Sean Spicer targets own staff in leak crackdown

So why exactly should we be outraged or heartened?

Last Admin did a better job of cracking down on whistle blowers... so should he be lauded or chastised for not embracing leaks...

Some of us are having trouble keeping up on what is ok?

Or should we just take the opinion that if its the other team having their information leaked its good... but bad for my team?

originally posted by: Irishhaf
So why exactly should we be outraged or heartened?

Last Admin did a better job of cracking down on whistle blowers... so should he be lauded or chastised for not embracing leaks...

Some of us are having trouble keeping up on what is ok?

Or should we just take the opinion that if its the other team having their information leaked its good... but bad for my team?

Do you. That's all that matters in the end.

a reply to: bender151

I Expected this. so much non experience.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Its All about the he said she said BS Whole bunch of it at work ,AA meetings, and church

a reply to: Irishhaf

Some leaks are on purpose. Some leaks are sold on the open market. Some leaks are when drunks are bragging to others about their importance with insider info they are privy to....

Information is the life blood in DC. It's a institutional hemorrhage that no tourniquet can stop.

The DC trinity

Information
Money
Power

I think we can all agree that a certain amount of transparency is a good thing.

But, there are leaks and then there are LEAKS. Those that hurt the country or the ability to have private policy discussions or that compromise our national security are not beneficial.

My personal opinion is that the White House is bugged. I know there are methods to finding regular ole bugging devices, but I have a feeling the technology has been developed to prevent normal security sweeps from finding anything.

This is a serious concern because every device with a microphone such as your cell, a laptop, a tablet, an Apple watch, etc. etc. etc. has ears. Then, there is no telling what new technology has been developed over the last eight years.

a reply to: Irishhaf

This particular leak is such a minor thing that it's neither "outrageous" nor "heartening." I find it funny.
What about "transparency" then, do you all NOT WANT? That was all the rage, remember? After 9/11, (indeed, this entire century!) it's been all about "transparency" in government.

See that's the thing. Once you've seen something, you can't "unsee" it. I suggest that the administration AND EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS clean up their own houses and start over. Isn't that what Trump's fans wanted?

To blow the whole thing up? "Burn it down!" they cried. "Throw the bums out!" they ranted. Why anyone would have predicted this would go well is something I'll never know.

This is deluxe ...

Spicer harshly criticized some of the work deputy communications director Jessica Ditto had done, causing her to cry, according to two people familiar with the incident.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I think both teams are reprehensible and have to question anyone that supports two obviously corrupted groups that only work to consolidate power and wealth for themselves.

The difference between me and some here on this site, I hoped Obama would do great... and I hope Trump does great... successful presidents usually help the american people.

Yet some people seem to be cheering for a failed presidency based on who's team they cheer for and that is mind boggling.

originally posted by: queenofswords
I think we can all agree that a certain amount of transparency is a good thing.

But, there are leaks and then there are LEAKS. Those that hurt the country or the ability to have private policy discussions or that compromise our national security are not beneficial.

Interesting. How did you feel about the Edward Snowden leaks at the NSA then? The government argued over and over again that those leaks compromised national security and weren't beneficial.

My personal opinion is that the White House is bugged. I know there are methods to finding regular ole bugging devices, but I have a feeling the technology has been developed to prevent normal security sweeps from finding anything.

No. If the WH was bugged, then we'd have been seeing leaks like this for Obama. Obama's leaks were much more impactful than this.

This is a serious concern because every device with a microphone such as your cell, a laptop, a tablet, an Apple watch, etc. etc. etc. has ears. Then, there is no telling what new technology has been developed over the last eight years.

Wouldn't the White House be up to speed on such technologies?

Gentle Reminder:
This is NOT the Mud Pit!!!

Please stay on topic.
All rules for polite political debate will be enforced.
Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)

You are responsible for your own posts.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't have a problem with leaks that expose corruption. I have a problem with leaks that put lives at risk, though, regardless of who they come from.

So I don't have a problem with leaks that expose an administration's, either side of the aisle, corruption. But I would have serious problems with a leak from, say, the intelligence community that reveals an agent's personal details or something.

Is there any actual proof this all happened anywhere ?

3-2-1

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I wanted transparency for years and all we have gotten no matter who was in office was theater, not true transparency... neither party supports it in any way beyond what they can spin to make themselves look good and the other guy look bad.

the problem with the series of leaks is when people are encouraged to leak everything, how long until something is leaked that actually causes harm, to the country... to under cover agents, or the military.

The press running with every silly thing like they have been, is helping to create that atmosphere, in my opinion.

a reply to: Irishhaf

What seems to be happening can be starkly different than what is happening in reality. Take me for instance. I was HIGHLY distrustful of Obama in 2008 thanks to all the people voting for him because of his skin color, but held out hope he'd do good. Eventually I came around and feel he did decent (not A grade quality, but B or B+ quality).

I'd have given the same courtesy to Trump, but when he was elected he proceeded to rub it in my face daily, then decided to make an issue out of him losing the popular vote on his first days in office. He burned his bridge then. If he wants me to support his Presidency as successful, then he needs to moderate his tone. Otherwise I will be cheering every little setback he experiences.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Okay, let's try this again. In all seriousness.
Sean Spicer targets own staff in leak crackdown


sigh.

Last week, after Spicer became aware that information had leaked out of a planning meeting with about a dozen of his communications staffers, he reconvened the group in his office to express his frustration over the number of private conversations and meetings that were showing up in unflattering news stories, according to sources in the room.

Upon entering Spicer’s office for what one person briefed on the gathering described as “an emergency meeting,” staffers were told to dump their phones on a table for a “phone check," to prove they had nothing to hide.

Spicer, who consulted with White House counsel Don McGahn before calling the meeting, was accompanied by White House lawyers in the room, according to multiple sources.

Sean Spicer called his staff into a meeting to discuss leakage of information.
The meeting was leaked immediately to the press.

This is what transparency really is, ladies and gentlemen.
There should be no "secrets" in a transparent government....and it's been a number of years now (this entire century!) that people are demanding government transparency.
For whatever good it does, the internet is a wide-open look at the state of our world.

Where to begin...

The leaking of information relating to confidential discussions and meetings, whether in the public or private sector (or in personal matters), is inherently disruptive, counter-productive, disloyal - in some cases dangerous - and will in nearly every case be counter to a leaker's non-disclosure agreement.

In short, it is wrong - and anyone caught doing it should be fired, if not sued or charged (as the case may be).

Now. Trump is an embarrassment for many millions of people. Keep in mind that he did NOT win the popular vote. His cabinet is disastrous, and Steve Bannon is largely seen as the de-facto POTUS now. It is increasingly obvious that Trump does not have what it takes to govern (mostly lack of experience). He is too enthralled with his own fame, and too thin-skinned to deal with criticism.

Hillary and Bill Clinton, Podesta, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Barak Obama, Nancy Pelosi...and others...are an embarrassment to millions of other people, and President's are elected according to the results of the Electoral College (not by the combined totals of New York, Los Angeles and the Illegal Immigrant vote - so what is your point?

And exactly how is it that his "cabinet is disasterous"?

Now, let's talk about leakers, and how many people didn't want Trump, and still don't. How many people (millions and millions) have been peacefully protesting, and calling out legislators (who as often as not run away from being questioned)? How many times have those people been maligned and scoffed at? How long must non-Trump people tolerate being browbeaten? Shunned? Refused entry?

If the people working in Spicer's office are opposed to the Presidency of Donald Trump, then they are completely free to hand in their resignations, and then go out and join in one of those "peaceful" protests.

They are not entitled to continue their employment, with the good faith and fiduciary duty that that entails - whilst releasing confidential information to the Press - whether or not that information casts their employer in a bad light.

Calling for, and expecting, complete transparency from Government is as naive and potentially disastrous as calling for completely open borders, for "free trade" (with no regard for fairness in trade - or the implications on the domestic population of such trade), and the insistence that the United States has an obligation to take in all of the people in the world who are in some kind of distress.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I think both teams are reprehensible and have to question anyone that supports two obviously corrupted groups that only work to consolidate power and wealth for themselves.

The difference between me and some here on this site, I hoped Obama would do great... and I hope Trump does great... successful presidents usually help the american people.

Yet some people seem to be cheering for a failed presidency based on who's team they cheer for and that is mind boggling.

Hoping Trump does great is a waste of hope. No one with a lick of real foresight thought he would do "great." Many saw right through it from his first triumphal glide down the escalator....he is not presidential material. He won't "do great," because he's simply not "great." Steve Bannon makes my skin crawl every bit as much as Ted Cruz and Mike Pence do.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Okay, let's try this again. In all seriousness.
Sean Spicer targets own staff in leak crackdown


sigh.

Last week, after Spicer became aware that information had leaked out of a planning meeting with about a dozen of his communications staffers, he reconvened the group in his office to express his frustration over the number of private conversations and meetings that were showing up in unflattering news stories, according to sources in the room.

Upon entering Spicer’s office for what one person briefed on the gathering described as “an emergency meeting,” staffers were told to dump their phones on a table for a “phone check," to prove they had nothing to hide.

Spicer, who consulted with White House counsel Don McGahn before calling the meeting, was accompanied by White House lawyers in the room, according to multiple sources.

Sean Spicer called his staff into a meeting to discuss leakage of information.
The meeting was leaked immediately to the press.

This is what transparency really is, ladies and gentlemen.
There should be no "secrets" in a transparent government....and it's been a number of years now (this entire century!) that people are demanding government transparency.
For whatever good it does, the internet is a wide-open look at the state of our world.

Now. Trump is an embarrassment for many millions of people. Keep in mind that he did NOT win the popular vote. His cabinet is disastrous, and Steve Bannon is largely seen as the de-facto POTUS now. It is increasingly obvious that Trump does not have what it takes to govern (mostly lack of experience). He is too enthralled with his own fame, and too thin-skinned to deal with criticism.

That is spilling out onto everyone who comes near him now, and everyone who voted for him.
He's not going to change.

So. Spicer made headlines this morning when someone leaked that there was a meeting about leaks and how leaks are not okay with him.

Now, let's talk about leakers, and how many people didn't want Trump, and still don't. How many people (millions and millions) have been peacefully protesting, and calling out legislators (who as often as not run away from being questioned)? How many times have those people been maligned and scoffed at? How long must non-Trump people tolerate being browbeaten? Shunned? Refused entry?

This is not fake news. This is real news. It's really happening. And thinking it can be stopped is, well, naive.

So what do we do now?

Wondered what happened to the last thread. As I said before, a "source" leaked info on checking for leaks. And it originates from a "news" site that has already been outed for Glenn Thrush running his stories by Podesta prior to submission. That's like asking Donna Brazile to hold the questions for a debate...oh...wait....

These stories are completely fake news. For a "journalist" to believe that a high ranking member of the Whitehouse administration actually called a meeting and had all of their close personal employees dump their phones on a table for physical checks is laughable. With the type of tech our government uses this would be the equivalent of writing a story about NASA igniting their rocket launches with a match by hand.

I have 3 personal friends who currently and have worked for more than 2 administrations and know protocol for communications and devices. I have worked in government facilities where these protocols are active myself.

A leak would be something with evidence behind it...this is not that. This is a "source" saying something happened with nothing to back it up. It's the same old story from the political hacks like Thrush that just want to get a headline....

Had this been a real issue, cellular and landline communications are captured by any device to and from the Whitehouse. There would be no need for a phone check...for the "Shill-it-ico" site that wrote this to even write it took some serious leaps and loss of judgement or any form of critical thinking.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't have a problem with leaks that expose corruption. I have a problem with leaks that put lives at risk, though, regardless of who they come from.

So I don't have a problem with leaks that expose an administration's, either side of the aisle, corruption. But I would have serious problems with a leak from, say, the intelligence community that reveals an agent's personal details or something.

I would too, and luckily those types of leaks aren't occurring. Probably because the men in the field aren't the enemies. The guy at the top is. Trump also made enemies with the IC, so any leaks coming from that direction are likely going to involve Trump and his cronies.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Yes, I can read, thank you.

My point that some (many?) on the left are obviously gleefully rubbing their hands over this revelation when they so vehemently defended Obama's "handling" of leaks or the DNC's "handling" of leaks is still relevant, regardless of how much you may wish it weren't.