Why hasn't NSA spying busted offshore $ transfers? Voting machine tampering?

[elehhhhna]

etc.?

Or has it?

Glenn, put up or shut up.

[northoftheborder]

1. vedddy good question

[JimDandy]

8. The answer is

Those in the Know are in Control.

[mikeypooh]

2. Why would they bust

the people who pay them the most?

[Fumesucker]

5. I like the cut of your jib

Welcome to DU!

[think]

12. Exactly. Why would the NSA spy on their own?

Unless of course they don't trust them with their share of the cut...

Booz Allen does very well for the Carlyle Group:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2013/06/10/the-carlyle-group-has-made-2-billion-off-of-booz-allen/

[bemildred]

3. Remember the airline stocks getting dumped right before 9/11? nt

[Jackpine Radical]

6. Yes, I remember that.

I also seem to recall that somebody chickened out & failed to collect on a bunch of short-sells.

[think]

14. I always wondered how they'd collect on those

didn't know they failed to show....

[bemildred]

15. Chickened out. nt

[elehhhhna]

16. yeah so they were never id'd lol

riiiiiiiight.

[Progressive dog]

20. No because it didn't happen

here [link:http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.asp|

[bemildred]

21. Ah, a successful coverup too. nt

[Progressive dog]

22. Of course it was a cover up,

it's difficult to maintain conspiracy theories without lots of successful coverups. Conspiracy theories fall apart pretty quickly without evidence, so the theorists have to pretend that there is lots of evidence, the conspirators have just covered it up.

[bemildred]

23. And conspiracies fall apart without coverups. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. They're too busy protecting us from ourselves by spying on us.

[silvershadow]

28. +1

[djean111]

7. Because our government already knows about or doesn't care about those things?

It is not like those things would be prosecuted, so why bother having evidence about them. The evidence that the NSA knows and does nothing would be sort of embarrassing, methinks. Well, inconvenient, I don't think the government gives a crap about what we think, really, unless it affects fund-raising, and with corporations able to openly buy politicians, even that is not a compelling thing.

[FirstLight]

9. GOOD ONE!!!!!

I think we have a winner

There are LOTS of questions like that we get to ask now that the cards are on the table. WHY is MY email privvy to the Govt, but they don't investigate themselves? ...well they DO, that has been leaked too...so WHY hasn't the NSA used this info to prosecute the Bankers, et al...?

[sibelian]

10. I don't think they care. I suspect they genuinely think it isn't their job. nt.

[magellan]

11. You don't bite the hand that feeds you! n/t

[HooptieWagon]

13. Why didn't NSA catch Boston bombers....

who posted on FB, communicated on cell phones, and who the US was pre-warned of by the Russians?

The answer to that ?, and the ones in the OP is quite simple. The surveillence system wasn't designed to catch terrorists, election thieves, or Wall St criminals. It is designed to spy on potential domestic threats....not dangerous ones like KKK, etc. but ones percieved to be politically embarrassing like Occupy, anti- Monsanto activists, Keystone XL protestors. IOW, the threats to the Corporate State.

[byeya]

18. + + +

[randome]

27. I think it's more likely that the NSA is not rifling through metadata...

...looking for suspicious people. I think it's more likely that the metadata mostly serves as a way to find contacts after an event like the Boston Bombing.

And if the NSA is spying on all those groups you mention, why haven't they been able to shut them down?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[HooptieWagon]

29. So you admit NSA can't prevent a terrorist attack?

That pretty much is its reason for existance. If it can do what its claimed to do, then there is no longer a need for it.

As to your second statement....has Occupy been in the headlines lately?

[randome]

35. The NSA does a lot more than attempt to track terrorists.

Human slavery, international child pornography, organized crime, etc.

As for Occupy, they are free to do whatever they want. Except take over other cities' parks. I think most people were pretty tired of that.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[WinkyDink]

17. I'm pretty sure it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure this one out.

[truebluegreen]

19. IOW,why hasn't NSA spying done anything useful?

And what does Greenwald have to do with that?

[Sancho]

24. then they would have to bust Cheney, the Koch bros, and all the other wall street crooks...

US security doesn't matter...only the wealthy!

[Pholus]

25. Better question: Do you think they should?

Is it okay to allow "mission creep" when pervasive surveillance is justified to keep us safe from terror?

[Skittles]

26. because they don't work for WE THE PEOPLE

[Chaco Dundee]

30. those are the real questions.

They know about that and lots of other things;those are the very things they protect and hold in the highest regard.

[snagglepuss]

31. Too bad questions can't go viral.

[questionseverything]

32. speaking of voting machine tampering

jim march has been long time election transparency advocate that is now connecting the dots on this nsa mess

http://legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/2013/07/was-fiery-death-of-journalist-michael.html

[chimpymustgo]

33. That is a groundbreaking link. Have you posted it separately?

The tentacles of the octopus are revealed.

Of course, Michael Hastings was murdered.

[questionseverything]

34. no i have not

i am fairly new at du and just want to pass on this important info

[chimpymustgo]

36. Welcome to DU!! And please post the link and a 4 paragraphs from the piece, if you can.

[Rex]

37. Simple answer, those are things that benefit their paymasters.

So they DON'T get investigated.