@emptywheel Yeah, just teasing. Your prescient 2013 article says foreign okay, but suggests could be abused for domestic, right?
-
-
Replying to @NathanielDWhite
@NathanielDWhite Everything NSA has been doing--incl transparency provisions under last fall's USAF--made it clear they get domestic.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel Get domestic, but can they task domestic? My read is that still limited to connect to foreign power.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NathanielDWhite
@NathanielDWhite Upstream targets selectors, not people in known places. They task first and only detask if they figure out later.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emptywheel1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
Replying to @NathanielDWhite
@NathanielDWhite@emptywheel Issue I'm raising isnt foreign v domestic - it's that we've been told selectors are "communications facility"4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JakeLaperruque
@JakeLaperruque Also, 702 defines a target differently than base FISA.@NathanielDWhite2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
Replying to @PatrickCToomey
@PatrickCToomey The selector v. facility.@JakeLaperruque@NathanielDWhite1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel Not sure it's a matter of different definitions; maybe usage.@JakeLaperruque@NathanielDWhite1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@PatrickCToomey Fair enough. By 2008 that word facility was already meaningless in any case. @JakeLaperruque @NathanielDWhite
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.