Absence of Evidence...

So apparently technicalities and the rule of law outweigh common sense. It's like the government appointees that control this huge part of our lives are playing some kind of game where "touch blue, make it true" actually applies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/16/washington/16cnd-nsa.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Because the evidence - the word universally being used to describe the information submitted to a lower court, since that's what it is - submitted about domestic wiretapping falls under the "State Secrets" privelege, it can no longer be considered admissable in court.

Even though we KNOW the program exists and has been fully admitted to, it can't be constitutional because it technically never happened. Even though it did.

So now this particular domestic wiretapping program might never be declared unconstitutional, despite the wide agreement that domestic wiretapping as a concept is unconstitutional. I thought these technicalities were there to protect our civil liberties, first and foremost. Apparently rights are a privelege.