NSA ***ADMITS*** Listening To US Domestic Calls WITHOUT A WARRANT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Contumacious]

OP- LIE. Nobody said they did. It's overseen by congress and reviewed by judges every 3 months. If you don't talk to terrorists and they don't get a warrant, that's illegal. The police etc CAN listen to anything, but it's illegal. So many chicken littles/liars/ignoramuses!
e.

AP, Politico, Others Ignoring CNET Scoop: 'NSA Admits Listening to U.S. Phone Calls Without Warrants'



.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

but, but, when Bush did it the rw'ers simply said "Well, if you're not doing anything wrong, what do you have to worry about?"

Bush got told to stop and then used Court orders. This policy allows joe blow to violate your rights with no intervention or overseeing by the Courts. But then facts never are the strong point of retardo liberals.

 

[mudwhistle]

Too bad you didn't say that when Bush was doing his warrantless wiretapping and Congress backdated his authorization.

Oh, right, terrorists were BAD GUYS then.

All this and unwanted, unsolicited Government pushes on our phones. Police state. Glad I have plenty ammo and reload.

My neighbors may need it someday

-Geaux

Yes, yes, I bow to your paranoid tendencies. I only hope the NSA is keeping an eye on you, after all, they missed those shit heads in Boston.

They're only watching people they consider a threat. Tea Party members, Republicans in general.

Muslims aren't a threat to this administration.

 

[Contumacious]

OP- LIE. Nobody said they did. It's overseen by congress and reviewed by judges every 3 months. If you don't talk to terrorists and they don't get a warrant, that's illegal. The police etc CAN listen to anything, but it's illegal. So many chicken littles/liars/ignoramuses!
e.

AP, Politico, Others Ignoring CNET Scoop: 'NSA Admits Listening to U.S. Phone Calls Without Warrants'



.

British NSA ( GCHQ ) intercepted foreign politicians' communications at G20 summits

.

 

[francoHFW]

OP- LIE. Nobody said they did. It's overseen by congress and reviewed by judges every 3 months. If you don't talk to terrorists and they don't get a warrant, that's illegal. The police etc CAN listen to anything, but it's illegal. So many chicken littles/liars/ignoramuses!
e.

AP, Politico, Others Ignoring CNET Scoop: 'NSA Admits Listening to U.S. Phone Calls Without Warrants'



.

Your ARTICLE says this is all based on one Dem rep who backed off and said warrants are always needed, liar/dupe gd waste of time. CNS of course is always totally fos, dupe.

 

[Geaux4it]

Too bad you didn't say that when Bush was doing his warrantless wiretapping and Congress backdated his authorization.

Oh, right, terrorists were BAD GUYS then.

All this and unwanted, unsolicited Government pushes on our phones. Police state. Glad I have plenty ammo and reload.

My neighbors may need it someday

-Geaux

Yes, yes, I bow to your paranoid tendencies. I only hope the NSA is keeping an eye on you, after all, they missed those shit heads in Boston.

 

[Contumacious]

OP- LIE. Nobody said they did. It's overseen by congress and reviewed by judges every 3 months. If you don't talk to terrorists and they don't get a warrant, that's illegal. The police etc CAN listen to anything, but it's illegal. So many chicken littles/liars/ignoramuses!
e.

AP, Politico, Others Ignoring CNET Scoop: 'NSA Admits Listening to U.S. Phone Calls Without Warrants'



.

Your ARTICLE says this is all based on one Dem rep who backed off and said warrants are always needed, liar/dupe gd waste of time. CNS of course is always totally fos, dupe.

NY TIMES:

Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell:

The Executive Branch DOES NOT NEED WARRANTS


.
.

 

[flacaltenn]

Apparently untrue:

CNET Story Alleging NSA Can Listen To U.S. Phone Calls Without Warrant Faces Skepticism

There seems to be a raft full of Congress Critters recanting their stories and outrage.. First Lindsey Graham blurts out indignation and then 1 hour later retracts.. Then the NY TIMES pulls an edit on "The President has lost all credibility". And NOW Adler reveals crap that would put him in a seat bound for Guantanamo, and then says "the Admin satisfied me as to the neccessity of a warrant."

That and Gen Petraeus and the other military guy being hit in a drive-by by their emails..

Seems like a lot of folks may be ALREADY compromised from telling the truth..
Anyway --- Yeah warrants are involved. But the details are that NSA CAN AND DOES monitor real-time traffic content and has 3 days to have the FISA court approve it AFTER THE FREAKING EVENT... They can frame someone in a 2 day media cycle. So if it's rubber stamped (which they are by the HUNDREDS) -- 3 days later, the violation of the law never happened..

They are lying to you.. Virtually ALL of them protecting their sorry asses for not understanding this and using it as a political football..

You GOOD with getting a rubberstamp warrant 3 DAYS after they listen in???

 

[Contumacious]

apparently untrue:

cnet story alleging nsa can listen to u.s. Phone calls without warrant faces skepticism

there seems to be a raft full of congress critters recanting their stories and outrage..

?

Has congressman Nadler denied cnet's report?!?!?!?!?!?

.

 

[flacaltenn]

apparently untrue:

cnet story alleging nsa can listen to u.s. Phone calls without warrant faces skepticism

there seems to be a raft full of congress critters recanting their stories and outrage..

?

Has congressman Nadler denied cnet's report?!?!?!?!?!?

.

Oh, Yes sir.. Strange as it is.. Both He and Graham both had phone calls or couriers or some dam thing affecting their short term memory..

See the link Ravi posted for the Update.. Nadler nows says "he's satisfied with Admin assurances that warrants are involved".. NOT A LIE --- but no where near the truth that voting citizens need to know...

 

[Immanuel]

but, but, when Bush did it the rw'ers simply said "Well, if you're not doing anything wrong, what do you have to worry about?"

It was put in place by the Bush admin to target terrorists....not US citizens.

You and I agree a lot, but this time I am not so sure. The Bush Admin did in fact use it to target terrorists but they were not stupid. They knew it could and would be used against us. They designed it that way. Maybe it never came out that they were targeting US citizens, but do not put it passed them. They were as power hungry as the Obama Admin.

Immie

 

[Contumacious]

there seems to be a raft full of congress critters recanting their stories and outrage..

?

Has congressman Nadler denied cnet's report?!?!?!?!?!?

.

Oh, Yes sir.. Strange as it is.. Both He and Graham both had phone calls or couriers or some dam thing affecting their short term memory..

See the link Ravi posted for the Update.. Nadler nows says "he's satisfied with Admin assurances that warrants are involved".. NOT A LIE --- but no where near the truth that voting citizens need to know...

Gee, why was he so talkative at one time now he only speaks through a spokesman.

Also, the trouble is that Nadler's quote refers to Thursday's hearing with FBI Director Robert Mueller and not the separate "secret Capitol Hill briefing" in the CNET story.

.

 

[francoHFW]

AP, Politico, Others Ignoring CNET Scoop: 'NSA Admits Listening to U.S. Phone Calls Without Warrants'



.

Your ARTICLE says this is all based on one Dem rep who backed off and said warrants are always needed, liar/dupe gd waste of time. CNS of course is always totally fos, dupe.

NY TIMES:

Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell:

The Executive Branch DOES NOT NEED WARRANTS


.
.

That's under Booosh fer chrissake. SAME PROGRAM, but Pub a-holes feel THEY'RE above the law. Same goes for perfidious Albion tapping visitng diplomats. Got NOTHING to do with Dems...BTW, you're an idiot waste of time. LOL

To review: NOT a new program, Dems doing NOTHING wrong, hater dupes...

 

[daveman]

It really doesn't matter if they can listen to phone calls right now.

The fact is they are accumulating a massive database of information on citizens which can be mined for a variety of purposes. (I'll note that, even with that info, the Feds are incapable of preventing attacks such as the recent Boston Marathon one, even when they have the Russian's giving them a warning.) The nature of government power itself means that somebody will abuse this data in violation of the Constitution. It's inevitable.

Combine that data with a growing and unaccountable bureaucracy run by the Executive Branch as a way around Congressional authority, and we have a Constitutional Crisis.

It's here. Ignoring it won't make it go away.

My brothers and I were discussing this at my folks' house yesterday (Mom and Dad celebrated their 68th wedding anniversary!), and my oldest brother, who's a liberal, said, "You know what worries me the most? That I wasn't surprised about this."

Sad times for America.

Too bad you didn't say that when Bush was doing his warrantless wiretapping and Congress backdated his authorization.

Oh, right, terrorists were BAD GUYS then.

Listen, you braindead boot licker, Bush spied on terrorists. Obama spies on innocent Americans.

Of course, you're another of those retards that thinks conservatives are a threat to the nation, so your stupid bullshit opinions are safely discarded.

 

[flacaltenn]

Has congressman Nadler denied cnet's report?!?!?!?!?!?

.

Oh, Yes sir.. Strange as it is.. Both He and Graham both had phone calls or couriers or some dam thing affecting their short term memory..

See the link Ravi posted for the Update.. Nadler nows says "he's satisfied with Admin assurances that warrants are involved".. NOT A LIE --- but no where near the truth that voting citizens need to know...

Gee, why was he so talkative at one time now he only speaks through a spokesman.

Also, the trouble is that Nadler's quote refers to Thursday's hearing with FBI Director Robert Mueller and not the separate "secret Capitol Hill briefing" in the CNET story.

.

I can tell you what approximately happened. He got a call from the Security Liasion in WHouse..

"If you want to be the only Congressman on Capitol Hill tomorrow without a Security Clearance, you don't need to respond. But otherwise, we need you to revise your statement to reflect our existing National Security public statements".. With an additional threat thrown in quoting violations of National Security and the penalties attached..

Certainly, the Admin can selectively pull clearances with no justification to the public. And we KNOW that the Dear Leaders primary goal here is NOT TO CALM the people or suggest remedies to this lawlessness, but to NAIL the leakers. That was his 1st and only reaction before going out for a few days of fundraising in friendly spaces..

 

[daveman]

OP- LIE. Nobody said they did. It's overseen by congress and reviewed by judges every 3 months. If you don't talk to terrorists and they don't get a warrant, that's illegal. The police etc CAN listen to anything, but it's illegal. So many chicken littles/liars/ignoramuses!

This whole thing isn't news of any kind, like finding out the illegalities the BUSHIES were up to, and the hater dupes just loved, like Nixon's and Reagan's. Fegging un-American a-holes...AND BS media, especially, of course the un-American, wrapped in the flag and the bible, rabble rousing, bought off Pub Propaganda Machine.

 

[daveman]

Apparently untrue:

CNET Story Alleging NSA Can Listen To U.S. Phone Calls Without Warrant Faces Skepticism

There seems to be a raft full of Congress Critters recanting their stories and outrage.. First Lindsey Graham blurts out indignation and then 1 hour later retracts.. Then the NY TIMES pulls an edit on "The President has lost all credibility". And NOW Adler reveals crap that would put him in a seat bound for Guantanamo, and then says "the Admin satisfied me as to the neccessity of a warrant."

That and Gen Petraeus and the other military guy being hit in a drive-by by their emails..

Seems like a lot of folks may be ALREADY compromised from telling the truth..
Anyway --- Yeah warrants are involved. But the details are that NSA CAN AND DOES monitor real-time traffic content and has 3 days to have the FISA court approve it AFTER THE FREAKING EVENT... They can frame someone in a 2 day media cycle. So if it's rubber stamped (which they are by the HUNDREDS) -- 3 days later, the violation of the law never happened..

They are lying to you.. Virtually ALL of them protecting their sorry asses for not understanding this and using it as a political football..

You GOOD with getting a rubberstamp warrant 3 DAYS after they listen in???

Of course she is. Ravi is good with the rights of conservatives being revoked.

There's really no way to deny this, Ravi. If you support this program, you support the government trampling on Americans' rights.

Just be honest and admit it. But then, progs don't do honesty, do you?

 

[francoHFW]

Listen, jackazz dupes. This is a Bush program, the difference is NOW they need warrants and have judicial review every 3 months. Try to get it through your thick skulls...

 

[francoHFW]

If you talk to or E-mail terrorists, THEN they get a warrant to see what you're saying, dupes. Everything else is BS. How 'bout, STFU, paranoid idiot Pub dupes?

 

[asaratis]

All this and unwanted, unsolicited Government pushes on our phones. Police state. Glad I have plenty ammo and reload.

My neighbors may need it someday

-Geaux

Yes, yes, I bow to your paranoid tendencies. I only hope the NSA is keeping an eye on you, after all, they missed those shit heads in Boston.

They're only watching people they consider a threat. Tea Party members, Republicans in general.

Muslims aren't a threat to this administration.

"You must spread some rep....mudwhistle...(blah blah blah)"

I owe you one!
Cheers!