Bob Litt pitched what appears to be an EXPANSION of use of back door searches in criminal prosecution as a reform.http://www.salon.com/2015/02/05/fbis_rich_white_man_hypocrisy_how_new_policy_will_let_the_1_percent_skate_free/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=socialflow …
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel I think this is a mistake. They COULD always use 702 intercepts in all sorts of criminal cases; they just didn’t in practice.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @normative
@normative Did Litt give more details about past practice? PCLOB report said FBI sometimes used 702 in ordinary criminal cases.@emptywheel2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PatrickCToomey
@PatrickCToomey No. He said he didn't know of any. Cause if he did, there'd be notice, right? Hahahaha! Bwahahaha! Hahahaha!@normative1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel Also, did he distinguish between using 702 info directly in court, and evidence "derived from" 702 collection?@normative3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PatrickCToomey
@PatrickCToomey@emptywheel Whereas “derived from” might mean parallel construction.1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @normative
@normative@emptywheel Yeah, they could almost always re-obtain the same communications using other authorities3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PatrickCToomey
@PatrickCToomey One QI have is whether timed this NOT to 1 year on Obama but to initial read that 702 challenges going nowhere.@normative2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel Seems aimed at undercutting backdoor search objections by creating two-tiered 4th Am: "serious" crimes v other crime@normative4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@PatrickCToomey In other words, they can still use back doors to find informants and racially profile AND use data for cyber. @normative
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.