General Discussion

Coyotl

(15,262 posts)

30. MUST SEE. Just posted this in Videos.

Reply to cantbeserious (Reply #1)

Sun Aug 11, 2013, 01:27 PM

Aug 2013

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017138186

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

77 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

There was no "legal" way to discuss mass surveillance. Wyden tried time and time again. [View all] dkf Aug 2013 OP

Wyden Warns of Potential Public Backlash From Allowing Secret Law - 2011 cantbeserious Aug 2013 #1

MUST SEE. Just posted this in Videos. Coyotl Aug 2013 #30

Congress makes the laws. They can change them. Congress is not impotent. ProSense Aug 2013 #2

Defy this President! earthside Aug 2013 #3

And how can they change the law if they can't discuss it with all those voting? dkf Aug 2013 #4

That's ProSense Aug 2013 #5

Did you read the piece by Wyden's ex deputy chief of staff? dkf Aug 2013 #6

Yes, and that comment at the link is from the same person. nt ProSense Aug 2013 #10

So you know all that and still post what you post? dkf Aug 2013 #11

Yes, I know Congress knew, and still post. What don't you "get"? n/t ProSense Aug 2013 #12

Congress, or at least the house, came close enough to doing that to scare the shit Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #15

I thought you had all the facts G_j Aug 2013 #8

For starters, they can start showing up at NSA briefings. LOL KittyWampus Aug 2013 #24

That's all changed now. Now Congress is beginning to take the steps that should have been sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #9

Right, the President and Dems marions ghost Aug 2013 #14

That, more than anything, will give the answer as to whether it was all talk, or they really sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #16

Kicking it down the road is not acceptable now marions ghost Aug 2013 #18

That effort failed. The corruption is bipartisan and firmly in control. Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #17

The effort wasn't expected to get even close to a successful outcome. In fact it failed by only sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #19

I agree that it was close and that caused the current charade Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #21

That's probably the plan, and just like the Bail Out vote that denied the bail out, they sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #23

Pelosi saved it for the Administration dkf Aug 2013 #76

Exactly. And those that claim it could happen through morningfog Aug 2013 #7

What questions do you think should have been asked at Manning's trial? Recursion Aug 2013 #34

My point is that a trial does not provide the venue morningfog Aug 2013 #74

Rec'd n/t Catherina Aug 2013 #13

DURec leftstreet Aug 2013 #20

Some of those that object are assuming that revelations will look badly for our President. rhett o rick Aug 2013 #22

If the government makes laws that prohibit the exposure of corruption and thus JDPriestly Aug 2013 #27

I agree completely. nm rhett o rick Aug 2013 #33

Absolutely true... ljm2002 Aug 2013 #25

Well, that's not true. Wyden knew he lied because he's on the committee Recursion Aug 2013 #37

Let's break it down... ljm2002 Aug 2013 #42

Wyden knew the answer to the question he asked. That was the point. Recursion Aug 2013 #45

"We would still know" ljm2002 Aug 2013 #50

It's still just people's words Recursion Aug 2013 #53

Now you're just being silly... ljm2002 Aug 2013 #57

I'm agreeing with your last sentence Recursion Aug 2013 #59

Well I'm glad we agree on that at least... ljm2002 Aug 2013 #60

Sorry, by "we" I was thinking "people who care", rather than "the US in general" Recursion Aug 2013 #61

No problem... ljm2002 Aug 2013 #63

Wyden asked Clapper the question in March. dkf Aug 2013 #77

I hope you are as concerned as I am that there is such a thing as a "script" when rhett o rick Aug 2013 #62

There should definitely be a "script" in the public hearings about classified programs Recursion Aug 2013 #64

So how can Congressional oversight work if Congress's hands are tied by secrecy? rhett o rick Aug 2013 #67

Congress is who decides what is and isn't secret to begin with Recursion Aug 2013 #68

Congress may provide guidance for classifications but it's the individual agencies rhett o rick Aug 2013 #75

And the surveillance issue is a political one that needs to be discussed by voters. JDPriestly Aug 2013 #26

REC truebluegreen Aug 2013 #28

Kick And Recommended cantbeserious Aug 2013 #29

Problem with secrecy. Even "the government" isn't told what's happening. DirkGently Aug 2013 #31

Reporting crime to criminals always ends well. AppleBottom Aug 2013 #32

Worked so well for Thomas Drake DirkGently Aug 2013 #55

I don't know. The Government got its ass handed to it by the judge in that case (nt) Recursion Aug 2013 #70

After crushing his home, career, & pension. DirkGently Aug 2013 #73

"much harder for the Administration to claim that these programs are legal, if people can see" Coyotl Aug 2013 #35

I hope they weren't so egregious that they will be laughed at. dkf Aug 2013 #43

It might be healthy for democracy Coyotl Aug 2013 #54

Then what? I guess only �ber transparency will work. dkf Aug 2013 #56

Probably true. Can we stop screaming "the government sucks" long enough Recursion Aug 2013 #36

How can we influence it properly if they haven't come clean? dkf Aug 2013 #41

Can you put aside your disappointment long enough Recursion Aug 2013 #44

HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Aug 2013 #38

Fantastic Artcile... From The Ending: WillyT Aug 2013 #49

Wow. Great article. lengthy, but definitely worth the read. kath Aug 2013 #39

If he had gone to anyone in the government... kentuck Aug 2013 #40

He could have taken it to Wyden. Or Rand Paul, if he prefered. Recursion Aug 2013 #46

And what could they have done? kentuck Aug 2013 #47

Well, Wyden showed one thing he could do when he went off-script with Clapper Recursion Aug 2013 #48

The "chain of command" is designed stifle dissent. We dont know how many people rhett o rick Aug 2013 #65

Wyden asked a question he knew Clapper couldn't legally answer truthfully Recursion Aug 2013 #66

Did that happen before or after Snowden? kentuck Aug 2013 #69

After; if he had done it before nobody would have cared Recursion Aug 2013 #71

Funny. kentuck Aug 2013 #72

K&R. silvershadow Aug 2013 #51

K & R AzDar Aug 2013 #52

knr Douglas Carpenter Aug 2013 #58