The same Apple that refused to open the phones of the San Bernardino terrorists for the FBI. Let that sink in....
-
-
-
Dammit, I don't need more blackpills today. I met my requirement
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
weren’t they the same company who didn’t want to invade the privacy of possible terrorists?
-
Way worse than that: they weren't "possible terrorists" it was 100% known that they were. Also they were dead. And the phone in question wasn't even owned by them, it was a work phone that he was allowed to use. The company that owned it gave permission. Apple said no.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Wouldn’t give access to San Bernardino shooters devices but they get walked right up to the door of Roger Stone’s devices. This is becoming the most obvious hypocrisy ever. How is the twitter left still engaging in defense of this stuff? It’s mind boggling.
-
It’s called a double standard! They live by it daily!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
probably because they're interested in actual crime.
-
Apple refused law enforcement access to terrorist's devices and also several other criminal investigations around the country. This certainly doesn't seem to have the same precedent as terrorism.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Now it makes perfect sense why someone would want their own server stashed in their own bathroom.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
FBI was later able to get into Farouk’s iPhone without Apple’s help. Hmmmmm
pic.twitter.com/I3vGPWzqgw
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.