techniques the other surveillance technology that could have that that could have been used to draft because that because as the government drafts the affidavit and then they then they get through and we have just become the new to the power of that intrusion into our privacy right thank you clear that the government is not required to exhaust every available means of surveillance before resorting to a wiretap nor did this year long investigation of these investigators dive head first immediately into a wiretap certainly didn't omit material information about what the agent's training and experience informed him in addition to concert with other agents about belief and after spelling out all of the other the quote sources the defense and defends the control dr site information but in the paragraph one seventy five of agent brown's affidavit he stated that based on my training and experience and conversations with other law enforcement bryson does not make precise location of the it available to law enforcement when it does it's a disclaimer that it provides when it does provide law enforcement with location information and that disclaimer makes it abundantly clear that their location information is  enabled knowing when the transaction was about to transpire knowing where firms are in a group of in some residence certainly wouldn't have a lot of the interest to discern what the topic of the conversation was who was talking who working upstream to identify sources of supply is not necessarily the litmus test and i might point out that the nor is the fact that my opponent just suggested that there's some just just violation that these affidavits applications are more often than not approved by a court the review process within the department of justice is in the department's office of in for operations it's quite rigid and it's formalized it's in writing it's not like when the prosecutors can just go to a judge and request a wiretap there's often several layers of preview and so it's not surprising in the government's you that when that threshold threshold level of scrutiny where the necessity has been described and will be history of move destination and the other alternative investigative tools have been set forth here and he page affidavit  fourth amendment jurisprudence must keep pace with events the technology that's clear that in berger when when we anticipate that this is a dirty business and that we need to we're going to need to keep pace that's been anticipated  you know there there was in fact a lot of evidence developed in the case as the investigation proceeded and that that was as attorney because it just it didn't need to know everything that everyone said we didn't need to take that step of wiretapping there were their means of tracking the defendants whereabouts there were there are other technologies available that can paying off of those telephone reckless in the face of content in the face of the public knowledge about surveillance technology if the court is down by precedent and they can only review for clear and and  recourse defendants need to have a remedy they need to be able to access the money that this court has put forward thank you very much for the question