Comments by "Spring Bloom" (@springbloom5940) on "Glenn Greenwald"
channel.
-
38
-
33
-
5
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Without a more nuanced policy statement, I can't call that a 'flip-flop'. The 'wiretap' provision, was/is a necessity, whatever anyone may think from the safe side of the keyboard. The issue has always been the permissive nature of the Court. These are not 'warrantless' searches, they do require a court approval. They can more appropriately be characterized as 'evidenceless' warrants, as the applicant often only produces a circumstantial suspicion. Rather than heres our current evidence that establishes a likrly crime now please allow us to search for the proof, its this guy is talking to a foreigner we've determined through classified methods is a threat to national security, we need to know what they're talking about before its too late. The problem is 99% of the time the Court asks no questions and simply takes the request at face value, because they dont want the responsibility for saying no. Like when your dad tells you if you go somewhere you're not supposed to the transmission will fall out of the car. Like a curse. So, dishonest and lazy investgators take advantage to facilitate corrupt intentions and or, to avoid the hard work and or, possible failure and responsibility. People have really forgotten what the 2000s were like and the immediate, merciless fingerpointing and scapegoating anytime something happened. Just look at how people treat Law Enforcement whenever a nut goes on a rampage. Now imagine you're the one that denied, or failed to get the warrant that would've stopped 9/11. So, you end up with a system where both sides are in full-time CYA mode. FISA is an extraordinary provision and therefore needs extraordinary oversight. It currently has essentially no oversight.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1