@Thomas_Drake1 @MarkSZaidEsq Yeah DOJ should prosecute officials who had written authorization from lawyers and management. Ex post facto??
-
-
@emptywheel@BradMossEsq@Thomas_Drake1@bmaz Of course existence of issues and questions does not mean unlawful, might but might not -
@MarkSZaidEsq Of course. But given that govt not even providing notice for 215, how will we figure out?@BradMossEsq@Thomas_Drake1@bmaz -
@emptywheel@BradMossEsq@Thomas_Drake1@bmaz I'm all for asking questions and pushing issue just not willing to assume unlawfulness -
@MarkSZaidEsq Also, if govt unwilling to provide FISC info requested (as w/Bates on upstream) how measure?@BradMossEsq@Thomas_Drake1@bmaz -
@emptywheel@BradMossEsq@Thomas_Drake1@bmaz Ultimately FISC got all it wanted as far as I know -
@MarkSZaidEsq False. Bates asked for # of USP SCTs, didn't get it. Reason to believe it's significant.@BradMossEsq@Thomas_Drake1@bmaz -
@emptywheel@BradMossEsq@Thomas_Drake1@bmaz If the FISC wants info it will get it I'm sure. Judges won't just sit back and do nothing -
@MarkSZaidEsq Well, 2011 decision made w/o info Bates specifically requested.@BradMossEsq@Thomas_Drake1@bmaz - 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@emptywheel@BradMossEsq@Thomas_Drake1@bmaz Collection might also be under different authority.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@emptywheel@BradMossEsq@Thomas_Drake1@bmaz You believe they are capturing USP content and not scrubbing?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.