General Discussion

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

146. There is no exception to the 4th Amendment unless there has been some kind of coup.

Sat Jun 29, 2013, 11:02 PM

Jun 2013

Even those who would like not to be impeded by the Constitution, they know better than to trample on it, at least publicly.

Just how can there be an exception, regarding Domestic Intelligence, to the 4th Amendment, and if by some secret ballot or whatever, this has occurred, the only response by any American Citizen should, and will be I am certain, outrage beyond belief.

Ron Wyden did say 'if the people knew how they are using the law, they would be outraged'. I hope this is not what he meant, because he is right, there will be outrage across the political spectrum.

By now, some Democrat should have introduced legislation to rescind any such attempt to violate the US Constitution. That is what their oath requires them to do. Please explain this 'exception' to the 4th Amendment.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

202 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Isn't it amusing to see all the Obama defenders ignoring the issue of mass surveillance? [View all] cali Jun 2013 OP

maybe people should post more on Wyden, Udall and Leahy JI7 Jun 2013 #1

Why haven't we heard from Snowden? Maximumnegro Jun 2013 #3

I've posted lots on Leahy and Wyden. Those OPs sink like little stones. cali Jun 2013 #4

maybe because people don't really have a problem with what they are saying JI7 Jun 2013 #5

Maybe because keeping threads on snowden nice and frothy sibelian Jun 2013 #18

+1,000,000 nt Andy823 Jun 2013 #66

Funny, haven't seem you starting or posting much in any threads about anything proactive. KittyWampus Jun 2013 #74

Ah. Others should not post so everyone will be forced to read what you want. aquart Jun 2013 #83

So what do you have a problem with in what they are saying? You are willing to give up your liberty rhett o rick Jun 2013 #132

liberty kardonb Jun 2013 #160

And how do you know they are "keeping track of ill-wishers and and conspiracies to do our country rhett o rick Jun 2013 #192

Really? Haven't seem those posts. You make it seem like you've started many OP on them… KittyWampus Jun 2013 #72

Oh, disingenuous GARBAGE sibelian Jun 2013 #17

World Net Daily as a resource. OnyxCollie Jun 2013 #152

Why don't you post something on Wyden, Udall and Leahy? Lots has been posted, right here sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #55

Lots? Sorry, it isn't lots. KittyWampus Jun 2013 #76

Were you around during the Bush years when they were implementing these policies? sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #78

About the only things BHO has done wrong are the continuance of any of junior's initiatives, indepat Jun 2013 #100

Sabrina the problem with Bush was that his way was clearly illegal because he was cstanleytech Jun 2013 #122

I remember exactly what Bush did. Then they changed the FISA law by adding an amendment sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #128

Oh I was around and I disagree with granting him immunity from it still however cstanleytech Jun 2013 #136

No law trumps the Constitution. Not that it hasn't been tried in the past. So I do not accept it as sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #145

Until a court says the law is or was unconstitutional its the law just like how cstanleytech Jun 2013 #148

I gather then that you think . . . markpkessinger Jun 2013 #165

No, the courts do make mistakes like Dred Scott v. Sandford cstanleytech Jun 2013 #193

You say, "Until a court ..." If you are a legal expert, where's your legal authority for that? AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #170

Courts adjudicate. OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #172

It looks like you have a word salad. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #176

Not clear, are you saying you approve of the Bush spy machine currently being used by the government rhett o rick Jun 2013 #133

In listening to Attorney Stone debate Glenn Greenwald, it seemed to me truedelphi Jun 2013 #130

What they can't ignore are Maximumnegro Jun 2013 #2

make shit up much? There have been few of those cali Jun 2013 #7

Can we see those statisics? OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #45

Actually the number of posts claiming "hero" and "message, not messenger" have remained sibelian Jun 2013 #15

Looks like you got nothing. nm rhett o rick Jun 2013 #131

I think it would be better to separate the issue both from Obama and Snowden Douglas Carpenter Jun 2013 #6

Of course it would. And I've tried to do that in post after post cali Jun 2013 #8

that irritated me too... I have not been excessively critical of President Obama nor have you - Douglas Carpenter Jun 2013 #10

I have generally been respectful of the President and have repeatedly cali Jun 2013 #12

Not for one moment will I separate the President from this. mick063 Jun 2013 #34

Some say that everthing being done is legal. 18 U.S.C. § 2511 says that it is not. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #67

Right mick063 Jun 2013 #94

You mean the part of 18 U.S.C. § 2511 which states... stevenleser Jun 2013 #119

Is so, start with FOREIGN Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #137

What probable cause was presented before a court, with evidence of wrong doing to justify the sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #143

Since we are dealing with the particular law the other poster offered, none is needed. It's an stevenleser Jun 2013 #144

There is no exception to the 4th Amendment unless there has been some kind of coup. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #146

Since you are not an expert on Constitutional law your opinion on the subject is irrelevant stevenleser Jun 2013 #147

I'm not an expert on Constitutional law. OnyxCollie Jun 2013 #158

Well said. But someone is being willfully ignorant. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #171

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, OnyxCollie Jun 2013 #179

Sorry ignored, I cannot read your response. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #159

Don't worry. You're not missing anything ConservativeDemocrat Jun 2013 #161

That's one of a couple of standard responses, sadly. stevenleser Jun 2013 #167

It would be truly interesting to have a debate... ConservativeDemocrat Jun 2013 #189

'The oddest thing is the absolute pure anti-Democratic party hatred.' freshwest Sep 2013 #202

Aww. OnyxCollie Jun 2013 #183

You haven't answered my question. We are talking about Domestic Intel sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #162

I've said the same thing to you under different OPs. It's your opinion that this constitutes stevenleser Jun 2013 #163

I don't care who signed off on it. Every respected Civil Liberties Lawyer I know along with sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #164

Did those lawyers who commented see the warrant? I'll be they haven't and are guessing. stevenleser Jun 2013 #166

What warrant are you talking about? We all saw the warrant, or what was supposed to be the warrant. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #168

Sabrina I strongly recommend that you read stevenlesser's NSA piece ucrdem Jun 2013 #177

K&R... I think if anyone doubted before how creepy and authoritarian our government has become woo me with science Jun 2013 #9

excellent point marions ghost Jun 2013 #33

Thank you, cali. These either or folks are precisely the kinds of people JDPriestly Jun 2013 #11

It boggles the mind that we have such a large contingent of cali Jun 2013 #14

"love it or leave it" = idiots. Here's one of my fav quotes... L0oniX Jun 2013 #38

what a great quote. I'll remember that cali Jun 2013 #47

Actually I don't think it's very amusing at all. sibelian Jun 2013 #13

I hear you. cali Jun 2013 #16

What's amusing is how many posts along this theme there are.... Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2013 #19

What really gripes me is they wouldn't be doing those things if this were 5 years ago MotherPetrie Jun 2013 #20

Isn't it amusing that people don't acknoweldge that President Obama put restrictions in graham4anything Jun 2013 #21

absolute bull shit. cali Jun 2013 #24

Polls show- America is OK with the whole thing. Keeping America safe is the #1 concern of the graham4anything Jun 2013 #25

If polls showed 99% of Americans approving, I'd still know they were wrong. cali Jun 2013 #28

Field of Dreams. If you build it, they will come. graham4anything Jun 2013 #29

oh, so the Vietnam war had a legitimate purpose? cali Jun 2013 #30

+1 Snotcicles Jun 2013 #26

True, and pithy. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #173

Obama Defenders? In MY Democratic Underground?! Scootaloo Jun 2013 #22

Yep. It's already devolved into that and the 2014 elections haven't even started. BlueCaliDem Jun 2013 #75

It's as if a group of DUers have turned into NSA corporate contractors fasttense Jun 2013 #23

Good point...It's the Private Contractors who can sell info to whomever they wish to... KoKo Jun 2013 #31

Exactly right. Contractors and their employees are in it for the money. There is no way that AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #180

Well there are cops, military and other gov DU members ...and the cult of personallity. L0oniX Jun 2013 #42

+100 nt Mojorabbit Jun 2013 #174

How Soon.... cynzke Jun 2013 #182

I guess some people are simply willing to give a bit of privacy for security. DCBob Jun 2013 #27

It's not "a bit of your privacy" though. And, while it may not bother you... KoKo Jun 2013 #32

No doubt there are some issues of concern but thats not a reason to trash the entire system. DCBob Jun 2013 #110

So should those who are brave give up privacy so the insecure can feel safe? L0oniX Jun 2013 #40

what you call brave others might call naive. DCBob Jun 2013 #108

Home of the naive huh ...nice modification. Must be just muscial lip service eh? L0oniX Jun 2013 #112

Theres are plenty of things we need to be brave about.. DCBob Jun 2013 #113

Yea well I don't control who is calling what "terrorism". A witch hunt in the USA is not acceptable L0oniX Jun 2013 #121

I can help you with that... DCBob Jun 2013 #125

How many "Al-Qaeda" terrorists do you think exist? Are they killing more people than the number of L0oniX Jun 2013 #127

Did you ever consider.. DCBob Jun 2013 #129

It is more than a bit. I also question whether it is for security. morningfog Jun 2013 #48

And those people ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #58

That might have been Dick Cheney's favorite quote. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #181

Not hardly... ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #196

The phrase "deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" is the attitude that I would expect of Dick Cheney. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #197

Your town of DC lives by this sort of thing, Bob. You did not 'give' your privacy Bluenorthwest Jun 2013 #91

I can assure no one here feels like they are living with a "blankie and warm security milk". DCBob Jun 2013 #109

I call it partisanitis, and it is klilling the country nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #35

Here is Joy Reid on Glenn Greenwald: Whisp Jun 2013 #36

Blame Snowden. Snowden through his drip, drip, drip of leaks puts continuing focus pnwmom Jun 2013 #37

I would say that those who don't care about my privacy rights also don't care what happens here. L0oniX Jun 2013 #41

When the first suitcase bomber sets off a dirty nuclear bomb in a major city, pnwmom Jun 2013 #50

There is no such thing. That is a baseless fear mongering hypo. morningfog Jun 2013 #51

"There is no such thing." The Federation of American Scientists disagrees with you. pnwmom Jun 2013 #53

You should read up on it. morningfog Jun 2013 #59

You should read up on it -- from a scientific source. pnwmom Jun 2013 #62

That article is explicit in addressing a radiological attack, not a nuclear suitcase bomb. morningfog Jun 2013 #73

A dirty bomb with nuclear materials is often referred to as a suitcase bomb. It requires pnwmom Jun 2013 #79

It is not a nuclear bomb, though. Not even a dirty nuclear bomb. morningfog Jun 2013 #81

It is called a dirty bomb or a dirty nuclear bomb. And it is something to fear. pnwmom Jun 2013 #84

Rinse and repeat talking points, even when they fail. morningfog Jun 2013 #86

You're the expert on that. n/t pnwmom Jun 2013 #87

Hahaha!!! Major Hogwash Jun 2013 #101

So is the "they are spying on us" stuff treestar Jun 2013 #64

Are you an associate of Kindasleaza Rice? L0oniX Jun 2013 #52

No. But I followed the Senate testimony. pnwmom Jun 2013 #54

Not worth responding too. Enjoy your fear. L0oniX Jun 2013 #56

we used to laugh at people like you back in the day.. frylock Jun 2013 #126

Sorry you're so afraid, but you have no right to take mine away. nt wtmusic Jun 2013 #184

There is more to come. No doubt it will include foreign and domestic actions. morningfog Jun 2013 #49

Oh yeah, authoritarian goons are hilarious, and it's all a big pile o' laughs kenny blankenship Jun 2013 #39

Call out of Obama Defenders on DU treestar Jun 2013 #43

He doesn't have the votes Stinky The Clown Jun 2013 #60

How does a law pass without a Congressional vote? treestar Jun 2013 #61

What a cheap shit cop out. You do this over and over. Stinky The Clown Jun 2013 #82

YOU don't get it treestar Jun 2013 #124

"Lead" . . . . . look it up. Stinky The Clown Jun 2013 #149

It is sad. Lady Freedom Returns Jun 2013 #185

See Jill Simpson's piece attacking the National Security Complex & calling upon POTUS to investigate Cliff Arnebeck Jun 2013 #44

But such is the irresistible nature of truth, that all it asks, and all it wants is the liberty of Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #46

Far from amusing. AmBlue Jun 2013 #57

Is Snowden is jail yet? DontTreadOnMe Jun 2013 #63

I keep hoping to hear that he is. Lady Freedom Returns Jun 2013 #186

I'm discouraged by the belief in belief that there is a single definition of liberal or Democratic loyalsister Jun 2013 #65

While I strongly support economic justice, an applaud others that do including politicians even when AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #104

That's not fair. They're also obsessed with Glen Greenwald. DirkGently Jun 2013 #68

Its not amusing. Its disturbing and sad NoOneMan Jun 2013 #69

SO> you start a thread attacking other DU'ers BUT where's your threads on Feinstein's legislation? KittyWampus Jun 2013 #70

do you mean Leahy's legislation? Because Feinstein hasn't introduced any legislation cali Jun 2013 #95

boy, does it figure you wouldn't respond to my post responding to this cali Jun 2013 #102

More scary than amusing. Imagine if they were a majority? Skip Intro Jun 2013 #71

Breaking ProSense Jun 2013 #77

Nice to see you have everyone in their proper boxes tied up neatly with a bow. Buzz Clik Jun 2013 #80

Amusing you ignored it until Glenn and Ed told you to jump. DevonRex Jun 2013 #85

Except I didn't, hon. cali Jun 2013 #96

I never saw anybody talk about this when they renewed it in December. DevonRex Jun 2013 #106

Frankly, Waiting For Everyman Jun 2013 #88

Binney left 2001, Drake in 2007, it's amusing Progressive dog Jun 2013 #89

Amusing that I knew who the OP was just by reading the title. lamp_shade Jun 2013 #90

Actually, it's pretty disturbing; following charismatic leaders while ignoring common sense Zorra Jun 2013 #92

Nothing is Obama's fault. Will you please try to understand that? n-t Logical Jun 2013 #93

They are skipping over denials of blanket surveillance now, and declaring it wise and good. kenny blankenship Jun 2013 #97

You never pass up an opportunity to attack our president, do you? kestrel91316 Jun 2013 #98

there is no attack on President Obama here. but you know that. cali Jun 2013 #103

You are, by far, the most divisive, corrosive influence on DU. kestrel91316 Jun 2013 #153

"and no I fucking well do not attack him, dearie." ProSense Jun 2013 #157

That is an impressive list, that is Hekate Jun 2013 #178

Illogical Fallacy. nm rhett o rick Jun 2013 #134

I hope that was a satirical compilation of the dumb things Union Scribe Jun 2013 #150

Hilarious and insanely frightening. Safetykitten Jun 2013 #99

Can't admit its true AND defend the dear government at the same time. idwiyo Jun 2013 #105

And you ignore dennis4868 Jun 2013 #107

No, I just give far more weight to my Senators, Leahy and Sanders cali Jun 2013 #111

Who are just as capable of being wrong as anyone else. I've never seen any of those three reference stevenleser Jun 2013 #123

More disturbing than amusing. NaturalHigh Jun 2013 #114

I'm rather amused at all of the above ignoring the facts of the situation. stevenleser Jun 2013 #115

nothing like referring to your own "expert" opinion cali Jun 2013 #117

My "opinions" have multiple fact based sources, sources that you are unable to refute. stevenleser Jun 2013 #120

Wyden Eatacig Jun 2013 #116

And Senator Leahy? Senator Sanders? Senator Udall? cali Jun 2013 #118

It is more effective to throw out one deflection. morningfog Jun 2013 #139

Here is the legislation Senator Leahy introduced. ProSense Jun 2013 #155

But but but GiGi had a brief dalliance with pornography and "Criticism is Racism!(tm)" nt DRoseDARs Jun 2013 #135

And now they will ignore President Carter. morningfog Jun 2013 #138

Ah, Obama Freedom - That Indescribable Feeling Of Being Coddled In The Warm Glow Of Surveillance cantbeserious Jun 2013 #140

I'll speak up ecstatic Jun 2013 #141

OMG what surveillance are you talking about? Sheepshank Jun 2013 #142

Bravo! Lady Freedom Returns Jun 2013 #187

What is one supposed to **DO** about the "massive, ever expanding national security state" CakeGrrl Jun 2013 #151

First thing to do is clarify the OP hyperbole and straw man. ProSense Jun 2013 #156

start by supporting Senator Leahy's cali Jun 2013 #190

I bet the Obama Defenders have been in love with Obama since even before 2008 or at least 2004 AZ Progressive Jun 2013 #154

Never mind... ucrdem Jun 2013 #169

Give me a break! Lady Freedom Returns Jun 2013 #175

Funny, Senator Leahy thinks it's "that big". cali Jun 2013 #191

They didn't till they smelled blood in the water. Lady Freedom Returns Jun 2013 #199

As I have said before there are three separate issues: davidpdx Jun 2013 #188

Well said Cali. Puglover Jun 2013 #194

Actually, I Think the Shoe is on the Other Foot On the Road Jun 2013 #195

You won't get a fact based response. You will either get an ad-hominem response, or ignored. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #200

K & R !!! WillyT Jun 2013 #198

Don't you mean 'most Americans'? Drunken Irishman Jun 2013 #201