Marcy's made a pretty strong case that's true. Fair to assume call data inbound to US & outbound captured thru 12333https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/673293523727290368 …
-
-
Replying to @joshgerstein
@joshgerstein@emptywheel And if that's the case, and assuming they weren't applying Sec 215 protections, Congress should slam them for miss2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq You're arguing 12333 collected data should be treated under 215?@joshgerstein1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@joshgerstein Didn't opine on it either way. Was saying assuming they didn't, and still missed it, that would be a big fail2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq No. Actually your comment did nothing but demonstrate (again) you don't understand any of this. Zero.@joshgerstein1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@joshgerstein So, to be clear, you are saying the FBI can access all 5 years worth historical records collected under Sec 215?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradMossEsq
@BradMossEsq The article doesn't mention Section 215, does it? Can it access 5 years? Yes, via several means.@joshgerstein1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@joshgerstein But your conclusion assumes the data was collected by non-Sec 215 means, correct?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@BradMossEsq Sure. Which is one reason 215 got shut down. Those other means are more effective. @joshgerstein
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.