6 ms·
He is helping himself, by removing oversight on his activities with respect to covert contacts with Russian agents.
by new_realist 7y ago
He is helping himself, by removing oversight on his activities with respect to covert contacts with Russian agents.
- kyleee 7y agoHow so?
- roenxi 7y agoAdmitting to not being an expert in American politics; but the FISA court was obviously going to be a disaster when it was established. It has been discovered that in recent times it was used to investigate an incoming presidential candidate (!) and set up years of harassment that seem to have eventually sorta died down to a general background murmuring based on it not being a major component of his impeachment. The worst-case path forward is for Trump to organise for Bernie Sanders, or whoever the next Democratic candidate is, to be secretly investigated via the FISA court for potential Russia links. Any move towards limiting (or ideally disbanding) the FISA court really should transcend politics. The worst case of the FISA court is horrific, and the expected case (which is really where we are now) is bad.
- cvwright 7y agoRight wingers used to post a low effort meme along the lines of, “WTF I love ____ now” or “WTF I hate ____ now”. Now for whatever reason, people in this thread have decided to prove them right, by acting out the meme in real time.
- benmmurphy 7y agoI think the FISA court was originally introduced because the State was abusing its power by illegally spying on citizens and the FISA court was meant to replace this unregulated illegal spying with legal spying regulated by a court. I guess the better solution may have been to stop the spying all together but FISA court was probably an improvement on the existing practices.
- tic_tac 7y agoIsn't anyone who opposes secret surveillance with minimal oversight "helping themselves"?
- new_realist 7y agoWarrants are required for FISA activities, and the surveillance is limited to non-citizens.
- staticautomatic 7y ago> the surveillance is limited to non-citizens How many times have we heard that one before?
- new_realist 7y agoThe FBI and local law enforcement can already investigate citizens in accordance with due process. Are you saying the FBI shouldn’t also have the power to investigate foreign governments or agents?
- 8note 7y agoisn't it communications with non-citizens? I imagine the government can twist that to mean that if a non-citizens could see it, then the government can access it legally.
- derision 7y agoSo Carter Page is a non-citizen? Because the FBI was granted a FISA warrant to surveil him, and the Trump though the two hop rule? Not to mention it's been stated publicly by the OIG that the FBI used falsified evidence to receive those warrants
- tic_tac 7y agoThe Leftist aligned media that many (most?) on HN follow, like MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, etc do not report on these things, so what you're describing will either be ignored completely or derided as a "conspiracy theory".
- mc32 7y agoAre you saying that pretty much Nixon should have been okay to have his intelligence organs spy on his opponents? The fact that some intelligence apparatuses were spying on congress people[1] is something that should not have happened; it did but there have been no repercussions for that. How did Brennan get away with that? [1]https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/12/a-brief-history-of-the-cias-unpunished-spying-on-the-senate/384003/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/12/a-brief...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- luxuryballs 7y agoBut he’s the President so even without the flawed premise what you’re saying makes no sense.
- soraminazuki 7y agoYou don’t need unconstitutional mass surveillance to investigate any of those things. I’m sick of people using terrorists, foreign agents, child exploiters, bigtech, or whatever else they come up with to justify government abuses.