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

501–510 of 612 posts

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#501

Post by watwut »

anon84873628 wrote: post #386
watwut wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well then that will be something for the courts to sort out, especially in the open carry states. They already sorted it out - in open carry states. In the above situation, the court in open carry state sides with cops. It is really simple. Sentencing cop for on duty murder is extraordinary hard even in clear cut cases. Guns presence means a cop can say he was afraid. And afraid cop is entitled to kill. > But I thi…

During BLM protests there were anti-protesters doing exactly what I described, and they were not automatically shot at by police. Of course the political roles are reversed, but I don't believe it is as guaranteed as you suggest. And the legality is of course much more complicated than you portray as well.

The courts decided exactly like I said when cops shot. That the cops shown more restraint in BLM case is good.

The political roles being different is key factor - ICE wants to kill and this administration wants them to kill. It makes them feel manly.

Frankly, the theory that armed forces would step back is absurd. They are cowards, but they are not afraid to kill. They are so afraid of everything that they are more likely to kill

And other side are people with moral limits. People who are not afraid and are showimg courage every day, but not murderers. And ICE knows that.

No one in ICE fears life ... they fear being emasculated.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#502

Post by SubiculumCode »

Ancapistani wrote: post #409
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).

I'm very much present in "right wing circles", and I've seen exactly zero mention of "militias" being involved in anything whatsoever. They are just as politically radioactive as they've always been. Where are you getting this?

When the militias can earn big dollars by joining ICE to do what they already want to do, the difference is meaningless.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#503

Post by dabluecaboose »

anigbrowl wrote: post #489
dabluecaboose wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The American left is very much in favor of the second amendment. You seem to confusing it with liberal centrists, the sort of people who say 'violence is never the solution' and wrings their hands wondering why someone doesn't arrest bad actors in government.

I specifically used the phrase "American Left" to try and head off this trite quip.

I was referring, in general terms, to the left wing of mainstream American political discourse without narrowing it down to just "Democrats". I was trying not to trigger the waves of "Ackshyually karl marx says under no pretext" comments that one usually gets.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#504

Post by dugidugout »

pcaharrier wrote: post #431
dugidugout wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the added nuance here and would like to hear your comments on the seperate issue of doing this to a member of the press, or better, the sepcific pretext presented by the reporting: > The warrant, she said, was executed “at the home of a Washington Post journalist who was obtaining and reporting classified and illegally leaked information from a Pentagon contractor. The leaker is currently behind bars.” >…

As long as there's probable cause for some crime, the subjective motivations of the officer are almost never going to enter the legal analysis. Whren v. United States[1] was a case about a pretextual traffic stop, but the core reasoning (unanimously) was about what the Fourth Amendment requires/allow. For example, if police have a "hunch" you're selling drugs but not probable cause, they can just wait for you to run…

> For example, if police have a "hunch" you're selling drugs but not probable cause, they can just wait for you to ...

Whren doesn't seem to track in this case or am I missing something? In the example provided, the hunch directly ties the target to the crime ("drug selling"), which matches the stop's pretext. Natanson isn't accused of any crime, she's essentially writing about the "selling of drugs", not organizing or committing it.

Adjusting your example, if I'm simply friends (implying history of contact) with a known drug dealer, am I really at risk of my home being raided and communications seized solely because I might have evidence leading to their conviction?

Then extrapolating this to the implications on freedom of press... This doesn't sit well with me.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#505

Post by belorn »

afavour wrote: post #280
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 understand the instinct to remove "politics" from HN but it's fuzzier than that. There were great HN-related conversations to be had around DOGE and what it was (purportedly) trying to achieve with automation, AI, replacing old code bases etc. There was a fascinating discussion about COBOL and what DOGE didn't understand and it immediately got flagged off the front page. Same thing recently with Grok and non-consen…

> There were great HN-related conversations to be had around DOGE and what it was (purportedly) trying to achieve with automation, AI, replacing old code bases etc

I have a very different impression of those discussions, with more or less half of the comments being flagged and downvoted into oblivion, and the overall mood being very heavy in negativity and hostility.

I would like to see great HN-related conversations. Maybe if they disabled donwvotes and flagging, and did some heavy handed moderation against negativity and hostility. A great conversation depend on a safe environment where people feel free to express their genuine views and opinions.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#506

Post by peab »

cdrnsf wrote: post #473
peab wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

ICE didn't exist prior to 9/11. There's no reason it can't be dissolved.

that's a fair point

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#507

Post by dabluecaboose »

codezero wrote: post #492
pjc50 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, now what happens when you show up in front of an ICE agent while carrying an AR-15? How, specifically, do you use the gun to effect political change?

I wasn’t suggesting that. The post I responded to basically said the left alienated people by restricting 2a, and it’s really not at all restricted. Some states are more restrictive than others but that’s not an overall “The Left” problem to be called out.

> The post I responded to basically said the left alienated people by restricting 2a,

Incorrect, but judging by the responses here I conveyed my point poorly. I wasn't trying to say that the Left alienated existing gun owners. I was trying to say that their actions and positions prevented the formation of a grassroots population of responsible gun owners in their ranks. Specifically, a population that might be more ready to stand up against ongoing injustices.

> and it’s really not at all restricted. Some states are more restrictive than others

Your AR-15 you smugly mentioned that you bought last year in "15 minutes" is in spite of Democrats best efforts. If they had their way on gun laws any time in the last 30 years, that transaction would be impossible. You'll note that there's a pattern with those "some states" that are stricter than others. The fact that their overreaches have been successfully fought is not evidence that they aren't constantly trying (Paid attention to the docket in Virginia lately?).

But that's not what I was trying to say anyway, you (like many others) just jumped at the prospect of sticking it to a perceived ideological enemy with a pithy reddit quip.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#508

Post by cdrnsf »

peab wrote: post #495
cdrnsf wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can enforce immigration laws without shooting people in the face, ramming into their vehicles, ripping them out and putting them in illegal chokeholds, shipping them to prisons in El Salvador, firing tear gas at legal observers and on and on. It also wasn't an agency prior to 9/11. It should be dissolved. All ERO agents should be prosecuted and or barred from all future public service.

Oh interesting, i didn't know it was a post 9/11 agency.

It was born out of INS but it and DHS have its roots in the security apparatus that developed thereafter. It's become progressively worse leading up to the weaponization we're seeing now.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#509

Post by mrtesthah »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #114
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…

No matter how many people vote for something, congress and the president do not have the right to infringe upon peoples’ fourth (searches & seizures) and 14th amendment (due process) rights. Federal agents are systematically violating those rights and not being held accountable due to a blatantly partisan supreme court. With no other alternative, it will be up to everyday citizens to stop those offenses and seek justice.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#510

Post by peab »

vel0city wrote: post #474
peab wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm, you seem to be replying to an argument that I did not make. this seems to fall under: > I understand protesting ICE for better accountability, they certainly need to be held accountable

The argument about getting rid of ICE isn't about having zero enforcement of immigration laws. It is about getting rid of this entire stack of management and agents. I guess that's what you're not understanding. ICE is recent. We don't need ICE, the organization and people that are currently doing what they're doing, to continue to be a part of the government. If the whole organization is behaving badly, the whole or…

I see, I can understand the argument better now, thanks!

Looking it up, it seems that ICE used to be part of INS, which was broken up into: -USCIS: Handles services (green cards, citizenship). -CBP: Handles the borders (Border Patrol and ports of entry). -ICE: Handles interior enforcement (raids, investigations, and deportations).

So I'm not really sure I follow. If we get rid of ICE, who handles Handles interior enforcement (raids, investigations, and deportations)? Another org?

This feels like people who argue to get rid of the police, and replace it with "Community Security Forces", or something of the likes.

Post reply on HN