I don't understand, the first basic rule of intelligence services is you can't use any of their information in court. It's the basic premise behind giving them unlimited privileges.
Right, so the dragnet surveillance isn't good for regular, American-style, jury of your peers type of trials.
Dragnet surveillance is only good for guilt-by-association, which really has no place in US jurisprudence. That "voice of authority" type of guilt is un-American, and non-rational, when we get down to it.
I dont see anything wrong with a simple acknowledge. there has to be some oversight on what information should be redacted, when they are used to build a case
