I didn't say you shouldn't worry, I said you shouldn't shoot your mouth off without taking the time to actually understand what you're talking about.
These snide "haha, I'm actually the one winning" comments of yours would come off a lot a better if you would stop saying things that are factually wrong.
That is, again, wrong. There are actually rules and standards in play for what is and is not due process, the government cannot just make it up as they go. It took me ten seconds to find
this list, you have no excuse for being this ignorant. I've coded the ones the FISA process fails in red, and as I'm no expert on this highly secret and unaccountable process, it's quite likely worse than this.
- An unbiased tribunal.
- Notice of the proposed action and the grounds asserted for it.
- The opportunity to present reasons for the proposed action not to be taken.
- The right to present evidence, including the right to call witnesses.
- The right to know the opposing evidence.
- The right to cross-examine adverse witnesses.
- A decision based only on the evidence presented.
- Opportunity to be represented by counsel.
- A requirement that the tribunal prepare a record of the evidence presented.
- A requirement that the tribunal prepare written findings of fact and the reasons for its decision.
Furthermore, as bad as this is, it gets even worse. The FISA court has an approval rate that makes third world kangaroo courts look like bastions of fairness and evenhandness, having only rejected 85 applications in it's entire history, out of more than 40,000. You would know this, if you had spent even a few minutes skimming it's wiki page.
But it gets even worse. The FISA court is used to authorize spying on single, specific targets, so there is at least a pretense of restraint. The NSA's mass surveillance and data collection program did not even go through that level of rubber stamping, they just spy on everyone all the time with no warrant or authorization from anyone, including the FISA court.