dburbach.bsky.social - Profile | ThreadSky | a Reddit-style client for Bluesky

This is 100% like something you'd see in our annual Information Assurance training -- see as in you fail if you say you would reply to this email.

submitted 7 minutes ago • 2 comments

This seems like a phisher's dream. Announcing that a government email is about to go out and that recipients are required to respond to it seems like the kind of thing cybercriminals would love to spoof in order to infect workers or trick them into revealing their login credentials.

submitted 33 minutes ago • 19 comments

Assuming the OPM email is as before: 1. It is unencrypted and unauthenticated 2. Asks you to send "what you did for your job, specifically?" info in plain text, unauthenticated reply with no confirmation where it went An agency might use as a test of who falls for phishing attempts

submitted 25 minutes ago • 3 comments

submitted 1 hour ago • 4 comments

My latest op-ed in the Washington Post www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/202...

submitted 6 hours ago • 20 comments

Oh, FFS, this is nuts. Beyond legallity, love to see how this works for DOD/Intel people who only have classified email working on TS and above stuff. Or say, wildland fire fighters or prison guards? www.politico.com/news/2025/02...

submitted 1 hour ago • 28 comments

Also note the context of some bad polling numbers for Musk, a few GOP in Congress raising a few questions, and another story or two of "WH insiders and Cabinet Secs worried and unhappy about Musk". Trump is really doubling down on Elon, not throwing him overboard.

submitted 3 hours ago • 8 comments

This is very, very bad. Am working on a write-up, but let’s just say that firing military leaders for blatantly political reasons is wildly inappropriate; firing all the too lawyers is ominous; firing them all at the same time is a terrifying five-alarm fire

submitted 20 hours ago • 113 comments

EMERGENCY FLOOFASAURUS

submitted 8 hours ago • 0 comments

EMERGENCY CATURDAY I wish I could be as relaxed as Marshall

submitted 8 hours ago • 1 comment

Firing career military officers for obeying the orders of the previous President sets up chaotic and dangerous incentives for senior commanders to shirk and scheme. Trump should wonder, will his generals resist following his orders on fear of what the next POTUS will do?

submitted 8 hours ago • 6 comments

Here’s what is going on. When you start firing the military’s top lawyers, that means you are getting ready to order the military to do unlawful things. Trump replaces those JAGs with men who will justify any future unlawful and unethical actions that he wants the military to do.

submitted 20 hours ago • 61 comments

I think the most wrong I have ever been as a political scientist was when I said in a public forum in 2020 that there would not be political violence in the US (Jan 6 was 2 mos later). Tonight’s purges are a clear precursor to more future such violence. This is textbook authoritarian abuse stuff.

submitted 16 hours ago • 44 comments

+1 "Removing them in this way will not make the military more lethal, but it could make the problem of politicization of the military that much harder to manage,” Feaver said.

submitted 18 hours ago • 5 comments

Firing all the JAGs is very very bad

submitted 21 hours ago • 70 comments

FOLLOWUP: SECDEF Hegseth also firing the CNO, the USAF Vice-Chief, and somewhat unusually and ominously to do in the same breath, the senior JAGs of the Army, Navy, and USAF

submitted 21 hours ago • 97 comments

Trump is nominating a retired Air National Guard 3-star to be Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Highest major command was Deputy Commander, CENTSOC www.af.mil/About-Us/Bio...

submitted 22 hours ago • 24 comments

This should be a huge red flag to countries other than just Ukraine. Predatory weaponization of interdependence is something the US can probably exploit in the short term but the rest of the world will, rightfully, avoid American solutions if that's our modus operandi

submitted 22 hours ago • 13 comments

Speaking personally but within my professional expertise... yes. Firing generals over politics, or for merely obeying the orders of the previous President, is a terrible precedent, weakens the military, and starts a dangerous cycle.

submitted 22 hours ago • 5 comments

after hearing from several of you last night, i think i have a general structure for this. it's subject to change based on feedback, but if you're a current, fired, or currently-being-litigated federal worker, i want to hear from you. here are the details.

submitted 1 day ago • 9 comments

Really wondering about my 401k allocation 1. Stand pat 2. Move equities to cash 3. Move to gold 4. Move 🧳🚢

submitted 23 hours ago • 8 comments

Federal employees are required not just by policy but by law to use a government credit card for travel expenses, not personal cards. So I assume the intent is just to catch-22 govt travel to zero? How do you redeploy ICE agents if they can't travel, for a start?

submitted 1 day ago • 1 comment

Good explanation of an infuriating trend: judges saying they can't rule for standing issues (unions don't have standing to represent their members!) or because those affected have not exhausted executive branch appeals that Trump now controls and rendered useless.

submitted 1 day ago • 5 comments

Oh fuck, what a grift. J6 terrorists sue a DOJ controlled by Trump; Trump orders DOJ lawyers to settle for an undisclosed amount, both sides agree to an NDA. This can happen dozens, hundreds of times. Just an ingenious way to funnel tax dollars to far-right terrorist groups.

submitted 1 day ago • 74 comments

But I was informed by savvy DC observers that the America First Policy Institute would be the dominant force in the new Administration...

submitted 1 day ago • 2 comments

Keep defending your public services!

submitted 1 day ago • 7 comments

"Fear now stalks the land. This is the most visceral indication that America has entered into an existential era for the future of democracy" --- Larry Diamond

submitted 1 day ago • 1 comment

The NAEP 2024 -2025 Long Term Trend Age 17 assessment will not be administered in the upcoming weeks Unbroken testing series since early 1970s Nothing like ignorance to keep our country moving forward

submitted 1 day ago • 6 comments