153 Comments
User's avatar
SimulationCommander's avatar

"Once you start down the road of collecting information on innocent people, it creates the intellectual justification for doing it again and again. From a contracting perspective, this is the proverbial self-licking ice cream cone, a spiral of endless expense."

Not to mention, the more "useless" data you have to sift through, the more difficult it is to get to the actual useful data that you're supposedly Hoovering up all this content to get.

Much more likely that they Hoover up everything so they have a play if you become a problem in the future.

Expand full comment
Kathleen McCook's avatar

Hoover--apt. and witty. I wonder if people say Dyson now.

Expand full comment
Kurt's avatar

Or Roomba!

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

Sifting the data will become the job of AI.

Expand full comment
badnabor's avatar

Damn, that's NOT a comforting thought to start my day!

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

It already has. AI may be stupid, but it never gets tired or bored.

Expand full comment
Fred's avatar

And the good news is AI has such high moral standards! /s/

Expand full comment
Kurt's avatar

Already is!

Expand full comment
Ayn's avatar

I do believe that unfortunately, with AI, the "sifting" is going to be so much easier, which is why we really have to put up real barriers to this kind of deep state cavity-searching on citizens.

Expand full comment
SimulationCommander's avatar

Yep. Automated censorship is even worse than the manual kind, because there's nobody actually responsible for it. "Oops, the algorithm messed up" will be the excuse.

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

There's someone responsible, but it adds another layer of difficulty to proving it.

Expand full comment
Madjack's avatar

The algorithm will send the drone….

Expand full comment
badnabor's avatar

The horse is already out of the barn. I may be a naturally pessimistic soul. Although some are at more risk than others, even as we type out comments today, we all have "predictive" profiles in the ether. They may not seem to matter now, but they are an undeniable resource for many kinds of future fuckery.

Expand full comment
Ann22's avatar

Agree. Especially with the likes of Peter Thiel and company at the helm, tech bros united for Trump, and let’s not forget the reams of our personal data collected by DOGE.

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

I don't worry about DOGE, any more than I ever worried about bureaucrats in general. All of our personal info is already available to any who want to buy it, along with any number of international spy agencies, who collect it just because they can.

I also suspect that if the political winds had been blowing another way, the "tech bros" would have gladly united for Kamala. I see this all as being somewhat inevitable --though I like to fantasize about a president who would try to protect us from these ghouls.

Expand full comment
Ann22's avatar

Then why would they take it?

Expand full comment
Tardigrade's avatar

Why does a dog lick its balls?

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

I'm a lot more comfortable with them at the helm than whoever was running the Biden Administration.

Expand full comment
A.'s avatar

Sounds much like Communist China.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

I was thinking more like J. Edgar...

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

Geez Louise...I thought Mr. "Drain the Swamp" was going to take care of this. So much for the Great White Hope of "populism".

Expand full comment
Doctor Mist's avatar

Matt did say, "Before Quiet Skies was discontinued by this administration..."

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

Meanwhile, Hassan Piker can be interrogated at the airport for speaking out against Israel. So really, what's changed? It's great that one minor intrusion on our freedoms has been officially ended. The lion's share will not be touched, and certainly Matt Taibbi will not lead the charge.

Expand full comment
Doctor Mist's avatar

My apologies for replying to you in the future rest place. I hadn’t noticed that you were a one-trick pony.

Expand full comment
Lawyers Guns & Money's avatar

Well, Matt isn't an elected official, much less the President. And he definitely leads the charge on free speech and the evils of surveillance.

Why are you trying to pin this shit on Matt?

Expand full comment
Tardigrade's avatar

because troll

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

If you’re trying to say Trump supports this as much as the previous bunch did, no doubt you’re right.

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

The surveillance itself is the new reality. We the People still have control regarding WHO is in control of it, and how it's used. That's what populism is. And that's why government officials and media hate populism so much. They've lost some of their grip on power, and their tears nourish my hope.

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

If surveillance is "the new reality", then brother, you can stop trying to console yourself with delusions that "We the People" are somehow in control of it. No one in government is crying, They are more powerful then ever, and the "people"s faith in jerk-offs like Trump giving them their power back is yummy yummy in their tummy.

Expand full comment
j juniper's avatar

Maybe some of us have experienced this. That gf/bf who doesn't trust you, and after you break up you find out they've had a year-long relationship with someone else. To me, it's always a "tell" that someone is not being entirely truthful and actually doing what they are accusing you of doing, if they accuse you of cheating.

Expand full comment
Tardigrade's avatar

'Not to mention, the more "useless" data you have to sift through, the more difficult it is to get to the actual useful data that you're supposedly Hoovering up all this content to get.'

That could explain a lot of the interest in AI.

Expand full comment
Inverted Pyramid's avatar

Too much hay in the haystack.

Expand full comment
John Bibish's avatar

Not to disagree but as St. Thomas said, "error has no rights."

Expand full comment
Bookers's avatar

"Morally, all this information-gathering reverses the natural political order, giving elected officials undeserved and unearned power over their bosses – the voters. These programs all need to be reevaluated. A lot of them have to go. People who lie about them in this chamber need to be fired."

Good stuff.

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

Along with way too many people employed by governments, who have a stake in preserving their supremacy any way they can.

Expand full comment
John Bibish's avatar

Is this comment that respectfully has only one reply? "Duh!"

Expand full comment
michael Griffin's avatar

Well said Matt

I knew when they passed the Patriot Act that it opened up the door for abuses of our individual rights. All in the name of protecting us. That should have sunsetted but still to this day congress votes to keep parts of it alive

If I remember correctly Tulsi herself was grilled on her position on this kind of surveillance?

Expand full comment
SimulationCommander's avatar

*USA PATRIOT Act

Because there's no problem so big the government won't give it a catchy acronym.

Expand full comment
Kathleen McCook's avatar

Yes, the formal name is "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism." Obama extended it in 2011.

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

And yet no one, not even Trump, is fighting to repeal it.

Expand full comment
MG's avatar

Isn't Tom Cotton the R Senator that keeps pushing this?

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

I think most senators in both parties continue to vote for extensions on the act.

Expand full comment
Ann22's avatar

Did you really think he would?

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

No, of course not. But I am tired of these subtle blowjobs from Matt for Trump and the MAGA party as if they represent some real reformist agenda towards surveillance. They are bigger scum than anyone that preceded them, and deserve no kudos.

Expand full comment
Fiery Hunt's avatar

"...bigger scum..."

You people really can't deal with reality, can you?

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

Meh. Someday Trump will do SOMETHING that will remind you that he is nothing like the conservative you imagine he is.

Expand full comment
Mike R.'s avatar

Lesbian feminist Marxist hustlers (now the DEI) and their friends in the "why can't we just kill men" MSM began the open malicious destruction of lives and careers way back in the 60's. As Paul Simon said:"Someone could walk into this room and say--...' you're life is on fire..it's all over the evening news about the fire in your life."

Innocence/evidence be damned, trial by press hysteria, stilted kangaroo court, whisper campaign, anonymous phone call complaint and when the target proved innocent it made no difference at all. How many Universities paid huge settlements to men whose lives and careers were destroyed--because "he made me feel uncomfortable". Electronic Salem witchcraft poisoned the American psyche, installed the political snitch and got paid to do it. How? They used crazy people and tax treasure.(The manufacture and exploitation of crazy people is an industry.) The MSM and spook land saw that the grift worked and said "why not".

"Back in the 60's" Tricky Dickie and staff couldn't find a way to throttle White anti-war protest and stop the Black civil rights movement so they invented the "drug war". Overcharged and booked criminal conspiracy and mass arrests, when open murder (Fred Hampton/Gary Webb) wasn't required, laid the ground work for the surveillance state intrusion into private citizen life and finance. How'd they do it? Compromised informants (Whitey Bulger) and tax treasure? (Did the "drug war" get murky? Well yes!! Who was dealing what to who?-- Gang culture and values is prison culture. Black youth violence today is the result of the drug war and the prison industrial complex.)

Meanwhile--(guess who?)--the MSM got their "nasty little fingers in every bodies pie" and gladly put the hatchet to anyone D.C. political surveillance deemed a threat. Heads rolled on demand and when state propaganda/spook land needed a voice the MSM was there. Why and how does the beast survive? Tax treasure.

Throughout this sorid little story polished (sometimes not so polished) little grifters cast their grasping little shadows across the lives of hard working Americans, looted their economy and stole everything they could get their hands on. Electronic shadow villains from East to American West abound. Silicon Valley, the D.C. "Swamp", the MSM, monopolizing Private Equity perps and the biggest canker sore of all, a surveillance machine that designates concerned parents terrorists and puts sniffer dogs on sane American political voices. And, turn over the dead on Fentanyl corner, boarded up downtown, car jacked, working two jobs, buying food on credit so my children won't starve, herd management, keep you're f'kin mouth shut rock and behold, the Gerogie Soros NGO, CCP, Billy Gates euthanasia center, Green New Deal Al Gore, EU/Brussels billionaire Davos snake pit.("Perpetual crisis and war for thee. Never for me")

Gee--How does that grift keep breathing? Tax treasure.

Expand full comment
P.S.'s avatar

First thing that came to my mind. One party started it, the other loved it. Anything that gives the Uniparty more power over the people.

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

And, uh... when is President Liberty going to fight to repeal the PATRIOT Act?

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

Never. Along with abolishing CIA and FBI, never.

Expand full comment
Pacificus's avatar

Yeah, "Patriot Act": maybe the most grab your balls you're about to get hit name of all time...

Expand full comment
eand's avatar

as Benjamin Franklin put it; “Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

Welp, we did give up, and Matt certainly will never lead the charge to get those liberties back if it means getting on the bad side of MAGA. (Do you think he wants his next appearance before Congress to include rough treatment by BOTH parties?)

Expand full comment
MG's avatar

Oh brother....

Expand full comment
Paul Harper's avatar

This is a "why does the dog lick his balls?" situation - they have too much power and are dumber than mutts. Fire all the bosses and let the agents do their jobs instead of checking for skid marks. For real! Great work, Matt!

Expand full comment
Jessica's avatar

Thx Matt- for your tireless drive to expose the government (and private sector!) on this! 👏

Expand full comment
Unset's avatar

I'd like to see an investigation into who exactly weaponized the federal government against Gabbard. It was an outrageous abuse of power.

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

Well, maybe if Gabbard hadn't been sidelined for speaking out against Israel that might have happened.

Expand full comment
Callicarpa Americana's avatar

Willing to bet it was the Hillary contingent trying to find dirt for Kamala.

Expand full comment
Richard Fahrner's avatar

Wow I got in early to this story. Never before SitCom gets the first word...

Question, is there any avenue for a "typical citizen" to get a report of what info has been captured on their person?

FOIA like and not a seven year wait.

rich

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

Defeats the whole purpose of the secret police…

Expand full comment
Richard Fahrner's avatar

Thanks Dave, true, but we know data is being gathered, so the police are "not so secret" anymore.. I was thinking like credit score reporting, but would be:

who/agency is gathering my data?

what did they get on me?

as a stretch, how can this data gathering be blocked,

take care

Expand full comment
Nicholas Spinelli's avatar

"Not wittingly" needs to be on Clapper's tombstone.

Expand full comment
BildvonGott's avatar

AKA plausible deniability.

Expand full comment
steven t koenig's avatar

If you're not careful, Matt, we're gonna elect you to something

Expand full comment
Tim Hurlocker's avatar

A government that commands so much of our personal information might even send IRS agents to the door of someone testifying to Congress -- to make sure we know who's boss.

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

You would think this would make Matt sympathetic to people being beaten up by ICE. Oh well.

Expand full comment
Heidi Kulcheski's avatar

Wow, you sure have a crush on Matt😉

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

Hey, I'm paying a lot to date they guy. $7.00 a month?? People with a lot more talent only charge $5.00. Sure hope I get a handy out of this!

Expand full comment
steven t koenig's avatar

By your own metrics it appears you're a dumbass

Expand full comment
Skenny's avatar

"The government spent $200 million a year following up to 50 people a day for a program that in its history never once led to an arrest, or thwarted a single criminal act."

Excellent example of our tax dollars at work! Ain't government great!!??

Expand full comment
steven t koenig's avatar

Ah, it's not real money. They're just printing it at will.

Expand full comment
Skenny's avatar

Word! But it may still be worth a few hundred thousand.

Expand full comment
Liz LaSorte's avatar

We the People need to ask what do we need a central government for?

One of the wisest founders no one knows about is Robert Yates (aka) Brutus – who predicted ALL the corruption we see today. When compared to Alexander Hamilton (who said a bill of rights is not only unnecessary but dangerous (Federalist #84 and argued against term limits), it’s very apparent we should have amended the Articles of the Confederation and not created a powerful central government further away from the people.

Brutus was right about EVERYTHING: https://lizlasorte.substack.com/p/captain-hindsight-to-the-rescue-brutus?r=76q58

https://lizlasorte.substack.com/p/get-in-the-ring-alexander-hamilton?r=76q58

Expand full comment
A.'s avatar
5hEdited

Just by the by.....the propensity for regular spying, on anyone, is a totalitarian trait.

We saw a great deal of spying -- by the average person -- emerge during the COVID-mania months and years. The British called them "curtain twitchers". Tells you something about totalitarianism being afoot during COVID-mania.

We also saw these everyday spies portrayed in "1984".

And Alienating parents who control their children to hate the other parent will have the kids spy on their innocent mother or father to report back to the controller. Damages the child, of course.

Totalitarians are so prone to spying because they want to determine who is following their narrative and who is not. Those who are not following what they demand will be punished. This is the general principle driving them.

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

Don't you worry! Trump's gonna get onto rolling back "totalitariansm" any moment now! Pack your bags, Deep State! Trumps'a commin' for you! Yessiree Bob, freedom is on the way! Swamp's a-drainin' faster than you can say "Jeffrey Epstein was a pedophile pimp!" Power is coming back into the hands of the people in three...two... one...

Expand full comment
A.'s avatar

It is the leftwing WOKE who are totalitarian, my friend.

Expand full comment
Salusa Secundus Snape's avatar

Oh, yes... I forgot that ICE is all about trans rights.

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

I won't buy a new car because ever since about 2011, they're all connected to the internet. Not only do cars hoover up data which the automakers can then sell to anyone (including government agencies!), they also have the ability to "update" the software that runs many (if not most) of the systems in your car without your permission, consent, or even knowledge. Oh, and if you financed your car, the lender can shut your car down if you've been missing payments.

Now, add in the wonderous technology of "self driving" and "autonomous" vehicles, and think of the potential for official or unofficial mischief. Could someone use it to make your car drive off a bridge? The sales people will assure you that of course that's impossible, and we believe them because there's no one on earth more trustworthy than auto dealership sales people.

I'll keep my 2006 car with 150,000+ miles on it until someone will sell me one that's not connected to the internet.

Expand full comment
Emmanuel Goldstein's avatar

"People who lie about them in this chamber need to be fired.

Correction: Those who lie about all of this to Congress need to go to prison.

Expand full comment