But seriously, @mikebutcher, I’m asking you to correct as it’s misleading to simply say “later” when it was 16 pivotal months. See Facebook testimony under oath to Senate Judiciary (Page 126) in answers to Ranking Member @SenFeinstein. judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/… 
Need I remind people the 2016 election occurred during those sixteen months. Facebook took in tens of millions of dollars and significant political heat and had embeds working alongside Cambridge Analytica using the same data they acquired through intermediary who laundered it.
As you said, timelines matter. Facebook testimony of the date under oath can be considered a fact and it’s the entire focus of your report that is missing from the @HindsightFiles leak.
Reading 👆🏽no doubt Facebook-pushed @TechCrunch to add correction, I actually think it’s less correct than original report. Facebook got emails, PR risk went away and it was 16 months before they received flimsy cover up doc from Nix and weeks after @HNSGR report ran in English.
I may have to put this all in a timeline document to make it crystal clear. @ceciliakang @sheeraf ping me if you need a chapter for your Deny, Delay, Deflect book. This overly qualifies and we still don’t have the actual answers.
Bravo, 👏🏼 I see @TechCrunch @mikebutcher corrected the correction which Facebook likely pressed into bottom of report noting it was 16 months before they received the “certification” from Nix. THANK YOU, keeping timeline accurate is critical. techcrunch.com/2020/01/17/cam…
