And Now a Federal Judge Pronounces the NSA's Telephony Dragnet Constitutional

Last week a federal district judge agreed with Larry Klayman that the NSA's suspicion-free bulk data collection on every US citizen was almost certainly unconstitutional. He enjoined the NSA from collecting the data under this program, but then immediately stayed his own ruling, so as to allow the case to proceed to appeal before enforcement began taking place.

Now a federal judge for the southern district of New York* rules that the same program is "lawful."

The judge to rule in the government's favor characterizes the government's policy of Let's Clean All The Data as merely a "counter-punch" against terrorism.

Pauley said that if the U.S. government had the phone data collection program before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, it could have helped provide critical clues. He said that so-called telephone metadata might have permitted the NSA to notify the FBI that one of the terrorists was calling a Yemeni safe house from inside the United States.

“The government learned from its mistake and adapted to confront a new enemy: a terror network capable of orchestrating attacks across the world,” Pauley wrote. “It launched a number of counter-measures, including a bulk telephony metadata collection program — a wide net that could find and isolate gossamer contacts among suspected terrorists in an ocean of seemingly disconnected data.”

Politico quotes more from the opinion. Having found the program lawful, the judge states that is up to the political branches to decide if the program should continue.

"This blunt tool only works because it collects everything," Pauley said. "The collection is broad, but the scope of counterterrorism investigations is unprecedented."

He said the mass collection of phone data "significantly increases the NSA's capability to detect the faintest patterns left behind by individuals affiliated with foreign terrorist organizations. Armed with all the metadata, NSA can draw connections it might otherwise never be able to find."

...

"The question for this court is whether the government's bulk telephony metadata program is lawful. This court finds it is. But the question of whether that program should be conducted is for the other two coordinate branches of government to decide," he said.

Part of the judge's findings is that this program is effective in stopping terrorism. That is far from clear. The government makes many vague assertions about the efficacy of the program, but offers very few verifiable examples of terrorist actions thwarted.

And one former NSA employee says the flood of data is nearly useless -- with so many terabytes of data collected from random citizens, the Agency is drowning in data but has no clear idea how to swim through it all.

William Binney, creator of some of the computer code used by the National Security Agency to snoop on Internet traffic around the world, delivered an unusual message here in September to an audience worried that the spy agency knows too much.

It knows so much, he said, that it can't understand what it has.

"What they are doing is making themselves dysfunctional by taking all this data," Mr. Binney said at a privacy conference here.

The agency is drowning in useless data, which harms its ability to conduct legitimate surveillance, claims Mr. Binney, who rose to the civilian equivalent of a general during more than 30 years at the NSA before retiring in 2001. Analysts are swamped with so much information that they can't do their jobs effectively, and the enormous stockpile is an irresistible temptation for misuse.

Drew has previously criticized the argument which the judge now endorses. Although section 215 of the Patriot Act, by its own terms, only permits the government to snoop in three categories of cases, it is argued that these classes are merely "exemplars," just some for-example fer-instances of whom the government may spy on. The specification of these three categories of permitted spying is not, the government argues, a limitation on its power, but merely a jumping off point for whichever powers it thinks would be useful.

As Drew says:

The criteria outlined in (b)(2) of Section 215 are the only cases in which the Congress has authorized the production of records (within the Patriot Act/FISA Court). In order to collect the records of someone the government has to be able to show that they fit into one of those three categories. This isn’t optional. It isn’t an invitation to find ever wider definitions that would eventually ensnare EVERY America who uses a cellphone. It’s the law. Full stop. End of story

To say they are nothing more than the noodlings of the Congress or a jumping off point for an active and imaginative executive branch implies a level of possible lawlessness that is breathtaking. Congress gave a specific grant of authority to the executive here; that they didn’t rule all other possible grants out doesn’t mean the executive can simply claim those other situations are OK too. If that were the case, why bother picking 3? Or any? Congress isn’t a consulting firm with expertise in investigative lines the Department of Justice might not have thought of. It’s a lawmaking body that either says you can or can’t do certain things.

The full decision is here, which is 53 pages long, but many pages of that are about non-essential procedural questions (such as standing) that a reader may skip to get to the heart of the ruling. Drew says it's doable (but I haven't read it yet myself).

Gabe sends this helpful comparison between the holdings of Judges Leon and Pauley. For example:

On Smith v. Maryland, a 1979 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that allowed police to collect phone records from a suspect in a robbery case without a warrant:

Judge Leon: “In Smith, the Court considered a one-time, targeted request for data regarding an individual suspect in a criminal investigation, which in no way resembles the daily, all-encompassing, indiscriminate dump of phone metadata that the NSA now receives as part of its Bulk Telephony Metadata Program. It’s one thing to say that people expect phone companies to occasionally provide information to law enforcement; it is quite another to suggest that our citizens expect all phone companies to operate what is effectively a joint intelligence-gathering operation with the government.”

Judge Pauley: “Clear precedent applies because Smith held that a subscriber has no legitimate expectation of privacy in telephony metadata created by third parties. Inferior courts are bound by that precedent. … Telephones have far more versatility now than when Smith was decided, but this case only concerns their use as telephones. The fact that there are more calls placed does not undermine the Supreme Court’s finding that a person has no subjective expectation of privacy in telephony metadata.”


* Corrected. I stated that Pauley was a DC Circuit Court judge. He isn't. Thanks to Drew and Gabe for correcting me.


Posted by: Ace at 03:12 PM



Comments

1 But Patriot Act! Bush! evul conservatiiiiiiiiiiives!!!!!!!

Posted by: Barb the Evil Genius at December 27, 2013 03:16 PM (WD0KF)

2 And one former NSA employee says the flood of data is nearly useless -- with so many terabytes of data collected from random citizens, the Agency is drowning in data but has no clear idea how to swim through it all.

So useless that they can spy on significant others and joke about having programs to do so?

Yah, pull the other one, you fucking nazi fucks.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at December 27, 2013 03:16 PM (dwArK)

3 Pauley said that if the U.S. government had the phone data collection program before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, it could have helped provide critical clues.


***

Uhhhh... I hate to break it to the dude but the one thing that was missing prior to 9/11 was not "clues"

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 27, 2013 03:16 PM (DmNpO)

4 by golly and that's the court Obmaessiah had Pedo Bear of the Senate break 2 centuries of rules to stack is it not?

Posted by: sven10077 at December 27, 2013 03:17 PM (9jfyN)

5 If you like your privacy…..fuck you.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 27, 2013 03:17 PM (JpFMR)

6 Yeah, It's not.

And it's a Clinton appointee, so we ALL know it's not about the Constitution, but the PARTY LINE.

Posted by: © Sponge at December 27, 2013 03:18 PM (xmcEQ)

7
Remember all the "OUTRAGE - ELEVENTY!!!!!" back when we were only listening to overseas calls placed by known bad actors????

Good times.

Posted by: fixerupper at December 27, 2013 03:19 PM (nELVU)

8 They want to look at our Public Library Records!?

/

Posted by: garrett at December 27, 2013 03:20 PM (nn4FE)

9 If you like your privacy…..fuck you.

***

This sums it up nicely.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 27, 2013 03:20 PM (DmNpO)

10 This sums it up nicely.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 27, 2013 03:20 PM (DmNpO)



I sometimes have a way with words.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 27, 2013 03:23 PM (JpFMR)

11
I saw "Telephony Dragnet" open for "Loverboy" at the Uni-Dome in Cedar Falls Iowa ..... 1981 or 82. I dont remember which.

Posted by: fixerupper at December 27, 2013 03:23 PM (nELVU)

12 Judge Pauley's extensive collection of child pornography obviously played no role in the ruling.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at December 27, 2013 03:23 PM (oFCZn)

13 Whew. They're only checking on terrorists.
Wait. Who all was it they said are likely terrorists?
Veterans
Tea Party folks
Pro Lifers
I think a few other catahories I fit too.

Posted by: teej at December 27, 2013 03:24 PM (/tk/V)

14 Yeah I'm going out on a limb here and predicting that in a year or two we'll find out the data is being used against political groups that rhyme with pee hearty.

But I'm paranoid and nothing like this has ever happened before, right?

Posted by: Xavier at December 27, 2013 03:24 PM (JqAxf)

15
So 2 federal judges with opposite decisions means probably SCOTUS which in turn means that The Dread Butt Pirate John Roberts will once again get to call it a tax.

No I do not believe he will go against the NSA.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at December 27, 2013 03:24 PM (MaP11)

16 "Part of the judge's findings is that this program is effective in
stopping terrorism."

Is there a fucking asterisk next to the fourth amendment that makes an exception for warrant-less searches that are effective in stopping terrorism? Is this an emanation of a penumbra? Where the fuck do they come up with this garbage?

Posted by: ol_dirty_/b/tard at December 27, 2013 03:25 PM (KSjsb)

17 He's not on the DC Circuit. Southern District of New York, which is in the 2d Circuit. Not a big deal, but might want to correct.

Posted by: Craig Pirrong at December 27, 2013 03:26 PM (ivwYi)

18
Judge William Pauley was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on October 21, 1998 on a Senate voice vote



Glad to do our part in the great pageant of American liberty.

Posted by: The Senate Republicans - Vote for Us in 2014!

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2013 03:26 PM (kdS6q)

19 YOU CAN'T KILL TERROR

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Itc54N6gGkE

Posted by: GWAR at December 27, 2013 03:27 PM (nn4FE)

20
"Part of the judge's findings is that this program is effective in

stopping terrorism."

----

Know what other program would be effective in stopping terrorism?????

Racial fucking Profiling.

Good luck getting that program off the ground and running.

Posted by: fixerupper at December 27, 2013 03:28 PM (nELVU)

21 "This blunt tool only works because it collects everything," Pauley said. "The collection is broad, but the scope of counterterrorism investigations is unprecedented."
He said the mass collection of phone data "significantly increases the NSA's capability to detect the faintest patterns left behind by individuals affiliated with foreign terrorist organizations. Armed with all the metadata, NSA can draw connections it might otherwise never be able to find."



this Judge is wrong, just wrong.

I don't care what degrees he has, I don't care how much he's read or who or how many say he's a great Judge, don't care how much experience he has, don't care how many legal papers he's written, he's wrong.

I even know why he is wrong, but would embarrass myself trying to express it in legal terms.

the things he mentions as being reasons for the activity being legal don't matter, the Bill of Rights doesn't depend on circumstance, it is universal, but this Judge is try to say that because od circumstance parts of the Bill of Rights are void...

they aren't.

Posted by: Shoey at December 27, 2013 03:28 PM (Y7jCH)

22 OMG, they actually found judge to write and opinion that was exactly what was needed! What are the odds?

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, shhh, be a little quieter, some of us are trying to sleep. at December 27, 2013 03:28 PM (kXoT0)

23 have they 'caught' anyone with all this data?

Maybe the guy in Colorado or that guy in Idaho a few years ago

Posted by: Ken, not the doll at December 27, 2013 03:28 PM (d6+u5)

24 This administration is making me paranoid. I suspect this data collection method does not help spot terrorists before they strike. Instead, when the government has targeted a citizen they feel needs to be harassed, they can use the data to come up with an excuse to harass him/her.

Posted by: Mindy aka Cupcake at December 27, 2013 03:28 PM (GRLuN)

25 So the justice dept found a judge who'd support them.

Whoda thunk?

Judge shopping + Christmas = Commie win.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 03:28 PM (x3YFz)

26
Ahhh, the days after 9/11 when the left screamed, yelled, and downright hissy-fitted that we were all going to lose our privacy because of Bush and the Patriot Act. Those same libs are totally silent now that dear leader has gone way past the intent of the act to the point where we do indeed have no privacy. Hypocritical sombitches.

Posted by: Havedash at December 27, 2013 03:28 PM (G1XMn)

27
*Looks in, runs*

Posted by: Meremortal, hiding in the bushes at December 27, 2013 03:28 PM (1Y+hH)

28 "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. And we have many miles to go before we sleep."

Posted by: Voice no a phone, whilst Charles Bronson listens . . . at December 27, 2013 03:30 PM (TM1p8)

29 Bulk data collection of every US Citizen in the effort to prevent terrorist acts is an admission that your federal government thinks YOU ARE A TERRORIST. EVERY ONE of you.

Posted by: © Sponge at December 27, 2013 03:30 PM (xmcEQ)

30 Part of the judge's findings is that this program is effective in stopping terrorism.

One day people who went to a prestigious law school and are well-connected will make such sweeping declarations on all facets of our lives.

That day is today.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 27, 2013 03:30 PM (nFI1a)

31 Yeah I'm going out on a limb here and predicting
that in a year or two we'll find out the data is being used against
political groups that rhyme with pee hearty.



But I'm paranoid and nothing like this has ever happened before, right?

Posted by: Xavier at December 27, 2013 03:24 PM (JqAxf)

----
Remember the day after Romney lost and the Dem operatives were on all the talking head shows bragging that they knew who their voters were, what their hot buttons were, where they lived, and how best to get them to the polls??
Ever wonder how they got all that data.??

Posted by: fixerupper at December 27, 2013 03:30 PM (nELVU)

32 What I gather from this is that the judge in Smith vs Maryland should have been hanged. Apparently, it only takes one bad precedent issued by one dumb fuck and then anything goes.

BTW, whether it would be effective to spy on everyone is irrelevant. Any judge who mentions effectiveness one way or the other should be removed from office because they are straying from what their job entails in a fundamental manner.

Oh, and I feel it also necessary to mention in any thread regarding the law that it should be pointed out that Justice Roberts is a spineless traitor.

Posted by: Thatch at December 27, 2013 03:30 PM (qYvEa)

33 23
have they 'caught' anyone with all this data?



Maybe the guy in Colorado or that guy in Idaho a few years ago

Posted by: Ken, not the doll at December 27, 2013 03:28 PM (d6+u5)


I think their last "caught" was a 12-year old cancer patient in a wheel chair headed to his Make A Wish event.

Go DHS! Go TSA!

You guys are heroes!

(I misspelled asshole, again.)

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 03:31 PM (x3YFz)

34
Even if ruled unconstitutional, howcould it be enforced?

Posted by: bopiddy at December 27, 2013 03:31 PM (gnekP)

35 28 Voice no a phone, whilst Charles Bronson listens . . . at December 27, 2013 03:30 PM (TM1p

You forced my hand...

http://youtu.be/7TTN8syo3ko

Telefon 1977

Posted by: sven10077 at December 27, 2013 03:31 PM (9jfyN)

36 Telephones have far more versatility now than when Smith was decided, but this case only concerns their use as telephones.

/facepalm

A 1979 telephone bears NO resemblance to a 2013 telephone.

When judges get technological, that way disaster lies.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here)-also drooling imbecile incapable of doing algebra or something at December 27, 2013 03:31 PM (659DL)

37 YOU CAN'T KILL TERROR

***

Well, I'm not watching that Gwar vid but the sentiment has merit. Terrorism is a shapeshifter. It can come in small, large, or x-large size. It can happen in capital city, a metropolis, or a burg. It can be carried out by one man or by many. It can be coordinated or not.

They don't even know WTF they are looking for and, as we've already witnessed, even when the clues are there, those in charge are so ckufing politically correct that they wouldn't dare do anything about it.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 27, 2013 03:31 PM (DmNpO)

38 Oh, almost forgot….

*waves at NSA guy monitoring the site*

Have a Happy New Year and go fuck yourself sir!

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 27, 2013 03:31 PM (JpFMR)

39
"Pauley said that if the U.S. government had the phone data collection program
before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, it could have helped provide
critical clues. He said that so-called telephone metadata might have permitted
the NSA to notify the FBI that one of the terrorists was calling a Yemeni safe
house from inside the United States."

________________________________________________________
When did "The end justifies the means" become a legal standard?

Posted by: Habib the Tolerant at December 27, 2013 03:31 PM (QKYRm)

40
"This blunt tool only works because it collects everything," Pauley said.






Doesn't that statement prove Clapper outright lied to congress when he testified that the NSA didn't collect data on citizens unless it was unintentional.

Posted by: Havedash at December 27, 2013 03:31 PM (G1XMn)

41 What Judge Smails said in his opinion is what I detest. Basing his opinion on what can never be proved and in fact , has been proven to be just the opposite. Didn't we have a special investigative report that identified the walls between agencies as the main cause of our failure to prevent 9/11?
How would having more information overload overcome that? Once again a judge already having a conclusion of what he wantsand constructing his opinion to try and fit that conclusion.

Posted by: polynikes at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (m2CN7)

42 Qoute: He said that so-called telephone metadata might have permitted the NSA to notify the FBI that one of the terrorists was calling a Yemeni safe house from inside the United States.

IIRC, one of the major findings of the 9/11 commission was that there was a plethora of intel inside the federal bureaucracy, however, BS turf wars between agencies prevented sharing useful intel. It's been a while and I've drank a lot of scotch in the past 12 years.

Posted by: 2549 at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (S/KDm)

43 "The question for this court is whether the government's bulk telephony metadata program is lawful. This court finds it is. But the question of whether that program should be conducted is for the other two coordinate branches of government to decide," he said.


I think that Smith is, at best, no longer apposite given the nature and extent of the information collected, not to mention the presumptions of privacy for such data as indicated by other Congressional action, such as the creation of privacy policies for the third parties holding such information. That being said, I agree that legislative action is far preferable to judiciary or executive action.


Then Drew has to go and point out that when Congress does act, the judiciary and executive go lol just kiding wut and ignore those restrictions.


Soooooo. Anyone want to help me eat a cheesecake?

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (VtjlW)

44 Judge William Pauley was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on October 21, 1998 on a Senate voice vote

We preserved comity. It was worth it.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (nFI1a)

45 So useless that they can spy on significant others and joke about having programs to do so?

No, it's useless as the datamining tool they claim it is. They're looking for tiny bits of information as patterns that could indicate a national actor or a malefactor. The problems are many, including the fact that the clues to one state-sponsored group may need analysis over months of surveillance. If you have months of THE ENTIRE WORLD under surveillance, even storing that data, much less finding it is problematic.

For the purpose of monitoring specific people, like Supreme Court Justices, or Republican Senators, that's not hard at all. In fact, they've probably got so much data on each of those, they could fill a server farm in Utah.

Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (4QSOR)

46 'The War Against Terror, Sublime'.

Posted by: GWAR Lyrics at December 27, 2013 03:33 PM (nn4FE)

47 41
What Judge Smails said in his opinion is what I detest. Basing his
opinion on what can never be proved and in fact , has been proven to be
just the opposite. Didn't we have a special investigative report that
identified the walls between agencies as the main cause of our failure
to prevent 9/11?

How would having more information overload overcome that? Once again
a judge already having a conclusion of what he wantsand constructing
his opinion to try and fit that conclusion.

Posted by: polynikes at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (m2CN7)


He wrote the decision he was bought and paid to write.

you know that, yes?

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 03:33 PM (x3YFz)

48
There aren't enough analysts to wade through all of the info being collected, so its not for prevention. Its to backtrack through after the attack already happened and catch the rest of the tangos. But the fiction the .gov is putting out about how it will prevent the attack is downright offensive.

When I worked at "The Building" at Ft Meade we analysts were told that if we got caught spying on US citizens our balls would be hanging from the prosecutors rearview mirror and our asses would be in Leavenworth. What changed?

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my Hate cannot be found) at December 27, 2013 03:33 PM (u1jJP)

49
On Drew's point re: "exemplars" don't the rules of statutory construction bar the judge's line of reasoning ? Seems to me there's a problem with not taking the statute as plainly stated as well as rendering the "exemplars" as surplusage. Why bother stating "examples" if McCarthy's right about "relevancy" being the actual standard ? I haven't seen many statutes that state "examples" of their application. That's something for admin agencies' policy and procedure manuals, not the actual laws.


Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at December 27, 2013 03:33 PM (il1Hy)

50 Remember the day after Romney lost and the Dem
operatives were on all the talking head shows bragging that they knew
who their voters were, what their hot buttons were, where they lived,
and how best to get them to the polls??
Ever wonder how they got all that data.??


Posted by: fixerupper at December 27, 2013 03:30 PM



Dionne Warwick and the Psychic Friends Network?

Posted by: huerfano at December 27, 2013 03:34 PM (bAGA/)

51 When did "The end justifies the means" become a legal standard?

Also note the whole justification is conjecture.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here)-also drooling imbecile incapable of doing algebra or something at December 27, 2013 03:34 PM (659DL)

52 Oh, and I feel it also necessary to mention in any thread regarding the law that it should be pointed out that Justice Roberts is a spineless traitor.


Posted by: Thatch at December 27, 2013 03:30 PM (qYvEa)


I forgot that part, thanks for the reminder

Posted by: Shoey at December 27, 2013 03:35 PM (Y7jCH)

53 Posted by: 2549 at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (S/KDm)

Beat you by mere seconds.

Posted by: polynikes at December 27, 2013 03:35 PM (m2CN7)

54
Pauley said that if the U.S. government had the phone data collection program
before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, it could have helped provide
critical clues.



William Pauley - JD in Alternate History Law

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2013 03:36 PM (kdS6q)

55 When I worked at "The Building" at Ft Meade we
analysts were told that if we got caught spying on US citizens our balls
would be hanging from the prosecutors rearview mirror and our asses
would be in Leavenworth. What changed?

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my Hate cannot be found) at December 27, 2013 03:33 PM (u1jJP)

----**waves at Hi Desert
Im the new President and Im here to do some transformin fundamentally.

Posted by: Barack Obama at December 27, 2013 03:36 PM (nELVU)

56 He wrote the decision he was bought and paid to write.

It's a tax!

Posted by: John Roberts at December 27, 2013 03:36 PM (nFI1a)

57 No, it's useless as the datamining tool they claim
it is. They're looking for tiny bits of information as patterns that
could indicate a national actor or a malefactor. The problems are many,
including the fact that the clues to one state-sponsored group may need
analysis over months of surveillance. If you have months of THE ENTIRE
WORLD under surveillance, even storing that data, much less finding it
is problematic.



For the purpose of monitoring specific people, like Supreme Court
Justices, or Republican Senators, that's not hard at all. In fact,
they've probably got so much data on each of those, they could fill a
server farm in Utah.

Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (4QSOR)


Here's the kicker:

Our enemies aren't stupid. Shit, I've probably pushed a few of them through my physics classes over the years.

Ya think they're going to just use cell phones like a teenage girl to communicate? Really?

I've seen stupid, and the NSA is stupid.

Metadata my ass. Metafail.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 03:36 PM (x3YFz)

58
IIRC, one of the major findings of the 9/11 commission was that there was a plethora of intel inside the federal bureaucracy, however, BS turf wars between agencies prevented sharing useful intel.

It wasn't turf wars. It was Jamie Gorelick's Wall of Separation. She put that up so her scumbag piece of shit boss could sell this country to the red chinese.

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at December 27, 2013 03:36 PM (V3kRK)

59 I think that judge Leon should enjoin (?) his decision and let the fucking sparks fly. This shit has got to stop

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 27, 2013 03:36 PM (HVff2)

60 -_- <------My shocked face.

Posted by: Codec717 at December 27, 2013 03:37 PM (oMBj/)

61 Soooooo. Anyone want to help me eat a cheesecake?

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (VtjlW)



*raises hand*

We going with strawberry sauce or chocolate?

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 27, 2013 03:37 PM (JpFMR)

62 53:

Drink!

Posted by: 2549 at December 27, 2013 03:37 PM (S/KDm)

63 Soooooo. Anyone want to help me eat a cheesecake?


Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (VtjlW)


Sure. Send some through the USB port.

BTW, for Christmas my parents handed out Kinder Surprises (it's white and milk chocolate shaped like an egg with a small toy inside). One of my nephews got a velociraptor. I immediately thought of you.

Posted by: Vendette at December 27, 2013 03:37 PM (Y6+7w)

64 Try going through the shit from people with arab surnames first.

Posted by: Bean Pies, ey? at December 27, 2013 03:38 PM (Qev5V)

65 We going with strawberry sauce or chocolate?
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 27, 2013 03:37 PM (JpFMR)

Don't ruin a perfectly good cheesecake.

Posted by: polynikes at December 27, 2013 03:38 PM (m2CN7)

66 When did "The end justifies the means" become a legal standard?
Posted by: Habib the Tolerant at December 27, 2013 03:31 PM (QKYRm)


----------------------------------------------


For sure, in January 2009. Perhaps as early as 2007.

Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 03:38 PM (fv6BP)

67
Remember the day after Romney lost and the Dem operatives were on all the talking head shows bragging that they knew who their voters were, what their hot buttons were, where they lived, and how best to get them to the polls??

That and Nate Silver's bullshit blog were the cover story for the massive vote fraud the motherfuckers pulled at the polls.

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at December 27, 2013 03:38 PM (V3kRK)

68 Perhaps searches of every home would be helpful in fighting terrorism, as well.

Posted by: --- at December 27, 2013 03:38 PM (MMC8r)

69 NSA found some kiddie porn on the good judge's laptop.
Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Posted by: superflex at December 27, 2013 03:38 PM (4a/4i)

70 Bought myself .03 bitcoins for Christmas. I'm going to be a hundredaire in 3 years suckers! And the gov can suck it.

Posted by: UWP at December 27, 2013 03:40 PM (2hQRj)

71 68
Perhaps searches of every home would be helpful in fighting terrorism, as well.

Posted by: --- at December 27, 2013 03:38 PM (MMC8r)


right?

fuck the 4th!

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 03:40 PM (x3YFz)

72
I supported the PA with the understanding that it could cross the line into domestic surveillance only where there was a contact with a foreign target for whom probable cause existed. And with the understanding that FISA and the oversight committees would actually do their jobs.

Bulk collection of data so they can go through it later ? Hell no, not even close.

Oops. Shame on me.

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at December 27, 2013 03:40 PM (il1Hy)

73
Soooooo. Anyone want to help me eat a cheesecake?
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (VtjlW)

Blueberry topping? Sure!

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 27, 2013 03:40 PM (HVff2)

74
Ahh even with scandal we see the old familiar template being emoyed.

1. The obama govt isn't spying on anyone.

2. Even if obama is spying on Americans, it's for national security.

3. Bush did it, too.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 03:41 PM (zvr0X)

75 64 Try going through the shit from people with arab surnames first.


We go for keywords like 'Patriot.'

Posted by: The IRS at December 27, 2013 03:41 PM (nFI1a)

76 Is there a fucking asterisk next to the fourth amendment that makes an
exception for warrant-less searches that are effective in stopping
terrorism? Is this an emanation of a penumbra? Where the fuck do they
come up with this garbage?


Read the Fourth Amendment. It doesn't provide for absolute prohibition against search and seizure without a warrant- only against "unreasonable" search and seizure. "Unreasonable" is a subjective term.

As such, there is always going to be a degree of subjectivity involved in determining what is constitutional and what is not.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 27, 2013 03:41 PM (SY2Kh)

77 Perhaps searches of every home would be helpful in fighting terrorism, as well.
Posted by: --- at December 27, 2013 03:38 PM (MMC8r)


----------------------------------------


Never believe that this regime is not thinking about it.

Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 03:42 PM (fv6BP)

78 and people laugh when I tell them I don't FB, don't twat/twit, don't have a cell phone.

Who's laughin' now, fuckers?

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 03:42 PM (x3YFz)

79 Bulk collection of data so they can go through it later ? Hell no, not even close.

Oops. Shame on me.


One of the morons or cobs quipped that they barely trusted Dubya with this stuff. The current crop? No way.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here)-also drooling imbecile incapable of doing algebra or something at December 27, 2013 03:42 PM (659DL)

80 Normally I say:
"I am not a lawyer, so I'll let the lawyers explain what this means."

But it seems to me we're getting farther and farther away from the law as it was into a realm of pure emotivisim.

That I can comment on. It's starting to look like these decisions are in fact no longer based upon the law itself, but rather if the particular jurist feels the program is making them any safer.

And frankly, that's a bad thing. All future laws will not, in fact, be upheld or struck down based on legal precedent, but rather what the jurists of the moment feel is optimal.

Brave new world folks, brave new fucking world.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at December 27, 2013 03:42 PM (GaqMa)

81 I guess I missed the part in the constitution that states if we are attacked by terrorists, the constitution is null and void.
Fuck you Judge Pauley.
There will be a lamp post and hemp rope with your name upon it.

Posted by: superflex at December 27, 2013 03:42 PM (4a/4i)

82 Welcome to East Germany pal.... yippa ki-yay!

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 27, 2013 03:43 PM (04hTF)

83 All that metadata, gosh we just don't know what to do with it all....

So, we target according to political necessity.

It keeps your friends on task, and your enemies quiet.
Combine that with a weaponized IRS and things always seem to go your way.

Constitution is whatever we say, whadda YOU gonna do about it?

Posted by: Normal man, tempted at December 27, 2013 03:43 PM (agLwc)

84 *raises hand*

We going with strawberry sauce or chocolate?
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 27, 2013 03:37 PM (JpFMR)



Yes.

Oh, hey, Bannion pointed out that we also need him along when camping because of his purty mouth. *goes back to lying in wait for his ankles* Mwaha. Mwahahahaha.


Vendette, I am so jealous of both the Kinder and the velociraptor.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 03:44 PM (VtjlW)

85 Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at December 27, 2013 03:33 PM (il1Hy)

The statute itself doesn't refer to those 3 cases as "examples'. That's McCarthy's spin on them.

He takes 3 very specific grants of authority and by his own hand reduces them to mere "examples".

When did we delegate the power to do that to Andrew McCarthy?

Posted by: DrewM. at December 27, 2013 03:44 PM (r5Qcm)

86 NSA found some kiddie porn on the good judge's laptop. Surprise, surprise, surprise.
Posted by: superflex at December 27, 2013 03:38 PM (4a/4i)


-------------------------------------------


You know, I used to laugh at comments like that. It's not so funny anymore. What better way to control people than to know absolutely everything they think and do.

Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 03:45 PM (fv6BP)

87
In related news:

The White House has announced a new terror fighting initiative. While details are at this point somewhat fuzzy, the new initiative would require housing and quartering NSA operatives in the homes and businesses of most American citizens.

When asked about the initiative, Jay Carney responded "Well, the Third Amendment was the only pin left to knock over".

Posted by: fixerupper at December 27, 2013 03:45 PM (nELVU)

88 and people laugh when I tell them I don't FB, don't twat/twit, don't have a cell phone.

Who's laughin' now, fuckers?
Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 03:42 PM (x3YFz)



Us.

Posted by: License plate readers, your ISP and surveillance cameras on the outsides of buildings at December 27, 2013 03:45 PM (VtjlW)

89

IIRC, one of the major findings of the 9/11 commission was that there was a plethora of intel inside the federal bureaucracy, however, BS turf wars between agencies prevented sharing useful intel. It's been a while and I've drank a lot of scotch in the past 12 years.

Posted by: 2549 at December 27, 2013 03:32 PM (S/KDm)

Nope. Nailed it.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 27, 2013 03:46 PM (4R4zF)

90 Who's laughin' now, fuckers?
Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 03:42 PM (x3YFz)


us?

Posted by: The NSA at December 27, 2013 03:46 PM (d6+u5)

91
Perhaps searches of every home would be helpful in fighting terrorism, as well.
***
That's this Court's standard in a nutshell. I'm usually the guy bitching when the Federal judiciary tries to usurp the other branches but it's clear that the other branches are putting the Bill of Rights to the torch on this - based on their own arguments (trust us, because it works, etc), not just based on trusting Snowden/Greenwald, etc...

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at December 27, 2013 03:46 PM (il1Hy)

92 And frankly, that's a bad thing. All future laws will not, in fact, be upheld or struck down based on legal precedent, but rather what the jurists of the moment feel is optimal.

The Founding Fathers were hopelessly naive when they thought judges could be trusted to be impartial.

There were no safeguards against this system. The judiciary is a super-legislature.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 27, 2013 03:47 PM (nFI1a)

93 And how can we forget Jamie Gorlick's wall that prevented the FBI and CIA trading data helped lead to 9/11.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 27, 2013 03:47 PM (04hTF)

94 Our enemies aren't stupid. Shit, I've probably pushed a few of them through my physics classes over the years.

Ya think they're going to just use cell phones like a teenage girl to communicate? Really?


Very accurate. I've seen at least two methods of communication exposed, that real terrorists have been using, that have nothing whatever to do with phones.

First is two people sharing the same public email information. The first puts a communique in draft, the second logs in and reads that information. No email is actually sent.

The second is two people getting onto a popular game server, and chatting in game.

Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 03:47 PM (4QSOR)

95 phone number to the HONORABLE Judge's chambers : 212 805 6387

Posted by: superflex at December 27, 2013 03:47 PM (4a/4i)

96 So every citizen is to have a lifetime dossier with realtime updating ready to go with a few keyword searches and, ultimately, open access to them by politicians and bureaucrats. Government: You're all guilty. Now let me just compile the needed data.

What could go wrong?

Potemkin Democracy

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 27, 2013 03:49 PM (eHIJJ)

97 The second is two people getting onto a popular game server, and chatting in game.

Which is why the NSA is spying on World of Warcraft.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 27, 2013 03:49 PM (nFI1a)

98 bonhomme, the leaving draft messages in an email account. Poor Petraeus.

The second is far more difficult to sort through. Got 10,000 gamers jamming various channels all screaming. In real time. Good luck. Even a log file for every hour is going to be huge.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 27, 2013 03:49 PM (04hTF)

99
...don't have a cell phone. Who's laughin' now, fuckers?
Posted by: tangonine




Well, must admit we're having a bit of a giggle at your expense.

Posted by: The Rescue Workers Finding Your Body in a Snow Bank Sometime in March


Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2013 03:50 PM (kdS6q)

100 Us.

Posted by: License plate readers, your ISP and surveillance cameras on
the outsides of buildings at December 27, 2013 03:45 PM (VtjlW)

Keep thinking that.

it's the best part.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 03:50 PM (x3YFz)

101 The judge's reasoning seems to be "since they are collecting on everyone, its reasonable." So its okay to toss the Constitution when the violation of rights is wholesale and not specifically targeted. Reasonably violating everyone's rights. What a concept.

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my Hate cannot be found) at December 27, 2013 03:50 PM (u1jJP)

102 It's a tax

Posted by: The Supremes at December 27, 2013 03:50 PM (S5LPT)

103 Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 27, 2013 03:47 PM (nFI1a)

One of the things that eternally perplexes my mentors is that my true nature is a bit "paternalistic."

And yet I'm constantly arguing that we need more individual control and less government control, which confuses them.

It's simple though I tell them "I don't trust myself not to become a totalitarian given the opportunity, I sure as hell don't trust anyone else in that area either. Ergo, as much freedom as possible, limit the number of people who can be totalitarians."

That was the idea this country was built upon. we lost that sometime ago.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at December 27, 2013 03:50 PM (GaqMa)

104 Since when is efficacy an argument for constitutionally premissible? Does this mean we can round up and deport all the Liberals now?

Posted by: Sam In VA at December 27, 2013 03:51 PM (Q52VH)

105 This decision comes from a judge in New York, not DC. It's the ACLU suit.

Leon, despite being a Bush appointee, went outside his judicial authority simply because he didn't like the precedent. Updated technology doesn't cancel a Supreme Court decision. This was an activist decision that should be overturned.

"Meta-data" isn't protected, period. Ever hear the cops on Law Order or some other show say, "Well, let's dump the LUDs and see"? That's Line User Detail, essentially "meta-data," for which they do not need a warrant.

The constitutionality of it shouldn't even be controversial. Smith controls.

Whether collecting the data is something NSA should be doing or is a productive thing to do is a political question, which should not be decided in court, but in Congress and at the ballot box.

Posted by: Adjoran at December 27, 2013 03:51 PM (473jB)

106 Thanks judge, we're all Sandra Fluke'd now.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 27, 2013 03:51 PM (04hTF)

107 “The government learned from its mistake and adapted to confront a new enemy: a terror network capable of orchestrating attacks across the world,” Pauley wrote. “It launched a number of counter-measures, including a bulk telephony metadata collection program — a wide net that could find and isolate gossamer contacts among suspected terrorists in an ocean of seemingly disconnected data.”

And bonus,it can also find those pesky Tea Partyand Christian terrorists.

Posted by: steevy at December 27, 2013 03:52 PM (zqvg6)

108 They want to look at our Public Library Records!?

What's a public library?

Posted by: Somebody who lives in the 21st century at December 27, 2013 03:52 PM (xSegX)

109 If the NSA were collecting information to stop terrorists, that would be one thing...and perhaps they have stopped some plots, though usually when that happens Obama does a happy dance for the press extolling his triumph. So I'm dubious.

I suspect the NSA is collecting information primarily to use against domestic "enemies" like the Tea Party. I also suspect that Moslems are expressly excluded from collection. Both those are remain just suppositions, but I would not put anything past the Democrats.


Posted by: Null at December 27, 2013 03:52 PM (DuH+r)

110 The judge's reasoning seems to be "since they are collecting on everyone, its reasonable." So its okay to toss the Constitution when the violation of rights is wholesale and not specifically targeted. Reasonably violating everyone's rights. What a concept.
Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my Hate cannot be found) at December 27, 2013 03:50 PM (u1jJP)


It's the same with the no standing for an individual argument. If everyone has standing, no one does. Ummmm, I was unaware that The Incredibles is binding precedent and, if so, I think the judiciary learned the wrong lesson from it.


I tell people about the capes and I tell them. . . .

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 03:53 PM (VtjlW)

111 Yeh know, if we, as a culture and a society, started enforcing adherence to oaths taken to occupy an office with, up to, and including death as punishments, we'd get a whole lot less of this idiot leftardicness from the bench.

Posted by: Grimmy at December 27, 2013 03:53 PM (uUsh9)

112 99

...don't have a cell phone. Who's laughin' now, fuckers?
Posted by: tangonine




Well, must admit we're having a bit of a giggle at your expense.

Posted by: The Rescue Workers Finding Your Body in a Snow Bank Sometime in March




Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2013 03:50 PM (kdS6q)


Can just recall the last time I was ass deep in a snowbank. I think it was '97. Didn't have a cell phone. I manned up and walked back to the ranch house.

Side note: I'm EMT-trained with a full trauma kit in the back so... I can self treat as much as possible.

But your derision is noted.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 03:53 PM (x3YFz)

113 Fuckity fuck fuck. Just got home from Christmas travels to find house at 49 degrees. Sump pump failed, basement flooded, oil burner doused. About 18 inches. Waiting on call backs from The Hartford and Servpro. Of course I won't hear from an actual adjustor until Monday, so I might end up paying for it all myself.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 27, 2013 03:53 PM (ZshNr)

114 If I trusted the government to use the data to find terrorists,and only terrorists,this program would not bother me.

Posted by: steevy at December 27, 2013 03:54 PM (zqvg6)

115
When did we delegate the power to do that to Andrew McCarthy?
Indeed. McCarthy has shown himself to be completely untrustworthy on security state issues. The argument you cited is the final nail for me - I'm done listening to him. Where he's willing to argue that dishonestly, I don't care to spend the time doing extra research to determine if he's lying on every other point he makes.

Between fake fi-cons and security state "patriots" I'm getting pretty damned sick of a lot of people allegedly on my side of the fence.

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at December 27, 2013 03:54 PM (il1Hy)

116 Bevel Lemelisk: "There were no safeguards against this system. The judiciary is a super-legislature."

Yep. It seems flippant but the institution seems not to understand its defined role. It's not its duty to pick out the nuggets of a law and throw the dirt back; its duty is to throw the whole thing back to the Legislature and force it to send up just the nuggets. You know, legislate.

Alas, it's yet another power grab by people who should never have power in the first place.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 27, 2013 03:55 PM (eHIJJ)

117

I'm more interested in seeing how obama and the Democrats are gonna use UE benefits in January to beat the R's.

Awful peculiar they let the benefits expire without much of a stink. It makes me think they're cooking up something big that will be attached to the debt ceiling increase.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 03:55 PM (zvr0X)

118
They want to look at our Public Library Records!?



Boy, remember how much e-ink the Left used decrying that "outrage" during the Bush years? Takes me back.

Good times. Good times.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2013 03:55 PM (kdS6q)

119 ALL YOUR FREEDOMS ARE BELONG TO US!!

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 27, 2013 03:55 PM (0LHZx)

120 You know, I used to laugh at comments like that. It's not so funny anymore. What better way to control people than to know absolutely everything they think and do.

Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 03:45 PM (fv6BP)


criminalize everything and everyone is a criminal.

if we aren't there yet, we are very close

Posted by: Shoey at December 27, 2013 03:56 PM (Y7jCH)

121 The NSA authority that said they were drowning in information probably didn't mention the scores of programers working around the clock to devise software that will sort out all that information. And sooner or later, probably sooner, they'll be able to do all sorts of things with "metadata".

Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 03:56 PM (fv6BP)

122 The might stache John Bolton also thinks losing this capability would be damaging.Maybe so,but the government has given ample notice that it cannot be trusted.

Posted by: steevy at December 27, 2013 03:56 PM (zqvg6)

123 Posted by: Adjoran at December 27, 2013 03:51 PM (473jB)

Leon is right. Smith was about collection on a single person who was suspected of a crime.

Section 215 of the Patriot Act only allows collection on people in 3 categories. In reality the NSA (technically FBI) collects data on EVERYONE because the NSA says the need that once they want to focus on someone in one of those 3 categories.

The way the NSA/FBI is doing it is bypassing Congress' very specific grants.

Doing that because it's "effective" (something Pauley asserts but doesn't prove) is not a legitimate reason to ignore the plain meaning of the statute.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 27, 2013 03:57 PM (r5Qcm)

124 Tyrants have their boot on our collective necks, and we're supposed to thank them because it *could* *theoretically* have stopped an attack that should have been stopped with damned regular police work.

Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at December 27, 2013 03:57 PM (E8IHS)

125 Judge Pauley:

"The bulk telephony metadata collection program is subject to executive and congressional oversight, as well as continual monitoring by a dedicated group of judges who serve on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court."

I'd bet sending Jews to the ovens was "subject to executive oversight" and "continual monitoring" too.

I suppose he would use the same euphamisms in the drone bombing of Women & Children in Yemen and elsewhere.

This man is precisely the color of traitor to The Constitution and the spirit of Liberty who needs to be executed for high treason.

Clapper of course, but add Judge Pauley to the list.

What an abject fool of a man.

Posted by: superflex at December 27, 2013 03:57 PM (4a/4i)

126 Alas, it's yet another power grab by people who should never have power in the first place.

The inevitable result of what happens if you fear a tyranny of the majority - a tyranny of the minority.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 27, 2013 03:57 PM (nFI1a)

127 97 Bevel Lemelisk at December 27, 2013 03:49 PM (nFI1a)

Sure but there are plenty of other FTPs to monitor...and you can use a simple book code and cipher to thwart casual perusal.

I'd respect these decisions and activities if they were beside profiling and hard counter-intel work...

they aren't which leads me to conclude they are simply a leftist version of CointelPro.

If I had reservations about the Nixonian Alphabets playing games with the US left how do you think I feel about them playing games with my fellow right wingers now?

Posted by: sven10077 at December 27, 2013 03:58 PM (9jfyN)

128 121 The NSA authority that said they were drowning in information probably didn't mention the scores of programers working around the clock to devise software that will sort out all that information. And sooner or later, probably sooner, they'll be able to do all sorts of things with "metadata".
Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 03:56 PM (fv6BP)

Like drone anyone who figures out what the system will be used for.

Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at December 27, 2013 03:58 PM (E8IHS)

129
Would it surprise anyone here if Paul Ryan was taken for a ride and obama and Reid have a major supplemental spending bill (filled with lots of populist crap) ready to be sprung to help the D's in '14, a mini Stimulus, if you will?

Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 03:58 PM (zvr0X)

130 The constitutionality of it shouldn't even be controversial. Smith controls.

Uh, no.

Many changes can trump stare decisis. While the Constitution does not change, the environment in which it is applied does. This is why we have judicial review. Otherwise, you are stuck with Plessy controls.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here)-also drooling imbecile incapable of doing algebra or something at December 27, 2013 03:58 PM (659DL)

131 Hey you know if we just gave the govt the right to come into our house every night unannounced, I bet it would reduce a lot of crime.

Let's do it!!

For the children of course.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 27, 2013 03:59 PM (0LHZx)

132 The system works. For instance, look at the bang up job they did in stopping Speed Bump and his Little Brother from wreaking havoc in Boston.

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at December 27, 2013 03:59 PM (jucos)

133
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 03:53 PM (VtjlW)

You do realize that this may indeed be your doing. You found something at the bottom of your purse this morning. When a woman finds the bottom of her purse it is like dividing by zero. The space/time continuum is rent and Bizarro World has a chance at entering our plane.

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my Hate cannot be found) at December 27, 2013 03:59 PM (u1jJP)

134 OMG, they actually found judge to write and opinion that was exactly what was needed! What are the odds?


Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, shhh, be a little quieter,
some of us are trying to sleep. at December 27, 2013 03:28 PM (kXoT0)

There's no end to the miracles that can happen when you have the finest justices that money can buy.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at December 27, 2013 04:00 PM (Q26ov)

135 "Meta-data" isn't protected, period.

I am sick and tired of people claiming metadata is all they're collecting, and that it's reasonable.

They buy public information (credit card companies information about purchasing habits reveal a lot about you), they steal private information (remember Google had NSA inside their private network), they weaken encryption standards (see the RSA group payment exposed by Snowden),
they're collecting your movement habits using license plate readers, they've got freaking trucks that use millimeter wave scanners on everything they pass. All of this is public domain knowledge. I'm not some HAARP freak or chemtrails loonie.

If you put all that information together along with any number of other sources they collect, including the location of the smartphone in your pocket all day long, they basically know EVERYTHING about you.

The idea that the thoughts in your head are private is literally true, but you expose them in small ways day in and day out. Put the pieces together and even those are partially revealed.

Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 04:00 PM (4QSOR)

136 Fuckity fuck fuck. Just got home from Christmas travels to find house at 49 degrees. Sump pump failed, basement flooded, oil burner doused. About 18 inches. Waiting on call backs from The Hartford and Servpro. Of course I won't hear from an actual adjustor until Monday, so I might end up paying for it all myself.
Posted by: Lincolntf at December 27, 2013 03:53 PM (ZshNr)

Who is your Insurance carrier? They should have a property adjuster on call. I remember my days on beeper duty.

Posted by: polynikes at December 27, 2013 04:00 PM (m2CN7)

137

btw, is the recount over in VA?

or, should I say did the R lose...again?

Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 04:01 PM (zvr0X)

138 Word on the street is Judge Pauley likes the taste of dog semen.

Posted by: superflex at December 27, 2013 04:01 PM (4a/4i)

139 Awful peculiar they let the benefits expire without much of a stink. It makes me think they're cooking up something big that will be attached to the debt ceiling increase.
Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 03:55 PM (zvr0X)


-------------------------------------------------


I still think that the rabbit the dems will be pulling out of their hat going towards the 2014 election is student loan forgiveness. All they have to do is for the dems in congress and the preezy to start talking about it, and all those yout votes they lost to Ocare will be scrambling back into the fold.

Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 04:01 PM (fv6BP)

140 The might stache John Bolton also thinks losing this capability would be damaging.Maybe so,but the government has given ample notice that it cannot be trusted.
Posted by: steevy at December 27, 2013 03:56 PM (zqvg6)

The Stache is a statist fool who wants unlimited police power to stop goat-fuckers who got really lucky once.

Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at December 27, 2013 04:01 PM (E8IHS)

141 132
The system works. For instance, look at the bang up job they did in
stopping Speed Bump and his Little Brother from wreaking havoc in
Boston.

Posted by: Truck M

There have been 0 terrorist attacks since 9/11, rube.

Party line, toe it.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:01 PM (x3YFz)

142 You do realize that this may indeed be your doing. You found something at the bottom of your purse this morning. When a woman finds the bottom of her purse it is like dividing by zero. The space/time continuum is rent and Bizarro World has a chance at entering our plane.
Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my Hate cannot be found) at December 27, 2013 03:59 PM (u1jJP)



Look, this particular space/time continuum rending is not my fault. Technically, it was just in the corner of a pocket of my purse, not the actual bottom bottom so no violation of the Law of Purses was had.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:02 PM (VtjlW)

143 >>>or, should I say did the R lose...again?


yes I think so.

Posted by: ace at December 27, 2013 04:02 PM (/FnUH)

144 Why no, it's not fascism . . . when WE do it.

Have some free health care. And cookies.

And a pony. If you want one, of course.

We promise.

You can trust us. Just like you always have.

Just like you always will.

Posted by: your betters at December 27, 2013 04:02 PM (roTS7)

145 AlextheChick and DrewM, what this judge has done to turn on its head that old precept of "It is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death." - Maimondies

We are all guilty until we prove that we are innocent. Thanks for nothing judge.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 27, 2013 04:02 PM (04hTF)

146 The idea that the thoughts in your head are private is literally true, but you expose them in small ways day in and day out. Put the pieces together and even those are partially revealed.
Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 04:00 PM (4QSOR)

If meta-data collection en-mass doesn't count as unconstitutional, it's time to amend the constitution. If it doesn't get banned by the time they figure out how to not drown in it, liberty gets the rope.

Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at December 27, 2013 04:03 PM (E8IHS)

147 I still think that the rabbit the dems will be pulling out of their hat going towards the 2014 election is student loan forgiveness. All they have to do is for the dems in congress and the preezy to start talking about it, and all those yout votes they lost to Ocare will be scrambling back into the fold.

Why the hell not? We're printing fake money anyways and treating the debt ceiling as an inconvenient speedbump. Might as well spread the pretend-money around.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 27, 2013 04:03 PM (nFI1a)

148 The Hartford. They tell me an adjustor will call me and or coordinate with ServPro, but nobody from Hartford will be out here until start of business Monday. Hoping Servpro shows up this afternoon/evening. Bonus, the In-laws are en route, and will now no doubt be promptly checking into a hotel when they get here.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 27, 2013 04:04 PM (ZshNr)

149 "Meta-data" isn't protected, period. Ever hear the cops on Law Order or some other show say, "Well, let's dump the LUDs and see"? That's Line User Detail, essentially "meta-data," for which they do not need a warrant.
Posted by: Adjoran at December 27, 2013 03:51 PM (473jB)

So you think the feds can simply demand every credit card company hand over all their customers' purchases every month?

In your Law and Order example, they are talking about issuing a subpoena for the records of an individual under suspicion or directly connected to an investigation.

Do you think every cop and DA should be able to simply subpoena the business records of every company/individual every month just in case they might be linked to some crime, somewhere by someone?

That's what's happening here.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 27, 2013 04:04 PM (r5Qcm)

150 Technically, it was just in the corner of a pocket of my purse, not the actual bottom bottom so no violation of the Law of Purses was had. Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:02 PM (VtjlW) Shoulda figured. If it had been your purse Ragnarok would have occurred.

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my Hate cannot be found) at December 27, 2013 04:04 PM (u1jJP)

151 We are all guilty until we prove that we are innocent. Thanks for nothing judge.


Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 27, 2013 04:02 PM (04hTF)


Well,Sure. Right up to the point he's swinging by the end of a rope. Then that all comes to an end, doesn't it?

Not advocating anything, just a student of history.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:05 PM (x3YFz)

152 147 Bevel Lemelisk at December 27, 2013 04:03 PM (nFI1a)

The GOP may as well beat the cocksuckers to the punch and then remove the Feds from the student loan biz as part of the bill.

If we are going to use Krugaton patented CandyLand Economics as a nation we may as well try to outfreeshit the Donks.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 27, 2013 04:05 PM (9jfyN)

153
Can just recall the last time I was ass deep in a snowbank. I think it was '97. Didn't have a cell phone. I manned up and walked back to the ranch house.
Posted by: tangonine




"Relatives recalled the deceased as independent and self confident. The woodland creatures recalled him as being tasty."

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2013 04:05 PM (kdS6q)

154 Do you think every cop and DA should be able to simply subpoena the business records of every company/individual every month just in case they might be linked to some crime, somewhere by someone?

Eh, I'm good with that.

Posted by: John Roberts at December 27, 2013 04:05 PM (nFI1a)

155
Maybe so,but the government has given ample notice that it cannot be trusted.

If you cannot trust them with the data, how can you trust them not to keep collecting it even if it's ruled illegal?

Fact is, we've been living in the might-makes-right jungle for a long time now. It's taken Obama's devil-may-care flouting of the rule of law to make that clear to more people.

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at December 27, 2013 04:06 PM (V3kRK)

156 all the data might be useless in preempting a terrorist attack, but it would certainly be siftable to get oppositon research on political opponents or to help prosecute a case where none may have existed if the data didn't exist

Posted by: jb at December 27, 2013 04:06 PM (I5svt)

157
Ace, you often ask how we should 'fight' the Democrats aside from being screamy lunatics.

How about, for example, put some effort in these recounts, ie, stolen elections.

I mean, the Left worked hard for Franken and Gregoire to steal those elections. Can we get the GOP to at least pretend they give a shit and send a lawyer or five to help?

Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 04:06 PM (zvr0X)

158 156
all the data might be useless in preempting a terrorist attack, but it
would certainly be siftable to get oppositon research on political
opponents or to help prosecute a case where none may have existed if the
data didn't exist


Posted by: jb at December 27, 2013 04:06 PM (I5svt)


Award this man a medal.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:07 PM (x3YFz)

159 "Relatives recalled the deceased as independent and self confident. The woodland creatures recalled him as being tasty."

I think it's darkly funny that people say things like "He died doing what he really loved."

Well, yes, in a way. But in a more literal way he was doing something he loved around the time he died. When he actually died, he was probably doing something he didn't love. Like getting brained by a rock, or dying of thirst, or suffocating under a snowbank.

Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 04:08 PM (4QSOR)

160 "was almost certainly unconstitutional"

almost certainly missed it by "that" much

Pauley, "could have" "might have"

Pied Piper Judges telling stories as if making law.

"Only if" you let them.

Posted by: panzernashorn at December 27, 2013 04:08 PM (MhA4j)

161 Just imagine the stock trends you could get in on early if you could see everybody's favorite new anything by sorting all social media mentions, etc. Oh, gee, lots of Gubmint employees do awfully well in the stock market already, don't they? Crazy coincidence.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 27, 2013 04:08 PM (ZshNr)

162 "Pauley said that if the U.S. government had the phone data collection program before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, it could have helped provide critical clues."

Neither did all this data provide sufficient alarms for government to investigate the family members of the Boston Bomber.

The 9/11 team had triggered the filing of several financial Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR), but the federal government did not investigate. Tens of millions of SARs are filed each year. Government can never have too much data and that is the exact problem with respect to civil rights. And government bureaucrats don't have to pay anything for the reports they demand their citizens and corporations must file to comply with their petty demands for endless amounts of data on our private activities. Other government bureaucrats, in the form of secret judges in secret special courts will always find it very easy to grant their fellow bureaucrats access to this data, after all, that is what we are spending all this money to collect, isn't it? We just want everyone to be safe.

Posted by: theBuckWheat at December 27, 2013 04:09 PM (nmcha)

163 And here you go, gremlins. Ronald Regan's speech on Why We Fight.

I shouldn't have to tell you that we need to hear this at least once a year; probably more often.

Here you go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpH5L8zCtSk

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:10 PM (x3YFz)

164 Shoulda figured. If it had been your purse Ragnarok would have occurred.
Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my Hate cannot be found) at December 27, 2013 04:04 PM (u1jJP)



Team Loki!

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:10 PM (VtjlW)

165 Does anyone think Obama would use this power to protect citizens? Or would he rather spend their effort investigating political dissidents and journalists?

Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at December 27, 2013 04:11 PM (E8IHS)

166 I remember getting angry about this after Wired ran some whistle blower stories in '05 or '06. Friends said I was paranoid and that the NSA could never break email passwords and banking encryption and I was just crazy. Latest whistle blower dirt is that all the meta data in the USA would fit in a server farm the size of an average living room and they are building in Utah because they actually now collect ALL voice communication and ALL email but NEVER look at it without a warrant.....of course an "administrative" warrant does not require a court or a judge and if one of those is needed they now have secret judges anyway. I remember in 2009 when Obama signed an EO that said all federal LE could share intel from the NSA. So the IRS knows what emails you are sending and where and the DEA knows if you are smoking a joint and with whom while the DNC knows who you vote for.
I can't wait for another President Clinton. Remember when Billy Jeff first got elected? A mere 3 or 4 weeks in a political aide was "reprimanded" when he was found to have hundreds of classified FBI files on all the major GOP donors in an office in the actual West Wing.
Jesus Christ.

Let it burn? Fuckit. It IS burning down.

Posted by: Daybrother at December 27, 2013 04:11 PM (gAGU2)

167
Adjoran, in addition to Drew's point about the ruling ignoring the plain language of the statute, Smith can't be stretched to cover all of this:
***
WaPo
Two of the four collection programs, one each for telephony and the Internet, process trillions of “metadata” records for storage and analysis in systems called MAINWAY and MARINA, respectively. Metadata includes highly revealing information about the times, places, devices and participants in electronic communication, but not its contents. The bulk collection of telephone call records from Verizon Business Services, disclosed this month by the British newspaper the Guardian, is one source of raw intelligence for MAINWAY.
The other two types of collection, which operate on a much smaller scale, are aimed at content. One of them intercepts telephone calls and routes the spoken words to a system called ­NUCLEON.
For Internet content, the most important source collection is the PRISM project reported on June 6 by The Washington Post and the Guardian. It draws from data held by Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and other Silicon Valley giants, collectively the richest depositories of personal information in history.

http://tinyurl.com/n7hx8ho

****
And from the WSJ:
Since the breadth of the phone-records collection came to light through leaks from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, lawmakers and top U.S. officials have defended the program. They have said that for all queries of the database, the NSA must show a "reasonable articulable suspicion" that the phone number being targeted is associated with a terrorist organization.
Between 2006 and 2009, however, of the 17,835 phone numbers checked against incoming phone records, only about 1,800 were based on that reasonable suspicion standard, officials said.

http://tinyurl.com/k4wa6yb

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at December 27, 2013 04:12 PM (il1Hy)

168

how does obama use his DoJ, for justice?

how does obama use his IRS?

Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 04:13 PM (zvr0X)

169 Well, yes, in a way. But in a more literal way he was doing something he loved around the time he died. When he actually died, he was probably doing something he didn't love. Like getting brained by a rock, or dying of thirst, or suffocating under a snowbank.
Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 04:08 PM (4QSOR)


----------------------------------------------


Yes. He loved skydiving into the ground when his parachute didn't open.

Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 04:13 PM (fv6BP)

170 "And one former NSA employee says the flood of data is nearly useless -- with so many terabytes of data collected from random citizens, the Agency is drowning in data but has no clear idea how to swim through it all."

I have some RAID1 sets of 3TB disks. At full disk channel data rate, it takes about 6 hours to just sequentially read the whole disk. It is waaay to much data to do any analysis on and 3TB is just a tiny amount of one days' worth of NSA hoovering.

All this hoovering is just like security cameras at a Walmart parking lot. They are there to protect the company when a customer gets shot there. They in no way protect the customer, who is really on their own, while the cameras record everything. In the case of the NSA, government protects itself first. NSA data can only be of any use after the terrorist attack kills and injures hundreds or thousands.


Posted by: theBuckWheat at December 27, 2013 04:14 PM (nmcha)

171 Which just goes to show that much of this nation's problems are caused by having idiots in the Judiciary.


Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:14 PM (bb5+k)

172 This decision doesn't even matter. It doesn't matter until it reaches the Nazgul.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 27, 2013 04:15 PM (DVPta)

173 Little short on snark due to a toothache, allergies, and various medications so all I have is these darn facts. I'll try to do better next time, promise.

Stanford Researcher Proves the NSA Actually CAN Identify You From Your Metadata

http://minx.cc/?post=346033

Posted by: Xavier at December 27, 2013 04:15 PM (JqAxf)

174 A mere 3 or 4 weeks in a political aide was "reprimanded" when he was found to have hundreds of classified FBI files on all the major GOP donors in an office in the actual West Wing.

Don't forget that when a whole bunch of super sekrit FBI files were "found", they were printed. Teh Hildebeast's fingerprints were all over them.

Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 04:15 PM (4QSOR)

175 138 Word on the street is Judge Pauley likes the taste of dog semen.
Posted by: superflex at December 27, 2013 04:01 PM (4a/4i)

Hmmm. Sounds like a tasty marinade.

Posted by: Barry Dogeater Soetoro at December 27, 2013 04:15 PM (wAQA5)

176
I suspect the NSA is collecting information primarily to use against domestic "enemies" like the Tea Party. I also suspect that Moslems are expressly excluded from collection. Both those are remain just suppositions, but I would not put anything past the Democrats.


Posted by: Null at December 27, 2013 03:52 PM (DuH+r)



Ding Ding Ding... Give that man a cigar!


The Chicago Machine has weaponized the Federal government against us.


Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:16 PM (bb5+k)

177 163. tangonine

Reagan v. Affordable Health Care, a quote applied from your linked speech:

"Well it's a simple answer after all. You and I have the courage to say to our enemies [opponents], 'There is a price we will not pay.' There is a point beyond which they must not advance." -- Ronald Reagan

Posted by: panzernashorn at December 27, 2013 04:16 PM (MhA4j)

178 Didn't Susan Rice come out recently and claim that there hasn't been so much as talk of another terrorist attack since Obama came into office?

Posted by: Dustin at December 27, 2013 04:18 PM (80R0X)

179 Let's try that again:

Stanford Researcher Proves the NSA Actually CAN Identify You From Your Metadata

http://victorygirlsblog.com/?p=16574

Did I mention I'm medicated?

Posted by: Xavier at December 27, 2013 04:18 PM (JqAxf)

180 Christ on a crutch. The modern State is the frakking One Ring, and Washington is full of Gollums.

I now fully expect the Great Seal to be revised to include the Eye of Sorrow.

Posted by: Brother Cavil at December 27, 2013 04:18 PM (naUcP)

181 180 next potus campaign logo

Posted by: panzernashorn at December 27, 2013 04:19 PM (MhA4j)

182
Yes, Dustin, because this is Shamelot.

In Shamelot, there is no terrorism or unemployment or spying.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 04:19 PM (zvr0X)

183
'There is a price we will not pay.'
There is a point beyond which they must not advance." -- Ronald Reagan

Posted by: panzernashorn at December 27, 2013 04:16 PM (MhA4j)


I scrawled that on my ballcap and wore it to Afghanistan. Now, I wasn't a hero, just support as a contractor. But those words matter.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:20 PM (x3YFz)

184 And unexpectedly, this article showed up wherein a bunch of amateurs with limited computing power did amazing things.


http://preview.tinyurl.com/ldgohdc

Think unlimited budget, petaflops of computer and exabytes of storage.

Posted by: Hrothgar FCC Commisioner at December 27, 2013 04:21 PM (o3MSL)

185 "helpful comparison between the holdings of Judges Leon and Pauley. For example:"

property and taxes would be great, financially scrutinize the entire Judiciary membership publicly.

Of particular note, large banking deposits or windfall profits associated with decisions.

Posted by: panzernashorn at December 27, 2013 04:22 PM (MhA4j)

186 Posted by: Xavier at December 27, 2013 04:18 PM (JqAxf)

When seconds count!

Posted by: Hrothgar FCC Commisioner at December 27, 2013 04:22 PM (o3MSL)

187 My Respect for the Law continues to grow.

Posted by: nip at December 27, 2013 04:23 PM (jI23+)

188
Incidentally, I was ordering shocks online and found the cheapest on Amazon. I was about to pay and noticed I was getting charged sales tax.

So I went to ebay and paid more. Fuck You, Jeff Bezos, you fascist cocksucker.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 04:24 PM (zvr0X)

189 This is part of the larger problem when we as a supposedly free citizenry abdicated our direct responsibility to protect our inalienable rights to the Courts.

Not advocating anarchy, but an honest read of the Federalists and other contemporary sources leads very clearly to the conclusion that the real check on tyranical, federal government was always expected to come from the States, or the people directly.

Marbury v Madison and succeeding precedent was improvised as an important tool to institutionalize the process; but over time our reliance on the Courts as sole arbiter to "check" unconstitutional governance has become the enabling drug to a citizenry that can't even think in terms of inalienable rights, unless as defined by and exclusively regulated by the Courts.

My current feeling is that the Anti Federalists had the better part of the argument -- just a bit late in their predictions.

Posted by: NYC Parent at December 27, 2013 04:24 PM (HEo6y)

190 Think unlimited budget, petaflops of computer and exabytes of storage.
Posted by: Hrothgar FCC Commisioner at December 27, 2013 04:21 PM (o3MSL)



But will it play Crysis?

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:25 PM (VtjlW)

191 Just remember, our Constitutional right to privacy only exists to allow abortion through all nine months of pregnancy.

Our Constitutional right to privacy does not guarantee actual,you know, privacy. This is especially true once the courts decide alleged effectiveness trumps anything that might be in the actual Constitution.

Posted by: OCBill at December 27, 2013 04:25 PM (rFipM)

192 Hey!

It's like a turn key orwellian state

Posted by: sump at December 27, 2013 04:25 PM (d6+u5)

193 Servpro will be here in 15 mins. They'll pump and clean it, but no repairs. Not sure if the auto delight button will work once it's visible again. Solid 18 inches of water.Pool ladders floating around like corpses.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 27, 2013 04:25 PM (ZshNr)

194
"Judge Pauly read his decision from the bench in a low halting monotone, his eyes shifting nervously from side to side..."

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2013 04:26 PM (kdS6q)

195 And yes, f*ck you you fascist c*cksuckers.

Posted by: NYC Parent at December 27, 2013 04:26 PM (HEo6y)

196 So?

Fucking stand up.

Man Up.

Ranger Up.

Shield Maiden Up.

I'm tired of tolerating nonsense.

We Fight.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:26 PM (x3YFz)

197 Relight

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 27, 2013 04:26 PM (ZshNr)

198
Good link, Xavier. This shows how technological advancement can change the applicability of Smith qualitatively. When you can process so much more from the metadata than one could in Smith's era, it obviously merits a second look from the Supreme Court.

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at December 27, 2013 04:27 PM (il1Hy)

199 It's like a turn key orwellian state.

Remember that article about Cuba where the reporter said that nobody has a American-style familial relationship there?

The surveillance state here is better. All it would take is someone like Castro to be at the helm.

Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 04:27 PM (4QSOR)

200
So I went to ebay and paid more. Fuck You, Jeff Bezos, you fascist cocksucker.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 04:24 PM (zvr0X)


I feel the same way.

Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:28 PM (bb5+k)

201 What was the other thing besides crockpots?

Posted by: nip at December 27, 2013 04:28 PM (jI23+)

202
OT: It's Not a tax in SD. Avoid Taxes Forevah!!

http://tinyurl.com/nj2j53d

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at December 27, 2013 04:29 PM (MaP11)

203 from the ONT: http://tinyurl.com/l9m6d85

Resist.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:30 PM (x3YFz)

204 But will it play Crysis?

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:25 PM (VtjlW)

Yes, and it has already won!

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 27, 2013 04:30 PM (o3MSL)

205
Not advocating anarchy, but an honest read of the Federalists and other contemporary sources leads very clearly to the conclusion that the real check on tyranical, federal government was always expected to come from the States, or the people directly.


Posted by: NYC Parent at December 27, 2013 04:24 PM (HEo6y)



From a sheer POWER standpoint, the taxpayers are the most dangerous mutherfuckers in the nation. But from a VOTING standpoint, the non-contributors are equally powerful.


It was that "representation without taxation" which is where we fucked up. That, and lowering the voting age to stupid.





Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:31 PM (bb5+k)

206 The second is far more difficult to sort through. Got 10,000 gamers jamming various channels all screaming. In real time. Good luck. Even a log file for every hour is going to be huge.
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 27, 2013 03:49 PM (04hTF)

Pwnd nub murlock dennys last day[Sexy Sabatons of the hoochie queen]3k pst darkmoon faire dirka dirka lfg 'nomer jihad parking lot pbuh boom! chuck norris buttsecks

Posted by: The Hobo Hooker, Waitress, Model, Actress, Wears Prada at December 27, 2013 04:31 PM (GeVLX)

207 The surveillance state here is better. All it would take is someone like Castro to be at the helm.
Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 04:27 PM (4QSOR)


----------------------------------------------------


We've already got Castro. What Castro didn't have to contend with is a well-armed citizenery.

Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 04:32 PM (fv6BP)

208
Our Constitutional right to privacy does not guarantee actual,you know, privacy. This is especially true once the courts decide alleged effectiveness trumps anything that might be in the actual Constitution.

Posted by: OCBill at December 27, 2013 04:25 PM (rFipM)


On another issue of supreme idiocy, To be Adopted into a family you have to go through an official adoption process. You don't get to be a member of a family simply because you were born in their house.


To be a citizen? Just be born in their house.


Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:33 PM (bb5+k)

209 Yes, and it has already won!
Posted by: Hrothgar at December 27, 2013 04:30 PM (o3MSL)



Now I know you're just talking crazy talk.


Pwnd nub murlock dennys last day[Sexy Sabatons of the hoochie queen]3k pst darkmoon faire dirka dirka lfg 'nomer jihad parking lot pbuh boom! chuck norris buttsecks
Posted by: The Hobo Hooker, Waitress, Model, Actress, Wears Prada at December 27, 2013 04:31 PM (GeVLX)



I don't know if it's awesome or terrifying that I know what all of that means. Awesomely terrifying. Let's go with that.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:33 PM (VtjlW)

210 Pwnd nub murlock dennys last day[Sexy Sabatons of
the hoochie queen]3k pst darkmoon faire dirka dirka lfg 'nomer jihad
parking lot pbuh boom! chuck norris buttsecks

Posted by: The Hobo Hooker, Waitress, Model, Actress, Wears Prada at December 27, 2013 04:31 PM (GeVLX)


it's "n00b" n00b.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:33 PM (x3YFz)

211 I don't care for Bezos but the sales tax thing isn't his fault.

Posted by: steevy at December 27, 2013 04:33 PM (zqvg6)

212 This seems totally unrelated to what i learned about our rights and personhood as a child in school.

and fk them.
shame .on.them.

Posted by: willow at December 27, 2013 04:34 PM (nqBYe)

213 Remember duck and cover in Boston, warrantless house by house searches. For public safety!

It's for own good peasants.

Posted by: The Hobo Hooker, Waitress, Model, Actress, Wears Prada at December 27, 2013 04:34 PM (GeVLX)

214 Yes. He loved skydiving into the ground when his parachute didn't open.
Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 04:13 PM (fv6BP)
_______________________
In the piloting world we call this CFIT. Controlled Flight Into Terrain.

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at December 27, 2013 04:34 PM (jucos)

215 Our Constitutional right to privacy does not guarantee actual,you know,
privacy. This is especially true once the courts decide alleged
effectiveness trumps anything that might be in the actual Constitution.



Posted by: OCBill at December 27, 2013 04:25 PM (rFipM)


The great thing about our nation is that this is the point where the citizenry hangs the judges.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:35 PM (x3YFz)

216
steevy, Bezos himself lobbied for that sales tax

Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 04:35 PM (zvr0X)

217
We Fight.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:26 PM (x3YFz)


We do not fight. We use "Irish Democracy." We use truculence, we use stubbornness, we mock, we ridicule, we refuse to participate, we defy.


But we do not fight.


Not yet.


Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:35 PM (bb5+k)

218 Something I'd be interested in knowing...Does the FBI/NSA have a similar program with credit card companies?

Why wouldn't the same legal justification for this apply?

The only reason I think they don't is Greenwald hasn't released it but he could be saving it.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 27, 2013 04:36 PM (r5Qcm)

219 i feel so absolutely bad for the grandchildren. We had the best country on earth and gave it the fk away.

Posted by: willow at December 27, 2013 04:36 PM (nqBYe)

220
This is part of the larger problem when we as a supposedly free citizenry abdicated our direct responsibility to protect our inalienable rights to the Courts.

***
That's a political demonstration of the Monderman effect (removing traffic signs increases traffic safety by removing "assumed safeguards").
http://tinyurl.com/qjvzx9d

IMO Fannie/Freddie and the SEC had the same effect on mortgages, mortgage backed securities, credit default swaps etc, and the effect contributed to the 2008 collapse.

Any time we complacently assume something is being well-regulated, we drop our guard.

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at December 27, 2013 04:37 PM (il1Hy)

221 216 Did he ?Well,than fuck him.

Posted by: steevy at December 27, 2013 04:37 PM (zqvg6)

222 We've already got Castro. What Castro didn't have to contend with is a well-armed citizenry.

Hypothetical self-flattery. I'll believe it when Tea Party people start disappearing.

Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 04:37 PM (WhJf8)

223 The only reason I think they don't is Greenwald hasn't released it but he could be saving it.
Posted by: DrewM. at December 27, 2013 04:36 PM (r5Qcm)



Do you know how utterly pissed off it makes me to acknowledge that Greenwald has been consistent on this matter?


Stupid blind squirrel.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:37 PM (VtjlW)

224 So I went to ebay and paid more. Fuck You, Jeff Bezos, you fascist cocksucker.



Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 04:24 PM (zvr0X)


Amazon didn't have a choice in the matter. Your state lawmakers saw to that.

But congrats on screwing yourself.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 27, 2013 04:37 PM (SY2Kh)

225 and ty snowden, whatever your motives were, I'm at least notified of our fall.

Posted by: willow at December 27, 2013 04:37 PM (nqBYe)

226 it's "n00b" n00b.
Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:33 PM (x3YFz)

LOL airport OMFG J/K saturday llama WTF propane lf tank firelands allah willing does anal

Posted by: The Hobo Hooker, Waitress, Model, Actress, Wears Prada at December 27, 2013 04:38 PM (GeVLX)

227 I'm sure beyond sure that they collect credit card data as well.

Posted by: steevy at December 27, 2013 04:39 PM (zqvg6)

228 I don't know if it's awesome or terrifying that I know what all of that means. Awesomely terrifying. Let's go with that.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:33 PM (VtjlW)


I don't know if it's awesome or terrifying that you never comment on a topic except only on weird diversions of the topic.

But you still have a fan base, so go you.

Try getting into the fight.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:39 PM (x3YFz)

229 Servpro will be here in 15 mins. They'll pump and clean it, but no repairs. Not sure if the auto delight button will work once it's visible again. Solid 18 inches of water.Pool ladders floating around like corpses.
Posted by: Lincolntf at December 27, 2013 04:25 PM (ZshNr)

Yep, insurance doesn't cover the repairs, just the damage. You have the burden though to make sure no additional damage occurs or they could deny payment for any subsequent damage.

Posted by: polynikes at December 27, 2013 04:39 PM (m2CN7)

230 i feel so absolutely bad for the grandchildren. We had the best country on earth and gave it the fk away.
Posted by: willow at December 27, 2013 04:36 PM (nqBYe)


----------------------------------------------


Please don't say "we". Because I'm sure as fuck not giving it away, at least not without a fight.

Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 04:39 PM (fv6BP)

231 The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Posted by: 9th Amendment at December 27, 2013 04:40 PM (e8kgV)

232 The only reason I think they don't is Greenwald hasn't released it but he could be saving it.

The NSA doesn't have to get judicial order for that info. The CC companies sell it.

Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 04:40 PM (WhJf8)

233 Posted by: NYC Parent


It does not help when the Chief Justice of the United States says that it is "not his job" to decide if a law is unconstitutional but rather that there should be a political remedy.
What I would really like to see is a public dump of ALL federal political voice communication, banking and email data. Turnabout. I think even the LIVs would be shocked at the evil found.

Article V is the last stop now. BTW the citizens of the USA hold enough firepower in private hands now to qualify as the third or fourth largest army in the world. Just sayin.

Posted by: Daybrother at December 27, 2013 04:40 PM (wrLkp)

234 Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:20 PM (x3YFz)

Glad you made it back to the US of A.

Yes. Words matter. So long as definitions aren't revised.

For instance this afternoon, I saw @ PJ Media a neo-conservative apologist post re-educating readers to appreciate their "betters"... Krauthammer, et al.

Imo, when referencing something "new" and wanting to sound sophisticated, something other than English, the "nouveau" is used.

Neo* doesn't even mean 2nd hand refurbishing of an original object/style. Although "Neo" DERIVES from the Greek "new" it references no reproduction, but rather an arbitrary revisionism (perniciously exercising an "opposite game" of meaning/usage), code for hijacking, to usurp a truth in order to corrupt it into compliance with one's own agenda. I spent enough years defending Neoconservatism as it seemed legitimate enough on early reading and consideration. But as the saying goes, by their fruits shall they be known. And no way will I give the usurpers of constitutional integrity and inalienable rights a free pass EVER again.

*/For instance from Western 18th and 19th Century Music, Neo-Classicism was NOT the music of ancient Greece rediscovered, repopularized.

Posted by: panzernashorn at December 27, 2013 04:40 PM (MhA4j)

235
The great thing about our nation is that this is the point where the citizenry hangs the judges.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:35 PM (x3YFz)


That won't happen till much bad has happened, though it would fill my heart with glee if we could skip to that part.


I wouldn't mind digging up a few and hanging them too, ala Oliver Cromwell.





Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:41 PM (bb5+k)

236 Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:31 PM (bb5+k)

And tax withholding. If we had to decide every year to fund the gov't, things would be different.

Posted by: AMDG at December 27, 2013 04:41 PM (t7OO0)

237 I mean, the Left worked hard for Franken and
Gregoire to steal those elections. Can we get the GOP to at least
pretend they give a shit and send a lawyer or five to help?
Posted by: soothsayer at December 27, 2013 04:06 PM


It's a little late for that, bro. Our Betters have decided to attack and destroy the eeeeevil Te Party, and snark long, loud and often about Anthony Weiner. When there's free time, they can get all jumbled up about how they can't yet play Angry Birds on the ChoomCare website.

Face it: the opposition in this country -- what used to be called Patriotic Americans -- has been neutered, and is happily content to swap snark on their little websites.

Halp us, Captain Poppin' Fresh, you're our only hope! *retches*

Posted by: MrScribbler at December 27, 2013 04:41 PM (ff7/5)

238 alex, it is rather perplexing isn't it? Greenwald i mean..
I hate that fkn guy, But as were so many worries during the patriot act it never reached this far into our existance , when you have the writer (patriot act) out there saying the overreach is not legal or right, but a Judge shames our country saying it is to be so.

at least we are now on notice.
not that we have ANY possibiltiy of staying out of trouble if THEY want to say we are trouble
Gah, think about this. I'm so piss'd off it happens in a decade we become a creepy country.

Posted by: willow at December 27, 2013 04:41 PM (nqBYe)

239 Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:37 PM (VtjlW)

He's an ideologue, not a partisan. But if had reviled this stuff during a Republican administration, he'd be the King of the Liberals. But since he's hurting their One True God, he must be destroyed.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 27, 2013 04:42 PM (r5Qcm)

240 and I meant to add, alex: shieldmaidens. warriors.

We need more of them.

I've seen you post for what? 6? 8? years now? here and at DPUD? Grab a blade.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:42 PM (x3YFz)

241 230 Soona, truer words.

Posted by: panzernashorn at December 27, 2013 04:42 PM (MhA4j)

242
Hypothetical self-flattery. I'll believe it when Tea Party people start disappearing.

Posted by: bonhomme at December 27, 2013 04:37 PM (WhJf


Have you noticed all the Military officers disappearing?


Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:42 PM (bb5+k)

243 Read the Fourth Amendment. It doesn't provide for
absolute prohibition against search and seizure without a warrant- only
against "unreasonable" search and seizure. "Unreasonable" is a
subjective term.

As such, there is always going to be a degree of subjectivity involved in determining what is constitutional and what is not.


Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 27, 2013 03:41 PM (SY2Kh)

- It is always reasonable if something incriminating is found.- If nothing is found, then there is no harm and you have no standing.

Posted by: Dustin at December 27, 2013 04:43 PM (80R0X)

244 we used to read about countries like this as children.

who knew.

Posted by: willow at December 27, 2013 04:43 PM (nqBYe)

245 I don't think we have gone full facist / communist yet because if we had, Greenwald would have already met a tragic accident on purpose.

Posted by: polynikes at December 27, 2013 04:43 PM (m2CN7)

246 I don't see some dramatic scenario in which you have to make a split second choice to "resist" or surrender.
"Noncompliance" will get your drivers license suspended, deactivate your health care account, invalidate your Passport, get you fined by the IRS, etc., etc.
The Administrative state has many levers of power
If we go a bit further along, I think the feel will be something like the post-Gulag Soviet Union.

Posted by: NYC Parent at December 27, 2013 04:43 PM (HEo6y)

247
I don't care for Bezos but the sales tax thing isn't his fault.
Posted by: steevy



Initially? No.

Then he cut a series of deals agreeing to pay sale tax to the states, while getting the money back in local tax offset and credits for distribution centers and such.

All the while figuring Amazon could better absorb the taxes because of its size than rivals. Thus helping to force them out of business.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2013 04:44 PM (kdS6q)

248 Message to congress "Own it Bitches"

Posted by: Federal Courts at December 27, 2013 04:45 PM (ygAxO)

249 They're here. Their pump is running, don't know how many gals it does a minute but they figure only about half hour till it's empty. Cool. It's actually only a corner of the house that has a cellar. Unfinished. So far, so good.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 27, 2013 04:45 PM (ZshNr)

250 So words just don't mean things anymore.

I see. Well, shut it all down, I guess. We're done.

Posted by: The Obsidian Owl at December 27, 2013 04:45 PM (tWmgi)

251 and I meant to add, alex: shieldmaidens. warriors.

We need more of them.

I've seen you post for what? 6? 8? years now? here and at DPUD? Grab a blade.
Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:42 PM (x3YFz)


I'm terribly sorry, first you insult me and then you attempt to draw me into your right on the borderline calls for active violence?


No, thank you.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:46 PM (VtjlW)

252 231 The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Posted by: 9th Amendment at December 27, 2013 04:40 PM (e8kgV)



"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;"

Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:46 PM (bb5+k)

253 plynikes, well look we had a large portion of the country say Hey they can't do that it's not legal or right, it squashes all our rights.

now as it is legal, who will fight for US or greenwald?
i mean what the hell as with everything these days we have No standing?

Posted by: willow at December 27, 2013 04:46 PM (nqBYe)

254 I'm terribly sorry, first you insult me and then you
attempt to draw me into your right on the borderline calls for active
violence?





No, thank you.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 27, 2013 04:46 PM (VtjlW)


The fact you missed the point entirely ends the discussion.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:48 PM (x3YFz)

255 I don't think we have gone full facist / communist yet because if we had, Greenwald would have already met a tragic accident on purpose.

You know the counterexample. Don't make someone post it.

I've seen you post for what? 6? 8? years now? here and at DPUD? Grab a blade.

We've established she's a mace specialist...

Posted by: Brother Cavil at December 27, 2013 04:48 PM (naUcP)

256 fgs am i late to the post again?

Posted by: willow at December 27, 2013 04:48 PM (nqBYe)

257 Initially? No.

Then he cut a series of deals agreeing to pay sale
tax to the states, while getting the money back in local tax offset and
credits for distribution centers and such.


This was after the states already started passing laws requiring Amazon to pay sales taxes there. Bezos fought pretty hard against that, but he lost. Hard to blame him for trying to make the best of it after the fact.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 27, 2013 04:48 PM (SY2Kh)

258 And tax withholding. If we had to decide every year to fund the gov't, things would be different.

Posted by: AMDG at December 27, 2013 04:41 PM (t7OO0)


I agree. I would love to for people to have to write checks instead of allowing withholding to ease the pain.


You see what happened to the Unions when automatic withholding was eliminated.


Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:49 PM (bb5+k)

259 Beyond the scope of the collection as a fourth amendment issue, the nature of the meta-data and it's use in network analysis is a first amendment, freedom of association problem.

Being able to track associations and networks of people is a powerful tool, esp. for politicians. The potential for abuse is enormous.

Posted by: Jean at December 27, 2013 04:49 PM (4JkHl)

260 NOOD

Posted by: Steck at December 27, 2013 04:50 PM (RL7U1)

261 I've learned that if you really care if anyone reads your posts, and I think I did at one time, you're best to save it if the post count is over 2-300.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 27, 2013 04:50 PM (ZshNr)

262 Fresh meat up

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 27, 2013 04:50 PM (HVff2)

263 I'm considering making "End Withholding!", my permanent sock.

Posted by: Jean at December 27, 2013 04:51 PM (4JkHl)

264 Because....that.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 27, 2013 04:51 PM (ZshNr)

265 The only reason I think they don't is Greenwald hasn't released it but he could be saving it.

Actually it was widely reported that after 9/11 all credit card data was collected by the NSA. It was later expanded to give the IRS authority to sift through any financial transaction by card worldwide. I believe they said that using an ATM or buying something or loading a debit card from a foreign account for example was a secondary transaction and needed no warrant. Recently they announced that they track EBay and online gun purchases. I think there is a lawsuit about the gun thing since it means a defacto registry. (I assume no one will be found to have standing in that one.) But what do I know. I'm just a wingnut with radical ideas like having a Constitutional Representative Republic.

Posted by: Daybrother at December 27, 2013 04:51 PM (9TDtS)

266 We've remarked on the too much data aspect a month ago.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/344694.php

Posted by: Purp at December 27, 2013 04:51 PM (70Unk)

267 Being able to track associations and networks of people is a powerful tool, esp. for politicians. The potential for abuse is enormous.
Posted by: Jean at December 27, 2013 04:49 PM (4JkHl)

I'm sure I have no idea what you mean by that.

Posted by: Lois Lerner at December 27, 2013 04:53 PM (r5Qcm)

268
This was after the states already started passing laws requiring Amazon to pay sales taxes there. Bezos fought pretty hard against that, but he lost. Hard to blame him for trying to make the best of it after the fact.
Posted by: Hollowpoint



The laws were passed and Amzon and other started court challenges, then Amazon ran the numbers and found out this could be a win for them.

Also note Amazon's support for the Marketplace Fairness Act national internet sales tax.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2013 04:53 PM (kdS6q)

269
And tax withholding. If we had to decide every year to fund the gov't, things would be different.

Posted by: AMDG at December 27, 2013 04:41 PM (t7OO0)

Another reason why I'm for consumption based taxes rather than income taxes.

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at December 27, 2013 04:53 PM (il1Hy)

270 252 D-Lamp

That's right vs. all the Obama neoconservative enablers constructing their post-constitutional era which THEY keep bemoaning while ingratiating themselves within. Screwtape bloggers.

His best shot at the obvious hollowpoint: "Unreasonable is a subjective term."

Posted by: panzernashorn at December 27, 2013 04:53 PM (MhA4j)

271 259
Beyond the scope of the collection as a fourth amendment issue, the
nature of the meta-data and it's use in network analysis is a first
amendment, freedom of association problem.



Being able to track associations and networks of people is a
powerful tool, esp. for politicians. The potential for abuse is
enormous.

Posted by: Jean at December 27, 2013 04:49 PM (4JkHl)


I'm a strict constitutionalist but I think this has grown beyond anything the framers could have envisioned.

An amendment is needed.

In short: the govt shouldn't have the ability to track who I associate with, without probable cause.

Simple.

Posted by: tangonine at December 27, 2013 04:54 PM (x3YFz)

272 Can anyone tell me what sites like Kos or MSNBC say about this stuff? Do they just ignore it altogether?

Posted by: steve at December 27, 2013 04:56 PM (cSDPa)

273 Have you noticed all the Military officers disappearing?







Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:42 PM (bb5+k)

Only the straight white Christian ones that understood what an oath to defend the Constitution meant.

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 27, 2013 04:56 PM (o3MSL)

274
Only the straight white Christian ones that understood what an oath to defend the Constitution meant.

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 27, 2013 04:56 PM (o3MSL)


Exactly my point. USSA here we come.


Posted by: D-Lamp at December 27, 2013 04:59 PM (bb5+k)

275 The NSA authority that said they were drowning in
information probably didn't mention the scores of programers working
around the clock to devise software that will sort out all that
information. And sooner or later, probably sooner, they'll be able to do
all sorts of things with "metadata".

Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2013 03:56 PM (fv6BP)

I am sure thy can now - just need a seed, say the name of a person who said something less than flattering about the President - instantly anybody who ever talked to anybody who ever talked to 'less than flattering' could be rolled up and interrogated because they know a 'suspected terrorist'.Publicize a few of those roll-ups like that and by time El Presidente humbly accepts, by popular demand, a third term ain't nobody gonna say anything but We Love Dear Leader.
Use the system to roll up real terrorists? Ummm, no. Dangerous work involving infiltrating real terrorist groups. Easier to root out political enemies on facebook. IRS, OSHA, etc. has already tested the means and methods

Posted by: Dustin at December 27, 2013 05:01 PM (80R0X)

276 Also note Amazon's support for the Marketplace Fairness Act national internet sales tax.

Right, but again- that was after states started requiring they collect sales taxes. Their stance is "If we have to, so should everybody else".

From a business standpoint that's not unreasonable. You don't want to face a government-imposed burden that your competitors don't.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 27, 2013 05:06 PM (SY2Kh)

277 Ummm, no. Dangerous work involving infiltrating real terrorist groups. Easier to root out political enemies on facebook. IRS, OSHA, etc. has already tested the means and methods
Posted by: Dustin


Read the review of the Fast & Furious whistle blower. The FBI and DEA place agents into drug cartels, urges them to kill and smuggle their way to the top and then keeps them there, committing crimes, to gather intel. They ARE the bad guys. Imagine what those kind of policy people do with the personal data on a political enemy. It means nothing to them.

Posted by: Daybrother at December 27, 2013 05:08 PM (YrqgX)

278 Read the review of the Fast & Furious whistle blower.

Book. I meant he wrote a book.

Posted by: Daybrother at December 27, 2013 05:10 PM (quBLd)

279 This decision is no surprise to any lawyer. You would be amazed at the mental gymnastics judges perform to reach the desired result.

Posted by: real joe at December 27, 2013 05:20 PM (xXhgd)

280 According to this logic, maybe Sherriff Arapaio should set up a surveillance program on these judges and the justice department . He´d have more constitutional justification for his own constituency. We all do.

Holder and Obama have a lawless administration that has made all government corruct through all these compromises.

Posted by: Minuteman at December 27, 2013 05:24 PM (hgczO)

281 I have no legitimate expectation of privacy?

Bull-fucking-shit.

I have every expectation of absolute privacy. I have a (discovered) Constitutional Right to Privacy; therefore the government is obliged to guarantee that Right to me. The first duty of government, as espoused in the Declaration of Independence is that "to secure these Rights, governments are instituted among Men." The first duty of government is to protect my Rights, not parse them for loopholes.

I hate that fucking "expectation of privacy" argument. It is false, wrongly-premised, an artifact of lazy thinking, and has no place in our legal lexicography.

I say again: Bull-Fucking-Shit.

Posted by: I lurk, therefore I amn't at December 27, 2013 08:08 PM (rz0yi)

282 I had always expected that the "fix is in" really only applied at the Municipal level, where judges have to stand for elections; that once you got to the appointive levels, the judges would generally be, well, judges.

I hate being wrong.

Posted by: I lurk, therefore I amn't at December 27, 2013 08:15 PM (rz0yi)






Processing 0.05, elapsed 0.0612 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0155 seconds, 291 records returned.
Page size 173 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat