FISA amicus initially an advocate. Weakened in final bill, albeit opened up to include technical expertise. No tech expert ever designated.
-
-
Steve would have been great.
-
Right. Bc convo should reflect info in that "It's Complicated" paper.
-
Generally I don't trust the FISC judges to fully grasp much of anything technical.
-
Collyer clearly didn't, but we don't know if it's bc DOJ misinformed her or bc she's dumb.
-
I don't think those are only two options. Tech can be hard, you don't have to be dumb to not understand it, but it's bad not to have help
-
No, not only two. But she REALLY didn't understand. (But in ways that mirror non-disclosures of USG in the past).
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Depending on when the application was made, I might not have been eligible; I was at PCLOB through mid-January.
-
First app made in September; it did not disclose the 9 month known problems. Collyer learned abt upstream problems Oct 24.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
At least two groups did submit my name (with my permission) as a candidate for FISA amicus, but they opted for others.
-
True, but 1) By law Collyer should have çonsidered an amicus (she broke that law) 2) Jeffress/Zwillinger could bring you in.
-
I think that as a PCLOB employee, there would have been a conflict of interest perceived.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.