This is a sneak attack on the emerging, post-Snowden consensus that surveillance agencies have far too many powers, and far too many checks on those powers.
Might want to double-check this sentence. (Edit: Glad to see it fixed.)
Pah! If they need a warrant for emails pretty soon you’ll be demanding they get warrants for everything they’re supposed to get warrants for! How can the Police State be expected to maintain Order under this terrible burden?
Hmmm… maybe I should change my .sig from "It was me, I killed the Lindbergh baby!’ to something less incriminating.
How could this possibly pass the SCOTUS? Is email somehow magically different from… say… mail?
Can’t they already use an NSL to open your snailmail?
Another anecdotal supposition: Isn’t this also related to the fact that email over 180 days old is considered, but the U.S. government, to be something like, “discarded” communications or something of that ilk?
Read the fucken article, his conscience told him…and I will!
This government is fucked.
This democracy is fucked.
This people is fucked.
Stop. Fucking. Humanity.
Hey now. Don’t be so defeatist. Soon Trump will be president and he’ll make America great again!
It’ll be the roaring 20s all over again! (I hope you have enough savings to avoid the poor house in your doddering old age.)
How can one “sneak” in changes to a bill? Seems like all amendments should be tracked.
What makes you think this is going to get anywhere NEAR the SCOTUS? If it does, they’ll say that SCOTUS has to refuse to take on the case and let the FISA court ruling (because of course it would have gone to FISA) stand, because State Secrets.
It just means flying under the radar, in part because people generally don’t pay much attention to the congress and their activities. But there is also attempts to “sneak” stuff in at the last minute because they’re cognizant of people’s lack of attention.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
