4 ms·
What's funny is while the judge might look silly suggesting such a basic technique, Twitter's lawyers were clearly "playing dumb" saying that a search for "real
by josefresco 3y ago
What's funny is while the judge might look silly suggesting such a basic technique, Twitter's lawyers were clearly "playing dumb" saying that a search for "realDonaldTrump" produced "millions of emails" and therefore was unreasonable.
- progbits 3y agoLawyers gonna lawyer, don't expect good intent from them. Edit, more accurately: do not anthropomorphize lawyers.
- justrealist 3y agoWell I think they were saying that (1) internally at Twitter there were millions of references to the realDonaldTrump account in slack/email (plausible) and (2) there were a ton of external communications about the account which were probably not material to this request.
- ceejayoz 3y agoThey're deliberately playing dumb, though, in a way that was probably pretty transparent to the judge. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/15/special-counsel-obtained-trump-twitter-howell-00111410 https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/15/special-counsel-obt... That conversation refers to: > Among the data the search warrant commanded Twitter to produce: Accounts associated with @realdonaldtrump that the former president might have used in the same device. They know that doesn't mean "anyone who @mentioned him publicly".
- peppermint_gum 3y agoThis is not true. "Millions of emails" was in reference to this part of the warrant: "Communications between Twitter and any person regarding the account including contacts with support services and records of actions taken"
- ceejayoz 3y agoA public @mention of Trump by a random person is not a "communication between Twitter [and that person] regarding the [@realDonaldTrump] account" by any sane reading. That item means they have to hand over things like support tickets or emails sent to the @realDonaldTrump account or Trump's social media team.