3 ms·
And the process of creating said legislation out of public view in the first place, and the courts which oversaw challenges to the constitutionality of the US s
by rfrank 10y ago
And the process of creating said legislation out of public view in the first place, and the courts which oversaw challenges to the constitutionality of the US surveillance state who deemed it acceptable. Much like the doctors, lawyers, and others who oversaw approval of US torture programs, they're all reprehensible.
From 1979 to 2013, the FISA courts have denied 12 warrants [1]. That a FISA court actually denied the initial surveillance on Trump Tower, and Obama's DOJ then pushed it through, should be an enormous red flag to people.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court#FISA_warrants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intellig...
- dragonwriter 10y ago> From 1979 to 2013, the FISA courts have denied 12 warrants That's also true of you change the time period from 2003-2013, since it denied zero from 1979-2012. (It's funny that the low rate of denial over the whole life of the FISC has been cited to support the idea that the court has become a rubber-stamp of the post-9/11 surveillance state, when all of the actual denials are in the post-9/11 period.)