The Trump Administration No Longer Wants Twitter To Reveal the Owner of an Anti-Trump Account (recode.net) 92
From a report on Recode: The Trump administration informed Twitter on Friday that it would withdraw its demand that the social media company unmask an account critical of the president -- a move that prompted Twitter to drop its lawsuit. On Thursday, Twitter revealed that U.S. customs agents filed a legal order in a bid to get the company to reveal who is behind @ALT_USCIS -- a so-called "alt-agency" account that has been taking aim at Trump, his immigration policy and the inner workings of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Pissy Frost (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I actually made the "oooooh" face reading these 2 comments. Thanks for the lulz.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
1) Not a billionaire, but I work for the government. So I live comfortably and dont do shit.
Look at you, You sit here and act so fucking righteous while at the same time admitting that youre a piece of shit. What the fuck is wrong with you people. Get a fucking clue. Boy your parents must be proud! Their son is a leech on society, and hes proud of it! I hope somebody beats you to a bloody pulp.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Trump is noob (Score:5, Insightful)
Not a huge fan of Obama either, but i can't really picturing him *caring* what some random person on twitter had to say about his policies.
That's Trump though, massively rich and successful businessman, and now the leader of the US; but his ego demands retaliation for any perceived slight. You'd think at some point getting upset over what randoms on the internet have to say would be a bit like getting your feelings hurt over a dog barking at you.
Re: (Score:2)
You're equating combating chain-mail spam with trying to unearth anonymous accounts by private citizens. Seems like a false equivalence to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, they were only looking to be sent chain-mail spam? Boy, sure wish they would have said that, rather than leaving their request rather open to include just about anything which disagreed with the acceptable narrative of the administration... ala wrong-think.
Except those private citizens claim to be government employees, who are openly acting in direct opposition to standing and lawful instructions from the
Re: (Score:2)
"There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."
What's wrong with that?
Re: (Score:2)
No, he's you're equating a crowd-sourced, Orwellian dragnet to a legal request for records relating to an individual likely committing crimes.
There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.
If you see something, say something, citizen!
Re: (Score:2)
Damn it. That should be:
No he's not. You're...
Re:Trump is noob (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a bit of a stretch to call him a "successful" businessman. His record is mixed, and in a way I respect that.
His father set him up in NYC real estate in the 1970s, staking him 40 million -- the equivalent of about two hundred million today. You'd have to be a fool not parlay that into a billion by 2000, because you could do that by playing it safe putting your money in conservative, diversified portfolio.
But here's the part I respect: Trump didn't play it safe. He invested in things he loved -- like golf courses and casinos. If it were me I'd have put the money into science and tech companies, because that's what I love, but either way investing for love isn't very sound financially, and Trump needed his father to bail him out at least one point.
It's clear that Trump's career motivation has been to leave his mark on the world, and because he's not a very imaginative man he set out to do that literally. And that thirst for recogntion not surprising, given the fact that in the Trump family succession, Donald was the spare. His older brother Fred Jr. was suppose to inherit the business empire, but he was a drunk.
So the need for approval and love is hardly incongruous with Trump's background. And that need is an asset for a politician; with it he can make a genuine emotional connection with crowds of strangers; without it he comes across as aloof and phony. But Trump's need for approval is altogether too malignant for comfort.
Re: (Score:2)
He invested in things he loved -- like golf courses and casinos.
I've always wondered about how anybody can 'love golf and casinos'; I've tried both and casinos in particular, I just find so mindlessly boring. And of course eye-wateringly poor taste of the decor. No, give me a muck heap and some honest labour any day of the week. (That's a pretty good description of SW engineering too, come to think of it)
So the need for approval and love is hardly incongruous with Trump's background. And that need is an asset for a politician; with it he can make a genuine emotional connection with crowds of strangers; without it he comes across as aloof and phony. But Trump's need for approval is altogether too malignant for comfort.
I think you're talking for you sick aunt, as we say in in Denmark. Trump is perhaps not a bad man at heart; neither were Obama not Bush; and it is quite likely that Put
Re: (Score:3)
One's behavior being understandable doesn't excuse it.
This is explainable as lack of thought. He felt he needed to react, but like many people he didn't think the consequences through. He's a profoundly ignorant man. Obama, although not shy about using military force, in absence of
Re: (Score:2)
That's Trump though, massively rich and successful businessman, ...
For specific values of "massively" and "successful".
Re: (Score:2)
Not a huge fan of Obama either, but i can't really picturing him *caring* what some random person on twitter had to say about his policies.
Of all the faeces that was publicly thrown at him by the likes of Fox News, Brietbart and other extreme right organisations that had easy to find owners... What did Obama do...
Nothing. By ignoring them he made them look like idiots. By going after a twitter troll (and this guy seems as much of a troll as Trump is a successful businessman with his 7 chapter 11's) Trump has given him an air of legitimacy.
The things Trump is doing seems very much like the actions of a 3rd world dictator (nepotism, media
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Alphabet Inc. owns Google, not Twitter.
Unless the Twitter account used a gmail account to open it, I don't see how Alphabet intelligence would be able to help.
Re: Trump is noob (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
that's what makes it the best kind of sarcastic troll.
A hat tip to the GP post indeed!
Re: (Score:2)
This was a test of how they would respond.
After seeing the response I'm sure the NSA got a call (they had probably already been contacted).
Yes, no (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually we'll be able to recognize the shifts and establish "jeckle" and "hyde" phases, then wonder how long each one will last.
Re: (Score:1)
The good news is that he projects just how nucking futs he is
The bad news is that his supporters would probably still vote for him today
Re:So sad... (Score:5, Interesting)
good luck with that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
I *lived* with a BPD for a decade before I successfully extricated myself from that disaster area.
Trump displays so many hallmarks of this that I actually get mild anxiety attacks from watching him.
There is *no* timing the cycles of "up on a pedestal" to demonization and back... none.
Next time will have gag order. (Score:5, Insightful)
All this means is that someone didn't know how to go about it the first time. They withdraw this one, then come back with a proper request tied with a permanent gag order. Takes care of that nasty little law suit, and they will still get what they want.
Re: (Score:2)
What grounds exist here to "unmask" an account that is posting stuff you dont like...? Thats what I'm struggling to understand - are they alleging the account owner is doing something illegal by mocking them?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Funnily enough, this is done through the foreign surveillance legal framework. Which can be done without a warrant now. They claim the accounts hurt national security.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether we like it or not, he is President, and as President he gets to set policy for the executive branch... which previously included an order for certain agencies not to provide updates via social media [fortune.com].
While I suspect some of the 'alt' department accounts are simply a fake PR attempt by the 'resistance', if the person running this particular account is an employee of the department in question, then they are very clearly violating the previously mentioned order... which at last check no one has claimed
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps. But last time I checked, insubordination was not a crime, so neither the courts nor law enforcement agencies have any role to play.
Re: (Score:3)
When/where did I say that insubordination is a crime? When did I mention any sort of crime?
More so, courts & law enforcement are involved in far more than just 'crimes'.
You breaking a personal contract with me isn't illegal, and I can go to court and ask the judge to order to you comply, if your refuse you can be subjected to being detained until you do. I could even use the police to seize enough of your property to compensate me for the order.
Having not read the specific complaint seeking the unmaskin
Translation: They found what they were looking for (Score:1)
Of course we'll never know if Twitter caved behind closed doors.
Re: (Score:3)
What do you think about the Republicans calling what was essentially their own ACA 'Obamacare' for 8 years and training their base to hate it?
This is a milder version of that. It's just a reminder that the guy who thinks he's running it all (which no president can actually do) is officially responsible.
He's going to drain the swamp, he's going to shake things up, he's going to stick it to the 1%ers, right?
Well, it's his show. Regardless of whether or not he has actual authority, Trump has claimed responsi
Re:Verbiage (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
This is the US Customs and Border Protection requesting private data on accounts who are criticizing POTUS, accounts purportedly done by current Administration staff. So it seems appropriate to tie in "Trump Admin" into this. Had it been US Customs and Border Protection doing their normal every-day thing of screening foreign visitors, you'd have a point.
Someone must have given Trump a new shiny toy (Score:2)
Uhhuh. (Score:2)
Unless these accounts were revealing classified information, who gives a shit - altUSEPA is just that an account prefixed with "altUS" not an actual official government account and no different than the accounts you or I create. There is a verification process for Twitter and such official accounts are marked as verified so it should be obvious to anyone looking at an alt account it is not verified nor official. If Twitter wants to implement a policy where alt govt accounts will NEVER be verified, so be it.
Paging Senator Franken... (Score:4, Interesting)
This flagrant attempt to abuse executive powers for political purposes provides the perfect opportunity for a high-profile congressional investigation. Whoever gave the order to send this summons to Twitter should be fired at the very least. If it was Trump himself (who else could it be, really?) then get the impeachment ball rolling!