FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home • Hacker News Board

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#571

Post by testing22321 » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 1:50 AM UTC

ikrenji wrote: post #567

testing22321 wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was originally named the department of war, and changing it to defence was just newspeak anyway. Of all the things trump has done, I actually like this one. At least he’s being honest about his intentions for what this department does.

it's not just newspeak though. names matter. an advanced civilization, which USA being the richest country on Earth is, should not strive to get into offensive wars...

Richest, clearly.

Advanced? No free healthcare, no paid maternity leave, two weeks paid leave, no free higher education, etc etc.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#572

Post by gusgus01 » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 1:51 AM UTC

xdennis wrote: post #463

rendaw wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that's what GP wrote, but I think GP's point is that it's not illegal for journalists to have classified documents, so it does not qualify as probable cause.

> it's not illegal for journalists to have classified documents, so it does not qualify as probable cause It's amazing how many people offer free internet advice off of ideological groupthink rather than actual laws. This raid was authorized by a warrant. Do you really think a judge doesn't know the law, but you do? If a crime happens in your neighborhood, and you have a camera, the cops could get a warrant to search…

Yes, but to continue the comparison, it would be weird/aggressive/intimidating if the cops raided the neighbor's home and took the device and all hard drives on the premises to get the footage instead of the normal methods of compelling someone to provide the footage.

Especially, if as is the case here, the criminal was already behind bars.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#573

Post by JumpCrisscross » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 2:09 AM UTC

raptor99 wrote: post #565

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are just as politically radioactive as they've always been J6ers attacking cops is currently being celebrated. That's an ad hoc militia. (Tarrio built an actual one.)

Dude, the Capitol Police are the ones that let them ("J6ers") in to begin with. The whole thing was a set up from the get go.

> the Capitol Police are the ones that let them ("J6ers") in to begin with

This is nonsense. The numerous videos of the insurgents violently assaulting said police not giving its proponents pause indicates the standard of evidence its propoents are using.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#574

Post by DANmode » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 2:45 AM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #162

cjs_ac wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's all well and good, but the law stands because the administration has more firepower than you.

I certainly don't agree that quantity of firepower determines what laws do or don't stand. Ask the federal agents who tried, and failed, to convict a guy for throwing a sandwich at them ( https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/dc-sandw... ).

Turns out perceived threats like Assange and Dotcom are more interesting than sandwich guy.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#575

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 3:00 AM UTC

shrubble wrote: post #530

dmschulman wrote: post #32

This 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

> since metadata will show I contacted you

What's the point of the reporter not responding?

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#576

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 3:27 AM UTC

nobody9999 wrote: post #452

fullstick wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

The link is interesting.

> the dataset includes names, work emails, phone numbers, job roles, and other employment details for frontline agents and support staff—a level of detail that has alarmed officials concerned about the safety and privacy of federal employees and their families

Worth noting that all of the information specified is public information and the people it concerns are public officials.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#577

Post by filoeleven » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 3:48 AM UTC

quietbritishjim wrote: post #527

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

The "hide" button is right next to the "flag" button.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#578

Post by filoeleven » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 3:53 AM UTC

Levitz wrote: post #319

simgoh wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 sympathize, relate, and I'm not about to lecture you like some corners of the internet about "the privilege" to try and ignore stuff like this, but it is important to keep stuff like this at the forefront. We continue to experience unprecedented life events.

On the contrary, there's no need whatsoever to even deal with this since it already happens everywhere else, it's not some niche, subtle matter, it's probably the most talked about subject in the last decade.

By that logic we shouldn't talk about AI or video games either.

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#579

Post by stogot » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 4:11 AM UTC

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…

They had a warrant and need the evidence to convict the person who failed to protect the information. They did not arrest the reporter did they?

Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home

#580

Post by octoberfranklin » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 5:03 AM UTC

IAmBroom wrote: post #493

Fazebooking wrote: post #437

Journalists are the backbone of a healthy democracy. FU USA FU And just to be clear: The biggest military force of the world threatens denmark, scrambles the economy around the world due to sudden politic changes (tarifs) and destroys its own integrity as an ally

Oh, we're clear. We're just powerless to do anything, as the (probably) legally elected administration runs this ship like its own personal party barge into ... everything in sight. Our Checks refuse to speak up in Congress, and our Balances keep voting to make the (current) POTUS immune to the law.

Frankly, both parties feel like the "elected administration runs this ship like its own personal party barge" when they're out of power.

If you don't like that, the only solution is to push for limited government next time you're in power.

Whatever power you put into the hands of the government is guaranteed to fall into your enemy's hands some day. This is a deliberate design feature of the US political system. It's the only way to get people to wake up for the need to limit government power.

A good start would be ending selective prosecution by restoring the original role of grand juries: to decide whether or not to hire a contract prosecutor for a single case. Public Prosecutors can be just like Public Defenders -- contractors of the court, with no discretionary powers.