Ah... The Sweetness Of Being Correct...

[WillyT]

Congrats certain fellow DUers !!!

[Electric Monk]

1. But, but (insert something about cardboard boxes and stripper poles here) and wharrgarbl!!1!

[BrotherIvan]

2. But we knew about it already!

It's legal! They have warrants!! What do you have to hide??????

[WillyT]

27. I Dunno... Apparently We Had Some Legal Eagles Telling Us Otherwise...

[Jackpine Radical]

43. All these accusations are nonsense. Until the truth is revealed.

Then it's old news. Move along, here, Dammit.

[eridani]

62. You mean sensible woodchucks, right? n/t

[daleanime]

3. Feel better when the programs are eliminated.....

[mindwalker_i]

16. Not gonna happen

They'll just keep doing it, get caught again, keep doing it...

[nashville_brook]

4. great week for freedom.

not a good week for authoritarians.

[n2doc]

5. NSA spying is illegal? Then let's make it law, say Republicans

Now that a US federal court has ruled that the NSA's mass wiretapping program exceeded its legal authority, leaders of the US Republican party are pushing to make it legal.

Within hours of the ruling by the US Second Circuit Court of Appeal that the NSA's bulk domestic surveillance program under Section 215 of the Patriot Act may be illegal, Republican Senate majority leader Mitchell McConnell (R-KY) argued on the Senate floor that the practice should be written into US law.

"If our intelligence community cannot connect the dots of the information, we cannot stop this determined enemy from launching attacks," he argued, according to a report by The Hill.

more
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/05/08/nsa_spying_is_illegal_then_lets_make_it_law_says_republican_leadership/

We needs the Precious!

[cui bono]

65. Obama already pushed to "legalize" BushCo's illegal activity.

But then he is a self-described moderate Republican...

[n2doc]

6. Spy chief had 'forgotten' about NSA program when he misled Congress

Director of National Intelligence Jim Clapper wasn’t lying when he wrongly told Congress in 2013 that the government does not “wittingly” collect information about millions of Americans, according to his top lawyer.

He just forgot.

“This was not an untruth or a falsehood. This was just a mistake on his part,” Robert Litt, the general counsel for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, said during a panel discussion hosted by the Advisory Committee on Transparency on Friday.

“We all make mistakes.”

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/241508-spy-head-had-absolutely-forgotten-about-nsa-program

Somehow when one of us makes a mistake that breaks a law, we get punished for it. Not so for the elite.

[Exilednight]

11. Yeah, "he forgot", and I own a bridge in Brooklyn. n/t

[xocet]

17. I thought that he already had made a different excuse that implied the lie was a choice....

[sabrina 1]

40. Leave Clapper alone, he's just a patriot who is under pressure to do the job Bush

appointed him to do, to keep funneling those Defense contracts to his former business partners and look what a good job he has done!

Talk about a conflict of interest, and why, since we elected Democrats to rid the government of people like Clapper, why is he still in that position after nearly seven years?

[xocet]

61. Yes, he's just up there standing a post on the wall of freedom...

[BeanMusical]

22. Clapper should be in jail.

[MrMickeysMom]

59. +1

[unblock]

26. mistakes happen. but people who aren't lying correct the record.

[seveneyes]

7. A great day for freedom

[Enthusiast]

33. +1! Oh, baby!

[djean111]

8. And my own "sweetness of being correct" - remember that utter bullshit about how the NSA was NOT

recording calls, and had no way to store them and did not have enough people to listen to them? I pointed out that yeah, they can record them and store them, and even a mere mortal citizen like me could buy software that would record all of my calls and then search through them for key words and phrases. $10 a month.

Not to mention Dragon, FFS. We can order Dragon for Christmas presents!

Why do people bother lying? Do they not know that the internet works the same for everybody?
And that people are not naive and trusting any more?

[WillyT]

15. I Remember...

[n2doc]

31. Lies give cover

Lies provide uncertainty. They allow the media to play the 'he said she said' game.

There are those who will believe lies, just because they support the cause or the leader behind it all. Always have been.

[GoneFishin]

102. "Lies provide uncertainty." True. And that fosters disunity, and the inability to coalesce

around a solution. Which is probably the objective of the lies.

[pa28]

9. SOMEBODY was wrong.

[WillyT]

12. ROFLMAO !!!

Perfect !!!

[pa28]

25. Yeah that's right. It's a callout.

I'm guilty.

[Octafish]

35. I just scared the dog LOL!

Right thing to do, seeing how that image is so perfectly, ah, sensible.

[hootinholler]

37. Woodchuck cider for everyone! n/t

[KG]

42. epic.

[bvar22]

69. DURec

Perfect!

[HeiressofBickworth]

10. I don't think this decision will change anything

Once acquired, NSA will NOT give up any technology. The use of the technology will just go further underground until people forget about it. And people DO forget.

[silverweb]

13. Count on it.

[WillyT]

14. It Changes ONE Thing... We Now Have The Courts On Our Side...

I've been told by serious lawyers, posting here, that we had not one leg to stand on.

[seabeyond]

54. not for long, if the democrats do not win in 2016. rw will stack more. they already have states

with gerrymandering. hence my issue with economic populist movement. it is short sighted. as i have been saying

[seabeyond]

53. we let this ship sail, when we saw bush implement, flagrantly breaking law. and america said nothin

it was allowed. they did not address or press.

now, people want it all over obama when it was alowed with bush. address where it is at.

right?

[OnyxCollie]

105. Wrong.

Prior to Snowden's first release, the blanket warrant for Verizon business customers, there was no way to prove standing.

Your inference that this is just Obama-bashing is without facts.

[nikto]

18. More vindication for Snowden ... (sorry, haters)

Some people hate Snowden like bacteria hate penicillin.

IF bacteria could hate, that is.

[840high]

19. Good.

[MaggieD]

20. Agreed, but....

This will probably go to the USSC and those fuckers will probably bless the NSA program. I guess we'll see.

[Logical]

21. Where are the Snowden haters? LOL. This is perfect! nt

[BeanMusical]

23. Big Kick & R!

[whereisjustice]

24. It comes as an inconvenient truth challenging our resident security concern agents. No reasonable

person can actually believe a surveillance state is good for any nation, except for the ruling class.

[WillyT]

28. Or... The Silence Of The Clams... Er, Claims...

Sorry... took too much shit over the past year or two...

Gotta Crow...

[seabeyond]

51. really looking all over the fuckin' place to see were the crow is. nt

[liberal_at_heart]

29. K&R

[pansypoo53219]

30. duh. but i knew this back when it started UNDER BUSH.

[seabeyond]

49. yes. see, i am working my way up the thread, to see what the party is about, lol

yes. we knew this. now what? lol

[OnyxCollie]

106. Could you prove it?

[Enthusiast]

32. K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations!

[malthaussen]

34. Well, the Two Vs are Validation and Vindication...

... important for the emotional health of the human organism.

-- Mal

[seabeyond]

48. interesting. and the stroking of ego? what is the necessity in that? nt

[malthaussen]

52. Helps bolster self-confidence, I reckon.

Although like most quick fixes, it is temporary.

-- Mal

[seabeyond]

57. lmFao. i love you. you are fun..... nt

[midnight]

36. If it is illegal, does that mean they can't do it and what will they do with all the

data they have already illegally tracked?

[randome]

38. Did you read nothing in the other threads about this?

The program was not ruled illegal. The appeals court says the Patriot Act does not cover it and kicked the dispute back to the lower court for clarification. In addition, the appeals court wants Congress to make it clear whether or not the program can continue.

Your phone records stored at Verizon, AT&T, etc. are still not your records. It's important to get the details right.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[seabeyond]

47. thanks. i walked into a victory party, .... looking around in a wtf. looking for, oh, the facts

before proceeding, lol

[LondonReign2]

100. Yay! Super NSA Defender Man to the rescue

I wondered how long it would take you to show up

[randome]

101. Couldn't care less about the NSA or the metadata collection.

But I do like viewing a subject with as much objectivity as possible. That's the reason I show up in these threads. It's a form of mental exercise that reminds me that nothing is as simple as it first appears and I use that reminder in other aspects of my life.

The appeals court did not rule the collection illegal and the OP conclusion is incorrect.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[LondonReign2]

109. You've spent 8,000 posts defending the NSA

Good to know you couldn't care less about them

[Octafish]

39. Shows some DUers are pretty brave.

Seeing how violent people are who lie America into war, direct the NSA to spy on Americans, and then allow the Banksters and Warmongers to walk free -- it's a miracle ANYONE would post anything in opposition to them. YOU and a good number of DUers didn't care and stood up to be counted. Says a LOT, WillyT!

[QC]

41. That judge is obviously an emoprog snowglennian poopiehead! n/t

[treestar]

44. Wait - I thought the courts were ineffective in this country

And that is why Eddie cannot expose himself to them.

We live in a police state Eddie had to flee so how could the government's acts be challenged? it must be part of the kabuki theater.

[seabeyond]

46. they way someone can twist something so very simple, to achieve a mythical victory is astounding. nt

[seabeyond]

45. wtf? are a certain some of you patting yourself on the back in cheer and glory and victory, about?

cause i gotta tell you the self righteousness in self absorption is really becoming an irritant.

[randome]

50. It's more important to be right than it is to be accurate, don't you know?

It's too easy to rain on the parade, though.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[seabeyond]

56. i couldnt do the drama sniping of the snowden issue. but seems to be with that. i have fox news rw

brother arguing this with me. about bad ole obama. and snowden did something. here is the thing.

stopped my brothers ass immediately and told him. we knew about it being implemented in 2003/2004. we were yelling about it. get the repugs off their ass and quit with the bush stupid, and step up and say no! they did not.

i told brother, dont be bringing the issue back to me cause brother sat quiet, voting bush in again, while i was saying... are you gonna think here, or just call me a flaming militant feminist liberal.

so

what am i suppose to do today. cause already fuckin know about this shit.

it is that shit, isnt it?

cause i am hearing this among my repugs, that now cheer libertarian, as they call get excited about sanders, growing out their side hair on their almost bald head and wearing that baseball cap.

[cui bono]

66. Yes, and it was illegal in 2003/2004, then Obama pushed to make BushCo's programs 'legal'

but I guess it turns out they're not so legal after all. So why did Obama push to 'legalize' something so egregious?

As to a couple other comments in your post, I would not necessarily call you a feminist considering you put politics and wanting to appear 'right' about your slanderous statements against Sanders ahead of becoming enlightened about said politician's fight for women's rights. Didn't even rec the thread. I posted it for you several times and sent you the link but you chose to ignore the fight for women's rights just because you were more into trying to take down Sanders, who, again, is fighting hard for women's rights.

And your comment about Sanders in the post I'm replying to should put the nail in the coffin about you not being a Sanders supporter, so you can stop pretending. Though I'm sure that after your antics last weekend no one on here would ever fall for your claim. So is this your latest claim about Sanders, that Republicans and Libertarians like him? They might, and if they do it's because he is fighting for the 99%. All of us. And he's not - contrary to your claim last weekend - working for Wall Street and corporations on some "trickle down" policy that will only benefit white males. There's another candidate that is much, much closer to that description.

[seabeyond]

67. obama did not push it. buscho and the congress did before he left office. obama may have extended

and reinforced, but do not turn history.

that is what i am saying. and the american people stood down.

[bvar22]

70. One man's "extending and reinforcing"...

is another man's "pushing".

In fact, "extending & reinforcing" would be interpreted by most people as "pushing".


It is fairly easy to spot the issues that Obama is willing to Fight For.

[seabeyond]

71. the LAW was passed by bushco. which is what i addressed. nt

[cui bono]

82. He pushed to extend it and he expanded it. See my other post. n/t

[seabeyond]

85. as i too acknowledged. that is not what i addressed with your post that was incorrect.

you said obama made it legal. bushco made it legal. we the people did not stand up when we saw him breaking the law, nor when he made it legal.

[bvar22]

84. I quoted your EXACT words.

No chance at deflection now.

"extending & reinforcing" IS "supporting".
In fact, it goes beyond just supporting,
it IS "pushing".

YOUR exact words.

[seabeyond]

86. WHO made the law legal? that is what i adddressed. bush made it legal. i do not change

history. others changed history. i called it out.

[cui bono]

92. If I misrememberd that, then thanks for the correction. Obama voted to make it legal.

And then vastly expanded it.

http://www.cnet.com/news/u-s-gives-big-secret-push-to-internet-surveillance/

[bvar22]

96. Then you will have to link to the post where I said that Obama started the Surveillance State.

You won't find that post, because I NEVER said that.

I was with Joe Biden in 2006:

Looks like YOU are the one trying to change history.


I'll wait for your link,
or your apology & retraction.

Knowingly Posting False Information at DU,
especially if this false information is used to attack another member is a serious offense.
I take it seriously.
You should take it seriously.
All of DU should take it seriously.

[AgingAmerican]

73. By what mechanism

...does someone extend and reinforce an issue, without 'pushing it'?

Seems to be a bit of cognitive dissonance going on here....

[seabeyond]

75. obama did not push to make legal. it was pushed to be made legal in bushco time.

[AgingAmerican]

76. Did he not 'push' to keep it legal?

nt

[seabeyond]

77. which is what i stated. but see, i read a person words. they say that obama made it legal. WRONG.

bushco made it legal. i was correcting an incorrect statement.

geeeez

read what people write, and address THAT instead creating your own fuckin argument that is not being made.

[AgingAmerican]

79. Word gymnastics

nt

[seabeyond]

87. for you and others, hell ya, you are pretzeling. bush made it legal, not obama. nt

[cui bono]

94. Obama did too. He voted for it.

And then he vastly expanded it.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/11/obama.netroots/index.html?eref=onion

http://www.cnet.com/news/u-s-gives-big-secret-push-to-internet-surveillance/

[seabeyond]

95. i htought you were saying obama did it in his presidency which is what fox says. bush's law,

and vote in the senate.

gotcha.

one of the most disappointing votes along with patriot act, while every stayed silent.

i was really really hoping the repugs would be as outraged as us. or that us... stood ground. in 2003, 2004, a criminality like we never say in the white house, up against 911 attack and deaths of americans.

i remember well.

[seabeyond]

78. illegal in 2003/2004, then Obama pushed to make BushCo's programs 'legal'

illegal in 2003/2004, then Obama pushed to make BushCo's programs 'legal'

first statement i came upon on that post. so, since it was WRONG, i stopped reading and addressed the incorrect statement.

[cui bono]

89. If I misrememberd that, then thanks for the correction. Obama voted to make it legal.

And to give telecoms immunity and then he vastly expanded the program.

In October, Obama had vowed to help filibuster an update of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that gave telecommunication companies that had cooperated with President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program immunity from lawsuits.

After 9/11, Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop, without the mandated warrant from a federal court, on electronic communication involving terrorist suspects.

Critics said Bush's Terrorist Surveillance Program was a violation of civil liberties.

The Senate voted Wednesday on the bill updating FISA -- which had a provision to shield telecommunications companies that had cooperated in the surveillance. Obama joined the 68 other senators who voted to send the bill to the president's desk.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/11/obama.netroots/index.html?eref=onion

Okay, here's something he did "push" in regards to surveillance:

U.S. gives big, secret push to Internet surveillance

Justice Department agreed to issue "2511 letters" immunizing AT&T and other companies participating in a cybersecurity program from criminal prosecution under the Wiretap Act, according to new documents obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

Senior Obama administration officials have secretly authorized the interception of communications carried on portions of networks operated by AT&T and other Internet service providers, a practice that might otherwise be illegal under federal wiretapping laws.

The secret legal authorization from the Justice Department originally applied to a cybersecurity pilot project in which the military monitored defense contractors' Internet links. Since then, however, the program has been expanded by President Obama to cover all critical infrastructure sectors including energy, healthcare, and finance starting June 12.

"The Justice Department is helping private companies evade federal wiretap laws," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which obtained over 1,000 pages of internal government documents and provided them to CNET this week. "Alarm bells should be going off."

[cui bono]

80. Obama absolutely pushed to legalize the illegal BushCo activities.

And he signed the 5 year extension of it. And also expanded it.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-worse-than-bush

In Warrantless Wiretapping Case, Obama DOJ's New Arguments Are Worse Than Bush's

We had hoped this would go differently.

Friday evening, in a motion to dismiss Jewel v. NSA, EFF's litigation against the National Security Agency for the warrantless wiretapping of countless Americans, the Obama Administration made two deeply troubling arguments.

First, they argued, exactly as the Bush Administration did on countless occasions, that the state secrets privilege requires the court to dismiss the issue out of hand. They argue that simply allowing the case to continue "would cause exceptionally grave harm to national security." As in the past, this is a blatant ploy to dismiss the litigation without allowing the courts to consider the evidence.

It's an especially disappointing argument to hear from the Obama Administration. As a candidate, Senator Obama lamented that the Bush Administration "invoked a legal tool known as the 'state secrets' privilege more than any other previous administration to get cases thrown out of civil court." He was right then, and we're dismayed that he and his team seem to have forgotten.

Sad as that is, it's the Department Of Justice's second argument that is the most pernicious. The DOJ claims that the U.S. Government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying — that the Government can never be sued for surveillance that violates federal privacy statutes.

This is a radical assertion that is utterly unprecedented. No one — not the White House, not the Justice Department, not any member of Congress, and not the Bush Administration — has ever interpreted the law this way.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/10/fact-check-obamas-misleading-answer-about-warrantless-wiretapping-daily-show

Fact Checking Obama's Misleading Answer About Warrantless Wiretapping on The Daily Show

On last Thursday’s Daily Show, Jon Stewart boldly went where no mainstream reporter has gone so far this election cycle: asking President Barack Obama why has he embraced Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program after campaigning against it on civil liberties grounds. While Stewart’s question was commendable, Obama’s answer was puzzling because it seems so obviously untrue.

Stewart first reminded Obama of his Bush-era statements that “we don’t have to trade our values and ideals for our security,” and pointedly asked the President, “do you still believe that?” He then specifically raised warrantless wiretapping, which Obama frequently criticized as a presidential candidate in 2008:

STEWART: I think people have been surprised to see the strength of the Bush era warrantless wiretapping laws and those types of things not also be lessened—That the structures he put in place that people might have thought were government overreach and maybe they had a mind you would tone down, you haven’t.

OBAMA: The truth is we have modified them and built a legal structure and safeguards in place that weren’t there before on a whole range issues.

To the contrary, there’s no indication that the still-active warrantless wiretapping program—which includes a warrantless dragnet on millions of innocent Americans’ communications—has significantly changed from the day Obama took office. With regard to the FISA Amendments Act, the Obama Administration has actively opposed all proposed safeguards in Congress. All the while, his Administration has been even more aggressive than President Bush in trying to prevent warrantless wiretapping victims from having their day in court and has continued building the massive national security infrastructure needed to support it.

But let’s take a closer look at the President’s actions on wiretapping and related issues:

Voting against FISA Amendments Act, Filibuster Telecom Immunity

Early in his first presidential campaign, then-Senator Obama was a leading critic of giving telecom companies like AT&T immunity for breaking the law to assist in the government in warrantless wiretapping. He repeatedly promised to filibuster any bill that contained retroactive immunity for telecom companies. Yet in 2008, when Congress debated the FISA Amendments Act—the law that allowed the President to give telecom companies full, retroactive immunity—Obama not only refused to filibuster the bill, but voted for it.

That decision came full circle just two weeks ago, when Obama’s Justice Department successfully convinced the Supreme Court to deny EFF’s appeal challenging the law’s constitutionality, ensuring AT&T and other telecommunications companies will never face legal consequences for breaking the law, both in the past and in the future.

Fixing FISA Amendments Act After Elected

Despite voting for the FISA Amendments Act, then-candidate Obama still promised to reform the law when he was elected president. But four years later, the FISA Amendments Act is up for renewal in Congress, as it expires at the end of this year. This would be perfect time to implement the reforms Obama promised, and there are several common sense amendments that would do so.

The Obama administration, however, is actively opposing any new privacy safeguards or transparency provisions, saying it is their “top priority” to renew it with no changes.

Stopping the Use of the State Secrets Privilege

Congress isn’t the only place where the President has been hostile to any “legal structure or safeguards” for the warrantless wiretapping. He has steadfastly sought to prevent the courts from engaging in any meaningful review

In EFF’s long-running lawsuit Jewel v. NSA, along with several related lawsuits, the Obama administration has continued the Bush Administration strategy of invoking the ‘state secrets’ privilege and demanding immediate dismissal (a practice which Obama specifically criticized on his 2008 campaign website). This, plus many other invocations of the privilege occurred even after a supposed internal policy change that was supposed to restrict its use.

Using the state secrets privilege for electronic surveillance is plainly wrong, since FISA specifically requires courts to determine the legality of national security spying. And of course the argument that the spying is a secret is increasingly untenable, as multiple whistleblowers, hundreds of pages of already-public evidence—including government admissions—and a massive construction project in Utah attest to its ongoing existence.

Sovereign Immunity

In addition, in both Jewel and other cases, the government has raised extremely technical legal arguments that the cases must be dismissed because it has “sovereign immunity.” In Al-Haramain v. Obama, a case where the government was caught red-handed illegally wiretapping attorneys, the Obama Administration was even able to convince the Ninth Circuit to dismiss the case because, according to the court, only government individuals can be sued, not the agencies that actually did the spying.

Declassifying Secret FISA Court Opinions

Both in 2010 and 2011, Obama administration officials promised to work to all declassify secret FISA court opinions that contained “important rulings of law.” These opinions would shed light whether and how Americans’ communications have been illegally spied on.

Since then, the administration has since refused to declassify a single opinion and still refuses to release the full (rescinded) legal memo written by Bush administration lawyer John Yoo that attempted to justify the illegal and unconstitutional program in 2001.

FISA court secrecy has never been more troubling, given the administration admitted in July that the FISA court ruled that collection done by the NSA violated the Fourth Amendment rights of some unknown American on at least one occasion. EFF has since filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit for that opinion, plus any others discussing the constitutionality of warrantless surveillance, but the Obama administration is fighting mightily against it.

Secret Safeguards Aren’t Safeguards

Some have suggested it’s possible when Obama said “safeguards” on the Daily Show, he is referring to some unspecified secret administrative rules he has put into place. Yet if these “safeguards” exist, they have been kept completely secret from the American public, and at the same, the administration is refusing to codify them into the law or create any visible chain of accountability if they are violated. But given the ample evidence of Constitutional violations since Obama took office (see: here, here, and here), these secret safeguards we don’t know exist are clearly inconsequential.

[seabeyond]

88. BUSH made it legal. obama extended it. how can you in good conscious ignore who made this legal?

bush broke the law. bush made it legal. obama went further. the american people did nothing.

[cui bono]

91. I'm looking for the links I'm remembering reading...

If I misremembered it I apologize. He did vote to 'legalize' it though.

And as president, Obama has renewed BushCo's wiretapping and vastly expanded BushCo's activities, which were ILLEGAL. Please see my other posts for all the info. Obama's surveillance program is far worse than BushCo's was, and then even worse than that since he's supposed to be a Democrat.

Please read the info in that other post of mine. It's full of information.

[bvar22]

81. Wait....What?

Your "Right Wing" brother supports Snowden & Whistle Blowers,
and believes that the government has overstepped its Constitutional limitations in Spying on Americans????


Some of us opposed it under Bush.....

and continue to oppose it under Obama too.

Just because "Bush Started It, waaa"
is no excuse to continue it.

[seabeyond]

90. yes. as do many rw'ers. when bush did it they ignored. when obama extended the law in place,

rw support snowdin and say obama is unconstitutional.

you are correct. welcome to the rw position.

[cui bono]

93. Liberals support Snowden.

Right wingers support their president no matter what he does.

To quote your words: "welcome to the rw position."

[bvar22]

97. As soon as President Obama made the decision to "extend & reinforce" these programs,

...he took ownership of them.

A Federal Court ruled today that the spying IS/was illegal.

Welcome to the moon-bat position.

[Katashi_itto]

55. .

[seabeyond]

58. wtf? you guys are hitting bottom dude. cant EVER reply to what i post. used all your powder?

feeling like. i have quite the cache.

[Katashi_itto]

63. "Cache?" Wtf are you talking about?

[OnyxCollie]

107. Obama looks bad.

Can't have that.

[Katashi_itto]

108. True

[treestar]

64. Especially the posts about "where are the authoritarians now?"

They are happy they think they won, not happy that freedom, or something.

And then the authoritarians find out once again, the Eddie fans exaggerated.

There is something about Eddie that makes people want to engage in hyperbole. It's fascinating.

[raouldukelives]

60. K&R nt

[bahrbearian]

68. yeah, So Snowden broke the law.

[AtomicKitten]

72. In light of this, Snowden should be pardoned, not prosecuted.

[malaise]

103. +1,000 n/t

[bvar22]

74. This is a good day for our Democracy!

Special thanks to Pulitzer Prize Winning, Whistle Blower Snowden who busted open the whole barrel of lies. He is a defender of our democracy.

I guess old Joe Biden was right after all:

Free Chelsea Manning

[Rex]

83. Careful! You will piss off the King of DU with that kinda stuff!

Nobody is more rightest then the King!

[L0oniX]

98. This will only piss off people who love Spy vs Spy err uhm Spy vs Citizens.

[True Blue Door]

99. We already knew we were right.

A court recognizing that fact is a vindication of the court, not of us.

[cantbeserious]

104. Don't Worry - The Snowden Denigration League Will Materialize Shortly

eom