

    Former FBI director Comey was publicly denounced and his firing publicly called for by both Republicans and Democrats for his very public back-and-forth flip-floppery all through 2016 which EVERYBODY thought interfered one way or another in a presidential campaign, UNTIL TRUMP FIRED HIM and suddenly swamp creatures in both parties started screaming that Trump was wrong to fire him. Comey then leaked to the newspaper (something he swore he never did) in a ploy he now admits was designed to trigger the appointment of a special investiagtor - which would be appointed by HIS GUY Rosenstein rather then the recused Sessions. And by a PURE MIRACLE [eye roll] Comey's old pal Bob Meuller was appointed special investigator. Rosenstein gave Mueller an unusually broad license to investigate and contrary to the law governing such investigators, no specific assertion of any law broken by Trump or his Team. In other words, this investigator has no defined task other than "get that guy for SOMETHING!".

    FBI guy Andrew McCabe who, former FBI director Comey had running the Hillary investigation, was getting money from Hillary's pal the Virginia governor and long-time Clinton family "bag man" Terry McAuliffe.

    FBI agent Peter Strzok, now known to be a hardcore Hillary stooge, was working the Hillary case and helped protect her from prosecution. He made sure the FBI director avoided the language that would have made it totally obvious she had violated the exact language of the federal espionage act. Unusually for the FBI, the statement exonerating her was drafted before the investiagtion even interviewd her and many other witnesses and Hillary was interviewed NOT under oath and without any recording made or even any transcript written, which meant there was no record of the interview and it was thus impossible to use the interview for a "purjury trap". General Flynn was given the normal FBI treatment in his interview and is now in a purjury trap.

    Strzok then got assigned to the Trump investigation, and Mueller has been refusing to tell congress anything about Strzok's involvement in either case even though congress has an oversight role here and a right to the information, indeed the law under which he operates is a congressional creation and his funding is from congress.

    The President of the US (no matter who he/she is) is in charge of the executive and all these individual people are legally and technically

    1. Re:Natural consequence of recent developments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Were you under a rock for the 2008-2010 years? Republicans refused to seat ANYBODY!

  104. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right, surely people with different opinions than you are idiots who don't know the meaning of a common word. This must be a very comforting worldview.

  105. You are the greater enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem should be obvious to you, but you have blinders on. We'll stick to Trump no matter what because whatever is bad about him, you are worse.

    1. Re: You are the greater enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you have a clue which side anybody is on? The âoeif youâ(TM)re not with us, youâ(TM)re against usâ attitude is tired and childish.

      During the term of president #44, the big fear was that guns would be banned... I clearly remember the petition at my local firearm store protesting âoeObamaâ(TM)s gun banâ(TM)â(TM) when I took my concealed carry permit in 2009. I remember seeing the same thing a year later for âoeObamaâ(TM)s Ammo banâ â" nevermind the nationâ(TM)s ammo factories were running full tilt to feed two wars.

      In the end, the closest thing to that was the same request as now: universal background checks.

      Now, the left has similar fears about Trumpâ(TM)s policies: immigrant families getting rounded up and sent to concentration camps, secret police.

      Much like fears that guns (or ammo) would be banned, I donâ(TM)t really see the fears as being likely to happen â" things the Republicans all want (repeal the ACA, tax reform) arenâ(TM)t slam-dunks; Tax Reform passing was iffy until a few days ago.

  106. Russian Oligarchy Model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's what the current US administration is attempting to duplicate.

  107. I imagine this is a non-starter by Headw1nd · · Score: 1

    I can't see how this could be accomplished via normal government funding. Even black budgets have some level of congressional approval, literally nobody in congress is willing to write Trump a check for his own private spy agency. The best they could do is hand out some short term contracts, not create their own agency.

    BONUS CONSPIRACY THEORY

    A "private intelligence agency" could produce some really impressive results for cheap if all they needed to do was launder information from some other intelligence organization funded by a government.

    1. Re:I imagine this is a non-starter by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Question is, with the amount of money and/or credit that Trump has, can his family write their own checks?

    2. Re: I imagine this is a non-starter by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Fortunately he is too greedy for that. He didn't even pay for his election campaign but stole money from it.

  108. Your definition of pedophile sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But since this is all politics...who cares, right? Clinton rapes, Franken and Conyers molest, and there is no penalty.

    You see, that's the problem. It is all politics. That's why Moore is going to win.

    1. Re:Your definition of pedophile sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you need a mental health exam and extensive treatment

  109. At least he wouldn't have to start from scratch by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    I'm sure his friend, the Little Russian Spymaster, is helping him out immensely with the initial planning.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  110. Or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe the Jesus you believe in is not the actual Jesus of scripture or belief. In fact, he assuredly isn't.

    The history of Christianity is very complex and reveals more about the culture of Christians than it does about Jesus.

  111. Unfortunately, you used up your bullets already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Trump wants to be a totalitarian, the "Resistance" enabled it. The same way that the antiwar Left enabled Nixon.

    Should have saved those bullets for when it counted instead of doing the full court press upon inauguration.

    There's a book out there called "Nixonland" that would be educational on this point.

    1. Re:Unfortunately, you used up your bullets already by hey! · · Score: 1

      Remember "peace with honor" and Kissinger's secret Vietnam peace plan? Of course not. You obviously aren't old enough to remember Nixon.

      The anti-war stuff didn't empower Nixon, they constrained him to do things in secret like bomb Cambodia. No doubt anti-war protests inflamed his base to the point where they'd approve of that, but Nixon had to keep it secret because he was expanding the war at a time he was forced to tell the public he was scaling it back.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  112. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a difference between pointing out what a group \ country's govt has done that has some evidence to back it up and posting an obviously incorrect meme about black people being the root cause of 90% of all crimes from an organization that doesn't exist... Or how muslims are 20% poisoned skittles.

    You're right, the term racism has been taken over to mean more than just a specific race. White, for example, is not a race.

  113. newspeak by multi+io · · Score: 2

    Under Trump, "deep state" is code for "rule of law". -- David Frum

  114. Re:You guys break me up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Obama blah blah blah." "BUT BUSH!!!!!111111" Remember?

  115. So glad I voted Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd gladly sign up to be a part of this network. Be afraid.

  116. Trump this, Trump that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WHILE THE MOON IS AN ARTIFICIAL ALIEN BASE THAT SPIES ON US. Face it, theres no terrain or chemical composition in common with earth, there aint no goddamn trees there, it has a perfect size and distance to make a total solar eclipse, its massively 1/4 the size of earth, we pretend to scientifically believe that it spins on its axis, and military remote viewers have seen the soul energy of the freshly dead go into a 7-mile tall crystal with a cube

  117. Trump this, Trump that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WHILE THE MOON IS AN ARTIFICIAL ALIEN BASE THAT SPIES ON US. Face it, theres no terrain or chemical composition in common with earth, there aint no goddamn trees there, it has a perfect size and distance to make a total solar eclipse, its massively 1/4 the size of earth, we pretend to scientifically believe that it spins on its axis, and military remote viewers have seen the soul energy of the freshly dead go into a 7-mile tall crystal with a cube on top

  118. Unnamed sources reportedly said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    according to multiple current and former officials speaking to The Intercept.

    I've never heard of the The Intercept. Is this some new site that is on the down low? Why is it all of these anonymous sources keep throwing out nothing burgers and horse shit?

    Harry Reid said somebody told him Mitt Romney never paid taxes and the news agencies ran with it. Then the fact checkers came along and said that what they reported was true because what they reported was that Harry Reid said somebody said something to him. What that person said was a lie but all the networks stood by their original story cause they was just reporting on what Harry Reid said.

    This is fake news. People who get worked up over this have reading comprehension issues and are also stupid.

    1. Re: Unnamed sources reportedly said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuck off ivan

  119. Flee reality much? by DavidHumus · · Score: 1

    This is just the logical next step for someone so self-delusional - representing equally delusional and cowardly people - that he actually believes the latest lie out of his mouth, even if it contradicted the one before it.

  120. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > You don't think maybe they call Trump a racist because he declared there were many very nice white supremacists?

    He actually scolded the white supremacists and had no praise for them at all. You see, this wasn't a thing with just white supremacists on one side, and he pointed out that there were people there who were just fine and weren't racist.

  121. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Birther-in-Chief is NOT racist. Nor is his goal of erasing the n*gger years.

  122. Fundng? by bigdavex · · Score: 1

    Ok, so how will they fund it? There's not a petty cash fund for creating redundant executive departments. That's a thing to watch.

    Oliver North funded the Contras with arms deals. That sounds pretty super-villainous in fact.

    --
    -Dave
  123. Whitefish MT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This company is based in Whitefish, Montana with 4-11 employees. Based in the same small town as Whitefish Energy that had the debacle over Puerto Rico. How much you want to Ryan Zinke is a chum of theirs?

  124. Trump the First by TiggertheMad · · Score: 2

    The Waters of the United States issue was a clear power grab by Obama. It doesn't matter where you stand on the EPA. That was clearly a power grab.

    And yet for all the slurs and barbs the right has concocted about Obama for no other reason than that he had the wrong skin color, there was a peaceful transition of power when his term was up. What reason is there to form a secret police force, other than to extra-judicially enforce the will of the president and keep him in power? The only reason to form a 'Off the Books' intelligence service is to BREAK LAWS.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  125. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    russia isnt a race, but dont let facts get in the way of a good story.

  126. Yuuuggee Hands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would Trump need anyone with intelligence reporting to him. He wouldn't know what to do. I can just see the missions his secret spy force would be going on... Go to China, Find the Leader, See if his daughter is hot, leave a note in her bedroom saying that Trump has YUUUUGE hands... and no troubles down there. Believe me, believe me. YUGE.

  127. Re: Great idea by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

    Which was a lie as every single person marching in the white supremacist side self identified as worthless scum.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  128. Re: Great idea by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    English is a language you have yet to learn at all evidently.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  129. I think the idea is by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    that there won't be another Democrat. Ever. Come on, you've got to start keeping up with these things.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I think the idea is by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I think the democrats should just disband the party and then register as rebublicans, along with all the democrat voters. Start winning internal primaries in blue states... as republicans.

      Take it over from the inside... like Trump himself did. Then everyone is a republican, and the farce of the whole party system is evident... because they'll still have the exact same people with the exact same positions in the exact same chairs.

  130. Then you basically need to shut down by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    the Republican party. Because once an idea like this is out there that's about the only thing that's going to stop it. I say that not to be partisan (though Lord knows I am) but because this idea was able to be flown in the first place and hasn't completely ended the Rebublican's mid-term elections. Seriously, you've got a party that is supposed to be in favor of limited gov't who's head (like it or not Trump's the president, so defacto head) just came out in favor of a secret police. Either the party cannot stand for that or the party is going to throw in with that. It's too extreme an idea for it to go any other way. And once a party starts trying to get something like this they're not going to stop. To do so would be to admit they did wrong, and the entire thing would unravel if they started doing that.

    The trouble with the Republican party is, oddly, Clinton (the Mr, not the Ms). Bill moved the Dems far right to form an alliance of economically right wing and socially left wing to get him into office. It worked, but it left the Republicans without an identity. So they moved right, hard right so they could establish a new brand. They're going to keep going, and this is part of that. The next step is an actual dictatorship. Trump's lawyer has already said he's above the law (e.g. that he can't obstruct justice). And now this. The Republican party cannot survive this. Well, it can, but if it does Democracy in America can't.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  131. Re:Leftist shoots self in foot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump is no Goldwater. Goldwater had some controversial opinions -- a few distasteful ones IMHO, and a lot of sensible ones, also IMHO.

    Trump is bugfuck nuts, completely unqualified for office. It is not OK to elect a failed flimflam artist to the office of the US presidency. Don't do that again, OK?

  132. Re:Vice reports from an anonymous source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet they have been corroborated a gazillion times and are

    ...the same news organizations that claimed in big bold letters "Trump will never be president" and the same news organizations that said we had to go to war with Iraq because of WMDs.

    I understand that this is a very divisive topic that will get some at -1 and some at +5 due to party lines, not the truth, but still...

    How many times do you need to be fooled before trusting evidence and distrusting the people that have lied to you?

  133. I don't think there's anything weird about it by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    this is how most democracies and through them empires die. The only difference is we've got a media reporting on it while it's happening. Damned if I can do anything to stop it. I'm knee deep in it. It's all I can do to survive.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  134. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF are you even getting on about. You only posted that so you could ragefully call them 'scum.' It makes you just seem stupid to post content-free ranting. Grow up.

  135. Re:Holy shit you're insane by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're the same as the crybabies who kept calling Obama a King. Do you have even the slightest idea how government works?

  136. Re: Great idea by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

    You have extremely well developed ideas about what does and does not constitute racism. I wonder why that might be.

    --
    Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
  137. Paranoid Schizophrenia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Add that to the list of Trump's mental illnesses.

  138. Re: Great idea by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Must be because I'm a Nazi.

  139. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, it's the US that's responsible for that. I suppose that must have been after the Nazis, the USSR, and then Russia had had their turn. Has Pripyat stopped glowing yet?

  140. Taken Right Out Of Tom Clancy and Dale Brown Books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does Jack Ryan Jr. work for Amyntor Group? Sounds like The Campus in some of the later Clancy books - off the books, but with a safe full of signed Presidential Pardons with blanks for names to be filled in if needed. Loose cannons with plausible deniability. Too bad (for their sake) so much info has already leaked.

  141. Of the Use of Riches by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

    In vain may heroes fight and patriots rave,
    If secret gold sap on from knave to knave.

    Blest paper-credit! last and best supply!
    That lends Corruption lighter wings to fly
    Gold imp'd by thee, can compass hardest things,
    Can pocket states, can fetch or carry kings;
    A single leaf shall waft an army o'er,
    Or ship off senates to some distant shore;
    A leaf, like Sibyl's, scatter to and fro
    Our fates and fortunes as the winds shall blow;
    Pregnant with thousands flits the scrap unseen,
    And silent sells a King or buys a Queen.

    --
    Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
  142. Re: Great idea by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Que?

  143. Idea Came From the Hall & Oates Administration by Scot+Seese · · Score: 1

    Private Spies
    They're watching you
    They see your every move
    Private Spies
    They're watching you
    Private Spies
    They're watching you
    Watching you
    Watching you
    Watching you

    --
    THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
  144. choreographed gridlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is obviously and poignantly wrong. We have a huge counter-example right here. The Democratic party supports net neutrality, the Republican party does not. How is that co-ordinated lock step?

    It's a game. It involves abusing language, legal interpretation, and complexity. Note how neither party, while in the majority, thought it a wise idea to introduce modern legislation, instead of letting the FCC play 'designed to fail repeatedly' legal interpretation games relating to technology from the last century entirely unlike the internet. Let's start a betting pool on how many years it takes for congress to lift a pen for the matter.

    Free Speech. Servers are where that power resides.

  145. Gestapo much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gestapo much?

  146. good often comes from unexpected places by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the prosperity gospel. The basic premise is that there is an all-good, interventionist, God, therefore the people that good things happen to must be good people, and the people that bad things happen to must be bad people. Unless, of course, bad things are happening to you or me, then it's God testing our greatness. The corollary is, of course, that taxes on rich people are inherently unjust because rich people are doing good while taxes on the poor are just what those sick depraved perverts deserve.

    It's a truly sickening perversion of Christianity.

    There have been worse. Pedophile priests, KKK lynchings, etc. Religion has always been in the mind of the conceiver. The first lesson I learned as a christian was the diversity (often in extreme opposition to one another) of various subsects. And of course the corollary that such was likely true of the other popular religions.

  147. Re: Great idea by c6gunner · · Score: 0

    He was there and personally interviewed every single person in attendance. You should like totally trust him and stuff

  148. Re: Great idea by c6gunner · · Score: 0

    I remember the good old days when vacuous comments on Slashdot were ignored instead of being modded "insightful". What a wonderful time that was.

  149. Well, I for one... by Hallux-F-Sinister · · Score: 1

    ... welcome our new Trump Praetorian Guard overlords. Hail President Donald Trump, Lord-God Emperor of EVERYTHING FOREVER!

    Because you know his super-secret, accountable-only-to-him will operate EXCLUSIVELY in hostile countries, right?!? Like... America, for example, when enough Americans wake up and realize what kind of... "person," for want of a better word, is "president".

    Christ... to think we have at most, (based on a human lifetime never being recorded to exceed about 117 years,) only about 45 more years of Trump being president before whichever of his kids takes over as President For Life. Now might be a good time for anyone not wanting to live under that to get out while the getting's good, because once the border walls go up, (mark my words, there'll be two,) they won't just keep other people OUT.

    --
    Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
  150. Re: Great idea by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

    Well, if you say so.

    --
    Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
  151. Spy on Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He is personally the greatest risk to American security, and the one most likely to actually attack America since he tries on a daily basis.

  152. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go back to your web brigade training camp - you are inept.

  153. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    En Russo Sovieto que te pregunta!

  154. Re:Great idea by aussie_a · · Score: 1

    When will you Americans learn to spell. It's cheque. FFS

  155. Neu Deutschland by doug301 · · Score: 1

    I heard they will name or Gestapo II

  156. more spys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    holy crapatoly.... we need more spys to spy on the spys spying on...the spys that spy on the spys spying on stuff. Then we can appoint an anti spy guy as head of the spy agency to breakup all the spying and then create a a new agency. Or epa or Dept of Energy or whatever... just appoint the nemises as head and do whatever cuz we cant get along anyway

  157. @real problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ignorance, hostility, frustration, impotence, financial/racial/political/sexual/religeous - divide. If you are lost in these things you are easily manipulated. The rest has already been purchased

  158. Alt-intelligence expected to yield alt-facts by OneAhead · · Score: 1

    Well duh, you need alternative intelligence to tease out the alternative facts. I can be a "private spy". All I'd need to do is sit in front of my computer and pull stories out of my ass that align with alt-right conspiracy theories.

    Seriously, I read this headline as: "Trump refuses to believe ears and eyes, tries to obtain new ones."

  159. Re: Great idea by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    Or I'm smart enough to figure out that "very nice people" don't say to themselves "hey, I think I'll go hang with the neo-Nazi scrum today and try to start a riot" you ignorant fucking douchebag.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  160. Re: Great idea by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    Res ipso loquitor

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  161. Private Spies or Secret Police by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds like a very dangerous step.

  162. Amyntor Group must be a great intelligence outfit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their website says "Copyright © 2015 Amyntor Group" on every page.

  163. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Also Arab isn't a race, either, so that's a double fail there.

    "Latino" also isn't a race. Neither is "Hispanic", any more than "Anglo" is.

    When you have no clue what the words "race" and "racist" mean, I suppose it is. It's also wrong.

    Race covers all three of those groups, it's a loosely used word, so you can find people referring to the Arab race, Latin race, Hispanic Race, and English race. Only pointlessly blithering pedants try to pretend otherwise, yet their very attempts to create some particular conceptualization of race are even more flawed due to their faulty insistence on a restrictive terminology that is more subject to error than the people willing to accept the loose usage of the term.

    Similarly, racist is also well known and established as a term of bigotry with some degree of ambiguity, but people are nonetheless familiar with it.

    I mean, really, if you want to lament the ambiguities of the way humans use language, in particular the English language, you can, but you'll just look stupid hanging your hat on these specific examples.

  164. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, it is one reason why. Yes, his coziness with white power nazis is one (main) reason, but plenty of people call him racist on a daily basis and specifically reference the Muslim ban and crackdown on illegal immigration.

  165. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iâ(TM)ve gone expat and donâ(TM)t plan on coming back. As an educated person with liberal leanings, I feel like Jew fleeing Nazi Germany â" or a person with a high IQ fleeing s redneck backwater of hate filled brainwashed bigots

  166. Re: Great idea by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Heh. "Smart".

  167. Already Been Done by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1

    Trump wants to "create a ghost network of private spies in hostile countries "? Isn't that a basic description of Wikileaks?

  168. Unfortunate Vendor Choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Trumpster ought go outsource this to Acme Co. ; It always worked out for the Cayote!

  169. Re: Great idea by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    Heh. Plonk

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  170. Already recruiting them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ads just went up on the mil channels for data scientists, AI devs, and hackers for his new Brownshirts.

    Just remember, this will be on the War Crimes test at Nuremburger. Mnunch Mnunch.

  171. Now wait a darn minute here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He wonâ(TM)t staff the State Department but wants his own personal spy agency?!?
    Remember when he said how much he loves dictators and it would be so easy to be one?
    This guy will kill the US unless the spineless republicans in Congress stop him. It is all on their heads!!

  172. Re:Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie

    Usage in Hitler's psychological profile

    The phrase was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing Hitler's psychological profile:

    His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.

    Hmmmm. Sounds like someone currently squatting in the White House.

  173. hashtag 140 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't think maybe they call Trump a racist because he declared there were many very nice white supremacists?

    In wikipedia/journalism terminology- 'citation requested'. If you really want to discuss the issue, you need to expand it beyond the boundaries of tweet thought constriction limitation, and address the likelyhood of Trump's overarching strategy (not novel, except perhaps for magnitude in this geographic region) of trolling political opponents with thoughtfully worded comments designed to provoke an over-reaction (in political realist terms) of his political opponents.

    Now I'm not saying he's *not* racist, but you do have to expand the discussion beyond tweet level thought constriction limitations if you want to really understand the issue.

    1. Re: hashtag 140 by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      No. I really don't.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  174. Too much... by martinfb · · Score: 1

    Way too much power for 1 person using my tax dollars!

    Dear Mr Trump: Your insecurity is showing! Try honest, transparent, reasonable actions and see if that gains any new allies!

    --


    Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
  175. The USA is coming unhinged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Decline and Fall of the American Empire...

  176. Why not? Obama did. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama weaponized the IRS, the EPA, the BLM against half of all Americans, and even allowed the Library of Congress to have a SWAT team! Don't return a book late!

    Called the "Deep State" these unelected upper and middle level bureaucrats have been hrowing re-bar into the spokes of our government, desperately trying to unseat a duly elected President by any means possible, legal or illegal, and replace him with Obama II.

    It has been proven beyond a doubt that the NSA and the CIA have been making ordinary Americans their targets of covert spying for decades, "to protect us". Obama even signed an Executive Order unilaterally declaring that he has the authority to unilaterally declare ANY American citizen a "threat" to America and have them executed without due process, or even a kangaroo court process.

    Spy on other countries if you must, Mr. President, but spy on the spies as well. The enemies within the gates are more dangerous than those without.

  177. Re:Great idea by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    I thought that government was "By the people, for the people". Here we want a billionaire to bypass the people, to bypass the CIA, and then congress and the senate.
    Give it 8 years and the USA will be more of a dictatorship than it already is.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  178. Re: Great idea by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    If "Race covers all three of those groups" because "it's a loosely used word", then the original dipshit saying that people are "racist against Russians" is equally correct. Since, you know, it's a loosely used word.

    I understand that there are millions of morons who misuse the word; that does not magically legitimise it.

  179. Re: Great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone's racist, he's just the wrong kind of racist.

  180. Re:Great idea by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    There IS a reason they are called "La Raza" after all, whitebread

  181. Re: Great idea by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    1, Patton would have been slaughtered by Zukov.
    2, Communist policies did not set food prices worldwide such that 1/2 BILLION died of hunger over the 75 years of Capitalist control of food pricing via commodities exchanges (see "maximum value theorem")
    3, in fact, the Capitalist Axis powers killed far more than Mao and Stalin combined

  182. Re: Great idea by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    Lie
    He in fact said there were "Good people" among them

  183. Ever heard of Good Cop, Bad Cop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is the Democrats and Republicans in a nutshell.

    Which of them is good and which of them is bad is subjective for the voting constituents, but they only need to slightly change their stances to maneuver weakminded moderates from one side to the other while making it look like 'the people had spoken' about whatever policy they attempt to push.

    Sometimes they don't even pretend, until and unless the people rise up against the idea (As can be see in SOPA, TPP, the recent FCC move, etc.) Unless there is sufficient outrage the desired change will go through, or sometimes an undesired change, but one which will be rolled back soon enough during a 'concession' to make some other desired people of legislation look more palatable to the easily manipulated masses.

    This isn't rocket science, it is just an understanding of psychological techniques that have been known for ages as methods for the leadership class to lead their flocks.

  184. Sounds like their Priests/Preachers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like their Priests/Preachers...
    Have failed to explain to them the guises the Devil comes in, and how he will lead them astray into Sin.

    Shit man, I am an atheist, but I seem to know more of my Bible than the average republican. Of course 9/11 made that obvious, since America didn't do its part as upstanding Christians to 'Turn the Other Cheek' after the towers came down, and instead chose to start an unjust war resulting not only in hundreds of thousands of deaths, many of civilians just as innocent of their government or religious extremists misdeeds as America's civilians were of its military-industrial complexes' foreign colonial and imperialism. It additionally resulted in untold devastation for religious artifacts of Buddhist, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and even older religions monuments spanning much of the middle east.

    I can only hope if any of their gods are real that these things get weighed against all those complacent in these misdeeds and the choice between heaven, hell, purgatory and oblivion is carefully weighed.

    Also: props out to crumax, I2P's cyberChristian crazy.. still more sane than our global leaders.

  185. Decades. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has been the go to strategy for conservatives and their children since I was a little kid. I didn't really understand the political difference until I got into high school and my US history class turned into a political flagging area between conservatives and liberals, but so many things from my childhood started making sense in that context. Combined with my ultraconservative family members and how they would deflect arguments both when their guy was in office and when 'not their guy' was in office, this strategy has been their go to for at least 3 decades now and maybe longer. While I have also seen it from ultraliberal apologists, it is far more prevalent on the right than the left, but on either end it quickly ends any conversation with a 'firm win' in their smug minds because debating or arguing with them just results in metaphorically bashing your head against a wall, which any rational person will find stupid and probably harmful to their wellbeing.

  186. Wonder what he will call them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Protection Squadron", perhaps (like in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., read up on them and see the parallels). It is sadly ironic to see America - who fought against Nazism and Stalinism - now taking the same path as their once enemies.