The REAL bombshell to come will be the list of people the NSA was targetting.

[reformist2]

"What happened was the ACLU went into court and asked for a ruling on the constitutionality of the law, and what the federal government said is, you have no ability to prove that your clients were actually eavesdropped on, you can't prove they were subjected to surveillance, because everyone that we surveil, we keep that a secret. And therefore your clients have no standing to sue. Part of what the documents include that he (Edward Snowden) turned over is a list of the people that the US government has been targeting and one of the reasons he did that was so those lawsuits finally can proceed so that we can now know who has been subjected to this surveillance so they can go into court and ask for a court ruling on whether or not this is a violation of the constitution to have this massive surveillance system aimed at millions of Americans regardless of whether there's evidence of any wrongdoing."

-Glenn Greenwald

&feature=player_embedded

[Autumn]

1. Alrighty, let it begin.

[reformist2]

2. I actually can't wait to see this list!

[Autumn]

4. This is going to be delightfully delicious

been waiting a looooong time for this.

[one_voice]

19. ?

You've been waiting a long time for this list? I thought this was new information....like last couple of days new.

[Autumn]

20. I've been waiting a long time for bush's acts to come to light.

It's no longer being ignored and swept under the rug.

[one_voice]

22. ooohhhhh....

gotcha! Maybe they'll sweep him under the rug instead.

[wandy]

6. I want to see Snowden's job discription and resume......

That list would not be low hanging fruit.

[hlthe2b]

15. Good... Let's get the truth out once and for all and may the ACLU move forward...

I think I need to make a donation...

[Autumn]

16. You are right. I'm going to send them one too

Thanks for the reminder that they can always use our donations.

[Fumesucker]

3. I have in my hand a piece of paper

[Duer 157099]

5. But the other night Glenn said that he wouldn't publish the names

He said that by publishing the list, it could damage the people on the list. I think what they will do is to privately inform the people on the list that they are on the list.

If the people on the list decide to reveal that, it will be their doing. Likely in the context of a lawsuit.

[reformist2]

7. That seems responsible. Not as fun, but more respectful of their rights.

I think we all have an individual right to know if we as individuals have been targeted by the NSA, but I guess we don't collectively have the right to know everyone the NSA has been targeting.

[Autumn]

10. But we can guess perhaps by the lawsuits.

Or maybe they will come forward. I know I would. I would scream it from one end of the country to the other.

[emulatorloo]

27. Yes thats what he said, and I agree that is the responsible thing to do.

[Historic NY]

17. So its okay for him to keep secrets......

how does he get to pick and choose. He should Produce the list or shut up.

[Life Long Dem]

29. Screw their privacy...

This is about MY privacy! Get the media on their asses NOW!

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

8. Actually it will be when some of these people work with the ACLU to SUE the Gov. n/t

[randome]

9. So once more Glenn Greenwald is going to decide what's best for everyone.

He still comes across as a wannabe superhero to me.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[DisgustipatedinCA]

11. I don't believe Greenwald has a hero obsession.

You seem to think a lot about it, but he's reporting a very important story. That's his angle.

[rhett o rick]

12. This has nothing to do with Mr. Greenwald. Your attempts to distract from

this very important issue by trying to discredit Mr. Greenwald is pathetic.

Why are you so afraid for us to look into the allegations? Snowden isnt the only person that have spoken out about this spying.

If there is proof that the NSA has targeted specific persons, then the NSA has been lying to us when they said they werent collecting data on American citizens. Sadly it seems you dont want to know the truth, you seem to want to "just make them stop mommy".

There was a day when Democrats were open minded and free thinking.

[randome]

13. His main source is in hiding after saying "I'm not going to hide."

That does not read well on my scale of trustworthiness.

And I agree, if there is proof, show it. Let the chips fall where they may.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[DesMoinesDem]

25. He's in hiding because or government will lock him up for the rest of his life

Or worse. How does not wanting to be locked up for life affect his trustworthiness and what does that have to do at all with the leaked documents? It is blatantly obvious that your character attacks are nothing more than distraction attempts. Your posts only expose your character and its not good. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[1StrongBlackMan]

28. Isn't that what Journalists do ...

report the whole story ... rather than, drip it out. There is only one reason I can think of for dripping the the "facts" out a little at a time; to prolong one's time on the stage.

That's a marketing decision, not a journalist decision.

[JackRiddler]

30. Yes, he should present himself for lifetime's imprisonment.

He's not hiding in the sense that he has revealed himself.

That doesn't mean avoiding papparazzi and kidnappers is wrong.

[hughee99]

14. It's all lies and distortions, old news and a matter of national security!

Oh wait, I almost forgot, it's all legal now (those things that aren't true, we all knew about for years and are top secret)! Nothing to see here, please move along.

[treestar]

18. I wonder if every single one of them will turn out to be

a completely innocent person with no ties to anything the least suspicious.

[DeltaLitProf]

21. Given the inaccuracy of Greenwald and the Washington Post's reporting . . .

. . . there likely IS no list.

Read this story before going off half-cocked about how intrusive the monitoring actually is.

http://thedailybanter.com/2013/06/nsa-story-falling-apart-under-scrutiny-key-facts-turning-out-to-be-inaccurate/

[Whisp]

23. probably so.

It was during O'Donnell's interview last night that I caught a sense of a pre-cheshire cat smile from Greenwald when O asked him when more of the information and the lists will be released. (oh, when I can get all I can out of this gig, that's when, Larry).

The guy is milking for time and his 15 minutes to stretch. There are so many willing cows in the herd, he could milk for ages.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

24. You're late to the game -

That one's been posted and debated already.

[emulatorloo]

26. Last night on The Last Word, Greenwald said they will NOT release those names

Said to do so would be unfair to those people. (press mistreatment, might case unwarranted suspicion about them etc)


ON EDIT: OOPS already covered here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2997497