The special counsel investigation into Donald Trump secured a search warrant of the former president’s Twitter account, @realDonaldTrump, according to a newly unsealed court filing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] [S] 143 points 3 years ago (9 children)
  • [–] 54 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    Are we going to see more bullshit "Twitter Files" about how the evil government dared to exercise a legal search warrant?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 85 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Actually, it's just "The X-Files" now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 3 years ago

    Yeah, THAT'S what CNN should've said in the headline. Investigations into Trump are so ordinary now they're barely news, but Twitter ignoring the law and the search warrant — that ought to be big news.

    There are still serious news sites and government agencies using Twitter, something that's been feeling more and more problematic to me. It would be nice if today's news started a groundswell, or at least a conversation about that. Twitter has made itself into a forum for nutters, and now this? To anyone who's still on Twitter, I would ask — Why?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 3 years ago

    Yes, that's generally how electronic record searches go. I don't get why "secret" is bolded, since any of us would be getting the exact same treatment if there was a warrant for our own accounts. This at least is equitable in that it's equally unfair under the laws that these very same people had no problem with when they were in power.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Still not a fan of secret subpoenas/warrants/whatever, but fuck that's funny

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    This is different from a FISA warrant I think. It's not that it was "secret", in that it won't ever be public. Just that they didn't tell trump first, which as far as I know is pretty standard

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    I'm aware. I'm not a fan of them not being able to tell their users when this stuff happens.

    Gotta wait til after they hand it over? Sure. But they should be legally required to inform the user after the fact.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    If you’re not a fan look into services that have a “canary in the coal mine” or “warranty canary”, the best example of this being at work I can remember would be lavabit or true crypt (RIP). Take what I say with more than a grain of salt… just an old privacy advocate that may dive to deep sometimes haha adjusts tinfoil hat

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Unfortunately a lot of the FISA warrants completely gut organization's ability to actually fail to renew a warrant canary

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    TIL… is there any real alternative option that a end user can look for from a service? (or ask that they add if they’re not aware of the option)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    A statute requires notice of the existence and scope of the warrant. Here, it sounds like the court issued a discretionary protective order, further limiting the contents of Twitters notice letter to trump.

  • source
  • parent