napolitano makes a point about kavanaugh

[justashooter]

it's a long read so i have quoted only the conclusion:

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/judg...nti-democratic

"What if this same lawyer, by now a federal appellate judge, was confronted with a case in which the feds had spied on Americans in blatant violation of the Fourth Amendment? What if this judge was publicly committed to originalism -- which informs that the Fourth Amendment prohibits all warrantless surveillance of people in America, no matter its purpose?

What if this judge employed linguistic acrobatics in ruling on this conflict between domestic warrantless surveillance -- which he advised a former president was constitutional -- and the original meaning of the Fourth Amendment, which he knew bars government spying without warrants?

What if this judge -- claiming a loyalty to originalism but nevertheless embracing its opposite, the concept of a "living Constitution" -- ruled that the feds can spy without warrants on anyone at any time, as long as they do so for intelligence-gathering and not law enforcement purposes? What if this intelligence-gathering exception to the Fourth Amendment exists only in this judge's mind and not in the Fourth Amendment itself? What if the Patriot Act permits the sharing of intelligence data with law enforcement? What if in this judge's mind, every bit of data on your mobile device or computer -- financial, legal, medical, personal, professional, intimate -- is available for government surveillance on a whim and without a search warrant?

What if that judge just joined the Supreme Court? What if his perverse views of privacy and the Fourth Amendment were never discussed at his confirmation hearings but his adolescent drinking habits and sexual proclivities were? What if it is too late to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution?" What do we do about it?

[TenTea]

So...actively supportive of the surveillance state?

[V guy]

After the Judge was fired at Fox News by the faggot Sheppard Smith, who apparently wields some power at the network, somethinghappened to the Judge.

Fox brought the Judge back because he was right, and the faggot was wrong. But the Judge got the strong message, that the liberal Trump hating faggot, was on his ass; so he is now an anti Trumper,...........THE JUDGE NEEDS THE FOX CASH.

Sellout.

[Bawana jim]

I know you guys think I am full of crap in my observations but I found a particular look about liars that so far has been true. Some try to hide this look when they lie but in general those that have that look have lied straight to your face. The judge has the look, it's that self centered pull your hair straight back from you face that the biggest liars have.

Rush Limbaugh has it and we all know he was such a drug addict he lost his hearing. AL Sharpton has it and so does the judge. Men who look in the mirror every day and it's all about their face. You see the look a lot on white criminals in prison. Now I am not saying that because a man combs his hair straight back that he is a liar but it's one of the first things I look at when people talk to me.

[brunop]

1. Judge N. asks some important questions - and specifically cites points about: a) Constitution, and b) Fourth Amendment

2. V-guy says: "faggots" and "someone's on his ass" and "cash"

3. B. Jim says "He may or may not be a liar because he combs his hair in a way I don't like."


This is possibly a new logical low-point in FF history - and that is saying something.

[V guy]

"Exigent circumstances", to search without a warrant, has already been confirmed by the SCOTUS, as constitutional in emergencies.

Fruit of the tainted tree, has always been used by libs to free criminals, but now it is not quite so ez.

The Main Core list has our names on it, but no apparent surveillance or renewable FISA level warrants.

Criminals are dumb, and that is their biggest failing.

Napolitano's stands, are now like spaghetti, rather than oak.

It is time to investigate Hillary, Obama and the dems, with a special prosecutor, but Nappi will be against it.

[brunop]

Judge N. isn't even saying anything - he's asking questions that each reader has to answer.

The super uncomfortable feeling is that we all just got played:

Deep State:1
Believers In The False Messiah Named Trump: 0

They (meaning "he"...) put a guy up with 'White Guy' and 'Nice Guy' and 'Conservative' (Inc.) creds.

They put up a *clear* hit job. They put up a woman that NO PERSON thinks was telling the truth. You thought it was because they were stupid and incompetent. Ha-ha - they weren't.

They did it on purpose. They did it so you would support the confirmation of the guy who thinks meta-data isn't data, and that there is no expectation of privacy in electronic communications, and that super-computers drawing 99.9999% accurate conclusions about the way you think, vote, worship, speak, support, assemble, purchase, work, save, etc. by 'sniffing' and recording data in the mail they deliver to you is NOT an invasion of privacy.

And in a massive double-win, they got the other side SUPER PISSED at you because you didn't believe Crazy Cat Lady. They *may* take the House next month.

So they won twice.

[TenTea]

^^^ Who's the mastermind(s) planning out all this fiendish stategery and it's outcomes.?

[medicmike]

Sobering thoughts there Brunop....

[Bawana jim]

Originally Posted by brunop

1. Judge N. asks some important questions - and specifically cites points about: a) Constitution, and b) Fourth Amendment

2. V-guy says: "faggots" and "someone's on his ass" and "cash"

3. B. Jim says "He may or may not be a liar because he combs his hair in a way I don't like."


This is possibly a new logical low-point in FF history - and that is saying something.

Well some guys you never see their face but know them to be a liar because they say they will call to do business and dont. I think that is the low point of FF. It's not what a man thinks but what he does so if you want to criticize me then do it from a moral high ground.

As far as looks there are dead giveaways and it's called profiling. In my experience I have seen a lot of bad people with their hair pulled back from their face.

I never expect any man to agree on my political opinions or my view of life but the one ting we all must agree on is honesty and integrity in business, that is the true measure of who we are. Heck you may have profiled me by what I post and became unwilling to do business but men stand up and give a reason. Oregon has a law we must register on transfer so you didn't even have to meet me face to face because it could have taken place at a dealer.

So if we ever meet and I know we won't but if we did I would look to how you comb your hair because I know you to have lied to me in business.

[V guy]

I guess that I gotta make it plain as day about the Judge.

Napolitano knows full well about the 4th amendment and the SCOTUS decisions-- are"stare decisis", precedent now.

Why is this Judge not actually working on the bench right now?

I guess he believes that he will get a show like Judge Jannine has, if he is nice to Sheppard Smith.

Yet this fool Napolitano tries to demand that Kavanaugh answer his questions, even though they are about already settled law; why is Napolitano not asking the other 8 justices about those questions? How about Obama? Holder?

Nappi is just playing for the affection of the never Trumpers, to keep his job.

Sheppard Smith just came out against Kayne because of his visits with Trump today.
If you talk to Trump, the Sheppard Smith hates you.

Nappi will come out against Kanye now, mark my words.

[Bawana jim]

Originally Posted by V guy

I guess that I gotta make it plain as day about the Judge.

Napolitano knows full well about the 4th amendment and the SCOTUS decisions-- are"stare decisis", precedent now.

Why is this Judge not actually working on the bench right now?

I guess he believes that he will get a show like Judge Jannine has, if he is nice to Sheppard Smith.

Yet this fool Napolitano tries to demand that Kavanaugh answer his questions, even though they are about already settled law; why is Napolitano not asking the other 8 justices about those questions? How about Obama? Holder?

Nappi is just playing for the affection of the never Trumpers, to keep his job.

Sheppard Smith just came out against Kayne because of his visits with Trump today.
If you talk to Trump, the Sheppard Smith hates you.

Nappi will come out against Kanye now, mark my words.

I don't know dude but is this a new low, I mean where is the bar on low? Is it low to have opinions or is it low to screw a man out of time and money on a deal?

You don't have to explain your opinions to me because after reading so many of them I feel I know where they come from. Nappi can't be trusted as he manipulates laws to say what he wants to say but then he only has a few minutes on the air to stir the pot. If he really wanted to ask questions as an honest judge he would put them in writing and CC to all the judges then give the reply to the media.

Nappi is a talking head on an opinion show that lives for ratings, somebody better will come along.

[Tuhlmann]

Originally Posted by Bawana jim

Rush Limbaugh has it and we all know he was such a drug addict he lost his hearing.

[Bawana jim]

Originally Posted by Tuhlmann

however Limbaugh became totaly about himself while going through drug addiction. Post any picture you have of him today and you see that pulled back hair of a self absorbed man.

Remember in the start when he was huge on getting other folks rolling on business and stood as a pillar of what's right with America? Now days he just gossips and plays with his apple toys and isn't nearly as relevant in politics as he was in the past. People stumble, will he make a comeback?

[JM]

You all can't see the trees through the forest. What do you expect from a Judge that looks like a Werewolf? Even a Caveman could see it.

[Bawana jim]

Originally Posted by JM

You all can't see the trees through the forest. What do you expect from a Judge that looks like a Werewolf? Even a Caveman could see it.

Now that's a new low to use a man's looks against him...low, really low FF is shamed by that oh my god what evil Say uh is profiling considered low because you profiled him from your life experiences or.. you are just being sarcastic.

[Right Side Up]

Kav is not a strict constructionist, originalist, or whatever some people call him. He's for radical departure from traditional views on the Fourth Amendment. He's already proved it during Bush 2's terms.

[Tak]

The son of the late Justice Scalia wrote an fine opinion piece on FOX today.

Worth the read.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/chri...s-confirmation

[Right Side Up]

Sounds like Scalia's son hasn't reviewed Kav's involvement in the Patriot Act.

[rowjimmy]

Originally Posted by brunop

1. Judge N. asks some important questions - and specifically cites points about: a) Constitution, and b) Fourth Amendment

2. V-guy says: "faggots" and "someone's on his ass" and "cash"

3. B. Jim says "He may or may not be a liar because he combs his hair in a way I don't like."


This is possibly a new logical low-point in FF history - and that is saying something.

This made me lol...well spoken.

I pointed out these concerns earlier, as did Juanni, but we're just trolls and all..

[V guy]

I used to comb my hair backwards.





I now wear it as a flattop.
A universe in meaning may be divined in that.

Napolitano needs to ask Eric Holder and Obama, those questions too.


What about Obama's hair?

[tdb59]

Originally Posted by V guy

......


What about Obama's hair?

His beard is named Michelle.



.....................

[JM]

Originally Posted by Bawana jim

Now that's a new low to use a man's looks against him...low, really low FF is shamed by that oh my god what evil Say uh is profiling considered low because you profiled him from your life experiences or.. you are just being sarcastic.

My life's experience with people is that most usually look like who they are. People mold their look to create an image that pleases them in their sub-conscious or create an image they think pleases others. There are some that create an image to rebel and repel. A tattooed rail thin woman is much more likely to be a crack whore than a pleasantly plump lady with a nice smile and attitude. Take a good look at your Pope Francis--he looks and acts like a pedophile and most likely is. Would you let this so called Vicar of Christ babysit your children or grandchildren? same with Wolfman Napolitano. His words are very telling and his look amplifies what he says.

[longhair51]

I wear my hair pulled back in a ponytail or braided...but I could be lying.

[Bama Steve]

Some of us really don't GAF any longer and look like comfortable office chairs.

[brunop]

Originally Posted by Bawana jim

So if we ever meet and I know we won't but if we did I would look to how you comb your hair because I know you to have lied to me in business.

I didn't lie to you in business - we didn't do any business. Or are you so old that your memory is failing?

I was late to call you. You got butthurt. Waaaannnnhhhh.

[brunop]

^

And none of that has anything to do with the fact that you and V Guy are spouting Sheer Stupidity.

I don't comb my hair.

[Bawana jim]

Originally Posted by brunop

I didn't lie to you in business - we didn't do any business. Or are you so old that your memory is failing?

I was late to call you. You got butthurt. Waaaannnnhhhh.

I ain't butt hurt other than you said the gun was mine and you would call to finalize the deal. Your word means nothing and neither do your insults because a man who lies in business can't be trusted in anything else. I know you deleted the thread where you Appologized for being a dick but now you come out with this bs.

You have no integrity by posting what you just did but you have the power to hide your words so others won't see them....just like last time. It's all good dude, play your cards like you want and spin your words as you need to but you are a hipocrite telling me I set a new low by profiling people by their looks while you screw a man on a gun deal.

Plus did you even offer to make up for the time and money you cost me setting up a deal? No sir I know what low is and will remind you where your snakes belly crawls when you insult my opinions.

Now I feel better and need the stress relief with my dog dieing, pain makes me onery and unwilling to put up with bs.

[Bawana jim]

Originally Posted by brunop

^

And none of that has anything to do with the fact that you and V Guy are spouting Sheer Stupidity.

I don't comb my hair.

Like I said, it's all good and I don't expect anyone to agree with my opinions.Mine are honest opinions from an honest man.


Edited to add and with great pleasure. Your college education taught you to spell better and write well but you must have been sick the day they covered integrity.

[Bama Steve]

Are you drunk, Jim?

Or is the frequent clown sex causing your current behavior?

[Bawana jim]

Originally Posted by JM

My life's experience with people is that most usually look like who they are. People mold their look to create an image that pleases them in their sub-conscious or create an image they think pleases others. There are some that create an image to rebel and repel. A tattooed rail thin woman is much more likely to be a crack whore than a pleasantly plump lady with a nice smile and attitude. Take a good look at your Pope Francis--he looks and acts like a pedophile and most likely is. Would you let this so called Vicar of Christ babysit your children or grandchildren? same with Wolfman Napolitano. His words are very telling and his look amplifies what he says.

I love my family and want to protect them so I profile people on their looks. There is a commonality in what I see and while folks may not agree with me it doesn't make me wrong. Below is three known liars and look at their hair and how big the lies are they told. Compare...

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q...BC&FORM=IARRTH

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q...C45F4285A316C0

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q...4D4394D4B6B35E


People lost a fortune believing Madoff. Limbaugh lost his credibility telling us how great of an American he was while being a drug addict.

Sharpton lies to enslave his own race.

Just saying when I meet someone a red flag goes up when they comb their hair back from their face. Myself I don't have a lot of hair to comb and as a fat old man its a normal look.

[Bama Steve]

Originally Posted by brunop

^

And none of that has anything to do with the fact that you and V Guy are spouting Sheer Stupidity.

I don't comb my hair.

"Disheveled" suits you.

[TenTea]

Originally Posted by brunop

I don't comb my hair.

Me neither, but I keep a comb around 'cause sometimes it feels good to drag it over my scalp.

[gunplumber]

Originally Posted by brunop

They did it so you would support the confirmation of the guy who thinks meta-data isn't data, and that there is no expectation of privacy in electronic communications, and that super-computers drawing 99.9999% accurate conclusions about the way you think, vote, worship, speak, support, assemble, purchase, work, save, etc. by 'sniffing' and recording data in the mail they deliver to you is NOT an invasion of privacy.

Interesting because Roe v Wade was decided in large part on privacy, and the left is convinced that the Kav is going to overturn it (by some strange yet-to-be-determined power).

But you have brought up a reasonable and legitimate disagreement with what some believe is Kav's belief, on the 4A and modern communication. Any good attorney can argue either side of a case, depending on who is paying him. When Kav was working for the Bush Administration, his job was to find a way to make his client's desires pass muster. That's why I don't think those working papers are particularly useful.

His decisions as a circuit court judge are unrevealing as only two cases involved 4A and electronic surveillance. In the first (US v Maynard) Kav sided against the government - that the gps tracker was a search (Scalia agreed). Not RBG's position that it started not a search, but through time, as it collected date, became a search retroactively.

The other, and the only 4A and metada case is Klayman v Obama. This was the Sec 215 NSA metadata collection. And from whence the quote the Section 215 program was “entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment” arose.

Kav agreed with the precedence set by Smith v Maryland*


Second, even if a future court adopted a different a view of what is a search, the Section 215 program was still reasonable under the balancing of interests of the “special needs” exception (see the discussion of Vilsack above). “[T]elephony metadata serves a critically important special need – preventing terrorist attacks on the United States,” Kavanaugh wrote, citing the 2004 9/11 Commission Report. “[T]hat critical national security need outweighs the impact on privacy occasioned by this program.”

*1979 - dialed number recorder w/o warrant did not violate 4A. Remember, the pen register was patented in 1840.

the defendant had disclosed the dialed numbers to the telephone company so they could connect his call, he did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the numbers he dialed. The court did not distinguish between disclosing the numbers to a human operator or just the automatic equipment used by the telephone company.

What's changed is the ability to correlate the data and reach conclusions.

[V guy]

Can you trust any man who parts his hair in the middle?

Parts on the left or right, can send a freudian message, like a shaved head.

Unlike Napolitanos Joe Pesci hair, his fake questions for Kavanaugh, written to try and establish the Judge............. as a never Trumper and an anti Kavanaugh man, are only written so he will not be fired again by that.............abomination, who combs his hair back too.

Fencing: I like fencing too.

Sometimes I can get others to help paint my fence.

[brunop]

Originally Posted by gunplumber

Second, even if a future court adopted a different a view of what is a search, the Section 215 program was still reasonable under the balancing of interests of the “special needs” exception (see the discussion of Vilsack above). “[T]elephony metadata serves a critically important special need – preventing terrorist attacks on the United States,” Kavanaugh wrote, citing the 2004 9/11 Commission Report. “[T]hat critical national security need outweighs the impact on privacy occasioned by this program.”

AND

Originally Posted by gunplumber

What's changed is the ability to correlate the data and reach conclusions.

I agree that judges will argue for their 'interpretation', and that different people will interpret differently. I also believe that we have (as a society?) 'agreed' that "keep and bear arms" and "shall not be infringed" has changed meanings as the "arms" have changed. If I'm not mistaken - and I'm willing to be corrected here - the "arms" in questions weren't rifles, since everyone already had them AND the idea that they would *not* have them was literally unthinkable, but were, instead, cannon. That is what the Brits went to collect at Lexington and Concord. But we roughly don't allow military grade mortars these days, and basically most people don't care.

Kav is making the same point: the potential 'cost' to the American public outweighs the 'need to protect' (or whatever) the right to bear mortars or RPGs. I understand that a skillful attorney will argue either side of this.

My argument is that the same "upgrading" in capacity creates a 'like' danger as it relates to government actor potential. While metadata helps protect U.S. citizens from attack, ongoing collection endangers U.S. citizens, too. In fact, I would argue that the ongoing collection of metadata is more dangerous to freedom of the individual that the danger of attack by *not* collecting it.

Kav will have his chance to demonstrate his interpretations and his character.

[gunplumber]

Originally Posted by brunop

My argument is that the same "upgrading" in capacity creates a 'like' danger as it relates to government actor potential. While metadata helps protect U.S. citizens from attack, ongoing collection endangers U.S. citizens, too. In fact, I would argue that the ongoing collection of metadata is more dangerous to freedom of the individual that the danger of attack by *not* collecting it.

I agree that the computer mining and correlation of metadata puts it in an entirely different context than the 1979 Smith v Maryland.

But the same people wailing about SCOTUS "legislating from the bench" are now wailing that Kav didn't create law out of thin air to claim that metadata is now something people have a reasonable expectation to be private.

Within the context of the COTUS and precedence, it seems a logical conclusion.

Many people are confused over what SCOTUS (and Appeals) do. Almost never is it a finding of fact. They are finding, often in an extremely narrow view, procedural issues and whether the law was applied correctly.

Klayman v Obama was very complicated, at least in my view, because it was filed under 1A, 4A and 5A grounds and exceeds the the statutory authority of Sec 215 of FISA (reauthorized in 2011, expired in 2015, and arguably reauthorized but not explicitly, in USA Freedom Act 0f 2015, through 2019).

So in 2014, a Fed Judge ruled bulk collection violates 4A. To whit (copied from Wiki 'cause the pdf is enormous) I cannot imagine a more 'indiscriminate' and 'arbitrary' invasion than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval ... Surely, such a program infringes on 'that degree of privacy' that the founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment.

He argued that Smith v MD was a short term forward looking capture and the NSA is a long-term historical retrospective analysis.

He asserted that despite the FISA claim that only foreign numbers were being collected, the method of query must compare against (and therefore collect) numbers that are not monitored. Which means they are collected too.

This reminds me of when I was working for a large corporation. HR required I fill in "race" when hiring a new employee. The ne hire had written "none of your business", to which I agreed. But I could not process their paperwork without it. HR said to just guess, and I refused. "Why do I need to record race when it is illegal to consider race?". The answer was a catch 22. We need to collect the data to prove that we're not using the data in hiring".

Similarly, all numbers have to be collected to differentiate the ones not authorized, from the ones authorized under PRISM. And what happens when an authorized monitor number is communicating with an unauthorized?

Then the American Hero Snowden leaked FISC order to Verizon to continually give up its business records, and these were customers of verizon, they had "standing". PRISM is non-US citizens in other countries, and the plaintiffs did not establish standing.

But he stayed his ruling, giving Feds 6 months to appeal.

Now it gets even more confusing, because it went back and forth with injunctions and vacating of injunctions, and it expired. So I'm a little dizzy. Then dismissed in 2017 for standing. In that portion, the legalities of the monitoring was not relevant, only that Klayman was no longer affected so couldn't bring the suit.

In any case, there are two parts of Kav's concurrence. Cato Inst. did a good summary here.

https://www.cato.org/blog/kavanaugh-...urth-amendment

[brunop]

That ^ point about "creating law out of thin air" is a very good point.

People who are paying attention should know that their electronica - and especially their data related to the utility of the resources (computers grab data to accurately send mail, and ISPs grab MAC ID / other data to accurately route traffic...) - do not effect private transmissions, and therefore they have no expectation of privacy in said utility of those resources.

That being said, the world is creating a 'class' of information which the government and other actors like Amazon (but I repeat myself...) are using to 'know' previously unknowable things that we *used* to consider private.

But it is absolutely true that Google knows when you are going to the grocery store before you do. They also know how you're going to vote before you open the Voter's Pamphlet and start to read the various measures.

We consumers should bitch about SCOTUS while we can, but we should de-Google and 'protect' via VPN and other tools everything that we can.

Otherwise we're bitching about something that we're participating in.

[Riversidesports]

Originally Posted by V guy

Can you trust any man who parts his hair in the middle?

Parts on the left or right, can send a freudian message, like a shaved head.

Unlike Napolitanos Joe Pesci hair, his fake questions for Kavanaugh, written to try and establish the Judge............. as a never Trumper and an anti Kavanaugh man, are only written so he will not be fired again by that.............abomination, who combs his hair back too.

Fencing: I like fencing too.

Sometimes I can get others to help paint my fence.

Now that's some sheer complete dumbfukkery V

For example most folks part their hair on the left side
know why ?
most folks are RIGHT handed
as a left hander I naturally am inclined to part my hair on the right side
Now if I get a clip at some beauty parlor the hair bitch invariably cuts and combs it for a left side hair parting.
I prefer Barbers, the cheap feel isn't worth the butchery.

Yes, some train themselves to part hair against predisposition
I have done it for periods of time
Gals change hair styles constantly

Yeah, one can "read" some appearance quees
I learned this the hard way
I picked up a minty Black leather WII German pilots jacket in the 70s
Just a cool jacket, no Nazi patches, etc
thing was many folks saw it as BIKER due to dumbassery
well that was maybe better than explaining that it was WWII German
Idiots were reading the wrong thing

No ink on me but these days it don't mean anything anyways
Tats don't mark a gal as some slut or whore anymore unless they are of a certain type like Kijara ink. Those kind of tats are mostly employed in high class prostitution rings to identify a hooker as a hooker & as property

Funny story, young gal I know went into a parlor and was looking through their flash for interesting patterns. Had herself marked on the thigh with one of the classic stylized Kijara brands. Boy she about shit when I explained she was now advertising holes for hire
Another none Kijara tat are the puppy paw prints
ugh hon', do you realize that means you are now a kennel bitch and fukk Doggies ?
That was the original meaning of the symbology involved and started as a Black thing within Gangbanger culture.

So truth is profiling can lead the casual observer far astray

Low hanging pants ?
Started as a prison thing to identify the jailhouse bitches then went into urban Hip Hop culture where youngsters didn't realize they were IDing themselves as a bottom for dominant Black Queers

Years ago I did tats for others
Bought a new gun, ink, drew my own flash for folks
wasn't about cash, it was about folks getting shitty work or getting infected
I'm extremely well versed on symbolism and hidden meanings
these days dumb broads look at flash and think Gee, that's kinda cute not even knowing what the heck they are marking up as. Ended up doing a Rose cover on top of my friends idiot Kijara brand
For the record, I detest tattoos but if a gal has to have one I'd rather do it for nothing than a shitty alternative.

Another good one...
Few years ago another gal griped to me that her daughter had her nipples pierced. Girl was not any bed backed slut either. Did it for her fiancé who also paid for a belly button and hood piercing...only guy she had slept with
I was all like cei le vie'

Now Kav ?
said from the start he IS the SWAMP but at least he seems to be on the shallow end of it. Oh I truly believe he was a black out drunk when younger, big fukkin' deal
Yeah, he likely grabbed some titty and/or ass when young
Shit Trump is probably still doing it
absolute truth is most boys do. Not many males wait for the gal to tell them would you do whatever. We would be extinct as a species in short order.

metadata
depends...
should be handled like telephonic interceptions frankly
you choose a target and execute surgically
no need to use an atom bomb when a bullet would do.

another just HUGE truth...
If you want to run secured comms it's very easy. People watch waaaay too much boobtube nonsense.
Shit if you reside in any semi urban area free wifi access is everywhere, just snag some second hand devices off CL these days, even better yet if they happen to be stolen

The main problem is those in power are usually absolutely ignorant and often figure on simple solutions
like Gun Control actually working
and yeah Kav is likely a severely ignorant assclown given his CV since College

For example Gun folk understand why Gun regulation don't work and why Smart Guns are a boondoggle...it's patently obvious on many levels
Most elites and much of the public are not Gun people and will willingly swallow the pablum fed out by "experts" and pundits.

Kav is an Elite member of the Swamp but he is better than a Clinton appointment ever would have been thus I support him.
I have held a profound dislike for Trump for decades yet I campaigned, voted and continue to support him as MY President

part of my detest for Trump the man has to do with his claim he never used illicit substances
That's every bit as bad as Frank Zappa and Teddie Nugent claiming the same damn dirty lie. The Donald was doing weed and blow at notorious NYC discos when a few member here were not even in the womb yet.
Yeah nothing recent at all but he was all around it back in the day screwing a different gal every time he was club hopping which was often in the Cocaine fueled era of the late 70s & early 80s.

He is pretty much the pervert as well if you followed his appearences with Howard Stern. Shit enough so I sometimes wonder if part of the Presidential personal Gym my have been converted into a Gorean training room for FLOTUS Trump is an old school Kinkster and was semi open about it over the years with Stern & others.
That's always been another thing the Left finds impossible to attack him on...sexually he acts out like a typical elite Democrat

This leads me to Trump on RKBA
He don't understand it as say someone in rural America does
He DOES understand it's extremely important to a good share of his base and the Liberals want far more of it.
That's enough for him to lukewarm oppose it in his soul

take the Bumpstock thing
Hillary ?
Been an immediate EO
Trump ?
Well let jeffy the diaper Sessions do a DOJ study
the language is such a stretch that it will fail proper Judicial challenge in my opinion
now remember how adamant Donald was that "bumpstocks were gone" ?
he straight told Congress HE was going to take them out and to leave it alone

well he can't, the NFA has to be modified by Congress
It's really a long term holding action as I see it & a very clever chess move
even the liberals are quiet on bumpstocks since that.

[Riversidesports]

Originally Posted by brunop

That ^ point about "creating law out of thin air" is a very good point.

People who are paying attention should know that their electronica - and especially their data related to the utility of the resources (computers grab data to accurately send mail, and ISPs grab MAC ID / other data to accurately route traffic...) - do not effect private transmissions, and therefore they have no expectation of privacy in said utility of those resources.

That being said, the world is creating a 'class' of information which the government and other actors like Amazon (but I repeat myself...) are using to 'know' previously unknowable things that we *used* to consider private.

But it is absolutely true that Google knows when you are going to the grocery store before you do. They also know how you're going to vote before you open the Voter's Pamphlet and start to read the various measures.

We consumers should bitch about SCOTUS while we can, but we should de-Google and 'protect' via VPN and other tools everything that we can.

Otherwise we're bitching about something that we're participating in.

Well Yes but sort of NO

here's my thing and I was online before alGORE created the web, {yeah old school GEEK here}
I'm not doing real bad shit online
The internet was built by DARPA that was laid over the older cold war era net. I was "online" in the 80s but was seriously primitive.
folks think NSA are running comms through a screen when the truth is they control the foundations, the baseline basement of it all
still don't mean they are recording all comm
that's just impossible with current tech

If I want to secure comm I can and would if needed
anything else well who gives a poop ?

[V guy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEtCZ0xssXQ

Ed "Kooky" Burns 77 Sunset Strip, combing his hair.
A follower of James Dean; could you trust him?


An obviously subversive ******** edited subversive WIKI Link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edd_Byrnes
Dem 'ol Wiki Links................

[Bawana jim]

Originally Posted by V guy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEtCZ0xssXQ

Ed "Kooky" Burns 77 Sunset Strip, combing his hair.
A follower of James Dean; could you trust him?


An obviously subversive ******** edited subversive WIKI Link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edd_Byrnes
Dem 'ol Wiki Links................

This might make sense and the again you might not care at all. When you have a hearing disability your other senses grow some to make up the difference. A man might be thought stupid because he doesn't write or spell good but when you can't hear the teachers lessons you won't pass the class.

Put my dog down for renal failure, his kidney went after 12 good years. So what do you learn from that that could help people through life? Well since you meet people and profile them with your past experiences with those who look the same, there are other things you pick up too.

People get renal failure too and look it up before you go on reading. Sam got horrible bad breath and we thought it was his teeth or gums. The breath was a smell you will never forget, an amonia so strong it's hard to believe. How many people do you meet with really bad breath? Does it mean they are dying of renal failure? Most folks would never even think that bad breath is a warning sign.

Anyway after a lifetime of not being able to hear folks I go alot by looks and now by smell.


Edited to add, here is another picture to back up profiling a liar.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q...=0&FORM=IARRTH

[V guy]

I never go to a barber anymore; I hate anyone with a razor too close to my neck.

http://munster.wikia.com/wiki/Munster_Wiki

It may be possible that the Judge was little Eddie Munster; very similar hairstyles.

Know a man by his deeds....and now maybe hair?

[Bawana jim]

https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...ton&ajaxhist=0

Perfect example of a self centered liar. notice the hair

[Impala_Guy]

This thread is hilarious. I always thought guys with ratclaw hands or guys who sit with their knees together like women were how you identified liars on sight

[Bawana jim]

How about George Soros

https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...ault&eim=1,2,6

Browse through the pictures.

[Bawana jim]

How about LBJ, remember this war monger that killed 50,000+ Americans?

https://www.picsearch.com/lyndon-b-j...-pictures.html

Maybe Richard Nixon?

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q...ixon&FORM=IGRE