FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home • Hacker News Board

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#111

Post by pjc50 » Wed, Jan 14, 2026, 4:08 PM UTC

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]

I don't know whether you've noticed, but being armed is simply giving the Federales more reasons to kill you first. The woman shot in Minneapolis was shot on the pretext of using her car as a weapon.

How do people really expect this to work? In detail? You show up with an armed militia at a school and the ICE guys just drive on past (and then raid someone else)? Or are they expecting more of an Amerimaidan situation? Jan 6th situation?

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#112

Post by dkdcio » Wed, Jan 14, 2026, 4:08 PM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #93

weberer wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM

I don't think that PRISM involved root access to any devices and this link does not claim that it did.

I was expecting this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_d...

still doesn’t really prove much

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#113

Post by relaxing » Wed, Jan 14, 2026, 4:09 PM UTC

squigz wrote: post #21

a2tech wrote: post #3

Between this and Minneapolis I guess the water temperature just keeps on being turned up, and us frogs are just chilling out in our warm baths.

Why has this analogy been repeated so much lately? Did someone famous use it or something? Edit: just to clarify, I'm not denying it's appropriate; it just seems remarkable to me that it's being used so often lately.

Baader-Meinhof effect.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#114

Post by SV_BubbleTime » Wed, Jan 14, 2026, 4:09 PM UTC

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.

> "They're gonna take my guns away!" Yet that never happens

That never happens because the parties vested in that right resist every single time. Effectively. With real numbers. Not media campaigns or propaganda social media mechanisms. Largely without protesting, with no need to get into degrees of legality in doing so.

You don’t get to say “that never happens” as if it isn’t the explicit goal of an entire political party. You get to realize “we don’t let that happen”.

As to current events… the mass deportation guy won elections, why is it you expect armed resistance to federal officers carrying out the exact thing the majority of voters wanted?

You can disagree on anything you like, but, I find the “why aren’t people shooting federal officers who are enforcing immigration law!?” posts to be extreme affirmations of echo chamber. If you don’t like it, get your reps to change the laws, not suggest murdering people who you don’t like.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#115

Post by disgruntledphd2 » Wed, Jan 14, 2026, 4:09 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #88

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 ob…

Thank you, this is really useful context!

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#116

Post by pjc50 » Wed, Jan 14, 2026, 4:10 PM UTC

SubiculumCode wrote: post #83

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).

Do you think the Minneapolis National Guard are willing to fire on ICE if ordered to do so? What do you expect the legal fallout of that situation to be?

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#117

Post by leoc » Wed, Jan 14, 2026, 4:10 PM UTC

FatherOfCurses wrote: post #63

Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post and gave a boatload of money to Trump's campaign. Democracy dies in darkness.

Don’t ever forget what Bezos chooses to do or not to do here, whenever his name comes up in any context in future.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#118

Post by cjs_ac » Wed, Jan 14, 2026, 4:10 PM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #85

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…

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.

That's all well and good, but the law stands because the administration has more firepower than you.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#119

Post by pjc50 » Wed, Jan 14, 2026, 4:11 PM UTC

eunoia wrote: post #23

webdoodle wrote: post #7

Not really surprised at this point. After Bush allowed, and Obama pardoned the collateral murder pilots, whistleblowers and journalists in the U.S. have been continually threatened, hazed, jailed and killed at the pleasure of whomever the current president is. This isn't party politics, Bush through Trump, are guilty. This is fascism at its finest...

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.

Most of which is downstream of 9/11 and the War on Terror. That provided lots of bipartisan support for state sponsored killings.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#120

Post by xhrpost » Wed, Jan 14, 2026, 4:11 PM UTC

INTPenis wrote: post #103

imzadi wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were over 1000 protests over the weekend. The one I went to in Surprise, AZ had almost 1000 people, in a fairly conservative area with mostly older, white demographics. I think the tide is turning.

Serious question from a clueless european here, who should they vote for? To us on the outside, getting filtered news that trickles down, it just seems like there are no candidates. One is 79 and one is 83, where are all the young politicians? Why does the media choose to only emphasize a few of them at the time?

If there's one thing both parties agree with, it's that you can't ever vote for a third party because that's effectively voting for the other major candidate. So the problem of not having more than 2 choices perpetuates indefinitely.