The Front Page Cover
2016 The truth will set you free
Featuring:
Fruit of the Poisonous Tree
By Judge Andrew Napolitano
~~~
.
nObama's Economic Escort Service
"It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so."
Ronald Reagan's famous quip sums up Barack nObama's recent use of Leftmedia to defend his abysmal economic record.
In a laughable puff piece entitled "President nObama Weighs His Economic Legacy," The New York Times' Andrew Ross Sorkin assumed the role of what we've dubbed the "presstitute." Willing to accept opinion and biased analysis for fact, Sorkin opened his piece with this shocking quote from one of
Saul Alinsky's top students:
"I actually compare our economic performance to how, historically, countries that have wrenching financial crises perform. By that measure, we probably managed this better than any large economy on Earth in modern history."
Did you get that, folks? nObama lays claim to the best managed recovery of "any large economy on Earth in modern history," and a supposed journalist offers no challenge or follow-up — instead shaming the American public for not appreciating the alleged benefits of nObama's economic policies.
"I actually compare our economic performance to how, historically, countries that have wrenching financial crises perform. By that measure, we probably managed this better than any large economy on Earth in modern history."
Did you get that, folks? nObama lays claim to the best managed recovery of "any large economy on Earth in modern history," and a supposed journalist offers no challenge or follow-up — instead shaming the American public for not appreciating the alleged benefits of nObama's economic policies.
Ultimately, the Times' piece as a whole is more self-congratulatory than it is informative — with nObama delivering an assessment of his performance that is nothing short of narcissistic. It's a case once again of someone who knows "so many things that aren't so" and speaks of so few things that are true. The numbers, however, speak the truth of our economy.
For the first quarter of 2016, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) — the total dollar value of all goods and services produced within the time measured — grew a paltry 0.5%, demonstrating a continued decline following 1.4% and 2% of the previous two quarters ending 2015. Translation: The American economy is not growing and is still mired in the worst "recovery" in history.
Yet, if you read CNN's review of the New York Times' piece, nObama laments "the fact that public perception about the economy remains negative despite important gains in recent years." He blames Republicans "that den[y] any progress," and laments his only fault: "[I]f we had been able to more effectively communicate all the [economic] steps we had taken to the swing voter, then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate."
So if Reagan was the Great Communicator — at first a leftist pejorative to explain away The Gipper's success — nObama is the Failed Communicator of terrible policies. And that on top of the fact that, as even Bill Clinton acknowledged, Democrats set the stage for the 2008 collapse.
Never mind nObama's proven record of increased taxes and massive regulations, his legacy is one that speaks of a labor force hampered by his policies, such as the near-complete government takeover of our health care; historic expansion of entitlement programs and dependencies for those outside the scope of need; the almost complete end of the coal industry, and more.
But the best line of the Times' fairytale was nObama's quote ascribing superhero status to his administration for its reaction to the economic hurdles he's faced since 2009: "We were moving so fast early on that we couldn't take victory laps. We couldn't explain everything we were doing. I mean, one day we're saving the banks; the next day we're saving the auto industry; the next day we're trying to see whether we can have some impact on the housing market."
While nObama claims he was "saving" the economy, he was actually artificially propping up failure through misappropriated and unconstitutional government spending on his favored constituencies. Meanwhile, wages remain stagnant for the working class who see their companies borrowing money to buy back stock instead of experiencing real growth.
nObama is on track to be the first president in American history not to steward at least 3% GDP growth in any year of his presidency. America's justified anger is rooted in the reality that 2015 marks the tenth consecutive year of such economic impotence.
The only positive metric for the nObama economy is the reduction in the unemployment rate, which has declined to 5%. With unemployment at 7.8% during nObama's first month in office and peaking at 10% in October 2009, the numbers do show improvement. But even that's a façade.
It may not be commonly known that the Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes six different rates and definitions of unemployment. The measurement known as "U-3" is what we call the headline unemployment rate, and it monitors "the number of unemployed people as a percentage of the labor force." But the labor force participation — or number of people actually seeking work — has hit historic lows during "Superman" nObama's recovery.
The fuller rate — dubbed the U-6 BLS rate of unemployment — measures the "total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force." So what exactly is America's U-6 unemployment rate compared to the U-3 rate as of March 2016? Measuring the entire adult population that is not previously employed or employed at a desired level, the rate comes out to 9.8% rather than the widely touted 5%.
Over the past two presidential terms, our economic policies, sown by a leftist president outmaneuvering an undisciplined Republican Congress, have included increased redistribution of wealth, along with excessive government taxation, spending and interference. The natural result is the flourishing of a bumper crop of economic weeds choking out authentic growth.
When reading The New York Times' masthead, you see its motto emblazoned proudly: "All the news fit to print." Given the paper's willing services as this administration's presstitute, it should read something along the lines of: "All the propaganda that we can fit."
-The Patriot Post
.
OPINION IN BRIEF
Peggy Noonan: "What slump liar-Trump supporters believe, what they perceive as they watch him, is that he is on America's side. And that comes as a great relief to them, because they believe that for 16 years Presidents Bush and nObama were largely about ideologies. They seemed not so much on America's side as on the side of abstract notions about justice and the needs of the world. ... Mr. slump liar-Trump comes and in his statements radiate the idea that he's not at all interested in ideology, only in making America great again — through border security and tough trade policy, etc. He's saying he's on America's side, period. And because people are so happy to hear this after 16 years, because it seems right to them, they give him a pass on his lack of experience in elective office and the daily realities of national politics. ... Bobby Knight, introducing him at a rally in Evansville, Ind., on Thursday, said that Mr. slump liar-Trump is not a Republican or a Democrat. The crowd seemed to like that a lot. Those conservative writers and thinkers who have for nine months warned the base that Mr. slump liar-Trump is not a conservative should consider the idea that a large portion of the Republican base no longer sees itself as conservative, at least as that term has been defined the past 15 years by Washington writers and thinkers." -The Patriot Post
.
Gov. McAuliffe Violated State Constitution by
Restoring the Vote to Felons Written
by C. Mitchell Shaw
.
.
{thenewamerican.com} ~ When Virginia Democrat Governor Terry McAuliffe announced on April 22 that he was restoring the civil rights — including voting rights — of 206,000 convicted felons, he must have expected some pushback from Republican lawmakers... After all, the felons include violent and repeat offenders. But did he anticipate the extent of the pushback, with one Republican lawmaker pointing out that the governor's executive order violates the state constitution? Governor McAuliffe responded by telling Republicans to “quit complaining.” This is not the first time McAuliffe has overstepped his reach and found himself in the hot seat. In December of 2015, he announced that he had unilaterally decided to no longer recognize the concealed carry permits from 25 states that had previously been recognized. His hubris was short lived in that case; before the new policy could even go into effect, McAuliffe was force to back-peddle and honor those permits anyway. As this writer said then: Virginia's governor, Terry McAullife, has "agreed to restore handgun reciprocity" with the 25 states that Virginia's Democrat Attorney General Mark Herring canceled a mere six weeks ago, according to a release from Republican Virginia Delegate James Edmunds... http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/23088-gov-mcauliffe-violated-state-constitution-by-restoring-the-vote-to-felons
.
slump liar-Trump:
A Lot of My Jewish Friends Say...
by Ruthie Blum
.
.
{algemeiner.com} ~ Republican presidential hopeful Donald slump liar-Trump told a rally in Indiana on Sunday that “a lot of his Jewish friends” tell him he “will never be able” to broker peace between Israel and the Palestinians... the Jewish Insider reported. During a speech to more than 2,000 supporters at the Indiana Theater in Terre Haute ahead of Tuesday’s primary race, slump liar-Trump first attacked the United Nations for not “going in and making such a deal,” which he called “probably the all-time hard deal to make,” and then criticized the Palestinians...He has no idea whats he talking about. http://www.algemeiner.com/2016/05/02/trump-a-lot-of-my-jewish-friends-say-you-will-never-be-able-to-make-deal-between-israel-palestinians/
.
Billionaire Conservative SHOCKS Everyone
By What He Said About slump liar-Trump!!
.
.
{conservativesunited.com} ~ Many pundits were shocked when the Koch Brothers said they weren’t going to put any money into attacking Donald slump liar-Trump months ago, but what Charles Koch said this weekend surprised even more!!... In case you didn’t catch it, Chuck Koch actually says that Donald slump liar-Trump might be so bad as a President that if he gets the nomination, he might just support Hilly Clinton!!! This is not a surprise for those who really understand his politics, as he’s more of a libertarian and not an ideologue, but he’s been vilified in the press so much that people think he’s a hardcore right-wing lunatic... http://conservativesunited.com/billionaire-conservative-shocks-everyone-by-what-he-said-about-trump/.
The Fight for Freedom in America will not be won by Presidential Candidates
by David Risselada
.
.
{freedomoutpost.com} ~ America as we have known it is on the verge of total collapse. It is doubtful that the Republic we once knew, where men were free and willing to work hard in pursuit of their dreams and to secure lives of autonomy will ever return... In its place we find a shattered nation where a narrow majority now live lives of comfortable mediocrity, benefiting from a failed welfare state where the initiative to better one’s self is destroyed due to a fear of losing needed resources. Everything has been redefined to the point that there is a raging debate as to whether or not a man who feels like a woman should be able to share a restroom with our daughters, and freedom of speech now means denying others their freedoms in acts of outright violence because someone hurt someone else’s feelings. How did this happen? How did we get to this point where people are literally begging the government to trample on our liberties in order to gain security? The very idea of freedom itself has been turned upside down and employed against us as a weapon; and sadly, few noticed because we were too busy having fun while ignoring the consequences... http://freedomoutpost.com/fight-freedom-america-will-not-won-presidential-candidates/
.
‘Asking if slump liar-Trump is Sexist is
Like Asking if He Has Bad Hair’
by Paul Bois
.
.
{truthrevolt.org} ~ Sen. Elizabeth Warren has consistently slammed GOP frontrunner Donald slump liar-Trump, having in the past called him a "loser" among other things. In response to his accusing Hilly of using the "woman card," she has cried "sexist."... Speaking to The Boston Globe, Warren said that slump liar-Trump's sexism is as innate to the candidate as his hairstyle. "Asking if slump liar-Trump is sexist is like asking if he has bad hair," said Warren. "He wears the sexism out front for everyone to see." In terms of slump liar-Trump's assertion that Hilly plays the "woman card," Warren dismissed it as just another man getting upset over a powerful woman... http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/warren-asking-if-trump-sexist-asking-if-he-has-bad-hair
.
Detroit Public Schools Can't Make
Payroll After June 30
by Sarah Fisher
.
{truthrevolt.org} ~ The Detroit Public Schools's emergency manager said on Saturday that the system will not be able to make payroll as of June 30, as the operation has run out of money... Steven Rhodes, a former federal bankruptcy judge, said that $48.7 million in supplemental funding approved by the Michigan legislature last month would allow paychecks for all employees only through the end of June. He urged state lawmakers to approve a $715 million rescue plan that would create a new Detroit Education Commission, with broad authority to control new school openings for the next five years... http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/detroit-public-schools-cant-make-payroll-after-june-30
.
Are Consumers in for a Nasty nObamacare
Surprise Just in Time for the Election?
by Kemberlee Kaye
.
.
{legalinsurrection.com} ~ Unfortunately or fortunately — depending on where you stand for Democrats, pending rate increase announcements could not come at a worse time... Open enrollment begins the first week of November, just in time for nObamacare and independent health insurance consumers to take their sticker shock to the ballot box. Last month, the country’s largest health insurer, UnitedHealth, announced its withdrawal from several nObamacare exchanges and projected losses of around $650 million this year alone. Other large insurers are eyeing the vacated territory, but none have committed yet. Insurer complaints are the same — health insurance consumers are sicker and older than their original models predicted, making affordable insurance a virtually impossible offering... http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/05/are-consumers-in-for-a-nasty-obamacare-surprise-just-in-time-for-the-election/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LegalInsurrection+%28Le%C2%B7gal+In%C2%B7sur%C2%B7rec%C2%B7tion%29
{legalinsurrection.com} ~ Unfortunately or fortunately — depending on where you stand for Democrats, pending rate increase announcements could not come at a worse time... Open enrollment begins the first week of November, just in time for nObamacare and independent health insurance consumers to take their sticker shock to the ballot box. Last month, the country’s largest health insurer, UnitedHealth, announced its withdrawal from several nObamacare exchanges and projected losses of around $650 million this year alone. Other large insurers are eyeing the vacated territory, but none have committed yet. Insurer complaints are the same — health insurance consumers are sicker and older than their original models predicted, making affordable insurance a virtually impossible offering... http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/05/are-consumers-in-for-a-nasty-obamacare-surprise-just-in-time-for-the-election/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LegalInsurrection+%28Le%C2%B7gal+In%C2%B7sur%C2%B7rec%C2%B7tion%29
.
Palestinians: Preparing Their People for Statehood?
by Khaled Abu Toameh
.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (left) and Mohamed Dahlan (right)
.
{gatestoneinstitute.org} ~ Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas's ruling Fatah faction is supposed to be preparing its people for statehood. But it seems to be busy with other business... According to sources in the Gaza Strip, Hamas security forces recently uncovered a scheme to assassinate a number of senior Fatah officials living there. The sources claimed that ousted Fatah operative Mohamed Dahlan, who has been living in the United Arab Emirates for the past five years, was the mastermind of the alleged scheme. Dahlan's men in the Gaza Strip were planning to assassinate Fatah officials closely associated with his rival, Abbas, the sources revealed... http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7960/palestinians-preparing-statehood
.
How Islam Erased Christianity from History
by RAYMOND IBRAHIM
.
.
{familysecuritymatters.org} ~ While Christianity continues to be physically erased from the Middle East, lesser known is that its historical role and presence is also being expunged from memory... Last month a video emerged showing Islamic State members tossing hundreds of Christian textbooks, many of them emblazoned with crosses, into a large bonfire. As one report putit, ISIS was "burning Christian textbooks in an attempt to erase all traces of" Christianity from the ancient region of Mosul, where Christianity once thrived for centuries before the rise of Islam. As usual, ISIS is ultimately an extreme example of Islam's normative approach. This was confirmed during a recent conference in Amman, Jordan hosted by the Jerusalem Center for Political Studies. While presenting, Dr. Hena al-Kaldani, a Christian, said that "there is a complete cancelation of Arab Christian history in the pre-Islamic era," "many historical mistakes," and "unjustifiable historic leaps in our Jordanian curriculum." "Tenth grade textbooks omit any mention of any Christian or church history in the region." Wherever Christianity is mentioned, omissions and mischaracterizations proliferate, including the portrayal of Christianity as a Western that is, "foreign" source of colonization, said al-Kaldani... http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/how-islam-erased-christianity-from-history?f=must_reads
.
Ayatollah to U.S.: Conduct Your Military Exercises
in Bay of Pigs, Not ‘Our" Persian Gulf
by PATRICK GOODENOUGH
.
.
{familysecuritymatters.org} ~ The United States military should get out of the Persian Gulf, Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Monday, suggesting the U.S. forces go to the "Bay of Pigs" instead to conduct its military exercises... Apparently responding to a recently introduced House of Representatives resolution critical of Iranian military activities in the Persian Gulf, Khamenei during a speech to teachers called the stance taken by Iran's "enemies" foolish and worthless. "The Persian Gulf is our home," he said. "The Persian Gulf is the place for the presence of the great nation of Iran," which will continue to hold maneuvers and demonstrate its power there. "It is the Americans who must explain why they have come here from the other side of the world to launch war games," Khamenei said...
..
Fruit of the Poisonous Tree
By Judge Andrew Napolitano
By Judge Andrew Napolitano
.
.
{townhall.com} ~ Would all of our lives be safer if the government could break down all the doors it wishes, listen to all the conversations it could find and read whatever emails and text messages it could acquire? Perhaps. But who would want to live in such a society?
To prevent that from happening here, the Framers ratified the Fourth Amendment, which is the linchpin of privacy and was famously called by Justice Louis Brandeis "the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men." He wrote those words in his dissent in the first wiretapping case to reach the Supreme Court, Olmstead v. United States, in 1928.
Roy Olmstead had been convicted for bootlegging on the basis of words he used in overheard telephone conversations. Because he had used a phone at his place of work that the government had tapped without breaking and entering his workplace, the high court ruled -- despite the fact that the government had not obtained a warrant -- that he had no right to privacy. Brandeis dissented.
Over time, the Brandeis dissent became the law. The Fourth Amendment, which protects the privacy of all in our "persons, houses, papers, and effects," was interpreted to cover telephone conversations and eventually emails and text messages. So today, if the government wants information contained in those communications, it needs to obtain a search warrant, which the Fourth Amendment states can only be given by a judge -- and only upon a showing of probable cause of evidence of a crime contained in the communications it seeks.
If the government does not obtain a search warrant and listens to phone conversations or reads emails or text messages nevertheless and attempts to use what it heard or read to acquire other evidence or directly in the prosecution of a defendant, that is unlawful. That type of information is known as the fruit of the poisonous tree.
Evidence procured that is the fruit of the poisonous tree has been inadmissible in federal criminal prosecutions in the United States for the past 100 years and in state criminal prosecutions for the past 50 years.
Until now.
Now comes the super-secret court established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, reaffirmed by Congress last year under the so-called USA Freedom Act. Beware the names of federal statutes, as they often produce results that are the opposite of what their names imply; and this is one of them.
Congress has unconstitutionally authorized the FISA court to issue search warrants on the basis of governmental need -- a standard that is no standard at all because the government can always claim that it needs what it wants. The FISA court does not require a showing of probable cause for its warrants, because it accepts the myth that the government is listening to or reading words by foreign people for foreign intelligence purposes only, not for prosecutorial purposes.
Never mind that Congress cannot change the plain meaning of the Constitution. Never mind that the Fourth Amendment protects all people in the United States, American or foreign, from all parts of the government for all purposes, not just criminal prosecutions.
Yet the FISA court still grants general warrants -- look where you wish and seize what you find -- exposing our innermost thoughts to the prying eyes of the intelligence community in direct contravention of the Fourth Amendment.
Enter the USA Freedom Act. One of its selling points to Congress was that it would permit the FISA court to appoint a lawyer to challenge hypothetically some of its behavior. The court recently made such an appointment, and the lawyer appointed challenged the policy of the National Security Agency, the federal government's domestic spying agency, of sharing data it acquires via the unconstitutional FISA warrants with the FBI. She argued that the data sharing goes far beyond the stated purpose of the FISA warrants, which is to gather foreign intelligence data from foreign people, not evidence of domestic crimes of anyone whose emails might be swept up by those warrants.
The challenge revealed publicly what many of us have condemned for years: The NSA actually makes its repository of raw data from emails and text messages available for the FBI to scour at will, without the FBI's obtaining a warrant issued by a judge pursuant to the Fourth Amendment.
In an opinion issued in November but kept secret until last week, the FISA court rejected the hypothetical challenge of its own appointee and ruled that the NSA could continue to share what it wants with the FBI.
There are several problems with this ruling. The first is the hypothetical nature of the challenge. Federal courts do not exist in a vacuum. They do not render advisory opinions. They can only hear real cases and real controversies involving real plaintiffs and real defendants, not hypothetical ones as was the case here.
The whole apparatus of hypothetical challenge and hypothetical ruling is constitutionally meaningless. It was the moral and legal equivalent of a law school moot court oral argument. Yet federal and soon state law enforcement will interpret it as giving cover to the NSA/FBI practice of data sharing, which is clearly unconstitutional because it is the use of fruit from a poisonous tree.
FISA and the USA Freedom Act were enacted under the premise -- the pretense -- that the data collected under them would be used for foreign intelligence purposes only so that attacks could be thwarted and methods could be discovered. Yet the use by the FBI of extraconstitutionally obtained intelligence data for ordinary criminal prosecutions defies the stated purposes of the statutes and contradicts the Fourth Amendment.
If this is keeping us safe, who or what will safeguard our freedoms? Who will keep us safe from those who have sworn to uphold the Constitution yet defy it?
{townhall.com} ~ Would all of our lives be safer if the government could break down all the doors it wishes, listen to all the conversations it could find and read whatever emails and text messages it could acquire? Perhaps. But who would want to live in such a society?
To prevent that from happening here, the Framers ratified the Fourth Amendment, which is the linchpin of privacy and was famously called by Justice Louis Brandeis "the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men." He wrote those words in his dissent in the first wiretapping case to reach the Supreme Court, Olmstead v. United States, in 1928.
Roy Olmstead had been convicted for bootlegging on the basis of words he used in overheard telephone conversations. Because he had used a phone at his place of work that the government had tapped without breaking and entering his workplace, the high court ruled -- despite the fact that the government had not obtained a warrant -- that he had no right to privacy. Brandeis dissented.
Over time, the Brandeis dissent became the law. The Fourth Amendment, which protects the privacy of all in our "persons, houses, papers, and effects," was interpreted to cover telephone conversations and eventually emails and text messages. So today, if the government wants information contained in those communications, it needs to obtain a search warrant, which the Fourth Amendment states can only be given by a judge -- and only upon a showing of probable cause of evidence of a crime contained in the communications it seeks.
If the government does not obtain a search warrant and listens to phone conversations or reads emails or text messages nevertheless and attempts to use what it heard or read to acquire other evidence or directly in the prosecution of a defendant, that is unlawful. That type of information is known as the fruit of the poisonous tree.
Evidence procured that is the fruit of the poisonous tree has been inadmissible in federal criminal prosecutions in the United States for the past 100 years and in state criminal prosecutions for the past 50 years.
Until now.
Now comes the super-secret court established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, reaffirmed by Congress last year under the so-called USA Freedom Act. Beware the names of federal statutes, as they often produce results that are the opposite of what their names imply; and this is one of them.
Congress has unconstitutionally authorized the FISA court to issue search warrants on the basis of governmental need -- a standard that is no standard at all because the government can always claim that it needs what it wants. The FISA court does not require a showing of probable cause for its warrants, because it accepts the myth that the government is listening to or reading words by foreign people for foreign intelligence purposes only, not for prosecutorial purposes.
Never mind that Congress cannot change the plain meaning of the Constitution. Never mind that the Fourth Amendment protects all people in the United States, American or foreign, from all parts of the government for all purposes, not just criminal prosecutions.
Yet the FISA court still grants general warrants -- look where you wish and seize what you find -- exposing our innermost thoughts to the prying eyes of the intelligence community in direct contravention of the Fourth Amendment.
Enter the USA Freedom Act. One of its selling points to Congress was that it would permit the FISA court to appoint a lawyer to challenge hypothetically some of its behavior. The court recently made such an appointment, and the lawyer appointed challenged the policy of the National Security Agency, the federal government's domestic spying agency, of sharing data it acquires via the unconstitutional FISA warrants with the FBI. She argued that the data sharing goes far beyond the stated purpose of the FISA warrants, which is to gather foreign intelligence data from foreign people, not evidence of domestic crimes of anyone whose emails might be swept up by those warrants.
The challenge revealed publicly what many of us have condemned for years: The NSA actually makes its repository of raw data from emails and text messages available for the FBI to scour at will, without the FBI's obtaining a warrant issued by a judge pursuant to the Fourth Amendment.
In an opinion issued in November but kept secret until last week, the FISA court rejected the hypothetical challenge of its own appointee and ruled that the NSA could continue to share what it wants with the FBI.
There are several problems with this ruling. The first is the hypothetical nature of the challenge. Federal courts do not exist in a vacuum. They do not render advisory opinions. They can only hear real cases and real controversies involving real plaintiffs and real defendants, not hypothetical ones as was the case here.
The whole apparatus of hypothetical challenge and hypothetical ruling is constitutionally meaningless. It was the moral and legal equivalent of a law school moot court oral argument. Yet federal and soon state law enforcement will interpret it as giving cover to the NSA/FBI practice of data sharing, which is clearly unconstitutional because it is the use of fruit from a poisonous tree.
FISA and the USA Freedom Act were enacted under the premise -- the pretense -- that the data collected under them would be used for foreign intelligence purposes only so that attacks could be thwarted and methods could be discovered. Yet the use by the FBI of extraconstitutionally obtained intelligence data for ordinary criminal prosecutions defies the stated purposes of the statutes and contradicts the Fourth Amendment.
If this is keeping us safe, who or what will safeguard our freedoms? Who will keep us safe from those who have sworn to uphold the Constitution yet defy it?
Comments