Spying?

[Jolly]

@loki said in Spying?:

I wouldn’t.

But I also can’t imagine other reporters wouldn’t pick up on the story even it was TuCa.

It is quite the allegation so it does deserve to be heard.

Those news outlets you mentioned? How long did they run with the Russia Hoax? Even after they knew better?

[jon-nyc]

It just seems like a lot of question begging. Given that (as you agree) he sensationalizes for a living, how can you assume this story is true?

[Doctor Phibes]

Once upon a time, there was a little boy who cried wolf....

[George K]

@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:

Once upon a time, there was a little boy who cried wolf....

What, in Carlson's statement is false? I'll grant the "trying to get me fired" is hyperbolic.

Even the NSA doesn't deny what he said, and the Axios article confirms it.

He's a blowhard, but he's not in the wrong here.

Why was his name revealed, and by whom?

But, spying on journalists is in the finest tradition of the US government, just ask James Rosen's mother.

[Doctor Phibes]

The point about the boy who cried wolf is how many times Tucker has talked about these imminent scandals that never really materialised.

Why believe him this time?

Maybe he's right. It wouldn't particularly surprise me. I'm sure the US intelligence services are a law unto themselves, and politicians from both parties are a bunch of sleazebags, but I don't really know what's happened.

[George K]

@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:

The point about the boy who cried wolf is how many times Tucker has talked about these imminent scandals that never really materialised.

I agree.

Why believe him this time?

Because an independent source (Axios) said so and the NSA didn't deny it. The very fact that they issued a statement is very unusual.

but I don't really know what's happened.

Yeah, and that's the problem. Nobody knows will admit what happened.

[Jolly]

Quit getting hung up on "who", simply because you don't like the messenger. It's looking more and more like Carlson is right - the NSA read through his emails and then unmasked him.

The email part is understandable and falls within the limits of the law. But the unmasking part does not. This is not the first time this has been done. It seems like it is becoming more prevalent. The law is being weaponized by political entities to destroy private citizens and their families.

This not a partisan issue. Because of the nature of power change in Washington, target lists will change.

Consider this scenario...Biden's economy tanks and stagflation erupts. The Administration is clearly foundering and is viewed as inept as Jimmy Carter's. Then, the same thing happens at the ballot box as happened after Carter's term...Twelve years of GOP administrations. Now, the NSA has been weaponized, so who lands on the new target list?

You might be angry and cry for justice at that point, but then you're just complaining about standard procedures...

[Doctor Phibes]

I don't like the fact that the US intelligence service spies on it's people. I'm not particularly over-excited about this instance, because I honestly think it's been going on for decades.

I realise some of you guys think Joe Biden is a whole new kind of evil, but I personally think that's a load of bollocks.

[Jolly]

Don't get hung up on the politics.

[George K]

@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:

I don't like the fact that the US intelligence service spies on it's people.

Right. So you agree that Carlson was spied upon...or at least "harvested" by spying, is that what you're saying?

I don't think the US is very different in that regard than other countries. Perhaps the difference is that we supposedly have laws that limit the type of surveillance that can be carried out on its citizens. FISA courts should have strict guidelines for this stuff.

Again, the question is who broke the law, if it was broken, indeed? If it wasn't broken, who permitted the work-around by unmasking him?

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Spying?:

Right. So you agree that Carlson was spied upon...or at least "harvested" by spying, is that what you're saying?

I honestly don't know. It looks as though they were spying on Russians, and he started to talking to them, so they spied on him.

It seems to me that what is being done now pales into insignificance when compared to the behaviour of J. Edgar Hoover and his ilk, back in the golden age before modern liberalism raised its ugly head and ruined America.

[Aqua Letifer]

@jolly said in Spying?:

Listen, you partisan, dim-witted bastard...and that's being kind, because you deserve worse, since you are much smarter than you are portraying yourself...This is an on-going problem. Whether it's happening to Trump, Tucker, whoever. You should have enough sense to know, that the pendulum will swing and then an already weaponized NSA will be used against people and things you value.

It's wrong. It needs to stop. Now. People need to go to jail.

If you don't cut the crap tap off right now, it can and will, get worse.

When Snowden broke the news about this happening to other people you completely ignored it. Because he was a traitor. But now that it's (still allegedly) happening to Tucker Carlson all of a sudden the story is "whether it's happening to whoever."

[Jolly]

@aqua-letifer said in Spying?:

@jolly said in Spying?:

Listen, you partisan, dim-witted bastard...and that's being kind, because you deserve worse, since you are much smarter than you are portraying yourself...This is an on-going problem. Whether it's happening to Trump, Tucker, whoever. You should have enough sense to know, that the pendulum will swing and then an already weaponized NSA will be used against people and things you value.

It's wrong. It needs to stop. Now. People need to go to jail.

If you don't cut the crap tap off right now, it can and will, get worse.

When Snowden broke the news about this happening to other people you completely ignored it. Because he was a traitor. But now that it's (still allegedly) happening to Tucker Carlson all of a sudden the story is "whether it's happening to whoever."

Yeah, and did you believe everything about wikileaks when it first hit? I certainly didn't. And what the hell does that have to do with this case?

We're not talking a one-off or sudden disclosure of classified information. We're talking about something that has been proven to happen multiple times. We're talking about a series of events. We're talking normalization of criminal behavior by your government.

[George K]

@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:

It looks as though they were spying on Russians, and he started to talking to them, so they spied on him.

Not quite. He was trying to arrange an interview with Putin - Chris Wallace got a Pulitzer (I believe) for that. This kind of communication is common by people in the press. NSA will monitor conversations of foreign nationals, but if they include a US citizen, he is to be not identified, unless a specific request is made to "unmask" him. There is should be a high bar for that kind of request.

Note, the NSA's 'non-denial' specifically said that Carlson was "not a target." They didn't say that they didn't have and read his emails.

And that comes back to my point, who in NSA or elsewhere thought that bar had been reached, and why?

[Aqua Letifer]

@jolly said in Spying?:

We're not talking a one-off or sudden disclosure of classified information. We're talking about something that has been proven to happen multiple times. We're talking about a series of events. We're talking normalization of criminal behavior by your government.

I've literally heard this all before, man. All of it. Tucker's complaints amount to about a sliver of what the Snowden documents revealed in terms of what the government already considers commonplace practice.

Respectfully, I think the story is "this affects all of us, I'm beyond the politics" because it's Tucker Carlson. If it were Ta-Nehisi Coates I really don't believe your perspective would be the same.

[Jolly]

@george-k said in Spying?:

@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:

It looks as though they were spying on Russians, and he started to talking to them, so they spied on him.

Not quite. He was trying to arrange an interview with Putin - Chris Wallace got a Pulitzer (I believe) for that. This kind of communication is common by people in the press. NSA will monitor conversations of foreign nationals, but if they include a US citizen, he is to be not identified, unless a specific request is made to "unmask" him. There is should be a high bar for that kind of request.

Note, the NSA's 'non-denial' specifically said that Carlson was "not a target." They didn't say that they didn't have and read his emails.

And that comes back to my point, who in NSA or elsewhere thought that bar had been reached, and why?

It boils down to a couple of things:

1. There is an employee or employees within NSA who are leaking for political purposes. They need to be vigorously rooted out, and prosecuted. Or...
2. A ranking official authorized the unmasking and abetted the leaking. This is worse on a logarithmic scale. This becomes institutional political warfare, that must be stopped.

[Jolly]

@aqua-letifer said in Spying?:

@jolly said in Spying?:

We're not talking a one-off or sudden disclosure of classified information. We're talking about something that has been proven to happen multiple times. We're talking about a series of events. We're talking normalization of criminal behavior by your government.

I've literally heard this all before, man. All of it. Tucker's complaints amount to about a sliver of what the Snowden documents revealed in terms of what the government already considers commonplace practice.

Respectfully, I think the story is "this affects all of us, I'm beyond the politics" because it's Tucker Carlson. If it were Ta-Nehisi Coates I really don't believe your perspective would be the same.

Then I assume you condone such actions?

[Aqua Letifer]

@jolly said in Spying?:

@aqua-letifer said in Spying?:

@jolly said in Spying?:

We're not talking a one-off or sudden disclosure of classified information. We're talking about something that has been proven to happen multiple times. We're talking about a series of events. We're talking normalization of criminal behavior by your government.

I've literally heard this all before, man. All of it. Tucker's complaints amount to about a sliver of what the Snowden documents revealed in terms of what the government already considers commonplace practice.

Respectfully, I think the story is "this affects all of us, I'm beyond the politics" because it's Tucker Carlson. If it were Ta-Nehisi Coates I really don't believe your perspective would be the same.

Then I assume you condone such actions?

If you had read any of my posts when the Snowden documents became public, which you didn't, you'd know I have a serious problem with them.

Had you read them at the time, you'd also be keenly aware of my disbelief that you and other conservatives were not taking any of it seriously, deciding to completely focus instead on how much of a shithead Edward Snowden was.

So I'm sorry, it's hard for me not to roll my eyes over the Carlson stuff. None of this shit is new. If it's new to you then you haven't been paying nearly enough attention.

[Aqua Letifer]

What's especially insane to me is that this, too, always becomes a partisan issue. Whoever complains about it gets support from their side until the next Bad Thing happens, and the opposite side ignores it until it's their mouthpiece's turn. No one actually gives a shit that the very concept of privacy died about a decade ago.

[Jolly]

@aqua-letifer said in Spying?:

@jolly said in Spying?:

@aqua-letifer said in Spying?:

@jolly said in Spying?:

We're not talking a one-off or sudden disclosure of classified information. We're talking about something that has been proven to happen multiple times. We're talking about a series of events. We're talking normalization of criminal behavior by your government.

I've literally heard this all before, man. All of it. Tucker's complaints amount to about a sliver of what the Snowden documents revealed in terms of what the government already considers commonplace practice.

Respectfully, I think the story is "this affects all of us, I'm beyond the politics" because it's Tucker Carlson. If it were Ta-Nehisi Coates I really don't believe your perspective would be the same.

Then I assume you condone such actions?

If you had read any of my posts when the Snowden documents became public, which you didn't, you'd know I have a serious problem with them.

Had you read them at the time, you'd also be keenly aware of my disbelief that you and other conservatives were not taking any of it seriously, deciding to completely focus instead on how much of a shithead Edward Snowden was.

So I'm sorry, it's hard for me not to roll my eyes over the Carlson stuff. None of this shit is new. If it's new to you then you haven't been paying nearly enough attention.

Again, you're just miffed because no one paid attention to your lone howl in the wilderness. Well, as of right now, that and a dollar bill will buy a small cup of at MickeyD's.

In the here and now, what is your position?