Yes, it was very deceptive to hide that the spying was done by an ally *in the headline* of the article. You've still got it, @joshuafoust.
-
-
@benwizner@emoprog@joshuafoust Where's the evidence the NSA guidance wasn't 'Provide us what you have without breaking a-c privilege?' -
@jeremyduns@emoprog@joshuafoust How could they "continue to cover the talks"--which were conducted by lawyers-without breaking privilege? -
@benwizner@emoprog@joshuafoust Did you not even read the NYT's article? Vanee M Vines explained precisely how that could be done. -
@benwizner@emoprog@joshuafoust Please point to the *evidence* in the article or documents that none of those were done. (Hint: you can't.) -
@jeremyduns@emoprog@joshuafoust Now which one of us is credulous. . . "Such steps could include." Why not deny outright? -
@benwizner@emoprog@joshuafoust I can think of several reasons, ie not setting precedent of commenting directly on specific operations. -
@benwizner@emoprog@joshuafoust But yes, they *could* be lying. Where is the actual evidence for the wrongdoing in the piece? Nowhere. -
@jeremyduns NSA's "minimization" procedures permit collection/retention of A/C comms (see 6 and accompanying dox): https://www.aclu.org/nsa-surveillance-procedures … - 4 more replies
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.