General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants [View all]OilemFirchen
(7,288 posts)Interesting to hear what Nadler said, versus what was reported. If, as Nadler suggests, an individual's testimony in the secret briefing contradicts Mueller, then it's imperative to determine the truth - as the legality of the various programs turn on this question. However, two of Nadler's observations should temper this discussion (probably won't, especially with the constant sneering interjections of one of our resident Purity Queens):
Nadler notes that he "thinks it's the same question" and that "you could get specific information from that telephone..." in the context of a question related to subscriber information. He may have been referring to content, though that's certainly not explicit. He most certainly did not say that the NSA "does not need court authorization to listen to domestic phone calls", as suggested by the article.
Clearly, if the NSA has strayed from the court-sanctioned collection of numeric metadata, even to include only subscriber information, that's troubling and calls for swift legislation. Time will tell.
Finally, it's worth noting that nothing raised in either the article or hearing was put forward by either Snowden or Greenwald, and that neither of them have offered one piddly bit of useful information since, despite their empty promises. Thanks to Nadler for adding to that narrative, and to Mueller for explaining why Snowden's non-revelation is still likely illegal and potentially damaging to national security.