The Supreme Court of the United States, (SCOTUS), decided
that cops need a judicially approved search warrant to investigate the contents
of your cell phone. That case arose when
an individual was pulled over for a traffic violation, had his cell phone
searched without any warrant and was subsequently charged with being a
terrorist and having illegal weapons.
In the second major decision, SCOTUS rule against AEREO, a
television rebroadcast company that was collecting local TV station broadcasts
for free and making them available to subscribers for a fee on the Internet. The Court ruled it was a violation of
copyright law.
COMMENTS:
The first decision was unique in modern Court history in
that it was a 9-0 decision. The second
was a 6-3 decision. What this all means
is that the cops cannot seize your smartphone and search its contents without a
warrant unless there are emergency extenuating circumstances. And, although broadcast signals may be
available for free, they are still the property of the broadcasting company and
cannot be resold for profit. I agree
with both decisions, which entitles me to a stiff drink.
TODAY’S QUERIES & ANSWERS:
Q. Is it true that Senator Charles Grassley from Iowa was a
potential target of the IRS for audit?
(Chester ~ Friant, CA)
A. According to emails recently uncovered by Congress, that
appears to be the case… that Lerner was advocating for such an audit. And, the IRS admitted yesterday that it had
leaked confidential information about a Tea Party group to the media prior to
the 2012 elections. Ladies and
gentlemen, (I'm sorry that excludes Obama, Reid and Pelosi), we have thugs in
charge of the IRS and our government.
Q. I heard earlier this year that the U.S. economy had only
shrunk by 0.1%; now we get a “revision” of 2.9%. I could understand a revision to .2% or even
to 1% under some circumstances. Isn’t
this really fraud on the part of the Administration? (Gayle ~ Silver Springs, NV)
A. Fraud? On the part
of THE Obama Administration? Come on!
Q. What’s your opinion of Hillary Clinton being paid
$225,000 to make a speech at the University of Nevada in Las Vegas? (Tillie ~ Las Vegas, NV)
A. Don’t be so critical.
Everyone knows that the Clintons were virtually “paupers” when they left
the White House; she said so. If she’s
going to be our next President, she simply has to be able to buy a new
wardrobe, doesn’t she?
TODAY’S QUOTE:
“I’d like to live as a poor man with lots of money.” ~ Pablo
Picasso
TODAY’S VIDEO:
No comments:
Post a Comment