emptywheel

Schiff, speaking with his inside voice, makes the point that unmasking is not about 702. He's right, it's not. Said Turner likely misunderstands this. Turner has...taken offense.

Here's the thing: Unmasking could affect efforts to ID minimized Americans' communications - but that is NOT where the real privacy invasion is. It's in the vast vast stores of unminimized 702 data that gets routines searched for Americans' communications & used for ALL purposes.

Stewart just said that unless you are under investigation, you get a right to privacy. Thats...not how it works at all. The 4th Amendment is literally there to PROTECT people who ARE under investigation to ensure they cannot be harmed w/out sufficient evidence.

Thank you @RepAndreCarson for standing up for Americans' rights, calling for additional protections, and criticizing the bill for failing to prohibit "abouts" collection and for not including a strict warrant requirement for U.S. person searches.

Gowdy telling Himes he must acknowledge that there were Rs who criticized Trump's wiretapping claims, and notes that HPSCI spent the better part of the last 9mo looking at non-702 related issues, but notes unmasking can be a problem in 702 too.

The problem w this argument is that unmasking is like a 0.0001% privacy problem whereas 702 incidental collection and warrantless searches of Americans' communications is like a 1000% privacy problem.

Speier says concerns about large-scale incidental collection of Americans' comms and use of those coms in non-nat sec investigations & prosecutions, cites privacy groups' letter that says bill is a step-back on privacy. Bill shared w her office less than 24hrs ago. That's NUTS.

Thank you @RepSpeier for defending Americans' privacy, calling for stronger protections to address privacy community's concerns, and for stating your opposition to this troubling bill.