41–50 of 144 posts
These prosecutors jobs is a dream job for psycopaths, jack the ripper would exceed in a job like this.
We need the hacker news party.
This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates. The Entitled Party had complete control of the House and a 60 senator supermajority in the Senate for the first year of Obama's presidency, not to mention near complete control of the "news" media, Hollywood, television, the arts, the unions, etc, etc. If they wanted to introduce habeas rights fo…
I can't tell if this is a markov generator trolling me or not. All I can tell you is: I'm glad the questions are being asked, but don't go assuming John Cornyn is a friend to hackers.
Maybe, but I hope you can appreciate why you're getting the ad hominem accusations from your words in the original post.
Can't we appreciate when justice is done or good questions are asked no matter who is asking them?
Personally, I know the national media is going to navel gaze on any opportunity to put any hard questions to this administration. We might as well support the opposition party for at least serving some purpose.
This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…
True, but so what? Isn't the point of having an adversarial political system that when one side fucks up, the other will call them on it? Even if they're being giant hypocrites in the process?
And with that perspective in mind, I can confidently assert that the constitution has been a wild success.
The good news is that some good questions have been asked, and the reply will be available for scrutiny. I'm not sure Cornyn was the best member of Congress to write this sort of letter. Yes, he is on the Committee of the Judiciary, but his political leanings might result in posturing that obfuscates the issues we care about. That being said, I'm glad someone asked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. This is poisoning the well. There are some good questions in the posted letter. Unfortunately, we are unlikely to get good answers. Whatever their political stripes or past failings, at least someone is willing to press the issue instead of…
I'm happy the questions are being asked, but Cornyn's no friend of civil liberties and I suggest you keep that in mind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm happy the questions are being asked, but Cornyn's no friend of civil liberties and I suggest you keep that in mind.
Only a small percentage of Congress are friends to civil liberties. This is the august body that gave us the Patriot Act, after all.
Voted YES on extending the PATRIOT Act's roving wiretaps. (Feb 2011)
Voted NO on requiring FISA court warrant to monitor US-to-foreign calls. (Feb 2008)
Voted YES on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad. (Aug 2007)
Voted NO on implementing the 9/11 Commission report. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees. (Sep 2006)
Voted NO on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods. (Sep 2006)
Voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act. (Mar 2006)
Voted YES on extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision. (Dec 2005)This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…
Definition of hyper-partisanship: Attacking the opposing side even when they agree with you.
This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…
The Swartz case aside, nobody likes the DOJ. Liberals don't like them because they're tasked with defending laws like DOMA (until recently), drug laws, etc, and people like John Yoo, etc, that are unpopular with their contingent. Conservatives don't like them because they are tasked with defending laws like the Sherman Act, etc, that are unpopular with their contingent. But each side likes the laws that are unpopular…
This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…
I'm not sure I understand why the "clown" scoring political points is so bad. Where in the rulebook does it state that doing the right thing must be completely devoid of agenda or beneficial byproducts?
Take, for example, volunteering. There are many who "volunteer" because they have to - whether it be for school, punishment, whatever. Do you think the volunteer organizations care why the volunteers are there as long as they work and do their jobs? No. They're just happy they've got people to help.
I think the same thing applies here. I never met Aaron nor do I know how he would react, but I know many folks who care deeply about this issue. They really only care that someone is asking the pointed questions and holding the DoJ accountable. They don't much care who it is or why he's doing it. If the end result is the same, what does it matter anyways?