> Your premise is faulty however—that something does not exist because there’s not a court case. My premise is that something does not exist because there are

> Your premise is faulty however—that something does not exist because there’s not a court case. My premise is that something does not exist because there are no documents claiming it does. Snowden had the chance to leak such documents, but he did not. Despite that, you produced a conspiracy out of thin air as if Snowden had produced such documents. > - Of course warrants are rubber stamped Then why haven't we seen thousands of warrants to obtain data from other countries on US citizens used in prosecutions? > Of course they help each other, why would they even bother to get in touch otherwise They help each other by sharing intelligence in other countries, not by helping each other break their own laws. > - There’s no laws against using third party data Then why doesn't the government just read your email? > This whole subthread is an immaterial pedantic angle and waste of time, and I won’t be returning here further. The next time you post conspiracy theories on HN, I will be there.