US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

what we have here is a hicklib. if someone found proof of them killing trannies in the jim crow south, this guy would be HHH's Sidekick overnight.

I was comparing the monsters to Mexican drug cartels, shit for brains.

 

[UncleAdolf]

Correct, if anything we (which is to say, ranchers in the developed world) should be teaching our tricks to Africa..

That hasn't worked at all for the better part of the last century. The shine menace will not abate.

 

[Darkholme's Dungeon]

EDIT: Circuit split stuff added.

The US 5th circuit court of appeals, which is relatively hostile to electronic privacy has reversed a court ruling that geofence warrants are illegal in an en banc decision. The decision is 3-0 with a concurrence.

The 4th circuit court of appeals has ruled the opposite.

A geofence warrant is where the government requests the information of all devices within a certain location zone (Think if you draw an enclosed shape in google maps) and time frame.

4th circuit Case: US. v Okello T. Chatrie No. 22-4489
​

Judges and appointing president:
J. Harvie Wilkinson III, Regan
Wynn, James Andrew, Jr., Obama
Richardson, Julius Ness, Trump

Applying this theory here leads to a straightforward conclusion. As the dissent correctly observes, Location History has capabilities much like GPS data and CSLI. But unlike in Carpenter or Jones, the government in this case obtained only two hours’ worth of Chatrie’s Location History data. Although this brief glimpse into his whereabouts may have revealed the locations he visited, it was plainly insufficient to offer insight into his habits, routines, and associations. So the government did not invade his “legitimate ‘expectation of privacy’” by obtaining it.24 Carpenter, 585 U.S. at 314 (quoting Miller, 425 U.S. at 442).

Unable to refute this point, the dissent tries a different tack. The dissent argues that Beautiful Struggle and Knotts are distinguishable because they involved observation of “strictly . . . public movements.” Diss. Op. at 94. According to the dissent, the duration of the government surveillance is only relevant in cases involving a person’s public movements. But this case, unlike Beautiful Struggle and Knotts, involves technology with the capacity to surveil a person’s private movements, too. So the dissent would apply a different set of principles here and treat the duration of the intrusion as basically irrelevant. The dissent is correct that the government conducts a search when it uses senseenhancing technology to learn information from inside a private space that it could not have learned without physically intruding on that space. See Kyllo, 533 U.S. at 34; Karo, 468 U.S. at 713–18. But the dissent fails to mention that those cases involved challenges brought by people who had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the place searched. Kyllo, 533 U.S. at 29–31; Karo, 468 U.S. at 714 (“This case thus presents the question whether the monitoring of a beeper in a private residence, a location not open to visual surveillance, violates the Fourth Amendment rights of those who have a justifiable interest in the privacy of the residence. . . . [W]e think that it does.” (emphasis added)). By contrast, the Supreme Court has long held that someone who does not have a Fourth Amendment interest in the place or thing searched lacks standing to challenge that search. Rawlings, 448 U.S. at 104–06; see Karo, 468 U.S. at 716 n.4, 719 (distinguishing Rawlings because several defendants had a privacy interest in the place searched, unlike in Rawlings). So to challenge the government’s use of technology to invade a protected space, a defendant must prove that the government violated his reasonable expectation of privacy in that space. The mere fact that the government observed him behind closed doors is insufficient to confer Fourth Amendment standing.

5th circuit Case: US v. Jamarr Smith et al. No. 23-60321
​

The judges and appointing president:
James C. Ho, Trump (This guy is the one who said in a speech new yale law grads can fuck off for being too retarded)
Kurt D. Engelhardt, Trump
Carolyn D. King, Carter (Former chief judge, now senior status)

A jury found Appellants guilty of robbery and conspiracy to commit robbery based on evidence obtained through a geofence warrant. On appeal, Appellants challenge the constitutionality of this novel type of warrant under the Fourth Amendment and maintain that the district court erred by failing to suppress all evidence derived therefrom. We hold that the use of geofence warrants—at least as described herein—is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment. In doing so, we part ways with our esteemed colleagues on the Fourth Circuit.

Having concluded that the acquisition of Location History data via a geofence is a search, it follows that the government must generally obtain a warrant supported by probable cause and particularity before requesting such information. Carpenter, 585 U.S. at 316. Accordingly, we turn to the issue of whether geofence warrants satisfy this mandate, addressing Appellants’ argument that these novel warrants resemble unconstitutional general warrants prohibited by the Fourth Amendment.
[...]
It is undeniable that general warrants are plainly unconstitutional. Indeed, “it would be a needless exercise in pedantry to review again the detailed history of the use of general warrants as instruments of oppression from the time of the Tudors, through the Star Chamber, the Long Parliament, the Restoration, and beyond.” Stanford v. Texas, 379 U.S. 476, 482 (1965). Thus, courts have recognized that no warrant “can authorize the search of everything or everyone in sight.”
[...]
When law enforcement submits a geofence warrant to Google, Step 1 forces the company to search through its entire database to provide a new dataset that is derived from its entire Sensorvault. In other words, law enforcement cannot obtain its requested location data unless Google searches through the entirety of its Sensorvault—all 592 million individual accounts— for all of their locations at a given point in time. Moreover, this search is occurring while law enforcement officials have no idea who they are looking for, or whether the search will even turn up a result. Indeed, the quintessential problem with these warrants is that they never include a specific user to be identified, only a temporal and geographic location where any given user may turn up post-search.11 That is constitutionally insufficient. Geofence warrants present the exact sort of “general, exploratory rummaging” that the Fourth Amendment was designed to prevent. Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 467 (1971); see also Riley, 573 U.S. at 403; Geofence Warrants and the Fourth Amendment, supra at 2519. In fact, Google Maps creator Brian McClendon has called these warrants “fishing expedition,” and explained that Google employees originally assumed law enforcement would only seek Location History data on specific people—a reality that did not come true.
[...]
“Awareness that the government may be watching chills associational and expressive freedoms.” Jones, 565 U.S. at 416 (Sotomayor, J., concurring.). And, when these core rights are at issue, the warrant requirement must “be accorded the most scrupulous exactitude.” See Stanford, 379 U.S. at 485. Here, the Government contends that geofence warrants are not general warrants because they are “limited to specified information directly tied to a particular [crime] at a particular place and time.” This argument misses the mark. While the results of a geofence warrant may be narrowly tailored, the search itself is not. A general warrant cannot be saved simply by arguing that, after the search has been performed, the information received was narrowly tailored to the crime being investigated. These geofence warrants fail at Step 1—they allow law enforcement to rummage through troves of location data from hundreds of millions of Google users without any description of the particular suspect or suspects to be found.
[...]
In sum, geofence warrants are “[e]mblematic of general warrants” and are “highly suspect per se.” Geofence Warrants and the Fourth Amendment, supra at 2520; Amster & Diehl, Against Geofences, supra at 433– 34; Chad Marlow & Jennifer Stisa Granick, Celebrating an Important Victory in the Ongoing Fight Against Reverse Warrants, ACLU (Jan. 29, 2024), https://perma.cc/SC2R-S7PJ (“The constitutionality of reverse warrants is highly suspect because, like general warrants that are prohibited by the Fourth Amendment, they permit searches of vast quantities of private, personal information without identifying any particular criminal suspects or demonstrating probable cause to believe evidence will be located in the corporate databases they search.”); Chatrie (App.), 107 F.4th at 353 (Wynn, J., dissenting) (“[A] [geofence] warrant is uncomfortably akin to the sort of ‘reviled’ general warrants used by English authorities that the Framers intended the Fourth Amendment to forbid.”). This court “cannot forgive the requirements of the Fourth Amendment in the name of law enforcement.” Berger v. New York, 388 U.S. 41, 62 (1967). Accordingly, we hold that geofence warrants are general warrants categorically prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. We now move on to suppression and the good-faith exception to the warrant requirement

 

[CaddestSlown]

Aside from a lil bit of rambling what was unhinged or hateful about it? This is the question I never get answered when talking to liberals.

Because they say it is. And don't need evidence or proof.

Imagine being a Kamala / Walz staffer.

You're retarded.

Your bosses hate you, and are unhinged drunks / crackheads.

You're forced to release a response to a really harmless conversation between an autist and old man, and that response comes off as absolutely pathetic.

AND you have the gall to ask for 25 dollars after 'record breaking campaign funding.'

You can't make this shit up!

 

[Jade Philosophies]

Thread is moving fast so sorry if this was already posted, didn't see it.

Here's Kamala campaign press release on the interview

View attachment 6301841

Why are they so butthurt about some irrelevant social network that Elon Musk has run into the ground? It's not like Trump is being interviewed on Threads or Bluesky. They have a point though. It should be illegal to interview, or even listen to an interview of, a rival political candidate if their views differ too much from the current Democrats.

 

[The Last Stand]

Aside from a lil bit of rambling what was unhinged or hateful about it? This is the question I never get answered when talking to liberals.

Trump calling Kamela an idiot, talking bad about migrants, that sort of stuff.

 

[rebel]

Some people are anxious when talking on the phone. I can't explain it.

I'm only anxious on the phone when someone is watching me.

What's with you and video games?

I think modern games are lame and make people lazy. I really ham this point home for the sake of shock value.

 

[draggs]

Trump calling Kamela an idiot, talking bad about migrants, that sort of stuff.

None of that is hateful or unhinged lol

 

[Seventh Star]

If I meet an actress, I hope I don't act like that. Oh, who am I kidding? I'll embarrass myself.

I can imagine you saying this in Cleopatra's tomb.

 

[rebel]

Thread is moving fast so sorry if this was already posted, didn't see it.

Here's Kamala campaign press release on the interview

View attachment 6301841

The deadnaming is out of control. Also, give us money.

 

[The Last Stand]

I'm only anxious on the phone when someone is watching me.

I had a dream where I was with Ingrid Bergman having a nice lunch outside. Think of this scene from Notorious:

Imagine being in a public space talking about something you know next to nothing about, while somebody listens and is aware of your inexperience yet you keep going. I think it was about politics.

 

[Amelia Troonheart]

That hasn't worked at all for the better part of the last century. The shine menace will not abate.

Fair point. I was more saying that rather than our cattle herds being a great evil, we're doing extremely well compared to developing nations who are inefficient and lacking in comparison.

 

[Sithis]

Two autists BUILDING together. It brings me to tears.

This might end up being even better than the timeline we were robbed of with the 2020 steal - if Trump and Elon actually repair and improve their relationship, I could see it working out well for everyone. Elon gets us to Mars and Trump guts the bureaucracy class to fund it.

 

[UncleAdolf]

lmao. I love the internet

 

[The Last Stand]

Thread is moving fast so sorry if this was already posted, didn't see it.

Here's Kamala campaign press release on the interview

View attachment 6301841

How many donors does the DNC have? They need to leave that "super-rich" shit alone.

 

[kickingstones]

imagine transparency and accessibility having a president thats willing to have freeform conversations on the fly like this. But this is the guy who's the threat to democracy.

 

[CarlKingofDucks]

Trump calling Kamela an idiot, talking bad about migrants, that sort of stuff.

I mean they dont even go that far. At least then we could discuss them using words improperly lol

 

[Get the rope Macaulay!]

What the fuck is wrong with his voice?

autism! and south african, but most AUTISM!

I SAID WAY

we sure Trump didn't get his brain swapped with a Gen Xer? he's talking like he went to high school in the 90s

but now I'm leaning closer to 7-8

and he has like 10 kids, multiple women (especially Amber Heard!) find him attractive enough to tolerate him fucking and cumming inside of them repeatedly

he Democrats have notoriously been anti-American space exploration since the 90's.

it was always a GOP-based thing, the only reason JFK and LBJ were supporting it was because it was literally a jobs program for Texas, after that it was just seen as some GOP evil jobs thingy, the same way democrats feel about oil.

Wtf elong

autistics aren't known for having a normal sense of what beauty is, we're just lucking he's into attractive blonde women instead of humping baloons.

yeah but you haven't been feeling well lately",

trump's got jokes.

 

[Sekirodiealot]

they got some nerve talking about desperation

 

[ForTheHoard]

Why do the press releases from the Harris/Walz campaign look like this? It seems like having a giant donate button in the middle of your message looks tacky and classless.
PLEASE CLAP DONATE CLICK HERE NOW FOR DEMOCRACY
Why don't Trump's press releases have this? How does anyone know how to give him money without being reminded about it every 5 seconds?