4 ms·

DOJ illegally obtained the identities of donors to Barrett Brown's defense fund

64 points by gasull 9y ago

rdtsc 9y ago
> On 17 July, the DoJ served a website-hosting company, DreamHost, with a search warrant for every piece of information it possessed that was related to a website that was used to coordinate protests during Donald Trump’s inauguration. And by coordinating protests they mean coordinating riots because I remember broken glass (including like say from bus stops, because Trump will be waiting for the bus to go to work in the morning, so it makes sense to break those), fires, including destroying a limo of an immigrant business owner, fireworks etc. It would have helped they had checked DC laws as the District has pretty strict laws against either rioting or inciting / organizing one. And if property damages are above $5000 the charges get very steep - felonies, up to 10 year imprisonment, etc. https://beta.code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/sections/22-1322.html https://beta.code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/sections/22-1...
- jlgaddis 9y ago
  What's that have to do with the price of tea in China?
  - rdtsc 9y ago
    > What's that have to do with the price of tea in China? Heh. Sorry, don't follow the reference / joke. Mind giving a hint?
- int_19h 9y ago
  There were protests, and there were riots. The majority of people were protesting peacefully, not rioting. And the website was coordinating protests, not riots. So, unless there's any evidence that riots were pre-planned by the organizers...
  - rdtsc 9y ago
    > And the website was coordinating protests, not riots. So, unless there's any evidence that riots were pre-planned by the organizers... Well, the alleged spokesperson from DisruptJ20 (the site in question) seems to be condoning and supporting it as quoted in WaPo : https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/protesters-who-destroyed-property-on-inauguration-day-part-of-well-organized-group/2017/01/21/096678c8-dfeb-11e6-ad42-f3375f271c9c_story.html?utm_term=.78d93c0cfe1f https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/protester... --- He said that what appeared chaotic was purposeful in its symbolism and that vandalism at a Starbucks shop and a Bank of America branch were executed as attacks on capitalism and corporate greed. “That’s what we’re making a strong stand against. I think that all of Washington, D.C., feels that way, even if they wouldn’t express it in something that results in a limo getting burned,” said Lacy MacAuley of the District. MacAuley is the spokeswoman for DisruptJ20,... --- Not sure how trustworthy WaPo is as it part of the mainstream media but I doubt they completely fabricated that quote. And from the videos I've seen, there weren't a lot of peaceful protestors pulling these rioters away or trying to stop them in any way.
dilemma 9y ago
Sounds undemocratic.
trhway 9y ago
reminds about how Russian FSB ~5 years ago forced Yandex (who has its own version of PayPal) to quietly disclose donors supporting opposition: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-13274443 http://www.bbc.com/news/business-13274443 Another note: looks like its ok for US government to have database of people inclined to protest in opposition while it isn't ok to have database of gun owners. That poses interesting question : what if a gun owner intends to use it for a protest in opposition - would such a case fall under the former or the later?
- thaumasiotes 9y ago
  > Another note: looks like its ok for US government to have database of people inclined to protest in opposition while it isn't ok to have database of gun owners. That poses interesting question : what if a gun owner intends to use it for a protest in opposition - would such a case fall under the former or the later? More "legal" than "ok", I'd say. But for your question, I don't think it's particularly interesting. It's a gun registry if the information recorded is "XXX has a gun", and it's a dissident registry if the information recorded is "XXX is up to no good".
  - LyndsySimon 9y ago
    > More "legal" than "ok", I'd say. Yeah - there has been legislation passed specifically to prohibit the creation of an electronic firearms registration scheme. For the record, it hasn't done much good. The ATF can still usually trace a gun from manufacturer to the current owner in a matter of hours at most.
throwawaymanbot 9y ago
Democracy Dies in Darkness.

64 points by gasull 9y ago

> On 17 July, the DoJ served a website-hosting company, DreamHost, with a search warrant for every piece of information it possessed that was related to a website that was used to coordinate protests during Donald Trump’s inauguration. And by coordinating protests they mean coordinating riots because I remember broken glass (including like say from bus stops, because Trump will be waiting for the bus to go to work in the morning, so it makes sense to break those), fires, including destroying a limo of an immigrant business owner, fireworks etc. It would have helped they had checked DC laws as the District has pretty strict laws against either rioting or inciting / organizing one. And if property damages are above $5000 the charges get very steep - felonies, up to 10 year imprisonment, etc. https://beta.code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/sections/22-1322.html https://beta.code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/code/sections/22-1...

jlgaddis 9y ago
What's that have to do with the price of tea in China?
- rdtsc 9y ago
  > What's that have to do with the price of tea in China? Heh. Sorry, don't follow the reference / joke. Mind giving a hint?
int_19h 9y ago
There were protests, and there were riots. The majority of people were protesting peacefully, not rioting. And the website was coordinating protests, not riots. So, unless there's any evidence that riots were pre-planned by the organizers...
- rdtsc 9y ago
  > And the website was coordinating protests, not riots. So, unless there's any evidence that riots were pre-planned by the organizers... Well, the alleged spokesperson from DisruptJ20 (the site in question) seems to be condoning and supporting it as quoted in WaPo : https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/protesters-who-destroyed-property-on-inauguration-day-part-of-well-organized-group/2017/01/21/096678c8-dfeb-11e6-ad42-f3375f271c9c_story.html?utm_term=.78d93c0cfe1f https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/protester... --- He said that what appeared chaotic was purposeful in its symbolism and that vandalism at a Starbucks shop and a Bank of America branch were executed as attacks on capitalism and corporate greed. “That’s what we’re making a strong stand against. I think that all of Washington, D.C., feels that way, even if they wouldn’t express it in something that results in a limo getting burned,” said Lacy MacAuley of the District. MacAuley is the spokeswoman for DisruptJ20,... --- Not sure how trustworthy WaPo is as it part of the mainstream media but I doubt they completely fabricated that quote. And from the videos I've seen, there weren't a lot of peaceful protestors pulling these rioters away or trying to stop them in any way.

dilemma 9y ago

Sounds undemocratic.

trhway 9y ago

reminds about how Russian FSB ~5 years ago forced Yandex (who has its own version of PayPal) to quietly disclose donors supporting opposition: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-13274443 http://www.bbc.com/news/business-13274443 Another note: looks like its ok for US government to have database of people inclined to protest in opposition while it isn't ok to have database of gun owners. That poses interesting question : what if a gun owner intends to use it for a protest in opposition - would such a case fall under the former or the later?

thaumasiotes 9y ago
> Another note: looks like its ok for US government to have database of people inclined to protest in opposition while it isn't ok to have database of gun owners. That poses interesting question : what if a gun owner intends to use it for a protest in opposition - would such a case fall under the former or the later? More "legal" than "ok", I'd say. But for your question, I don't think it's particularly interesting. It's a gun registry if the information recorded is "XXX has a gun", and it's a dissident registry if the information recorded is "XXX is up to no good".
- LyndsySimon 9y ago
  > More "legal" than "ok", I'd say. Yeah - there has been legislation passed specifically to prohibit the creation of an electronic firearms registration scheme. For the record, it hasn't done much good. The ATF can still usually trace a gun from manufacturer to the current owner in a matter of hours at most.

throwawaymanbot 9y ago

Democracy Dies in Darkness.