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

131–140 of 612 posts

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#131

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

joering2 wrote: post #60
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.

Take it for whats its worth but I been good friends with someone who works in Newsom camp, and constantly goes for a bite with his team. They talk alot. The main theme now is how to use illegal immigration situation to their benefit. If Newsom is elected President, he wants to go door to door in search for illegal guns that illegals are harboring. Of course all this is BS, or in such insignificant amount that its rat…

In your “it would be fun to see people I don’t like being killed” you have conflated legal gun ownership that you don’t like to illegally crossing the remaining the borders of a country… and you can’t see it huh?

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#132

Post by gvedem »

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.

This would only be true if ICE cared to obey the law, which they do not. They are not observing even the most basic facsimile of due process or probable cause. Protesting them is being treated as grounds for brutalization or arrest. They are actively flaunting their contempt for the Constitution while "conservatives" cheer from the sidelines.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#134

Post by HNisCIS »

cjs_ac wrote: post #118
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The American military couldn't handle rice farmers or goat herders, they sure as fuck can't handle the most armed country in history.

The question is how many people will side with them vs reality.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#135

Post by bossyTeacher »

nickff wrote: post #77
bossyTeacher wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As others pointed out, the problem with this is that you end up with a government that can target any reporter by claiming they have "classified materials". No need to prove what those materials are (because they are classified). This is how third world countries choke journalists.

In the USA, the claim has to be convincing to a judge, so it’s not quite as arbitrary as you indicate.

Clearly, the bar for it to be convincing seems quite low here

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#136

Post by NickC25 »

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]

>Just a few years ago, their own supporters were smugly saying that standing up to the government is a fantasy for paranoid whackjobs.

One dude in his home with a gun or two versus a 50 billion dollar ICE force that has complete immunity and a massive media and political empire ready to spin any bad incident into an us-versus-them narrative.....

Yeah, it is a fantasy. Oh, and if anything really gets out of hand, that political empire also has nuclear weapons.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#137

Post by toomanyrichies »

blhack wrote: post #102
cultofmetatron wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That only works if they aren't U.S citizens Ice has already summarily executed two US citizens. one literally on camera and broadcasted to the world.

I think you're talking about Renee Good - who is the other person?

His name was Keith Porter. [1]

Relatedly, here's a fuller list of recent shootings by immigration agents. [2]

1. https://www.foxla.com/news/ice-shooting-keith-porter-northri...

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shootings_by_U.S._immi...

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#138

Post by njovin »

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.

I don't know if it's fair to say we're chilling - there have been fairly organized (although admittedly not very large) protests around the nation related to the killing of Nicole Renee Good. I live in southern California and there were at least 6 within easy driving distance this past weekend.

Whenever ICE goes into a new city, they're meeting more and more community resistance. The protestors have mostly been very smart about remaining civil, which continues making ICE look worse and worse as they tear gas and arrest peaceful protestors.

The supreme court has ruled (somewhat surprisingly) that Trump can't deploy the National Guard into cities any longer.

Trump's approval rating has continued steadily declining since he took office, and the midterms are shaping up to be a bloodbath.

I'm mid-40s and this is the best-organized and most successful demonstration movement I've witnessed in my lifetime. Occupy got close, but that felt like something that the more 'extreme' ones were actively participating in, with more passive support from the populace. Now it feels like everyone is getting directly involved in one way or another.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#139

Post by lokar »

expedition32 wrote: post #125
iamtheworstdev wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The following question is "what will they do with the names of the people they pull?". I'll take a shot at the answer -> Charge them with treason. Because that's the country we live in now, and most of us are just sitting by passively watching it happen.

Ironic that the orange man is telling Iranians to risk their lives.

His policy is very consistent and clear. He does not care about the form of government, how they treat the population etc, only that they show deference to him (personally).

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#140

Post by scarecrowbob »

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…

They can and do make whatever they want illegal, but you're correct not to make a moral claim about it. I'm not making a moral claim, either, but a pragmatic one.

At the same time, it's entirely legitimate to look at a set of laws and think "fuck that". Just because you're correct that bad things might happen to folks doesn't mean I have to be happy with it.

At the end of the day, having bad laws doesn't make the rest of us cower in fear.

Rather, those laws help us understand that the folks protected by those laws (and the systems that they are using to harm us) neither have our interests in mind nor have any legitimate claim to authority.

So while your "bad things will happen if I break the law" is maybe pragmatic, consider a similar pragmatic point:

"writing laws that folks feel justified in breaking might lead to shifts in how legitimate people see that government".

Post reply on HN