Is there legislative history of Congress/FBI/NSA saying of course Sec. 702 info won't be used for regular criminal investigations?
-
-
Replying to @RachelBLevinson
@RachelBLevinson Nope, that concern was raised at the time and ignored. FAA 2008 pretty intentionally adopts significant purpose / 101(h).1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @Richardson_Mich
@Richardson_Mich Ah. Bummer.@JennaMC_Laugh, there you have it.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RachelBLevinson
@RachelBLevinson@Richardson_Mich Ugh. PCLOB raised it too. Guess it continued to be ignored.1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @JennaMC_Laugh
@JennaMC_Laugh@RachelBLevinson I swear there was an amdt rejected on this point on floor in 2007/8? 2012?2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Replying to @Richardson_Mich
@Richardson_Mich Rejected Feingold amendment made it clear they were spying on USPs https://www.emptywheel.net/2008/02/06/mcconnell-and-mukasey-tell-half-truths/ … @JennaMC_Laugh @RachelBLevinson
2:56 PM - 20 Apr 2016
0 replies
2 retweets
2 likes
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.