Snake Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 Pay attention Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 War on terror-supersedes the constitution. Right? The Patriot Act? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 That was awesome....well said Mr Gowdy. For that 2 minutes i felt that man was doing the work of the citizenry of this country Thank you for posting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 He did show that she was clueless. She could have at least put the Patriot Act out there! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 Did Obunga expand the patriot act? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 3 minutes ago, Capt.Storm said: He did show that she was clueless. She could have at least put the Patriot Act out there! The patriot act was the most unpatriotic thing ever passed. I hope ever official that voted for it dies in a fire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1jkw Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 2 minutes ago, f7ben said: The patriot act was the most unpatriotic thing ever passed. I hope ever official that voted for it dies in a fire I you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 2 minutes ago, f7ben said: The patriot act was the most unpatriotic thing ever passed. I hope ever official that voted for it dies in a fire Oh I concur..not sure which way Hillary stands on it now...lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Sludgey said: Did Obunga expand the patriot act? Obama signs NSA bill, renewing Patriot Act powers AddThis Sharing Buttons 1.2K4 45 Getty Images By Julian Hattem - 06/02/15 10:44 PM EDT President Obama signed legislation into law on Tuesday evening reinstating key counterterrorism laws and reforming the government’s surveillance powers. The announcement from the White House that Obama had signed the USA Freedom Act came a few hours after the bill sailed through the Senate 67-32, following a protracted debate that lasted for weeks and forced some of the provisions to expire for nearly two days. With Obama’s signature, three parts of the Patriot Act — including the controversial Section 215 — came back into force after expiring Monday morning. The bill also enacts the most sweeping surveillance reforms in a generation, for the first time in years putting new restrictions on federal intelligence powers. The USA Freedom Act ends the National Security Agency’s (NSA) bulk collection of Americans’ telephone records, limits other ways the government collects large amounts of records and adds new transparency measures to the way the government collects information. The Senate’s overwhelming passage of the bill comes after a weeks-long standoff following the House’s approval by 338-88. During the protracted fight, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) — a presidential candidate — used procedural tactics to force the expiration of the Patriot Act measures. Amid the dispute, Paul’s counterpart from Kentucky, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, came under fire from both lawmakers and the White House for repeatedly attempting to block the bill, even when other legislative paths seemed impossible. http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/243850-obama-signs-nsa-bill-renewing-patriot-act-powers TAGS:Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul, USA Freedom Act, Patriot Act, Barack Obama Share on Facebook Share on Twitter by Taboola Sponsored Links FROM AROUND THE WEB Edited June 18, 2016 by Capt.Storm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 The original Patriot Act was put into place in 2001. In 2011 President Obama signed a four year extension of 3 key provisions in the "PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011". Parts of the Patriot Act expired on June 1, 2015, when there was no congressional approval to renew. On the next day the USA Freedom Act was passed into law, which renewed the expired parts until 2019. So a lot of its provisions are still in place, just under different names. https://www.quora.com/Is-the-USA-PATRIOT-Act-still-in-effect-as-of-April-2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 Yep libs,your man barry kept this going. Section 215 Section 215: Access to records and other items under FISA[edit] See also: NSA warrantless surveillance This section is commonly referred to as the "library records" provision[29] because of the wide range of personal material that can be investigated.[30][31] FISA was modified by section 215 (Access to records and other items under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) of the Act to allow the Director of the FBI (or an official designated by the Director, so long as that official's rank is no lower than Assistant Special Agent in Charge) to apply for an order to produce materials that assist in an investigation undertaken to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities. The Act gives an example to clarify what it means by "tangible things": it includes "books, records, papers, documents, and other items". It is specified that any such investigation must be conducted in accordance with guidelines laid out in Executive Order 12333 (which pertains to United States intelligence activities). Investigations must also not be performed on U.S. citizens who are carrying out activities protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Any order that is granted must be given by a FISA court judge or by a magistrate judge who is publicly designated by the Chief Justice of the United States to allow such an order to be given. Any application must prove that it is being conducted without violating the First Amendment rights of any U.S. citizens. The application can only be used to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a U.S. citizen or to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities. This section of the USA PATRIOT Act is controversial because the order may be granted ex parte, and once it is granted — in order to avoid jeopardizing the investigation — the order may not disclose the reasons behind why the order was granted. The section carries a gag order stating that "No person shall disclose to any other person (other than those persons necessary to produce the tangible things under this section) that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained tangible things under this section". Senator Rand Paul stated that the non-disclosure is imposed for one year,[32] though this is not explicitly mentioned in the section. In order to protect anyone who complies with the order, FISA now prevents any person who complies with the order in "good faith" from being liable for producing any tangible goods required by the court order. The production of tangible items is not deemed to constitute a waiver of any privilege in any other proceeding or context. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 (edited) To make it simple that is why the DHS can do(sec 215) what Trey says they can't because of the constitution...no due process. Ex parte - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte Wikipedia Ex parte /ˌɛks ˈpɑːrtiː/ is a Latin legal term meaning "from (by or for) [the/a] party". An ex partedecision is one decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties to the controversy to be present. Ex parte Milligan · Ex parte Quirin · Ex parte Endo Edited June 18, 2016 by Capt.Storm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 I always find it hilarious when the "talking heads" on the other side of the question have ZERO answer. Nothing, nada, speechless. Complete idiocy. Now, this is a slippery slope for sure but I think certain criteria can be put in place that can determine who is a legitimate threat. And personally, once the oversight has done the "due process" via "ex parte" (see, I read), well, they are on the list and some of their rights get suspended. Now, that should not be an indefinite suspension and they should know they are on it and should be able to appeal it. In other words, our wonderful government doesn't get to keep their own private "black list" while they infringe rights "willy nilly". BTW, we've been doing this in some form or fashion as long as we've been our own country, so, it's nothing new. Now, I understand the argument against that, and I certainly have a suspicious eye on our government. But they aren't all bad there and some are actually trying to do us all justice (but most are not the career politicians). And again, like mentioned, if your not doing anything wrong, well, you've got nothing to worry about. AND AS LONG AS CITIZENS CAN CONTNUE TO STAY ARMED, I BELIEVE THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE FORCED TO STAY IN CHECK. That doesn't mean every citizen gets to be armed though. On the list? No soup for you! Again, those rights have been and can continue to be taken away through due process. By the way, it sure sounds like this last little gay bar incident happened because our government didn't want to step over the line and risk a political government racial accusation. So well done there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 Maybe it's just me Z but damn the laws and acts like the patriot deal just seem to be getting so convoluted that nobody can understand nothing anymore with out a harvard lawyer being present...and if you had two of them they would both come to a diff conclusion. I spend a considerable amount of time trying to figure chit out..how many people do think really do that. We have to get back to basics and that might not never happen. Unless maybe another war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 2 minutes ago, Capt.Storm said: We have to get back to basics and that might not never happen. Unless maybe another war. I think we are real close to a "civil unrest" as it stands now. Our two chosen political candidates represent nothing more than two sides of a nation's hatred for one another. Of course there are a few that actually may think these two can be great leaders (weirdos). That thread I started a couple of weeks ago defines one side (my side). That is just sick of the political pandering and false representation of the uneducated, unknowing, uncaring and disenfranchised population milking our resources for every penny they can muster up. And the other side, well, they are all for that.....the lazy, free (or cheap) ride who think we can all get along better if they just get everything they want. Whoever pulls this election out is gonna have their hands full, and it will not be easy to keep us from getting too restless. Hell, it may not even be possible. And really, as I've stated, maybe we are due for a good ol' fashioned dust up. I'm not sure what else we can do to start getting peoples heads right anymore. I'll crack as many as I can though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 (edited) 8 hours ago, Zambroski said: Our two chosen political candidates represent nothing more than two sides of a nation's hatred for one another. I do believe they count on that..distraction from the real issues that they cannot solve...just what sr does. Edited June 19, 2016 by Capt.Storm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racer254 Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 6 hours ago, Capt.Storm said: I do believe they count on that..distraction from the real issues that they cannot solve...just what sr does. That is exactly what they count on, guys like sr just fall for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 17 minutes ago, racer254 said: That is exactly what they count on, guys like sr just fall for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt.Storm Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 (edited) 10 hours ago, racer254 said: That is exactly what they count on, guys like sr just fall for it. You're right I guess..he sucks it up then spews it out. I do give the guy a lot of credit for sticking up for things he believes ..even though he's mostly wrong..lol. Edited June 20, 2016 by Capt.Storm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamgreen02 Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 As usual, Gowdy completely owns the talking heads on the left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racer254 Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 17 hours ago, Capt.Storm said: You're right I guess..he sucks it up then spews it out. I do give the guy a lot of credit for sticking up for things he believes ..even though he's mostly wrong..lol. He just parrots the talking points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.