Thread by @jason_kint

In list of items Facebook covered up, this report deserves questions under oath if FB won't answer press. Facebook's CTO said he didn't know nearly 6 million Fake Accounts, Fake Likes were deleted after 2016 election? And Facebook doesn't know countries?

From docs unsealed in fall 2018 from a lawsuit. press reported it appears to be discovery from internal Facebook communications discussing strategy to cover up a fairly large mistake.

https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1052400225602756608

Never dug into Zuckeberg lieutenant @boztank's old tweets but note how he failed to mention what he calls Cambridge Analytica's "certification" wasn't even legally useful and came more than 16 months, a brexit and US election after Facebook knew about it.

Truth always comes out. I’ve been suspecting much of this but DC attorney general has a nuclear bomb to drop on Facebook. These docs need to be unsealed and then top brass should resign. documentcloud.org/documents/5777…

Again, if execs knew before Dec 9, 2015 then perjury is even less debatable than it already is. FB execs went out of their way testifying only “2015” until squeezed into “Dec 2015” for date of first knowledge. In addition hired Joseph Chancellor in between Sept and Dec 2015.

Testimony to Whitehouse, Doyle, a few others will be key off top of my head. Also this here with Sen Kamala Harris.

https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/984066284471111680?s=21

Also worth noting if this is the same email chain which ICO referenced to @CommonsCMS but never released then it’s all about which employees and what was communicated to where in the company.

@CommonsCMS Reading more closely, my favorite section of the filing against Facebook is the reference to Brown & Williamson v FTC which is apropos.

Here are a couple relevant transcripts from CEO Zuckerberg's testimony and written answers. You can see how they often tried to just say the entire year 2015 but ultimately stated they took action immediately after being made aware when Guardian reported.

https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1055475285410361344?s=20

putting aside the fact Zuckerberg testified to
@SenWhitehouse
they received legal certification from Cambridge Analytica when really they received a legally useless document 16 months later after Brexit and after US election.
@AGKarlRacine

https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1097319773967392768?s=20

@SenWhitehouse @AGKarlRacine Actually reviewing my notes, Zuckerberg testimony to @USRepMikeDoyle was the clearest testimony that he found out after the Guardian report.

https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1067580192791687170?s=20

@SenWhitehouse @AGKarlRacine @USRepMikeDoyle it was also touched on by @RepAnnaEshoo. Here are more relevant exchanges from Congressional testimony.

https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1009204974251859968?s=20

@SenWhitehouse @AGKarlRacine @USRepMikeDoyle @RepAnnaEshoo and of course, @IanCLucas has by far been most diligent at trying to get a simple answer when Zuckerberg was first aware. This video makes clear they don't want to answer considering exchange was after 6 months and many obfuscated answers from Facebook.

https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1097300877600272389?s=20

Wow. Overnight, Facebook put out another statement attempting to separate the CA reference in DC AGs filing as a different activity. This will only surface even more questions. theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/m…

This is why failure to disclose facts and consistent obfuscation bites them. So who exactly was aware of this speculation that Cambridge Analytica was “scraping data” in Sept 2015? Release the emails then if it’s something different.

So even in FB new timeline of events:
- sep 2015, FB employee speculation CA is scraping data
- dec 2015 news report GSR harvesting/selling to CA - apr 2017 CA sends useless legally doc saying they no longer have data - mar 2018 FB informs users after blows wide open.

And despite this in the final @CommonsCMS report referencing emails related to the GSR breach, Facebook is saying the emails were unrelated. 👀

https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1108888337757163521?s=21

So FB is confirming awareness CA was trying to do bad stuff, something still would have caused rumors they were scraping and a DC employee knew about it. So which one? DC means puts this directly into politics. DC also handled other GSR/CA matters in 2017.

This new info, @juliacarriew reporting on Facebook's awareness of CA in Sept 2015 just makes Facebook's Simon Milner's evidence even more dubious. Read. It. Again. This was one month PRIOR to March 2018 press reports on Facebook/Cambridge Analytica. data.parliament.uk/writtenevidenc…

@juliacarriew @CommonsCMS by the way, if you can't sense the arrogance in this answer, you should watch video. "Simon Milner: There can be all kinds of things that these organisations
do. I think what data they have would be a good question to ask them, rather than us. We have no insight on that."

@juliacarriew @CommonsCMS Bottom-line: 1) Facebook hearing 3pm ET today in DC. 2) FB produced 130k docs in response to DC subpoena. 3) FB is fighting super hard to keep one doc from being disclosed. Same doc UK ICO also didn't disclose thru Parliament report. 4) Involves DC sales execs' emails about CA.

@juliacarriew @CommonsCMS @ICOnews @AGKarlRacine @IanCLucas @DamianCollins I'm fairly confident these are same internal comms Facebook wants sealed. Left is DC court filing. Right is DCMS report. CEO has obfuscated/dodged timeline. New info is DC-based employee(s) involvement in Sept '15, 3mo before Guardian reported, 2mo before FB hired Chancellor.

@juliacarriew @CommonsCMS @ICOnews @AGKarlRacine @IanCLucas @DamianCollins Here is the fuller context including redactions. Facebook has provided another statement overnight saying this was a different Cambridge Analytica incident (attached). This should be unsealed at this point. Shine the light. documentcloud.org/documents/5777…

Hearing just ended. Multiple ppl present sharing supposedly internal Sep 2015 Facebook emails about Cambridge Analytica scraping data included employee(s) from CA office, too. A big deal and inconsistent with how I read this sentence from FB’s filing which suggests DC sales only.

FB and DC AG continue to volley filings back and forth over Cambridge Analytica. This over the weekend. I find it amusing as it defies most consumers’ experience to suggest a “reasonable person” viewing Facebook’s disclosures of its surveillance would understand them.

FB filed their side of transcript confirming 1) emails about Cambridge Analytica prior to press involved DC and California employees, 2) FB attempts to isolate emails as involving different incident about “data scraping.” Quite unbelievable at this point we can’t see these docs.

Here are two important pages for those following more closely. You can see there is one doc out of 130k from subpoena that Facebook really wants to keep sealed. Why? It’s a thread predating Cambridge Analytica press by three months.

Trying to reconcile this description by FB lawyers filed over weekend in DC courts of a doc it’s desperate to keep sealed (“takes place between a number of Facebook employees located all over the country”) with UK reports suggesting only 3 senior managers were aware pre-Dec.