Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 300 posts

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#31

Post by [deleted] »

strictnein wrote: post #27
mgamache wrote: post #5

The problem with the press coverage of this topic is a lack of personalization. What does the government know about me and why is that important? I think most US citizens would be shocked to learn that most of our personal information is accessible without a warrant. (phone records / bank account / email / web history / phone location data / Car location / Purchase history / Facebook etc....). Also, how much the gove…

All that is available without a warrant? Strange then that the government gets search warrants for lots of that stuff. edit: Maybe my sarcasm/snark wasn't clear: almost the entirety of the parent comment's list of stuff available to the government without a warrant actually requires a warrant.

[deleted]

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#32

Post by [deleted] »

strictnein wrote: post #27
mgamache wrote: post #5

The problem with the press coverage of this topic is a lack of personalization. What does the government know about me and why is that important? I think most US citizens would be shocked to learn that most of our personal information is accessible without a warrant. (phone records / bank account / email / web history / phone location data / Car location / Purchase history / Facebook etc....). Also, how much the gove…

All that is available without a warrant? Strange then that the government gets search warrants for lots of that stuff. edit: Maybe my sarcasm/snark wasn't clear: almost the entirety of the parent comment's list of stuff available to the government without a warrant actually requires a warrant.

[deleted]

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#33

Post by fictioncircle »

strictnein wrote: post #27
mgamache wrote: post #5

The problem with the press coverage of this topic is a lack of personalization. What does the government know about me and why is that important? I think most US citizens would be shocked to learn that most of our personal information is accessible without a warrant. (phone records / bank account / email / web history / phone location data / Car location / Purchase history / Facebook etc....). Also, how much the gove…

All that is available without a warrant? Strange then that the government gets search warrants for lots of that stuff. edit: Maybe my sarcasm/snark wasn't clear: almost the entirety of the parent comment's list of stuff available to the government without a warrant actually requires a warrant.

They can't get the content of communications w/o a warrant is the reason. They need that for legal action.

However, the stuff they can get without a warrant is enough people /do/ freak out if its applied in a manner they understand.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#34

Post by shamwow »

lordnacho wrote: post #19

I have a question about this whole government intrusion thing. Perhaps a lawyer can explain: Suppose the government gets a warrant to wiretap some guy. He happens to get a call from his lawyer, and the government overhears that he's committed some crime. Now there's an attorney/client privilege preventing you from directly producing the tape (is there?) so you can't just do that. But the fact that you've heard this m…

TLDR: use illegal methods to find a crime, use that to make up a way to "discover" it legally. Present to a judge, easy conviction.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#35

Post by rosser »

strictnein wrote: post #26

One feels that Paul doesn't quite have a full grasp of the techniques he's describing (and it sounds like he's conflating a lot of stuff that Snowden leaked), but that headline sure gets the clicks, so let's go with it. Especially since it's Greenwald, who uses Paul's jumbled mess of an explanation to burn everything down. Doesn't even make sense what he's proposing: Instead of getting a warrant to record the America…

Paraphrasing Donald Rumsfeld, "You spy on your own people within the legal regime you've got, not the one you wish you had."

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#36

Post by kfe »

strictnein wrote: post #27
mgamache wrote: post #5

The problem with the press coverage of this topic is a lack of personalization. What does the government know about me and why is that important? I think most US citizens would be shocked to learn that most of our personal information is accessible without a warrant. (phone records / bank account / email / web history / phone location data / Car location / Purchase history / Facebook etc....). Also, how much the gove…

All that is available without a warrant? Strange then that the government gets search warrants for lots of that stuff. edit: Maybe my sarcasm/snark wasn't clear: almost the entirety of the parent comment's list of stuff available to the government without a warrant actually requires a warrant.

I think it is important to note, that thought "lots of stuff" may may be available to the government without a warrant, "lots of stuff" may not be usable in court without a warrant. So - search warrant is often needed...

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#37

Post by youdontknowtho »

It's a mistake to empower and legitimize the right. Rand Paul is an extremist on issues of life and limb. Just because he's "good" on this issue doesn't change that. In fact, it makes it more likely that he will be afforded the position of a moderate because he went against his party on this issue, when he is just as extreme as anyone in his party on any others.

It is something that Democrats will need to understand at some point. You have to deny them victories, even on issues that you support. It sucks but the right has outsized influence over the country because of party discipline like I've just described.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#38

Post by strictnein »

rosser wrote: post #35
strictnein wrote: post #26

One feels that Paul doesn't quite have a full grasp of the techniques he's describing (and it sounds like he's conflating a lot of stuff that Snowden leaked), but that headline sure gets the clicks, so let's go with it. Especially since it's Greenwald, who uses Paul's jumbled mess of an explanation to burn everything down. Doesn't even make sense what he's proposing: Instead of getting a warrant to record the America…

Paraphrasing Donald Rumsfeld, "You spy on your own people within the legal regime you've got, not the one you wish you had."

You can legally tap phones of Americans in a far less convoluted way than what Rand Paul attempted to describe.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#39

Post by sand500 »

youdontknowtho wrote: post #37

It's a mistake to empower and legitimize the right. Rand Paul is an extremist on issues of life and limb. Just because he's "good" on this issue doesn't change that. In fact, it makes it more likely that he will be afforded the position of a moderate because he went against his party on this issue, when he is just as extreme as anyone in his party on any others. It is something that Democrats will need to understand…

>Democrats will need to understand at some point. You have to deny them victories, even on issues that you support.

Putting party warfare comjng first before the actual issue is the reason why politics is such a shitshow.

Re: Rand Paul: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants

#40

Post by guelo »

youdontknowtho wrote: post #37

It's a mistake to empower and legitimize the right. Rand Paul is an extremist on issues of life and limb. Just because he's "good" on this issue doesn't change that. In fact, it makes it more likely that he will be afforded the position of a moderate because he went against his party on this issue, when he is just as extreme as anyone in his party on any others. It is something that Democrats will need to understand…

This is not a Democrat/Republican issue. Obama and Bush both expanded these programs with their party's blessing. There are pockets of civil liberty defenders in both parties.
Post reply on HN