Oh man it must be nice to base your arguments on imagined scenarios.

You’re obviously free to believe whatever you want. I’m just pointing to the evidence we have available.

That has literally nothing to do with how those devices are connected to the internet.

The answer is in the article above if you cared enough to find it.

Is that a reasonable or necessary standard? Do we only hold the President to it, or other top leaders?

Do you think that the President of the US is just sitting there by himself connecting to random wifi networks? Either way, we’re speculating. Fortunately, the article does provide some insight:

Not sure what that’s relevant to unless you’re arguing in favor of speculation.

How far do you take this standard? Does everywhere the President sets foot need to be swept for unsecured wifi networks? What about areas where other high level members of the government go? I’m sure there are plenty of others who are not tech savvy either.

It’s plausible but not likely and the evidence we do have, per this article, suggests that it does not happen:

If you’re asking if that’s within the realm of possibility, the answer is obviously yes, but even this article points out how it works when Trump travels. He’s not exactly asking the staff for the local wifi password:

Yes. While this article is interesting, the idea that the president or anyone on his staff would be connected to public wifi at any time is ludicrous.

I think a more accurate term is “body man” - the guy that goes with him everywhere and makes sure that he’s sticking to his schedule, etc. Most politicians have something like it. The Secret Service does the actual physical protection.

You could use the same logic you use in regards to schools to say that “a healthy population is generally a good thing for the entire nation” - especially considering that right now we do pay for healthcare for those who can’t afford it, at extremely high cost when they wind up in the ER.

It is crazy how Trump has turned supposed liberals into right-wingers. First, Red Scare 2.0. Now, apparently, everyone’s a huge fan of Israel - an apartheid state.

Nice list of propaganda outlets.

This has to be the most ludicrous comment I’ve ever read. First of all, the idea that any country ever does something for another country for purely altruistic reasons is nuts. That is not how states work - and countries exchange intelligence with one another for all kinds of reasons.

Is this an argument against the idea of taxation in general? Where do you think the roads you drive on every day come from, just to use the most basic example?

I actually think that there’s another element of the argument that you’re missing - the idea of positive vs. negative rights. In the US, our rights are overwhelmingly negative. That is, the government doesn’t need to do anything in order for us to have free speech, for example. They just need to not infringe on our…

“LESS human’s” lol

I like that you illustrated the “real world” with a furry comic. Really drives home your terrible point.