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

Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 493 posts

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#361

Post by StavrosK »

sk5t wrote: post #353
tialaramex wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're spooks. This is what they're for. The constraints are at best just theatre, obviously their adversaries aren't going to obey these rules, and they know that so if they are to be effective (and if they aren't why would they exist at all?) they will also disobey these rules. The purpose of such rules in practice is to help the American public to sleep at night despite having tacitly authorised a nightmare. You…

> But as much as they enjoy bluster, Americans are afraid [...] Are Americans really afraid? Or is it that Americans feel comfort in having the meanest dog on the block, even if that dog sometimes nips its master?

When I expressed horror and outrage at the notion that the TSA can go through your luggage, an American friend told me "well if it keeps us safe...", so I'd say "afraid".

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#363

Post by [deleted] »

BoorishBears wrote: post #211
0xdde wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have some deeper point you're trying to get at? This sounds like a total nitpick, and I'm not sure where you're getting your erroneous corrections from. The illegal wire-tapping was a matter known to the public before Obama's time and there was a case brought by the EFF during the Bush years. The CIA torture comment most likely refers to the fact that a Senate report on CIA abuses was published during Obama's…

It is plain as day the current language in the comment is implying Obama was behind it. A clarification to that is pretty far from a nitpick.

[deleted]

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#364

Post by bosswipe »

fareesh wrote: post #341

In operation crossfire hurricane, the FBI doctored an email and used its contents as part of an effort to get a FISA warrant to spy on a member of the incoming administration. This gave them access to listen to conversations of anyone 2 levels of connection away from the target. They also withheld exculpatory evidence at the time of requesting the warrant, and relied on a fictional document paid for by the opposing p…

You present a very one-side of view of that story that has been extremely muddied by a constant stream of conspiracy theories and misinformation from everyone including the president. Even though I agree with Trump on some things and dislike Biden the lying, conspiracy theories and general disrespect for our democracy is completely disqualifying in my book.

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#365

Post by yyyk »

triceratops wrote: post #288
yyyk wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Congress could have passed acts granting blanket pardons to all involved. That's just a slightly different method of doing the same thing. I agree involving Congress in pardons would make sense. >It might have been better for the rule of law if he had been convicted and removed forcibly, then subject to prosecution. It would have also involved more chaos in an already chaotic time, is that better than him resigning?…

Congress granting pardons is different. It's limited in scope and has a higher bar, since it requires the assent of a majority of the legislative branch. What's chaotic about punishing a lawbreaking president? Sounds pretty lawful to me. It's how healthy democracies are supposed to operate. Pardoning Nixon set a bad precedent.

It's not so limited in scope, Congress could pardon half the felonies in the law book. It's only limited because Congress does yet have the authority to pardon people already in bars (or does it? I could be wrong here), but that could be changed.

As for Nixon, not pardoning him would have led to some very messy politics (does he even quit?) in the middle of the oil crisis/price controls/etc. I have no idea how it would have played out, but the US needed at the time a functioning presidency (more than usual).

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#366

Post by fareesh »

bosswipe wrote: post #364
fareesh wrote: post #341

In operation crossfire hurricane, the FBI doctored an email and used its contents as part of an effort to get a FISA warrant to spy on a member of the incoming administration. This gave them access to listen to conversations of anyone 2 levels of connection away from the target. They also withheld exculpatory evidence at the time of requesting the warrant, and relied on a fictional document paid for by the opposing p…

You present a very one-side of view of that story that has been extremely muddied by a constant stream of conspiracy theories and misinformation from everyone including the president. Even though I agree with Trump on some things and dislike Biden the lying, conspiracy theories and general disrespect for our democracy is completely disqualifying in my book.

The conspiracy theory is that the agency conspired to do this for political reasons. Even if you discount that entirely it does not take away from the fact that this is possible and happened, and that in itself ought to be cause for concern.

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#367

Post by alfiedotwtf »

cortesoft wrote: post #315
Ansil849 wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cynicism aside, I genuinely don't understand how the legal system works where an action may be found illegal - with no actual penalties despite organizations and persons having committed that action.

Part of the issue is that, until a court case like this, it isn't certain whether something is illegal or not. It took a lot of back and forth in court to determine that this was illegal. Now, if someone does it again...

It will happen under a different technicality and under the table that it will be another 30 years before it’s brought to light and again nobody will be prosecuted

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#368

Post by kelnos »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #342
tialaramex wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're spooks. This is what they're for. The constraints are at best just theatre, obviously their adversaries aren't going to obey these rules, and they know that so if they are to be effective (and if they aren't why would they exist at all?) they will also disobey these rules. The purpose of such rules in practice is to help the American public to sleep at night despite having tacitly authorised a nightmare. You…

Huge parts of these agencies' activities have been moved off the books or to private entities. It's not as simple a matter as just cutting off their funding anymore.

Sure, but the money still has to come from somewhere, and that's from appropriations authorized by Congress.

Now, if you believe that these agencies have amassed and hoarded enough of the money they've already been given that they now have an endowment that can perpetually fund their activities, then yes, that would mean you really can't stop them. But I'd find it hard to believe that's the case; what they do is not cheap, and I'd be surprised if there's all that much left over after they spend their yearly budget on regular operations.

If Congress voted to completely defund these agencies, they'd go away. Not immediately, and I'm sure there will still be some in power who create limited shadow agencies that run on much, much smaller budgets, but they can't operate at the scale they do now without continued funding.

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#369

Post by philh »

newswasboring wrote: post #347
tialaramex wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're spooks. This is what they're for. The constraints are at best just theatre, obviously their adversaries aren't going to obey these rules, and they know that so if they are to be effective (and if they aren't why would they exist at all?) they will also disobey these rules. The purpose of such rules in practice is to help the American public to sleep at night despite having tacitly authorised a nightmare. You…

>and if they aren't why would they exist at all? Reminds me of Lisa simpsons rock which protects against tigers.

I read that as "if they aren't going to be effective". Not a claim that they are effective, but a claim that they're intended to be effective.

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#370

Post by ryani »

Cd00d wrote: post #323
est31 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah but Gina had unanimous support by Democrats, Republicans, and the entire CIA to become the Director of the CIA. * 109 generals oppose her nomination in a letter: https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/sites/default/files/RMLSena... * yes, there were some democrats who voted in her favour, but there were republicans too who voted against her. Overall though, the overwhelming majority democrats did vote against her. F…

I have no goal in undermining your point; it has only raised a curiosity for me. Overall your point is strong with your second bullet, it's just the first bullet I want to discuss without detracting from. 109 generals sounds like a large number. It's a compelling metric! But, I don't really know how many generals (and admirals) there really are in the military. I just know that the US military is kinda huge, so there…

> I see in the letter that all of the signees are retired, which expands the total number of generals (and admirals) alive significantly.

Active duty generals generally do not comment on political matters. Once they have left military service it's much easier for them to give a public opinion about politics without creating a conflict of interest.

Post reply on HN