s career. and-- >> it's about his career. >> i don't believe him, either. kevin eubanks, thank you for joining us. eliot spitzer, viewpoint, coming up next. go get 'em. >> good evening, i'm eliot spitzer and this is viewpoint where we drill down on the top stories of the day in search of facts that inform. mitt romney's etch-a-sketch moment may have arrived. to perform the greatest flip flop of his career, a move to the center after running hard to the right throughout the republican primary campaign. romney surrogate governor robin ehrlich suggested women voters who abandoned romney romney may return

when they see the new improved romney 4.0. >> when they see again and reminded of governor romney's real views that gender gap will dissipate. >> what have we been seeing until now, the phoney mitt? now romney is showing his strategy as well not by answering that question but turning it around. in a speech before the newspaper association of america and asking who is barack obama. >> he doesn't want to share his real plans before the election. either with the public or with the press. what exactly does president obama intend to do differently once he's no longer accountable to the voters. >> meanwhile romney is facing another challenge in his effort to redefine himself. whom will he select as his vice president? after days campaigning together in wisconsin, some analysts are touting paul ryan as a likely choice. how about this suggestion from

arizona senator john mccain. >> i think it should be sarah palin. [laughing] >> it's a good thing he saw that as a laugh line as well. for more on governor romney and his perspective slide to the center. i'm joined by juliana glover. juliana, thank you so much for joining us. first you have seen all of the critiques and the sort of mockery and etch can search metaphors. you can't avoid them. you're from the world who believes in the republican message. how is mitt romney, who is suffering badly with women and minority voters begin to redefine himself in a credible way? >> well, first of all, i don't think he is at a point where he'll have to redefine himself. what they need to do is to convince santorum to get out of the race before pennsylvania. if they don't do that, then going into pennsylvania they'll have to beat santorum.

santorum will be angry and humiliated and he'll want to continue. santorum has left the race in pennsylvania on a loss. he lost 18 points in 2006. you know, he has seen that show. he doesn't want to end his political cycle, this political cycle that way this time. so he'll go on and he'll run again for the following week where there will be north carolina and west virginia. he'll likely win north carolina and west virginia. those are two states with southern evangelical denominations. romney needs to be pivoting to the middle, and he has until the middle of june. >> if that's the case it will get more difficult for mitt romney who is losing that vital center. you're a strategist. you understand. i've been in that arena for a period of time time. mitt romney is plummeting, i don't think that's an

overstatement, plummeting wrong him and minority votes. swing voters who are going to be outcome determine nateers. they're the dispositive voters he will need to pivot at some point. you may be right. it may be later in the cycle than he wishes. he has begged rick santorum to get out of the race. but at some point mitt romney will be the nominate. i'll concede that. what does he do to sway women. he was pro-choice at one point in massachusetts. he has lost women. what does he do to get them back. >> one of the first things he has to do is ask the surrogates to use better choices in words. last week's etch-a-sketch, and today's mention of real position going into the general election is not giving anyone faith in what is going on around his campaign or the hopes that he'll be an authentic candidate. he needs to be persuading santorum that it's in his best interest to get out of

pennsylvania. mitt romney will have to keep running to the right. and as we move into april and may is that at some point in time romney convinces conservative voters and they have to run to the right and not to the middle and run to the southern states. that's not going to happen, he's going to have real position soon. >> i'm going to agree with you about one thing that you just said that's very important. the etch-a-sketch metaphor provided to those of us who retief pundits, we're sitting behind the desk where life is easy. that was a gift to anyone who wanted to make fun of governor romney. but the metaphor morphed so well. you have to admit. top adviser to vice president cheney. you've been right at the vortex

of public relations. governor romney has done this for us because he has gone back and forth on policies as well. when do they stop revolving and which way does it point. how does the authenticity is key to winning in november, how does he reclaim it. >> let me quickly, before i plunge into that. i have to say i've been very lucky. i've worked with authentic individuals who said what they meantime, cheney, ashcroft, all of them are folks that you couldn't--they generally don't move to various positions depending on the race they're in. however, on the other hand romney is going to be no matter what positioned as a flip flopper by the obama campaign. they're going to do an incredibly good job of that. romney in response will have to do a good job of pointing out the one thing he has been consistent of has been an exceptionally goodbyes man with solid judgment as to how to fix things. that's what will get him elected

in november. he's not going to get elected trying to defend what his real positions are or etch-a-sketch and one of the most metaphors that he heard, yes, he's like an etch-a-sketch, he has tin bits or aluminum pits on the inside i.e. computer reference we hear about all the time. >> look, let me agree with you about one other thing. folks with whom you have worked rudy giuliani and dig dick cheney ashcroft, you knew where they stood. at the end of the day the public respects that. when people stick to their guns articulate their views regardless of poll positions. but when running for the president of the united states people expect that. one thing you conceded, mitt romney doesn't have. we're not electing a businessman. you know, in a way dick cheney was put in there by president obama to be the businessman, the ceo who would run things

day-to-day. that might be good for a chief operating officer but not ceo. i don't see you answering the harder question. how could mitt romney get the heart and soul of the american public. when you're running for the presidency you have to appeal at an emotional level. does he have an answer for that? >> i'm not entirely sure that he has to appeal to the heart and soul of the populous. i think he has to run as the calm, cool, capable individual who can get things done who has the capacity to look at situations and sort of have this innate ability to understand the algorithms that will end in success. that's why people will support romney now, and that's why voters will support him in the fall. people will not make a decision on where he was on his pro-life positions back in 2004 when he was governor. they're going to look at him and say, can he fix the problems facing the problem right now? can he make a calculated careful decision about what budget cuts

need to be made that cause the least amount of harm to get the country back on the right track. when you compare him to obama who was a cool individual, but he doesn't have the same credentials, the same capacity the same history of making hundreds of millions of dollars. like romney has. he has done that on his wits, on his smarts, and on his simple innate capacity. i think that's what people will elect him for. >> i hear your argument. there are many things you listed that are admirable, that are to be applauded in somebody's business career and his political career as well effectiveness, competence. on the other hand there are few elements that are missing as you go into a presidential race, and the weather vane etch-a-sketch quality will come back to haunt him. we'll see how this plays out when rick santorum does jump out of this race. juleanna glover, g.o.p. strategist, thank you for some

of your time tonight. >> thank you. >> joining me now is perspective vice president, i'm joined by tim dickinson. thank you for being with me. >> it's good to be with you. >> i think you just heard juleanna. does that strategy work running as the wealthy competent businessman when people don't know what you believe. >> i don't think so. i think people connect with presidents on an emotional level and mitt romney has failed throughout the primary campaign to connect on an emotional level of the g.o.p. base. he was supposed to bring this party together, to rally behind them or get a line. here we are sitting in april and there is still--the evangelical block that is right there for santorum to pick off whenever he can, ron paul all the time.

he has failed in the basic work of consolidating the g.o.p. base. then he has to try to shift to the center to appeal to all the people that he has offended with his talk contortions to the right to appeal to these people to convince them that he's a true believer on things like abortion, immigration contraception. the list goes on. so romney has just got a very heavy lift in front of him in terms of trying--not only still consolidate the right wing, but reach out to the pool of centrist voters. >> you got it exactly right. he failed to bring together the three strands of the party, but alienating two critical voting blocks, women and minorities. that's a daunting political strategic task as he works from now to november to figure out how to meld it all together. the sweeps sweepstakes was kicked

off. who do you think if you were mitt romney's strategist, that's not a position you're likely to get. but if you were-- >> i'm for hire. >> well, you got the funds, we would be disappointed if you jumped shipped. but who would you recommend and why. >> oh, man, this is a very heavy lift. how do you excite the tea partyers, how do you excite libertarians and appeal to libertarians and get women back. the numbers on women are astonishing. since the end of last year independent women in battleground states have swung 20 points, 19 points for president obama away from mitt romney. it's catastrophic. >> tim. >> i need to interrupt you because you're so right and i want to give people the 19-point swing. the last year, late last year mitt romney was beating president obama among independent women, 48% to 43%.

nobody would have predicted that maybe that was a stray data point. mitt romney beating barack obama among women. you don't see swings that dramatic in politics that often. >> he lost hispanic by losing hispanic by 30, 40, 50 points staggering numbers. who fits that bill? and if you're casting a ballot suzanne martinez in new mexico. she's woman, a dead shot in the shooting ring. she excites the tea party base but she's also a pop populous and hispanic woman. if you're trying to punch all the tickets she comes up. marco rubio comes up. he does well with the establishment of republicans. he's cuban, obviously, and he

does well with the tea party set. those are names. but you know, there are a lot of risk there is. suzanne martinez is from a small state. we've seen this play out before. >> is that aveiled reference to sarah palin. >> exactly. and then marco rubio is young and appealing in principle more than execution. i think after the sarah palin experience you got to have gun shyness on making such a rogue bold choice. so i would be--i would be sort of less surprised to see somebody like bob mc mcdonald chris christie governor come on board and augment the romney competence brand rather than the picks that are trying to contrast of romney. >> there is a heavy lift for mitt romney. whatever remuneration we get

5.0, 6.0 to win the ohio and pennsylvania, that will determine this race. >> most of the west, and there are so many problems. i don't think you solve all of them with the vice presidential pick. >> so many numbers will drive this thing. tim dickinson with "rolling stone," we'll continue this why weeks ahead. >> thank you. >> the president versus courts. a titanic battle for power. ahead on viewpoint. ...so we can match you with someone who truly compliments you.

>> a republican appointed judge gives a home work assignment. three pages, single spaced and on his desk in 48 hours. we'll explain. and for congress to scrap sopa and pipa. you would think that the message was received. apparently not ahead on viewpoint hershey's air delight. >>how's college life, honey? >>its great, but i'm already getting homesick. >>i've left something for you in

your suitcase. >>thanks mom. it's perfect. if i can't be at home, at least i can have a taste of it. >>hershey's air delight milk chocolate, a lighter, airier >>i'm a political junkie. this show is my fix. [[vo]]this former two-term governor is ... >> judicial temper tantrums or consecutive branch overreach. many on the right are accusing president obama of second guessing judicial authority following comments made earlier this week and whether the supreme court would uphold the affordable care act. >> ultimately i'm confident that the supreme court will not take

what will be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of democratically elected congress. i just remind conservative commentators that for years what we've heard was the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint. that an unelected group of people would some how overturn a duly constituted and passed law. >> the president attempted tocally fay those words one day later but it did litter to quell conservative outrage. taking it a step further calling

for a three-page single-spaced letter. >> i'm referring to statements by the president in the past few days to the effect, and i'm sure you've heard about them, that it is some how inappropriate for what he termed unelected judges to strike acts of congress that have enjoyed--he was referring, of course, to obama care--to what he termed broad consensus in majorities in both houses of congress. that was troubled a number of people who have read it as some how a challenge to the federal courts or to their authority or to the appropriateness of the concept of judicial review, and that's not a small matter. >> joining me now is ruth marcus, columnist and editorial writer for the washington post and a classmate of mine.

she's one of the best lawyers you'll ever meet and columnists. >> not true. >> i gave a big build up. is this a fight that the president should have picked? going right at the supreme court, and all judges basically saying i dare you to overturn this statute. >> no, it's not a fight the president should have picked. i think that the answer to that question was made clear by the way in which he walked back toned down, clarified his remarks from the first day to the second day. i was really taken aback by i thought his remarks were incautious on days one where he talked about the judges and the remarks that got judge smith all hot and bothered. i think what he said when he revised and extended his remarks the next day. look, these are acts of congress. these are settled principles of law that the courts should be wary and differential about

overturning lax of acts of congress. that was fine and appropriate, but he stepped into it. at the same time i thought what judge smith was really completely outrageous. this home work assignment. >> this is lawyers who are more sensitive to than normal people as i say, we being not so normal. >> thanks. >> i'm one of them, too. so when the judge says to the lawyer for the justice department give me a three-page letter basically saying you understand the court case saying that they can overrule statutes. he was slapping him on the rbiss in a judicial manner. that was completely over the line. >> the court sort of reached out and took judicial notice of% these extraneous comments. there was no suggestion that the poor justice department lawyer in that courtroom defending some

piece of the affordable care act was in any way going to argue that the judge didn't have authority to make a ruling on the law. they're there precisely because they understand that the judges have authority to make a ruling on the law. so what does the judge to expect. eric holder writing 100 times on the chalkboard, i do believe in marbury versus madison. the case that cemented the importance of judicial review. >> let's put this in the back group. the jousting that we're seeing right now races raises the fundamental question that this minimize the integrity of the court. bush v. gore, where it was drawn on party lines. citizens united where the president went after the court in the state of the union message and now perspectively

overturning the single most important statute passed during the obama presidency. are we beginning to see this court in particular as more activist, more partisan? some how itself not as judicial as we've grown to think that courts were over the last several decades. >> yes, just as the president created some of his own problems with his statements, the court has laid the groundwork understandable suspicion of people. you and me could not believe in a the court would step in on bush v. gore. very surprised for them to make the decision they did in citizens united which is not in the case before them. this court much like the court in the roosevelt years right before his court packing plan ill-fated court packing plan it's sort of has its own issues

of responsibility and prestige to worry about. i think that is to some extent at least perhaps in the chief justices' mind, having 5-4 majorities decisions either way with a group of entirely republican or entirely democratic justices is not healthy for the court, and i suspect some of the justices know that. >> and i think that will weigh heavily as you points out in their thinking about how this decision is written about the healthcare act. i think folks should understand that stands in stark opposition to brown versus board opposition that says the schools of this nation must be integrated. an unanimous decision, something that completely transformed this society, but the chief judge said we will not do this unless we stand unanimous. a different setting from what we're seeing in this court. >> one thing that may be in the

justicejustices' minds as they go beyond technically what they're supposed to think about in terms of the merit of the case and the role of the court. the fact of the matter is that the affordable care act, this provision of it is not a popular provision. it's not as if they're going to save necessarily a popular up rising of an outraged populous if they come out and strike it down. i just want to make clear that i think that provision is constitutional. i think they should uphold it. i actually have a guess that they will. and perhaps for the reasons that we've been talking about by a greater than 5-40 majority. you can imagine if justice kennedy supports the statute, that provision of the statute that the chief justice might includes to go along with him and write the opinion himself. >> ruth, with your permission, we'll invite you back to have that conversation when that opinion comes back. >> please, only if i'm right. >> fair deal. ruth marcus, columnist writer

and class of '84. a membership of every ceo whose company is a sponsor of the master golf tournament until this year when one of the ceos happens to be a woman. coming up next.

attack on women that perhaps the majority of the population woke up? >> idaho is not known as approaching act i.v. you had hundreds of women show up, thousands signed petitions. they made their voices heard. what happens is that now, the legislators are running scared. very similar laws have passed quietly in other states for the past 10 years, really in the past two years have intensified. pennsylvania a similar law was shelved, idaho this proved to be political poison. women are paying attention and having their voices heard. >> thanks for coming in. >> the aclu considers a demand that to get a job you have to let an employer open your private mail, the senate wants to make it illegal to hand over a password to your facebook

account. >> s the home of the most august golf tournament in the world. the masters. but since opening in 1933 the exclusive augusta national golf club has had no female members and they would not admit women even at the point, i quote, at the point of a bayonet. now they have have problem. they have always extended an invitation for membership. this year the ceo is a woman. when asked if virginia rometty would be offered membership. the president gave a mulligan. take a listen. >> all issues have.

membership have been and always been subject to the bill of deliberations and that statement remains accurate and remains my statement. >> he said this over and over and over again. joining me now, a member of the british pga and independent journastd d down, clarif% his t% second oay. i was really t% n abackalist thought hi% remarks were incautious on days % in 2012 talked about the judge% the ionúremarks that got judge % years d h> andmarks the next da% 3 he same time i thought what % ifmith was really

compl% ly outr toous. this home w% themselves? le >> thanks. sos.hen the j% so they the lawyer for th% ustice departm% theyme a three-page lett%r basically saying you understand the cobershipe saying tha% hey can overruntedtatutes. he % speakng him on the rbiss in a judicial mannerot i> therece of these extra% us coponses from there wts no suggestion tues.the in that courtroom defending s% piece of the affordable care% point3% was in any way going t% ridiculous.% that% judge didn't have dúauthorit% make a ruling on the law. on the law. thewhat does the judge to er% lder writing 100 times on% he ghters,ard, i do believe in%

theyry versus madison. the % ofat cemented the ,úimportan% of judicial review. >> let's put this in t% ck group. the% usting that we're geeing right%now races raises t% butmental question that%this minimize the integrity of the court. bush va.gore, whe% it was drawn on pad.y lines.% - ovtrturning the single most court in particular as mo% america activist, more partisan? as ve've grown% think dhat courts were ove% he last seve%al decades.ally >> yes, just as t% presieent created some of his% problemsnd with his state% situationrt has laid the g% work people.%

theirand me cosld not believe in bush v. gore. citizses united which is n% would% the case before them. before his court% playingn% well-fated court packing plan,on3 bout. i think that is to some extent sion.t least p% s in the chief justices' mi% english-4 shiprities de% ns ei wer way with a gro% entirely republican or ent% ly it healthy for the cour% soi suspect some of the just% very% know tha%

ist. i think folks should% rstand thadersands in star% ibm,ion to brown versus b% oppndition tg.t says th% school, thankis nation must be% graeed. a% nimouthankision, somethi%

ls ] lucky for me your friends showed up with this awesome bone. hey! you guys are great. and if you got your home insurance where you got your cut rate car insurance, it might not replace all this. [ electricity crackling ] [ gasping ] so get allstate. you could save money and be better protected from mayhem like me. [ dennis ] dollar for dollar, nobody protects you from mayhem like allstate. look, i don't play 'bout my facial hair. but if i grow this out a little bit i look too much like an english country gent... naaah. a little this way and i feel like i'm from outer space. this and i feel like a viking... [ roars ] not my style, man. [ male announcer ] master your style... even trimming, a close shave and accurate edging... with the new gillette fusion proglide styler. every inch of hair needs to be on point. ♪ ♪

polar shifts will reverse the earth's gravitational pull and hurtle us all into space. which would render retirement planning unnecessary. but say the sun rises on december 22nd and you still need to retire. td ameritrade's investment consultants can help you build a plan that fits your life. we'll even throw in up to $600 when you open a new account or roll over an old 401(k). so who's in control now, mayans? beyond technically what they're supposed to think about in terms e facnts. the matt% theat the affordable ca% spainis provision of it is not arsopular provision.% but save necessarily a popular up% andjust want to make clear that i

i think they should uphol% i actually have a guess that and perhaps for the reasons % sion of the statute, t% he > thereustice might inclu% o ginglong with him and% e tt. opinion % but >> ruth, with your % ssion, we'll invite yo% something that conversation % hast opinion comes back.

ruth% to, columnist writer % class of '84. a member% p of lvery ceo whoseat's company% happeningof the mast% >> youament until this% courseone of the cnomics. sos to be a woman. coming up% we rome % the> spainf the most august % theyurnament in the world. % masters. but since opening in% push exclusive a% whentional golf

club % essentiallye members and % y wouyd not admit women 2008, even % theoint, i quote, at the p% crisisayonet. now th%y have lydally.blem.% % yúthey have always elyended an% his they the ceo is a woman. asked if virginia rometty% they% would be offered membership. .he presid% gave a mulligan. ta.e a liste%. >> all issues have. underminep have been ds. always ticaleliberations and that statement re% theyurate and remains my s% they've

ndent journalists, sue. a

>> president obama finally banning insider trained but first let's check in with governor jennifer granholm. >> we'll bring folks the latest on that, and buzz feed is unearthing mitt romney's art of the flip flo flop. all these clips that come up from his past. >> mitt romney looks like a weather vane in a hurricane he turns around so quickly. you should have a good time with that one. >> lots of good metaphors. >> more viewpoint coming up next. just refreshing to hear.

no other television show does that. we're keeping it real. i think its brilliant. >>current tv welcomes two new hosts. news and analysis with a washington perspective from an emmy winning insider. >>i know this stuff and i love it and i try to bring that to the show. >>and humor and politics with a west coast edge. >>politically direct means no bs, cutting through the clutter. >>bill press and stephanie miller, current's new morning news block. weekdays six to noon.

>> coolingcoming up, freedom of the internet again. today my view. the president signs the stock act. it prevents members of congress of using insider information were trading stocks. we're supposed to say thank you finally you're being honest. we love you once again. my view, forget about it. this is politics at normal. it will distract us. you know what's going on the same time they passed the stock act they passed the jobs act which is a favor to their political patrons, the bakers, the repeals, the few remedial measures we put in place to take corruption out of the stock market. congress is trying to deceive us. if they want us to trust them, here are a couple of things they can do. pass real finance campaign

reform. they call it the clean money act that pays small donations with public financing so big donors do not control members of congress. pass a disclose act so we finally know who is putting money in those super pacs. even if they can do it, it doesn't mean they can do it anonymously. make them tell us who they are. and pass the vocal rule. so that finally the banks aren't gambling with our money, which is what they're doing. they get the upside. we get the down side. if congress does those three things, then we can trust them. until then, no way. that's my view.

i just want to give her everything. [ whistles ] three words dad, they'll hook you up with a solid plan. wa-- wa-- wait a minute; bobby? bobby! what are you doing man? i'm speed dating! [ male announcer ] get investing advice for your family at e-trade. >> a dangerous new bill is

moving through congress that could alter the freedom of the internet. sound familiar? it should. if it seems like only weeks ago that the internet-threatening bills sopa and pipa were discarded because of protests both on the streets and online, that's because it was. yet that has not stopped congress from trying to ram through another vaguely acronym acronymed-bill to limit the freedom of the web. this one is called the cispa or the cyberintelligence sharing and protection act. while sopa and pipa were concerned with online piracy, cispa is concerned with your online communications. operating like an online patriot act, cispa would allow the federal government access to your online correspondence and information and it's advancing through the house. here is kendall berman. thank you for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> first, to those of us who have too many letters flying

around, i'm going with the acronyms when it comes to financial regulatory agency, what is going on here? what does this bill do? dumb it down for folks like me who don't get it. >> so there is a number of cybersecurity bills in congress, but the bill that we think is more concern something cispap this is congressman roger's bill in the house. it would create an exception to all law including all privacy law to allow companies like your internet service provider to share information not only with other companies, but also with the government, including the national security agency about your online activities. now they're doing this in the name of cybersecurity, but the way that the bill defines the type of information that could be shared with the government is potentially so broad that it would include not only just the malicious code that you think of when you think of a cyberthreat, but we're talking about the content of your emails,

potentially evidence of copyright violations or intellectual property issues. we think that this bill is extremely broad and very concerning. >> now i just want to zero in on something you said at the top of your answer. it would be up to the company to determine when to gather this information and turn it over either to the government or other companies without going to any judge without going to a prosecutor. the company itself would make the determination to override the privacy laws that exist. am i understanding that properly? >> that's exactly right. the bill puts it on the companies when to share what with the government. this is the type of information that beforehand the government would need a warrant or subpoena or some other court order in order to obtain. this is potentially problematic. whereas before companies were in a position when the government comes knocking for information about your online activities to say, you know, not without a

warrant, they know longer have the shield of the law to protect them. we're concerned with the position this puts companies in. >> you also said once that breach of security or privacy occurs, then there is almost no limitation on the purposes to which their aggregation of all your information is used. they could disseminate it out to anybody they wish. >> that's right. the bill says that the information that the government receives can be used not only for any cybersecurity purpose or national security purpose and it could be used for any purpose whatsoever including law enforcement so long as it's used for something like cybersecurity. this really has the potential of becoming a back door wiretap or surveillance program under another name. >> usually this would post civil liberty concerns. there are many who stand up and

protest and aggregate and pull together a powerful force in opposition, is that happening with this statute? where are the voices of opposition? >> well, i think that we're seeing an increasing attention in the information-sharing issues in the cybersecurity bills. the house does plan to introduce an information sharing bill on the floor. we understand at the end of april. we think that these issues are very, very serious, and we think there is increasing attention and public scrutiny that they deserve. the bill marked up congressman roger's bill marked up was done in secret. it was done the day after it was introduced, and it really creates serious concerns about what kind of scrutiny these serious issues have had. >> is there bipartisan support for this bill or is there a partisan divide, are there those standing up and saying slow this down.

who is standing up and saying let's slow this train down and take a harder look at whether or not the right balance is being struck in terms of privacy concerns? >> right, i mean there does seem to be bipartisan support for a number of cybersecurity bills and there is interest on the hill to do something about cybersecurity, this cycle, but we have concerns in the direction this is going, and the lack of attention the information sharing provisions have received up to this point. we think now is the time for people to take notice. >> in 15 seconds what would you change. >> let's keep the national security agency and intelligence agencies out of the cybersecurity debate right now. let's make sure that our information that should be--if it's going to be used at all, it should be for cybersecurity purpose and it should not be used for intelligence purposes. >> fell low at the center for