the 2 things are not parallel and should never be treated that way.
ianal but the difference is that lying in court is a criminal offence called ~perjury~... requiring a separate criminal proceeding to resolve. a foul on the ball field is a rules violation that is administratively punished under the same rules during the same "proceeding" (the legal parallel is contempt of court).
the referee (who hands out fouls) in sports is theoretically impartial; the district attorney (who pursues indictments) isn't and has a vested interest in not calling "foul" on the law enforcement "players".
it's like the coach for the home team has taken over the job of referee. we wouldn't accept that in sports why do we accept it in court?
While i'm against doing this to the mentally ill to "let the demons out" I suspect that with the right subjects restrained for the trepanning tool it could be highly entertaining ... infact i'm sure that there are people that would pay to watch!
Brute Force Search Space Analysis: Search Space Depth (Alphabet): 26+26+10+33 = 95 Search Space Length (Characters): 26 characters Exact Search Space Size (Count): (count of all possible passwords with this alphabet size and up to this password's length) 2,663,234,997,260,162, 196,476,097,223,547,872, 948,519,727,017,017,120 Search Space Size (as a power of 10): 2.66 x 1051 Time Required to Exhaustively Search this Password's Space: Online Attack Scenario: (Assuming one thousand guesses per second) 8.47 hundred trillion trillion trillion centuries Offline Fast Attack Scenario: (Assuming one hundred billion guesses per second) 8.47 million trillion trillion centuries Massive Cracking Array Scenario: (Assuming one hundred trillion guesses per second) 8.47 thousand trillion trillion centuries
Funny how when the DOJ circumvents the letter of the law by lying about the facts, the law forced them to do it; But when Aereo complies with the letter of the law, they're accused of deliberately circumventing it and slapped down.
the nsa guy says it's legal ... he is telling the truth. laws were passed, executive orders issued and court precedents set that makes it all "legal".
it's also unconstitutional, but until SCOTUS rules on the laws in place and declares them unconstitutional it remains "legal".
"you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." Obi-Wan Kenobi and from the NSA point of view everything they are doing is perfectly in accordance with the law.
Possibly ... but that assumes they used the same accounts for their subsequent predations. If the predators indeed used the same accounts, then MM clearly facilitated their actions. I seriously doubt this was the case ...
Doesn't a "war" require a declaration of Congress to actually be a war ? And since no war has been declared by Congress, how does the Executive reasonably use the provisions of war to justify unconstitutional activity?
Put simply ... Even if you agree with the prima facie argument that in time of war the Executive has the power to ignore the Constitution; Since Congress never declared war and thus no state of war exists, the provisions of war that grant the Executive the power to ignore the Constitution don't apply and any argument that they do is entirely specious. Simply calling something a "war" doesn't make it one.
Interesting that you think this is incredible Mike ... There is a long and storied tradition of blaming the messenger. I think it's inevitable that the messenger will be blamed by the powers that be and their hired shills.