16 ms·
I refused to be an FBI informant once. They threatened to make up false charges on me. I held my ground. They harrassed me at home twice, talked to my employer
by lrvick 6y ago
I refused to be an FBI informant once. They threatened to make up false charges on me. I held my ground.
They harrassed me at home twice, talked to my employer and made a huge stink trying to create pressure.
I didn't cave and they eventually went away, because I committed no crimes and they knew it.
As a security researcher I sometimes make contact with controversial people in order to get information, like a journalist might. They wanted those contacts. Too bad.
- giantg2 6y agoSo who do you report law enforcement misconduct to? Normally it's the FBI/DOJ, but it seems there's a conflict of interest in these cases...
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago> who do you report law enforcement misconduct to? These rights are privately enforced. There is no public federal enforcement. You have to do what this gentleman is doing. Sue in the courts. It is becoming apparent that the U.S. needs an independent agency focussed on transgressions by law enforcement / a civil rights enforcement bureau. One could keep it purely civil, to avoid conflicting with the DoJ. But in the same way that criminal prosecution is specialized enough that consolidating it in the DoJ makes sense, investigating law enforcement is specialized and conflicted enough that consolidating it under an independent agency makes sense.
- Sargos 6y agoYou could argue that this is what the ACLU is. They need better funding.
- ScoobleDoodle 6y agoACLU donation link for the lazy https://action.aclu.org/give/now https://action.aclu.org/give/now I personally have a monthly recurring donation. Give what works for you.
- giantg2 6y agoI wish they could let you donate to specific issues. I agree with much of what they do, but I disagree on specific issues.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- robocat 6y agoYou point is true for all organisations that cover many issues, and do not concentrate on one single small issue. You end up not donating to anything, even if your donation would have a large net positive. Tagging money for specific issues is problematic because the organisation doesn’t change its budget percentages for small donations (money is fungible), and organisations find tagging difficult to manage [TODO insert article link here].
- novok 6y agoI've been in organizations that allowed earmarked donations for certain funds / projects. The ACLU can totally allow earmarked donations for projects they are undergoing. Ex: A policy of %80 towards earmarking & %20 towards the general fund to help boot up new projects / general admin would be totally fine with many donators.
- yardie 6y agoCall them and ask. There is usually a fund manager who can direct the money into different causes at the benefactors wishes. Now, if you only donate a minimal amount that will go in to the general fund. They wouldn't expend the same energy for a $35 donation that they would for a $3500 donation.
- giantg2 6y agoIf I were able to donate thousands, then I'd probably use it to file a civil rights case for a recent issue we've experienced.
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoACLU has mostly shirked their core mission and embraced whoring around their brand recognition for political gain in recent years. Basically the NRA but for the other side of the isle. But yes, they kind of used to do that.
- giantg2 6y agoActually, they've supported some gun cases in the recent past.
- jimz 6y agoThey, alongside the Second Amendment Foundation, have actually had some success fighting states for discriminatory laws that deny 2nd Amendment rights to specific populations. After all, the Constitution wouldn't work if it doesn't apply to everyone, but states have spent a lot of effort putting up roadblocks to everyone from legal immigrants to medical marijuana patients and states would selectively refuse to renew CCWs and licenses without cause or bar legal gun owners from receiving Section 8 vouchers and imposing categorical bans on legal gun owners attempting to foster or adopt children. In a sense they are the exact opposite of the NRA, who haven't done much to address the lack of equal access to the Constitutional right for quite some time when the complainants don't fit a particular mold.
- giantg2 6y agoThat's not really true. The NRA has fought for shall issue and even constitutional carry, which removes the discriminatory possibilities under may issue schemes. They worked with an African American in the Chicago handgun ownership case, the PA mother arrested after crossing into NJ, etc. They have shied away from ambiguous or complicated cases, regardless of demographics.
- vharuck 6y ago>It is becoming apparent that the U.S. needs an independent agency focussed on transgressions by law enforcement / a civil rights enforcement bureau. YMMV, but: Many agencies have an Auditor General with a cadre of agents whose entire role is to investigate and publicly report on what that agency does wrong. Sadly, I can't think of any Auditor General's office with the power to punish. So if the agency is acting unconstitutionally or illegally because the governor or agency director wants them to, it's on the public to push for change. That's a hard ask. For issues with state agencies, contact your District Attorney or state Attorney General. I've never done this, but it's stuck in my mind as the path to go. If other people want to report their dead end stories of doing this, I'd welcome the lesson.
- giantg2 6y agoThe DAs work with law enforcement on a daily basis. They are in some ways considered law enforcement themselves (they have detectives and investigators working directly for them). My experience is that they don't care. I've contacted the AG about stuff in the past. He was a complete idiot. I contacted him about a state law that was being violated by a state government policy and he said he would forward the complaint to the FBI. Why? It has nothing to do with federal law!
- istjohn 6y agoIn my experience, state AG's can be very helpful with consumer complaints.
- giantg2 6y agoYes, but those are usually against companies. Do you have any info when it's a complaint against state agencies?
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoBetter than my state AG. She actively works with state law enforcement to deny people their rights without saying that's what they're doing.
- worik 6y agoIndependant agencies to police the police can help but more is needed We have such a organisation here (Aotearoa) to monitor the police. https://www.ipca.govt.nz/ https://www.ipca.govt.nz/ It is mostly captured, policywise, and supports outrages committed by police. It is a improvement over what there used to be, but not much. What has made the biggest difference here is a succession of cases where it became undeniable that the police were raping and framing. They have taken shame and attempting to reform themselves, which is a surprise to those of us who over the years had to deal with the bigoted, prejudiced, violent pigs. There is a lot of opposition within, and without, the police here. Time will tell.
- EdwardDiego 6y ago...you really had to throw a 'pigs' in there?
- hellbannedguy 6y agoI always felt it was a slur to Sus scrofa—an animal I like.
- bigiain 6y agoYou could easily argue that any law enforcement officer who feels targeted or offended by that is admitting to being bigoted, prejudiced, and violent... Or at the very least knows their profession contains enough bigoted, prejudiced, and violent members that they're being tarred with the same brush, while presumably turning a blind eye to it all instead of outing the pigs from the inside.
- solveit 6y ago> You could easily argue Sure. But it still just hurts your main argument.
- worik 6y agoNo it does not. Ask George Floyd... Oh wait, you cannot. "Pig" is a pejorative term, I used it in connection with the violence, bigotry, prejudice, adn stupidity (forgot to mention that), the raping, the framing.... I did not use it as a replacement for "peace officer". I know what I said and I meant it
- sixothree 6y agoThis country was founded on checks and balances. We seem to have lost that entirely.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> This country was founded on checks and balances. No, it wasn’t. It was founded on an impotent central government. It later adopted checks and balances when it decided it needed a much more powerful central government and what it was founded on was unsuitable. But just because US Gov 2.x lasted longer than 1.x doesn’t mean everything in the 2.0. release was perfect; its certainly needed many minor and bugfix releases, and there’s no reason to think that it might not at some point need another ground-up rewrite.
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoPrior to 1900 or so (even more so prior to 1860) the "potent" central government was still very impotent by modern standards.
- giantg2 6y agoWhat are you counting as 1.x, Pre-Constitution?
- Jayschwa 6y agoMost likely https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Confederation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Confederation
- jimz 6y agoArticles of Confederation. It was in force for 6 years before the founders dumped it and drafted the Constitution. The main problems were the inability for congress to levy taxes, regulate trade international and interstate, and congress wound up having to beg the states for money.
- fallingknife 6y agoThis isn't really an example of that, though. This is just a clear cut 6th (and probably more) amendment violation by the government.
- istjohn 6y agoThe DOJ does have a civil rights division that investigates issues in state and local law enforcement agencies. But politicians seem to have no taste for proper oversight of the federal law enforcement agencies. For example, Biden's Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines shielded CIA agents who hacked Senate Intelligence Committee computers. The hacking occurred while the Senate Intelligence Committee was attempting to perform oversight of the CIA's use of torture.
- selimthegrim 6y agoOn a scale of 1 to Feinstein and Harman, how bad was this?
- ncmncm 6y agoWorse than.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- throwitaway12 6y agoWe need such an accountable agency more badly than any of the other govt projects being funded right now.
- giantg2 6y agoThere's the GAO. They don't get much publicity or power.
- PastaMonster 6y agoThe courts protect FBI and police. [0] Impossible to get a real win from a lawsuit. Getting money is not a real win. [1] No changes will be made. The dude who got murdered by police and caused a riot of criminals stealing and burning down buildings, not even that caused the police to change. I should add a white person got killed the same way before that. No riots. No news. No screaming crying people in the streets demanding justice. No change then either. The family of that person didn't even get money from it. [0] https://abc7news.com/san-jose-police-beating-hotel-couple-tased-by-caught-on-camera/6370948/ https://abc7news.com/san-jose-police-beating-hotel-couple-ta... [1] https://www.sltrib.com/news/2017/10/31/utah-nurse-arrested-for-blocking-cop-from-drawing-blood-from-patient-receives-500000-settlement/ https://www.sltrib.com/news/2017/10/31/utah-nurse-arrested-f...
- jungturk 6y agoGovernment agencies often have an inspector general's office responsible for reviewing misconduct complaints against the agency itself. https://oig.justice.gov/hotline/submit_complaint https://oig.justice.gov/hotline/submit_complaint
- kelnos 6y agoHow effective is it to report misconduct to the very agency that is committing the misconduct?
- jungturk 6y agoI'm not aware of any summary reports on the effectiveness of the OIG, but I've read that its structured to try to minimize the most obvious types of corruption (for instance, by also reporting to Congress and not just to the agency head). I'm sure there's plenty of mileage variation depending on the circumstances and political environment. This page suggests that the office does investigate misconduct claims and issue reports periodically: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/type/investigation https://oig.justice.gov/reports/type/investigation
- giantg2 6y agoI can say that at the state police level, self-investigation is a joke.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> So who do you report law enforcement misconduct to? In the case of the FBI, the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility (essentially, the FBI’s “Internal Affairs” unit), DoJ Inspector General, your reps in either House of Congress, or members of the Judiciary Committee (in either House) or the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (in the Senate) or the Oversight and Reform Committee (in the House). May also be worth going to media and/or NGOs, though which, if any (especially of the latter) are most likely to be useful varies a lot by who you are and what the exact details of thr misconduct are. Private litigation may or may not be useful (both governmental and personal immunities come into play) and can be very expensive (though NGOs may help with this.)
- giantg2 6y agoI agree with the options you mentioned. It's just that I've dealt with a similar issue at the state level and none of that works. A trooper knew he was holding an incorrect charge against my wife. The charge carried with it pretrial restrictions that would not have occurred under the correct charge (a "leash law" violation). IAD didn't care. The investigation even tried to explain the trooper's lie to the judge about why he was amending the charge as just a misunderstanding... yeah, ok. Neither state reps replied to my two letters. The governor claims he can't get involved in a court issue even though I only wrote him about the practices of the state police (which he oversees) leading to violations, and that the policy should change. I contacted the ACLU, but this is not a big enough issue for them. The only thing with any traction is an investigative journalist who is pitching the story to their editor. I'm not holding my breath, but I am either in the process of submitting or waiting to hear about: a complaint to the Bar about the ADA having information that it was an incorrect charge and allowing it to stand, the DOJ to investigate the practices of the state police knowingly holding false charges, and a response from my latest letter to the governor.
- tyingq 6y ago>your reps in either House of Congress I would guess that would be the most expedient route, if you can get them interested. If you work for a big employer in their district, and are comfortable with it, having your employer reach out to them might help.
- datavirtue 6y agoUS Attorney General's office. They have authority over the FBI.
- neartheplain 6y agoCall the DoJ Inspector General hotline number: https://oig.justice.gov/ https://oig.justice.gov/
- mox1 6y agohttps://oig.justice.gov/ https://oig.justice.gov/ This is basically internal affairs for the FBI. Report here. Personally, I would make a report here no matter what, just to start a paper-trail of them harassing you.
- busterarm 6y agoI think people here will probably underestimate how common your story is in the security industry. Just from DEFCON connections, I'm on a first name basis with a roughly four different FBI employees who are constantly trying to recruit myself or friends as informants. We discuss, openly, what a bad deal it is to be an informant and how I don't have any useful information for them anyway. But they persist. Thankfully lightly. Nothing like what you mentioned, but I fully believe that your story happens. And regularly.
- llaolleh 6y agoWhat does the FBI offer for becoming an informant if you are a law abiding citizen?
- notsureaboutpg 6y agoThey won't ruin your life. It's an offer you can't refuse.
- lrvick 6y agoThey offered: "Politicians are not happy. Someone has to pay for it. If you help us we can make sure you are not that someone" And yeah, I was terrified. It was a mistake to talk to them in the first place. They got in my door by telling me they wanted my opinion on some activity they felt is a threat to a visiting president then things took a fast turn asking me about my research and contacts. FBI is 100% allowed to lie to you but if you lie back to them they own you. They also like to catch you unprepared and off guard. Don't fall for it. Say something like: "I'm sorry this is not a topic I feel well prepared to talk about right now. If you have a court order I will honor it but even then I am going to need time to collect my thoughts and ensure I am speaking accurately. I'll walk you out" Then get a lawyer to coach you on what you can and can't say. If they catch you in a lie even by accident they can -force- you to be an informant.
- viraptor 6y agoI'm curious, do you know what happens if you tried to make yourself useless by publicly announcing that FBI is trying to make you an informant? Has anyone tried that as a way out?
- osazuwa 6y agoA friend of mine (mid-West redhead) spent years in China doing research. She came back to the US to do her PhD, and FBI started hassling her, asking if she was spying for the Chinese. Finally ended when she called that agent's superior and implied the agent was coming on to her.
- fallingknife 6y agoThat is so ridiculous. They stopped because she accused them of sexual harassment, not because they were out of line? Like is that all a real Chinese spy would have to do to get the FBI of her back?
- walshemj 6y agoWhich is totally not how you recruit a source - sounds like some FBI officers think that acting like an OTT cop from TV show (Constable Savage for UK HN's of a certain age.) is how it works. The way malwarebytes was handled is another example great the FBI has just alienated a large potential group of sources and this FBI idiot by bullying Mr Chebli has alienated a lot of Lebanese Americans who might provide information in future.
- anonymousisme 6y agoDuring my last polygraph (I've had a lot over the years), I was accused by the FBI examiner of being a terrorist. Although we are not supposed to discuss these things, my boss told me later that they had done the same thing to him. The accusations rose to the level of abuse and the examiner was yelling at me and threatening my livelihood and future for several hours. Apparently, once he was satisfied that I had done nothing wrong, we were done. He offered his handshake to me as I left the room. I shook his hand, but I felt soiled afterward.
- marshmallow_12 6y agohow accurate are polygraphs? they seem to be uniquely American (though i can't pretend i know that as a fact). I always thought they are really just worthless window-dressing on par with the tsa.I.e it's a lot of bluff and only a bit of substance. Can your experiences substantiate what i'm saying or am i being biased?
- klondike_ 6y agoPolygraphs are intimidation devices with no scientific merit. They don't work. By making people believe that they do work, sometimes interrogators are able to get people to admit things they otherwise wouldn't. Polygraphs are not admissible as evidence in court and civilian employers are not allowed to administer them to employees. Regardless, the US Government still uses them for security clearance. More information: https://antipolygraph.org/ https://antipolygraph.org/
- marshmallow_12 6y agoyour answers and the fact that no one is defending polygraphs indicates to me that i'm not far off the mark. In which case, why on earth is the FBI messing around with it? My conclusion, corroborated by this story is that they are not so professional as they would like you to think. This is compensated, probably with interest, by being very heavy handed. But surely that is no way to run a large agency.
- PastaMonster 6y agoWhy not ask for something impossible for them to agree to so they leave you alone? For example "I'll become an informant if you pay me 2 billion per contact and 1 million per week while being an informant". Will that not work? Besides why didn't you go for a lawsuit? They threatened and harassed you. They threatened your employment, your livelihood. Not to mention you claim to be a security researcher and the first thing on your mind wasn't to record them and take down their details to publish later on internet. It's a good punishment. It would prevent those who visits you to do certain work and with their face and name everyone will know what they are, where they live. In case people want to visit and leave some very justified feedback about the FBI. It's perfectly legal to record them since they entered your home/property. Always, always record! I bet they left a card so you could contact them. Even publishing that alone is good. FBI is very afraid of the public light because of this in my opinion illegal stuff they do. FBI must have positive PR. Bad PR means less trust, less informants, etc. A a security researcher you are supposed to know this stuff. How to deal with FBI, etc. I'm disappointed.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- busterarm 6y agoThis is hilariously bad advice. Keep in mind that the FBI needs a good relationship with people out in industry and doing research. Most of the attempts to recruit informants are benign, as I mentioned in my own story elsewhere in the thread. It boils down to being in Vegas the same few days and having a drink and killing time talking about how great America is (yes, FBI agents generally do love their country). It's good PR for everyone involved.