The Next Shoe To Drop

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[Tryharder62]

It will make it harder and harder to be an anonymous informant.

 

[Busybody]

Santelli On IRS Witch-Hunt Repurcussions: "No Stent For You"


In a perfect follow-up to both President Obama's earlier comments and the news that a hearing is to be held ion May 17th, Rick Santelli has a few things to say. Clearly irritated at the incredible reality of big brother and government intervention, Santelli pushes his blood pressure to 11 on the dial as he comes to grip with the repercussions of the IRS actions. "Truth is power," he exclaims, "you can't assume someone is fair and honest," just because a politician says so. His bigger fears lie in the IRS administration of Obamacare where he is concerned that "No stent for you," will be heard when the powers that be know what groups you support, what thoughts you have, and what area you live in. Think he is exaggerating? Did you really believe the tin-foil hat wearers conspiracies that the IRS was doing this before it became mainstream news?

 

[LiFeNdEaTh]

interesting..

 

[Busybody]

Doesn't Michelle look cute and sexy in bangs?


Who cares about wire taps

 

[unregistered]

 

[Busybody]

they will

be

COWED

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean]

So you're in favour of people leaking classified information to the press? You'll be campaigning for Bradley Manning's release now, right?

 

[miles]

"The media is like an abused woman with Obama as the abusive husband. They will scream and bitch at him and eventually he will slap them around. After an hour of silence they will make up like nothing happened. It's a cycle."

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean]

The Obama administration is slowly imploding. I think a high ranking person will be found to have leaked that classified information, probably Donilon.

But you don't want the Justice dept to investigate. And if they didn't investigate, you'd be screaming cover up.

 

[Liar]

What was the first shoe?

 

[Colonel Hogan]

GOVT OBTAINS WIDE AP PHONE RECORDS IN PROBE
By MARK SHERMAN
— May. 13 4:28 PM EDT

Once again, it is worth remembering that the issue here is what constitutes an "unreasonable search and seizure" of one's "person(s), houses, papers and effects."

Is the time of a call and the phone number dialed entitled to the same degree of 4th Amendment protection as is traditionally afforded to the substance of the conversation itself? Is the answer to that question materially affected by whether the phone number of the caller or recipient is "unlisted and unpublished"?

In the same manner, we might ask if the government has a right to intercept our mail and take note of the names and addresses of those to whom we write as long as they do not open the envelope and read the contents therein?

I believe we have a Constitutional right of privacy with regard to the substance of our communications only, and not to the "address" of the devices we use or our location or the location of those with whom we are communicating.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Busybody]

tell me again why Obama/Holder were up in arms when Bushco did the same VS TERRORISTS?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Thinking back I don't recall the government wiretapping the NYTs when the Pentagon Papers were leaked.

I'm not sure what your point is. The Pentagon Papers case was a First Amendment case wherein the issue was whether the government could legally compel the prior restraint of the publication of classified information. The Supreme Court ruled that the Nixon administration did not meet the "heavy burden" that the government must show to warrant such restraint.

It was a narrowly drawn decision that was ultimately material primarily to the circumstances of that case.

It had nothing to do with Fourth Amendment searches and seizures.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean]

I guess me point was that in the case of the Pentagon Papers, which was a leak of classified information which was published in the media by the NYT's, nobody had the balls to wire tap the The Grey Lady.

Agreed that the court said they had the right to publish (which I never agreed with, it's either a classified document, or it isn't. Only the CinC has the power to classify and de-classify). The emphasis was on the leaker, Daniel Ellsberg.

No-one has wire tapped the AP, either.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean]

For the drug adled:

GOV'T OBTAINS WIDE AP PHONE RECORDS IN PROBE
By MARK SHERMAN
— May. 13 6:04 PM EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department secretly obtained two months of telephone records of reporters and editors for The Associated Press in what the news cooperative's top executive called a "massive and unprecedented intrusion" into how news organizations gather the news.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/govt-obtains-wide-ap-phone-records-probe

Not much different.

That's not a wire tap, you dumb fuck.

 

[JohnnySavage]

I guess me point was that in the case of the Pentagon Papers, which was a leak of classified information which was published in the media by the NYT's, nobody had the balls to wire tap the The Grey Lady.

Agreed that the court said they had the right to publish (which I never agreed with, it's either a classified document, or it isn't. Only the CinC has the power to classify and de-classify). The emphasis was on the leaker, Daniel Ellsberg.

That power has been delegated for over 30 years.

 

[Wrong Element]

The government would not say why it sought the records. U.S. officials have previously said in public testimony that the U.S. attorney in Washington is conducting a criminal investigation into who may have leaked information contained in a May 7, 2012, AP story about a foiled terror plot. The story disclosed details of a CIA operation in Yemen that stopped an al-Qaida plot in the spring of 2012 to detonate a bomb on an airplane bound for the United States.

I thought this looked familiar, because I remembered posting in the thread about this story:


http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=809413


Notice that the outrage then was over the administration allegedly leaking national security info to make themselves look good (totally unlike any previous administration, of course). Now the outrage is that they went too far looking into the leak?

Moral of the story: whatever happened, Obama was wrong! Life is so much less complicated once you no longer have to think about stuff.