search results matching tag: Wiretapping

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (73)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (5)     Comments (160)   

Anderson Cooper Dismantles Rod Blagojevich

newtboy says...

Let's not forget.....
“I’ve got this thing and it’s f—ing golden, and, uh, uh, I’m just not giving it up for f—-in’ nothing. I’m not gonna do it. And, and I can always use it. I can parachute me there.”— Nov. 5, 2008, in a conversation secretly recorded on FBI wiretap about Obama’s Senate seat.
Not exactly the type of political fundraising that was considered ordinary (or legal) in the days before Trump...selling vacant Senate seats to the highest bidder....and certainly not what Mandela was in prison for. I hope he got a few more things that were f-ing golden in prison.

These revelations about Iran show Obama got played!

newtboy says...

Well under 18 months in and already 5 times more administration convictions over Trump administration/Russia collusion than there were unfounded charges against the administration under Obama in 8 years. Jesus Bob, can you not get a single fact right?

Let's not ignore the Trump tower meeting with Russian officials where the repeatedly and clearly stated reason for the meeting (after the lies denying it ever happened fell apart) was to collude with Russia against Clinton by getting more Russian supplied dirt against her, or the unending lies and forced corrections the Trump camp has trotted out to deny, obfuscate, downplay, and finally admit but excuse the meeting.

You're also totally wrong about the 13 Russians indicted, those are about interference in the election, and not low level bean counters, they're mostly Putin's inner circle.

Those "boatloads" were gone over for years with fine toothed combs and serious bias and still nothing illegal found, not a whit, and zero evidence of anything nefarious from the FBI or CIA besides the timing of the baseless FBI attack against Clinton's reputation by publicly announcing they were still investigating her (while hiding the far more serious investigation against Trump).

He lied to you about being wiretapped, just like he lied about 3 million illegal alien votes for Clinton, and unlike the illegal hush money he's now finally admitted he paid his mistresses it simply never happened. Remember, he's plead guilty to being a massive fraud, and he's quite proud of his ability to lie and get away with it but you still believe his obvious lies and never investigate yourself anywhere less biased than Faux or Jones.
Sad and willfully gullible.

bobknight33 said:

Nearly 2 years and still ZERO nothing with Trump/Russian collusion. Mueller's indictments of 13 so far are for low level irreverent to Trump or pre Trump issues

However boat loads if nefarious activity between HRC, DNC, CIA,FBI to interfere, monitor, railroad Trump.

newtboy (Member Profile)

John Oliver - Trump's Wiretapping Claim

newtboy says...

Oops.....
*related=https://videosift.com/video/Trumps-Wiretapping-Claims-Destroyed-By-Comey
And they've had to publicly apologize to the Brits too.

What's ironic is, Trump is also accused of enlisting a foreign intelligence office to spy on and damage a political opponent, and there's a lot of evidence indicating that it really happened, coming not only directly from multiple sources in the intelligence community, (not conspiracy theory loving fake news talking heads with a clear bias) but also directly from Trump's mouth when he publicly asked the Russians to hack Clinton and release any emails they find....which they actually did in a clear attempt to help him get elected.

I think any nomination hearings need to be postponed until this investigation is complete, because if it does find what seems apparent, that Trump and his administration colluded with a hostile foreign power to rig our election, that makes them treasonous traitors, and we certainly don't want that kind of person installing Supreme Court judges (or any other nominees for permanent or important positions) that are working for our enemies. As long as there's serious question of Trump's Russian ties, it's possible treason to follow his lead in any way. If it finds collusion, anyone involved should probably be executed as traitors after conviction, with their assets seized.

Once that investigation is over...if it finds no collusion...it's time to start a second investigation into his mental condition, as it seems he's developing dementia at a rapid pace, and that's a legal reason to remove him from office. He needs to prove he's not mentally impaired using accepted medical tests and standards...the long form tests.

Trump's Wiretapping Claims Destroyed By Comey

John Oliver - Trump's Wiretapping Claim

Bill Maher: Who Needs Guns?

scheherazade says...

The only textual interpretation they should do is to understand the meanings behind the words.
(Like the subject at hand : what was the functional definition of the words "well regulated" in 1791.)

The act of deciding "well, they wrote X, but we think they would have written Y had they thought of these new circumstances, so we're going with what we think" is taking things too far. (eg. concepts like : surreptitious telephone wiretap law applying to overt public video/audio recording)

The legislature exists for a reason. Writing/Updating laws is what they are here for. Let them do their job and legislate new laws that alter the scope/definition of old ones.


The problem with case law is that there is no Federal/State/Country/City LIS system where you can just search for whatever laws apply to whatever activities. You would need access to legal databases, like say LexisNexis. Even lawyers don't read case results directly to know what the decisions mean, they use summarizing services that outline the fallout of court decisions in terms of enforcible concepts. Ironically, these summaries are copyrighted, and the public at large is not allowed to know what those enforcible concepts are without paying.

IMO, I think eminent is easiest confused with emanating. Because the concepts behind them are so similar. One sticks-out-of, the other oozes-out-of. If you said that 'an eminent thing emanates from something', you would be so so close to literally correct.

-scheherazade

newtboy said:

Both. They must interpret the meaning/definition of the law before they can interpret whether actions are in compliance.
No, that IS judicial scope. It's what those that lose call 'judicial activism', but you never hear a winner call it that.
Judges interpret the words AND the meaning of laws. They often 'read between the lines' to determine what they think was intended, not just what was specifically written. That's not new or out of line, it's how it's always worked.
True, it creates a minefield of interpretation of written laws that may not completely jibe with the exact verbiage in the written laws, but they are documented in the decisions.
No, I'm not forgetting those laws, I'm disputing your statement that "Again, it's a matter of what people are willing to enforce.....If everyone is on board with twisting the rules, then that's the norm." Populist feelings do NOT effect the law, only legislation and interpretation do.
Until recently, there was nothing to show that the 2nd amendment addressed individuals. That's why Washington DC had a complete hand gun ban, and that case is what changed the meaning to include individuals instead of simply regulated militias.
Eminent is a word I might use to say 1) conspicuous or 2)prominent (especially in standing above others in some quality or position). I think the latter is how it's used in this case, not the former. EDIT: I expect most people confuse it with the word "Imminent".
My mother is a professional editor, so I admit I'm more familiar with odd words than many people. (Most people didn't have to read the dictionary or encyclopedia while they sat in a corner for being bad as a child). I think if you ask the populace about many legal terms, or really any >3 syllable word, most people won't know the actual definitions.

Justin Trudeau explains marijuana legalization to a mother.

Krupo says...

My favourite moment, for those of you unfamiliar with Canadian politics, is at 4:20 when they realize she's connected to this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vic_Toews

This was the tail end of his political career:

"In February 2012, as Minister, Toews introduced the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act (also known as Bill C-30).[118][119] If passed, the bill would grant police agencies expanded powers, mandate that internet service providers (ISPs) provide subscriber information without a warrant and compel providers to reveal information transmitted over their networks with a warrant. When criticised about privacy concerns, Toews responded that people "can either stand with us or with the child pornographers."[120] Public response followed, with an anonymous Twitter account posting personal information of Toews' court proceedings during his divorce, and around this time Conservative support appeared to back away from the bill and open up to amendments.[121] Toews later denied that he had made the "child pornographers" reference, despite his comments being available in Hansard and on video.[122] In February 2013 the government announced Bill C-30 would be scrapped entirely in favor of changes in Canada's warrant-less wiretap law"

How to Age Gracefully

How to Age Gracefully

Apple Creating Technology To Help Cops Hide Police Brutality

shatterdrose says...

Yeah, if technology was designed to disable video capture so the police could domestically take liberties without any verification of their actions, I can see this being a major blow to civil liberties and social accountability.

If however, this is just a "movie theatres want this" type thing, then there's no real hype. Plus, the attempt to disable one feature in one brand in a phone, such as the iPhone, would do nothing at all to protect the corrupt officers. It just means no one will buy an iPhone.

But, this is also hype over a patent. No actual device has been made with this. And just because it is possible, doesn't mean someone is doing it. I mean, it IS possible for us to build a space ship to harvest asteroids or space elevators . . . but alas, we are sadly Earth bound for the time being.

If anything, this discussion is what leads to this technology not being implemented, but the irate and irrational discussion does nothing but hype fear that has no rational basis. Except, you know, the NSA really is wiretapping this. . . .

newtboy said:

As I understood it, that technology stops cell phone use (as a phone or text device), not the other functions of your phone. That would make this something new (at least to me) in that it's something embedded in the device that allows others to disable all features based on a GPS 'area', so there's no device involved that blocks the signal (meaning it might fly in Canada because it doesn't interfere with airwaves or (perhaps) cell interruption (I can't tell if this will disable the 'phone' part of the phone or not).
What they were working on for movie theaters and the like actually blocked the signal, not the phone itself, with a separate device installed in the area they want to be a dead zone. It would not have interfered with taking video.
Agreed though, TYT is well known for getting irate over year old stories.
This sounds like a perfect reason to not buy Apple.

Republican Amash Argues with AIPAC Democrat on NSA Spying

Verizon & US Government : Can you hear me now? Yes we can!

robdot says...

The authoriuty for the nsa warrentless wiretapping was given by executive order,,by bush...in 2001. 12 fucking years ago. The patriot act was signed by bush 41 days after 9/11...The ACLU sued over these policies in 2003. Michael moore devoted 10 minutes of his movie to it in 2004. It was WIDELY REPORTED in 2005 that the nsa was monitoring domestic phone calls and collecting and reading email and phone records. 9 fucking years ago..The nsa has been building billion dollar data centers, they are not fucking invisible buildings that only wonder woman can see. NONE OF THIS HAS EVER BEEN A FUCKING SECRET. Obama and congress just reauthorized all these OLD FUCKING BILLS. It took 12 fucking years for the mindless fox news fucking morons to catch up to what liberals have been saying since at least 2004. here is the ny times, from two thousnd..fucking..five.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&

NSA Wiretap Footage REVEALED!

NSA Wiretap Footage REVEALED!

robdot says...

The authority for warrentless wiretapping was given by Bush, by an executive order ,TWELVE YEARS AGO,,before Obama was even in the senate. The patriot act was signed by Bush 41 days after 9/11. Obama wasnt even in the senate then. That the nsa had access to phone and email servers was known, at least 7 years ago,, and many, many, media outlets reported it. Why does everyone suddenly care now??! Oh,,because fox news got upset, now all the teaparty idiots suddenly caught up with the rest of the fucking world....welcome.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon