General Discussion

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)

155. That spin is fascinating. If anything, this is a rejection of Snowden. What the ruling says is...

Fri May 8, 2015, 10:42 AM

May 2015

... "we think the NSA data collection exceeds FISA and the Patriot Act, but we're so worried about the impact that not doing this may have on the efforts to protect America from terrorism that we are not going to put a stop to it. In fact, congress should pass a law saying it's legal, then we will be happy"

----------------------------------------------------------
So basically if you are the President or anyone in the executive branch whose responsibility it is to protect the country against terrorism and are searching for the right balance between privacy and investigative abilities, the appeals court just validated and expressed the same concerns. In fact, Obama's speech a few weeks before Snowden committed his crimes expresses the same concerns.

Snowden has added nothing to the conversation.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

207 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Snowden has been vindicated and he is a hero [View all] Harmony Blue May 2015 OP

The courts have not addressed whether the program is constitutional. Thinkingabout May 2015 #1

Do you think that there is anything constitutionally correct about this? marym625 May 2015 #3

Notice poster never agrees, just brings up something else. Rex May 2015 #5

unbelievable marym625 May 2015 #9

IT is right here in this thread...the grudge against someone for being right. Rex May 2015 #15

smh marym625 May 2015 #22

When you are right then it remains right. Glad to know you noticed my consistent stand. Thinkingabout May 2015 #12

Consistency in deflection should not be a point of pride. merrily May 2015 #113

+1,000 malaise May 2015 #51

Notice poster's username is a misnomer WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2015 #63

It's called propaganda. woo me with science May 2015 #111

Good point. Continual deflection. merrily May 2015 #112

I don't know about that legendary part. d_legendary1 May 2015 #156

In reading the constitution and knowing warrants have been requested and granted, yes. Thinkingabout May 2015 #7

warrants have been granted against everyone in the US? marym625 May 2015 #10

The warrants went to the providers of the records of which was their property. The records does not Thinkingabout May 2015 #14

Which is another bullshit policy marym625 May 2015 #19

Call it whatever you please, the Constitution was around before any of the providers. Thinkingabout May 2015 #23

This has been challenged marym625 May 2015 #25

If the president and congress believe it to be Exilednight May 2015 #55

excellent question. Ask them marym625 May 2015 #58

Exxon pumps gas into me, and that's apparently okay. JackRiddler May 2015 #193

EXXON gas in your vehicle does not give you ownership of the pumps, station Thinkingabout May 2015 #194

Exxon POLLUTION in my veins gives me ownership... JackRiddler May 2015 #200

So pollution is the answer, nope don't think it is, maybe this is a part of the problem. Thinkingabout May 2015 #205

Are you a Turing machine? JackRiddler May 2015 #206

Perhaps mentioning Exxon turns into pollution might make one Thinkingabout May 2015 #207

Do you purchase any articles, services, etc like groceries, milk, gas? Thinkingabout May 2015 #16

What! ? marym625 May 2015 #24

If you eat food, you must support capitalism! JackRiddler May 2015 #201

oh! my bad! marym625 May 2015 #202

by the way marym625 May 2015 #13

The quote i gave you was from the link listed in the thread. Thinkingabout May 2015 #18

General warrants were requested and granted, JDPriestly May 2015 #42

Yes, it is true our homes are "safe" but when a warrant is issued then your home can be inspected. Thinkingabout May 2015 #66

We used to "expect" - reasonably! - that our phone conversations/mail were private bread_and_roses May 2015 #119

Are you old enough to remember looking at a phone bill and observing the long distance calls, Thinkingabout May 2015 #172

Yeah, I remember those bills. randome May 2015 #186

That is the same information delivered to the NSA. I do not know who started Thinkingabout May 2015 #187

Of course I understand that warrants were issued - I said so bread_and_roses May 2015 #189

Why do you think the phone call records do not belong to the providers? Thinkingabout May 2015 #190

Of course the gas pump owner jeepers May 2015 #203

The phone data records never went through you phone, they belong to the provider. Your Thinkingabout May 2015 #204

As I remember the Constitution says, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, rhett o rick May 2015 #169

But you don't know that warrants have been requested and granted. You are rhett o rick May 2015 #90

My understanding is that, yes, the program is constitutional and that... PosterChild May 2015 #73

and other courts have found it is unconstitutional marym625 May 2015 #81

I don't believe so . ... PosterChild May 2015 #83

Which Supreme Court case is the basis for your understanding about constitutionality? merrily May 2015 #114

I think they will fail to extend Harmony Blue May 2015 #8

Issuing the warrants is in the Constitution and until that is changed getting the Thinkingabout May 2015 #38

The courts found it illegal Aerows May 2015 #43

+1 Ed Suspicious May 2015 #45

warrants in the constitution? Mnpaul May 2015 #48

The warrants are not issued to persons, houses, they are issued to providers of services, the Thinkingabout May 2015 #94

Clearly, you are no Fourth Amendment scholar. merrily May 2015 #115

Got the doctorate by completing a 6,000 page thesis on the 3rd Amendment. Glassunion May 2015 #158

LOL! But seriously folks.... merrily May 2015 #159

Don't knock the 3rd Amendment. Glassunion May 2015 #163

Plus that lovely news that the Republican congress people are so freaking dysfunctional dixiegrrrrl May 2015 #62

How many illegal activities are constitutional? Can you give me a list? n/t cui bono May 2015 #27

The question of constitionality... PosterChild May 2015 #85

No. There are two kinds of analysis. One is whether a law is, on its face, unconstitutional, merrily May 2015 #116

I find your analysis... PosterChild May 2015 #126

Those purporting to be attorneys on DU always avoid substantive legal questions riderinthestorm May 2015 #151

I do not purport to be an attorney on DU, or off DU. merrily May 2015 #153

Thanks! Keep facts in focus ! /nt/ PosterChild May 2015 #70

It must hurt, Thinkingabout. It must truly hurt. delrem May 2015 #75

I read it was under the Patriot Act it was illegal, the ruling did not exclude other methods. Thinkingabout May 2015 #93

Other methods of what? And, with all due respect, what you give a damn about is totally irrelevant. merrily May 2015 #118

:facepalm: BeanMusical May 2015 #95

It did address the question of whether the program is legal and said no. merrily May 2015 #110

Great news marym625 May 2015 #2

+1 a whole bunch! Enthusiast May 2015 #31

YEP. Metadata illegal...he was right. Rex May 2015 #4

Oh if only marym625 May 2015 #36

Telephone metadata collection was known in 2006, long before anybody knew who Snowden was Cali_Democrat May 2015 #6

No it wasn't Harmony Blue May 2015 #11

The article is from May 2006 and it specifically mentions the phone data collection program Cali_Democrat May 2015 #26

Insane ... Fantastic Anarchist May 2015 #180

Right. It's more about Obama who pushed to "legalize" it after BushCo did it illegally. n/t cui bono May 2015 #28

+1000 marym625 May 2015 #37

It was known, but there was no proof Oilwellian May 2015 #79

Yes. We had hints that it was happening. delrem May 2015 #82

Hints? Cali_Democrat May 2015 #103

What Snowden revealed was way more that just telephone data. And the lie came from your rhett o rick May 2015 #92

The ruling mentioned in the OP was specific to telephone metadata collection only Cali_Democrat May 2015 #101

"way more than just telephone data." woo me with science May 2015 #107

Best anti-bs, anti-shill post ever. merrily May 2015 #122

That's a phenomenal compilation! Posting it is a great public service - thanks! nt GliderGuider May 2015 #123

Jesus. F4lconF16 May 2015 #170

Thanks for all those links red dog 1 May 2015 #171

Wonder why Eric Holder thought he might have a criminal case against Snowden, then? merrily May 2015 #117

Hopefully Snowden will stand trial for his crimes. stonecutter357 May 2015 #124

Yeah, you gotta love the circular logic: Snowden's a criminal! closeupready May 2015 #183

How has anyone's privacy been invaded? randome May 2015 #188

Always Thought So - Always Will cantbeserious May 2015 #17

Thank you again Mr. Snowden. You are an American hero! n/t wildbilln864 May 2015 #20

I am think the full picture is a little more nuanced. iandhr May 2015 #21

Oh please. truebluegreen May 2015 #34

He's not stuck there. He's welcome back - as long as its with an FBI escort. LeftInTX May 2015 #108

Gandhi? Is that you? truebluegreen May 2015 #139

Got the avatar FlatBaroque May 2015 #182

Indeed. truebluegreen May 2015 #198

Someone should make a statue of Snowden! TerrapinFlyer May 2015 #29

How about Snowden bedsheets? randome May 2015 #141

Nothing in that link vindicates Snowden MohRokTah May 2015 #30

A whistleblower by definition has not committed crimes Harmony Blue May 2015 #40

Snowden is NO whistleblower. MohRokTah May 2015 #52

With that my respect for the H with a right arrow just went down a notch. zeemike May 2015 #64

IOW ... NanceGreggs May 2015 #77

Not just any board, a progressive or liberal board zeemike May 2015 #87

Your own words ... NanceGreggs May 2015 #88

Preach it LittleGirl May 2015 #89

My comment was on the comment of the poster. zeemike May 2015 #136

Wow. Predictable immediate, attacking defense not just of HC, but of her *ICON.* woo me with science May 2015 #99

My posts have had nothing to do with HC ... NanceGreggs May 2015 #102

Propaganda is a low, disreputable occupation. woo me with science May 2015 #104

Again, totally off-topic ... NanceGreggs May 2015 #106

heh Bobbie Jo May 2015 #154

Ain't that the damn truth. Number23 May 2015 #184

As I told someone who thought I might be interested, "I'd rather be bitten by rabid dogs merrily May 2015 #120

LOL Cali_Democrat May 2015 #167

If you're gonna let an anonymous poster on a message board influence your vote... Cali_Democrat May 2015 #181

I am sure you feel that voting is for the right thinking people. zeemike May 2015 #185

+ up! /nt/ PosterChild May 2015 #74

The only one doing the spying... Oilwellian May 2015 #80

Spy's don't publicly release information that they know Joe Turner May 2015 #86

+ 1 red dog 1 May 2015 #174

Hey, you're back! BeanMusical May 2015 #96

Kicked and recommended! Enthusiast May 2015 #32

kick samsingh May 2015 #33

I think the compelling public service that Snowden provided - lovemydog May 2015 #35

Agree 100% marym625 May 2015 #39

History moved pretty quickly in vindicating Daniel Ellsberg, and I believe lovemydog May 2015 #44

But no one will be punished but Snowden, cuz, you know, America. nt valerief May 2015 #41

And the authoritarians haz a sad. 99Forever May 2015 #46

pretty much! blackspade May 2015 #47

So stealing hundreds of thousands of documents... randome May 2015 #49

This... rep the dems May 2015 #60

Of course it's more fun to think of some DUers as 'losing' something in this debate. randome May 2015 #65

He's a whistleblower, randome. delrem May 2015 #78

A whistleblower reveals illegality or fraud. randome May 2015 #125

And according to the courts, he revealed illegality. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #129

I don't see it that way. randome May 2015 #132

Really? Because bank robbers usually rob banks to take and keep money. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #133

"...wasn't all that secure..." randome May 2015 #137

He'd be more of a hero in my books if he'd simply released all of the documents in full Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #128

I can appreciate that viewpoint but I don't see ANY government wanting its secrets exposed. randome May 2015 #134

Except as we just saw, unless you have people leaking classified info Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #135

But in reality we have created such a cluster fuck all over the planet with randys1 May 2015 #177

Crows are becoming endangered... L0oniX May 2015 #50

Nah, they're still all living in denial and declaring him a traitor. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #130

. AuntPatsy May 2015 #53

No he hasn't, and no he isn't. gcomeau May 2015 #54

Good. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #131

WTF do you mean... "Good"? gcomeau May 2015 #157

I don't consider it 'legitimate'. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #160

On what grounds? gcomeau May 2015 #173

Yes. YES. YES!!!! 840high May 2015 #56

Huge K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT May 2015 #57

It's time for the president to give him a full pardon and allow him to come home. totodeinhere May 2015 #59

Good. delrem May 2015 #61

And a personal opinion is a more honest one, IMO. randome May 2015 #67

You say delrem May 2015 #69

Yikes, can only see 19 of 64 replies but have a question for all carolinayellowdog May 2015 #68

I like Snowden. delrem May 2015 #72

Wrong on both counts, but don't mind me Blue_Tires May 2015 #71

This also, it seems to me, to be a triumph for US law. delrem May 2015 #76

Authoritarian concern agents are outraged, introduce new legislation... whereisjustice May 2015 #84

Moscow to Kennedy flights available alcibiades_mystery May 2015 #91

I would not kvell just yet. There's still the Supremes. merrily May 2015 #97

"Who are these three judges???" Spitfire of ATJ May 2015 #98

He is absolutely a hero. It's way past time to end the criminal secret government. woo me with science May 2015 #100

K & R AzDar May 2015 #105

And metadata is just the tip of the iceberg for these criminals. woo me with science May 2015 #109

Said it before and I'll say it again. I'm glad I know what Snowden revealed. merrily May 2015 #121

+1 navarth May 2015 #142

Rec. and Kudos to Snowden. But that is one nasty link. Smarmie Doofus May 2015 #127

I see the usual Snowden bashers and totalitarians are out in force hueymahl May 2015 #138

I will NEVER understand the need to call fellow DUers 'authoritarians'. randome May 2015 #140

Not "does not cover it," but does not authorize it. The agency, part of the Executive Branch, merrily May 2015 #146

Fine by me. Such judicial rulings happen nearly every day. randome May 2015 #147

Not really a daily occurrence at the SCOTUS. Something being a common practice for a long time is merrily May 2015 #148

This was actually a federal appeals court ruling. randome May 2015 #149

Some posters are consistently anti-freedom and pro authoritarianism hueymahl May 2015 #152

States that build surveillance machines woo me with science May 2015 #191

easy to understand "kiss up, kick down"-- authoritarian aggression carolinayellowdog May 2015 #150

Yeah the authoritarians are so easy to spot, they instantly reply to your type of post Rex May 2015 #165

kick for Ed Snowden. navarth May 2015 #143

He was already vindicated. But he's still not a hero. True Blue Door May 2015 #144

Can't wait until they pull this sh#t on Hillary. nt ucrdem May 2015 #145

That spin is fascinating. If anything, this is a rejection of Snowden. What the ruling says is... stevenleser May 2015 #155

Snowden is on the right side of this issue, it doesn't make him my hero. cheapdate May 2015 #161

Yes, that was my first reaction too. Damansarajaya May 2015 #162

Nothing new here. n/t Mira May 2015 #164

He hasn't been "vindicated". Funny how ONE illegal act is BAD, but another is perfectly fine? George II May 2015 #166

Yes!! Puzzledtraveller May 2015 #168

K&R red dog 1 May 2015 #175

Post removed Post removed May 2015 #176

This I like! nt wolfie001 May 2015 #178

I already recommended this, but wish I could again. Fantastic Anarchist May 2015 #179

Ellsburg was a Hero Zo Zig May 2015 #192

I'll just leave this here from 2013 Paulie May 2015 #195

Thanks Zo Zig May 2015 #197

Daniel Ellsberg Calls Edward Snowden A 'Hero' Not water May 2015 #196

What about the perfectly legitimate foreign intelligence operations? Adrahil May 2015 #199