FISC has approved these searches; they're considered legal but Congress may change that. But 5,000 USPs were searched on w/o a warrant.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel @microbear1 and
So the 106k "data stream" number is NSA. Raw data. FBI and CIA get a subset. What 34k? CIA gets more than FBI? Same? This is over 4years?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @okanogen2010 @microbear1 and
106K is just last year. Last year they pulled all the data streams for 94K targets. Before that 92K targets. Data kept for 5 years.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel @okanogen2010 and
Again of who? You have said 106k US citizens and106k foreigners.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @microbear1 @okanogen2010 and
I keep pointing out these are foreigners. Q is how many Americans are talking to those 106K foreigners? We don't know.pic.twitter.com/GSqLrNBVG8
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel @okanogen2010 and
So why do we care how many foreigners are spied on? That's legal and the job of the IC. That seems 100% fine and dandy.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @microbear1 @okanogen2010 and
If you're pulling full streams off 106K foreigners who talk to Americans, you're pulling in the conversations of a whole lot of Americans
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel @okanogen2010 and
But how would that number be bigger, or the biggest number as you say?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @microbear1 @okanogen2010 and
Number would be bigger than 9000. Every time FBI opens NatSec investigation, & for some "assessments" and criminal cases, it'll search FISA
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel @okanogen2010 and
Bigger than 9000 is nowhere near 106k and you said it was biggest number yet.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Sorry. I meant within that one tweet.
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.