@BradMossEsq "Received intel" does not equate to spying? @bmaz
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@bmaz Depends on whether you see a distinction in "collection" vs. use of intel.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq Again, the NSA EXPLICITLY allows the use of intel except when collected post-indictment.@bmaz1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@bmaz Subject to minimization (or does that not apply to corporate store?)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq Subject to minimization. How hard is it for prosecutor to guess who "USP lawyer" sub is when he's gotten legal notice?@bmaz1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@bmaz Restrictions in article mention info can't be shared with prosecutors. And pre-indictment use subject to challenge.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq Post-indictment can't be shared w/prosecutor. Pre-indictment can be. They took 6 mos to indict Medunjanin. 42 convos@bmaz1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@bmaz Any restriction on ability to challenge admissibility of that info I'm not thinking of?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq You're assuming they'll get notice to it. Wondering whether we'll hear from Pete Seda case on notice. http://www.emptywheel.net/2009/06/04/vaughn-walkers-chess-game-the-cases/ …1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel Under updated notice rules I would expect it. That is something I view as non-negotiable.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@BradMossEsq They only get notice on stuff introduced. That's why I raise Seda. Surely fruit of illegal surveil, never able to challenge
-
-
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.