first one from andrew mccarthy, as i mentioned the former terrorism prosecutor of national review ofwhich he's a contributing editor, the comments were triggered by the recent apple-fbi controversy. they address fundamental points about government limited power either to constrain individual rights or to conscript private business. as andrew mccarthy wrote, our rights to communicate and be free from unreasonable searches preexist law enforcement's capacity to intrude on them. it is law enforcement's burden to evolve technological surveillance capabilities that can be deployed in a manner consistent with our rights. the constitution's point is to limit government's ability to intrude on liberty, not to limit the scope of liberty to government's capacity for intrusion. again, former federal prosecutor, former debate partner of david rivkin. let me post a op ed from officials, mike mcconnell, former director of the national security agency, william lynn, former defense -- deputy defense secretary. for several years they have been writing that the chinese government poses a serious natio

first from andrew mccarthy and as i mentioned the former terrorism partner from which he is a contributing editor. his comments were triggered by the apple fbi controversy, but they address the general points about government's limited power either to constrain individual rights or to conscript private business. our rights to communicate and be free from unreasonable searches exists in the capacity to intrude on that. it is law enforcement's burden to evolve technological surveillance capabilities that can be deployed in a manner consistent with our rights. the point is to limit government's ability to intrude on liberty, not to limit the scope of liberty to government's capacity for intrusion. again, former federal terrorism prosecutor, former debate partner of david ripken. let me post an op ed. mike mcconnell and the nsa and michael chertoff, former secretary and william lynn, former defense deputy. for several years, they have been writing that the chinese government poses a serious national security threat through the massive theft of intellectual property, technology, and business in

and that is notable because recently andrew mccarthy has been speaking out strongly against excessive government surveillance as have others who have held top counter intelligence and national security positions. they maintain that national security and personal privacy in our online communications are mutually reinforcing and correspondingly that excessive surveillance undermines both security and privacy. to explain why that is, i would like to quote publications by some of these former officials. first from andrew mccarthy and as i mentioned the former terrorism prosecutor in the national review of which he is a contributing editor. his comments were triggered by the apple/fbi controversy, but they address the general points about government's limited power either to constrain individual rights or to conscript private business. as andrew mccarthy wrote, quote, our rights to communicate and be free from unreasonable searches preexist law enforcement's capacity to intrude on them. it is law enforcement's burden to evolve technological surveillance capabilities that can be deployed in

government of limited power to this trade individual rights or conscripted private business says andrew mccarthy wrote to communicate from unreasonable searches with law enforcement capacity to intrude but yet it is their burden to fall that technological surveillance capabilities to be consistent with our right. the constitution's point is to limit the government's up ability not to limit the scope of liberty but the capacity for intrusion. again with i recent "washington post" op-ed with mike mcconnell former director of national security of the nsa had michael chertoff a.m. and the former deputy defense secretary. for several years there writing that the chinese government poses a national security threats of intellectual property and technology they advocate ubiquitous encryption with such cyberexpectations and they do recognize as former law-enforcement in security officials with the serious concern the fbi has raised to allow criminals to keep communications secret but they explained we believe and protected by ubiquitous encryption for three reasons. with that business information but sec

. >> andrew mccarthy. >> you can head back to the podium.> that was hard. scores are still very close. right now in third place, brooke and brianna, 320 points. robin and kamau still in second in place with 350. and don and alisyn still in the lead, 410 points. ahead, a rapidfire round with big points. anyone can take the lead. stay right there. nexium 24 hour introduces new, easy-to-swallow tablets. so now, there are more ways, for more people... to experience... complete protection from frequent heartburn. nexium 24hr. the easy-to-swallow tablet is here. ♪ some people know how to make an entrance... ♪ to thrive under pressure... ♪ to reject the status quo... and they have no problem passing the competition. the aggressive lexus gs 350 and 200 turbo. once driven, there's no going back. i klooks easy...the neighborhood speed record but i wouldn't be able to burn rubber without optum. see i have diabetes... which can make it a little harder to become a racing legend. thankfully, though, i have an optum nurse and in-home biometric monitoring t