This is quite confusing. Nunes has said the collection was "legal" and "incidental." But adds it was "inappropriate" and troubles him.
-
-
Perhaps he feels things that never should have met the threshold to enter the reporting stream did,went wide, got unmasked?
-
Most charitable explanation may be a complaint that "lawful but spurious" reportage improperly circulated innocuous comms.
-
Least charitable explanation: political self-interest leading to objections that are themselves spurious.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.