5 ms·
>The entity that’s conducting the most extreme and far-reaching surveillance against most of the world’s communications—the National Security Agency—is bound by
by shit_parade 12y ago
>The entity that’s conducting the most extreme and far-reaching surveillance against most of the world’s communications—the National Security Agency—is bound by United States law.
This seems clearly wrong -- when people like clapper can essentially lie under oath to congress and not suffer any legal consequences it is rather dubious to claim the NSA is bound by US law. There are increasingly 'secret' courts, 'secret' laws, 'secret' budgets, 'secret' legal memos, etc etc, why would you begin your game plan with stating something so clearly incorrect. The reason we know much about what is happening is because of whistle blowers, and much of these people are either in hiding, on the run, dead, or being jailed by the US government. The eff is out of touch with reality if they truly believe the NSA is beholden to the law instead of those controlling and using it as they see fit.
- tomrod 12y ago> why would you begin your game plan with stating something so clearly incorrect Because once Congress publicly disavows the NSAs actions, I suspect then working against Congress would result in rogue status.
- debacle 12y agoThe NSA has the browsing history in hand of every congresscritter and hopeful congresscritter, phone records, travel records, IRS statements, etc. It's not unbelievable that they would use this information to buy or bury an elected official.
- jMyles 12y agoIt's tough to believe they wouldn't. And don't.
- AnthonyMouse 12y agoGetting caught blackmailing a Congressman would be very, very bad for them. It's far more likely that money from a secret budget ends up in the campaign fund of friendly politicians, or that politicians who do what they want end up with lucrative consulting work after they leave office, much as it is with other industries. But what do you propose to do about it either way? Go join Lawrence Lessig's anti-corruption campaign. In the meantime it's not like positive change is impossible, it's just harder than it ought to be.
- grecy 12y ago> Getting caught blackmailing a Congressman would be very, very bad for them Isn't it common knowledge big corporations "buy" congressmen all the time with insanely big "contributions"? Why wouldn't the NSA do exactly the same thing?
- guizzy 12y agoBecause bribing and blackmailing are not the same thing. The first one is unfortunately legal as long as its done the right way (through campaign contributions and PACs) and the second one is still a crime.
- grecy 12y agoI was implying they result in the exact same outcome, which means for all intents and purposes they are the same thing, when done correctly.
- semi-extrinsic 12y agoExcept one leaves the congressperson happy and one leaves the congressperson angry. Do you think the angry or the happy person is most likely to anonymously disclose this information to a journalist?
- ingler 12y agoSo they'd spy on everyone, throw whistleblowers in jail, pass naked selfies of citizens around and more, but they'd never try to blackmail politicians or others. K.
- LLWM 12y agoYou're not a rogue if you win.
- qewrffewqwfqew 12y agoIn principle, the NSA is bound by US law. The problem is that US law is broken.