3 ms·
It's really hard for me to tell on these issues what is real. I feel like they just have a certain number of senators who are allowed to look moral, but the end
by kolbe 6y ago
It's really hard for me to tell on these issues what is real. I feel like they just have a certain number of senators who are allowed to look moral, but the end result always needs to be that surveillance wins. My gut says that Wyden just happens to have drawn the long straw in a sick game to make the Seante look more moral than it is, but if he needed to vote for it to pass for some reason, he would. This loss is kinda like a carnie saying "oh close one, you almost got it" in a game he knows is fixed.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y agoMaybe. That said, he was one of the few people, who actually made Clapper lie in front the of the entire world. Reportedly, this lie was a breaking point for Snowden who saw the exchange between Clapper and Wyden[0]. While I would be willing to accept your suggestion that is basically just Kabuki theatre, it seems even more cynical than I am willing to contemplate now. I am saying this, because Wyden visibly pushed Clapper ( apparently knowing that he was lying ). [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwiUVUJmGjs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwiUVUJmGjs edit: Come to think of it, if Wyden was a genuine threat, I am sure security apparatus would have tried to take him down by now. But no dead hookers, no unsavory hobbies, no character assassination.. your suggestion makes more sense than I initially thought it had.