Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 153 posts

Re: DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

#121

Post by JumpCrisscross »

pdx wrote: post #115
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Speech itself isn't protected if it is directed to incite or produce imminent lawless action. See Brandenburg v. Ohio Correct, but for that argument to hold within the context of this case (EDIT: warrant) we would need the government to show that most people who visited this site did so with the intent to incite imminent lawless action. (Note, too, that Brandenburg v. Ohio specifically struck down a law banning the…

> Correct, but for that argument to hold within the > context of this case we would need the government to > show that most people who visited this site did so with > the intent to incite imminent lawless action. Of course that's not true. For the government to prosecute all of those visitors requires additional proof, to be sure. However, for the government to gather evidence on a subset of those visitors who have a…

> for the government to gather evidence on a subset of those visitors who have already been arrested and are being charged with politically inspired violence, is perfectly appropriate

If this warrant were replaced with demands for visitation logs from specific IP addresses or relating to certain people, it would be far less controversial.

Re: DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

#122

Post by openasocket »

pdx wrote: post #110
pmiller2 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't refer to these morons committing violent acts in the name of protest as "alt-left." It does nothing but legitimize them, much as the moniker "alt-right" legitimizes white supremacists. There is a time and a place for violent protest/revolution, but we're nowhere near there yet.

> much as the moniker "alt-right" legitimizes white > supremacists. Actually, alt-right was coined as a term to differentiate people who adhere to the traditional republican/libertarian views about personal liberty and small government from the neo-conservatives such as Romney, McCain, Graham, and others who push so strongly for nation-building and big government. The collection of people that are drawn to the ideal…

Source? The Southern Poverty Law Center says it was coined by Richard Spencer to describe a white nationalist political ideology: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideo...

Re: DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

#123

Post by mulmen »

gozur88 wrote: post #67
mulmen wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would a political organization feel the need to protect their information from the DOJ? This isn't a matter of "sides", it is a matter of extreme overreach by the executive branch.

It's not overreach if the political organization is behaving like a criminal organization. Much of the rioting and property damage at the inauguration was clearly planned, so the DOJ is just doing its job here.

While individuals may have used the platform to plan illegal acts that does not mean everyone on the platform should have their information revealed. This type of dragnet investigation is illegal for a reason. The DOJs job is to collect evidence on criminals without trampling on the bill of rights. Asking for this information is lazy at best and malicious at worst.

Re: DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

#124

Post by tekromancr »

Boothroid wrote: post #109
Akujin wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one has a problem when they remove sites affiliated with ISIS but apparently Nazis should be given a pass because "free speech". Uh huh.....

How many people have been killed by far right terrorism? Exactly.

Off the top of my head?

Oklahoma City

Dylann Roof

The asshole who drove his car into a group of counterprotestors

Re: DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

#125

Post by Akujin »

Boothroid wrote: post #109
Akujin wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one has a problem when they remove sites affiliated with ISIS but apparently Nazis should be given a pass because "free speech". Uh huh.....

How many people have been killed by far right terrorism? Exactly.

The Holocaust doesn't count?

Now I know you're a racist piece of shit.

Re: DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

#126

Post by flipgimble »

krath94 wrote: post #66

Sorry, but antifa is more than Anti-Trump Activists, they are dangerous. They attack people for political reasons and are largely unpunished because they wear all black and wear masks. They are the clowns that started fires in berkeley and hit the Trump support in the head with a bike lock, causing a fractured skull. That's no good imo.

so antifa = anti-fascists, right?

By fascists we are talking about the white supremacists fascists with Nazi flags and salutes that staged violence in Charlottesville last weekend?

If you openly glorify Nazi-ism then I'm going to assume that you would kill a few million people you don't like, given any political power. Incidentally a person was killed by fascists.

Given that background, whats wrong with being against fascists?

Now that you mention it, I am an anti-fascist and still firmly committed to non-violence.

Re: DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

#127

Post by Boothroid »

Akujin wrote: post #125
Boothroid wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many people have been killed by far right terrorism? Exactly.

The Holocaust doesn't count? Now I know you're a racist piece of shit.

Well if we're going that far back: Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, King Herod - plenty of butchers of every persuasion. I was talking about more recent history.

Re: DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

#128

Post by Boothroid »

tekromancr wrote: post #124
Boothroid wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many people have been killed by far right terrorism? Exactly.

Off the top of my head? Oklahoma City Dylann Roof The asshole who drove his car into a group of counterprotestors

A drop in the ocean compared to ISIS and even the IRA. A poor showing really in the global terrorist bodycount.

Re: DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

#129

Post by dmix »

EpiphanyMachine wrote: post #98
tehlike wrote: post #16

I wonder if eff will support them. Probably semi annual reminder time to consider donating to eff

Yes they are helping. Is the government really asking for all those visitor logs? "Yes, they definitely are," says Electronic Frontier Foundation senior staff attorney Mark Rumold. EFF advocates for Internet privacy and free speech, and has advised DreamHost in its case. Rumold tells NPR that when DreamHost first approached EFF about responding to the warrant, he guessed "that DOJ would realize how broad the warrant…

So if any charges are brought against anyone as a result they could most likely get any evidence from it thrown out because the initial warrant was too broad and violated their right preventing unlawful search?

The real test for the legality of these warrants is typically in the courts for the defendant's trial, which is unfortunate. It's not often thoroughly challenged by the initial judge from what I've heard.

Which is interesting when you think of the implications of NSA FISA warrants not having any public scrutiny at all, just a judge's opinion in total secret.

I know in Canada it's not even full judges who sign off on police warrants but people called "Justice of the Peace" who are less trained than a judge and spend all day working with police signing off warrants.

Various defense attorneys I've spoken to have said they sign almost everything the police give them and tend to give the police the benefit of the doubt. Which is why the first thing every defense attorney does is look to challenge any warrants because they are usually the lowest hanging fruit in terms of how well thought out the police investigation was.

Re: DOJ Demands Files on Anti-Trump Activists, and DreamHost Resists

#130

Post by dragonwriter »

dmix wrote: post #129
EpiphanyMachine wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes they are helping. Is the government really asking for all those visitor logs? "Yes, they definitely are," says Electronic Frontier Foundation senior staff attorney Mark Rumold. EFF advocates for Internet privacy and free speech, and has advised DreamHost in its case. Rumold tells NPR that when DreamHost first approached EFF about responding to the warrant, he guessed "that DOJ would realize how broad the warrant…

So if any charges are brought against anyone as a result they could most likely get any evidence from it thrown out because the initial warrant was too broad and violated their right preventing unlawful search? The real test for the legality of these warrants is typically in the courts for the defendant's trial, which is unfortunate. It's not often thoroughly challenged by the initial judge from what I've heard. Whic…

> So if any charges are brought against anyone as a result they could most likely get any evidence from it thrown out because the initial warrant was too broad and violated their right preventing unlawful search?

No, IIRC, because you can only get evidence excluded if our were the target of the unlawful search; an unlawful search of Art's papers that turns up evidence used against Beth doesn't qualify for the exclusionary rule.

Post reply on HN