The TISA would empower multinational companies to suppress democracy in a broad range of service businesses.

It would prohibit countries with real privacy laws from stopping multinationals from exporting data to countries such as the US that snoop on it.

Whether the quoted text would really prohibit a government from deciding to use only free word processors is not clear to me. I am not sure whether that situation falls under the category of "providing services related to" the word processor.

The DEA avoids federal government rules for collecting evidence by working through state prosecutors that have lower standards.

A father was arrested for leaving his son in a car seat in a truck for two minutes. The child was in no danger, but try convincing panic-stricken Americans of that.

Americans freak out at the thought of allowing a child to be alone. Meanwhile, they are not very concerned about the poverty and stress that scar millions of American children for life.

Scott Walker wants the fathers of 20-week fetuses to sue when women abort them.

Late term abortions in the US require specific justification, either on medical grounds, or because the father committed rape. What kind of twisted man would feel "distress" with an operation to protect the woman from danger? Will the bill permit rapists to sue abortion clinics?

Meanwhile, what about the other side of this? Why not allow men to sue for a court order to insist on an abortion? A lot of men feel distress for very rational reasons at learning they will be forced to support an undesired baby.

The US government, in trials of supposed terrorists, demands that defendants not mention the name Snowden, not raise issues of whether massive surveillance was used on them, and not accuse the government of entrapment.

Many of these cases are at least pretty close to entrapment.

The recordings they present in court may have been carefully selected to omit the conversations in which the FBI's agent led the defendant to join in the scheme (i.e., entrapped him).