December 28, 2013

Talking NSA Phone Metadata Collection on Vigilant Liberty Radio at 10pm
— Gabriel Malor

FYI, I'll be discussing the NSA phone metadata cases tonight on Vigilant Liberty Radio's Cigar Lounge show at 10pm Eastern.

As Ace and Drew have discussed, the two district court decisions on the NSA's phone metadata collection came to opposite conclusions about the program's constitutionality. The first court to rule on it (PDF) straight-up admitted that it was discarding the Supreme Court precedent known as the third party doctrine, saying the precedent should not apply in the context of phones anymore because their use is so ubiquitous. The second court to rule (PDF) stuck with precedent and held that the ACLU did not have a constitutionally protected privacy right to business records created and maintained by a third party, i.e., the phone company.

You can probably tell where I come down on it. Not only do I think the program is constitutional under current precedent, I think it should be constitutional.

Here's the key holding of the second decision:


And here the judge lists analogous situations:


The first district court repeatedly mischaracterized the metadata records as belonging to the customers and not the phone company, dismissed relevant precedent, responded sarcastically to the government's arguments (it's been a while since I've seen a court decision with that many exclamation marks), and dismissed out of hand part of the government's explanation for the program. For all those reasons, I expect the first decision to be overturned on appeal and the second to be upheld.

Whether the Supreme Court ultimately overturns its own precedent with respect to the third party doctrine in the context of this case, I don't want to guess. The high court's Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is a mess. Last year they held that the Fourth Amendment forbids police from putting a GPS tracker on a car for a month without a warrant, but allows police to take DNA swabs from every person arrested on suspicion of a felony. Predicting how they'd come out on this one is probably a fool's errand. And, of course, Congress may moot the question by altering FISA or the NSA next year.

Anyway, it should be a lively discussion tonight. Jason Pye from United Liberty will be on arguing for the other side. Tune in at 10pm.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:03 PM | Comments (279)
Post contains 436 words, total size 4 kb.

1 It's all fun and games until someone goes to jail.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:06 PM (LSDdO)

2 It's not the regime in power now that may be the problem. It's the regime in 2030 that's going to looking down your throat.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:07 PM (LSDdO)

3 You can probably tell where I come down on it. Not only do I think the program is constitutional under current precedent, I think it should be constitutional. -Gabe Squish. Fucking. Squish. Why even have a bill of rights?

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 02:07 PM (HVff2)

4 3rd?

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:07 PM (LSDdO)

5 Nope 1,2 & 4

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 02:10 PM (HVff2)

6 Seriously? This is how big our tent has to be, that we suffer cheerleaders for the big government police state? You really want to give President Santorum these powers Gabe?

Posted by: @koenigjojo at December 28, 2013 02:10 PM (58bxI)

7 Hey Gabe nice post. No sarcasm, of course I completely disagree with you and point to the IRS maluse of procedure and data stream as plaintiff's exhibit one. I find the MetaData Vacuum cleaner barely tolerable from a government I trust and this government is so far out of the I trust Barn it is not funny.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:10 PM (9jfyN)

8 If you think that the simple use of a cell phone or the internet is equivalent to standing on a street corner shouting out your (intended to be) private conversations, then what the NSA is doing is fine, I guess. I do not think that. I don't care if someone's network is not secure, just as I don't care if the glue has loosened on their letter. The communication is intended to be private. I would not read someone's mail and I would not use technology, no matter how simple, to read their internet (or phone) communications.

Posted by: Y-not (@MoxieMom) at December 28, 2013 02:10 PM (zDsvJ)

9 Anytime the Gov't collects any information about it's citizens, it better have a damn good reason and proof to back it up.

They even made the LAW secret. How does that comport with a Government of Laws and not of Men when you can't find out that the law exists and how it's applied.

Nor be able to determine if it was applied correctly?

How is this Constitutional? Or helpful for a free country?

Do we become a barbed wire enclosed enclave with surveillance 24/7 on each and every one on the off chance someone might do something wrong so that we can be FREE?

How do you reconcile that in your mind?

You know gov'ts are made of people. sinful, petty stupid people. They can't be trusted to be trusted.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:12 PM (LSDdO)

10 8 Y-not (@MoxieMom) at December 28, 2013 06:10 PM (zDsvJ) Indeed. Look Target just showed why using debit cards willy-nilly is dangerous(and I am very guilty).... IRS showed why NSA having your MetaData is dangerous. I'll be okay with Obama having access to MetaData right around the time I can read his Master's Thesis and Curricula Vitae.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:13 PM (9jfyN)

11 I find the MetaData Vacuum cleaner barely tolerable from a government I trust and this government is so far out of the I trust Barn it is not funny. Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 06:10 PM (9jfyN) Call me paranoid, but I no longer trust my government and for the most part I fear my government. I did not feel that way 25 years ago.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 02:13 PM (HVff2)

12 9 Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 06:12 PM (LSDdO) Like I said in Gabe's post on Ogabecare, if every dumb fuck to get elected gets free swings at the Constitution we are not a Constitutional Republic.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:14 PM (9jfyN)

13 They couldn't do anything about Boston after being tipped off by the Russians, so what is it they are doing with this data exactly? Huh? It sure isn't to keep us (the people) safe. Hmmm. You think it just might be used to protect an illegitimate government from the people once they realize how they have been abused?

Posted by: @koenigjojo at December 28, 2013 02:14 PM (58bxI)

14 Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 06:13 PM (9jfyN)

I'd be happy these days just to see a live camera of an entire round of golf.

Just to show that

1) he actually can
2) he actually does
3) he can actually go 18 rounds

I don't believe either of those.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:15 PM (LSDdO)

15 Jason Pye from United Liberty will be on arguing for the other side.

---------------




You mean on the right side. 

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:15 PM (P6QsQ)

16 Transactional data is far from being the same as content.  I could give a rat's ass, as long as Justice recognizes that content is protected.

Posted by: Fritz at December 28, 2013 02:15 PM (TKFmG)

17 11 Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 06:13 PM (HVff2) My fall back position to keep from shifting to paranoia was the apathy of the civil service heretofore on hard work in partisan bingo matters. Obama has if nothing else shown that a portion of the civil service is quite willing to work with the zeal of an acoloyte in service to a tyrant they find charismatic enough in numbers large enough I am wary. No more Caligulas.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:16 PM (9jfyN)

18 14 Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 06:15 PM (LSDdO) Heh er uh see y'all at the 19th hole hey ValJar what does uncle George Soros need? //Ogabe

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:17 PM (9jfyN)

19 16 Fritz at December 28, 2013 06:15 PM (TKFmG) They can reverse engineer identity from transactional data, and in so doing they can map out your network in a heartbeat. You give me a person's web I can destroy their world in less than 2 months.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:18 PM (9jfyN)

20 I find the MetaData Vacuum cleaner barely tolerable from a government I trust and this government is so far out of the I trust Barn it is not funny. I think this is my sentiment as well. Fuckin' robots.

Posted by: toby928© insists on talking about robots at December 28, 2013 02:19 PM (QupBk)

21 It's computers that have made all this possible. Until recently it was theoretically possible but impractical in reality.

Now they have the storage capacity AND the computing capacity to keep tabs on more than they need to know.

Frankly, I'd rather risk being blown up than have that kind of information held by people I don't trust. (because I don't know them and they're people)

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:19 PM (LSDdO)

22 Frankly, I'd rather risk being blown up than have that kind of information held by people I don't trust.

-----------------




Amen.  Or to put it another way, give me liberty or give me death.

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:20 PM (P6QsQ)

23 The logic that because the government could have a good reason to access records doesn't mean it should have the unfettered power to an entire set. The 4th Amendment to our Constitution should have been a sufficient limit, but apparently it isn't, and the government (judicial) has decided that the government (executive) can hoover up those records without "probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." I suppose "unreasonable", as used in the 4th Amendment, is whatever the government deems it is.

Posted by: jim at December 28, 2013 02:20 PM (VwhRo)

24 19 Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 06:18 PM (9jfyN) And that is why I fear our federal government. After what happened with the IRS is only the beginning. But for an attorney like Gabe that's ok. Lawyers love that kind of shit

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 02:21 PM (HVff2)

25 What's next?  Watchers in each of our households?

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:21 PM (P6QsQ)

26 Perhaps they will assign all of us a "minder".

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:22 PM (P6QsQ)

27 Watchers in each of our households? Speak into the televisor, comrade.

Posted by: toby928© insists on talking about robots at December 28, 2013 02:22 PM (QupBk)

28 This is going to be very interesting indeed at the SCOTUS level.

It appears from previous rulings that only one of the Justices has really spent any time thinking about the complexities of modern privacy when weighed against security imperatives and Constitutional constraints, and that's Alito.

Posted by: torquewrench at December 28, 2013 02:22 PM (gqT4g)

29

Vigilant Liberty Radio: Broadcasting from the Fillings in Your Teeth

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 28, 2013 02:22 PM (kdS6q)

30 First comes watchers, then comes enforcers.

Let Gabe know when that happens so he can get all upset that they've "GONE TOO FAR".

Once they've gone too far, it's TOO LATE.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:22 PM (LSDdO)

31 >>>They can reverse engineer identity from transactional data, and in so doing they can map out your network in a heartbeat.

You give me a person's web I can destroy their world in less than 2 months.<<<

And prove what without a warrant?   I post too many selfies and love lolcats?

Posted by: Fritz at December 28, 2013 02:23 PM (TKFmG)

32

Seems to me you would need consent of both parties to a contract for releasing personal information on one of the parties.  Especially a release to a massive govt bureaucracy proven to misuse such private information for nefarious purposes.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at December 28, 2013 02:25 PM (MaP11)

33 Frankly, I'm not very happy that the Postal Service records/photographs every piece of mail they handle. Although the outside of the envelope is not private in one sense, in another it is. The assumption was always that some mail carrier, although working for the govt in the capacity of delivering mail, was not Big Brother. So if Joe Blow mailman makes note of sender and recipient data, it'd be for his own private reasons, not on behalf of the govt. The postal service existed to deliver our mail, not record and analyze data about citizens' communications. And since the USPS is subsidized with our tax dollars, it's not like there is a real competitor/option for most things.

Posted by: Y-not (@MoxieMom) at December 28, 2013 02:25 PM (zDsvJ)

34 Sometimes we face things that we can do but must not do. Here is where the lawyers should sit down and watch in silence as this abuse is ended.

Posted by: eman at December 28, 2013 02:25 PM (EWsrI)

35 Look, they couldn't track the Boston Bomber Boys even after being given a Clue-by-4, a map and a flashlight.  But somehow this data collection will keep us all safe?

I didn't fall off the rutabaga truck yesterday, you know.

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:25 PM (P6QsQ)

36 The activities of the NSA are properly the province of politics, the limits to be decided and set by the Congress and ultimately by the voters. It is not a question of constitutionality, at least as involves the collection of "mega-data," which quite clearly comes under the authority of the Smith v Maryland decision.

It's a horrible mistake to ask and allow courts to resolve political questions.  That's the left's modus operandi, and it should be defeated and rolled back, not emulated by our side.  Courts should rule on questions of law, not set public policy.

Posted by: Adjoran at December 28, 2013 02:26 PM (473jB)

37 Actually, they won't need watchers as everyone will begin to self censor.

It happens in all the totalitarian regimes.

The knowledge that they MIGHT be listening is enough for everyone to assume they ARE listening.

Thus speech is stifled by each citizen. Those who are unwise enough to still speak out will be stifled by their family and neighbors and then if that fails the Gov't itself will step in.

"an iron curtain has is descending across the Continent."

*With apologies to Winston Churchill.*


Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:27 PM (LSDdO)

38 31 Fritz at December 28, 2013 06:23 PM (TKFmG) Really? You think: a) the maluse is court of law maluse b) they cannot exert coercion through allied NGOs on the web? c) that evidentary standards are static? It's funny I was reading Stalin's Henchmen and I made a nice diagram of the wandering lines of evidentary necessity in Worker's Paradise judicial execution protocols.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:28 PM (9jfyN)

39 32 Seems to me you would need consent of both parties to a contract for releasing personal information on one of the parties. Especially a release to a massive govt bureaucracy proven to misuse such private information for nefarious purposes. Posted by: Guy Mohawk at December 28, 2013 06:25 PM (MaP11) Didn't stop Lois, Teat Face, Learner at the IRS. Oh yeah, no criminal charges filed either & never made the news

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 02:28 PM (HVff2)

40 The knowledge that they MIGHT be listening is enough for everyone to assume they ARE listening.

Thus speech is stifled by each citizen.

-----------------




Yep.  I see this even in myself.  I never used to watch what I say.  That's changing.

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:29 PM (P6QsQ)

41 39 Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 06:28 PM (HVff2) I'm old enough I remember hearing how the Nixon aid had to go to prison for two FBI files he had illegal access to. I'm old enough I recall Clinton Inc having access to 900+ FBI files with no price paid. Ogabe has just cut out the middleman and has NSA having access to 330 million people's metadata.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:29 PM (9jfyN)

42 The Matrix is here.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:30 PM (LSDdO)

43 41 I'm old enough I remember hearing how the Nixon aid had to go to prison for two FBI files he had illegal access to. Me too.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 02:31 PM (HVff2)

44   39

Exactly my point, and that's on data provided TO the govt, not a 3rd party.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at December 28, 2013 02:32 PM (MaP11)

45 43 Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 06:31 PM (HVff2) It's surreal...the democrats are absolutely brazen in their sense of entitlement to treat the civil service as their partisan intel service.... The Clinton INC era is when I decided I was more libertarian than I thought. Gabe what is the answer for a weaponized partisan non-partisan civil service?

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:32 PM (9jfyN)

46 To explain why you think it *should* be constitutional is to explain why everyone hates lawyers. Law as a parlor game rather than the relationship between the powerful government and lonely individuals. Technology has gotten us to the point at which we can either choose to live in a cave or surrender third party information to the federal government, according to precedent, so obviously we need to change precedent.

Posted by: major major major major at December 28, 2013 02:32 PM (fRYRo)

47 This is one of times where you say fuck the Constitution. You can't do this fucking shit. Period.

Posted by: eman at December 28, 2013 02:33 PM (EWsrI)

48 >>>It's funny I was reading Stalin's Henchmen and I made a nice diagram of the wandering lines of evidentary necessity in Worker's Paradise judicial execution protocols.<<<

B-b-but what if I'm only posting selfies and lolcats?

Posted by: Fritz at December 28, 2013 02:33 PM (TKFmG)

49 I don't belong to the State.  My children and grandchildren do not belong to the State.  My church does not belong to the State.  My money does not belong to the State.  My data does not belong to the State.  I am a freeborn person, and I intend to die a freeborn person.

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:33 PM (P6QsQ)

50 And prove what without a warrant? I post too many selfies and love lolcats?

Posted by: Fritz at December 28, 2013 06:23 PM (TKFmG)




You think someone would need a warrant to fuck your entire world? All they need is the data and a convenient excuse, and any excuse will do to attract their undivided attention. And if they are a .gov employee, apparently they will come to no harm.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 02:34 PM (yh0zB)

51 46 major major major major at December 28, 2013 06:32 PM (fRYRo) Amen, and the parlor game is predicated on the people not remembering that the entire Federal System exists ONLY because the fucking Constitution had to have a Bill of Rights saying "keep the fuck off"... it is a Bill of Rights for the people not the Federales...the people win all ties not the Feds.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:34 PM (9jfyN)

52 >> Not only do I think the program is constitutional under current precedent, I think it should be constitutional. I frequently notice that the latter forms the bulk of your arguments for the former.

Posted by: Andy at December 28, 2013 02:36 PM (ddb4x)

53 Gave is like so many other people I see on TV after 9-11 they are scared of their own shadow and would sacrifice the rights of all the rest of us just to feel safe. Fcuking pussies all of them.

Posted by: Fourth Horseman RN now your MD at December 28, 2013 02:37 PM (KuZ6A)

54 If you like your privacyÂ….fuck you. So third party invalidates privacy? That's a deep dark hole.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 02:37 PM (JpFMR)

55 48 Fritz at December 28, 2013 06:33 PM (TKFmG) You post here comrade...ever do it from your phone? Why do you affiliate with the horde comrade it has members who do not back comrade Barry and in fact donated thousands to Mitt Romney? They are not looking for your selfies friend they are looking for hits on reverse engineering the webs of enemy political action groups. They couldn't get the Tsarnevs with pretty big "LOOKY HERE!s" from the Russians but they knew to hit Gibson geetars pretty easily.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:37 PM (9jfyN)

56 What astounds me is the silence from the left. (well not really)

Having lived during the times when the right was suspected of every totalitarian machination that every happened or dreamed up, and the virulent and vituperative reaction to even the hint that anything close to that could happen (let alone if something actually happened) it is shocking to me to see how thin the left's veneer of defenders of civil rights really is.

This has only really been a danger since the Media decided to endorse anything said/done/thought by the current resident of the WH.

Again, the Media is responsible for the dangerous and treacherous situation the country's citizens find themselves in.

Of course their are the adjuncts of the Educational and Legal monopolies that have created the foundation for our current circumstance.

I can only assume that God has let Satan do what he will with this country because of our 50 years of decadence and infanticide.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:37 PM (LSDdO)

57 Damn autocorrect!

Posted by: Fourth Horseman RN now your MD at December 28, 2013 02:38 PM (KuZ6A)

58 Instead of sifting metadata the government should read alerts from.foreign intelligence services and note when someone changes his name to "mujahid". But that would work and cost trillions less, so nonstarter.

Posted by: Beagle at December 28, 2013 02:38 PM (sOtz/)

59 Not a PRISONER!
I'm a FREE MAN!
And my BLOOD is MY OWN!!

Posted by: Iron Maiden at December 28, 2013 02:38 PM (E7Iyp)

60 56 Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 06:37 PM (LSDdO) There's nothing wrong with this country that forcing the media to run a gauntlet couldn't fix.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:38 PM (9jfyN)

61 I can only assume that God has let Satan do what he will with this country because of our 50 years of decadence and infanticide.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 06:37 PM (LSDdO)


---------------------



Yes. 

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:39 PM (P6QsQ)

62 Gabe what is the answer for a weaponized partisan non-partisan civil service?-Sven And when you answer that one I'm looking for a plan here in Wisconsin where a rogue John Doe court is going after conservatives.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 02:39 PM (HVff2)

63 We've legalized the Communist Party, and the democrats are working towards outlawing the Tea Party, Conservative thought, and charging any in the GOP with sedition should any Republican obstruct the long march toward the collective state.

You don't see anyone looking at Bill Ayer's telephone records to see who he calls on his 'cell, or who his friends are.

Posted by: Hermin Genesis at December 28, 2013 02:39 PM (F9dzS)

64 South Pacific's Talky Talk:

http://youtu.be/cwu4SHQHoj4

Posted by: You filthy cork soaker at December 28, 2013 02:39 PM (R6JT1)

65 The Federal Empire can not function without lawyers. It uses them to create the facade of a Republic. For now.

Posted by: eman at December 28, 2013 02:39 PM (EWsrI)

66 The Clinton INC era is when I decided I was more libertarian than I thought.

Gabe what is the answer for a weaponized partisan non-partisan civil service?

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 06:32 PM (9jfyN)




Me, too. In fact, it was during the Clinton years that I became a card-carrying member of the Libertarian Party...until the attacks on 9-11 and they couldn't decide whether or not they should be pro-war or anti-war because of it. The LP richly deserves its reputation as the party of doped-up pacifists.



And yes, do, please assplain why the Dept of Education (or the EPA) needs a SWAT team? I am dying to know.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 02:39 PM (yh0zB)

67 Crime Alert - 64yr old man attacked at Starbucks in Mall of America.  Thug tried to steal his iPhone 4G.  Man gave chase.  Thug's two female accomplices attacked the man, using a billy club and fingernails.  Took police five minutes to arrive and none of the other customers came to the man's assistance.  That is until Letaija Shapree Cutler-Cain tried to claim Mr. Andrew attacked them, that is when a witness came forward to support Mr. Andrew's version.  Thug is still on the loose while his squeezes sit in jail, one is 18 and other is 17.

http://tinyurl.com/n9y9k5h

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 28, 2013 02:40 PM (zb54T)

68 With all due respect.. fuck you, Gabe!

Constitutional, my ass!

I've got a solution, but I'm betting you and the lying sacks opf shit in the NSA would never approve of it.

Given:
1. The NSA and its proponents testify that all the data ONLY ever is looked at in an ad hoc manner - i.e. - only once a person is suspect is their data looked at.
2. A FISA warrant must be approved before ANY metadata is examined

If that is true - easy solution:  Force the phone companies to keep all meta-data.  When a warrant is approved, the phone company must transfer all related data to the NSA.

I don;t for one minute believe the NSA is NOT doing fishing expeditions with this data.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 28, 2013 02:40 PM (b/lt+)

69 Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 06:39 PM (yh0zB) Truancy is serious fucking business.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 02:40 PM (JpFMR)

70 62 Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 06:39 PM (HVff2) I wouldn't hold my breath. No offense meant Gabe I just notice that you have a lot of faith in the types who Joe the Plumber folks to "get punished." I am lacking that faith

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:41 PM (9jfyN)

71 Anybody wanting to put more power into the hands of the thugs who run our government is insane.

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:42 PM (P6QsQ)

72

In the end, the NSA data is not used for finding terrorists or stopping any other crime.

Its a look back tool, to CREATE a criminal, to control for their purposes.  That criminal is you.  or some random filmmaker.

On the other hand, that crazy Mo the Muzzie film caused an attack in Benghazi, so I am torn.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at December 28, 2013 02:42 PM (MaP11)

73 @70
I find you lack of faith... warranted..

Posted by: Darth Vader at December 28, 2013 02:42 PM (E7Iyp)

74 So third party invalidates privacy? That's a deep dark hole.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 06:37 PM (JpFMR)




Why do you not practice? You have had the training, and you are apparently on the side of limited governance, so why why why???

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 02:43 PM (yh0zB)

75 They turned the IRS bean counters into political saboteurs, but they'll totally rein in their spies.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 28, 2013 02:43 PM (ZshNr)

76 54 If you like your privacyÂ….fuck you. So third party invalidates privacy? That's a deep dark hole. Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 06:37 PM (JpFMR) I tried to come up with something. BC said it best.

Posted by: Golfman in. NC at December 28, 2013 02:43 PM (/djtm)

77 73 Darth Vader at December 28, 2013 06:42 PM (E7Iyp) Hey I totes get why you needed more power constantly to save..er kill the ones you loved.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:43 PM (9jfyN)

78 and has NSA having access to 330 million people's metadata.

Billions, not millions.  Public posturing aside, I doubt the intel sharing conduits among the US and allies have actually been shut down.

Those intel sharing  agreements have been in place since the mid 1950's, and the earliest revisions date back to WWII.

I've read the declassified 1950's version cover to cover and the language within covers the US/UK, and commonwealth nations (Canada, NZ, AU)

Given logical expected modifications as post war Europe got back on its feet, I'd expect at minimum Germany/France/Belgium/Italy/Japan to be included in some level of sharing as well, and probably some of the Scandinavian countries.  It wouldn't be a shocker if Mexico had some of the action too.

Posted by: Purp[/i][/b][/s] at December 28, 2013 02:44 PM (70Unk)

79 NSA - "We assume you are guilty until you prove you are innocent after we charge you and after planting digital evidence."

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 28, 2013 02:45 PM (zb54T)

80 There is , Nothing That Makes Me Angrier than the likes of our "betters" (spit) like Gabe who In Their pussiness decide that their peace of mind is worth more than our right to privacy!

Posted by: Fourth Horseman RN now your MD at December 28, 2013 02:45 PM (KuZ6A)

81 Anybody wanting to put more power into the hands of the thugs who run our government is insane.

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 06:42 PM (P6QsQ)




It is discouraging to note the number of people who do not realize this...especially if it is "their" party in power. None so blind and all that.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 02:45 PM (yh0zB)

82 Apparently "right to privacy" only holds for when you want to exterminate a baby.

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:46 PM (P6QsQ)

83 78 Purp at December 28, 2013 06:44 PM (70Unk) That's very true actually. Obama can and maybe does feed Web Data to tyrants from their dissident communities here I'd wager. He loved him some Hug Chavez's parrot choad.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:46 PM (9jfyN)

84 Absolutely GGE and they would sell us down the river in a heartbeat!

Posted by: Fourth Horseman RN now your MD at December 28, 2013 02:47 PM (KuZ6A)

85 78

I cant decide if this is my new Wrestler name..

Or some kinda pr0n move...

Posted by: Mexican Shocker at December 28, 2013 02:48 PM (E7Iyp)

86 Why do you not practice? You have had the training, and you are apparently on the side of limited governance, so why why why??? Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 06:43 PM (yh0zB) I'm so far on the side of limited governance that those on the right have to look to the right to see me. Because I hated it. I hated the people I was around. The unbelievable arrogance and condescension towards those not of the legal profession was as mind numbingly stupid as it was horrifying. Could I practice? Sure. Would I be good at it? I'd like to think so. ButÂ….Matthew 16:26/Mark 8:36

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 02:49 PM (JpFMR)

87 78 and probably some of the Scandinavian countries. It wouldn't be a shocker if Mexico had some of the action too. Fucking Scandis

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 02:49 PM (HVff2)

88 I also think this administration is hijacking the data for political use. In certain forms, straight to OFA etc it is a powerful tool

Posted by: Golfman in. NC at December 28, 2013 02:49 PM (/djtm)

89 Absolutely GGE and they would sell us down the river in a heartbeat!

Posted by: Fourth Horseman RN now your MD at December 28, 2013 06:47 PM (KuZ6A)



I really wish I had a better opinion of my fellow man.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 02:49 PM (yh0zB)

90 So the excuse is that they are using this data to screen for terrorists.


YOU IDIOT THEY HAVE TOLD US WHO THEY CONSIDER TO BE TERRORISTS!



Me.  You.  Us. 


For the love of all that is good and holy, WAKE UP

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 02:50 PM (P6QsQ)

91 >>>You post here comrade...ever do it from your phone?

Why do you affiliate with the horde comrade it has members who do not back comrade Barry and in fact donated thousands to Mitt Romney?<<<

I've never thought of AOSHQ as anything other than a smart military blog that has let me run my mouth for ten years.

Humor, snark, mockery, silliness, - some of my favorite pastimes, thanks to the magnificent mind of Ace.

Posted by: Fritz at December 28, 2013 02:50 PM (TKFmG)

92 So.

Gabe trolls the Saturday AoSHQ?

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:50 PM (LSDdO)

93 Because I hated it. I hated the people I was around. The unbelievable arrogance and condescension towards those not of the legal profession was as mind numbingly stupid as it was horrifying.



I understand.



Just don't forget what you learned, I have a feeling we may need people like you some day. I pray that we will not, but I fear that we will.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 02:51 PM (yh0zB)

94 I don;t for one minute believe the NSA is NOT doing fishing expeditions with this data.

The limitation is the vastness of the data itself, and speed hit to access slow mass storage devices.  

The only way for it to work effectively is find some way to discard the apparently worthless to make the process tractable.  NSA already ran into the "too much data" problem ~5 years ago and had to initiate efforts to throw the chaff out so finding the nuggets would be computationally viable.  The NYT ran a piece on that maybe a couple of months ago.  I did a post on it maybe a month or so ago.

Posted by: Purp[/i][/b][/s] at December 28, 2013 02:52 PM (70Unk)

95 Always on topic- Jesse Palmer saved Chris Fowler's life today, per Twitter/ESPN, etc. Heimlich maneuver.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 28, 2013 02:52 PM (ZshNr)

96 91 Fritz at December 28, 2013 06:50 PM (TKFmG) and believe it or not...despite my embittering these last five years that is what this place is to me. The objective is to find out intersection points of dissidence I assure you that if they were reverse engineering NRA donors this site will likely be a flashpoint.... THAT is the problem the metadata even transactional data can be used to back trace opinion points. It is not a power the Feds should have to the degree His Imperial Majesty Barack Hussein Obamacles has decided he is entitled to. I am old enough to remember when Barky Choom was against the Patriot Act... I turned six today.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:53 PM (9jfyN)

97 Just don't forget what you learned, I have a feeling we may need people like you some day. I pray that we will not, but I fear that we will. Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 06:51 PM (yh0zB) I don't. And I won't. But there should be no real training needed. Any man or woman can read the Constitution. It's not complex. It's simple, it's direct, it's beautiful. If it's not specifically enumerated the federal government CAN NOT DO IT. That simple fact has gotten so lost.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 02:53 PM (JpFMR)

98 Me. You. Us.


For the love of all that is good and holy, WAKE UP

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 06:50 PM (P6QsQ)



Retired vet + CWP holder + gun owner...yep. Me.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 02:54 PM (yh0zB)

99 Did Jesse put a little Unnng into it?

Chris may have spit out the sandwich due to shock and awe. (or fear)

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 02:55 PM (LSDdO)

100 94 Purp at December 28, 2013 06:52 PM (70Unk) Yeah sorta, BUT that is why I use the term precisely "reverse engineer." You are a politico oppo research team because of the FEC records and IRS you already have your initiation point and you simply start backtracing from the activists you wish to neutralize. Jim "Gacy" Messina essentially bragged they could do this along with Steffy "south end of a north bound mule" Cutter in her "we know who you are" snark.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 02:55 PM (9jfyN)

101 69 Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 06:39 PM (yh0zB) Truancy is serious fucking business. Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 06:40 PM Heh

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 02:56 PM (teFlO)

102 But there should be no real training needed. Any man or woman can read the Constitution.


Read it, yes. Argue on its behalf in a court of law, not so much. I get frustrated too easily, and when that happens my brain locks up and my tongue gets wrapped around my eyeteeth so I can't see what I'm saying. To me these truths are self-evident, so it is particularly annoying to have to explain that which, to me, requires no explanation.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 02:56 PM (yh0zB)

103 Jesus Gabe, you and Peter King should get a room.

Posted by: Motorhead at December 28, 2013 02:58 PM (qAMin)

104 Obama can and maybe does feed Web Data to tyrants from their dissident communities here I'd wager.

US "help" in dealing with other's internal problems can be a powerful lever for us to get cooperation when we want it.

I costs us little to fork over data on various rebels and malcontents, but that can have a huge impact on local operations.

IMO, a lot of the "outrage" voiced by foreign governments is phony as a $3 bill.  They're only irked that this decades long cozy arraignment got shoved out into the open, so they're forced to say some shit publicly to save face.

Posted by: Purp[/i][/b][/s] at December 28, 2013 02:58 PM (70Unk)

105 Tune in to the Cecil Lipshitz Show tonight at 9. I'll be on to discuss the spatial complexity of the two Darrens on Bewitched and the Commerce Clause.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:00 PM (b1O1M)

106 I think, if this kind of law is "okay," there is absolutely no reason our President can seal his records and his past.

If it is okay to spy on the entire citizenry like this, our leaders should have the same level of privacy, not more.

When Barack Obama, or whomever he really is, releases all his transcripts, passport, medical records, and the like, THEN he can talk about metadata collection on the rest of us.

Which, of course, will never happen.

We are a nation of men, not laws.

Posted by: acethepug at December 28, 2013 03:00 PM (Zho+Y)

107 Man of La Mancha's "The Impossible Dream":

http://youtu.be/RfHnzYEHAow

Posted by: You filthy cork soaker at December 28, 2013 03:01 PM (R6JT1)

108 Read it, yes. Argue on its behalf in a court of law, not so much. I get frustrated too easily, and when that happens my brain locks up and my tongue gets wrapped around my eyeteeth so I can't see what I'm saying. To me these truths are self-evident, so it is particularly annoying to have to explain that which, to me, requires no explanation. Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 06:56 PM (yh0zB) Happens to all of us. I approach it like this, keep the argument simple. The KISS method works. "You say the govt can do X? Show me where. Show me what Article and Section grants the government the right to do X." Just keep hammering that. Don't allow yourself to be led off into meanings and interpretations and penumbras and emanations. That's utter bullshit. Where. Does. It. Say. It. A court of law is an entirely different matter of course. That shit is fucked up from the word go.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 03:01 PM (JpFMR)

109 Fowler's Tweets were sufficiently fanboi-ish. Great hair, great instincts, something like that.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 28, 2013 03:01 PM (ZshNr)

110 82 Apparently "right to privacy" only holds for when you want to exterminate a baby. Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 06:46 PM Don't forget HIPPA. Your kids can pay for kids insurance until they're 26, but you as payer you can't ask health professionals any questions if kids are over 18. That's just wrong. If you're paying you should get answers without getting waiver from kid that isn't paying.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:03 PM (teFlO)

111 Your kids can pay = You can pay

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:04 PM (teFlO)

112 I hear ya old dog in MO. Same goes for college records.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 28, 2013 03:05 PM (HVff2)

113 Don't allow yourself to be led off into meanings and interpretations and penumbras and emanations. That's utter bullshit. Where. Does. It. Say. It.



That's a hard thing to do, BTW...not get distracted. I've been getting better at it but I can still be tempted to wander down that path. Practice, I guess, but it still happens distressingly easily.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 03:06 PM (yh0zB)

114 We are a nation of men, not laws.

Posted by: acethepug at December 28, 2013 07:00 PM (Zho+Y)



We are a nation of lawyers, not laws.

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 03:07 PM (o3MSL)

115 Meanwhile, the Democrats want to make it illegal for employers to run simple background checks. And Means Testing for welfare recipients? No Effin Way! It's All Bullshit. Govt Cannot Be Trusted. Only a BFI (big fuggin idiot) would approve of this obvious bullshit.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:07 PM (b1O1M)

116 This stuff just burns me up.  Brave men left their families and their homes across this land for 200 years to help keep us free. They shed blood for precious liberty.  And fools like this want to piss all that away, so they can pretend they live in some kind of bubble-wrapped world where nothing bad every happens.


Screw that.

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 03:08 PM (P6QsQ)

117 114 We are a nation of men, not laws. Posted by: acethepug at December 28, 2013 07:00 PM (Zho+Y) Being a nation of men is what got us into this clusterfuck.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 03:08 PM (JpFMR)

118 Ditto that, MH. It's all horseshit.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:08 PM (teFlO)

119 Squirrel!

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 03:08 PM (yh0zB)

120 119 Squirrel! Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 07:08 PM (yh0zB) I can't hear that without think of Up. Great movie.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 03:09 PM (JpFMR)

121 "You can probably tell where I come down on it. Not only do I think the program is constitutional under current precedent, I think it should be constitutional." Absolutely. And the Founding Fathers would definitely agree as well. Lenin, Trotsky, Kossior, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Yezhov, Yagoda, Beria. Later, all. God bless. :-)

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at December 28, 2013 03:09 PM (VYM4n)

122 And Means Testing for welfare recipients? No Effin Way!



ID to vote??? RAAAAACIST H8Y H8Y H8R!!!

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 03:09 PM (yh0zB)

123 So go sit in your safe little Washington office bubble and we'll just all be slaves so you can feel safe.

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 03:11 PM (P6QsQ)

124 I can't hear that without think of Up.

Great movie.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 07:09 PM (JpFMR)




One of my favorites.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 03:11 PM (yh0zB)

125 Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 07:06 PM (yh0zB)

To me one of the points of the written Constitution was that the truths were self-evident, yet still needed to written down in relatively plain language so that every citizen could read and understand the nature of the contract between the governed and the government.  A far cry from a 2000+ page document deliberately obscured by legislativese written by a K-street staff funded by George Soros and other cronies of teh won is a far cry from law as understood by the Founders.

Shakespeare's maxim still holds as far as I am concerned.

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 03:12 PM (o3MSL)

126 Hey GGE, when your driving from Memphis to STL on your trip, if you wave at exit 96 on I-55 I'll wave back. Should be around 9:30a if I correctly understood your itenerary.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:12 PM (teFlO)

127 BCochran1981 --  I know, believe me, I know.

Were we a nation of laws, Ogabe would not ever have been President of anything but a local lemonade stand.


Posted by: acethepug at December 28, 2013 03:13 PM (Zho+Y)

128 your = you're. Damn Evan Williams Egg Nog kicking in.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:13 PM (teFlO)

129 ^^
I hope my intent was self evident.

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 03:13 PM (o3MSL)

130 Well folks, I have much to do before staying up all night tonight so I'm off to do it. For the normal ONT denizens, see you there.


Later roonz and roonettez, fear no evil.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 03:14 PM (yh0zB)

131 Were we a nation of laws, Ogabe would not ever have been President of anything but a local lemonade stand.


Posted by: acethepug at December 28, 2013 07:13 PM (Zho+Y)


Which would have gone bankrupt within hours of opening for business.

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 03:14 PM (o3MSL)

132 And Michelle would be hoarding all the sugar.

Posted by: Lincolntf at December 28, 2013 03:14 PM (ZshNr)

133 Bob Evans makes egg nog, too?!?

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:14 PM (b1O1M)

134 One of my favorites. Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at December 28, 2013 07:11 PM (yh0zB) The wife and I will be in the middle of talking about something and, for no reason at all, one of us will shout "SQUIRREL!" http://youtu.be/SSUXXzN26zg

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 03:15 PM (JpFMR)

135 What the fuck have you idiots done to the place?  Can't leave you for a couple of centuries without you sticking your dicks in the fan.

Posted by: Washington,Adams,Jefferson,Franklin, et al at December 28, 2013 03:15 PM (o9Rp5)

136 Why is this cunt Gabe still posting on this site? I'm sorry, but my tent isn't wide enough to accommodate this big government teat sucking loser.

Posted by: Tilon at December 28, 2013 03:15 PM (vO0lg)

137 When there are too many policemen, there can be no individual liberty, when there are too many lawyers, there can be no justice, and when there are too many soldiers, there can be no peace.

    Lin Yutang, Between Tears and Laughter (1943), p. 66.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:16 PM (LSDdO)

138 Category: highway rest stop restaurants Fill in the blank: Howard Johnson's > _________________ > McDonald's

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:16 PM (b1O1M)

139 131 Were we a nation of laws, Ogabe would not ever have been President of anything but a local lemonade stand. Posted by: acethepug at December 28, 2013 07:13 PM (Zho+Y) ------- Which would have gone bankrupt within hours of opening for business. Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 07:14 PM (o3MSL) Assumes facts not in evidence. Nothing suggests that McShanksalot the Dog Eater would ever be willing to work, let alone show the initiative to start his own business.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 03:17 PM (JpFMR)

140 "to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity"




But not if it makes us feel "unsafe" apperently?

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 03:17 PM (P6QsQ)

141 "You say the govt can do X? Show me where. Show me what Article and Section grants the government the right to do X." Well , there's the commerce clause, which explicitly states the government is Lord and Master of us all. Failing that, calling it a tax makes it okay.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 28, 2013 03:18 PM (+NYjg)

142 Denny's

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:18 PM (LSDdO)

143 What we say and do here and other 'questionable' opinion sites, is enough to get a one-way ticket to whichever camp/gulag/jail you care to name. Any additional info gather from electronic media is bringing coals to Newcastle. Face it, we are all fcuked. We're dead. We just have to get in the box.

Posted by: EROWMER at December 28, 2013 03:18 PM (OONaw)

144 Bob Evans makes egg nog, too?!? Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 07:14 PM 30 proof http://www.evanwilliams.com/bourbons.php?page=seasonal

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:19 PM (teFlO)

145 IHOP

Posted by: Duke Lowell at December 28, 2013 03:19 PM (o9Rp5)

146 You first sunshine.

cold dead hands etcetera etcetera etcetera

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:19 PM (LSDdO)

147 Remember folks, this post is brought to you by the "conservative" who thinks the Hill to Die On is the Internet Sales Tax. I'd really love to know what dirt Malor has on ace.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at December 28, 2013 03:19 PM (Qt/d2)

148 Failing that, calling it a tax makes it okay. Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 28, 2013 07:18 PM (+NYjg) Oh please oh please oh please let them argue Taxing Authority. Please go to the American People and explain that you have the authority to do X because it's a tax.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 03:19 PM (JpFMR)

149 Posted by: Burn the Witch at December 28, 2013 07:19 PM (Qt/d2)

He prolly knows where he lives and has pics.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:20 PM (LSDdO)

150
30 proof
http://www.evanwilliams.com/bourbons.php?page=seasonal

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 07:19 PM (teFlO)

 

So, that's the kid's version, yes?  Otherwise needs more bourbon.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at December 28, 2013 03:20 PM (o9Rp5)

151 Charles King's "Happy Days Are Here Again":

http://youtu.be/iL0Qt7IF8Q4

Posted by: Sunny side Krupp at December 28, 2013 03:20 PM (R6JT1)

152 Posted by: EROWMER at December 28, 2013 07:18 PM (OONaw)

Here is your official notice and ticket for the train to the camps, comrade.

Please leave all your personal possessions neatly arranged in your current dwelling so someone more deserving then you can make good use of them.

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 03:20 PM (o3MSL)

153 I'm a longtime lurker, but seeing Gabriel Malor cheerleading for the State and the establishment GOP over, and over, and over with the seeming approval of the leadership of this blog is about at the point where I'm going to spend my reading time elsewhere. I can do much better with my limited time than read some worthless dime-a-dozen beltway barnacle's parlor room blather about the letter of the law, while ignoring the spirit of the law.

I have better things to do than to ever waste another second of my life reading one of Gabe's 'opinions'. I'll be skipping any post written by him in the future, and if he continues to defecate all over this blog on a regular basis, I'll be skipping this entire site in the future.

Posted by: Tilon at December 28, 2013 03:21 PM (vO0lg)

154 I prefer "We're In the Money".

Utube http://tinyurl.com/ylekr7e

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:22 PM (LSDdO)

155 No, sorry, we were looking for Roy Rogers restaurants.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:22 PM (b1O1M)

156 153 I'm a longtime lurker, but seeing Gabriel Malor cheerleading for the State and the establishment GOP over, and over, and over with the seeming approval of the leadership of this blog is about at the point where I'm going to spend my reading time elsewhere. I can do much better with my limited time than read some worthless dime-a-dozen beltway barnacle's parlor room blather about the letter of the law, while ignoring the spirit of the law. I have better things to do than to ever waste another second of my life reading one of Gabe's 'opinions'. I'll be skipping any post written by him in the future, and if he continues to defecate all over this blog on a regular basis, I'll be skipping this entire site in the future. Posted by: Tilon at December 28, 2013 07:21 PM (vO0lg) The door is over there, skippy.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 03:22 PM (JpFMR)

157 There's nothing wrong with this country that forcing the media to run a gauntlet couldn't fix. Bastinado. Although the gauntlet of a thousand men may be a suitable substitute.

Posted by: John Roberts at December 28, 2013 03:22 PM (5ujLp)

158 So, that's the kid's version, yes? Otherwise needs more bourbon. Posted by: Duke Lowell at December 28, 2013 07:20 PM Yes. That's why I have Evan's friend Jack Daniel's here.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:23 PM (teFlO)

159 Started reading that headline and thought I was in for a Bob Dylan joke.

Posted by: garrett at December 28, 2013 03:23 PM (TkB7A)

160 Inspired of course by FDR's election.


FAIL!!!

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:23 PM (LSDdO)

161 Please go to the American People and explain that you have the authority to do X because it's a tax. They did. Soetero was reelected. It doesn't matter what the justification is. It only matter if you can whip enough votes in the Supreme Court.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 28, 2013 03:23 PM (tmzN0)

162 Please go to the American People and explain that you have the authority to do X because it's a tax.

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 07:19 PM (JpFMR)


Hasn't CJSC Roberts already run that by us, and nary a significant peep from our establishment betters?

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 03:23 PM (o3MSL)

163 I won't be able to form an opinion on this until Malor tells me what GOProud's conservative take is.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at December 28, 2013 03:24 PM (Qt/d2)

164 For the love of pete, I'm an old wrinkly white women and I'm not half as scared of my shadow as some of the cobs here.


I'm gonna go drink.  You all have a nice night.

Posted by: grammie winger at December 28, 2013 03:24 PM (P6QsQ)

165 Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 07:22 PM (JpFMR)

We don't need no steenking flouncers here, amigo.

A (dios) M (other) F (kcufer)

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:24 PM (LSDdO)

166 Tilon, we are always thrilled to have a lurker de-lurk, but if the most you can contribute is to call a co-blogger the *c* word, then perhaps it's best you went back to lurking.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 28, 2013 03:25 PM (DmNpO)

167 Why do the regulars feel the need to chime in with a don't like it leave comment when someone says they don't dig a particular poster?

How is it not a valid position to say you like the site but it could use less cowbell?

Posted by: Typo Dynamofo at December 28, 2013 03:26 PM (FtCW+)

168 Who is this Pete and why does he get all the love?

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:26 PM (b1O1M)

169 Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 07:22 PM (b1O1M)

Think Hardees took over RR, and did not maintain the quality (IMHO).

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 03:26 PM (o3MSL)

170 I am sure you can trust our Government to safeguard this information.

Posted by: Password : 00000 at December 28, 2013 03:26 PM (TkB7A)

171 How is it not a valid position to say you like the site but it could use less cowbell? *** It's perfectly acceptable to debate and to disagree. It is not acceptable to call anyone here a cunt.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 28, 2013 03:27 PM (DmNpO)

172 Why do the regulars feel the need to chime in with a don't like it leave comment when someone says they don't dig a particular poster? Reflex, I think.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:27 PM (b1O1M)

173 Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 28, 2013 07:25 PM (DmNpO)

"C" word?

cheerleader?

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:28 PM (LSDdO)

174 Nieds- didn't see that.

Carry on.

Posted by: Typo Dynamofo at December 28, 2013 03:28 PM (FtCW+)

175 To be fair, I call Barack Obama a Petulant Cunt all the time. But he doesn't post here.

Posted by: garrett at December 28, 2013 03:28 PM (TkB7A)

176 How is it not a valid position to say you like the site but it could use less cowbell?

Posted by: Typo Dynamofo at December 28, 2013 07:26 PM (FtCW+)


If it smacks of ad hominem then AMF.


If it is a substantive intellectually based disagreement, then welcome to the club.

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 03:28 PM (o3MSL)

177 They did. Soetero was reelected. It doesn't matter what the justification is. It only matter if you can whip enough votes in the Supreme Court. Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 28, 2013 07:23 PM (tmzN0) No, the Admin jumped up and down screaming that it wasn't a tax. Roberts was the one who torturedly insisted it was. A POTUS declaring the he was advocating for X to be passed as law and, oh btw, it's a tax will go as well as a fart in church. The only prayer that has is if they can convince people that it affects "not them".

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 03:28 PM (JpFMR)

178 I was going to mention how similar Roy Rogers was to Hardees. They both taste like airport/airplane food.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:29 PM (b1O1M)

179 To be fair, I call Barack Obama a Petulant Cunt all the time. *** And you would be accurate in that description, but we're supposed to be a bit more respectful to our own.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 28, 2013 03:30 PM (DmNpO)

180 Wait WHUT?

GABE'S OUR OWN?

I always thought he was planted on us by the ABA.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:32 PM (LSDdO)

181 He ain't 'one of mine.'

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:32 PM (b1O1M)

182 ABBA's "Money, Money, Money":

http://youtu.be/ETxmCCsMoD0

Posted by: Fiberarian at December 28, 2013 03:33 PM (R6JT1)

183 Evan Williams Egg Nog anyone. Cleaning out frig and figure some good cheer is in order. His friend Jack Daniels is here too.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:36 PM (teFlO)

184 Since 2009, everyone (well almost everyone) was assuming (because they were lied to AND they were gullible kcufs) that the ACA wouldn't cost them much if anything and that millions (millions I say) would be helped. (plus, and this also is key, all those free riders would get shafted. Of course no one can provide any stats on who or how many of those free riders existed)

Now, (and they delayed implementation for just that reason) they have found out that they were lied to and that they were stupid and that they are screwed.

bonus: they also are going to find out that not only are free riders still going to ride for free but that we're soon going to have MORE of them.

If only Democrats could be the only ones taking it in the ass over this, it would be amusing.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:36 PM (LSDdO)

185 Johnnie Walker there too? Or his brothers Black and Red?

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:38 PM (b1O1M)

186 Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 07:36 PM (teFlO)
 
Yes, please.  Heavy on Mr Daniels, light on the nog.  Just slip it thru the USB port.  Thanks!

Posted by: Duke Lowell at December 28, 2013 03:38 PM (o9Rp5)

187 Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse
..........
Yeah.. Tilon - don't you know only the regulars can call Gabe a c*nt?

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 28, 2013 03:39 PM (b/lt+)

188 I'm thinking that perhaps this Gabriel fellow is here as our very own shit stirrer,,,, devils advocate , would be more polite , I guess . Or , maybe he just likes abuse .

Posted by: awkward davies at December 28, 2013 03:39 PM (WK8VM)

189 Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 28, 2013 07:39 PM (b/lt+)

And we mean that in the nicest way.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:39 PM (LSDdO)

190 185 Johnnie Walker there too? No, but there is some Crown Royalty present.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:40 PM (teFlO)

191 Cent as in an opinion not worth two cents.

*I still say he's trolling us*

Nicely played Gabe.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:42 PM (LSDdO)

192 Yes, please. Heavy on Mr Daniels, light on the nog. Just slip it thru the USB port. Thanks! Posted by: Duke Lowell at December 28, 2013 07:38 PM Right with you. **looks furiously for USB funnel**

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:42 PM (teFlO)

193 of course Jessica Simpson is now the TV face of Weight Watchers.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 03:42 PM (b1O1M)

194 I still disagree on Gabe with regards to what the program is even vacuuming up. Seems to me that "Trunk data" cell site data (and the New Yorker agrees) in which case they're sucking up location data, which probably causes more than a few 4A problems. But Gabe seems to think that a) doesn't affect the analysis and b) isn't how the cellular system works. We shall see I suppose.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at December 28, 2013 03:44 PM (GaqMa)

195 *I still say he's trolling us*

Nicely played Gabe.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 07:42 PM (LSDdO)

 

I don't think so.  I think Gabe has illustrated the problem we all face now-  that the lawyers have taken over and the focus has shifted to legal VS illegal instead of right VS wrong.  The focus in Washington is now "can we do this"  instead of "should we do this."

 

Yes, they can.  Which is why we find ourselves where we are.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at December 28, 2013 03:46 PM (o9Rp5)

196 Notice they never have some balloon that weighs 500 pounds?

There's a reason for that.

Beyond a certain weight, it's just about impossible to reduce to the point where one can exercise without exercising.

Ever tried to exercise weighing over 400?

Not only that the rewards are 0000000000. For months/years.

the only ones who succeed at those weights are those that have surgery.

Not something weight watchers is interested in promoting.

They want to sell designer food to well to do women with time on their hands and a few pounds on their ass.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at December 28, 2013 03:46 PM (LSDdO)

197 I know I won't be happy until Gabe defends the plaintiffs in the first lawsuit against a Christian Church that refuses to hold a gay marriage ceremony. That is the Hill To Surrender On. That is all that matters. Gay Marriage is the Holy Grail to our precious co-blogger. Why not throw out the first Amendment with the rest....who needs 'em...

Posted by: Some Guy in Wisconsin at December 28, 2013 03:49 PM (n+lFz)

198 We shall see I suppose.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at December 28, 2013 07:44 PM (GaqMa)


I am sure the secret courts will review the functionality of the cellular system, the true meaning of metadata, and the limits of meta-data mining by a bunch of government employees that are answerable to no one before the final ruling. 



Too bad none of us affected by this decision will have standing to read the decisions of those courts, because safety first, liberty second.

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 03:51 PM (o3MSL)

199 Let them have the power to abuse your rights and they will. With all the wars in the last century governments still killed more of their own citizens than any enemy did. Human nature is to obtain and abuse power and it can happen here. We all know it. With the Constitution on full ignore expect bigger gov't and fewer rights. The trip back to the divine right of kings is a short road, it will just have a new progressive name to make it sound kinder and gentler.

Posted by: Bob from table9 at December 28, 2013 03:54 PM (jsa6I)

200 Where did everyone go?  Enjoying olddog's egg nog?

Posted by: Duke Lowell at December 28, 2013 03:55 PM (o9Rp5)

201 The trip back to the divine right of kings is a short road, it will just have a new progressive name to make it sound kinder and gentler.

Posted by: Bob from table9 at December 28, 2013 07:54 PM (jsa6I)


Coming up with the proper nomenclature to soothe the serfs is a major task for all establishment types (R & D).

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 03:57 PM (o3MSL)

202 I don't think so. I think Gabe has illustrated the problem we all face now- that the lawyers have taken over and the focus has shifted to legal VS illegal Posted by: Duke Lowell at December 28, 2013 07:46 PM I'm confused. Lawyers or the Courts? DC has been taken over by lawyers and lobbyists. But, don't courts/judges ultimately decide legal vs illegal?

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 03:58 PM (teFlO)

203 I think Gabe has illustrated the problem we all face now- that the lawyers have taken over and the focus has shifted to legal VS illegal instead of right VS wrong. Reminds me of something I read from a lawyer several years ago. “There are some things that are legal and ethical, but are simply not right.” Whether something was ethical was once meant for examining whether it was right or wrong. Then the lawyers needed rules to know whether any particular thing is ethical, so now whether something is ethical is whether it passes a rules test. Not whether it is in fact ethical.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at December 28, 2013 03:59 PM (WX3R9)

204 I was going to mention how similar Roy Rogers was to Hardees.

You heathen bastard.  Never defame Roy's name.  Now I want a Roast Beef.

Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at December 28, 2013 04:00 PM (DL2i+)

205 They should only track people that are calling Yemen & other terrorist hot spots. I believe that was the original argument for the FISA court.

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 04:02 PM (z4WKX)

206 Duke, has the Egg Nog made thru to your USB port yet? If so, hope you had your glass ready.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 04:02 PM (teFlO)

207 "I'm confused. Lawyers or the Courts? DC has been taken over by lawyers and lobbyists. But, don't courts/judges ultimately decide legal vs illegal?"

 
 
My point is that the system has become so convoluted that you can now find a legal justification for just about any action the government wants to take. See Chief Justice Roberts.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at December 28, 2013 04:02 PM (o9Rp5)

208 I'm confused. Lawyers or the Courts? DC has been taken over by lawyers and lobbyists. But, don't courts/judges ultimately decide legal vs illegal?
Posted by: olddog in mo
..........
Who the hell do you think the judges and courts are?  Former lawyers.

I suggest you watch some lawyer movies like The Rainmaker..

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 28, 2013 04:02 PM (b/lt+)

209 See Chief Justice Roberts.
Posted by: Duke Lowell
........
and.. putting on my tinfoil hat for just a minute.. WTF do you think the NSA had on Roberts by examining his phone records?

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 28, 2013 04:04 PM (b/lt+)

210 When I open The Blog at first, there is the series from the WSJ I read a fews weeks ago, where they gave soldiers from WWII lobotomies that were most likely suffering from PTSD and they didnÂ’t know how to treat or diagnose it then. If you can, read it, itÂ’s interesting but scary.

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 04:04 PM (z4WKX)

211 "Duke, has the Egg Nog made thru to your USB port yet? If so, hope you had your glass ready."

A little spilled on the floor, but the dog lapped it up.  The rest was delicious!  BTW, anyone know a good veterinarian in Edmond, OK?   Asking for a friend.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at December 28, 2013 04:04 PM (o9Rp5)

212 Do i have a constitutionally protected right to a new thread so I don't have to see this garbage up top when I check back in?

Posted by: shredded chi, the young curmudgeon at December 28, 2013 04:04 PM (T481d)

213 Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 08:02 PM (z4WKX)

HI Carol:



FISA = Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, but at this point what difference does it make, we've got so many illegal foreigners here we might as well surveil everybody.

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 04:07 PM (o3MSL)

214 Do i have a constitutionally protected right to a new thread so I don't have to see this garbage up top when I check back in? Posted by: shredded chi
..........
You used to.. not any more...

But, it's a right you would gladly give up in exchange for piece of mind that folks like Gabe have our back.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 28, 2013 04:07 PM (b/lt+)

215 212 Do i have a constitutionally protected right to a new thread so I don't have to see this garbage up top when I check back in?

Posted by: shredded chi, the young curmudgeon at December 28, 2013 08:04 PM (T481d)

 

 

This thread is a tax, so yes you do.

Posted by: CJ Roberts at December 28, 2013 04:07 PM (o9Rp5)

216 We need a kinder gentler thread!

Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 04:08 PM (o3MSL)

217 FISA = Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, but at this point what difference does it make, we've got so many illegal foreigners here we might as well surveil everybody. Posted by: Hrothgar at December 28, 2013 08:07 PM (o3MSL) They should not be surveilling US citizens unless we are calling Yemen, etc as I posted above.

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 04:09 PM (z4WKX)

218 I suggest you watch some lawyer movies like The Rainmaker.. Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 28, 2013 08:02 PM Your assumption seems to be that I'm stupid. I've seen the movie. Got the t-shirt. I've been in business for 30+ years.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 04:12 PM (teFlO)

219 The limitation is the vastness of the data itself, and speed hit to access slow mass storage devices.

I don't think the vastness is a storage cost issue anymore, drives are so cheap.  Plowing thru it in real time is probably some interesting stuff programming wise.  Just letting Discover The Network queries running all the time is easy though.

Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at December 28, 2013 04:13 PM (DL2i+)

220 Legal vs ethical has been lost because we are not operating under agreed ethical values any more.  Legal is an exercise in sophistry and any relation to reality or ethical behavior is almost accidental.  One thing the Judaeo-Christian tradition offered is an ethical underpinning to exercise of legal/judicial power.  As far as the mass data collection goes, Washington has its own power interests, directly conflicting with free citizens.

Nobody should live in DC longer than ten years, elected or adjunct.

Posted by: Mustbequantum at December 28, 2013 04:14 PM (MIKMs)

221

Fill in the blank:

Howard Johnson's > _________________ > McDonald's

Pilot truck stops!, my latest favorite.

Posted by: BunkerInTheBurbs at December 28, 2013 04:15 PM (X3xYu)

222 BTW, anyone know a good veterinarian in Edmond, OK? Asking for a friend. No, but I could make some calls and prolly hook you up with one in Joplin, MO

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 04:16 PM (teFlO)

223 Posted by: CJ Roberts at December 28, 2013 08:07 PM (o9Rp5) CJ Roberts, Is is true you rewrote TFGCare to be a tax because TFG was going to expose your illegal adoption of Irish babies by having the pregnant women go to South America to give birth? The Irish have very strict adoption laws and it must be done through the Irish court and must be to Irish citizens? If that is true, you lied and should have recused yourself from being on SCOTUS. YouÂ’ve made us very upset.

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 04:17 PM (z4WKX)

224 Stuckey's?

Posted by: shredded chi, the young curmudgeon at December 28, 2013 04:17 PM (T481d)

225 You know what I really miss about Ace O'Spades.? I kow you don't but I'm gonna tell ya any way.

I really miss the steel door boy. The lace wig bot and the women's handbags
bot.

I miss the generator bot a little bit to, just to compare what is available today as opposed to the one I have.

Unban the bots!!!!

Posted by: GMB-Schoolyard bully at December 28, 2013 04:18 PM (nkPV9)

226

 Plowing thru it in real time is probably some interesting stuff programming wise

 

Hmm. Yet all the buzz about "Big Data" when few corporations have a clue how to monetize it... why are all the university/silicon valley types working on it...?

Posted by: BunkerInTheBurbs at December 28, 2013 04:18 PM (X3xYu)

227 216 We need a kinder gentler thread! Well, I did offer some Egg Nogg earlier. Where the eff were you? (I keed, I keed.)

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 04:18 PM (teFlO)

228 Mustbequantum, I agree we've got to get em outta DC. They are so insulated in their little world they have no idea what Americans want or need in government . I also think they don't care as long as all is right with their little world.

Posted by: Fourth Horseman RN now your MD at December 28, 2013 04:19 PM (KuZ6A)

229 Given:
1. The NSA and its proponents testify that all the data ONLY ever is looked at in an ad hoc manner - i.e. - only once a person is suspect is their data looked at.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry

Problem: we have a number of verified reports that's not a rule. They've broken it before and the potential to break it again is a certainty.

2. A FISA warrant must be approved before ANY metadata is examined

You really need to look up that Guardian log-article of the infractions that already taken place. They have and do apply for retroactive FISA warrants.

Not only that, at least one was retro-actively denied. What is the recourse then? How are they stopped from using the info? What mechanism can be used to make whole the error?

If that is true - easy solution: Force the phone companies to keep all meta-data. When a warrant is approved, the phone company must transfer all related data to the NSA.

Easy? It's meaningless; if the NSA has all electronic communication monitored, what the phone companies have or keep to themselves is irrelevant. The NSA has a tap on all networked communications.

I don't for one minute believe the NSA is NOT doing fishing expeditions with this data.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry

Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at December 28, 2013 04:20 PM (dwArK)

230 Interstate Rest Stop bathrooms?

Posted by: shredded chi, the young curmudgeon at December 28, 2013 04:21 PM (T481d)

231 Your assumption seems to be that I'm stupid. I've seen the movie. Got the t-shirt. I've been in business for 30+ years. Posted by: olddog in mo
......
No.. but I do not understand your question then.. unless it was meant to be snark.. in which case, I missed it entirely.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 28, 2013 04:21 PM (b/lt+)

232 I hereby establish 'Hammer's Rule': Any information that is gathered 'confidentially', will ultimately be used nefariously, no matter by whom the data is gathered, and no matter who promises confidentiality.

Posted by: Mike Hammer at December 28, 2013 04:21 PM (aDwsi)

233 Some of you may remember a German politician suing for 6 months of his phone meta-data to see just what could be determined from it.
They could tell, not only who he called, and was called by, but where he went/when/and how fast he was driving on the way.

http://tinyurl.com/q3hp4fm

Telco has the data because of billing and how the system works.
The government needs it, WHY?

Posted by: ChrisP at December 28, 2013 04:21 PM (BpTC0)

234 Stuckeys and their pecan pies are only down the mid Atlantic states along I95 I think.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 28, 2013 04:23 PM (b1O1M)

235 Nobody should live in DC longer than ten years, elected or adjunct. Some commenter here once made the point that there really is no reason to have a capital any more other than the cocktail party reasons. Everything else can be handled online.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at December 28, 2013 04:24 PM (WX3R9)

236 Easy? It's meaningless; if the NSA has all electronic communication monitored, what the phone companies have or keep to themselves is irrelevant. The NSA has a tap on all networked communications.
Posted by: weft cut-loop
...........
Yeah. Easy.  If we had someone in the White House who gave a fuck about the rights of individuals.... and.. if we had a Congress who would rein in the NSA.

But, as of now?  We're fucked.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 28, 2013 04:24 PM (b/lt+)

237 Mustbequantum, I agree we've got to get em outta DC. They are so insulated in their little world they have no idea what Americans want or need in government . I also think they don't care as long as all is right with their little world. Posted by: Fourth Horseman RN now your MD at December 28, 2013 08:19 PM (KuZ6A) I third that! They are insulated in DC and donÂ’t even care what the people want.

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 04:25 PM (z4WKX)

238 Some commenter here once made the point that there really is no reason to have a capital any more other than the cocktail party reasons. Everything else can be handled online. Posted by: Stephen Price Blair --------------------------- But then, where would Joe Manchin (WV) moor his million dollar yacht?

Posted by: Mike Hammer at December 28, 2013 04:25 PM (aDwsi)

239 die grinders angle grinders hoagies and grinders girders stretching across gilders gliding to golden acres of griffons gleaming with oh so knowing looks of floating down the Ganges with Ganesha gone gilded gonads for gimp who got grinded by ga-ga while getting graduated cylinders' glass ground with grit teeth while grinding grout use great grinders angle or die

Posted by: The failure of man melded with machine at December 28, 2013 04:26 PM (R6JT1)

240 @233

And yet... And yet...

The Tsarnaev brothers....


The government!  substitutes as the Aristocrats!


Posted by: Kreplach at December 28, 2013 04:26 PM (Xkr8I)

241 But then, where would Joe Manchin (WV) moor his million dollar yacht? Posted by: Mike Hammer at December 28, 2013 08:25 PM (aDwsi) Rhode Island?

Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 28, 2013 04:28 PM (JpFMR)

242 When a government becomes so totalitarian that it sets to spying, and in mass and in great detail, on it's own people like they were all subjects, if not criminals, it is not doing so on their behalf. Only mice and sheep could think so (or maybe some who fancy themselves patriots, but that would be "patriots" on the Russian plan). The Stasi wasn't in East German and the N-Stasi-A isn't in America. And this is on top of the TSA/Gropestapo molesting little girls and grandmas at our airports and largely giving middle easterners a pass. I don't think the federal government has stopped a single attack, and has caused quite a number (Fort Hood, Boston, Benghazi, Navy Shipyard, Mexican invaders who kill so many and most every day), with their gross willful dereliction. I don't care how many times Herr Hussein Obama and other N-Stasi-A supporters and apologists and lackeys tell me that's Holy Water they are spraying on my leg to keep me safe, I know that it's something very different - and it smells to high Heaven.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Founding Fathers, to  a man, would despise the NSA at least as much as they despised King George, probably more. <b>As Barry Goldwater said of "the end justifies the means", if ever there was a philosophy of government totally at war with that of the Founding Fathers, it is this one".</b>  If there were justice in the world, Snowden would be living it up in the White House and Obama and all his N-Stasi-A criminals would be in hiding, maybe somewhere in North Korea, in a dark cave. subsisting on grass and having nightmares of Nuremberg.

Posted by: FeralCat at December 28, 2013 04:28 PM (TWcaX)

243 When I open The Blog at first, there is the series from the WSJ I read a fews weeks ago, where they gave soldiers from WWII lobotomies that were most likely suffering from PTSD and they didnÂ’t know how to treat or diagnose it then.

If you can, read it, itÂ’s interesting but scary.

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 08:04 PM (z4WKX)

 

The father of my best friend from a long time ago had the lobotomy procedure due to PTSD due to service in WWII. I was told his was the last one done in the U.S.

 

I did not understand the significance at the time. But even then I noticed he was very chill.

 

I have not and cannot read the story.

Posted by: tbodie at December 28, 2013 04:30 PM (13IVx)

244 Posted by: FeralCat at December 28, 2013 08:28 PM (TWcaX) Feral Cat, Several times I have posted over the past months and or year that our Founding Fathers would turn over in their graves if they could see what weÂ’ve let happen to what they fought with their lives to give us. This is a Republic, if we can keep it, to paraphrase Ben Franklin.

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 04:30 PM (z4WKX)

245 Make DC a museum campus and disperse the adjunct bureaucracy (or private armies as I see them).  Congress can meet in different states each session. 

Posted by: Mustbequantum at December 28, 2013 04:31 PM (MIKMs)

246 I'll be skipping this entire site in the future. Posted by: Tilon at December 28, 2013 07:21 PM (vO0lg) You will not be missed.

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 04:36 PM (z4WKX)

247 I couldn't agree with you more, Carol. Another favorite from Ben (and quite pertinent): Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters. 

Posted by: shredded chi, the young curmudgeon at December 28, 2013 04:37 PM (T481d)

248 Send them all home they must live in the state they represent and let them videoconference like everyone else does. It would put a kink n their tail to have to face the constituants they represent.

Posted by: Fourth Horseman RN now your MD at December 28, 2013 04:37 PM (KuZ6A)

249 that there really is no reason to have a capital any more other than the cocktail party reasons.

When they spread out it's call metastasizing isn't it?

Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at December 28, 2013 04:38 PM (DL2i+)

250 @235 I would agree except for the fact there is enough miscommunication online, also the probability of (ahem) agencies able to read whatever is there at any time, and if the intrawebs and phone communication is down.... suffice it to say those possibilities do not give me a warm fuzzy. Do I think there is a problem? Certainly! However telecommuting a Cruz (or whoever) formal rant would lose so very much IMHO.

Posted by: FCF at December 28, 2013 04:40 PM (Khja4)

251 No.. but I do not understand your question then.. unless it was meant to be snark.. in which case, I missed it entirely. Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 28, 2013 08:21 PM My question was referring to Duke's 7:46 post that was responding to Bitter Clinger's 7:42 post regarding Gabe's post trolling us. Apparently my post was not cogent. I was soliciting clarification from Duke. Prolly too much Egg Nog. Or maybe not enuff.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 04:40 PM (teFlO)

252 "I have better things to do than to ever waste another second of my life reading one of Gabe's 'opinions'. I'll be skipping any post written by him in the future, and if he continues to defecate all over this blog on a regular basis, I'll be skipping this entire site in the future.

Posted by: Tilon at December 28, 2013 07:21 PM (vO0lg)"

He's just doing his best to be a loyal subject of Herr Obama and  the State.

Posted by: FeralCat at December 28, 2013 04:41 PM (parIF)

253 The father of my best friend from a long time ago had the lobotomy procedure due to PTSD due to service in WWII. I was told his was the last one done in the U.S. I did not understand the significance at the time. But even then I noticed he was very chill. I have not and cannot read the story. Posted by: tbodie at December 28, 2013 08:30 PM (13IVx) IÂ’m surprised that they told you he had one. IÂ’m sorry for your long ago, best friendÂ’s father. That was no way to treat the men that saved the world from Hitler. They deserved better. It is a sin that they used such harsh methods. DonÂ’t read it,it made me feel ill.

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 04:42 PM (z4WKX)

254 All of these supposed measures to protect us from terrorism, but when we see terrorist acts that go by the "safeguards" like Ft Hood or Boston or Benghazi, they are defined differently. What we need are protections from the terrorist acts of the IRS, ATF, EPA, and TSA that are holding our freedoms hostage 9/11 has been turned into a straw daw for government tyranny.

Posted by: ontherocks at December 28, 2013 04:43 PM (XPDCV)

255 Stuckeys and its pe-KHAAAAANNN!!!! pies are (at least used to be) plentiful down I-20 in Texas.

Posted by: JarvisW at December 28, 2013 04:44 PM (E7Iyp)

256 Well, it kept East Germany safe from terrorists. Good summary here: http://tinyurl.com/mujrr8f The real problem is that the NSA and the media are not reporting the full story. Snowden might be a sleazebag but I'm beginning to realize that he will likely be the last to expose what is actually going on. Go read the old "Wired" stories and the Glenn Beck interviews with the ex NSA people. While Federal Judges decide or ignore Federal unconstitutional acts one tree at a time the whole forest is on fire. Sweet Jesus Christ. Never in the history of mankind has this sort of power invested in a central government turned out well. Never. It usually ends in a goddamn genocide. Pick up a fucking book and read what happened over the last one hundred years.

Posted by: Daybrother at December 28, 2013 04:45 PM (276bI)

257 Nood up guys and girls.

Posted by: Fourth Horseman RN now your MD at December 28, 2013 04:45 PM (KuZ6A)

258 Gabe, you are awesome.

Posted by: Zelda at December 28, 2013 04:48 PM (I7/r9)

259 I  don't really understand the 3rd party precedent here.

When most of our conversations , business,  are through these things such as phone, email, letters
personal or private when this is how we now conduct  our regular existance with everything online, from banking to credit card payments and Everything else ..

and yet because of Modernization now privacy to papers is outdated?

Posted by: willow at December 28, 2013 04:52 PM (nqBYe)

260 Pee-Khan' or Pee'-Cnn or Pee-Can'? Discuss.

Posted by: olddog in mo at December 28, 2013 04:52 PM (teFlO)

261 so because they decide we will be a paperless society, they than use that paperless society to snoop ?

and it's now considered alright?

Posted by: willow at December 28, 2013 04:54 PM (nqBYe)

262 Wouldn't want to eat a pee-can..

Posted by: JarvisW at December 28, 2013 04:57 PM (E7Iyp)

263

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 08:42 PM (z4WKX)

 

I once asked why "he was different". My Mom was the one who informed me of the lobotomy. She was an RN. The family (especially their mom) are some of the most impressive people I ever met. The more I know, the more I respect their service.

Posted by: tbodie at December 28, 2013 04:57 PM (MBZW0)

264 Another lurker de-lurking. All that to say... What the fuck Gabe? What. The Fuck.

Posted by: GOC at December 28, 2013 04:58 PM (M7g90)

265 Posted by: tbodie at December 28, 2013 08:57 PM (MBZW0) tbodie, at least you know why he was different. There is a new post up.

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 05:00 PM (z4WKX)

266 Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters. Posted by: shredded chi, the young curmudgeon at December 28, 2013 08:37 PM (T481d) I forgot that one and it is quite relevant now. A new one has been up for a half hour; go over to it

Posted by: Carol at December 28, 2013 05:04 PM (z4WKX)

267 I really think the First Amendement right of free association is at peril here, not the fourth. The real value of these meta-data is not the personal, private communications therein. The value is in the networks of associates people have. That is a first amendment issue, not a fourth. The government is loaded for bear on the fourth amendment issues - look at the first.

Posted by: Jean at December 28, 2013 05:11 PM (4JkHl)

268 Jean, they are certainly using lists of assocation )tea party/conservative Koch etc) to punish.

still what if one would tell ones Priest, Rabbi,  Imam something on a cell  a personal issue you'd tell no one else?
do we really have to go to a private room check all the appliances before we share an experience that might ruin us or another?

Posted by: willow at December 28, 2013 05:19 PM (nqBYe)

269 Jean I hadn't thought of it that way, (IOW why I read this blog) Great point!

Posted by: FCF at December 28, 2013 05:22 PM (Khja4)

270 So Gabriel is another who doesn't understand the intent of the 4th amendment, and who would love to piss away our freedoms. Noted. Quickly falling back on precedents is generally the first sign that someone knows he's full of it.

Posted by: Just A Guy at December 28, 2013 05:26 PM (5v7zJ)

271 Hoovering up every telephone call in the country...ALL of them...is as clear a violation of the intent of the 4th Amendment as I can imagine.

Gabe, you are just wrong.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at December 28, 2013 05:39 PM (ltdV/)

272 The Fourth Amendment states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."



The Second Amendment states: "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."



In both cases, would-be totalitarians ignore the plain and clear language of the underlined part to quibble about the rest. The "business records exception" is saying, in effect, that the first portion of the Fourth Amendment is an exhaustive list, and since 3rd-party business records aren't on that list, the underlined restriction doesn't apply. It's an argument very similar to when gun-grabbers say that anyone not in a militia has no right to arms.



In both cases, the latter half of the Amendment is the basic rule. The Fourth basically states that the government cannot compel anyone to give something up -- material or immaterial, live or dead, whether owned by the party or held for someone else -- without a specific warrant specifying where the thing is and describing it detail. In the context of telephone metadata, that would either be "cellular metadata for cell tower 838, between 9:00 and 10:30am on Saturday, 12/28/13" or "cellular metadata for cellular telephone 212/123-4567 between 9:00 and 10:30am on Saturday, 12/28/13."




The problem lies in the words "particularly describing" -- and I would put it to you that this is where Gabe is wrong and the whole show can and should be tossed out as unconstitutional. It should be a ginormous red flag for the word "all" to show up in a warrant without significant further restrictions -- e.g. "all objects", right out; "all media", right out; "all evidence of guilt", right out; "all clothing", maaaaaayyyybe; "all compact flash cards", yeah; "all red shoes", yeah; "all left-handed golf clubs", yeah.



I would go so far as to say that any warrant that returned more than 10,000 of anything -- data records, CDs, canceled checks, whatever -- was likely, on its face, to be less than "particularly describing" anything. And a warrant that returned billions? You must be joking.



That's not to say that the government might not have other ways of acquiring information -- it is free, for instance, to buy mailing lists or electronic yellowpages from various entities that collect such things, but they may not compel this information without a warrant, and the warrant must be particular.



Another item that works into this area, BTW is that regulated companies seemed to be falling all over themselves to provide this information and thus curry favor among their regulators. I believe (but could be wrong) that there are already statutes that cover such circumstances.

Posted by: cthulhu at December 28, 2013 06:30 PM (T1005)

273 272 cthulhu at December 28, 2013 10:30 PM (T1005)

an excellent point and a much more eloquent and precise dissection of what I rendered as "the people win all ties not the feds"...

Gabe is on his side of the natural rights debate and I am on the other.

I am just fine with where I sit.

Posted by: sven10077 at December 28, 2013 06:36 PM (9jfyN)

274 No different than querying the FBI fingerprint database? BULLSHIT! There are two very important problems with this theory. First of all, everyone with fingers is not in the fingerprint database. The only prints in the database are people who work in a job that requires it, people who have been arrested or imprisoned, and unidentified prints from crime scenes. Everyone is not in the database. You have to be in there for a reason to begin with, and most of the people in it are already known criminals. An equivalent comparison would be if your metadata got uploaded if you were booked in a criminal investigation or applied for a job that required fingerprinting. The second problem is that you can't troll the fingerprint database for connections suggesting anti government behavior. The fingerprints stand alone with only the name of their owner as a cross reference. If I happen to sit on a committee at the local service club with an anti government militia member, me and everyone I have ever called, emailed, or commented on their Facebook status is suddenly associated with this person too, and we are all about to get a colonoscopy from multiple government agencies. If the government is going to stretch the bounds of legal theory in order to keep us safe, how about applying it to people who are in the country illegally or being involved with overseas terrorists as the patriot act was intended for instead of hounding law abiding citizens.

Posted by: Scot at December 28, 2013 07:04 PM (aW66K)

275 This says something on the nature of this debate: A. the first Federal Court opinion -- the one that characterizes metadata as private (or private 'now' because it's being collected AS data, whereas in some gentler kinder it was 'only' or 'incidentally' collected as a function of executing on search warrants) -- comes to us from a Republican nominated by GW Bush, while B. the second FC opinion -- the one that's tossed the ACLU lawsuit -- comes to us from a Democrat nominated by Clinton. The Bush appointee's opinion considers the very idea of government surveillance of a private citizen as 'invasive' in the sense of the 4th Amendment. If so, that means Congress cannot 'fix' this 'problem'; it can only be 'fixed' by a Constitutional amendment. The Clinton appointee's opinion considers that it IS the business of Congress to consider whether government surveillance is or is not 'invasive' in the sense of the 4th Amendment. This is an important distinction, for the extremely practical reason that it's been pretty much politically impossible to amend the Constitution for 42 years and counting -- that is, since we agreed to reduce the voting age to 18. (I'm discounting the 1992 amendment that kept Congress critters collecting paychecks until the next Congress. Amendments to ensure Congress' own get paid No Matter What apparently have always resonated deeply with The American People.) For that reason alone, I think the chances of the first opinion being upheld in the SCOTUS are somewhere between zero and zero point zero. CJ Roberts, for crying out loud, APPOINTS all the members of the FISA court, and it's not like they've gone all maverick on him. And I can't think of a single vote on the SCOTUS even remotely likely to go against the CJ on this. But there's still a problem, and it's real, and it's spectacular: It's not that the government 'ONLY' retains metadata -- they retain the very calls for which, according to what Alexander and Clapper, those saintly men who would never ever lie about such a thing, an actual search warrant would be required to get at. Here's where the rubber hits the road on this problem: in the nature of 'government collection'. If 'collection' means what we all use the term for, that is, gathering up and holding onto things, then this is at least "extra-constitutional", and the resolution to the issue revolves entirely around what's intended by the 4th Amendment. Was it the intent of the Founders that the government, in essence, be permitted to employ a robot to make a copy of the sealed content of a letter sent by post?

Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at December 28, 2013 07:30 PM (w45V0)

276 We don't have a constitutional right to privacy once we release information to a non government entity?  Hon... the 4th amendment protects us from GOVERNMENT, not cell phone providers.  When I enter into a contract with AT&T, I'm not authorizing the government to seize my personal phone records.  They are not entitled to information I provide to a third party.

PERIOD.

Posted by: Sarah at December 28, 2013 08:18 PM (xGr1s)

277

The writer is on pretty solid ground with his analysis of current case law.  As he points out, this could change at the SCOTUS, they have done an about-face many times before, and this area could be ripe for it.

This really should be solved at the political level.  The problem is that the public is pretty hypocritical on liberty and security.  Their reference points for counter-terrorism and investigative work are the product of movies and television.  They blather on about liberty or death then clutch their pearls when shit starts blowing up.  They get all clawy bald eagle and flag waving when they get attacked, then get bored and start navel gazing before long.  At the same time, Americans will run amazing risks for fun and profit when given the opportunity so its not as if the culture is allergic to conflict or suffering.

I think it would be an interesting thing if  the airport should have two wings, the security wing, and the liberty wing.  In the former, its run just like it is now, in the latter, everyone just gets on the plane, no searching, no scanners, no nothing, you just sign a waiver for any attacks.

How long would it be before something happened?  How much would people alter their behavior once they had skin in the game and things got untheoretical?  I bet we would learn a lot about ourselves.

Posted by: Sultan Touma at December 28, 2013 11:49 PM (trzMq)

278 Thanks for this one, Gabe, After reading Kerr's compendium of The Third Party Doctrine I compiled a list of "Honey-Don'ts" for the free American determined to stay that way in the face of a politicized, unionized, militarized civil service: 1. Limit or tailor bank transactions. ex. Cash withdrawals, believe it or not, are suspicious to law-enforcement, so cash has de facto become illegal. In the case where a man is side-stepping unionized tradesmen to build a home, he should only pull cash in small increments to pay his builder so as to not alert unionized policemen of his "wrongdoing." In Bill Blasio's NYC, following this rule will become second nature for freemen, or else. 2. Never use an accountant (this includes Turbo Tax, too, guys!). Use a paper form, do your own taxes, and do not rely on a third party provider. 3. Suspect confidants who solicit information from you. Unless they are common-law relatives or a contracted attorney (where third-party protections exist), mum's the word. 4. False friends abound in this world. The newer the friend, the more likely she'll be a false, fair-weather friend. See number 3, for confirmation. 5. Use felt-tip pens in your home office. They don't leave an imprint on the tablet pages below. 6. Use a company or club internet connection when possible, and practice extreme discretion online. 7. Never send suggestive or suspicious information over the internet or in emails. In today's capricious law-enforcement environment, simply provoking a unionized civil servant with controversial, protected information can be termed harassment by the "victim," and your political expression, taken out of context, can serve to incriminate you in sympathetic courts. 8. Do not use Facebook! Repeat after me: "Facebook is not your 'friend. Facebook does not "like" you."" One more time now: "Facebook is not your "friend." Facebook does not "like" you." Seems like good list...I'm a gonna stick to it 'till we get the Nation back on track! -S

Posted by: steveaz at December 29, 2013 06:03 AM (JTVH+)

279 Thanks to Gabriel for coming on the show. I actually lean against NSA spying and the whole Patriot Act, but tried to play moderator during the show. Gabriel made his points really well and I completely see where he's coming from. Just don't agree. The entire discussion (which isn't long enough) is here: http://t.co/UgE5CGOHoL

Posted by: Taylor at December 29, 2013 01:43 PM (x1L8S)

Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
239kb generated in CPU 0.1626, elapsed 0.3303 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.2527 seconds, 407 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Support





Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact

Change the At to "@" and the DOT to "."




Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Search Thingy



Archives

Monthly Traffic

  • Pages: 6544
  • Files: 116
  • Bytes: 140.1M
  • CPU Time: 5:47
  • Queries: 165146

Content

  • Posts: 22824
  • Comments: 5953260

Feeds


RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0