re: #127 earthanimal

Yes, that’s pretty much how I read it too. It is somewhat unclear whether the subject of “the specific information from the telephone” that Nadler claims to have heard can be accessed “simply based on an analyst deciding that and you didn’t need a new warrant” refers to just subscriber name or also to actual recordings. I think the more natural reading in context is that he is referring to recordings, but reasonable people could disagree.

What “recordings?” You’re not seriously saying that the government is recording every phone call in the US?

Never mind - I can see you probably are.