Sean Spicer Launches Witch Hunt Over The 'Secure' App He Just Said Was No Big Deal

from the keep-up dept

So here's a story that goes from weird to bizarre in record time. A few weeks ago, Axios was among the first to report that White House staffers were using an app called "Confide" to make use of its disappearing message feature, specifically to avoid putting things down on the record, that might later be leaked or revealed:

We spoke with one influential GOP operative who is using the app. He told us he especially likes that Confide makes it harder to take a screenshot—you have to slide your fingers over text and it only captures a portion of the screen. He also likes the integration with iMessage, allowing him to write self-destructing encrypted messages within the confines of the iPhone's standard-issue messaging platform.

He says Republicans like him are especially paranoid about their communications after Hillary Clinton's email scandal. "For folks that are on the inside in this city, it provides some cover," he said.

Among those found to be using the app? Trump Press Secretary Sean Spicer, who got upset that anyone might think it was a big deal that the app was on his phone:

BuzzFeed News found the phone numbers of Spicer, along with Hope Hicks, the director of strategic communications, via a feature that allows users to see friends who have already joined.

In a phone call with BuzzFeed News, Spicer confirmed that he used the app, but said that he had done so only once, when asked to by a reporter “months ago.” He offered to show a BuzzFeed News reporter his phone as proof.

“I downloaded it, but I’m glad to show anyone my phone and that I’ve literally sent one message on Confide,” said Spicer. “These are personal phones… I also have iTunes on my personal phone, Solitaire, and other apps. Frankly I think the idea that you guys are writing a story, the idea of what apps I use on my phone, is an invasion of my privacy.”

Of course, if the messages are deleted soon after sending, as the app advertises, then showing the app to a reporter doesn't really prove much of anything. Either way, hold that thought.

Security experts have ripped apart Confide, saying that it's claims of being secure are "a triumph of marketing over substance," however others in the White House are making use of an app that is generally considered more secure: Signal.

And, apparently, that has some in Congress worried that the apps are being used not to undermine things like federal record keeping laws, but rather that it may be used by people inside the government to go undermine the administration or to leak information to the press.

And, indeed, this weekend it was reported that Sean Spicer (remember him from above?) conducted a surprise leak crackdown last week, ordering staffers into a conference room and then searching their phones for Confide or other apps, and telling them not to use such apps:

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.

There, he explicitly warned staffers that using texting apps like Confide — an encrypted and screenshot-protected messaging app that automatically deletes texts after they are sent — and Signal, another encrypted messaging system, was a violation of the Presidential Records Act, according to multiple sources in the room.

Leaving aside, for now, the humor in this information (of course) then leaking to the press, it does seem somewhat amusing that Spicer is now suddenly running surprise phone checks on staff members over these apps when he, himself, admits to having used at least Confide, and his insisting that its presence on his phone was really no big deal. Remember, "Frankly I think the idea that you guys are writing a story, the idea of what apps I use on my phone, is an invasion of my privacy." And yet... it's not such an invasion of privacy to suddenly order lower ranked staff members into a conference room to do a "phone check" to see if they have any of those apps on their phones?


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:00pm

    The @POTUS Twitter account tweeted out that this had happened, but then later deleted the tweet.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:12pm

    Oh the irony and hypocrisy when the team that screamed "her emails!" so much didn't learn to use official channels from the Clinton issue, but just learned to work harder at hiding their electronic use policy violations.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    bob, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:13pm

    fact or fiction it is a lose lose situation

    Of course now the administration is claiming that they purposely leaked this story to make newspapers look bad because it didn't actually happen. At least according to spicer.


    Honestly on this particular thing I don't know who to believe, politico or the whitehouse. However I know that with every issue like this I believe the administration less and less. Of course it is hard to lose confidence in a president when you had none to begin with.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      DannyB (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:28pm

      Re: fact or fiction it is a lose lose situation

      What should we think of an administration that would leak a story to the press to make the press look bad. Particularly an administration that is at war with the press and publicly and brazenly declares the press the enemy of the people.

      Wow. Just wow.

      Don't know whether to believe politico or the whitehouse. That sounds like the result of someone who would run a disinformation campaign to undermine the public trust in everything. At some point the public will question basic facts like whether the sun rises in the East or West.

      Every time I think I can lose no more confidence in the president or his administration, something new happens that makes my jaw drop even lower.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Thad, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:29pm

      Re: fact or fiction it is a lose lose situation

      You don't have to believe anybody. A healthy skepticism is usually good policy, especially when it comes to stories from anonymous sources.

      I think that most of the leaks that have come out about the administration have been plausible (and obviously the one about Flynn's communication with Russia had legs), but there's a difference between "it's plausible" and "it's true." I think it's quite clear that there are rival factions within the administration all seeking to undermine one another, and also that there are people within the intelligence community who are deliberately seeking to undermine the President. Regardless of your feelings on Trump (and I think he's a dangerous lunatic), that's not something to celebrate; CIA versus Trump is like Alien versus Predator: whoever wins, we lose.

      The enemy of your enemy is not your friend, and it's unwise to believe a story just because it reinforces your preconceived notions.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        JoeCool (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:50pm

        Re: Re: fact or fiction it is a lose lose situation

        See a leak saying Trump is replacing the Supreme Court with chimps... definitely plausible, probably not true. ;)

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        David (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 5:52pm

        Re: fact or fiction it is a lose lose situation

        The rival factions thing has some traction personally. In particular after the two good ol' boys making nice at the CPAC. Steve Bannon slings shit really fast, is noted for off the cuff riffs, on pizzas for for instance. The make nice was clearly staged.

        Of course then entire Trump Bunch have no real idea how the government actually works, they just know they want to disable the Executive branch completely, except for Der Groper. And their own job, that goes without lying.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        nasch (profile), 1 Mar 2017 @ 10:12am

        Re: Re: fact or fiction it is a lose lose situation

        Regardless of your feelings on Trump (and I think he's a dangerous lunatic), that's not something to celebrate; CIA versus Trump is like Alien versus Predator: whoever wins, we lose.

        It might be preferable to an administration and intelligence apparatus unified behind President Bannon's vision for America.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Almost Anonymous (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 3:24pm

      Re: fact or fiction it is a lose lose situation

      "Of course now the administration is claiming that they purposely leaked this story to make newspapers look bad because it didn't actually happen. At least according to spicer."

      Oh, it happened. This is classic Spicer.
      Source: I watch Saturday Night Live.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        nasch (profile), 1 Mar 2017 @ 10:13am

        Re: Re: fact or fiction it is a lose lose situation

        Oh, it happened. This is classic Spicer. Source: I watch Saturday Night Live.

        Yeah, but this is new Spicy!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 11:14pm

      "I didn't rob that store, I was mugging a homeless person at the time!"

      Of course now the administration is claiming that they purposely leaked this story to make newspapers look bad because it didn't actually happen. At least according to spicer.

      So the WH lied, and knowingly told the press something that was blatantly untrue, and the press reported what they were told as true, and the press is supposed to be the one that comes out looking bad?

      Whether deliberate lie or weak attempt at spin to make something that did happen look 'good', neither has the WH coming out on top.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 6:42am

        Re: "I didn't rob that store, I was mugging a homeless person at the time!"

        "and the press is supposed to be the one that comes out looking bad?"

        Only to those who support such craziness

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Berenerd (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:19pm

    It was also reported on ABC news (Not sure if there is facts behind it) that the search included personal phones as well.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:19pm

    How is this not a violation of the 4th amendment?

    The federal government just ordered people to surrender their phones for a mandatory search. How is that not a 4th amendment violation?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:27pm

      Re: How is this not a violation of the 4th amendment?

      Depends on whether these were the staffer's personal phones or government issued phones. Not a violation in the latter, but the former....

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Whoever, 28 Feb 2017 @ 1:53pm

      Re: How is this not a violation of the 4th amendment?

      I expect what was said was something like:
      "Either voluntarily hand over your phones, or you are fired, with immediate effect."

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Chuck, 1 Mar 2017 @ 3:53pm

      Re: How is this not a violation of the 4th amendment?

      Because the 4th amendment only applies to the government. While this would APPEAR to apply at first glance, under the law, a staffer working at the white house is treated no differently than a staffer working at a private corporation as far as 4th amendment protection is concerned.

      If the phone is a work-issued phone, then it's the corporation's property. They don't have to even ASK you to see their own property. They can point-blank demand it because the phone is theirs.

      As to your personal phone, any employer in the US can demand to see your phone, right now, and they can fire you on the spot for refusing, though you do have the right to refuse.

      This is a little secret about most rights we have under the constitution: just because you have a right doesn't mean you won't be punished for exercising it. You can stand on the sidewalk just outside your local church and preach the gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and as long as you aren't so loud as to be a valid noise complaint, there's nothing they can do to stop you, but good luck getting a job, a girlfriend, or the time of day from basically anyone if you do. You may also be committed to a psychiatric facility if the local police don't get the reference.

      That said, your employer cannot, on the other hand, force you to unlock your personal phone (or fire you if you refuse to), because they have tried that before, been sued, and lost. I mean, they CAN, but they know if they do, you can sue them for wrongful termination and there's precedent on your side, so they'd have to be pretty stupid to do so.

      SO ALWAYS USE A PASSWORD AND NEVER TELL YOUR COWORKERS!

      But yeah, the law on this is really strange.

      Sauce: I'm a paralegal.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:25pm

    Maybe you should get your news from a better source than buzzfeed. He never said it was no big deal, he rightfully stated that its use was in violation of transparency laws.

    [Spicer] explicitly warned staffers that using texting apps like Confide — an encrypted and screenshot-protected messaging app that automatically deletes texts after they are sent — and Signal, another encrypted messaging system, was a violation of the Presidential Records Act, according to multiple sources in the room.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/sean-spicer-targets-own-staff-in-leak-crackdown-235413

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:34pm

      Re: Maybe you should get your news from a better source than buzzfeed.

      Buzzfeed was only reporting what Spicer told them. Who else should we find this out from?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Thad, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:34pm

      Re:

      Sure, but that's an excuse. Do you think Trump's more concerned with complying with the Presidential Records Act, or with stopping leaks?

      Hint: you may want to check the amount of time he's spent expressing his concern over Presidential Records Act compliance over the past couple of weeks, and compare it to the amount of time he's spent swearing he's going to crack down on leaks.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:46pm

      Re:

      Maybe you should get your news from a better source than buzzfeed. He never said it was no big deal, he rightfully stated that its use was in violation of transparency laws.

      I think you misunderstood what was stated.

      Back when he was questioned about having the software on his own phone, he said it was no big deal.

      When rounding up his staffers for a phone check, he said the software was a violation of the PRA. Including if they had it on their personal phones (like he did).

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 1:09pm

      Re:

      Are you capable of reading words? It seems that you are not.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JMT (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 3:03pm

      Re:

      *"Maybe you should get your news from a better source than buzzfeed."*

      Maybe you should be more cautious with the snark in case you completely misunderstand the story and post a silly comment that makes you look foolish.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    John Cressman, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:31pm

    I'm not sure what the point is?

    So, EMPLOYEES were told to hand over their phones to make sure they weren't using software that violated the law.

    Anyone who thinks that is odd hasn't worked a real job.

    I work for a hospital. If I want to access any work related information, I pretty much have to have invasive software installed on my phone, use a VPN to connect to work and my phone is continuously scanned for new software to prevent it being hijacked. All so that no patient information gets out.

    I have three options: 1) Do it and get access, 2) Don't do it and don't get access, 3) Quit

    Personally, I opted for #2, but if I absolutely needed access, I'd only have options 1 or 3.

    That's life. Deal or be dealt out.

    It's the same with the government I assume, only more so since we're talking levels of classified information. Anytime they feel they're being treated unfairly... there's the door.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:35pm

      Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

      As Spicer himself said, “Frankly I think the idea that you guys are writing a story, the idea of what apps I use on my phone, is an invasion of my privacy”.

      So was it an invasion of the staffers’ privacy to find out what was on their phones, or wasn’t it?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 2:18pm

        Re: Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

        "As Spicer himself said, “Frankly I think the idea that you guys are writing a story, the idea of what apps I use on my phone, is an invasion of my privacy”.

        So was it an invasion of the staffers’ privacy to find out what was on their phones, or wasn’t it?"

        No, Spicer doesn't work for the press, but his staffers work for him. So, no invasion of staffers' privacy.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Thad, 28 Feb 2017 @ 3:14pm

          Re: Re: Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

          Are you suggesting that if your boss does it, it's not an invasion of privacy?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 28 Feb 2017 @ 6:59pm

          Re: No, Spicer doesn't work for the press...

          Why did he offer to show them his phone, then?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Bones, 1 Mar 2017 @ 9:37am

            Re: Re: No, Spicer doesn't work for the press...

            I guess you will have to read the article to find out why he offered to show his phone to the press.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 12:10am

          Re: Re: Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

          Sure.
          I do understand that you routinely pass your boss the details of your medical history and sex life.
          Poor guy, must be bored to tears by now...

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Baron von Robber, 1 Mar 2017 @ 10:41am

          Re: Re: Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

          I don't get it. Is Spicer a public employee or not? If so, his phone needs to be treated as public.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 12:07am

        Re: Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

        OTOH you also have to keep in mind, that "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear".

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 6:19am

          Re: Re: Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

          OTOH, then you find yourself continually having to prove that you have nothing to hide.

          Live right, and you don't have to worry about either hiding or being found out.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Thad, 28 Feb 2017 @ 12:36pm

      Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

      I know a guy who feels he's being treated unfairly. Whines about it all the time.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Atkray (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 3:00pm

      Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

      Option 2 FTW.

      If they require you to have access then that can give you the hardware needed.

      I get that having 2 phones is a pain but mixing work and personal life is a steep price to pay.

      With the possible exception of being self employed.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Almost Anonymous (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 3:28pm

      Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

      I promise you that I work at a "real job", and I don't care who demands to see my phone, boss, CEO, whatever, they will be told to jump up a fat dog's ass. And if I got fired over it, I would be looking at a yuge wrongful termination suit.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 6:44am

      Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

      "Anyone who thinks that is odd hasn't worked a real job."

      lol - wut?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      I.T. Guy, 1 Mar 2017 @ 7:02am

      Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

      "have to have invasive software"
      Your hospital CANNOT force you to install their MDM solution unless you want to connect it to their resources. In most situations I have been in IT will provide the phone. If your duties require you to have 24/7 access then have them provide a phone, or get them to reimburse you for another.

      "Anyone who thinks that is odd hasn't worked a real job."
      Well I have. I have rolled out MDM solutions, AirWatch, MaaS360, and XenMobile. So if some IT guy is asking to search through your phone pre MDM, tell him after you see his first. And then ask if you could see his phone. BLAH!!! Just kidding. Anything on your phone would be handled by application management.

      The majority of MDM I have set up have done a few common things mostly. Force a pin, encrypt the phone, having the ability to do a remote wipe, SSO, making sure the device is of a certain patch level. Nobody is using it to look at your nekkid selfies.

      Lastly, I gathered from your statement that your access is not critical. So its a convenience. It's nice enough that the place you work gives you the option. They have to protect their data first and foremost. Your feelings on the matter are not relevant. You want the convenience? You accept the measures required for that convenience.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 12:40pm

      Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

      I have three options: 1) Do it and get access, 2) Don't do it and don't get access, 3) Quit

      BYOD devices for a hospital, as a condition of employment?

      Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit on that one.

      Conversely, if that's the policy, please let me know what city that hospital's in so I can stay the fuck away from it.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Baron von Robber, 1 Mar 2017 @ 2:26pm

        Re: Re: I'm not sure what the point is?

        It's doctors. :(
        They want info on their device. So long as it's a portal to the info and not an app with data on it, it should be good.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 1:19pm

    Whats the problem?

    90% of what is done on the floor is under the secrets act..
    I KNOW...its the girl friend thing..

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    I.T. Guy, 28 Feb 2017 @ 2:17pm

    "are especially paranoid about their communications after Hillary Clinton's email scandal."

    If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      ECA (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 4:32pm

      Re:

      wouldnt it be NICE...
      If everything in the GOV. was to be Public knowledge...
      RELEASED, in 4 years or LESS...
      Yes, SOME things are Secret..but SHOULD NEVER be hidden for 20+ years...AFTER all those concerned are DEAD/DYING/MOVEd to another country, or the Statute of Limitations has RUN OUT..

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 6:20am

      Re:

      Kindly prove that you have nothing to hide.

      See the problem, yet?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 2:48pm

    "Frankly I think the idea that you guys are writing a story, the idea of what apps I use on my phone, is an invasion of my privacy."

    two points...

    1. maybe talk with one of the lawyers before asserting a privacy violation by the media, from the pulpit of the office of the president of the united states.

    2. did you read the Terms of service and privacy agreement you accepted when you created an account on that app...if you did, see #1, if you didn't see #1.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ryunosuke (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 2:53pm

    so when can we start seeing Trumps white house emails?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 3:15pm

      Re:

      ***a couple of large dumpsters of finely chopped paper appear at your desk. Then you see some half mangled hard drives and phones and you notice they look like someone tried to shred them as well but they got jamed in the blades of the shredder.***

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 3:15pm

      Re:

      Any time you like, his phone isn't secure.

      /s

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Chuck, 1 Mar 2017 @ 4:02pm

        Re: Re:

        Quick question: can anyone actually prove that it isn't Trump's own phone that's doing all this leaking? I mean, what better "anonymous source" than a primary source, i.e. the guy's own phone?

        I mean it'd be pretty damn funny if we find out, after all this crap he's said, that the Russians have a backdoor into his phone and are leaking all this, right?

        Or anyone really...but the Russians especially. I swear I'd literally die laughing.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Rapnel (profile), 28 Feb 2017 @ 3:52pm

    "Yeah, that'll stop the leaks." Said nobody.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    SpaceLifeForm, 28 Feb 2017 @ 3:52pm

    The two brothers of fascism

    Hypocrisy and Insanity.

    If you have not met them yet,
    you will. Some day, many people
    will even recognize them.

    When they look in the mirror.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 28 Feb 2017 @ 5:51pm

    "Sean Spicer Launches Witch Hunt Over The 'Secure' App He Just Said Was No Big Deal"

    ... and then promptly threatens to leak a story smearing the author of the politico piece about their cell phone meeting.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    My_Name_Here, 28 Feb 2017 @ 10:55pm

    The new administration has a problem with leaks. There is no one best solution, but I actually think they may be starting to do the right thing, which is the opposite of what you think.

    Step 1 is to try to secure the ship as best you can. Make a solid sweep so you look like you are serious about it, so random staff members are less likely to take the risk to leak stuff. It's sounds pretty much like what they are doing and that is good.

    What is more secret is step 2: Overwhelm the leaks with more leaks that are entirely plausible but entirely false. Hand the media a bucket load of leaked stories that end up not being true, and you end up discrediting the leaking process. Keep it pretty constant, throw in a few nuggets that are in fact true (but unimportant) and generally muddy the waters until the media no longer is willing to accept leaks on their face without some checking. All the while, the Cheetos In Chief can yell about fake news and pretty much discredit the media. Given enough time, this buys the administration a whole bunch of space to do all sorts of stupid shit without anyone wanting to report it in case it's not true.

    Considering that Bannon has control (direct or indirect) over a fair pile of the conservative media apparatus, it's not hard to make this work out.

    Only in America!

    (This comment held for moderation)

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    SteveMB (profile), 1 Mar 2017 @ 7:51am

    > Sean Spicer (remember him from above?) conducted a surprise leak crackdown last week, ordering staffers into a conference room and then searching their phones for Confide or other apps

    Yeah, like this doofus would have a clue about how to search a phone if the owner took the basic and obvious precaution of using an app-hiding app.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    apk-facebook-2, 1 Mar 2017 @ 3:11pm

    If they really could secure the leaking from White House staff, intelligence agencies, DOJ, etc. then this wouldn't be necessary. And if they can't, then it wouldn't be sufficient. If they have 12 leaks and 10 of them are saying one thing and 2 something different, they can be fairly sure which is correct. And if they actually know who the leakers are, then it's even easier to tell which to trust

    http://prnmeg.blogspot.com/2017/01/2017-apk-facebook-2.html
    http://prnmeg.blogspot.com/2017/01/2 017-download-icq-free_5.html
    http://prnmeg.blogspot.com/2017/01/2017-casper-snap-chat.html
    http://prnm eg.blogspot.com/2017/01/2017-lestartstop.html

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.