3 ms·
Thanks :). What's absurd is that they released (redacted) numbers for phones outside of government, but claimed that even redacted government phones were exempt
by bpchaps 10y ago
Thanks :). What's absurd is that they released (redacted) numbers for phones outside of government, but claimed that even redacted government phones were exempt from release. Because of privacy reasons, and because they'd be interrupted at home. So, they essentially gave themselves FOIA privacy while giving strangers information on strangers.
The judge eventually just told them to just Google the phone numbers as a check if they're public numbers. They followed with other checks, and a longish list of numbers was the result. There was one government phone redacted, but we got the name of the person a bit later, with just a name, no number.