2 ms·
it is you who is reading what isn't there - like "search warrant" and "consent". I refer to the words what is explicitly there - like "exigency" (which allows t
by trhway 6y ago
it is you who is reading what isn't there - like "search warrant" and "consent". I refer to the words what is explicitly there - like "exigency" (which allows to bypass search warrants and consent) and clearly sets the context, especially when we are talking about FBI Fly Team.
- bladegash 6y agoI am not reading into it, I said from the beginning the statement in the email is ambiguous. The word “exigency” isn’t explicitly there in the email. It is referenced by the author as being present in a separate email (which for some reason they didn’t include...?) and then qualified via a source as being facetious. Even if it was there and taken literally, I fail to see anywhere in law, case law, the email, and/or the article that suggests “exigency” is sufficient justification for violating an individual’s 4th Amendment rights. To the best of my knowledge, that does not exist.