[don-o]

Well, well.

Will WH Press Corpae get up to speed on this?

[don-o]

Press Corpse

[Travis McGee]

[unixfox]

The 4th Amendment doesn’t provide for loopholes!

Screw these tyrants, they can all go to hell!

[Blood of Tyrants]

There is no “loophole” in the law. There is only the law that gives them power to search.

[bamahead]

Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!

[xzins]

Next we’ll discover that “direct communication” means 2, 3, 4 or 5 degrees of separation.

Terrorist talks to American. That persons communications are then subject to recording. He talks to person 1, and that’s 1 degree of separation. Person 1 talks to person 2, and that’s 2 degrees.

The argument will be that that’s how a “secret cell” operates. One layer doesn’t know the identity of any other layers, so therefore, they must collect a variety of layers.

The only question is how many layers. I’ve read that one American is only 5 degrees of separation from any other American. We all know somebody who knows somebody, etc.,

[LibLieSlayer]

Well, well, well... looks like Snowden is winning this battle... they call him a traitor and he releases secret documents proving that our government is a traitor.

LLS

[OneWingedShark]

There is no loophole in the 4th Amendment: all unreasonable searches are prohibited. Period. Moreover, the requirement for a warrant is that probable cause is sworn to [under penalty of perjury] — this whole idea of "probable cause" being a way around the 4th's requirement for a warrant is bullshit… it is from here that these violations stem.

[RC one]

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.[/i>

[Vendome]

” The previously undisclosed rule change allows NSA operatives to hunt for individual Americans’ communications using their name or other identifying information.”

Guess it’s too much expecting The United States of America to uphold and defend The Constitution.

[edcoil]

Isn’t a loophole simply something not covered under law and a clarification is required by the court? There is really no such thing as a loophole it is either covered or not covered in the law.

[New Jersey Realist]

I’m sure whatever evidence they turn up with a warrant will be tossed out at the arraignment.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Ooops! Sorry, Barry.

Eddie can drip faster than you can spin.

[Red in Blue PA]

“A chill wind is blowing in this nation. A message is being sent through the White House and its allies… If you oppose this administration, there can and will be ramifications.”

Tim Robbins
April 15, 2003

[Gene Eric]

>> under a legal authority

That would be the charlatans in Congress granting this “legal authority.”

The NSA ain’t the boogeyman. It’s our neighbors we elect to represent us in DC.

[Chode]

[metmom]

The Constitution doesn’t.

Since when does the NSA usurp the Constitution?

[devolve]

.
.

- A number of allegedly healthy athletes have encountered severe health problems after using mucho booze and cocaine

- The first WH doc was sacked after warning Goofy of excessive boozing

- Good thing Goofy has never used cocaine.....

- Suicide is painless

- It brings on many changes

.
.

[freedomfiter2]

They have legal authority to do something unconstitutional?

[greeneyes]

Well, now the spies, and any citizens who want freedom and privacy are gonna have to kick the tech habit and go back to old school in order to keep stuff secret/private.