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

451–460 of 612 posts

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#451

Post by estearum »

BryantD wrote: post #414
estearum wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. It wasn't to recover the diary, it was an investigation into how they acquired it (which appears to have been clearly illegal given that you can't buy stolen goods, even if you're a journalist).

I would not say that Project Veritas acted illegally in this case, although I have absolutely no love for them and I think they have acted illegally and immorally in other cases. In the end the Justice Department did not bring charges. You absolutely can't offer someone money to steal documents. That's clear. Even providing advice on acquiring documents is probably going to be unlawful. And if possession of the docum…

It is unambiguously illegal to pay for goods you know to be stolen. In all 50 states and federally.

Most courts would assume someone who purchased a private diary of a living person would know that it was stolen.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#452

Post by nobody9999 »

fullstick wrote: post #98
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.

It feels like all of the "patriots" joined ICE.

>It feels like all of the "patriots" joined ICE.

That's certainly possible. Maybe even likely. Fortunately, we now have more information[0] to correlate whether or not that's true.

Perhaps soon we'll see a "Show HN" with a searchable database of those folks with links to known "patriot" groups. That would be interesting.

[0] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/whistleblower-leaks-person...

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#453

Post by datsci_est_2015 »

perihelions wrote: post #394
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What recourse would an American have against a punitive search? And what if something turns up which would retroactively justify it?

> "And what if something turns up which would retroactively justify it?" US constitutional law prohibits the introduction of evidence obtained illegally. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule ( "Exclusionary rule" ) There's no "retroactive" exception. The core point of this rule is to deter police from intentionally violating people's rights, under the expectation that what they find will, "retroactively",…

See also: parallel construction, which has come up (rightfully so) in HN threads about dragnet surveillance.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#454

Post by HNisCIS »

ceejayoz wrote: post #192
HNisCIS wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> The American military couldn't handle rice farmers or goat herders… The American military at the time cared - at least somewhat - about the international reputation of the United States. That may not always be a thing. It may not be a thing now.

The American military is designed to operate away from its shores. One hunting rifle round into the transformer outside of the bases and they're trucking in fuel for generators, a few rounds into the fuel trucks and they have no power. They would have to mobilize massive resources to secure Lockheed and Raytheon facilities from sabotage...

Keep thinking along these lines and you realize the situation for them is actually quite dire.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#455

Post by HNisCIS »

selectodude wrote: post #175
HNisCIS wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The American military would have zero problems massacring an unlimited number of rice farmers and goat herders.

They absolutely did, and yet still lost both wars horribly.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#456

Post by peab »

rmah wrote: post #435
peab wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand protesting ICE for better accountability, they certainly need to be held accountable. But I don't understand those who protest the presence of ICE as a concept. Are there any countries that don't enforce their immigration laws?

It saddens me that your rather innocuous comment has been down-voted so aggressively. Immigration enforcement is required. Illegal immigration should be discouraged. ICE's current tactics seem overly aggressive to me and, yes, seem to be used politically. But immigration laws should still be enforced. I imagine you'd agree that if ICE agents/supervisors act beyond the scope of their duties or with excessive force, th…

> ICE's current tactics seem overly aggressive to me and, yes, seem to be used politically. But immigration laws should still be enforced.

Yeah, it's strange that this take is so polarizing.

> I imagine you'd agree that if ICE agents/supervisors act beyond the scope of their duties or with excessive force, they should be disciplined/prosecuted. Yes of course, it's hard to disagree with that.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#457

Post by HNisCIS »

pixl97 wrote: post #183
HNisCIS wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>The American military couldn't handle rice farmers or goat herders Eh, they killed them by the hundreds of thousands, and were not even trying to genocide them. If the current regime decided to actually just exterminate people our level of technology would make what the Nazis did look like babies playtime. >The question is how many people will side with them vs reality At least 40% of the population given what we've…

We'll find out I suppose, the Iranian government is currently seeking the answer to that question experimentally.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#458

Post by Levitz »

pureagave wrote: post #343
bix6 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I agree that HN tends to have better discussion, but I'd argue it tends to have better discussion precisely because it's not the norm, so there's input from the type of people that loathe the current state of Reddit on the matter, and also the type of people that do like yapping about it 24/7 are absent from it.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#459

Post by roywiggins »

lurk2 wrote: post #442
perihelions wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "And what if something turns up which would retroactively justify it?" US constitutional law prohibits the introduction of evidence obtained illegally. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule ( "Exclusionary rule" ) There's no "retroactive" exception. The core point of this rule is to deter police from intentionally violating people's rights, under the expectation that what they find will, "retroactively",…

> Won’t work. How would you know when it did? You can’t “retroactively” justify an arbitrary search under the exclusionary rule, but this doesn’t exclude evidence tangential to a legally-executed warrant during the execution of that warrant. For example, suppose someone is suspected of illegally possessing wildlife. A search warrant is issued on the residence. No wildlife is found, and in fact no wildlife was ever on…

Only if it falls under the "plain view" doctrine, which is not unlimited:

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

> In Arizona v. Hicks, police officers were in an apartment investigating a shooting and suspected that a record player in the apartment was stolen. The officers could not see the serial number, which was on the bottom of the record player, so they lifted the player and confirmed that its serial number matched that of one that had been reported stolen. However, the Supreme Court ruled that lifting the record player constituted an additional search (although a relatively nonintrusive one) because the serial number was not in plain view.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#460

Post by peab »

toast0 wrote: post #317
peab wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand protesting ICE for better accountability, they certainly need to be held accountable. But I don't understand those who protest the presence of ICE as a concept. Are there any countries that don't enforce their immigration laws?

A protest movement can't be very subtle. A clear and short message like "No ICE" or "ICE Out" is much preferable to "We would like an immigrations and and custom enforcement agency that respects people and the law, efficiently inspects imports, checks in on visa overstayers, pursues charges against business owners that have a business practice of not checking work eligibility of new hires, and works with competent, t…

but it's directionally wrong. It's like the BLM protests that had main messages of abolishing the police - those had terrible consequences [1]. "Reform" would be a better direction.

[1] In 2020, during the height of the protests and the pandemic, low-income communities of color experienced the sharpest increases in firearm violence and homicides https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/firearm-deaths/index.html [2] Polls have consistently shown that a majority of Black (52%), Latino (66%), and Asian (61%) Americans oppose defunding the police. https://www.thirdway.org/memo/what-communities-of-color-want...

Post reply on HN