FBI Director James Comey seeks to reassure Congress that Apple fight is not about precedent

Posted:
in iPhone
The Federal Bureau of Investigation does not believe its battle with Apple will result in a legal precedent that could weaken encryption protections across the board if the bureau prevails, director James Comey told the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday.




Comey said that the case is "unlikely to be a trailblazer," according to Reuters. Apple has taken the opposite position, with chief executive Tim Cook going so far as to call the court order the "software equivalent of cancer."

During his testimony, Comey did acknowledge that any decision handed down in the California matter would be "instructive for other courts" -- perhaps a worrying conceit, given that the bureau is seeking similar orders in at least nine other cases.

Still, that is not the agency's goal, Comey told the panel.

Instead, the debate over encryption -- which he called the "hardest question I've seen in government" -- is "really about who do we want to be as a country and how do we want to govern ourselves," he said.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 29
    Breaking: FBI director is a blatant liar.
    bloggerblogjSnivelyhydrogenicoco3fotoformattallest skiljdgazlostkiwiewtheckmanAMC
  • Reply 2 of 29
    Precedence will happen wether it was intended or not. If this case goes to court and the FBI wins, next time a similar situation occurs or if the FBI wished to trample on someone's rights, the victory will be used as precedence 
    icoco3hlee1169lostkiwiewtheckmanAMCtdknoxbadmonk
  • Reply 3 of 29
    How does this guy say this with a straight face? Isn't there some enforceable law against lying to Congress?
    icoco3lostkiwiewtheckmancnocbuiAMCdrowSpamSandwichtdknoxstskbadmonk
  • Reply 4 of 29
    FBI:  Really.  You can trust us.  We'd never lie.  Really. Ha! B)
    icoco3lostkiwiewtheckmanAMCtdknoxbadmonk
  • Reply 5 of 29
    How does this guy say this with a straight face? Isn't there some enforceable law against lying to Congress?
    He is not lying. He really believes what he is saying. Trust me when I say they cannot help themselves. There are parts of their brain that just do not function. It is a disability not a choice.
    icoco3jdgazquadra 610lostkiwiAMCtdknoxbadmonkbuzdots
  • Reply 6 of 29
    icoco3icoco3 Posts: 1,474member
    ...


    My lips aren't moving, honestly
    ...

    105
    edited February 2016 ewtheckmanAMCstskbadmonk
  • Reply 7 of 29
    The FBI deliberately chose a high profile terrorism case to use in their fight to compel Apple to build them a less secure operating system that they will be able to hack so that they could win over the support of an ill-informed public through propaganda and demagoguery.  But, it's not about setting a precedent.
    Rayz2016lostkiwitdknoxstskbadmonk
  • Reply 8 of 29
    James Comey, September 25, 2014:

    "There will come a day-well it comes every day in the business-when it will matter a great, great deal to the lives of people of all kinds that we be able to with judicial authorization gain access to a kidnappers' or a terrorist or a criminals device."

    Comey is such a liar. He's been waiting for a while to seize an opportunity to have the government force their way into an iPhone via the court. 
    lostkiwiSpamSandwichtdknoxstskbadmonk
  • Reply 9 of 29
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    Bottom line Mr. Comey? We no longer trust our government or its agencies to have our best interests at heart. You’ve lied to us before and continue to lie. In the past you (the government) performed medical/radiation experiments on the populace without our knowledge or consent and then lied about it when caught. Mr. Comey, you’re a lying son-of-a-bitch and we’re not that stupid. We don’t believe a word of this.
    SpamSandwichtdknoxstsk
  • Reply 10 of 29
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    creek0512 said:
    The FBI deliberately chose a high profile terrorism case to use in their fight to compel Apple to build them a less secure operating system that they will be able to hack so that they could win over the support of an ill-informed public through propaganda and demagoguery.  But, it's not about setting a precedent.
    It's about countering the precedent that is likely to be set against the applicability of the All Writs Act of 1789 to smartphones that judge Orenstein in Brooklyn is soon to release.
    lostkiwibadmonk
  • Reply 11 of 29
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 1,035member

    During his testimony, Comey did acknowledge that any decision handed down in the California matter would be "instructive for other courts" -- perhaps a worrying conceit, given that the bureau is seeking similar orders in at least nine other cases.
    precedent
    [noun pres-i-duh nt; adjective pri-seed-nt, pres-i-duhnt]

    noun
    1. Law. a legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritativerule or pattern in future similar or analogous cases.
    2. any act, decision, or case that serves as a guide or justification forsubsequent situations.
    Synonyms: example, model, pattern, standard
    adjectiveprecedent
    3. going or coming before; preceding; anterior.

    So this case won't serve as precedent or a trailblazer? Mr. Comey, you are only arguing with semantics or "wordsmithing." 
    badmonk
  • Reply 12 of 29
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    justme12 said:

    Immigration or an iPhone? We don’t have an encryption problem, we have a Muslim immigration problem.

    Brilliantly summed up by Daniel Greenfield

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/node/261941

    The terrorist in question wasn't an immigrant. He was a US citizen, born in Chicago I believe. Your problem isn't immigration, it's radicalisation. 
    rob53tdknoxbadmonk
  • Reply 13 of 29
    Rayz2016 said:
    justme12 said:

    Immigration or an iPhone? We don’t have an encryption problem, we have a Muslim immigration problem.

    Brilliantly summed up by Daniel Greenfield

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/node/261941

    The terrorist in question wasn't an immigrant. He was a US citizen, born in Chicago I believe. Your problem isn't immigration, it's radicalisation. 
    Not true. There were 2 terrorists. One was an immigrant that came here on a K1 visa. 
  • Reply 14 of 29
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,241member
    Rayz2016 said:
    justme12 said:

    Immigration or an iPhone? We don’t have an encryption problem, we have a Muslim immigration problem.

    Brilliantly summed up by Daniel Greenfield

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/node/261941

    The terrorist in question wasn't an immigrant. He was a US citizen, born in Chicago I believe. Your problem isn't immigration, it's radicalisation. 
    And racial profiling which is illegal but it doesn't stop a lot of this country from doing it
    edited February 2016 AMC
  • Reply 15 of 29
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    He's FULL OF SHIT, there are already hundreds of cases both by the feds and locally that are just waiting for this.
    Does he control the DOJ and all local juridictions,  Does he control, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran , India, Malaysia, etc.
    Does he know the whole technical, legal, commercial, etc implications of this.
    HE DOES NOT. So, he's talking out of his ass.
    How can he promise what he can't hope to deliver?

    T
    edited February 2016 AMCbadmonk
  • Reply 16 of 29
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,192member
    It's in Comey's best interest to play dumb on this, because dumb it is to think this wouldn't set a legal precedent. Comey is just trying to flout the law, because no current law (not even the All Writs Act) supports the FBI demands.
    edited February 2016 badmonk
  • Reply 17 of 29
    This just in... In a poll taken after these comments, 99% agreed that 'Comey is a bald faced liar'. 1% did not understand the question.
  • Reply 18 of 29
    AMCAMC Posts: 5member
    The lying rat SOB. Another J Edgar, thinks the FBI is above the constitution , we should all be sheep
  • Reply 19 of 29
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    FBI:  Falsehoods, Bullshit and Inaccuracies.
    AMCbadmonk
  • Reply 20 of 29
    Take a look at Comey's track record on Wiki, he's a very upstanding chap, appointed by Obama, and has a long, successful, nonpartisan track record.  

    The USA is very fortunate to have good men of his caliber at the helm of position of great power.

    Cook and Hillary are two people in power who's competence and honesty are called into question on regular basis.  


    edited February 2016
Sign In or Register to comment.