@BradMossEsq Again, are you accusing Clapper of LYING abt his declass? otherwise, your point is false. @Paulmd199 @ashk4n
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel No, not making that claim. Which point are you saying is false?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq That Clapper released all the info your client did, saying it was so he could respond to Snowden leaks.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel That was your point, the whole justification of graymail angle.4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq And again, that's NOT to take away from your client. Now people will finally read what was in public domain bc of Snowden leaks1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel Which brings it back to my original point, that this is what can be done lawfully.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq Yes, there is a whistleblowing process. Yes, in this case that was made easier bc Snowden leaked the info first.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel And, FWIW, do you think that justifies the leak? No judgment, curious.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq Justifies? That your client was able to say things he almost certainly wouldn't have before? That's your question?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel But that wasn't my question. It was whether the declassification of info to respond to the leaks justified the leaks themselves3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@BradMossEsq Does fact that govt has now admitted this stuff should have been declassed justify leak? A more interesting Q.
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.