For a bunch of folks, it's an issue they care a lot about, and some of these polls used to be 50%+ in favor of prosecution.
Latest Scoops
HK Migration says the refugees who aided me must face irregular, immediate deportation hearings this week. Details:
Least charitable explanation: political self-interest leading to objections that are themselves spurious.
Most charitable explanation may be a complaint that "lawful but spurious" reportage improperly circulated innocuous comms.
Perhaps he feels things that never should have met the threshold to enter the reporting stream did,went wide, got unmasked?
...which dovetails with the current, unexplained obsession with unmasking procedures.
USP identities are masked in reporting (but not in the original, raw SIGINT), but can be unmasked on request.
Armchair quarterbacking, basically, but with a point: raw SIGINT has a short reach, but derived reporting goes wide.
May object to analyst determination re: reporting thresholds. "Lawfully intercepted but innocuous" comms "reported anyway."
If your calls were monitored, you were spied on. Which end of the calls were "targeted" speaks to propriety, not whether it was spying.
Right or wrong, if a spy agency -- via any method -- intercepts, copies, or otherwise reviews your communications, they have spied on you.
The former head of @NSAGov's Snowden task force just publicly vindicated my decision. Stunning but welcome reversal.
If true, what little faith remains in surveillance law will vanish without the swift prosecution of the senior police officials responsible.
Whistleblower: Police shredded documents about unlawful surveillance of protestors in defiance of legal order.
Whistleblower: Government using surveillance powers to monitor the emails of domestic journalists and protestors.
Whistleblower: Government using surveillance powers to monitor the emails of domestic journalists and protestors.
You want to know how to stop the next whistleblower? Stop breaking the damn law.
This is simply not true. Even monstrously unjust sentences (Manning) have been shown insufficient to deter the next whistleblower.
A member of Congress asked the Director of the FBI if journalists can be imprisoned for doing their jobs. Worse: Comey didn't say "no."
Congress conflates legality and morality. The Flynn leak was unlawful, but revealing official deception is moral.
Red flag: NSA Director careful to discuss only who can unmask USP identities in reporting, not who can access collection involving USPs.
The fact that you're getting replies from my critics defending the point should be cause to reconsider. All the best.
Total(1) => 0.33383512496948 f_u_GN(1) => 0.00079202651977539 f_f_dT(31) => 0.0083951950073242 f_f_QM(2) => 0.2607581615448 f_f_pTL(2) => 0.0085129737854004 f_u_GLN(1) => 0.1569459438324 indS(1) => 0.0039510726928711 indM(1) => 0.018563985824585 indM_1(1) => 0.0011940002441406 indM_2(1) => 0.00049209594726562 indM_4(1) => 0.0055110454559326 indM_5(1) => 0.00083780288696289 indM_6(1) => 0.0031111240386963 indM_7(1) => 0.0043079853057861 indM_8(1) => 0.0020129680633545