6 ms·

Up until now these crazy cases have been rejected by the courts. But this feels like a crack in the dam. A judge actually sentenced someone to 30 years for hidi

by xrd 3mo ago

Up until now these crazy cases have been rejected by the courts. But this feels like a crack in the dam. A judge actually sentenced someone to 30 years for hiding zines, zines that had been published for years. This was under the pretense hiding those zines was hiding evidence of criminality. And the criminality was worth 75 years. For someone who was at a protest where a federal agent was shot, but was not the shooter. Does anyone have a link to details on the case because there must have been more details, like these two were accused of planning a murder in advance, because otherwise this seems insane. It seems insane no matter what, but if this was a judge making a bunch of logical leaps while guided by DOJ lawyers, something is really broken

appreciatorBus 3mo ago
I think all of this hinges on whether or not you think it was a protest. If they had been peacefully sitting outside the facility holding signs, I think you'd have a case that the sentencing is insane. But if they were actively planning a break-in & preparing to use deadly force, that's quite another matter. I haven't spent a lot of timing reading about it, but what I have read suggests it was much closer to the latter.
- devmor 3mo ago
  From what I read, the person who was arrested for transporting zines was not even at the protest or part of the group - just the husband of one of the protestors.
  - paisawalla 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - axus 3mo ago
      If I were transporting copies of this magazine, am I concealing evidence? What is special about this guy? Is there anything he could have legally transported, or is everything she's written banned? The irony of The Intercept requiring my identity is funny.
      - glitch003 3mo ago
        she called her husband, from jail, and asked him to move them so they couldn't be used in court against her. she said "do whatever you have to do". the cops listened to the phone call, watched him load them into the car and arrested him on the drive. i think it's pretty straightforward that she was asking for his help in obstructing the investigation by hiding potential evidence against her.
        mindslight 3mo ago
        Lawful investigation and prosecution would of course not hinge upon the contents of political publications. As such, any obstruction was purely aimed at the inevitable two minute hate by the addled autocrat about how antifa is hiding everywhere, making his coffee too cold and his food not taste as good as it used to.
        lobf 3mo ago
        Well regardless, the obvious answer is that you simply turn your zines in to slurry in a bucket or sink, you don’t drive them anywhere.
        deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
        metabagel 3mo ago
        Maybe so, but 30 years is wildly disproportionate.
        axus 3mo ago
        I am asking those questions in good faith, to explore the new limits on free speech, and don't see any direct answers. What happens to this guy specifically is only interesting as far as it affects everyone else in the US.
    - anigbrowl 3mo ago
      And you think that's worth a 30 year sentence? I think the founders of the US would disagree. Also worth noting that the husband did not conceal evidence of the wife committing a crime. Having political zines isn't illegal. The zines were circumstantial evidence that the prosecution wanted to use to characterize her general political views. They had no direct relation to the events at the ICE detention center.
      - 21asdffdsa12 3mo ago
        Im somehow more reminded of the loyalists in the revolutionary wars. 80.000 people who fled to canada, when it became obvious they where no longer wanted or needed by the new administration. Trying to do a Che Guverra against the expressed will of the people - seems kind of extremist.
      - paisawalla 3mo ago
        As with many of your premises throughout this thread, > And you think that's worth a 30 year sentence? this claim was never argued.
    - autoexec 3mo ago
      The wife was charged with: Rioting with the intent to commit an act of violence, providing support to terrorists, and conspiracy to use and carry explosives. In what way would a box of magazines be evidence of any one of those crimes? I very much doubt there was an article called "My plan to commit an act of violence by Maricela Rueda" in any of them. The ones they choose to photograph for inclusion in their criminal complaint (likely because they were the most scary looking ones) appear to have been written many years ago. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Literature_from_Fed-Complaint-Daniel-Sanchez.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Literatu... Two of those pictured are on archive.org and War in the streets : the story of urban combat from Calais to Khafji is available at amazon.com https://dn790008.ca.archive.org/0/items/ItsVacantTakeIt/its-vacant-take-it-SCREEN.pdf https://dn790008.ca.archive.org/0/items/ItsVacantTakeIt/its-... https://ia601803.us.archive.org/29/items/the-anarchist-library-full-list-of-pdfs-nov-2020/anonymous-another-critique-of-insurrectionalism.pdf https://ia601803.us.archive.org/29/items/the-anarchist-libra... It sounds to me like she was just making arrangements with her husband from jail to handle their property. She told him to have her car towed because it was left on the street by someone else's house and she told him to "move whatever you need to from the house" which is a pretty sensible heads up to give someone when you know that their house will likely be ransacked later by police who could take or destroy anything.
      - 9x39 3mo ago
        "The government showed that there were items in the box that were the same items found in the Soto’s residence, tying Sanchez and Rueda to the Sotos, and similar items found amongst the other defendants. It also showed materials in the box contained handwritten notes on them, specifically the name “Ines,” and “Ines in bc” [Ines in book club]. This further drew the connection between Sanchez, Rueda, and the Sotos. This connection was important for purposes of Pinkerton liability and showing they all shared the same motive, intent, knowledge, and foreseeability." https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410489/gov.uscourts.txnd.410489.385.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.41... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_liability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_liability No lawyer, today is the day I learned about Pinkerton Liability, but apparently under it you can be held liable for the actions of your co-conspirators.
    - devmor 3mo ago
      Well then it’s a great thing that no one attempted to do that.
    - Findecanor 3mo ago
      Isn't the purpose of zines to publish them? Then how could that even be considered concealment?
    - kristjansson 3mo ago
      How would possession of political material be evidence one way or the other? She can own, read, share, publish, disseminate all the revolutionary literature she wants
    - one33seven 3mo ago
      Is protesting a crime now?
- ipython 3mo ago
  Unfortunately, the administration wants it both ways- if you were on the Capitol grounds on January 6, 2021, you were simply part of a "peaceful tour group". If you stand to the side of an ICE agent in Minneapolis, you are a "domestic terrorist", deserve to be murdered in cold blood, and any attempts to investigate further will be stonewalled. So it's hard to take their characterization seriously when they have demonstrated that there is a clear double standard, depending on whether you are a FoT (Friend of Trump).
  - wmf 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - platevoltage 3mo ago
      Imagine having to pardon an anti-fascist in the USA.
    - compass_copium 3mo ago
      Imagine a Democratic president with a spine like that.
    - ipython 3mo ago
      Can anyone seriously define “antifa”? What would the pardon read? “Anyone who is anti-fascism is hereby pardoned…”? Edit: downvoting me doesn’t answer the question. If you have a definition please reply! If nobody can define “antifa” how the heck can you prosecute someone for being a member of it?
      - wmf 3mo ago
        It wouldn't be a blanket pardon.
      - incompatible 3mo ago
        Wikipedia uses "a left-wing anti-fascist and anti-racist political movement." Until recently, there was nothing controversial or illegal about being any of those things.
- lelandfe 3mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention_center_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention...
  - appreciatorBus 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - stronglikedan 3mo ago
      [flagged]
      - j16sdiz 3mo ago
        [flagged]
        deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
  - snvzz 3mo ago
    Do not just link some Wikipedia article. Express your point.
    - reverius42 3mo ago
      The parent comment has a lot of "if this" and "if that", but the linked Wikipedia article has a thorough sequence of events. The point is clearly: we don't need to surmise.
- felixgallo 3mo ago
  'they' is doing a lot of work. This guy wasn't even there.
  - BobbyJo 3mo ago
    You don't have to be present for the act to be part of the conspiracy...
    - saintfire 3mo ago
      You presumably need to convict the conspirator on evidence that doesn't consist of having published documents on your person.
- shimman 3mo ago
  What hogwash. Resistance is as American as the founding of the country, acting like there is a "right way" to protest is deeply antihuman.
  - Manuel_D 3mo ago
    The "protestors" shot someone, if that's not the wrong way to protest then what is?
    - mulmen 3mo ago
      [flagged]
    - thunderfork 3mo ago
      An individual shot someone, unless you think multiple people were helping pull the trigger.
      - Manuel_D 3mo ago
        This was a coordinated group of people who procured body armor, radios, and firearms, and planned to break into a Federal facility. Responsibility for this incident doesn't rest exclusively on the hands of the shooter. An analogy is Enrique Tarrio's arrest in the wake of January 6th. Right wingers complained that he wasn't even in the capital during the riot. But of course that's not evidence his innocence. Even though he didn't personally participate in the putsch, he was still held responsible for organizing it (not for long on account of his pardon, unfortunately, but he was still rightfully convicted).
        thunderfork 3mo ago
        Responsibility is a separate question from correctly reporting on the events that occurred. "A protestor shot someone" is correct, "a protestor shot someone and the group is culpable" could be argued, but "the protestors shot someone" is simply untrue.
daedrdev 3mo ago
If you think that this was a protest then yeah it's worrying. The feds case, which they did win convictions based on, was that they were terrorists who set off fireworks to lure police into an ambush, and there weren't more casualties because one of the members shot early and only injured one cop. An accessory to this who hid evidence is also part of the crime in the Feds case Is this embellished by the Feds? I think so, it seems some of the group did not think this was the plan. But there did seem to be a plan and it did involve bringing guns, setting off fireworks, opening the gate and trying to break out the prisoners, and "not going quietly"
- tkel 3mo ago
  "Lure police into an ambush" is quite a stretch. It's quite normal to do noise demonstrations outside jails/prisons to show solidarity with the captives, the captives will often times knock on the windows to communicate back. In fact there were noise demonstrations outside the Delaney Hall ICE jail in New Jersey just this month, which you may have heard about. The mischaracterization of fireworks as "explosives" is also a huge stretch by the government in order to pursue their antifa conspiracy.
  - snvzz 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - Aeolun 3mo ago
      > Or are you saying you'd be happy to have one of these shot at your face? Given the choice between the fireworks and an actual grenade? Yeah, absolutely.
      - simianparrot 3mo ago
        [flagged]
        goatlover 3mo ago
throwawayffffas 3mo ago
> ... like these two were accused of planning a murder in advance, ... The 30 years is for evidence tampering. The rest have been convicted of various terrorist charges. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention_center_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention... It's really funny because all of this has played out in the past with people that actually conspired to do all that and more and walked away free. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Smith_sedition_trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Smith_sedition_trial That case, the incredibly bad handling of Ruby Ridge and Waco put a real freeze on the FBI dealing with domestic terrorism, and then the focus moved outward with 9/11. But now "domestic terrorism" is priority number 1. Enjoy your choices folks.
panny 3mo ago
[flagged]
totetsu 3mo ago
All the best discussion of this is on sites that I wouldn’t want to link to on HN incase It puts me on a list in line for a 30 year prison sentence
- vrganj 3mo ago
  Will you look at that, the authoritarian suppression of opposition speech is already working!
- sourcecodeplz 3mo ago
  prob zerohedge, i can say it. no need to link it.
  - totetsu 3mo ago
    No I wasn’t thinking far-right libertarian I was thinking far-left anarchistic, haha
nylonstrung 3mo ago
Insane to think they'd have gotten a small fraction of the sentence had they been distributing CSAM they produced instead Apparently Marxist film reviews and gardening tips are more criminal than child pornography
- jmyeet 3mo ago
  This isn't even a theoretical comparison. Consider the case of popular far-right influencer Dom Lucre. In 2023, he uploaded screenshots from what is apparently a "known" CSAM video. Not only that but he watermarked the screenshots, showing he had the screenshots on a computer he had access to and likely had access to the source video itself. Mere possession of this should land you in jail. One side of the story is that Elon Musk personally intervened to unban him for this [1], which is a whole other aspect to this. But the Feds, as far as we know, never charged him. This leads many (including myself) to believe Dom Lucre is an asset to the FBI already. Jeffrey Epstein was charged for his pedophile ring. Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted but is now sitting in a Work camp she should never be in for her crimes. And she was charged with trafficking. To whom exactly? Nobody has ever been charged or even named as being who minors were trafficked to. At least 4 presidents have sat on a mountain of evidence of this and done precisely nothing. The last president (Biden) and his AG (Garland) even sat on these files when the current president was credibly implicated. And of course there are the January 6 ringleaders who were convicted of seditious conspiracy (22, 18 and 18 years) for attempting to overthrow the government and storming the Capitol. All pardoned now of course. But sure, 30 years for moving a box of zines. [1]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/07/27/twitter-suspends-then-unsuspends-popular-right-wing-user-who-tweeted-image-of-child-sexual-abuse/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/07/27/twitter-...

by xrd 3mo ago

appreciatorBus 3mo ago

I think all of this hinges on whether or not you think it was a protest. If they had been peacefully sitting outside the facility holding signs, I think you'd have a case that the sentencing is insane. But if they were actively planning a break-in & preparing to use deadly force, that's quite another matter. I haven't spent a lot of timing reading about it, but what I have read suggests it was much closer to the latter.

devmor 3mo ago
From what I read, the person who was arrested for transporting zines was not even at the protest or part of the group - just the husband of one of the protestors.
- paisawalla 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - axus 3mo ago
    If I were transporting copies of this magazine, am I concealing evidence? What is special about this guy? Is there anything he could have legally transported, or is everything she's written banned? The irony of The Intercept requiring my identity is funny.
    - glitch003 3mo ago
      she called her husband, from jail, and asked him to move them so they couldn't be used in court against her. she said "do whatever you have to do". the cops listened to the phone call, watched him load them into the car and arrested him on the drive. i think it's pretty straightforward that she was asking for his help in obstructing the investigation by hiding potential evidence against her.
      - mindslight 3mo ago
        Lawful investigation and prosecution would of course not hinge upon the contents of political publications. As such, any obstruction was purely aimed at the inevitable two minute hate by the addled autocrat about how antifa is hiding everywhere, making his coffee too cold and his food not taste as good as it used to.
        lobf 3mo ago
        Well regardless, the obvious answer is that you simply turn your zines in to slurry in a bucket or sink, you don’t drive them anywhere.
        deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
      - metabagel 3mo ago
        Maybe so, but 30 years is wildly disproportionate.
      - axus 3mo ago
        I am asking those questions in good faith, to explore the new limits on free speech, and don't see any direct answers. What happens to this guy specifically is only interesting as far as it affects everyone else in the US.
  - anigbrowl 3mo ago
    And you think that's worth a 30 year sentence? I think the founders of the US would disagree. Also worth noting that the husband did not conceal evidence of the wife committing a crime. Having political zines isn't illegal. The zines were circumstantial evidence that the prosecution wanted to use to characterize her general political views. They had no direct relation to the events at the ICE detention center.
    - 21asdffdsa12 3mo ago
      Im somehow more reminded of the loyalists in the revolutionary wars. 80.000 people who fled to canada, when it became obvious they where no longer wanted or needed by the new administration. Trying to do a Che Guverra against the expressed will of the people - seems kind of extremist.
    - paisawalla 3mo ago
      As with many of your premises throughout this thread, > And you think that's worth a 30 year sentence? this claim was never argued.
  - autoexec 3mo ago
    The wife was charged with: Rioting with the intent to commit an act of violence, providing support to terrorists, and conspiracy to use and carry explosives. In what way would a box of magazines be evidence of any one of those crimes? I very much doubt there was an article called "My plan to commit an act of violence by Maricela Rueda" in any of them. The ones they choose to photograph for inclusion in their criminal complaint (likely because they were the most scary looking ones) appear to have been written many years ago. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Literature_from_Fed-Complaint-Daniel-Sanchez.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Literatu... Two of those pictured are on archive.org and War in the streets : the story of urban combat from Calais to Khafji is available at amazon.com https://dn790008.ca.archive.org/0/items/ItsVacantTakeIt/its-vacant-take-it-SCREEN.pdf https://dn790008.ca.archive.org/0/items/ItsVacantTakeIt/its-... https://ia601803.us.archive.org/29/items/the-anarchist-library-full-list-of-pdfs-nov-2020/anonymous-another-critique-of-insurrectionalism.pdf https://ia601803.us.archive.org/29/items/the-anarchist-libra... It sounds to me like she was just making arrangements with her husband from jail to handle their property. She told him to have her car towed because it was left on the street by someone else's house and she told him to "move whatever you need to from the house" which is a pretty sensible heads up to give someone when you know that their house will likely be ransacked later by police who could take or destroy anything.
    - 9x39 3mo ago
      "The government showed that there were items in the box that were the same items found in the Soto’s residence, tying Sanchez and Rueda to the Sotos, and similar items found amongst the other defendants. It also showed materials in the box contained handwritten notes on them, specifically the name “Ines,” and “Ines in bc” [Ines in book club]. This further drew the connection between Sanchez, Rueda, and the Sotos. This connection was important for purposes of Pinkerton liability and showing they all shared the same motive, intent, knowledge, and foreseeability." https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410489/gov.uscourts.txnd.410489.385.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.41... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_liability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_liability No lawyer, today is the day I learned about Pinkerton Liability, but apparently under it you can be held liable for the actions of your co-conspirators.
  - devmor 3mo ago
    Well then it’s a great thing that no one attempted to do that.
  - Findecanor 3mo ago
    Isn't the purpose of zines to publish them? Then how could that even be considered concealment?
  - kristjansson 3mo ago
    How would possession of political material be evidence one way or the other? She can own, read, share, publish, disseminate all the revolutionary literature she wants
  - one33seven 3mo ago
    Is protesting a crime now?
ipython 3mo ago
Unfortunately, the administration wants it both ways- if you were on the Capitol grounds on January 6, 2021, you were simply part of a "peaceful tour group". If you stand to the side of an ICE agent in Minneapolis, you are a "domestic terrorist", deserve to be murdered in cold blood, and any attempts to investigate further will be stonewalled. So it's hard to take their characterization seriously when they have demonstrated that there is a clear double standard, depending on whether you are a FoT (Friend of Trump).
- wmf 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - platevoltage 3mo ago
    Imagine having to pardon an anti-fascist in the USA.
  - compass_copium 3mo ago
    Imagine a Democratic president with a spine like that.
  - ipython 3mo ago
    Can anyone seriously define “antifa”? What would the pardon read? “Anyone who is anti-fascism is hereby pardoned…”? Edit: downvoting me doesn’t answer the question. If you have a definition please reply! If nobody can define “antifa” how the heck can you prosecute someone for being a member of it?
    - wmf 3mo ago
      It wouldn't be a blanket pardon.
    - incompatible 3mo ago
      Wikipedia uses "a left-wing anti-fascist and anti-racist political movement." Until recently, there was nothing controversial or illegal about being any of those things.
lelandfe 3mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention_center_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention...
- appreciatorBus 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - stronglikedan 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - j16sdiz 3mo ago
      [flagged]
      - deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
- snvzz 3mo ago
  Do not just link some Wikipedia article. Express your point.
  - reverius42 3mo ago
    The parent comment has a lot of "if this" and "if that", but the linked Wikipedia article has a thorough sequence of events. The point is clearly: we don't need to surmise.
felixgallo 3mo ago
'they' is doing a lot of work. This guy wasn't even there.
- BobbyJo 3mo ago
  You don't have to be present for the act to be part of the conspiracy...
  - saintfire 3mo ago
    You presumably need to convict the conspirator on evidence that doesn't consist of having published documents on your person.
shimman 3mo ago
What hogwash. Resistance is as American as the founding of the country, acting like there is a "right way" to protest is deeply antihuman.
- Manuel_D 3mo ago
  The "protestors" shot someone, if that's not the wrong way to protest then what is?
  - mulmen 3mo ago
    [flagged]
  - thunderfork 3mo ago
    An individual shot someone, unless you think multiple people were helping pull the trigger.
    - Manuel_D 3mo ago
      This was a coordinated group of people who procured body armor, radios, and firearms, and planned to break into a Federal facility. Responsibility for this incident doesn't rest exclusively on the hands of the shooter. An analogy is Enrique Tarrio's arrest in the wake of January 6th. Right wingers complained that he wasn't even in the capital during the riot. But of course that's not evidence his innocence. Even though he didn't personally participate in the putsch, he was still held responsible for organizing it (not for long on account of his pardon, unfortunately, but he was still rightfully convicted).
      - thunderfork 3mo ago
        Responsibility is a separate question from correctly reporting on the events that occurred. "A protestor shot someone" is correct, "a protestor shot someone and the group is culpable" could be argued, but "the protestors shot someone" is simply untrue.

daedrdev 3mo ago

If you think that this was a protest then yeah it's worrying. The feds case, which they did win convictions based on, was that they were terrorists who set off fireworks to lure police into an ambush, and there weren't more casualties because one of the members shot early and only injured one cop. An accessory to this who hid evidence is also part of the crime in the Feds case Is this embellished by the Feds? I think so, it seems some of the group did not think this was the plan. But there did seem to be a plan and it did involve bringing guns, setting off fireworks, opening the gate and trying to break out the prisoners, and "not going quietly"

tkel 3mo ago
"Lure police into an ambush" is quite a stretch. It's quite normal to do noise demonstrations outside jails/prisons to show solidarity with the captives, the captives will often times knock on the windows to communicate back. In fact there were noise demonstrations outside the Delaney Hall ICE jail in New Jersey just this month, which you may have heard about. The mischaracterization of fireworks as "explosives" is also a huge stretch by the government in order to pursue their antifa conspiracy.
- snvzz 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - Aeolun 3mo ago
    > Or are you saying you'd be happy to have one of these shot at your face? Given the choice between the fireworks and an actual grenade? Yeah, absolutely.
    - simianparrot 3mo ago
      [flagged]
      - goatlover 3mo ago

throwawayffffas 3mo ago

> ... like these two were accused of planning a murder in advance, ... The 30 years is for evidence tampering. The rest have been convicted of various terrorist charges. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention_center_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention... It's really funny because all of this has played out in the past with people that actually conspired to do all that and more and walked away free. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Smith_sedition_trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Smith_sedition_trial That case, the incredibly bad handling of Ruby Ridge and Waco put a real freeze on the FBI dealing with domestic terrorism, and then the focus moved outward with 9/11. But now "domestic terrorism" is priority number 1. Enjoy your choices folks.

panny 3mo ago

[flagged]

totetsu 3mo ago

All the best discussion of this is on sites that I wouldn’t want to link to on HN incase It puts me on a list in line for a 30 year prison sentence

vrganj 3mo ago
Will you look at that, the authoritarian suppression of opposition speech is already working!
sourcecodeplz 3mo ago
prob zerohedge, i can say it. no need to link it.
- totetsu 3mo ago
  No I wasn’t thinking far-right libertarian I was thinking far-left anarchistic, haha

nylonstrung 3mo ago

Insane to think they'd have gotten a small fraction of the sentence had they been distributing CSAM they produced instead Apparently Marxist film reviews and gardening tips are more criminal than child pornography

jmyeet 3mo ago
This isn't even a theoretical comparison. Consider the case of popular far-right influencer Dom Lucre. In 2023, he uploaded screenshots from what is apparently a "known" CSAM video. Not only that but he watermarked the screenshots, showing he had the screenshots on a computer he had access to and likely had access to the source video itself. Mere possession of this should land you in jail. One side of the story is that Elon Musk personally intervened to unban him for this [1], which is a whole other aspect to this. But the Feds, as far as we know, never charged him. This leads many (including myself) to believe Dom Lucre is an asset to the FBI already. Jeffrey Epstein was charged for his pedophile ring. Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted but is now sitting in a Work camp she should never be in for her crimes. And she was charged with trafficking. To whom exactly? Nobody has ever been charged or even named as being who minors were trafficked to. At least 4 presidents have sat on a mountain of evidence of this and done precisely nothing. The last president (Biden) and his AG (Garland) even sat on these files when the current president was credibly implicated. And of course there are the January 6 ringleaders who were convicted of seditious conspiracy (22, 18 and 18 years) for attempting to overthrow the government and storming the Capitol. All pardoned now of course. But sure, 30 years for moving a box of zines. [1]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/07/27/twitter-suspends-then-unsuspends-popular-right-wing-user-who-tweeted-image-of-child-sexual-abuse/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/07/27/twitter-...