It would seem DHS is illegally spying on protesters

Alex Jones and his flock, when it comes to science and engineering, couldn't find the other end of a tunnel. Alex Jones, 9/11 was an inside job, pizzgate, the newton ct school shooting was a hoax. He even got his flock to attack the victims parents. (if that were me, i would have paid a personal visit to jones)

Alex Jones is one of the worst of mankind !!!!!

 

We've got agents provocateurs burning down police stations and murdering cops, and their coordinating via cell phones and you think we shouldn't be gathering intelligence and trying to stop it?

 

Doesn't change the fact that you are engaging in Ad Hom Fallacy - - and Soleimani was revered in his country - What is your deal ?

Do you not believe that our intelligence services spy on US citizens from time to time ?

 

Of course they are. This is nothing new. It's what they do because they can. They have the power. Also I love the Angus king is an independent but caucuses with the democrats bit. Very independent indeed.

 

So you think authorities should break the law.

 

I'm not sure gathering intelligence on violent revolutionaries is breaking the law...

 

That is the topic...

Kinda looks like they are.

 

Terrible. The DHS is trying to see what the "peaceful" protesters are going to destroy next.

 

Matter of opinion at this point, and WAPO isn't the court room where that will be litigated.

 

Another brilliant piece of journalism from the WAPO. Why aren't they reporting on the mobs of criminals rampaging across America. These aren't protesters, they are criminals participating in violent crimes, law enforcement is entitled to use any tool at their disposal to combat this garbage. Blow hards like King think that this is an ordinary matter of law enforcement and that you can control the situation by following protocols that don't apply to this situation. If anything the government should be easing up on the tether that is keeping law enforcement from doing their jobs. It's as ridiculous as generals ordering tight rules of engagement while combat troops are being slaughtered. Does King think that mob gives a rats ass about rules? Protecting people who are openly engaged in crimes is not in the Constitution. The treatment of felons after the fact, after they are apprehended is quite different but police are not required to aid and abet them in their criminal activity. Law enforcement can shut down communications in a given area without any sort of special permission and surveillance has always been a part of law enforcement. If the intent is to gather intelligence and nothing else I see no reason why this should be an issue. I guess that King & Co hasn't caught on to the fact that these are not peaceful protesters but un lawful combatants who have willingly waived any presumption of safety and protection.

 

Authorities DO break the law, whenever they want to.

It doesn't matter what we the people think about that. It is just a fact of life.

 

Childlike oversimplification...

 

Magna Carta..

 

It would seem DHS is illegally spying on protesters
You probably mean rioters. It isn't illegal.

 

Brit Law, US is the Bill of Rights but we have laws to deal with riots and a lot of new ones on the way. The fact of the matter is the right to assembly is still subject to what defines an assembly or protest. Nowhere in the first amendment is there language that describes a right to riot, loot, burn or murder. The Antifa punks are all in violation of the law by their presence without a permit and there is a bevy of laws regarding what may be done to those who participate in riots, even finely enumerated for individual acts and subsequent penalties. There ought to be laws about leaders who hobble law enforcement in the name of politics.

 

First thing the courts did was adopt English law.

While a lot has changed, the underlying principles remain.

"The most important demand of the Rule of Law is that people in positions of authority should exercise their power within a constraining framework of well-established public norms rather than in an arbitrary, ad hoc, or purely discretionary manner on the basis of their own preferences or ideology. It insists that the government should operate within a framework of law in everything it does, and that it should be accountable through law when there is a suggestion of unauthorized action by those in power."




https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rule-of-law/

 

Yeah but sent the Brits packing and very little remains of the Charter of the Forest in American Law you'd have to task a clerk to spend a week or two finding it for you. The founding fathers were very familiar with British law but were loath to adopt much from that which they broke away from. Madison and Hamilton had very different ideas of what America was going to be. Madison was inspired by Virginia's Declaration of Rights in penning the Bill of Rights not the Magna Carta. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are 100% American, written by Americans for America at a time when the world was mostly ruled by monarchs. Any allusion to European influences is a real stretch.

 

I was talking about the courts, which did adopt British law. As I said before, the principles remain.

 

State the law you are referring to, statute number please.