http://twitchy.com/amy-curtis/2024/02/15/jake-sullivan-fisa-warrants-n2392946
The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution says:
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
Pretty clear language, no?
Apparently not for National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan:
RNC Research (@RNCResearch) ~ NSA Jake Sullivan on amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to require a "warrant for every query of lawfully collected data":
"We do not believe that that serves the national security interests of the United States."
Video ~ http://twitter.com/i/status/1757819736744739122
Say, Jake ... how about we get a warrant to search your bowels by ramming a broomstick up your ass? I mean, after all, it should serve the national security interests of the United States.
First, some background:
Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) ~ Update: Our government invades Americans’ privacy without a warrant, using the FISA 702 program.
That’s unconstitutional.
Thursday, we will have a recorded vote on an amendment to reform this program so the feds will have to get a warrant to search US citizens’ communications.
Later this afternoon there will be a vote to require warrants to search our communications.
It'll be very interesting to see how this vote goes.
Especially since NSA Sullivan says it's not in our 'national security interests.'
Twitter/X users, on the other hand, are very supportive of such an admendment:
Andrea E (@AAC0519) ~ Former UN Ambassador Samantha Power signed over 200 FISA requests and couldn't remember any of them. That's how Democrats use this system. Bury the request like expenses buried in obscure accounts.
Bury it in bureaucracy.
Buried DEEP within the Deep State, as it were.
It's the American way.
Lately, yes.
Charles R. Smith (@softwarnet) ~ One of these days ... these guys might try reading the US Constitution.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.
It's right there in black and white.
Jules! (@sparkly_jules1) ~ It's getting hotter in this pot of water for us frogs.
Yes it is.
often uncommon (@oftenuncommon) ~ "Lawfully collected" is carrying a lot of water here. Our government should be erring on the side of collecting less data unless there is a specific warrant for the collection.
Given the breadth of federal law, this gives them carte blanche to get you for breaking a law you didn't even know existed. Data collection should require a warrant and be minimized.
President Doctor (@LDreeniatnuom) ~ {Replying to Jake Sullivan} No but it serves the letter and the intent of the U.S. Constitution, you fascist.
They hate the Constitution, and the rights it protects.
'Because we said so' seems to be their argument here.
Rand Paul (@RandPaul) ~ It’s time to end the unconstitutional spying on Americans and restore our 4th Amendment rights! No more sacrificing our freedoms in the name of national security.
This is long overdue.
Joe (@JoeMaristela) ~ But hey, who cares about civil liberties or privacy rights when the government is "protecting" us, right? I mean, it's not like the NSA has ever abused its power or overstepped its boundaries before. Oh, wait ...
We can totally trust the government.
The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted. ~ D.H. Lawrence
| 
