General Discussion

SlimJimmy

(3,251 posts)

138. They *needed* the warrant because the meta data does touch on the fourth amendment

Sat Jun 22, 2013, 04:04 PM

Jun 2013

when the contents are opened. And we know from the NSA itself that some contents were opened. Clearly, the government knew this and was covering its backside in advance of something they were intending to do. The problem is that it was not a specific warrant, as required by the Constitution, but a general warrant covering literally hundreds of millions of people.

I know you are pinning your argument on the fact that the court has ruled that this data is not owned by individuals, but as I have explained above, it went well beyond simply collecting and storing the data. In addition, I have not yet seen your argument for the collection of texts, e-mails, and drone surveillance. I'd be interested in your take on that.

This is a good discussion, and I appreciate you keeping it civil.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

167 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The abuse of FISA, prosecuting whistleblowers, PRISM, kill lists. Guess what. It isn't about Obama [View all] Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 OP

There is a difference between leaking and whistleblowing. randome Jun 2013 #1

The abuse of FISA, PRISM, surveilling journalists and kill lists are still realities. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #2

All the NSA stuff is based on Snowden's ridiculous claims that have no evidence. randome Jun 2013 #11

You contradict yourself Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #14

His claim about the phone metadata was obviously correct. randome Jun 2013 #16

How can it be a legal warrant? Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #21

First the phone metadata has always been ruled as belonging to the companies, not individuals. randome Jun 2013 #23

That MD belongs to the carrier service is irrelevant. It allows a blanket invasion against citizens Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #26

'Irrelevant'? The law permits this and now you say it is irrelevant. randome Jun 2013 #29

The OP is not about whether they have legal cover or not. All powers try to validate their GoneFishin Jun 2013 #40

Courts have ruled for a hundred years or so that third-party records are not yours. randome Jun 2013 #74

Bullshit. What do you think retroactive immunity for the telecoms was all about. LEGAL COVER. GoneFishin Jun 2013 #150

I hope you enjoy giving this power to the president backwoodsbob Jun 2013 #70

What 'power' are you talking about? randome Jun 2013 #80

What law permits spying on the American people? sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #131

Show me that the NSA is doing that. randome Jun 2013 #137

For the umpteenth time, it's not just metadata, and you know it. Th1onein Jun 2013 #97

How do you know it's more than metadata? randome Jun 2013 #100

Do you read ANYTHING on this topic, Randome, or do you just blather on? Th1onein Jun 2013 #103

Your hair on fire paranoia is showing DontTreadOnMe Jun 2013 #134

Paranoid? I think not. Th1onein Jun 2013 #144

when randome says one thing in one thread, that directly contradicts what he said in another thread Monkie Jun 2013 #142

Re: Bullshit? Red Oak Jun 2013 #69

I could steal a pencil from the office and use that as evidence I stole something, Life Long Dem Jun 2013 #98

If you stole heroin from the office it would be proof your boss deals heroin. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #104

Also illegal Life Long Dem Jun 2013 #107

Then they should share a cell. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #108

This is hilarious! You've got to be kidding! Th1onein Jun 2013 #92

What is 'it'? randome Jun 2013 #96

Can you say obsfucate? Th1onein Jun 2013 #99

He's deeply invested in never "getting it". DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2013 #167

HEY RANDOME! Here is the info you need to educate yourself! Th1onein Jun 2013 #115

Every bit of that is supposition and innuendo. randome Jun 2013 #120

Yeah, that Utah facility is probably just a big, BIG fitness center. Th1onein Jun 2013 #145

It's still in the process of being built is my point. randome Jun 2013 #146

Wow, not a good arguement at ALL. Th1onein Jun 2013 #148

It's a waste of time. PSPS Jun 2013 #24

You forgot Meta Data, Meta Data, Meta Data, Meta Data, Meta Data, Meta Data, GoneFishin Jun 2013 #43

You believe that why? tblue Jun 2013 #55

You misunderstood the tone of my post. It is in the context of a list of tired and worn excuses. GoneFishin Jun 2013 #149

I think that about covers it. I've been accused of being at least two of those as I SlimJimmy Jun 2013 #66

There's a new one out now: Rand Paul supporters put this scandal out there. Th1onein Jun 2013 #105

There certainly is think Jun 2013 #9

Bringing up Bush Era abuses does not support Snowden's ridiculous claims. randome Jun 2013 #13

Snowden's ridiculous claims? think Jun 2013 #15

And yet no one can furnish evidence of this. It's all just manufactured crisis crap. randome Jun 2013 #17

So, their testimony means nothing? ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #153

The Patriot Act revisions indirectly made legal what was illegal under Bush think Jun 2013 #20

You are seeing what you want to see. randome Jun 2013 #25

How do you use the FOREIGN Intelligence Surveillance Act for a solely domestic operation? Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #28

You don't. Where is the evidence that the NSA does that? randome Jun 2013 #30

Now you're just playing ridiculous games. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #37

Right. Asking for evidence is 'ridiculous'. randome Jun 2013 #41

No, you won't but that's OK because I don't have expectations of you. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #65

Show me evidence that the NSA is spying on all of America. randome Jun 2013 #67

Collecting metadata for intel purposes is spying Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #73

I don't consider it to be spying. I understand your point of view but I disagree with it. randome Jun 2013 #76

"I don't consider it to be spying." Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #82

And some continue to ignore facts that are as plain as day think Jun 2013 #34

"...sometimes circumvented the spirit of the law..." isn't that melodramatic where I come from. randome Jun 2013 #39

What are the "ridiculous" claims of Snowden that you keep refering to? think Jun 2013 #47

It's how the system works. Agencies are called to account all the time. randome Jun 2013 #51

By "fine line," I assume you're talking about that toss of a coin + 1%, right? Th1onein Jun 2013 #101

If an analyst is looking at an email that suggests something illegal... randome Jun 2013 #106

I've seen the same documents you have, Randome. You're obsfucating again. Th1onein Jun 2013 #110

Why do you keep saying they are pulling everything? There is no evidence of that. randome Jun 2013 #112

BECAUSE THEY ARE PULLING EVERYTHING. Th1onein Jun 2013 #147

So according to you, under President Obama A Simple Game Jun 2013 #62

What 'fact'? You haven't provided any. randome Jun 2013 #64

he's shown no evidence of his wild claims. DJ13 Jun 2013 #119

You steal from your employer, you go to jail. It's that simple. randome Jun 2013 #121

Perhaps I don't understand, what if anything has changed from Bush to President Obama A Simple Game Jun 2013 #123

The FISA Amendments Act of 2008. randome Jun 2013 #127

You misunderstood my question, what changed from Bush to President Obama? A Simple Game Jun 2013 #130

I mistakenly believed Obama had a hand in that. But he did have a hand in this. randome Jun 2013 #135

Only to those in power. morningfog Jun 2013 #58

In case you haven't been paying attention for the past hundred years or so... randome Jun 2013 #60

Obama is in power, it is on his terms and definitions that he goes after "leakers" morningfog Jun 2013 #113

Do you actually know the difference? n/t ReRe Jun 2013 #72

I don't know the precise legal terms myself but I know they have very different legal meanings. randome Jun 2013 #79

OK... ReRe Jun 2013 #88

Drake also stole documents and I believe that was the only charge that stuck, wasn't it? randome Jun 2013 #89

Whatever. ReRe Jun 2013 #117

"Legal meanings" Bonobo Jun 2013 #154

Well, actually we're in a time when social networks railsback Jun 2013 #3

K & R Wonderful report, also the freedom to move about the country and our home streets might be a Thinkingabout Jun 2013 #5

These were powers given to Bush Turbineguy Jun 2013 #4

I did not like the wiretapping without a warrant or even when the excuse we don't have time to Thinkingabout Jun 2013 #8

You cannot deny - Hell Hath No Fury Jun 2013 #38

+100% mazzarro Jun 2013 #6

The courts will decide treestar Jun 2013 #7

Do you think this will be overturned by courts, those judges know the Constitution and will see the Thinkingabout Jun 2013 #10

They courts upheld the FISA treestar Jun 2013 #18

I might win the lottery even though I hardly buy a ticket. Thinkingabout Jun 2013 #109

What has that got to do with it? treestar Jun 2013 #122

These same courts abused the FOREIGN Intel Surveillance Act and the 4A Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #12

Look if you can't trust the US system of government at all treestar Jun 2013 #19

It will become the worst of the worst if you insist on sad arguments like that. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #22

What do you intend to do about it? treestar Jun 2013 #32

We should accept our fate like good little subjects. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #52

So we can't do anything? treestar Jun 2013 #61

But you don't want anything done. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #85

Don't put it on me treestar Jun 2013 #86

I don't want another system. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #93

The courts decide whether it is constitutional or not treestar Jun 2013 #124

Because that isn't the system we have. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #126

The interpretation of the Fourth Amendment treestar Jun 2013 #129

Ultimately the citizens of this ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #155

Didn't a few of your trotters live under a monarchy Progressive dog Jun 2013 #63

Don't forget Santayana - nt HardTimes99 Jun 2013 #160

So...the system works? randome Jun 2013 #27

No, the system did not work Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #31

So the system is to send to jail people you believe have done wrong? treestar Jun 2013 #33

It's better than your system where the law and the Constitution are ignored to spy on everyone. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #44

the law and the Constitution are ignored? treestar Jun 2013 #48

Please cite the probable cause for the NSA program. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #53

Non responsive treestar Jun 2013 #59

No warrant can be issued without probable cause. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #68

There have been a zillion cases in the courts on that very question treestar Jun 2013 #71

FISA is for foreign agents Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #75

Cite what? treestar Jun 2013 #84

"Cite what?" Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #90

I cited cases that have to do with spying treestar Jun 2013 #125

Good evidence for my contention Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #128

There is no evidence of 'wholesale spying on Americans inside America'. None. randome Jun 2013 #35

Clapper lied. He had time to prepare an answer and he had time to privately amend his answer Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #42

'Prepare an answer'? What could he possibly have said? randome Jun 2013 #46

You're being ridiculous again. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #54

Maybe he was afraid that some would blow it out of proportion. If so, he called that right. randome Jun 2013 #56

Why settle for ridiculous when you can shoot for fanciful? Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #57

when randome says one thing in one thread, that directly contradicts what he said in another thread Monkie Jun 2013 #143

He lied. Let's call it what it was. He could have answered the question by saying SlimJimmy Jun 2013 #77

Yes, he lied about something he was sworn to keep secret. randome Jun 2013 #83

Let me guess. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #94

There have been at least three other whistle blowers that have verified what he said. Getting SlimJimmy Jun 2013 #114

The only 'secret document' that has shown anything is the warrant about phone metadata. randome Jun 2013 #118

That's an extremely parsed view. SlimJimmy Jun 2013 #132

Metadata is not your 'papers'. They belong to the telecom companies. randome Jun 2013 #136

They *needed* the warrant because the meta data does touch on the fourth amendment SlimJimmy Jun 2013 #138

We don't know that texts & emails are being collected. randome Jun 2013 #139

Sorry for the delay in responding. We were out to dinner last night with friends. SlimJimmy Jun 2013 #165

Why do you keep saying strictly domestic communications? bornskeptic Jun 2013 #141

A-FUCKIN'-MEN! Hell Hath No Fury Jun 2013 #36

K&R Also about the guy BEFORE Obama - and if that walking-around-free-thanks-to-Obama war criminal MotherPetrie Jun 2013 #45

So it's about the guy before Obama... Iggo Jun 2013 #49

Good OP. .... Same regurgitated excuses. Anybody buy this stuff anymore? GoneFishin Jun 2013 #50

Absolutely! ReRe Jun 2013 #78

+ 1,000,000 dawg Jun 2013 #81

+ 1,000,001 forestpath Jun 2013 #87

Make that 1,000,002 RC Jun 2013 #116

Very few people realized the momentum behind the events of today siligut Jun 2013 #91

"I could rec this if you hadn't added the second paragraph." Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2013 #102

Maybe it is his idealism that believes it can be tamed siligut Jun 2013 #111

We're deluding ourselves if we think we can stop this once and for all. pnwmom Jun 2013 #95

We need to make it the political kiss of death for a Democrat to support this. dawg Jun 2013 #151

It would be the political kiss of death if a President pnwmom Jun 2013 #152

Well, then why stop there? dawg Jun 2013 #156

Why NOT stop there? pnwmom Jun 2013 #157

Meta data on all Americans is a step too far. dawg Jun 2013 #158

There was a related Supreme Court decision decades ago, pnwmom Jun 2013 #159

There was one that said separate but equal was okay too. dawg Jun 2013 #161

I didn't say we should be doing it. pnwmom Jun 2013 #163

Wrong is wrong. dawg Jun 2013 #164

Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2013 #133

THANK YOU!!!! YOU ARE 100% CORRECT!!!! Yavin4 Jun 2013 #140

The obstructionists got away with fucking murder under Bush. We cannot allow that to happen again. Initech Jun 2013 #162

Reality. Great post. nt Zorra Jun 2013 #166