5 ms·

But not under Obama or (potentially Hillary)? What about Trump makes them so fearful now where they weren't under the current state of affairs. I'm not saying

But not under Obama or (potentially Hillary)? What about Trump makes them so fearful now where they weren't under the current state of affairs. I'm not saying that a Trump presidency isn't a great way to convince people to get a Signal account, but it strikes me that NSA spying and everything else that's gone on over the past decade should have been enough.

cmdrfred 10y ago
Obama put the left to sleep. Ironically Trump will probably be the best possible outcome for civil liberties as people will actually fight him.
- AnimalMuppet 10y ago
  I hope you're right. I fear that they will continue to sleep.
- 3131s 10y ago
  > Obama put the left to sleep I agree with this 100%. Suddenly people care about mass deportation, for example, but where were they when Obama was deporting a record 2.5 million people? They are terrified of Trump's "deportation force", not realizing apparently that many such deportation forces (e.g. ICE) already exist. Some things that the left should have cared about under Obama: * initiating new undeclared wars * expanding the surveillance state * eliminating habeas corpus with the 2012 NDAA * killing two American citizens extra-judicially * fracking * selling arms to radicals and brutal foreign regimes * the Honduran coup * CIA black sites / torture (forced rectal 'feeding' to the point of rectal prolapse, for example) * prosecuting whistleblowers * raiding legal dispensaries / grow ops and wholesale continuing the ludicrous war on drugs * pro-corporate policies like the TPP, ACA, and the bailouts * running up the national debt another 10 trillion or so * contracting out development of astroturfing software from HBGary / Operation Earnest Voice I could go on. The real left barely exists anymore in America.
  - amckinlay 10y ago
    Is that the same NDAA that gives the military law enforcement powers?
hackuser 10y ago
The increased fear is not based on the capabilities, which as you said have existed for awhile, but on what Trump will do with them. They feel he has fascist tendencies or intentions and does not respect for American traditions or law. (I'm not trying to make partisan points; I'm only saying that there is a large cohort that feels that way. Obviously, many in the U.S. voted for Trump.)
- ozaark 10y ago
  > They feel he has fascist tendencies or intentions and does not respect for American traditions or law. These illegal capabilities have been spreading regardless of party or political promises.
  - rconti 10y ago
    Absolutely. And I don't doubt that Hillary wouldn't have expanded them further; if anything she's more hawkish than Trump. That said, only one of these two people is asking for names of every government employee who has attended a climate science meeting in the past 5 years. The implications are truly chilling.
    - throwanem 10y ago
      "Chilling" seems a bit histrionic. It's an interesting challenge to the customary, but as far as I know extraconstitutional, idea that cabinet departments operate independently of the sitting president rather than, like the rest of the executive branch, serving at his pleasure. If law exists to mandate this arrangement, I'd be obliged to anyone who wil make me aware of it; absent that, it seems like something that's purely de facto, albeit at this point quite longstanding, and open to challenge by any president who so chooses. I'm not surprised to see Trump mount such a challenge, because he is likely ill accustomed to tolerating independent fiefdoms within an organization he nominally heads. But he's far from the first president to try it on, and I very much doubt he'll find more success than his predecessors - indeed the latest on this particular story seems to be that DOE has told him to go to hell, and if that sounds like hyperbole then it's no more so than a lot of the headlines I've just seen.
anigbrowl 10y ago
Not agreeing with people's apprehensions about Trump is one thing, but ignorance of why people are apprehensive isn't credible. I do not believe that you are cognizant of privacy issues but unable to see any qualitative difference between him and Obama (or HRC).
- AnthonyMouse 10y ago
  > Not agreeing with people's apprehensions about Trump is one thing, but ignorance of why people are apprehensive isn't credible. I do not believe that you are cognizant of privacy issues but unable to see any qualitative difference between him and Obama (or HRC). The specter of Trump has been there the entire time. The danger of mass data collection isn't merely the current President, it's that we have an election every four years. Go start encrypting everything now. Better late than never. But all the things you sent unencrypted during Obama's presidency, that you didn't stop them from keeping, now Trump will have all of it.

cmdrfred 10y ago

Obama put the left to sleep. Ironically Trump will probably be the best possible outcome for civil liberties as people will actually fight him.

AnimalMuppet 10y ago
I hope you're right. I fear that they will continue to sleep.
3131s 10y ago
> Obama put the left to sleep I agree with this 100%. Suddenly people care about mass deportation, for example, but where were they when Obama was deporting a record 2.5 million people? They are terrified of Trump's "deportation force", not realizing apparently that many such deportation forces (e.g. ICE) already exist. Some things that the left should have cared about under Obama: * initiating new undeclared wars * expanding the surveillance state * eliminating habeas corpus with the 2012 NDAA * killing two American citizens extra-judicially * fracking * selling arms to radicals and brutal foreign regimes * the Honduran coup * CIA black sites / torture (forced rectal 'feeding' to the point of rectal prolapse, for example) * prosecuting whistleblowers * raiding legal dispensaries / grow ops and wholesale continuing the ludicrous war on drugs * pro-corporate policies like the TPP, ACA, and the bailouts * running up the national debt another 10 trillion or so * contracting out development of astroturfing software from HBGary / Operation Earnest Voice I could go on. The real left barely exists anymore in America.
- amckinlay 10y ago
  Is that the same NDAA that gives the military law enforcement powers?

hackuser 10y ago

The increased fear is not based on the capabilities, which as you said have existed for awhile, but on what Trump will do with them. They feel he has fascist tendencies or intentions and does not respect for American traditions or law. (I'm not trying to make partisan points; I'm only saying that there is a large cohort that feels that way. Obviously, many in the U.S. voted for Trump.)

ozaark 10y ago
> They feel he has fascist tendencies or intentions and does not respect for American traditions or law. These illegal capabilities have been spreading regardless of party or political promises.
- rconti 10y ago
  Absolutely. And I don't doubt that Hillary wouldn't have expanded them further; if anything she's more hawkish than Trump. That said, only one of these two people is asking for names of every government employee who has attended a climate science meeting in the past 5 years. The implications are truly chilling.
  - throwanem 10y ago
    "Chilling" seems a bit histrionic. It's an interesting challenge to the customary, but as far as I know extraconstitutional, idea that cabinet departments operate independently of the sitting president rather than, like the rest of the executive branch, serving at his pleasure. If law exists to mandate this arrangement, I'd be obliged to anyone who wil make me aware of it; absent that, it seems like something that's purely de facto, albeit at this point quite longstanding, and open to challenge by any president who so chooses. I'm not surprised to see Trump mount such a challenge, because he is likely ill accustomed to tolerating independent fiefdoms within an organization he nominally heads. But he's far from the first president to try it on, and I very much doubt he'll find more success than his predecessors - indeed the latest on this particular story seems to be that DOE has told him to go to hell, and if that sounds like hyperbole then it's no more so than a lot of the headlines I've just seen.

anigbrowl 10y ago

Not agreeing with people's apprehensions about Trump is one thing, but ignorance of why people are apprehensive isn't credible. I do not believe that you are cognizant of privacy issues but unable to see any qualitative difference between him and Obama (or HRC).

AnthonyMouse 10y ago
> Not agreeing with people's apprehensions about Trump is one thing, but ignorance of why people are apprehensive isn't credible. I do not believe that you are cognizant of privacy issues but unable to see any qualitative difference between him and Obama (or HRC). The specter of Trump has been there the entire time. The danger of mass data collection isn't merely the current President, it's that we have an election every four years. Go start encrypting everything now. Better late than never. But all the things you sent unencrypted during Obama's presidency, that you didn't stop them from keeping, now Trump will have all of it.