251–260 of 269 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here is a thing. I am not sure anyone really can at this point. I am not being hyperbolic.
Not with the assholes we have running the tech industry right now trying to groom every nation state into letting them help them morph into a technocratic hellhole, no.
I'm old enough to remember that time the Obama administration requested Edward Snowdens private SSL keys from Lavabit, because it would have opened up every email from every single user. So the owner nuked everything and was held in contempt of court. He was forbidden from talking about it for months too. Don't give too much unprecedented power to the government. It doesn't matter who the president is. They've all do…
> until it's too late. I'm afraid it's far too late.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The federal government was found violating the constitution, and yet he's the bad guy. Nonsense.
> The federal government was found violating the constitution This was of course not known at the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To the three points you list: Number 1 was Bush. The republicans crated the NSA surveillance machine. Number 2 — know your US history. The democratic and republican parties flipped philosophies in 68. Their dems went pro integration and the southern dems went to the Republican Party, which remained segregationist. Nixon was closer to Kennedy and LBJ than Humphrey. Number 3 is nothing - it wasn’t active targeting. The…
1. If I give you a loaded gun you're still responsible for shooting somebody. 2. It is an oversimplified view to suggest that Democratic and Republican parties completely flipped during the late 60s but they certainly did reverse views on race. 3. They put extra scrutiny organizations with "Tea Party" or "patriots" in their names and admitted as much. Unless the Obama administration was secretly Republican and put ou…
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/11/irs-tea-party-s...
You're not allowed to seek tax exempt status if you are a partisan organization. Searching for political terminology to determine that is perfectly logical.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The federal government was found violating the constitution This was of course not known at the time.
Sure, but it took multi court cases and years to prove that "legally".
> This was of course not known at the time. The only thing that was known is that a single individual was responsible for the greatest breach of classified secrets in the nation's history, and that individual was still at large.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Less than 1% of what Snowden took and leaked pertained to domestic surveillance programs, The rest was intelligence capabilities and sources and methods. But that's besides the point. There is a real argument that the U.S. government, in trying to catch Snowden, was protecting national security. There is no such argument with Trump.
If Snowden hasn't moved quickly, he wouldn't have been able to leak any of it. What he did, grab it all, then give it to reputable journalists, was the correct option to be able to inform the public of massive intelligence dragnets targeting civilians that the government was lying about.
How does stealings sensitive materials not related to domestic surveillance improve his odds of successfully leaking information and fleeing the country?
And please be specific.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the standard we're discussing. It's what Donald Trump's DHS is doing right now and the Snowden comparisons are irrelevant and imo a bad faith attempt at trying to muddy the waters. Stop both sides-ing everything the Trump administration does to give them more oxygen to operate. These are uniquely awful times.
Friendo,the sooner you recognize it is both sides, the sooner you can step off the merry go round.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Friendo,the sooner you recognize it is both sides, the sooner you can step off the merry go round.
One more try, what did Obama in terms of abusing his police state targeting American citizens that even approached what we are seeing with ICE, the FBI, etc. right now.
Fuck man. Here is a short list of how he explictly expanded police state that impacted actual American citizens ( and not random criminal aliens ICE picks up ):
- Targetted killing of US citizen without a trial via drone strike ( Anwar al-Awlaki ) - Signed 2012 NDAA with 'indefinite detention' provisions - Extended Patriot ACT in 2011 - Re-authorized FISA in 2012 - Defended post-Snowden NSA metadata collection - Seized reporter's property in leak investigation edit: - 'fast and furious' which effectively created a problem, which at best can be considered reckless if not planned and pretty evil if actually intended to work the way it did
Seriously man, unless you literally just started observing politics, you may want to reconsider your high horse stance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One more try, what did Obama in terms of abusing his police state targeting American citizens that even approached what we are seeing with ICE, the FBI, etc. right now.
Hmm. You are putting me in quite a pickle, but I can't tell if you are being serious or not. Obama was almost literally Bush 2.0, but with better PR and media coverage. Fuck man. Here is a short list of how he explictly expanded police state that impacted actual American citizens ( and not random criminal aliens ICE picks up ): - Targetted killing of US citizen without a trial via drone strike ( Anwar al-Awlaki ) - S…
This was in a literal war zone against a man who literally declared war on the United States.
> Signed 2012 NDAA with 'indefinite detention' provisions
Didn't answer my question. This law targeted terrorists, not mothers of two, driving home from dropping their kids off at school.
> Extended Patriot ACT in 2011 - Re-authorized FISA in 2012
Didn't answer my question.
> Defended post-Snowden NSA metadata collection
Didn't answer my question.
> Seized reporter's property in leak investigation
This appears to be an actual leak investigation done by the DOJ. I don't recall these journalists being arrested, denied a lawyer, etc. I can't find any evidence that this was a legitimate leak investigation done in accordance with the law.
> 'fast and furious'
Reminder, we are talking about domestic surveillance and illegal detainment for political purposes.
Donald Trump has over 6,000 habeas corpus violations working their way through the court system in America right now. Obama had Your attempt to say both sides are the same is clearly an attempt to sound intelligent like you're above the discourse. You're not.