Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shouldn't this be basic knowledge for journalist?
Why would it be if nobody trains them on it?
People train to become journalists, wouldn't these practices be part of the curriculum?
FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
521–530 of 612 posts
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#522Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 enf…
> If we get rid of ICE, who handles Handles interior enforcement (raids, investigations, and deportations)? Another org?
Yes, a different org, back under the Department of Justice, staffed by very different people and with a different way of going about enforcement of immigration law. I'd argue there have been a lot of issues with the Department of Homeland Security and that massive parts of the organization should probably be reworked.
The DHS' mission is supposedly all about protecting people from terrorist attacks, go read the arguments on why it was a good thing right after it was created to see that kind of connection[0]. Why do we have an organization designed to fight terrorists in charge of handling civil infractions? Its no wonder we have agents treating everyone as a terrorist; its what the department is supposed to focus on, fighting terrorists! Its almost like maybe we should have a different group of agents equipped to handle potential terrorist threats to the agents making sure foreigners aren't overstaying visas or working while not authorized to work.
In another direction but related to this, we should also pretty much scrap and redo all of our immigration laws as well. They really don't work well and are generally pretty bad. Note I'm not saying we should have no immigration laws at all, but the systems we have today are largely dumb, ineffective, and just end up hurting a lot of people while not really doing much good for the American people.
> This feels like people who argue to get rid of the police, and replace it with "Community Security Forces", or something of the likes.
A lot of what the police do these days probably should be re-tasked to different, potentially new agencies with different trainings and different focuses. Police these days are expected to handle such a wide range of community issues, many of which probably don't need the same kind of people who respond to violent threats and what not. When someone is experiencing a mental health crisis we probably shouldn't send people who spend their days training to perceive every action as a threat to be handled with a gun as the first line responder. When there's someone on the street strung out on drugs having the police respond and put them in jail/prison probably isn't helping the situation.
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20071114000911/http://www.dhs.go...
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#523To 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…
> "So in this case the government is raiding the home of someone who did not commit any crime, in the hopes of getting at people who might have." That's unequivocally a lawful basis for a court-ordered search warrant. They must have probable cause that the person being searched has evidence of a crime; not necessarily that the search target and the criminal suspect are one and the same. Search is investigative; not p…
Anyone who has had their home searched AKA ransacked by law enforcement knows that searches are effectively punitive.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#524"that the raid was conducted by the justice department and FBI at the request of the “department of war”, the Trump administration’s informal name for the department of defense." uh oh sounds like the Guardian is asking for a raid too
The Guardian is not an American newspaper.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#525Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And there has been plenty US citizens deported under DHS. Are you sure? Do you mind linking to information / reporting about that? I have not seen any.
Sure, since you haven't heard of Wikipedia, or internet in general. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths,_detentions_and_deporta...
Thanks. It (US citizens deported) hadn’t crossed my radar before, so it is helpful to have this reference.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#526To 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…
[dead]
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#527Earlier 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.
There is also a conflict of interest for many in the tech space who browse this forum. Many of the technologies we work on are being abused by this administration. IE Flock being a ycombinator startup, Ring cameras giving free access to police and others[1], AI systems being used for targeting dissent, ad-services and the data they vacuum up being bought by agencies to build up profiles for dissenting citizens[2]. We…
> There is also a conflict of interest for many in the tech space who browse this forum. Many of the technologies we work on are being abused by this administration.
Possibly true. Just irrelevant.
I already have far too much exposure to Trump, and I'm not even American. I'd like it not to come up here. You may disagree, and that's fine, but the original question was - why are stories about him flagged. I maintain that the answer, for many people if not nearly all, is simple: ugh, not again.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#528Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Practically, what is stopping them from black-bagging and deporting citizens? Congress? The courts?
That's just it. In theory Congress watches the watchers.
But half of Congress sucks Trump's cock and the other half is literally denied the right to do their job.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#529Earlier quoted context omitted.
The no politics rule on HN is the equivalent of "the suspect smelled like marijuana so I had probable cause to search his car." -- it gives the moderators a plausible reason to remove content they don't want on here while maintaining an air of legitimacy around the removable because thems the rules. Donald Trump has threatened to annex my country. Are posts about that political? Sure doesn't seem like it to me. From…
Sorry, your country potentially being annexed just doesn't spark curious discussion. We've seen this with the other 5 countries that were annexed: just a lot of tiresome complaints and people flagging each other in the comments. When I'm hiding in my basement from the Patriot Press Gangs, I want to read about the difference between TCP Reno and TCP Tahoe, not about some boring politics.
If you want to talk about a country being annexed, you can go to literally any other website. That's not true if you want to talk about TCP.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#530This is Nathanson's recent article (gift link) describing her work and the story that likely triggered the FBI's interest. Her reporting tells the stories of federal workers, she's not involved in any investigative work beyond interviewing current or former civil servants who feel helpless and lost now that the career that gave them purpose is no longer the same: wapo.st/49BQBrh One day, a woman wrote to me on Signal…
Steps before self-ending:
1. Feed cat, ensure that friend will adopt cat.
2. Talk to any family members.
3. Uninstall Signal
4. Take too many Ambien.
Or:
“I’m sending this to you confidentially so please don’t respond since metadata will show I contacted you.”
Reporter: responds anyway