Latest Breaking News

Katashi_itto

(10,175 posts)

30. Shit. This is who I campaigned and voted for?

Reply to think (Original post)

Fri Jul 19, 2013, 06:10 PM

Jul 2013

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:

NSA Phone Snooping Cannot Be Challenged in Court, Feds Say [View all] think Jul 2013 OP

Above the law... wtmusic Jul 2013 #1

To be chanllenged in court Cryptoad Jul 2013 #24

Why the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, of course. wtmusic Jul 2013 #26

Collecting Data and Searching Cryptoad Jul 2013 #31

If you say so, Ace. wtmusic Jul 2013 #36

YOur point reinforces Cryptoad Jul 2013 #41

Not sure where you're getting your information but it's not accurate. wtmusic Jul 2013 #65

Wrong analog - this would be like the post office saving the return address and the to address karynnj Jul 2013 #62

. wtmusic Jul 2013 #66

You are mistaken thefool_wa Jul 2013 #40

NO,,,, there is no logic that could Cryptoad Jul 2013 #42

There is no decision regarding the massive, invasive collection of data on the scale that the NSA JDPriestly Jul 2013 #56

Two things Cryptoad Jul 2013 #58

Being challenged in court is what determines if it is an illegal act. JoeyT Jul 2013 #33

I think you are reading more into it than there is Cryptoad Jul 2013 #35

I think the administration's view is that a court cannot even consider it because it is protected JDPriestly Jul 2013 #57

The Meta Data collected is archieved so it can be search by warrant at a later date. Cryptoad Jul 2013 #59

The mere act of collecting information is prohibited under the Wiretap Act. wtmusic Jul 2013 #67

+1. blkmusclmachine Jul 2013 #44

And yet magically we can't know if it is illegal, because nobody can challenge it in court... limpyhobbler Jul 2013 #53

Nobody has said you can't petition the courts about the legality of this . nt Cryptoad Jul 2013 #60

Are you joking? Cases have been rejected for lack of standing. limpyhobbler Jul 2013 #63

It just has to be alleged to be an illegal act. An argument has to be made, and you have to have JDPriestly Jul 2013 #55

The content of these conversation is not being collected and saved Cryptoad Jul 2013 #61

If you have the metadata, you can easliy figure out what is being said. JDPriestly Jul 2013 #72

No public oversight = tyranny Android3.14 Jul 2013 #2

This message was self-deleted by its author ladjf Jul 2013 #3

yet another story.... dtom67 Jul 2013 #4

What are we fighting for? avaistheone1 Jul 2013 #5

I have seen the enemy. blkmusclmachine Jul 2013 #45

... Mnemosyne Jul 2013 #6

In the run-up to the 2008 election... FiveGoodMen Jul 2013 #7

And I fought those detractors tooth and nail ... Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #15

But I'm sure they meant that they were above the law...... DeSwiss Jul 2013 #8

Oh my fucking god. The Stranger Jul 2013 #9

Greasing the skids for the next GOPee Administration. blkmusclmachine Jul 2013 #46

No law of the land SamKnause Jul 2013 #10

Congress can change the law Rosa Luxemburg Jul 2013 #23

DC: By, and for, the 1% ONLY. blkmusclmachine Jul 2013 #47

How quaint! City Lights Jul 2013 #11

If we can't challenge things in court, then what can we do? Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #12

The President pals around with a number of high-profile NAR/Christian Dominionists. blkmusclmachine Jul 2013 #48

In the public interest, huh? That's great, Mr. President, because truth2power Jul 2013 #13

Just remember tazkcmo Jul 2013 #14

Alrighty then. Solly Mack Jul 2013 #16

if it cannot be challenged in court - that proves it is completely legal, right? Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #17

Expecting that to be the main argument in 3, 2, 1.... nt Pholus Jul 2013 #19

11-Dimensional Bull$hit, blkmusclmachine Jul 2013 #49

Exactly. Plus the BFEE* Walk Free. Octafish Jul 2013 #74

Cannot be challenged in court--what does that leave? Comrade Grumpy Jul 2013 #18

Excellent question /nt think Jul 2013 #20

We Be "Above The Law", so Nyaaa, Nyaaa ... you can no longer seek "justice" in US courts anymore. nt 99th_Monkey Jul 2013 #21

They're paying attention to us! Chef Eric Jul 2013 #22

... PD Turk Jul 2013 #25

They can say any thing they want. That doesn't make it so. The Executive Branch 1monster Jul 2013 #27

Read it and weep. Thinkingabout Jul 2013 #28

I do... think Jul 2013 #38

Actually, I don't think even one person responding did. Hosnon Jul 2013 #52

You've sure got some strange concepts of legal systems over there. dipsydoodle Jul 2013 #29

Our "Rights" only exist when they don't threaten the rich ... HumansAndResources Jul 2013 #50

Shit. This is who I campaigned and voted for? Katashi_itto Jul 2013 #30

This displeases me ... brett_jv Jul 2013 #32

Another term for this type of thing, is catch-22 daleo Jul 2013 #73

I welcome this conversation, JoeyT Jul 2013 #34

Disgusting that this invasive spying on Americans is going on under a Democratic administration. blackspade Jul 2013 #37

Not unexpected from this gang but, gee, thanks a pantload, Obummer. PSPS Jul 2013 #39

Police State blkmusclmachine Jul 2013 #43

Sensationalist b.s. article sweeping the internet. Hosnon Jul 2013 #51

Look 5 posts up ... brett_jv Jul 2013 #68

What gives an administration, the executive branch, the authority to decide what is constitutional JDPriestly Jul 2013 #54

They're not given that authority ... brett_jv Jul 2013 #69

Under their rationale for why there is a lack of standing, what is the difference in real world TheKentuckian Jul 2013 #76

Bush administration attacked other countries, Obama administration attacks this country avaistheone1 Jul 2013 #64

This is NO LONGER a democracy. Imagine if the same was said by a President Palin. n/t NoodleyAppendage Jul 2013 #70

No one is above the law kick. n/t bobthedrummer Jul 2013 #71

I guess that taking these from everyone could get a bit expensive, Trillo Jul 2013 #75

the (telephone routing) data belongs to the phone company .nt quadrature Jul 2013 #77