Sigh. What you actually mean is their own gloss on the audit is "an agency correcting itself." http://on.wsj.com/1cYaF6k
@papicek Spying on China in no way abuse of anti-terror laws. Point is, all but dragnet allowed for far wider use than terrorism @normative
-
-
@emptywheel@normative When did China become a state sponsor of terror? Is that how we were sold the Patriot Act? -
@papicek Point is most spying takes place under 702 (limited only to foreign power) or just 12333. Not PATRIOT.@normative -
@emptywheel@normative I'm not arguing that. But is this how it was sold? And how t is defended?
End of conversation
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.