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

FBI director admits they rarely have probable cause for using NSA collections

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 140 posts

Re: FBI director admits they rarely have probable cause for using NSA collections

#21

Post by [deleted] »

Clubber wrote: post #18
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be good, right up until it itself becomes as corrupted as the entities is prosecutes. The problem is that 'unconstitutional' is in the eye of the beholder. Take for example the classic "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.". Does this mean all gun control laws are unconstitutional or does it mean th…

>or does it mean that gun control laws are implicit in what it means to be a 'A well regulated Militia' People who use this argument are disingenuous because they wouldn't argue the same thing about press being limited to printing presses or speech being limited to the spoken word.

[deleted]

Re: FBI director admits they rarely have probable cause for using NSA collections

#22

Post by Throw10987 »

yieldcrv wrote: post #17
CoastalCoder wrote: post #12

I'm sure it would end badly, but sometimes I fantasize about the U.S. citizens having a LEO that actively investigates / prosecutes government officials who violate the constitution.

Developed nations laugh at our checks and balances, because we believe in them bUt aT LeAst wE cAN tALK aBoUt It

Believe me it is not laughing in a good way, it is more a nervous laughter with a permanent sinking feeling in the stomach kind of way.

The collective 'we' developed nations have our own set of problems, but broadly speaking from time to time self correct away from polarisation to hopefully enough of a degree.

A unique kind of leadership needs to be allowed to grow in America to stear a less polarised course.

Re: FBI director admits they rarely have probable cause for using NSA collections

#23

Post by progne »

datadrivenangel wrote: post #15

"A warrant requirement would amount to a de facto ban, because query applications either would not meet the legal standard to win court approval" I hope that we get that de facto ban. It would be good for society.

The fourth amendment is a de jure ban, and shouldn't a de jure ban be a de facto ban for law enforcement? The lawful way to make it de facto is to make it de jure first by repealing that pesky amendment.

Re: FBI director admits they rarely have probable cause for using NSA collections

#25

Post by superb_dev »

appleskeptic wrote: post #20
underseacables wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could not think of something more that America needs. The government accountability office publishers reports all the time about government waste and malfeasance, but it is consistently, dare I say, pointedly, ignored. Having a separate independent agency, cast with investigating and prosecuting crime and criminals within the government itself would be amazing. Same with congress.

This would be awful. Theft and bribery are already prosecuted aggressively. If anything, too much. It’s gotten to the point that high government officials can’t afford to be lobbied. Here they are, some of the most powerful people in the world, paid barely enough to live an hour drive away from DC, having to spend a fair bit of their personal income to go to lunch and dinner with leaders of private industry. As for c…

> It’s gotten to the point that high government officials can’t afford to be lobbied.

This is just nonsense, most members of congress take lobby money.

https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/top-recipients

Re: FBI director admits they rarely have probable cause for using NSA collections

#26

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

appleskeptic wrote: post #20
underseacables wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could not think of something more that America needs. The government accountability office publishers reports all the time about government waste and malfeasance, but it is consistently, dare I say, pointedly, ignored. Having a separate independent agency, cast with investigating and prosecuting crime and criminals within the government itself would be amazing. Same with congress.

This would be awful. Theft and bribery are already prosecuted aggressively. If anything, too much. It’s gotten to the point that high government officials can’t afford to be lobbied. Here they are, some of the most powerful people in the world, paid barely enough to live an hour drive away from DC, having to spend a fair bit of their personal income to go to lunch and dinner with leaders of private industry. As for c…

> It’s gotten to the point that high government officials can’t afford to be lobbied.

Of all the sad things I’ve read today, this one is surely the saddest. Good thing it isn’t based on a reality I have observed… where do you think those billions “to” Ukraine are really going?

Re: FBI director admits they rarely have probable cause for using NSA collections

#27

Post by advisedwang »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #12

I'm sure it would end badly, but sometimes I fantasize about the U.S. citizens having a LEO that actively investigates / prosecutes government officials who violate the constitution.

I'm not sure having police investigating our elected officials is such a good thing. If you look at corruption investigations of high level officials in history, they are very frequently partisan attacks. For example, the investigation into Lula da Silva turned out to have been driven by a group of right wing judges and prosecutors that had his ouster as a goal, not justice.

It's not even a question of whether corruption happens! Of course it does. E.g. maybe Lula did some kind of wrongdoing. However frequent and highly publicized corruption investigations put the power in the hands of police, prosecutors and judges and takes it away from democratic means. Frankly, I'd rather have a little bit of corruption than allow police to say who is an acceptable leader.

Part of the issue is that there is a lot of grey area in what even counts as corruption. What counts as "violating the constitution" is even greyer, especially in the US where the constitution itself is short, vague and poorly phrased leaving decisions on what is constitutional to be a political question in itself.

Re: FBI director admits they rarely have probable cause for using NSA collections

#28

Post by jpk »

appleskeptic wrote: post #20
underseacables wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could not think of something more that America needs. The government accountability office publishers reports all the time about government waste and malfeasance, but it is consistently, dare I say, pointedly, ignored. Having a separate independent agency, cast with investigating and prosecuting crime and criminals within the government itself would be amazing. Same with congress.

This would be awful. Theft and bribery are already prosecuted aggressively. If anything, too much. It’s gotten to the point that high government officials can’t afford to be lobbied. Here they are, some of the most powerful people in the world, paid barely enough to live an hour drive away from DC, having to spend a fair bit of their personal income to go to lunch and dinner with leaders of private industry. As for c…

You seem to be arguing that we have a system where theft and bribery are necessary in some way, and therefore we shouldn't prosecute it aggressively. Wouldn't we rather reform the system such that it makes theft and bribery less attractive?

Re: FBI director admits they rarely have probable cause for using NSA collections

#29

Post by tehwebguy »

appleskeptic wrote: post #20
underseacables wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could not think of something more that America needs. The government accountability office publishers reports all the time about government waste and malfeasance, but it is consistently, dare I say, pointedly, ignored. Having a separate independent agency, cast with investigating and prosecuting crime and criminals within the government itself would be amazing. Same with congress.

This would be awful. Theft and bribery are already prosecuted aggressively. If anything, too much. It’s gotten to the point that high government officials can’t afford to be lobbied. Here they are, some of the most powerful people in the world, paid barely enough to live an hour drive away from DC, having to spend a fair bit of their personal income to go to lunch and dinner with leaders of private industry. As for c…

> It’s gotten to the point that high government officials can’t afford to be lobbied.

Good! But also, not true!

Re: FBI director admits they rarely have probable cause for using NSA collections

#30

Post by jauer »

superb_dev wrote: post #25
appleskeptic wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be awful. Theft and bribery are already prosecuted aggressively. If anything, too much. It’s gotten to the point that high government officials can’t afford to be lobbied. Here they are, some of the most powerful people in the world, paid barely enough to live an hour drive away from DC, having to spend a fair bit of their personal income to go to lunch and dinner with leaders of private industry. As for c…

> It’s gotten to the point that high government officials can’t afford to be lobbied. This is just nonsense, most members of congress take lobby money. https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/top-recipients

Members of congress are a small subset of government officials.

That they get away with corrupt behavior doesn't mean that people in the civil service should have to be anxious about trivial things. If a government employee can be influenced by something as minor as a pen or lunch, they are in the wrong line of work.

Post reply on HN