pacino wrote:looking for patterns

been happening since Oct 2001

td11 wrote:

pacino wrote:looking for patterns

been happening since Oct 2001

thanks, this link i found says pretty much the same thing: http://joshuafoust.com/nine-dashed-off- ... a-scandal/

:shrug:

Anyone who calls this a “wiretap” is probably stupid or didn’t read the order.

pacino wrote:so it's not like he's some hypocrite

pacino wrote:so are you, so i mean, what of it?

pacino wrote:he's not a hypocrite in action. wasnt in congress in 2001. vote for fisa when he could. who cares what he said in the past? to act as though you 'got me' is your own little problem. you seem to think you are talking with some obamabot or something. get off this glee you have to try to corner obama as not perfect as though anyone here has said that he is/was/doesnt have issues.

where was your outrage at this under bush? i mean, where was it? but you are a party man, so that comes first. congress gave him power that he is currently using. appears to have done absolutely nothing illegal, like it or not (And I dont). that's messed up, and he should be better than to use it, but he's not. he's a politican.

td11 wrote:i'm enjoying reading jh attack obama from the left. maybe there's hope for him yet

1. Congress voted to legalize expansive surveillance powers in 2001 (The USA PATRIOT ACT), 2008 (retroactive immunity for warantless NSA wiretaps in the FISA Amendments Act), and in 2012 (renewing the FISA Amendments Act).

2. Congress declined to force administration transparency/honesty on secret interpretations of the law in 2001 (USA PATRIOT ACT), 2008 (NSA immunity), 2011 (the Wyden amendment to the NDAA, which would have required interpretations not be secret) & 2012 (the similar Markley amendment to the NDAA). Those last two actually got voted down, which means Congress voted to enable secret government legal interpretation.

3. All of the opprobrium you should feel at the government’s ridiculously broad surveillance powers needs to be directed at CONGRESS, which keeps approving them while voting they stay secret.

td11 wrote:yes you're attacking him for continuing bush era policies which were started in the name of "national security" after 9/11 and are now impossible to roll back

pacino wrote:are liberals in NJ actually going to go with the liberal, Russ Holt, or are they going to vote Cory Booker because of his name recognition? Does Holt have widespread name recognition in NJ, enough to win?

td11 wrote:it's not like obama got to the WH and had the sole power to just roll back whatever he wanted. if you want to call him naive for making those comments as a senator, fine.

1. Congress voted to legalize expansive surveillance powers in 2001 (The USA PATRIOT ACT), 2008 (retroactive immunity for warantless NSA wiretaps in the FISA Amendments Act), and in 2012 (renewing the FISA Amendments Act).

2. Congress declined to force administration transparency/honesty on secret interpretations of the law in 2001 (USA PATRIOT ACT), 2008 (NSA immunity), 2011 (the Wyden amendment to the NDAA, which would have required interpretations not be secret) & 2012 (the similar Markley amendment to the NDAA). Those last two actually got voted down, which means Congress voted to enable secret government legal interpretation.

3. All of the opprobrium you should feel at the government’s ridiculously broad surveillance powers needs to be directed at CONGRESS, which keeps approving them while voting they stay secret.