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

341–350 of 612 posts

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#341

Post by JumpCrisscross »

skrebbel wrote: post #170
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One final resolution is the guillotine Did you miss the lesson from the actual guillotine? It’s just another escalation in the cycle. The parties switch from raiding to guillotining each other. The guillotine doesn’t solve the problem, it just raises the stakes.

Just to add to this, it still blows my mind how quickly this happened. The French went from overthrowing the royals to guillotining their neighbours within 5 years, and in the same short timespan Robespierre went madder than any Sun King had ever been. "La Terreur" was total madness.

> French went from overthrowing the royals to guillotining their neighbours

The irony being the elites after the French Revolution were not only mostly the same as before, they escaped with so much money and wealth that it’s actually debated if they increased their wealth share through the chaos [1].

[1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/650023

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#342

Post by estearum »

beej71 wrote: post #322
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…

How does this apply to Trump and mar-a-lago, then? Genuine question.

Trump was requested to return the classified documents several times. He said he returned them all, then said he didn't need to return them all, then said he actually declassified them with his mind.

And yeah, it's not a great situation with terrible optics. It would've been better for everyone if he just didn't steal the classified documents to begin with or, once requested, he returned them.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#343

Post by pureagave »

bix6 wrote: post #198
quietbritishjim wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are severely misreading why people flag posts about that discuss the administration (whether for or against): they are tiresome to read about, and it doesn't lead to productive interesting discussion (which is supposed to be what the vote buttons are for here). Politics isn't 100% off topic for HN but mostly I come here to get away from it and I'm sure others do too.

I find the political discussions on here interesting and generally of decent+ caliber. Plus so much of what’s happening is tech related / enabled. There’s 30 posts on the front page. If someone doesn’t care about politics why can’t they just ignore that 1 post instead of flagging it into oblivion?

I agree that it is slightly better than Reddit but often it just turns into a mess that doesn't touch on tech.

They are plenty of places for political discussions. HN is a rare great place for tech so personally I'd rather keep it that way.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#344

Post by watwut »

potato3732842 wrote: post #294
pjc50 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?…

I'm gonna say the same thing I said the last time you trotted out this opinion (which is far more excusable now that you've outed yourself as a brit BTW). At a societal level the LARPers don't matter. They are a rounding error compared to all the people who have a single daily carry piece or purse gun or whatever. And those people affect the numbers and the risk calculations happening in offices far away. ICE is thug…

ICE is hopefully waiting for any sign of violence against them so that they can escalate even more. They do their best to provoke.

You know where are all NRA and "have gun against govermental tyrrany" guys? In the ICE or supporting from sidelines. And they are itching for when they will finally be able to commit even more violence.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#345

Post by PlatoIsADisease »

testfrequency wrote: post #154
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…

Not to belittle good framing, but we are /waaaaay/ past the ugly point of law and order.

Maybe this is too idealistic, but Waltz the IR Realist, frames this as 2 types of situations.

You have your anarchic situations, International Relations, non-law breaking situations like having a conversation with a friend/stranger, and everything not covered in (signed) (legal) writing.

You have your hierarchy. When the police get involved, when your boss can fire you, legal, etc.. In this case, you still need 4 things to happen: There needs to be a legal basis(Legislature), they need to be caught(Executive), they need to be found guilty (Judicial), it needs to be enforced (Executive).

I wouldn't give up in hierarchy yet. But know the limitations.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#346

Post by anon84873628 »

pjc50 wrote: post #119
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.

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

It's been going since Reagan. Justice John Roberts is in the "unitary executive" camp and has been working to expand presidential power his whole career.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#347

Post by naravara »

tuna74 wrote: post #336
naravara wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope Washington Post does a better job of training their reporters than my friend’s former employer did. They sent her off to a certain country with highly repressive speech laws and secret police to interview and survey various civil rights activist groups. They gave her little to no guidance about how to protect herself aside from “Use a VPN to send any documents to us.” They didn’t even instruct her to use an en…

Shouldn't this be basic knowledge for journalist?

Why would it be if nobody trains them on it?

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#348

Post by [deleted] »

BryantD wrote: post #197
giancarlostoro wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's nothing, there was the time the FBI raided James O'Keefe's house to find Ashley Biden's diary. I feel weird writing any of that out, because its sounds batshit, but they did that. Some people may not like James for any given number of reasons (NPR did a hit peace saying he doesn't qualify for journalism protections - which to me is a matter of opinion not necessarily fact), but since when do federal agents rai…

Sorry to be a pedant, but not exactly. They raided James O'Keefe's house to seize his cell phones as part of an investigation into potential conspiracy to traffic stolen goods (the diary) across state lines. Journalists (which is a very broad term, and in this context I think O'Keefe qualifies) are certainly allowed to receive stolen or classified material, which also applies to the raid on the WaPo reporter. They ar…

[deleted]

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#349

Post by eunoia »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #277
eunoia wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would highly recommend the book Amusing Ourselves to Death if you are looking to understand how the populace got to the point where truth is irrelevant and nothing really matters. It helped my mental model a lot at the very least.

I’m extremely aware of amusing ourselves to death I think we came away with very different conclusions To me it is abject proof that individuals do not have the mental emotional or other capacity to actually behave in the modern world such that they retain their mental independence and develop a sense of personal epistemology Humans are way too dumb and prone to propaganda to actually have a coherent society at the s…

Unfortunately I think we actually agree on this and did come away with the same conclusions.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#350

Post by watwut »

anon84873628 wrote: post #318
jeroenhd wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the government harassing, attacking, and now killing innocent American citizens, I'm not so sure if the second amendment is working out so well. With the ridiculous leeway American law enforcement has when it comes to harming people ("qualified immunity"), I don't think that second amendment will be relevant until there's an outright civil war happening. And when it comes to that, one or both sides have access t…

Imagine every protestor you see on video was instead standing rank and file in the street with a rifle on their shoulder. I.e. a well regulated militia. That would sure send a very different message, wouldn't it?

Message that "yes these are thugs and it is ok to kill them".

Police can kill you if they feel fear or pretend to feel fear. And having a gun was already ruled valid legal reasom for police to kill people.

If protesters carried guns, ICE could legally murder them. Not just J.D.Vance legaly, but legaly per how courts interpret such situations.

Post reply on HN