This is the problem with having massive government agencies that collect everything. Once they've got it, they can't keep it safe, and privacy is inevitably violated.
This is why the 4th Amendment should be read to mandate that they do not get access to it, at all, until they specifically go to a court and get specific permission for a specific person based on specific probable cause of a crime.
If he's right, it's not the first time Halper engaged in a little election meddling on both sides. And there are some very large payments from government accounts to him. It looks very much like the intelligence community is for hire and willingly takes money to help decide elections. That's a bigger scandal than even I expected.
Yes, elections. He apparently has close ties to the Bush family, which has surprisingly amiable relations with the Clintons. There are indications he meddled in the Reagan-Carter race, in the other direction, perhaps explained by his connection to the Bushes (George Bush Sr was Reagan's VP candidate). And if he'll do it twice, why wouldn't he or others do it much more often than that?
The claims from the intelligence community that revealing his name would jeopardize his life seems absurd and self-serving. Unless, you know, they think someone would object to him fixing elections for the intelligence community rather violently.
They ruled out terrorism as a motive already? Smells like bullshit to me. Not to mention media censorship; have there been any reports in major US media about this attack? No?
Oh, and remind me again how this doesn't happen in the Europe?
And note how these are "automatic" rifles, not semiautomatic. That's the full military scary version that the gun control crowd likes to imply are heavily used in the United States. They aren't, but terrorists can get them even in gun control friendly Europe.
There are millions of peaceful, law-abiding gun owners in America.
How many of us are you willing to kill to get our guns?
Will you stop at murdering ten times the number of people who die in school shootings?
Will you stop at one hundred times that number? One thousand times?
If you kill one million gun owners for every student who died in a school shooting this year, you'll still have millions of formerly peaceful, law-abiding gun owners left over who will not be very happy with you. And the blood of their friends, their family, their children, their parents... all of it will be on your hands, Dave, because you said you were going to come and take our guns, right now. You're not going to wait to change the law or allow for due process, so when we respond, it will be self-defense against felony home invasion and theft.
At least, I assume you meant you, personally, right? You'll be on the front lines going door to door, right? Taking the risk yourself?
Oh, and while you're on the front lines to confiscate guns from peaceful, law-abiding Americans, will you be threatening them with a gun?
Oh, you say you won't be doing it personally? You'll send the police? Well, Dave, fuck you anyway.
UPDATE: He added a followup article, in which he claims his original article was "moderate" and that he just wants to "compromise". Sorry, no. We've compromised how many times over the past few decades? And every time you want something more as soon as the next inevitable tragedy rolls around. So, no. No more one-sided compromise. If you want something, at least consider giving us something we want in return. Because taking half of what we have left isn't compromise just because you left of half of what we started with.
Trump is also demanding the FBI and DOJ release the documents requested by Congress.
And it looks like there will be an order to DOJ/FBI to release the documents to Congressional oversight, too. Personally, at this point, I'm curious who was making the decision to try to keep those documents held back, because it seems likely they have a vastly personal stake in hiding what those documents contain.
I'm not sure if I want to go that far. Any serious attempt at regulating the media would invite regulatory capture immediately, and backfire upon the small, indepedent bloggers and commentators. But to be honest... yes, I do think the media attention given to mass murders that happen at school contributes to them happening again and again and again.
Rand Paul wants to know what Haskel knew and when she knew it
I could care less about what Haskel did to terrorists. But what she may have done to Trump's campaign is important. If there is reason to think she was involved, she should be questioned about it, extensively, under oath, after a thorough review of all available documentation. Treat this as an opportunity to get her on the record. And, if she lies... there's always a perjury charge, or contempt of Congress, or impeachment.
Treat it, as well, as an opportunity to extract a pledge from Haskel to provide Congress with everything CIA has on Brennan's abuses of power.
Funny how all these upstanding straight shooters from the left always turn out to have skeletons in their closets when you bother to open them. In this case, a Russian billionaire in 2009 (under Obama, when Mueller was running the FBI) spent about $25 million trying to rescue an FBI agent captured in Iran. The operation ended when then Secretary of State Clinton refusing to make a statement that would allegedly have shifted the blame away from Iran.
Funny how leaving Americans to die is better for Clinton then a little diplomatic lying. Of course, the Russian billionaire involved has since been caught up in legal issues over ties to Paul Manafort, whom Mueller has charged, and the aid he gave to the FBI in that case may have been illegal as well.
Russian company demands dismissal of Mueller's charges
I don't claim to know if any of these companies actually did what Mueller is accusing them of or not. But Mueller should not be allowed to get away with sham indictments designed to smear a president. He should have to prove his charges.
Jack Dunphy, a pseudonym for a police officer who writes articles on police work online, has an article complaining the "untrained" are criticizing police work. He seems to think that being untrained in police work means the criticizes of police work are invalid, and, by implication, that members of the Civilian Oversight Board should be "trained" to police standards before they criticize the results of that police training.
He's got it exactly wrong.
Police should be trained to meet the standards of the Civilian Oversight Board. Those civilians are representing the larger public who employs the police force, and from whom collectively the police derive their authorization to operate.
Don't get me wrong; I believe civilian oversight boards should be fully informed about the training and policies used by the police forces they oversee. But their role in that process is not to be passively trained until they accept both the police training and the results that come from it. Their role is to understand the current training standards and evaluate the results of that training in the real world.
That they are civilians, not trained police officers, is the whole point.
FBI used national security letters against Trump campaign
So, in other words, they were operating in secret and without lawful authority, concealing the full extent of their activities from their politically-appointed supervisor.
Either that, or they are lying now in an attempt to protect Comey.
I'm betting on what's behind door number two.
Comey is a weasel, proven by the way he repeatedly, consistently denies being a weasel.
Since their inception, National Security Letters have been criticized as incompatible with free speech and a democratic society. They threaten privacy, abuse due process, prevent public discussion and criticism of their use, and make handy tools for spying on the political opposition. If the FBI can't play nicely with their toys, we should take the toys away.
Any time you have an entity with an effectively unlimited amount of money and a legal mandate to give it away, you will find people who want to take that money by fraud for their own purposes. When the person on the other side of the transaction isn't spending their own money and is in fact required to give it to you, fraud becomes much easier. And eventually, people learn how to game the system and do so on a large scale.
When you are simultaneously allowing terrorists into the country, you end up supporting the terrorists while they plan and prepare to kill you.