Live data from Hacker News

Wife of ICEBlock app founder speaks out after DOJ fires her

newsweek.com

21–30 of 93 posts

Re: Wife of ICEBlock app founder speaks out after DOJ fires her

#21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Identifying and catalog law enforcement actors are not threats. Certainly, they feel threatened by the threat of current or future accountability, but that is their feeling. https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-sections/right-to-r... https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/stopped-by-police

[flagged]

> Surveilling the police obviously enables crime, and in this case is specifically intended to enable crime.

Sure, some kinds of crime would be easier when we can track the police. However, crime caused by police is a real threat to people and they are right to be worried. We don't want a world where the people with the badge and the gun cannot be held accountable at all.

Re: Wife of ICEBlock app founder speaks out after DOJ fires her

#22
post #16
post #10

Where all all the "Free Speech Absolutists" on this?

[deleted]

In this case parent-poster is sarcastically using that phrase/quotation-marks to refer to a different group, one which is lying and supports censorship in their own interests.

Re: Wife of ICEBlock app founder speaks out after DOJ fires her

#24
post #12

Happy for her. She can retire early with an excellent settlement or get another job she is passionate about without worrying about money. It's pretty despicable, but I think in the end it will turn out for the better.

This administration has fired thousands of workers without cause with almost no legal ramifications. What is special about this case?

And the SC has been exceedingly lenient in allowing them.

Re: Wife of ICEBlock app founder speaks out after DOJ fires her

#26
There’s a bit more context in this article: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/bondi-takes-revenge-fami...

According to this article, she self-reported to the DOJ ("Feinstein says that she took it upon herself to inform the DOJ of her relationship with Aaron after the backlash first kicked off more than three weeks ago.”). The people from the DOJ who contacted her initially were looking into ethical issues ("Within a week, she said that she was then contacted by the Office of the U.S. Trustee, which said it was reaching out on behalf of an ethics committee.”).

She told the investigators that she didn’t have anything much to do with the app ("They asked me about my relationship to the ICEBlock App,” she said. “And I informed them in so many words that I really didn’t have any relationship or involvement in the app, I was married to the creator.”) However, she also admits to the journalist that she is a ‘minority shareholder’ in the app development company.

The Newsweek article on HN seems to have a lot less info than this one, though both have pretty inflammatory headlines.

Re: Wife of ICEBlock app founder speaks out after DOJ fires her

#27
post #10

Where all all the "Free Speech Absolutists" on this?

[flagged]

Husband wasn't endorsing candidates. Hatch Act does not forbid activism. Clarence Thomas' wife was very active in conservative causes including explicit support for Trump's candidacy and the Jan 6 insurrection. No charges have ever been filed against her or Justice Thomas.

Re: Wife of ICEBlock app founder speaks out after DOJ fires her

#28
post #8

In addition to the obvious problems of the US government illegally firing one family-member solely to punish a different family-member's constitutionally-protected free-speech... I'd also highlight these aren't even the same part of the federal government. ICE is under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), whereas she is/was employed as a forensic accountant at the Department of Justice (DOJ). To make an throw-b…

You sound surprised? The administration has been purging non-loyalists since January.

I wouldn’t be surprised if they start firing anyone who even downloaded the app.

Re: Wife of ICEBlock app founder speaks out after DOJ fires her

#30
post #10

Where all all the "Free Speech Absolutists" on this?

you mean the "I must have the right to harass people online" people?

The "someone fact checking my political propaganda is not okay" people?

Or like the "objective facts are not neutral because they they imply I'm probably fascist when spreading fascist leaning propaganda" people?

Post reply on HN