strawd boosted

Trump knows what he’s doing when he calls his enemies “vermin” in his speeches and online. He’s dehumanizing them. This has happened to my community twice in my lifetime: once during World War II, and again during the pandemic. It is so dangerous, and Trump knows it. He’s preparing his base to do things that you can’t do to other humans, only to subhumans. Be warned. Be vigilant.

@freemo I went with Colemak after trying Dvorak for a little bit. I found Colemak to be a good compromise of keeping your shortcuts working / not changing too much, while also moving common stuff to the home row. No regrets!

@freemo a ruler tattoo seems to be common in the knitting community, or sometimes a design that subtly functions as a ruler

@freemo I totally agree that we shouldn't call it a disease. I'm hesitant to call for reversing the descriptors, but getting rid of the pathology language and stigma seems like the right direction to go.

@freemo I would say that pathologizing the way a minority of human brains work is the wrong way to go about it, so if that's what you mean by incorrectly diagnosed, then I agree.

I do think it can be useful to explore how an individual's brain works, and whether they for instance tend to pay a lot more attention to rationality than they do to social norms. Or something along those lines. I'm far from any kind of expert in this area, but I'm learning.

strawd boosted

@danirabbit @CosmicTraveler if there's one thing i wish i could get into these people's heads... actually it's what my grandfather said, after i came out. “you're still you, but you're more *you* than you've ever been.” You're not losing a person. it's the same person. you're only losing an illusion.

@freemo in my experience as a former Evangelical, that culture has the belief that pornography is against the will of God and is thus immoral, since morality comes from God. They believe it is destructive to marriages and that it corrupts God's perfect plan for humanity.

I suspect that several other Christian sects believe similar things, so at least in the US I think that 1/3 is probably lower than the rate in the general population.

@freemo no, consuming and participating in it (consenting adults only) is not wrong according to my moral framework. That said I'm pretty sure there is a lot of exploitation in the porn industry, so I wouldn't give the whole operation a pass.

strawd boosted

Wow, Hunter Biden has been indicted on 3 gun charges. That must mean there’s probable cause he committed those 3 gun crimes!

And if you agree, then you’d also agree that there’s probable cause that Trump committed 91 crimes.

Right?

@freemo

> Why would you think that? There are at least 4 choices for president in every election, and some states have quite a few more choices.

I know that me treating it like a two-party system contributes to that being true, but it's hard to believe that voting for any other party has any chance of actually selecting a winner without some big shake-up. Who knows though, maybe a Trump arrest could be just such a shake-up.

> if anything we’ve seen the opposite that communism is harmful and capitalism far preferable

I'm somewhat convinced of this, but I'm not ready to write off communism completely based on the few implementations so far. I guess I just hope that a system that includes massive exploitation isn't the very best that humanity can do. Maybe there's a better choice than both out there.

> Most of the communist countries have long since failed.

Often with some significant "help" from the US, I think. But it does seem like several have imploded mostly on their own.

> The problem with america isnt capitalism (free markets) its the lack of capitalism (monopolies making the market not free)

I'm pretty sure both are a problem. Capitalism because it incentivises greed and funnels power to those willing to exploit others. Monopolies because they lock up that power in very few hands.

Both can have upsides too - capitalism seems pretty good at producing innovation and increasing quality of life, at least for many people. I won't defend monopolies but I can imagine potential for making big moves that wouldn't otherwise be possible.

@freemo that would have to be a Republican then I suppose. I'm all for that party to find its way back to sanity so I can think about maybe voting for them again someday. But they have a long way to come back imho.

It's hard to imagine a Republican winning the 2024 primary who doesn't at least signal that they want to ban abortion and trans health care and increase preferential treatment of the Christian majority. I hope I'm wrong. Not to mention any critical thinking about the harms of capitalism (not that Biden is any better on that front though).

strawd boosted

I assume you get why it's not a nice thing to say that "slavery helped black people in some ways" but I think some people miss why this particular idea is *exceptionally* racist.

One of the main arguments to justify slavery was that it "civilized" black people by making us Christian & teaching us obedience to our "betters." Black people were "lucky" or "better off" as slaves.

It assumes that when people were enslaved they had no skills, nothing to offer, that they were basically animals.

Show thread
strawd boosted

@freemo makes sense. Something that starts small but grows at a high order may be smaller than another effect for some take, but it'll eventually overtake it

@freemo you support LGBTQ rights, correct? His track record there is awful

@Pat sure, and I have for at least a couple of those. But the content in email is much more curated and less real-time than their Twitter posts. It's not the end of the world to lose that, but it's also not zero value lost.

@Pat I follow a few accounts like that: city, county, fire department, school district

Well is now unusable. I was following around 50 accounts and only viewing their posts, but somehow I still quickly hit the rate limit.

One gap this leaves for me is that I was following local accounts for safety/travel/etc updates. Hopefully they'll all start embracing mastodon now.

strawd boosted

The Difference Between How Trump, Biden, Pence, and Clinton Mishandled Classified Information

I should first state where I’m coming from (because #IANAL). I served in the US intelligence community from 1996-2004, first as an enlisted Marine, and then as a federal employee at NSA and later CIA. I worked on watchfloors and did ops, but most of that career was spent managing and/or securing classified systems. I was trained at the Fort Washington¹ facility in qualifying SCIFs², had my classified courier card for years, and in my time saw a few classified mishandling cases up close.

Next is a bit of background on how classified information handling works. In the 99.99% case, classified docs are only ever handled in SCIFs (which have fence-lines and armed guards). Printed documents are marked with their classification level, and when not in use everything is locked in a properly rated safe, managed with access logs. Classified computer systems are rated to the maximum level of classified allowed, and also secured when not in use. Systems at different classification levels are air-gapped to prevent leakage (technically it’s more complicated, but accurate for this discussion).

The last bit of background is the legal framework for classified document handling. There actually is no law defining classified information or handling processes. Rather, there’s the 1917 Espionage Act³, plus 100 years of legal precedent and executive orders (most recently EO 13526⁴). The Espionage Act refers to a very broad category of “information respecting the national defense” and makes illegal the dissemination of this information through either “willful intent” or “gross negligence.”

The key point is that the law applies to a broad category of information, and the EOs build a framework for identifying such information and how to securely handle it. This is also the main basis that the courts use to delineate violations of the law, which is why classified mishandling is prosecuted under the Espionage Act.

With all of that out of the way, it’s time to look at each of these cases of classified mishandling. I’ll start with Clinton’s case first, because it’s the weirdest, in that it only barely involves classified data handling. That might seem confusing given all the press coverage in 2016, but the most accurate description of what Clinton did is that she forwarded emails from her official DoS (Department of State) email account to a personal account. The critical thing here is that because her DoS account was on a FOUO (For Official Use Only⁵) system, directly connected to the public Internet, those emails never should have contained any classified information. FOUO systems may contain sensitive information, but are explicitly not for handling classified information.

Accepting that, sometimes classified information leaks to a FOUO system. This tends to happen one of two ways, the first of which is usually in preparing briefings/reports for a lower classification level. It’s common to pull some of that information from classified documents, declassify as needed, and then transfer that to a lower classification system. Sometimes mistakes are made in this process and (now invalid) classification markings are left in the downgraded document. That explains the classification markings found in a few of Clinton’s emails⁶.

Classified information can also leak without being marked, if the substance of discussion simply includes information that would be considered classified. This is why it was reported that Clinton had 2,100 classified email threads⁷. Because, all of her emails were sent to the classification authorities at all of the intelligence agencies, and they reviewed everything, flagging anything they would have viewed as classified. FWIW, I doubt that any senior national security official’s FOUO inbox would make it through this process without coming away similarly flagged (but that's its own very long discussion).

With that context, here’s the first critical thing to understand about Clinton’s emails: The classified information leak was independent of her forwarding her official email to her personal email address. This is because any classified information she received was already leaked on the FOUO systems that the emails were coming from. So, the classified mishandling situation is the same regardless of whether Clinton’s email had remained on the FOUO DoS server or on a machine in Clinton’s basement. Neither are authorized for handling classified information.

So, then what was wrong with Clinton forwarding her FOUO emails to a personal address? Mainly it comes down to the government’s obligations regarding records retention and the mandatory security baseline for the systems they manage. Those are both extremely good reasons for why Clinton shouldn’t have forwarded her emails, but they don’t really have anything to do with classified information handling.

And to be fair to Clinton, since she was using a FOUO system, she had a reasonable expectation that she wasn’t receiving any emails containing classified information. So, unless she personally introduced the classified information into the discussions that got retroactively flagged, it’s entirely possible that she never even mishandled classified herself. Rather, she may have simply had additional copies of emails that had already leaked to FOUO systems. (FWIW, I don’t expect to ever find out the answer to this.)

This gets to the legal repercussions of what Clinton did. Once again, IANAL, but I did see cases of similar infractions. And as long as the offending party cooperated, there was very little in the way of repercussions. About the worst case would be junior enlisted getting slapped with non-judicial punishment⁸ because their commander wanted to make an example of them. But outside of that, pretty much anyone else in the same situation would just be told to stop, or at worst get a minor slap on the wrist.

Either way, I cannot imagine what grounds someone could even be prosecuted over if they're simply forwarding emails from a FOUO account, to their personal account, for the purposes of accessing their email from another device. Moreover, the scope and depth of the Clinton investigation would normally have been reserved for someone stealing actual marked classified information or otherwise bridging classification levels between systems. Clinton genuinely received more scrutiny and greater repercussions than pretty much anyone else in her situation would have. None of this is to say that what Clinton did was a good thing, but it genuinely was far less than it's usually made out to be.

Now, on to Biden and Pence, which are nearly identical cases of classified mishandling. Remember several paragraphs back about the 99.99% case? Well, that’s not the White House, because that place is just weird. It has a mess of spaces cleared for handling classified, and uncleared people endlessly circulating about—some of whom literally live there! The whole thing is a security nightmare, and they should ban printed classified just as a precautionary measure.

That’s why I’m not surprised that Biden and Pence wound up with marked classified papers mixed in with their other documents. TBH I’m surprised it doesn’t happen more often. But that sort of thing is also why the statute sets the bar at “willfully” or “negligent.” Both Biden and Pence did exactly the right thing in notifying the appropriate custodian of the mistake, turning over everything, and complying fully with investigations. It was all by the book, and no one would ever be charged for something like this.

Finally, we get to Trump. His case is highly unusual, but not at all complicated. The indictment⁹ provides mounds of evidence that he “willfully” took large quantities of classified material with him when he left the White House. After NARA (National Archives and Records Administration) contacted him about returning the missing classified material, he chose to lie, evade, and then turn over only some of the stolen documents. Eventually the FBI had to raid Mar-a-Lago to recover 300+ additional classified documents, and it’s still unclear whether everything has been recovered.

The whole point here is that the Trump case is genuinely unprecedented in just how crazy it is. The volume and scope of the theft puts it in league with espionage cases that land people in prison for decades. Even worse, the whole crime is documented with recordings, corroborating witnesses, and pretty much everything a prosecutor could dream of.

While I'm at it I should also quickly knock out some of the more common attempts I’ve seen to dismiss the criminality of Trump’s situation, so here goes:

Are the classified documents in fact Trump’s property? No. The Presidential Records Act is entirely clear on this¹⁰.

Could Trump have declassified these documents already as president? No. EO 13526 sets out the classification process, and if he wanted to expand it to include psychic declassification he had to write a superseding EO laying out such a process.

Does it matter that Trump doesn’t appear to be an agent of a foreign power? No. Just ask Petraeus¹¹ or Schulte¹²; you break the law when you willfully take the information and risk dissemination to those not cleared for access.

Does it matter that Trump stored the information in a locked room? Accepting that a resort with random people ambling about is laughably unsafe, the fact is that there are clear regulations for storage and transport of classified material, and Trump was so far outside the bounds of those that the tiny measures he took are immaterial.

TL;DR: Literally anyone else who did what Trump did would already be sitting in federal prison for at least a decade. Trump is getting an unheard of level of special treatment—entirely to his own benefit! There’s simply no comparison to what Clinton, Biden, or Pence did. The most appropriate comparisons for Trump’s case all involve people currently serving long federal prison sentences… or people who already died in prison.
_
¹ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interage
² en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitiv
³ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionag
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executiv
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Offi
politico.com/blogs/under-the-r
usnews.com/news/politics/artic
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-judi
justice.gov/storage/US_v_Trump
¹⁰ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presiden
¹¹ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Pe
¹² en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_S

@freemo @georgetakei no idea. It's hard to picture Trump admitting guilt even if the offer was there, but I guess it's possible.

Here's what I could find about his pubic stance on the matter:

> Trump predicted he would not be convicted and said he did not anticipate taking a plea deal, though he left open the possibility of doing so “where they pay me some damages.”

politico.com/news/2023/06/10/t

So I guess he would plead guilty if DOJ paid him money, which sounds like a ridiculous stipulation to me. Anyway I don't see any immediate evidence of unfairness.

Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.