For the record, I agree with you. I'm personally opposed to this line of thought, I'm just devil's advocating what the executive branch and legislature has and will argue.
The Devil already has enough advocates. Please stop spamming HN with bad-faith noise.
You'd rather this forum be a hugbox of agreement rather than one of actual discussion?
That never leads anywhere. Good ideas can stand up to criticism. Strong opinions necessarily must be defendable. You don't get that with a hugbox.
So I put my karma on the line for what I think is good argument.
Not only tracking them, but putting flags on their passports and interrogating them at the border: “They asked about the new caravan and if word had gotten out about how difficult it is to seek asylum in the U.S.,” Drehsler said. “Then before I left, the female agent asked if I rented or owned my home.” This sounds much more like a political intimidation operation than serving a national security purpose.
It sounds most like a criminal investigation into a particular violent incident at the border and the investigators are trying to follow the money.
I don't think so. Pulling a journalist in once to ask for information would fit with that.
But flagging them so that all future border crossings result in automatic detainment for questioning can't be seen that way. I can only read that as surveillance and harassment.
Not only tracking them, but putting flags on their passports and interrogating them at the border: “They asked about the new caravan and if word had gotten out about how difficult it is to seek asylum in the U.S.,” Drehsler said. “Then before I left, the female agent asked if I rented or owned my home.” This sounds much more like a political intimidation operation than serving a national security purpose.
this is normal. journalists are hot targets to either spoof or buy to snoop around as they often have more access than regular civilians to high profile targets.... counter-intelligence and counter-espionage. people should realise that forgein powers demotivate them against their own government, and now these demotivated people are the ones complaining about this kind of shit, preventing their own government from fun…
people should realise that forgein powers demotivate them against their own government
But what's wrong with that? Americans have every right to be "demotivated" and seek change from the government. The government has zero authority to coerce people to support the government, or to prevent dissatisfied citizens from agitating for change through free speech.
Not only tracking them, but putting flags on their passports and interrogating them at the border: “They asked about the new caravan and if word had gotten out about how difficult it is to seek asylum in the U.S.,” Drehsler said. “Then before I left, the female agent asked if I rented or owned my home.” This sounds much more like a political intimidation operation than serving a national security purpose.
It's terrifying. Free speech should not be infringed upon. This is obviously happening more and more. High profile cases like journalists and activists caught up in association with Snowden, like Greenwald, Poitras and Lavabit's founder... Are probably known to most here. But I wonder if most are aware even a journalist covering the dakota pipeline protests was detained by the US government(1). 1- https://www.nytimes…
I wonder if that might have to do with foreign influence being involved with the protests?
Journalists are often harrassed when they dig into things the powerful want to leave burried. https://sharylattkisson.com/new-update-attkisson-v-doj-and-f... https://cpj.org/asia/china/
Sharyl Attkisson, the person interviewing Jerome Corsi, author of Killing the Deep State: The Fight to Save President Trump in this interview?
"Citizens United’s David Bossie and former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski argued that Washington bureaucrats are seeking to undermine the presidency of Donald Trump."
This is incorrect. A criminal investigation would be legal. A quote directly from the article sums up the counterpoint nicely: “We are a criminal investigation agency, we’re not an intelligence agency,” the Homeland Security source told NBC 7 Investigates. “We can’t create dossiers on people and they’re creating dossiers. This is an abuse of the Border Search Authority.”
If you are investigating or otherwise overseeing the border, would it not be useful to have a list of journalists who are actively gathering on-the-ground intel (for their jobs)? This is a weak attempt to make it look like the Obama era abuses a la Sheryl Attkinson. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/01/29/sharyl_at...
Databases of journalists have slightly different optics when the president has called for opening libel laws, encouraged violence against the press at his rallies, and has labeled journalists the "enemy of the people".
A journo friend of mine told me foreign journalists need special visa to enter the US. In fairness I don't think they have ever refused anyone or expelled the press over reporting but the US knows who is in the country.
How do they know/enforce that? (Put a different way, if I were a journalist what would stop me entering the same way as Joe Average)
Usually when entering a country one is asked the purpose of one's visit. Saying you are there for vacation when really you are there working could be an issue.
Journalists are often harrassed when they dig into things the powerful want to leave burried. https://sharylattkisson.com/new-update-attkisson-v-doj-and-f... https://cpj.org/asia/china/
It's like a video game, if there are obstacles in your path then you're heading in the right direction.
Who is the obstacle, the wealthy or the journalist?