3 ms·

These people stole all the DBs and stored them on insecure systems and in the cloud. I am expecting all these individuals or connected individuals to immediatel

These people stole all the DBs and stored them on insecure systems and in the cloud. I am expecting all these individuals or connected individuals to immediately be seized and jailed by an Executive Order from the next Democrat President. A lot of people need to serve long prison sentences and these guys are prime candidates.

dpark 11mo ago
> I am expecting all these individuals or connected individuals to immediately be seized and jailed by an Executive Order from the next Democrat President. Democrats broadly lack the spine necessary for this. But regardless, this is also illegal. Despite the actions of the current administration, an EO to snatch people off the street and jail them would violate the 4th amendment.
- beefnugs 11mo ago
  Nothing is illegal if the prez can just tell you to execute someone. Then pardon you.
- idle_zealot 11mo ago
  Eh, the EO would just have to direct the justice department to look into pursuing criminal charges against the people.
  - dpark 11mo ago
    “Investigate criminal activity” is a very different EO than “immediately seize and jail”.
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      Jailing while completing an investigation is perfectly precedented for all sorts of crimes. To suggest these guys, in particular, aren’t a flight and destruction of evidence risk would take work.
- sys_64738 11mo ago
  That would be for a court to decide later. Meanwhile, they'll languish in a hot and humid prison somewhere. Preferably Alligator Alcatraz. Even if some court decided then it would immediately be appealed and precedent from the current Executive Branch shows that court orders don't need to necessarily be obeyed anytime soon.
  - dpark 11mo ago
    “I don’t care about the law as long as the lawbreakers are on my side.”
    - s5300 11mo ago
      [dead]
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      We’ve already crossed this bridge. Unilaterally disarming doesn’t make sense if the next MAGA President just chips away at the system again.
      - dpark 11mo ago
        Sorry, does “disarming” here mean “not engaging in illegal authoritarian action”? I’m not sure what system is being protected in the scenario where everyone is openly and illegally authoritarian. I hope that if Democrats get back into power they will invest in stabilizing democracy and the rule of law, not just attempting to run the same authoritarian playbook for their own benefit.
        JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
        > does “disarming” here mean “not engaging in illegal authoritarian action”? Nothing discussed is black-and-white illegal. SCOTUS has made that clear. > hope that if Democrats get back into power they will invest in stabilizing democracy and the rule of law Me too. The first step in that has to be setting the precedent that if you side with an autocrat, you lose your wealth and freedom.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > Democrats broadly lack the spine The party elites are complacent. That’s creating a political vacuum for someone who’s more aggressive. > this is also illegal An EO is. The President asking the FBI, DoJ and state AGs to prioritise the last administration’s lawbreakers—a thing Biden was elected to do and failed at—is just norms and conventions.
idle_zealot 11mo ago
> I am expecting all these individuals or connected individuals to immediately be seized and jailed by an Executive Order from the next Democrat President I am not expecting the Democrats, at least as they are now, to pursue justice regarding the schemers and criminals in this administration. They are far more interested in preserving power structures and the tiered justice system than even the easy political win inherent in holding their enemies to account. Expect the rhetoric to rapidly shift to "moving forward" and "Trump was an exception, other Republicans are totally reasonable coworkers."
rsynnott 11mo ago
... I mean, the response to lawlessness is not more lawlessness. That's essentially a bill of attainder.
anigbrowl 11mo ago
I'm pretty sure this administration will just pardon them.

dpark 11mo ago

> I am expecting all these individuals or connected individuals to immediately be seized and jailed by an Executive Order from the next Democrat President. Democrats broadly lack the spine necessary for this. But regardless, this is also illegal. Despite the actions of the current administration, an EO to snatch people off the street and jail them would violate the 4th amendment.

beefnugs 11mo ago
Nothing is illegal if the prez can just tell you to execute someone. Then pardon you.
idle_zealot 11mo ago
Eh, the EO would just have to direct the justice department to look into pursuing criminal charges against the people.
- dpark 11mo ago
  “Investigate criminal activity” is a very different EO than “immediately seize and jail”.
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    Jailing while completing an investigation is perfectly precedented for all sorts of crimes. To suggest these guys, in particular, aren’t a flight and destruction of evidence risk would take work.
sys_64738 11mo ago
That would be for a court to decide later. Meanwhile, they'll languish in a hot and humid prison somewhere. Preferably Alligator Alcatraz. Even if some court decided then it would immediately be appealed and precedent from the current Executive Branch shows that court orders don't need to necessarily be obeyed anytime soon.
- dpark 11mo ago
  “I don’t care about the law as long as the lawbreakers are on my side.”
  - s5300 11mo ago
    [dead]
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    We’ve already crossed this bridge. Unilaterally disarming doesn’t make sense if the next MAGA President just chips away at the system again.
    - dpark 11mo ago
      Sorry, does “disarming” here mean “not engaging in illegal authoritarian action”? I’m not sure what system is being protected in the scenario where everyone is openly and illegally authoritarian. I hope that if Democrats get back into power they will invest in stabilizing democracy and the rule of law, not just attempting to run the same authoritarian playbook for their own benefit.
      - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
        > does “disarming” here mean “not engaging in illegal authoritarian action”? Nothing discussed is black-and-white illegal. SCOTUS has made that clear. > hope that if Democrats get back into power they will invest in stabilizing democracy and the rule of law Me too. The first step in that has to be setting the precedent that if you side with an autocrat, you lose your wealth and freedom.
JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
> Democrats broadly lack the spine The party elites are complacent. That’s creating a political vacuum for someone who’s more aggressive. > this is also illegal An EO is. The President asking the FBI, DoJ and state AGs to prioritise the last administration’s lawbreakers—a thing Biden was elected to do and failed at—is just norms and conventions.

idle_zealot 11mo ago

> I am expecting all these individuals or connected individuals to immediately be seized and jailed by an Executive Order from the next Democrat President I am not expecting the Democrats, at least as they are now, to pursue justice regarding the schemers and criminals in this administration. They are far more interested in preserving power structures and the tiered justice system than even the easy political win inherent in holding their enemies to account. Expect the rhetoric to rapidly shift to "moving forward" and "Trump was an exception, other Republicans are totally reasonable coworkers."

rsynnott 11mo ago

... I mean, the response to lawlessness is not more lawlessness. That's essentially a bill of attainder.

anigbrowl 11mo ago

I'm pretty sure this administration will just pardon them.