Reminder: The Section 702 bill the Senate will vote cloture on today gives criminal suspects more protection than it gives people against whom the FBI has no evidence of wrong-doing. Call your Senator and tell them to vote no.
-
-
This was then, David Nunes is adding an amendment in which oversight will be required for 702 searches.
-
No. It's meaningless.
-
702 “about searches/queries” had no oversight b4 NSA Director Mike Rogers shut the searches down in late October 2016 after finding out about the violations. Now they r adding oversight which deters illegal/suspicious activity in re to these searches. How is that “meaningless”?
-
You're talking about something besides backdoor searches, for one. For two, there was oversight before: I knew abt the violations. For three, what Nunes did was codify the way to reopen abouts, not oversee them.
-
702 & all its sub numbers (in which I specifically mentioned “about queries” (702(17))) will have oversight & not by Obama admin hold overs like head of DOJ NatSec Division, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin who left his job right after Rogers asked 4 a review on the searches.
-
You have no clue what you're talking about. Trust me. Zero clue. But thanks for defending warrantless surveillance.
-
Keep spreading misleading tweets so when someone asks you to clarify aans have a discussion supported with facts, all you say is “you have no clue” because your spin has found its dead end.
-
There are 4 major problems with this bill 1) It explicitly provides a way to turn about collection back on 2) It permits back door searches for tips at FBI 3) It permits collection of entirely domestic comms off VPN/Tor
- 1 more reply
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.