Apparently a goodly number of people covering FISC opinion have no fucking clue EFF FOIAed it. I guess that's what DNI dog-&-pony intended.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel - In any case, it looks like the FISA court's allegedly toothless rubber stamping reputation is not true.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Hesiod2k11
@Hesiod2k11 Let's see. It said the govt lies, and then said, "no reason to believe govt lies" while expanding collection. Right.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel It's legit to complain about lack of adequate safeguards & oversight. But where's the evidence of deliberate abuse under Obama?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Hesiod2k11
@Hesiod2k11 I've written a bunch of posts about this. You can read.4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel - And, for some reason, the Obama admin told the FISA Court about the overcapture problem! Seems odd if it's intentional.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Hesiod2k11
@Hesiod2k11 & you STILL haven't addressed why, after FISC found OBAMA to have lied 3 times, they trusted again in spite of evidence of lies?3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel -- Because FISC didn't find that OBAMA lied three times. Obama is the one who TOLD the FISC about the problems! BUSH lied.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Hesiod2k11
@Hesiod2k11 Anyway. There are number of reasons that is not true. BUT you still haven't answered my point.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel - So, you're saying the FISC was lying in footnote 14 in October, of 2011?3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@Hesiod2k11 Look. Repeating what journos have said dumbly does not refute the problems in document.
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.