Dianne Feinstein has no problem with the government using drones. There is evidence that she is concerned about police use of drones without some kind of oversight but she has no problem with big government using drones to spy on Americans. She has no problem with the NSA spying on Americans.
That changes a bit when she is one of the Americans being spied on. There have been revelations that the NSA has been spying on members of Congress. That is not sitting well with people like Feinstein who have stated that we need such spying for national security.
It also appears as if Feinstein is not happy with unregulated drones that are used by private citizens to invade privacy, at least not her privacy. Code Pink folks were demonstrating at her home over government surveillance and according to Feinstein she looked out her window and there was a drone looking back.
It was probably some small craft that was privately owned (it was claimed that it was a toy helicopter) but it was invading her privacy and she did not like it.
So what to do what to do. Like everything else in life Feinstein thinks government needs to regulate private drones. You got that? It is OK, in her mind, for the government to use drones to spy on citizens but if citizens use their own drones to spy back well that is a different story.
Feinstein has indicated that we need to do this spying for national security. Well if that is the case then spying on members of Congress would be a better use of our assets with regard to national security. Congress is more dangerous to this nation than its citizens and politicians like Feinstein are the most dangerous.
This idea that citizens need to be regulated but government (or its elitists) does not should not surprise you. Feinstein wants to take every firearm from every citizen. She has called for a complete ban on guns and said she would confiscate them if she could. Feinstein authored the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban.
This is the same Feinstein who had a concealed carry permit in the past because of threats she received. She thought she would be safer carrying a gun so she got a permit (something that the average Joe in CA has a hard time doing) but she wants to take the firearms from everyone else. She is more important than us.
So it is no stretch to see how she would be upset that a group demonstrating government surveillance used the same kind of surveillance to make a point.
She did not like it one bit.
But only because it was directed toward her. When it is directed toward YOU it is necessary and we serfs should just shut up and bow down to our overlords.
But, but, Dianne, if you have nothing to hide why would you worry?
The morons in California will probably never vote her out of office. On a positive note she is 80 and time is not on her side…
Never surrender, never submit.