Okay, I will inject as little snark as possible.
It is enshrined in the words, intent, and court cases that sources reporting to journalists, in exceptional circumstances is legal. Even if it breaks a law.
So yes, laws were obviously broken. But precedent is stronger, and laws may be upheld or struck down and sent back to congress.
That ruling is what we are waiting for.
G-N-T? Jolly good show! You, sir, have coined the:
Bravo !
No one has ever argued that there isnāt a need for state secrets. Skeptics and critics think the government keeps too many secrets, often to cover up blatant, ugly crimes.
I didnāt intend to ātrollā accidentally, either.
What can I say.
Welcome to BoingBoing.
Well thatās less depressing, I guess.
āSorry for driving trollies the site with ludicrous flame-bait, I realize it was wrong, and will stop nowā - thatās what you can say.
This isnāt driving trollies, itās just confusing. Are you playing 1 dimensional chess here?
Snark is good. My appreciation is for your not using the words āassholeā, āidiotā and āmoronā in your responses. Cogent responses are always appreciated.
This narrow ruling again only applies to the long term retention of phone metadata. I think the probable outcome is that - that nothing will change. If it returns to the legislative realm, where the responsibility for oversight supposedly lies and the Patriot Act originated, I think nothing will change. SCOTUS should toss this, if it makes it that far.
Note that Iām not advocating change to this narrow issue. Not the who but the what. There is a need to monitor persons within our borders. But thatās the purview of the FBI not the NSA or CIA.
And it is the journalists who are held harmless, not the sources. So Greenwald skates but his source may not. We agree to the precedent.
I think we may be closer in opinion than either may think. It is a narrow ruling, but six out of eleven circuits (if they take the cases) would basically impel the scotus to rule that 1918 and patriot are over broad.
That will never happen though.
So my secret hope is a friend of Thomas or Scalia on the circuit will, in a friendly way, convince one of them to cast their opinion against bulk surveillance. Perhaps over a cigar.
That would be enough for snowden to come back and have a fair trial, since the DoJ would be kneecapped on several fronts.
Yep, and getting legal ways to extract Intel for the FBI is a PITA. But thatās okay, even though I am usually on the PITA side of things.
Sorry you are depressed. Seek help, soon.
And if you quote me do it completely.
āI didnāt intend to ātrollā accidentally, either.ā
BTW, on a tangent. people on this very forum have made fun of me for suggesting, ācall the suspect, knock on their door, send a certified letterā technique.
It is usually a hundred times easier, completely legal, and extremely effective. Calling a suspects mother and calmly talking to them is also surprisingly effective. But I deal with online crimes.
Well thatās better.
āYouāve won a prize, come collect itā.
Canāt tell if serious.
Not. Is another technique.
Iām really enjoying the Americans. Although, after watching Season 2ās opener, Iām starting to wonder about the wisdom of a father employing his kids as cover. But hey, at least we got to sit in the Soyuz capsule.
Hahaha, that took me a second :). Well played 
Did I mention I am setting up six honeypot bitcoin exchanges next week?
Did you know most bitcoin exchanges and darknet entry nodes are honeypots?
(Ssshh!!! )
He canāt have a fair trial because there is no defense he could offer in an open court that would let him off from the crime of which he is accused. Heās spoken about that a bit, as has at least one of the lawyers he has had. He could say āI did it because these programs are illegal!ā and the courts could rule that this is true and then heād still be convicted because that isnāt a legal defense for his charges.
This is leaving aside that āNational Security!ā would be invoked, all press and public removed from the trial, and everything done out of the public eye (before his inevitable conviction to a cell next to Chelsea Manning).
Yeah, Patriot would have to be gutted and Espionage would have to be ruled unconstitutional. Also, whistleblower laws would have to be respected.
