FBI to gain expanded hacking powers as Senate effort to block fails

reuters ^ | 12/1/16 | Dustin Volz

[ColdOne]

A last-ditch effort in the Senate to block or delay rule changes that would expand the U.S. government's hacking powers failed Wednesday, despite concerns the changes would jeopardize the privacy rights of innocent Americans and risk possible abuse by the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump.

Democratic Senator Ron Wyden attempted three times to delay the changes, which will take effect on Thursday and allow U.S. judges will be able to issue search warrants that give the FBI the authority to remotely access computers in any jurisdiction, potentially even overseas. His efforts were blocked by Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the Senate's second-ranking Republican.

[ColdOne]

He added that such authority, which was approved by the Supreme Court in a private vote earlier this year.............since when does the Supreme Court have private votes?

[BenLurkin]

[Candor7]

He added that such authority, which was approved by the Supreme Court in a private vote earlier this year.............since when does the Supreme Court have private votes?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Liberal fascism, the gift that keeps on giving.

We will have to stick it straight up their arses.

We now have the trump card.

Read it here:

Barack Obama, The Quintessential fascist

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html

[CIB-173RDABN]

So he would have been okay with the changes if a Democrat had been elected but now that a Republican has been elected it is too much power.

I personally am against giving any government agency too much power regardless of the party.

[HiTech RedNeck]

This sure seems odd.

I pray for wisdom here, too.

I have a hunch that in a Trump-led government, this will be leaving private computers alone unless there is a substantial thing, like Islamoterrorism, leading to that particular machine or virtual machine. Trump isn’t a paranoid Nixon; he’s an excellent pragmatist. There’s no need to spend the extra effort nosing at random, so it won’t happen.

We could have problems in a government led by a different figure (assuming the law would even stop it).

[Read Write Repeat]

Whatever happened to warrants?

[bgill]

Perhaps SCOTUS has private votes under our Terrorist in Chief. Who knows what goes on on the Hill these days that We the People aren’t privy to. Also, under our Terrorist in Chief the Constitution and Congress has been kicked to the curb.

[SubMareener]

Look, folks, all this stuff was put in place for a HILLIARY VICTORY! They just couldn’t turn it off. Now, President Donald J. Trump will have these powers, at least until he gets them reversed.

Of course it is dangerous, but YHWH has already demonstrated that He is in control by stopping Hillary.

[i_robot73]

>I personally am against giving any government agency too much power regardless of the party.

Maybe, if we had a limiting doctrine of stated authorities, we wouldn’t have need....

If ‘secret votes’ don’t raise the red flag a/o scare of bejeezus out of everyone, we’re way past, “It’s dead, Jim.”. Damn, what am I talking about, it doesn’t seem to be an issue for the (R); I haven’t heard hide nor hair about it from the ‘leaders’ of the (opposition) party.