7 ms·

> The defense motion claims that beginning in December 2009 government agents planted microphones in three locations near the entrance of the courthouse at 401

> The defense motion claims that beginning in December 2009 government agents planted microphones in three locations near the entrance of the courthouse at 401 Marshall Street in Redwood City: inside a metal sprinkler box attached to the wall, in a large planter box and in vehicles parked on the street. The hidden microphones were activated at least 31 times through September 2010, according to the filing. > > The only authorization came from attorneys working for the FBI and Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, the motion states. In one sense, this is a small thing. There isn't any allegation that the recordings caught privileged attorney-client communication or jury deliberations. But it is an attack on the integrity of the legal system, and it's part of a pattern of attacks on the legal system that adds up to a serious threat to the rule of law. Defendants are asking for these recordings to be quashed. That is what is customary, but it is not sufficient; there need to be consequences for those who did it and who authorized it. The defendants are only incentivized to argue as far as necessary for their own defense; it is up to the judges to censure the parties responsible.

cryoshon 11y ago
Read Glen Greenwald's book Liberty and Justice for Some. The rule of law is largely a joke that the powerful trick the weak into accepting. The constant drilling away at the supposed sanctity of the legal system is evidence that the people who run things really don't care so much about attorney client privilege or due process.
- jimrandomh 11y ago
  The rule of law was a real thing for much of American history, and it's a real thing in many other countries. If we want it back, we can't be tricked into thinking this problem is in any way universal or inevitable.
  - davidw 11y ago
    There have always been problems in the US and elsewhere. It's a continual fight. Saying "woe is us, it's all rotten, we can't do anything" is capitulating in the worst sort of way to those who would take away our rights.
    - happyscrappy 11y ago
      "woe is us, it's all rotten, we can't do anything" is the motto of the current generation and self fulfilling.
    - Frondo 11y ago
      Oh my god YES, the cynicism in politics and about the process is the quickest, surest way to guarantee that the people who hold those attitudes will be proven right. "Those politicians are all the same, there's no point in voting or being politically active, it's all going to hell, etc." It's so not true, and it's just the kind of disempowering disregard for one's own agency that anyone who's greedy for power would love to hear. Man, when I hear that shit now, I just want to shake those people and say, "YOU'RE THE PROBLEM!!" You're right, it is a continual fight. It never ends. There's no final set of laws or behaviors we're going for. The process is what matters.
  - gohrt 11y ago
    It's not binary. The rule of law has quite often failed to protect the legal rights of Black Americans, for example. (even laying aside the historical problems when rule of law didn't even provide legal rights.)
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - laotzu 11y ago
    >The rule of law was a real thing for much of American history When was that?
- genericresponse 11y ago
  If this really is what Greenwald is saying, than he's pretty solidly turned into the Glenn Beck of the left. The rule of law might not seem always fair, but it hampers the powerful much more than the weak. As an example: None of the billionaires in my city have set up their own duchy pressed us into an army, enforcing their own laws. Their taxes, while not as high as I would like, in fact pay for much of our city budget including city services. Even the poor in my city have access to clean water and the library system. Just because we have to fight to maintain the sanctity of the legal system and because every actor isn't perfect, does not mean that it's entirely corrupt and captive. I would ask you to take a moment to compare the current rule of law, rule of law in a developing country, and rule of law without the rights guarded by a nation-state.
  - enraged_camel 11y ago
    >>The rule of law might not seem always fair, but it hampers the powerful much more than the weak. I guess we live in different realities. The powerful have proven over and over that they are capable of subverting the system in their own favor using their resources and influence. >>As an example: None of the billionaires in my city have set up their own duchy pressed us into an army, enforcing their own laws. They haven't set up their own duchies with private armies because they haven't had to. The state already protects them. Here is a direct quote from Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations: “Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.”
    - hueving 11y ago
      >I guess we live in different realities. The powerful have proven over and over that they are capable of subverting the system in their own favor using their resources and influence. At least the post you are replying to had the courtesy of providing supporting arguments.
      - smalley 11y ago
        I don't think I agree with the extreme nature of the premise a number of comments up the thread, that said my favorite example of this: http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20101104/NEWS/101109939 http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20101104/NEWS/101109939 A hedge fund manager had his criminal charges substantially reduced over the victim's objections because having a felony would mean the hedge fund manager would have to admit what he did to his clients. The defendant in question struck a bicyclist in a hit and run, drove far away and called for roadside assistance for his car never mentioning anything about the bicyclist he left with lifelong injuries. Of course the excuse is that after he was caught he agree to pay some restitution to the victim... Anyway, just a crazy story that I figured I'd share so not really a study of real national trends or anything.
- rtl49 11y ago
  I wouldn't dispute that we do not all enjoy equal protection under the law. But I wonder how your belief accounts for instances where the "rule of law" has been prioritized by the courts over criminal investigations. For a notorious example, consider that some members of the Weather Underground committed crimes that could easily have resulted in life sentences, yet they are free today because the court found the evidence against them was collected illegally. This may not be a typical example, but it would seem to conflict with the idea that the rule of law is "largely a joke."
- nemo 11y ago
  "The rule of law is largely a joke that the powerful trick the weak into accepting." If you're saying that in the US the rule of law has been corrupted to the point that it's largely a joke that the powerful trick the weak into accepting, then while that's a bit stronger than I'd agree with, I do see how you'd come to the conclusion. If you're saying that rule of law itself is largely a joke that the powerful trick the weak into accepting, then that's a deeply concerning statement. Which do you mean?
  - e40 11y ago
    Pretty sure the former.
fineman 11y ago
It's only a small thing like someone firing a few rounds into a school but missing everyone is a small thing.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
  - rtl49 11y ago
    I believe he or she is pointing out that, while there is currently no evidence that the FBI has violated a defendant's legal rights, their actions could very easily have had this result and that was probably their intention.
- jimrandomh 11y ago
  The article claims the recording devices were placed to catch bidders colluding in a real-estate auction. That particular moral high ground is unavailable here.
x5n1 11y ago
Who is above the law? The FBI is above the law...! Who follows the rules? Not the FBI, not the FBI. But do let us surveil all your conversations, we promise we won't abuse the privilege. You know you can trust us, because we follow the law.
guelo 11y ago
Real estate auction collusion is a big problem that robs people of 10s of thousands of dollars. I don't buy the argument that conducting your crimes on the courthouse steps should entitle you to any kind of protection.
- gohrt 11y ago
  Especially because we have a rubber-stamp process for registering and supervising investigatory projects like this.

cryoshon 11y ago

Read Glen Greenwald's book Liberty and Justice for Some. The rule of law is largely a joke that the powerful trick the weak into accepting. The constant drilling away at the supposed sanctity of the legal system is evidence that the people who run things really don't care so much about attorney client privilege or due process.

jimrandomh 11y ago
The rule of law was a real thing for much of American history, and it's a real thing in many other countries. If we want it back, we can't be tricked into thinking this problem is in any way universal or inevitable.
- davidw 11y ago
  There have always been problems in the US and elsewhere. It's a continual fight. Saying "woe is us, it's all rotten, we can't do anything" is capitulating in the worst sort of way to those who would take away our rights.
  - happyscrappy 11y ago
    "woe is us, it's all rotten, we can't do anything" is the motto of the current generation and self fulfilling.
  - Frondo 11y ago
    Oh my god YES, the cynicism in politics and about the process is the quickest, surest way to guarantee that the people who hold those attitudes will be proven right. "Those politicians are all the same, there's no point in voting or being politically active, it's all going to hell, etc." It's so not true, and it's just the kind of disempowering disregard for one's own agency that anyone who's greedy for power would love to hear. Man, when I hear that shit now, I just want to shake those people and say, "YOU'RE THE PROBLEM!!" You're right, it is a continual fight. It never ends. There's no final set of laws or behaviors we're going for. The process is what matters.
- gohrt 11y ago
  It's not binary. The rule of law has quite often failed to protect the legal rights of Black Americans, for example. (even laying aside the historical problems when rule of law didn't even provide legal rights.)
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- laotzu 11y ago
  >The rule of law was a real thing for much of American history When was that?
genericresponse 11y ago
If this really is what Greenwald is saying, than he's pretty solidly turned into the Glenn Beck of the left. The rule of law might not seem always fair, but it hampers the powerful much more than the weak. As an example: None of the billionaires in my city have set up their own duchy pressed us into an army, enforcing their own laws. Their taxes, while not as high as I would like, in fact pay for much of our city budget including city services. Even the poor in my city have access to clean water and the library system. Just because we have to fight to maintain the sanctity of the legal system and because every actor isn't perfect, does not mean that it's entirely corrupt and captive. I would ask you to take a moment to compare the current rule of law, rule of law in a developing country, and rule of law without the rights guarded by a nation-state.
- enraged_camel 11y ago
  >>The rule of law might not seem always fair, but it hampers the powerful much more than the weak. I guess we live in different realities. The powerful have proven over and over that they are capable of subverting the system in their own favor using their resources and influence. >>As an example: None of the billionaires in my city have set up their own duchy pressed us into an army, enforcing their own laws. They haven't set up their own duchies with private armies because they haven't had to. The state already protects them. Here is a direct quote from Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations: “Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.”
  - hueving 11y ago
    >I guess we live in different realities. The powerful have proven over and over that they are capable of subverting the system in their own favor using their resources and influence. At least the post you are replying to had the courtesy of providing supporting arguments.
    - smalley 11y ago
      I don't think I agree with the extreme nature of the premise a number of comments up the thread, that said my favorite example of this: http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20101104/NEWS/101109939 http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20101104/NEWS/101109939 A hedge fund manager had his criminal charges substantially reduced over the victim's objections because having a felony would mean the hedge fund manager would have to admit what he did to his clients. The defendant in question struck a bicyclist in a hit and run, drove far away and called for roadside assistance for his car never mentioning anything about the bicyclist he left with lifelong injuries. Of course the excuse is that after he was caught he agree to pay some restitution to the victim... Anyway, just a crazy story that I figured I'd share so not really a study of real national trends or anything.
rtl49 11y ago
I wouldn't dispute that we do not all enjoy equal protection under the law. But I wonder how your belief accounts for instances where the "rule of law" has been prioritized by the courts over criminal investigations. For a notorious example, consider that some members of the Weather Underground committed crimes that could easily have resulted in life sentences, yet they are free today because the court found the evidence against them was collected illegally. This may not be a typical example, but it would seem to conflict with the idea that the rule of law is "largely a joke."
nemo 11y ago
"The rule of law is largely a joke that the powerful trick the weak into accepting." If you're saying that in the US the rule of law has been corrupted to the point that it's largely a joke that the powerful trick the weak into accepting, then while that's a bit stronger than I'd agree with, I do see how you'd come to the conclusion. If you're saying that rule of law itself is largely a joke that the powerful trick the weak into accepting, then that's a deeply concerning statement. Which do you mean?
- e40 11y ago
  Pretty sure the former.

fineman 11y ago

It's only a small thing like someone firing a few rounds into a school but missing everyone is a small thing.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- rtl49 11y ago
  I believe he or she is pointing out that, while there is currently no evidence that the FBI has violated a defendant's legal rights, their actions could very easily have had this result and that was probably their intention.
jimrandomh 11y ago
The article claims the recording devices were placed to catch bidders colluding in a real-estate auction. That particular moral high ground is unavailable here.

x5n1 11y ago

Who is above the law? The FBI is above the law...! Who follows the rules? Not the FBI, not the FBI. But do let us surveil all your conversations, we promise we won't abuse the privilege. You know you can trust us, because we follow the law.

guelo 11y ago

Real estate auction collusion is a big problem that robs people of 10s of thousands of dollars. I don't buy the argument that conducting your crimes on the courthouse steps should entitle you to any kind of protection.

gohrt 11y ago
Especially because we have a rubber-stamp process for registering and supervising investigatory projects like this.