Being able to 100% protect the President is something they have to get right the first time, and every time.
Seeing how crap they've been over the last several years (hooker scandals, fence jumping guy with a knife gets INTO the White House, etc.), I'm suspect that only applies if the POTUS is White.
The article specifically addresses the issue of standing:
"The 2013 mass surveillance disclosures included a slide from a classified NSA presentation that made explicit reference to Wikipedia, using our global trademark. Because these disclosures revealed that the government specifically targeted Wikipedia and its users, we believe we have more than sufficient evidence to establish standing."
So instead it will be thrown out as 'fruit of the poisoned tree' (stolen documents).
Same police state, different day.
Look at it as an insight into how people REALLY feel--when they're not compelled by threat of expulsion/arrest/harassment to be polite and politically correct.
The other harsh reality is that the source of easily +90% of this garbage is spewed from the orifices of white men, symmetrically bell-curving around college age.
Life is a whim of several billion cells to be you for a while.