Here's the article that the documents relate to, for context: <a href="https://theintercept.com/2016/08/14/nsa-gcsb-prism-surveillance-fullman-fiji/" rel="nofollow">https://theintercept.com/2016/08/14/nsa-gcsb-prism-surveilla...</a>
Is this a warning shot in the Shadow Brokers/DNC battle? Snowden previously insinuated that the NSA had interfered with US ally's elections...<p>Very unpleasant stuff, it's disturbing to see how far it goes.
At the top of every page is the following: <i>"This information is provided for intelligence purposes in an effort to develop potential leads. It cannot be used in affidavits, court proceedings or subpoenas, or for other legal or judicial purposes"</i>.<p>I understand that the NSA wants to hide their sources and methods, but it seems to me (as a non-lawyer), that this goes against the principles upon which courts are supposed to based. If they are going to charge someone with a crime (presumably the intended outcome of such an investigation, if it comes to anything), are they not supposed to provide all the evidence upon which those charges are based?