The president of the United States, Donald Trump, showed his dissatisfaction with the actions of Apple and announced what the company must do to continue having the support of the US Government.
As is tradition, the president of the United States went to Twitter to criticize the company.
We are helping Apple all of the time on TRADE and so many other issues, and yet they refuse to unlock phones used by killers, drug dealers and other violent criminal elements. They will have to step up to the plate and help our great Country, NOW! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.RELATED
– Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 14, 2020
"We are helping Apple all the time in commerce and many other issues, but they still refuse to unlock cell phones used by murderers, drug dealers and other violent criminal elements. They will have to step forward and help. to our great country, now! "says the president.
With this statement, Donald Trump referred to the cases when Apple resigned from unlocking the iPhone used by some criminals for the US authorities. The company explained its refusal with the importance of privacy, which would be compromised if the US government can unlock Apple devices.
Meanwhile, the tweet of the US president caused a wave of criticism from the Internet respondents.
Apple actually respects privacy and the law, unlike you, a career criminal.
– California Resists! (@CAResists) January 14, 2020
"Apple actually respects privacy and the law, unlike you, a career criminal," said user California Resists !.
Some Internet users did not openly oppose the demand of Donald Trump, but wondered about what would happen if the president himself was the subject of an investigation.
I wonder if Trump will sing the same song when apple is asked to unlock his phone. ..
– whamish2.0 (@ wisconsinvotes1) January 14, 2020
"I wonder if Trump will sing the same song when Apple is asked to unlock his cell phone," said user whamish2.0.
There were also more weighted and argued comments with the law.
I disagree here. Unless this person is convicted and there is indisputable proof then their privacy should be respected.
– Jason Smith (@ JasonSm75682050) January 14, 2020
"I disagree here. Unless a person is convicted or there is indisputable evidence, their privacy should be respected," said Jason Smith.