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

FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 612 posts

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#81

Post by mingus88 »

everdrive wrote: post #68
edot wrote: post #2

"Natanson said her work had led to 1,169 new sources, “all current or former federal employees who decided to trust me with their stories”. She said she learned information “people inside government agencies weren’t supposed to tell me”, saying that the intensity of the work nearly “broke” her." Wow. So they're going to plug her phone in to whatever cracking tech they have and pull down the names of everyone who has…

It's important to note, that the law is not written such that it's only illegal to share classified information when you have a good president. I think a lot of us are very sympathetic when classified information is released to the public due to public interest, concern regarding government action, etc. But it's still illegal. I'm not making a moral claim here. Rather, people who release classified information withou…

Soap box > ballot box > jury box > ammo box

We are on step 3

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#82

Post by everdrive »

kasey_junk wrote: post #80
everdrive wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's important to note, that the law is not written such that it's only illegal to share classified information when you have a good president. I think a lot of us are very sympathetic when classified information is released to the public due to public interest, concern regarding government action, etc. But it's still illegal. I'm not making a moral claim here. Rather, people who release classified information withou…

But also note the government is punishing people for legal acts as well. It’s perfectly legal to tell a soldier they do not have to obey unlawful orders, in fact in many cases it’s a requirement. But the us military started court martial proceedings against a sitting congressman person for doing it.

Well yes, but you can't tell a judge "yes, I broke the law, but it's OK because the government broke the law first."

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#83

Post by SubiculumCode »

Keep your eyes on protecting the midterms from interference... re ICE / militias etc. I encourage governors to call up their State's National Guards to protect their State's electoral systems from Federal intrusion and extremist militia groups. This move is founded in the most republican of urges: State Sovereignty. (btw, I'd even consider that as a move in Minneapolis, right now).

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#84

Post by Hikikomori »

atlanta90210 wrote: post #57
eunoia wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re fundamentally right. Trump is obviously the worst we’ve seen yet, but power has been accumulating unchecked in the executive branch’s hands for decades now. Trump is merely a symptom of the problem that is the Imperial Presidency. If we can’t tackle the problem itself we’ll get another politician doing the exact same shit after Trump.

They raided Trump's wife's underwear drawer too so Trump is a victim of this FBI overreach as well.

Its not really overreach if they get a warrant and find the things they were looking for.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#85

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

everdrive wrote: post #68
edot wrote: post #2

"Natanson said her work had led to 1,169 new sources, “all current or former federal employees who decided to trust me with their stories”. She said she learned information “people inside government agencies weren’t supposed to tell me”, saying that the intensity of the work nearly “broke” her." Wow. So they're going to plug her phone in to whatever cracking tech they have and pull down the names of everyone who has…

It's important to note, that the law is not written such that it's only illegal to share classified information when you have a good president. I think a lot of us are very sympathetic when classified information is released to the public due to public interest, concern regarding government action, etc. But it's still illegal. I'm not making a moral claim here. Rather, people who release classified information withou…

I reject the current legitimacy of that law. After Donald Trump claimed personal immunity for classified document violations in his interregnum, any prosecutions his government launches based on it are presumptively invalid.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#86

Post by zxcvasd »

andsoitis wrote: post #79
joering2 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What difference does it make whether they are US citizens or not? At least DHS is not interested in finding out. And there has been plenty US citizens deported under DHS. https://www.congress.gov/119/meeting/house/118180/documents/... https://www.propublica.org/article/immigration-dhs-american-...

> And there has been plenty US citizens deported under DHS. Are you sure? Do you mind linking to information / reporting about that? I have not seen any.

[dead]

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#87

Post by dabluecaboose »

dabluecaboose wrote: post #56
alsetmusic wrote: post #31

It'd be real cool if all the second amendment (guns) people cared as much about the first amendment (free speech and freedom of press). "They're gonna take my guns away!" Yet that never happens. But people are being targeted for what they say, for disagreeing publicly. That's real. And a lot of "patriots" don't seem to notice or care.

[flagged]

Adding this on as a separate thought:

If you genuinely think we're at the point that we need to start shooting, the onus is on YOU to get armed, get trained, and take action. Don't expect anyone else to come and fight for you, especially those you perceive as your political enemies.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#88

Post by snowwrestler »

To clarify why it’s aggressive: federal employees have a legal duty to secure classified information, but everyone else does not.

Reporters are not federal employees and it’s not illegal for them to have or discuss classified materials. Most of what Snowden leaked was classified, and remains classified to this day, but you and I can read about it on Wikipedia. The government pursued Snowden because he was legally obligated to protect that info. They did not pursue Barton Gellman because he wasn’t.

So in this case the government is raiding the home of someone who did not commit any crime, in the hopes of getting at people who might have. I think it’s not hard to imagine how this concept could get ugly fast.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#89

Post by rozab »

mikeweiss wrote: post #34
lawn wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they'll have ICE take them and they'll be deported or made to disappear. Some might even end up dying. That's how the US is right now.

That only works if they aren't U.S citizens... Which if they're working for the gov means they are. This administration is creative they will find other more 'legal' ways for retribution so the punishment sticks.

ICE just summarily executed a US citizen in the street with the full support of the administration.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#90

Post by kasey_junk »

everdrive wrote: post #82
kasey_junk wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But also note the government is punishing people for legal acts as well. It’s perfectly legal to tell a soldier they do not have to obey unlawful orders, in fact in many cases it’s a requirement. But the us military started court martial proceedings against a sitting congressman person for doing it.

Well yes, but you can't tell a judge "yes, I broke the law, but it's OK because the government broke the law first."

It’s frequently not illegal to talk to a reporter. Let’s not kid ourselves, this isn’t about classified material it’s about loyalty, so watch what happens to sources that didn’t do anything illegal.

This government brought sham charges against the Fed president, what are they going to do to a run of the mill federal employee?

Post reply on HN