DOJ: We Don't Need Warrants For E-Mail, Facebook Chats

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The Department of Justice says it doesn't need no stinking warrants to search your e-mail, Twitter messages or Facebook chats. Umm, didn't the IRS just claim the same thing last month?

The U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI believe they don't need a search warrant to review Americans' e-mails, Facebook chats, Twitter direct messages, and other private files, internal documents reveal. Government documents obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union and provided to CNET show a split over electronic privacy rights within the Obama administration, with Justice Department prosecutors and investigators privately insisting they're not legally required to obtain search warrants for e-mail.
 

mavrocket

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 10, 2008
Messages
1,099
Par for the course.

El Presidente says one thing in public, then his Administration does the opposite behind closed doors.

And the drones still swoon for the two-faced liar.
 

DarkStar_WNY

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
2,362
I haven't seen any split within the Obama administration, the split is because Congress and the administration.

Let's see how many posts it takes before current administration is excused by blaming it on Bush.
 

Darunion

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
4,395
This makes sense. I mean they did just hire a lawyer off twitter...
 

Spidey329

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 15, 2003
Messages
8,683
So are they claiming they can also take anyones postal mail and xray it for contents? That's essentially the same thing, and I'm pretty sure the mail is protected under someones right to privacy.

Unfortunately, this type of thing is going to need a SCOTUS decision to be handled. And even then, law enforcement will still break the law.
 

DeathPrincess

Fully [H]
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
18,205
Par for the course.

El Presidente says one thing in public, then his Administration does the opposite behind closed doors.

And the drones still swoon for the two-faced liar.

I don't know if you've realized this, but that's what politicians do, all of them. Whoever was there, the same stuff would be happening. The President is always just a friendly scapegoat and the two parties are the same people working for who pays them the most in a system that just gives you the illusion of choice. :p
 

JoeUser

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
3,919
I don't quite understand why the government thinks that something you write online is just free game. They can't break into your house illegally and read your journal/diary. I mean, if your Twitter or Facebook is PRIVATE than that means it's PRIVATE. Public shit is fine, since it's public...but private without a warrant should be illegal.

This is just mad dumb...I swear the government is PUSHING for a revolution. It's already past ridiculous.
 

Darunion

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
4,395
another thought. if the government backs the practice of major label companies 'rights' to digital content, why do they feel 'regular' citizens have no rights to digital content?
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
What's the point of going down this path. These kinds of issues are always going to be issues for government. Something bad happens and then the first fingers get pointed at the government and people yell and scream why wasn't more done.
 

DarkStar_WNY

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
2,362
I don't quite understand why the government thinks that something you write online is just free game. They can't break into your house illegally and read your journal/diary. I mean, if your Twitter or Facebook is PRIVATE than that means it's PRIVATE. Public shit is fine, since it's public...but private without a warrant should be illegal.

This is just mad dumb...I swear the government is PUSHING for a revolution. It's already past ridiculous.

No, they are actually looking to avoid one, I mean consider once they disarm the population and monitor all forms of communication they can pretty much do whatever the hell they want.
 

yankee495

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2011
Messages
149
Revolutions, those always work out so well and exactly according to plan.

Yes they Do, America was born out of revolution! You should buy firearms and ammo instead of "war games". Not to attack the government but to protect yourself from those who would take your food when the SHTF!!!
 

mavrocket

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 10, 2008
Messages
1,099
I don't know if you've realized this, but that's what politicians do, all of them. Whoever was there, the same stuff would be happening. The President is always just a friendly scapegoat and the two parties are the same people working for who pays them the most in a system that just gives you the illusion of choice. :p

Of course I realize it. If it were the other party in office, the statement would remain the same.

Honest politicians are as rare as honest lawyers, and unfortunately, the DOJ is full of both politicians and lawyers.
 

kbrickley

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
7,514
Badges ... We don't need no Stinking Badges :cool:

stinking+badges.jpg
 

FiveFig

Gawd
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
517
Revolutions, those always work out so well and exactly according to plan.

seemed to work out pretty well a couple hundred years ago

if you don't want rights or liberties there are plenty of shithole countries you can go move to

read a book
 

kbrickley

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
7,514
seemed to work out pretty well a couple hundred years ago

if you don't want rights or liberties there are plenty of shithole countries you can go move to

read a book

Depends on which revolution you want to use as a baseline though ... the French Revolution was all about rights and sent tons of people to the Guillotine ... our own constitution failed to resolve a question of states rights related to slavery that required a civil war and the death of millions to resolve ... so revolutions should always be the last resort ... that said rights are important also :cool:
 

spintroniX

Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
974
seemed to work out pretty well a couple hundred years ago

if you don't want rights or liberties there are plenty of shithole countries you can go move to

read a book

your post is pathetic and full of fail.

1) the revolution was only good if you were a white land owning male. If you happened to be black, or a woman... well... you were shit out of luck.

2) telling people to move elsewhere when they recognize social injustice is just playing into the hands of your slave masters

Learn to think for yourself.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
protip: don't let your system get so screwed up it comes in second to chaos and bloodshed.

I think you'll find that the overwhelming majority of people from all walks of life would much prefer the current system over untold death and destruction that would more than likely end up in worse system for most anyway. Just a guess.
 

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
15,189
So if email isn't "private communications" and not subjected to warrants how come people get in trouble for being "whistle blowers" and release emails between people to the public?
 

pxc

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 22, 2000
Messages
33,064
So if email isn't "private communications" and not subjected to warrants how come people get in trouble for being "whistle blowers" and release emails between people to the public?
Because they're not exempted from the "abandoned" communications provision of the SCA which The Law can use to acquire those messages without a warrant.
 

sliverjazz

Gawd
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
747
See how sneaky they are? They group a bunch of things together so when they grace us with a change of mind on one of the items it makes it seem as if we are gaining something rather than losing something.
 

NeghVar

2[H]4U
Joined
May 1, 2003
Messages
2,607
I say they should be removed from office and arrested on charges of perjury. After all, both federal judges and members of congress take an oath of office as follows

"I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter."

When something is blatantly unconstitutional yet is upheld, they have broken the oath and since the oath was sworn before a federal judge, that should count as perjury.
 

MrGoodbar

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 11, 2008
Messages
469
Who needs warrants when people publicly post criminal acts and coversations on their wall?

Wasn't there a post about CIA thanking Facebook as a godsend to track criminals? Just remove all the safety labels and the problems will take care of themselves.... oh wait, I almost forgot how sue-happy everyone is. Another punch to accountability in the nuts.
 

Skripka

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
10,792
I say they should be removed from office and arrested on charges of perjury. After all, both federal judges and members of congress take an oath of office as follows

"I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter."

When something is blatantly unconstitutional yet is upheld, they have broken the oath and since the oath was sworn before a federal judge, that should count as perjury.

Tell me where in the US Constitution, the Amendments, or the Declaration of Independence it states that the 50 need a warrant to search your emails. Also tell me where in those founding documents there is any "right to privacy".

Good luck. Because they aren't there.*

*Not saying the DoJ is wildly wrongheaded in their thinking on this one
 

-Axiom-

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 28, 2006
Messages
2,213
Depends on which revolution you want to use as a baseline though ... the French Revolution was all about rights and sent tons of people to the Guillotine ... our own constitution failed to resolve a question of states rights related to slavery that required a civil war and the death of millions to resolve ... so revolutions should always be the last resort ... that said rights are important also :cool:

Approx 625,000 civil war deaths on both sides.
Don't let facts get in the way of rhetoric.
 

-Axiom-

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 28, 2006
Messages
2,213
I say they should be removed from office and arrested on charges of perjury. After all, both federal judges and members of congress take an oath of office as follows

"I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter."

When something is blatantly unconstitutional yet is upheld, they have broken the oath and since the oath was sworn before a federal judge, that should count as perjury.

In the 2011 NDAA they voted in favor of taking away our right to habeas corpus, it was almost unanimous.
Congress is the greatest threat this country faces.
Nobody gave a crap then and they don't now.
 

NeghVar

2[H]4U
Joined
May 1, 2003
Messages
2,607
Tell me where in the US Constitution, the Amendments, or the Declaration of Independence it states that the 50 need a warrant to search your emails. Also tell me where in those founding documents there is any "right to privacy".

Good luck. Because they aren't there.*

*Not saying the DoJ is wildly wrongheaded in their thinking on this one


The reason why email is not mentioned is because laws have not kept up with technology. Yet a warrant is required in order to intercept and open your mail going through the USPS. A warrant is required to wiretap a telephone line, but VOIP technology accomplished the same task as telephones except that it uses a data line instead of a standard analog telephone line. Present the laws are being take extremely literally. Saying that that law applies to phone lines not data lines when it actually should since it is the same task but over a different medium. The same thing is going on with standard mail vs. email
 

temujin987

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
1,351
I think you'll find that the overwhelming majority of people from all walks of life would much prefer the current system over untold death and destruction that would more than likely end up in worse system for most anyway. Just a guess.

I think our forefather's corpses just puked in disgust. I guess they fought for nothing. let's just let it all go to hell because... it's easier.
 

mavrocket

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 10, 2008
Messages
1,099
In the 2011 NDAA they voted in favor of taking away our right to habeas corpus, it was almost unanimous.
Congress is the greatest threat this country faces.
Nobody gave a crap then and they don't now.

Government is the greatest threat this country faces, not just Congress.

All three branches are culpible for the losses to liberty we have suffered.
 

kbrickley

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
7,514
Approx 625,000 civil war deaths on both sides.
Don't let facts get in the way of rhetoric.

Well one could argue that alot of black slaves died prior to the resolution of this question ... even at hundreds of thousands it is still an impressive number (and the fact that until the Viet Nam war we had more dead from the Civil War than every other war combined) ... but point taken

Rhetoric aside, the American Civil War was a direct result of the failure of our founding fathers to resolve a key question left hanging after our revolution (the question of slavery), including the US Constitution quantifying a black as 3/5ths of a person for the census :cool:
 

NeghVar

2[H]4U
Joined
May 1, 2003
Messages
2,607
Tell me where in the US Constitution, the Amendments, or the Declaration of Independence it states that the 50 need a warrant to search your emails. Also tell me where in those founding documents there is any "right to privacy".

Good luck. Because they aren't there.*

*Not saying the DoJ is wildly wrongheaded in their thinking on this one

BTW, I did not say this as fact. By saying “I say” and “should be” acknowledges that I know that’s not the way it work but in my opinion, it should
 

Phoenix333

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
3,510
1) the revolution was only good if you were a white land owning male. If you happened to be black, or a woman... well... you were shit out of luck.
A lot has changed since then, but without the revolution, the end of slavery and the civil rights movement would not have taken place. History moves in steps, and not all the right steps are made all at once. Of course, if you dislike the revolution so much try to imagine the world today as it might be had the USA never come into existence. It's easy to armchair history and point fingers at the imperfections of the time. I'm certain that 200 years from now people will look back on this period of time and find fault with decisions that were made. What's your excuse for not fixing the problems of the world all at once, hmm? If you're going to blame the injustices of the day on the people of the day, are you not just as guilty as they are since you're griping about it on a message board instead of leading revolutions against what you think are wrong?

telling people to move elsewhere when they recognize social injustice is just playing into the hands of your slave masters
So people should stay in the ghetto despite their living conditions? I suppose the Jews should have stayed in Auschwitz too, or the people that died trying to cross the Berlin wall should have just committed suicide by protesting to their Soviet oppressors instead. Sometimes escape is the only option, but then, unless you've seen real injustice and not the very minor perceived injustices in the Western world, you're pretty much clueless as to how difficult it can be for oppressed people to effect change. But then, have you ever tried?

Learn to think for yourself.
Usually the people that claim others do not think are guilty of not questioning what they've been told. Perhaps you should heed your own advice before handing it out to others. If you're going to be judgmental, I recommend starting with yourself first, that is, if you have the courage for true introspection. I find far too few do.
 

U-238

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
255
Tell me where in the US Constitution, the Amendments, or the Declaration of Independence it states that the 50 need a warrant to search your emails. Also tell me where in those founding documents there is any "right to privacy".

Good luck. Because they aren't there.*

*Not saying the DoJ is wildly wrongheaded in their thinking on this one

4th and to an extent, 5th amendment as defined by SCOTUS using the 9th amendment as a basis for their decision.

As pertaining to this case anyway.
 

Skripka

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
10,792
4th and to an extent, 5th amendment as defined by SCOTUS using the 9th amendment as a basis for their decision.

As pertaining to this case anyway.

Email does not reside in one person's home or on their person, or even necessarily is the server the emails they're on in the same state....usually email accounts are contingent on an EULA that basically says SOL if the gov't wants to look anyway. Email being a bunch of 1s and 0s really isn't something you need compensated for so I'm not sure what the 5th has to do with this.

9th is the only one...and even then....given the interstate commercial nature of all online services, that is pushing it.


Even then...as far as the OP goes anything you post on Twitter or FacePlant of [H]ardforum is fair game. Doesn't matter if you set it to "private" or not. Presume it is going to be seen be any and everyone.
 
Top