Hours after vowing to sign USA Freedom Act, Obama asks FISA to turn the NSA Mass Surveillance back on

How's that going back to the Constitution workin' for ya?

The Obama administration has asked a secret surveillance court to ignore a federal court that found bulk surveillance illegal and to once again grant the National Security Agency the power to collect the phone records of millions of Americans for six months.
The legal request, filed nearly four hours after Barack Obama vowed to sign a new law banning precisely the bulk collection he asks the secret court to approve, also suggests that the administration may not necessarily comply with any potential court order demanding that the collection stop.

US officials confirmed last week that they would ask the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court – better known as the Fisa court, a panel that meets in secret as a step in the surveillance process and thus far has only ever had the government argue before it – to turn the domestic bulk collection spigot back on.

"Back on?" That would presume that it stopped at some point, a "fact" of which I am highly skeptical.

The FISA Court and its ongoing extra-Constitutional powers show that the terrorists are winning.

The goal of terrorism is to disrupt the normal operations of a society so that it fractures under internal strife, fear, and government/security force overreach. Eventually the government becomes delegitimized in the eyes of its own citizens either through its inability to stop the terror attacks or through its devolution into a tyrannical state in reaction to the terror attacks.

With this end-run on the Constitution, our government is fast on a bad track.

Imagine the damage to Democrats if it gets turned off and something happens. (Something that Dick Cheney has probably already financed)

Steve said:
"Back on?" That would presume that it stopped at some point, a "fact" of which I am highly skeptical.

Theoretically it did. I think there are a couple of schools of thought on this. I believe they may still be able to get this data from other countries. I believe Britain may also have this data. The other theory is that the meta-data isn't really that effective. So, they throw people a bone, but they are still doing other stuff.

Good times...

mfpark said:
The FISA Court and its ongoing extra-Constitutional powers show that the terrorists are winning.

Since the Obama and his admin are enabling this extra-Constitutional putsch, what does that make Obama? The extra-Constitutional scholar?

BG9 said:

mfpark said:
The FISA Court and its ongoing extra-Constitutional powers show that the terrorists are winning.

Since the Obama and his admin are enabling this extra-Constitutional putsch, what does that make Obama? The extra-Constitutional scholar?

I think Obama's reputation as a Constitutional Scholar are pretty well sullied at this point.

.

I think the President realized that there is a huge difference between being a scholar critiquing and analyzing from the outside, and being the guy who has the responsibility to keep the nation safe. Unfortunately, he dove right into the deep end and forgot the lessons he had learned on the outside.

In academia we used to call this "going native without a field map." As in when an anthropologist stops studying a culture and starts to act like a member of that culture.

mfpark said:
I think the President realized that there is a huge difference between being a scholar critiquing and analyzing from the outside, and being the guy who has the responsibility to keep the nation safe. Unfortunately, he dove right into the deep end and forgot the lessons he had learned on the outside.

Did he learn anything on the outside? Or was he all bs?

BG9 said:

mfpark said:
I think the President realized that there is a huge difference between being a scholar critiquing and analyzing from the outside, and being the guy who has the responsibility to keep the nation safe. Unfortunately, he dove right into the deep end and forgot the lessons he had learned on the outside.

Did he learn anything on the outside? Or was he all bs?

Who knows? My guess is that he is a lot like the rest of us humans, but clearly there are some who think the President is different than everyone else.

So, my guess is that he had one perspective when he was on the outside, and came to a very different one when he was the person responsible for making the actual decisions. Perspectives change radically given where you are with regards to things.

Where you stand often is determined by where you sit.

To me, the issue is that most of this stuff is baked in the cake. A POTUS is going to behave the same as every other POTUS regardless of what they say unless they surround themselves w/ different people. You can't be an expert on everything.

I think what happens is these Intelligence guys provide advice like. Well yeah, you can give the people their 4th Amendment rights back, but do you want to be the POTUS who let someone sneak a nuke into NYC/Washington/Chicago/LA? So, the POTUS is given these false choices. This is a difficult dillema even for people with high moral character. And think. We are asking an American Polititian to navigate this? Forget it.

I think you're right. The minute the president is installed you have the whole security/military/conservative complex whispering in his ear the worst possible scenarios if he limits the military or letter agencies

They've been at it for 50 years, highly experienced in "convincing" presidents. They even convinced some presidents that Asia would fall like dominoes if Vietnam fell.

They seem to set policy. Its the tails wagging the dog.

And, it's back on (as if it were ever off). http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/30/us-usa-security-nsa-idUSKCN0PA2G220150630

That's surprising. But maybe I shouldn't be? That the FISA court is not bound by a Federal Court of Appeals.

Considering that less than 1% of petitions are granted cert by the Supreme Court, effectively, this makes the FISA courts just about the court of last resort. A court that is known to be the hand puppet of whatever administration is in power. Very convenient for some.

What other nugget of information will be given next? Maybe we'll find out the FISA court will not be bound by the Supreme Court.

Well, there is the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, but that only reviews denials of applications for warrants. Typically, the subject of the warrant has no idea of the existence of the warrant and therefore is not in a position to object to its issuance/move to quash it.

That must be a very rare event indeed, a denial for a warrant application. And then government can go to the Court of Review to reverse the denial without even the object of the warrant being able to contest it. Such a fair playing ground.

If they don't infringe on our rights, the terrorists win.

BG9 said:
That must be a very rare event indeed, a denial for a warrant application. And then government can go to the Court of Review to reverse the denial without even the object of the warrant being able to contest it. Such a fair playing ground.

Hello, I would like to contest the warrant authorizing the clandestine electronic surveillance of my phone.

Actually, never mind -- I'll just get another phone.