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

Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 200 posts

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#151

Post by IgorPartola »

rootusrootus wrote: post #78
IgorPartola wrote: post #28

I get some kind of sick satisfaction out of watching a certain small subset of HN lose their mind trying to square the circle when it comes to stuff like this. On one hand “this is government overreach!” (it’s not because the committee here is on a specific task to investigate a specific crime) and “free market!” and on the other hand “big social media companies are evil and decide what’s right and what’s wrong.” Nev…

AFAICT political tribes rule everything now, and the actual policy issues are unimportant. I rarely see anyone discussing policy, everything is very shallow, very personal.

Has policy ever been discussed as the main thing? It seems like at least American politics has always been about which faction you align with/how you self-identify.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#152

Post by IgorPartola »

MiroF wrote: post #112
IgorPartola wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How to misunderstand the situation 101: bring the first amendment into the discussion when that’s not what the discussion is about. Let me break this down for you: you host a weekly poker night. My buddies and I come and during these nights plan a crime. We than carry out a crime and get arrested. The investigators come to you and ask “what did those guys talk about at your poker nights?” You say “poker stuff”. They…

> They subpoena you to get a better answer Sure except the subpoena in question was not actually about records of conversations that the rioters had, it was about efforts FB did/didn't take to discount election misinformation. Election misinformation is covered by free speech.

> Election misinformation is covered by free speech.

In the same way as yelling “fire” in a theater.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#153

Post by deburo »

MiroF wrote: post #134
Mountain_Skies wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently most self-identified leftists in the US didn't get the memo because they haven't been anti-corporate since corporations rainbowed themselves after Occupy Wall Street ended. The 1999 WTO protests in Seattle could never happen today but a celebration of the WTO and global corporate power certainly could. That's simply what the left in the US has become: another wholly owned subsidiary of Corporation Inc.

You are imputing a lot of views onto "leftists" that I do not think are accurate. I am unsure how rainbow flags have any relevance to this discussion. So called "pinkwashing" is well known among leftist circles so to suggest that entire political spectrum has been hoodwinked by American corporations seems wrong? The real answer is just that the Left isn't particularly powerful in the US, even during the WTO protests.

>Left isn't particularly powerful in the US

There's always the mistake of assuming the person means the US Left as opposed to another country's Left movement, but the Left as understood within the US is quite powerful. It seems really as if both movements divide the country in two.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#154

Post by beerandt »

cmiles74 wrote: post #66
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #17

Quoted post unavailable.

I think it's worth mentioning that the executive branch of the US government, including the president of the US, were supporting the rioters. In my opinion, this is part of the reason why the capital was not more secure. It may be more difficult for another country, like England, to get that kind of support from the executive branch of the US government.

No post body was provided.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#155

Post by jsnell »

akomtu wrote: post #149
guerrilla wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that I disagree, but how does this particular thing factor into that?

This Jan6 committee doesn't look legit, to be honest. Issuing subpoenas and jail time for ignoring those subpoenas is the courts' territory. I dont understand how a bunch of legislators, who were elected to write laws, created an "emergency committee" with judical and executive powers.

Isn't this power already a well-established (though also fictional) part of the US system?

What I mean by the parenthetical statement is that while the legislative branch does have an established right to ask the disclosure of information, their power to actually compel is limited. Without cooperation from the other branches of government, what they directly control is a handful of operatives who maintain no facilities for detaining people for the long term.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#156

Post by yucky »

lapsedacademic wrote: post #55
yucky wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think it is probable she would have been killed. What leads you to call that probable? I don't think it's impossible, after all it's only been a few years since that Bernie supporter shot at all those Republican congressmen, and Scalise almost did die. But that guy was actually armed and went with that purpose, these goofs appear to have been unarmed protesters who turned into a mob. I know you don't need a gun to…

> What leads you to call that probable? Because people with guns who said they wanted to kill her entered the capitol with their guns and started looking for her. E.g., from one charging document: "Thinking about heading over to Pelosi CUNT’s speech and putting a bullet in her noggin on Live TV [purple devil emoji]." Charges: Possession of Unregistered Firearms, Possession of Unregistered Ammunition, Possession of La…

>entered the capitol with their guns

Correct me if I'm wrong, but nobody entered the Capitol with guns. I'm aware that sounds like downplaying the incident, which is not my intention. I just think accuracy matters.

The guy you're referring to (who was thankfully charged), did not enter the Capitol with a gun, according to the charging document. What gave you the idea that he entered the Capitol with a gun, the charging document is pretty clear?

>the main different here is that I don't recall there being a systemic effort to defend him and explain that it's really no big deal.

The effort was just to blame Trump's rhetoric for that guys actions. Which, Trump's rhetoric was less than helpful to say the least, but that was a poor excuse for trying to murder a bunch of congresspeople.

Alas, this is the problem with demanding accuracy. If someone says something false about a bad person or incident, we are unable to ask for accuracy unless we are willing to be seen as defending it.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#157

Post by ModernMech »

akomtu wrote: post #149
guerrilla wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that I disagree, but how does this particular thing factor into that?

This Jan6 committee doesn't look legit, to be honest. Issuing subpoenas and jail time for ignoring those subpoenas is the courts' territory. I dont understand how a bunch of legislators, who were elected to write laws, created an "emergency committee" with judical and executive powers.

To be clear, the Jan 6 Committee sent criminal referrals to the DoJ, so the judicial system is the one deciding the fate of these individuals, not the Committee. In fact Steve Bannon's due process has been preserved; he has a court date set and he is currently free on bail. Mark Meadows has not been charged yet, but that will also be decided by the DoJ.

It's worth pointing out though, that Congress does in fact have a power of inherent contempt that enables them to enforce their own subpoenas. This is a separation of powers concern: what if Congress needs to subpoena someone in the Executive branch or DoJ in particular?

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#158

Post by beerandt »

oneoff786 wrote: post #80
whimsicalism wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The rioters came fairly close to getting to the senators. Suppose the mob found Nancy Pelosi? "Fairly close" to me would likely involve more of the rioters being shot. The fact that so few were shot indicates that the state was largely keeping their gloves on, which they would not if there was any risk of a senator actually being killed.

The rioters failed to find the senators. They were one door away, and a guard lured them in the wrong direction. I’m not sure how much of an armed guard presence was accompanying the senators at the time, though I believe it was not a large presence. Supposing they instead entered the room, it is probable to me that they would have been immediately shot. I doubt the rioters could have taken the room but who knows. In…

And yet Democratics encouraged and even participated in blocking the Supreme Court confirmation vote using... a march to the capital and overrunning capital security forces and successfuy occupying every space they attempted to reach.

Why shouldn't any of them been shot?

Both were confirmations to the highest level of office in their respective branch of government and both were staged by political opponents protesting and admittedly attempting to block an "unjust" transfer of power.

If "peaceful protest" vs "riotous coup" can hinge on the fact that your ideological allies could only have been there to "righteously have their voices heard" but ideological opponents must be there as "murderous usurpers", then your sympathetic reasoning might be better described as paranoid delusional projections.

Let's remember that it was Eric Holder and Bill Clinton who pardoned a woman who literally bombed the capital building.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#159

Post by satronaut »

mindslight wrote: post #132
satronaut wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I don't understand how it's possible for anyone to believe this "Biden caused inflation" nonsense. Do you really think that inflation occurs immediately? And if it does happen so quickly, couldn't it be undone just as easily? The current price inflation is the result of all that monetary inflation of March 2020 finally hitting the wider market. The new money was injected mainly into the banking sector and took over a…

No post body was provided.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#160

Post by dukeofdoom »

Bhilai wrote: post #144
leetcrew wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's not clever to go out of your way to piss off the base of the last guy from your team that won. clearly the democrats understand that, seeing as we are currently experiencing Obama's third term.

Tired of this dont piss the crowd who lost line of thinking. Well, the crowd who won in a fair election is also pissed because the side who lost doesn't want to accept their defeat and move on.

Hello Russiagate, Impeachments ... how long did those go on.

Increasing trust in the outcome would go a long way. How about trying to make the election more verifiable. Put it some real biometric features into mail out ballots. Instead we get, no id required to vote. Doesn't really build trust.

Post reply on HN