Slashdot Mirror
Feds Confiscate Investigative Reporter's Confidential Files During Raid
schwit1 writes "Using a warrant to search for guns, Homeland security officers and Maryland police confiscated a journalist's confidential files. The reporter had written a series of articles critical of the TSA. It appears that the raid was specifically designed to get her files, which contain identifying information about her sources in the TSA. 'In particular, the files included notes that were used to expose how the Federal Air Marshal Service had lied to Congress about the number of airline flights there were actually protecting against another terrorist attack,' Hudson [the reporter] wrote in a summary about the raid provided to The Daily Caller. Recalling the experience during an interview this week, Hudson said: 'When they called and told me about it, I just about had a heart attack.' She said she asked Bosch [the investigator heading the raid] why they took the files. He responded that they needed to run them by TSA to make sure it was 'legitimate' for her to have them. '"Legitimate" for me to have my own notes?' she said incredulously on Wednesday. Asked how many sources she thinks may have been exposed, Hudson said: 'A lot. More than one. There were a lot of names in those files. This guy basically came in here and took my anonymous sources and turned them over — took my whistleblowers — and turned it over to the agency they were blowing the whistle on,' Hudson said. 'And these guys still work there.'"
I donâ(TM)t suppose this critical file of confidential sources and interview information was encrypted?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Leader of the free world!!!
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
'"Legitimate" for me to have my own notes?' she said incredulously on Wednesday.
Depends, how large are these constitution free border zones again?
A raid to steal a reporter's notes (verses a Watergate sneak-theft)? That crosses the line into jackboot thuggery.
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.
Enjoy Obummer's America you fucking retarded liberals.
All praise to the Glorious Leader!
Our government began abusing other countries and the media ignored it.
Our government began abusing it's citizens and the media ignored it.
Our government began abusing the media...
The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains
http://www.whistleblowers.gov/
This looks to be well outside of the intent of the law, if not outside the reach of the national security letter, but the writing's been on the wall for a while now that even this government is out of control and can no longer be trusted at all, with any information, whatsoever.
Better to have off-site backups and have everything encrypted. Journalists critical of any government anywhere, take heed.
Bet not
"Hitler's police state worked on the rule that if you said nothing, no harm, could come to you. If you had doubts about the way the country was going, you kept them to yourself - or paid the price".
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/nazi_police_state.htm
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
1. The issue is not that she lost her information, it's that her confidential anonymous sources have now been potentially revealed to the agency they were blowing the whistle on.
2. Where can you hide your stuff that law enforcement cannot find it if they try hard enough?
3. The government can find any excuse to raid you if they want (in this case, because in 1986 her husband was found guilty of resisting arrest). And once they do find an excuse, what can you do when an elite, armored team shows up at your doorstep?
There is nothing you as an individual can do to retaliate against this, other than speaking out (as she is doing). If you really want to prevent this from happening, choose to live somewhere else, or just be a nice little citizen and never try to rock the boat.
It's hard to tell if the farcical's becoming outrageous or vice-versa. But good God those sources deserved better protection from that woman if the file was, in fact, unencrypted. That's easily as execrable as the pretext of a raid to seize a journalist's files.
“That explains the one file they took but does not explain why they took four other files with my handwritten and typed interview notes with confidential sources, that I staked my reputation as a journalist to protect under the auspices of the First Amendment of the Constitution,”. Ok, so she swore to protect them and yet did not bother with even basic encryption? And then did not notice the loss of files for quite some time (article suggests a month after the raid, until she was notified by investigators that they took those files)
Well, perhaps she should not be trusted with confidential information, if she can't be bothered to take even basic care of it.
And yes, I am all against jackbooted government agents busting doors and grabbing whatever they please, but that does not absolve individual from responsibility to protect data.
What imaginary guns were they looking for? Where'd the intell saying there were imaginary guns come from?
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
I would assume not for long unfortunately. It's also quite likely the feds will gin up some very expensive to defend gun charges against the husband.
Were this the previous administration (Bush) using jackbooted tactics like this there would be a huge uproar in the US press and public. Why do they tolerate it now? It's just as dangerous to freedom, and to people's rights and a free press as it would have been 8 years go.
Welcome to the USSA Incorporated, please check your opinions at the border. You can pay the fine on an installment plan.
I mean, seriously? What kind of journalist, investigating malfeasance by federal agencies, would have the names of her sources in plain text? Sounds like someone on the local newspaper who would ordinarily be writing the horoscopes and gardening news.
Wait a minute! You are implying it's the Journalists fault and not the Government's fault who illegally confiscated her materials? Either that or you are diverting the argument from the Government Employees breaking the law.
You should be ranting and raving to get Government Employees people fired and put in jail for breaking the law, not complaining about the journalists.
Are you happy that your tax dollars were just spent in illegal activities? Just not care as long as it's not you getting fucked?
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Someone do a blog post for reporters on the use of true crypt. MF.
“ You asked me once, what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world."
— O'Brien
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
At this point, the best defense is a good offense. They know by now their identities are compromised to their employer, so whatever they said that could be construed to be negative against the TSA will be used against them. Otherwise, it's just a waiting game to find out how much harassment and attrition will be leveled against them to force them to resign, if not downright fire them.
Except if they go public with it. In unison. Loudly. Right now.
Turn the tables. Then again, that approach will be heavily dependent on how the media will cover it, and what the spinsters have to say. Yes - there are risks. Yes - these are probably people with families and commitments and responsibilities that would be at risk. Then again, as of this raid, they already are.
In my mind, this was a stupid move by the establishment. The whistleblowers now have nothing to lose. Absolutely nothing.
they are murdering the truth.
lieing, thieving, murdering tyrannical bastards is what has taken control of this country
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
How many constitutionally guaranteed rights can the DHS violate with a single action? Quite a few it turns out. . .
Just read some of the comments and you'll see the audience of this rag. Slashdot can do better than to post this crap. If Ann Coulter is associated with it..... I'm NOT.
But, hey. Gotta keep the family rat-free, right?
"Using a warrant to search for guns, Homeland security officers and Maryland police confiscated a journalist's confidential files. "
I thought warrants had to be specific as to what they're looking for and allowed to confiscate? Somehow I can't make the mental connection between the stated purpose (guns) and a pile of papers, which were probably not left out in plain sight...
On the other hand, cat's out of the bag now, so there's no reasonable reparation possible. The notes can't be un-read, and I am sure that multiple copies were made the moment they got them back to the office...so what is a reasonable legal response? I suppose if any lawsuits develop against the sources, perhaps all evidence collected on them after this date should be tossed out as inadmissible due to illegal search and seizure? As in, they would not have begun gathering intel on the sources without the notes to point the finger at them, and the notes were seized outside warrant...
But what do I know, IANAL, just a crime show junkie :)
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
what the REAL threat to American freedom is: government bureaucrats desperately wanting to stay in power hooking up with jackbooted thugs cloaked in the mantle of the state, stomping all over Liberty.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
If you have desirable skills, it's time to leave the u.s. If you can't leave then move your data and services outside the u.s. I don't mean to godwin, but I spent most of my life wondering when I would have left Germany if I lived there during the rise of the Nazis, and how I can apply this to my own life. Two of my great-grandparents fled and lost some modest lands, and one of my grandfather's land was invaded by the Germans. He went back to fight the Germans while in the u.s. army. I often wondered at what point my great-grandparents decided it was time to give up and leave Germany. They left a comfortable aristocratic life and became immigrants in the u.s., owning a neighborhood grocery store. They made a new and somewhat comfortable life for themselves in the u.s. but gave up more to leave. About 6 years ago I decided to leave the u.s. and move to Switzerland, one of the last bastions of freedom in the West. I was lucky - it's difficult to get a work permit here, and will be even more difficult after the elections coming up. So, if you can, just leave. Don't be a cog in the evil that the u.s. has become. If you can't leave, then do what you can to not support it.
My ass! Land of the Immoral and Home of the Cowards!
I predict that President Obama will publicly announce his shock and outrage. "I am as upset as anyone," he will say. "We will get to the bottom of this."
Then absolutely nothing will happen.
Theoretically, "the buck stops" at the President's desk. But he is acting like he is just as much an outsider as any common voter, not like he has the power to order these agencies to cut the shenanigans.
I don't know whether he ordered this or approves. But if he takes no action, I can and will blame him for that. He's the head of the Executive branch and he can damned well be held accountable for actions of people he is in charge of.
Ask yourself this: "If Obama did want this to happen, what would he be doing differently than what he is actually doing?"
Pickaninny President!
Enjoy your 'hope and change'!!!
A warrant should be very specific about what items are to be siezed. If the warrant was for guns, how does that get extended to files ?
No matter what the law is found to be later, now the ones in power have a way to get what they want. They use mindless cops at the street level. What kind of policeman in his right fucking mind supports this type of raid? Right, mindless cops.
The 'department of securing the homeland from terrorists', and local police raided a journalist's house looking for guns, but left with her personal files. Why should she have thought these people to be legitimate law enforcement? I'd have called the cops after they left. I'd also get with a few lawyers and go ahead and get the lawsuit-ball rolling.
This makes me want to get with some of my buddies and raid homes, claiming to be law enforcement, and just take things from these weak people that are simply trying to live a safe life, obeying the rules.
But again, I'd like to say a nice "FUCK YOU" to the local street-level cops that support this type of behavior. It's because of you that America is scary.
Lying on an affidavit is perjury and gathering evidence is limited to what the warrant states. Other evidence outside the scope of the warrant requires another warrant before it can be taken. Otherwise that evidence is inadmissible.
What happended to USA?
This is downright wrong.
Not much longer.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
what the REAL threat to American freedom is: government bureaucrats desperately wanting to stay in power hooking up with jackbooted thugs cloaked in the mantle of the state, stomping all over Liberty.
Which is why people are yammering about the NSA.
Nobody (who isn't a complete, certificate-holding even, fucktard, is complaining about the NSA being all up in Angela Merkel's cellphone.
The concern is that our own politicians are desperately wanting to stay in power and hooking up with jackbooted thugs cloaked in the mantle of the state. What, you think the treasure trove of the NSA isn't going to fall into their hands?
Of course it fucking will.
If it was only the NSA, nobody would care, because when was the last time the NSA popped out of the vent of your air conditioner to discuss recent investments you clearly haven't paid the proper tax on*? Never, that's when.
(* Probably because our tax code is completely fucked and requires you to have your own personal IRS agent on the payroll to actually be remotely safe.)
This article makes it sound like it is illegal for the FBI to confiscate journalists notes with a real bona-fide warrant.
Is there some law that prevents the seizure of journalistic notes?
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
"There is nothing you as an individual can do to retaliate against this"
As an individual most likely no, except snipering government officials, you know the ones obviously abusing their power. In groups, especially large, heavily armed groups, yes there is plenty that can be done. This is direct evidence that of the four boxes, ammo is all that's left. Publicity failed because she got raided. Court failed because the judge signed the warrant. Ballot failed as it is meaningless at this point since power is obviously being abused.
The reporter was an idealistic moron. She should have known better by now just from what she's reporting on that the TSA won't play nice. She should have gotten herself killed challenging the raid. And kept a copy of her notes in multiple places and a dead man's switch to auto-uploading to the internet. Encryption means nothing as the TSA will just hand it over to the NSA.
And "exercising one's freedoms" doesn't convey the complete scenario.
She was REPORTING on LIES that GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES were telling.
So she is treated the same as if she was holding innocent children hostage at gunpoint.
We are not in a "police state" yet. But tactics such as that for "crimes" that are not crimes WITHOUT REPERCUSSIONS FOR WHOMEVER AUTHORIZED IT do blur the distinction.
1. The issue is not that she lost her information, it's that her confidential anonymous sources have now been potentially revealed to the agency they were blowing the whistle on.
2. Where can you hide your stuff that law enforcement cannot find it if they try hard enough?
3. The government can find any excuse to raid you if they want (in this case, because in 1986 her husband was found guilty of resisting arrest). And once they do find an excuse, what can you do when an elite, armored team shows up at your doorstep?
1.) That I do fault her on. She had people's lives in her hands, and should have tried very hard to protect them.
2.) Trying, and failing, is not the same as not trying.
3.) Sue the bastards, obviously. Call the EFF and the ACLU and get the best pro bono counsel in the country and nail them to the wall.
If this is true, law enforcement (a) blatantly exceeded the scope of a lawful search warrant; and (b) used a search warrant as a pretext to seize material that they had no authority to seize.
This is unusually bad. People need to lose their jobs for this.
If she doesn't know how to encrypt her data, she isn't a professional journalist but an incompetent wannabe. Let's hope her sources sue her and she will never work again.
Outside of a small minority, most Americans seem to be okay with the US turning into a police state. If the majority of you don't care about what your government is turning your country into, then we don't care either. We cannot fix your problems for you - only you can fix your problems. So far we see little evidence that the American people will resist, rise up, and retake their freedoms. It makes us sad to see such a great nation fall so far so fast.
We DO care that you are spying on other countries while pretending you are their friend. We do care that you are exporting terror around the world. That just makes us angry and less likely to feel bad for you or to try to help you. Pllease keep your screwed up ideas about "security" to yourselves.
We still love you but you are trying our patience.
The World
A tyrant is someone who can sign the death warrants for a thousand people without a second thought.
A bureaucrat is someone who, when told they've been reprieved, will insist on properly-completed individual documents for each person.
Perhaps someone post about about "most free nation on earth" or "well XYZ doesn't happen in America unlike China".
I cannot believe that the Feds would do anything to hurt a whistleblower. After all, this text still appears (despite scurrilous reports to the contrary) on the Obama/Biden campaign website:
The politician said it, I believe it, that settles it.
I very much doubt that a search warrant for guns prevents the police from taking files that very well might have to do with the purchase/maintenance/use of guns.
And I very much doubt that they need to read every single file they confiscate before they confiscate it to guarantee its relevance (as that would take months in some cases).
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
RTFA. They were physical files, not electronic.
Page 1: "confiscated a stack of her confidential files" (computer files generally aren't stacked)
Page 2: "But it wasn’t until a month later, on Sept. 10, that Hudson was informed by Bosch that five files including her handwritten and typed notes from interviews with numerous confidential sources and other documents had been taken during the raid."
Why is this on slashdot then?
Sue them? And watch as they use state sovereign immunity to brush you off?
I'm guessing they could have stopped to look at the documents. It's not as if they took away a skip full of papers. A quick browse, and only seize if they have grounds to suspect the documents could be tied to illegal gun ownership.
If all the had was a warrant for guns, then seizure of her notes is pretty plainly overreaching. Call me paranoid, but doesn't this warrant seem like a pretty good pretense to go confiscate documents that would be easily justified by a warrant?
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Yes, actually, it does. If a warrant says "search and seize guns", and you find something that's not a gun, you don't get to mess with it.
"[N]o Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." "Guns and whatever other stuff we find" is not a particular description.
Bullshit. A prima facie examination of a document is all that would be required.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
As soon as they start taking things that aren't in the warrant try to sneak in a head shot and take the lead guy out. After that shoot who you can.
Sorry, what I meant in the last line is that a warrant for guns is easier to obtain than a warrant to seize hand written notes of possibly confidential information.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
You are going to get nowhere with this argument on Slashdot. The Slashbots seem to love government bureaucracy. They couldn't wait for the government bureaucrats to get their hands all over Health Care. I'm sure they will say that Health Care is different, but really it is not.
Just wait 20yrs or so when ever increasing regulations slowly push private insurers out of business and the government take-over is complete. Drinking a soda over 20oz will be considered an act of terrorism because of the associated costs to the government health care system.
Does it even explain why this guy wasn't supposed to have guns? Saying the warrant was for "guns" doesn't tell us anything.
Here are a few key points from the original story in The Daily Caller:
Warrant Basis:
The document notes that her husband, Paul Flanagan, was found guilty in 1986 to resisting arrest in Prince George's County. The warrant called for police to search the residence they share and seize all weapons and ammunition because he is prohibited under the law from possessing firearms.
Militarization of Police Angle:
At about 4:30 a.m. on Aug. 6, Hudson said officers dressed in full body armor presented a search warrant to enter the home she shares on the bay with her husband. She estimates that at least seven officers took part in the raid.
Document Seizure Justification:
Diaz explained that the files were taken because they found official government papers, which Hudson had obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.
"During the course of the search, the CGIS agent discovered government documents labeled FOUO - For Official Use Only (FOUO) - and LES - Law Enforcement Sensitive. The files that contained these documents were cataloged on the search warrant inventory and taken from the premises," Diaz said.
"The documents were reviewed with the source agency and determined to be obtained properly through the Freedom of Information Act," he said.
Document Seizure Counterpoint:
But Hudson doesn't buy the explanation: "That explains the one file they took but does not explain why they took four other files with my handwritten and typed interview notes with confidential sources, that I staked my reputation as a journalist to protect under the auspices of the First Amendment of the Constitution," she said.
They Did Have Guns:
During the raid, the officers also went after Hudson's three pistols and three long guns, which she obtained legally.
"I'm a Kentucky girl," she said. "I come kitchen trained, and firearm ready. I grew up with guns and I've always been around guns."
She Is A "Real" Reporter:
Hudson has been a reporter in Washington, D.C. for nearly 15 years and was nominated twice by The Washington Times for the Pulitzer Prize. She is a freelancer for Newsmax and the Colorado Observer.
Her Investigative Reporting:
While at the Times, Hudson reported extensively on the air marshal program - specifically about whether Homeland Security officials had lied to Congress and reported protecting more flights than they really were. Using her sources inside the government, Hudson has also reported for years about possible terrorist "dry-runs" on airplanes.
Unlike some other reporters whose sources have been targeted in recent years by the government, Hudson said none of the information she had was classified or given to her by someone who broke the law.
"None of the documents were classified," she said. "There were no laws broken in me obtaining these files."
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Hows thai for a NICE NATIONWIDE HEADLINE ? ...? ...?
Isnt LYING TO THE CONGRESS. A FEDERAL FELONY OFFENSE
Isnt INTIMIDATION OF A REPORTER and FEDERAL CRIME WITNESS a FEDERAL RACKETEERING and ORGANIZED CRIME class FEDERAL OFFENSE....!
Who is the CRIMINAL, then
Maybe, but she's not the incompetent wannabe making Slashdot comments
Can any of you seriously defend the civil rights record of this president? Anything GW Bush did with the patriot act (Obama actually strengthened it) pales in comparison to the jackboot Obama has on the throat of the American people.
from (non wacko news page):
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/10/conservative-reporter-says-feds-took-her-files-while-searching-home-guns/70941/
"In the course of a joint Federal & Maryland State Police investigation, a lawful search warrant was served on August 6, 2013 in Shadyside, MD. The Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) was asked to participate since the search involved a Coast Guard employee. During the course of the search, the CGIS agent discovered government documents labeled FOUO - For Official Use Only (FOUO) and LES - Law Enforcement Sensitive. The files that contained these documents were cataloged on the search warrant inventory and taken from the premises. The documents were reviewed with the source agency and determined to be obtained properly through the Freedom of Information Act. The CG employee was notified that the documents were cleared and the CG employee picked them up after signing for the documents."
1. Ask the journalist to show you his/her laptop.
2. Check if it's protected by Truecrypt and watch him/her type a small novel as password.
3. Blow the whistle.
If 2. does not apply, run like hell.
The document notes that her husband, Paul Flanagan, was found guilty in 1986 to resisting arrest in Prince George's County. The warrant called for police to search the residence they share and seize all weapons and ammunition because he is prohibited under the law from possessing firearms.
But without Hudson's knowledge, the agents also confiscated a batch of documents that contained information about sources inside the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration, she said.
Since when does a felon's restricted rights extend to a spouse? G. Gordon Liddy has been publicly vocal about all the guns his wife owns. You don't see the jackboots raiding his home.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
This story lacks quite a few CRITICAL details. Most important of which is the warrant itself.
We do NOT know if the warrant was for guns ONLY, or if it was for many other things.
This could be a perfectly legal warrant and seizure. Until we see the warrant all outrage and accusations are pure conjecture.
Present the warrant, then we rampage. Or not...
that very well might have to do with the purchase/maintenance/use of guns.
When you start adding arbitrary meaning to your interpretation of the law, you can get away with anything. I mean, why don't they seize the house too, since it was obviously used to shelter said gun, and also seize bank accounts because the money to purchase the guns came from there.... etc, etc etc. THIS is what is happening all over America - bullshit interpretation of what you WANT the law to mean instead of what it actually means. On the part of cops, judges and prosecutors. Well, do enjoy the police state this has led to. I'm glad I don't live there.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/10/conservative-reporter-says-feds-took-her-files-while-searching-home-guns/70941/
"In the course of a joint Federal & Maryland State Police investigation, a lawful search warrant was served on August 6, 2013 in Shadyside, MD. The Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) was asked to participate since the search involved a Coast Guard employee. During the course of the search, the CGIS agent discovered government documents labeled FOUO - For Official Use Only (FOUO) and LES - Law Enforcement Sensitive. The files that contained these documents were cataloged on the search warrant inventory and taken from the premises. The documents were reviewed with the source agency and determined to be obtained properly through the Freedom of Information Act. The CG employee was notified that the documents were cleared and the CG employee picked them up after signing for the documents."
From the (non wacko) Atlantic Wire
"In the course of a joint Federal & Maryland State Police investigation, a lawful search warrant was served on August 6, 2013 in Shadyside, MD. The Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) was asked to participate since the search involved a Coast Guard employee. During the course of the search, the CGIS agent discovered government documents labeled FOUO - For Official Use Only (FOUO) and LES - Law Enforcement Sensitive. The files that contained these documents were cataloged on the search warrant inventory and taken from the premises. The documents were reviewed with the source agency and determined to be obtained properly through the Freedom of Information Act. The CG employee was notified that the documents were cleared and the CG employee picked them up after signing for the documents."
She waited two months to go public. Her sources have either been rendered helpless or terminated/neutralized in one way or another by now. The dumb bitch should have gone public immediately if she thought her sources were compromised. The fact that they went after her anything shows it was more a fishing expedition.
As for her husband not being allowed arms after 25 years, never mind an ordinance guy in the guard, for something as minor as resisting arrest shows how low the bar is for 'unalienable' rights suspension.
Wonder why.
Regardless, her Constitutional rights should have negated any need for encrypting her work.
The constitution is dead. You don't have any rights.
There wont be any soda. Not that you could afford it if there was.
Security through obscurity isn't encryption and we've already discovered how to recover text from burnt paper.
Flush the ashes.
Maybe they could still recover it, but at least you would create a really bad day at work for someone.
it blows my fucking mind how many people here are placing the blame on the person who's papers were confiscated. this is completely unacceptable.
Why the hell are they using a gun warrant to seize papers?
Don't they have to go back and get a new warrant?
I don't suppose that you noted that the files in question were (believe it or not) on dead plants.
Every tried encrypting dead plants?
http://www.amazon.com/Scanners-Office-Electronics/b?ie=UTF8&node=172584
The issue is not that she lost her information, it's that her confidential anonymous sources have now been potentially revealed to the agency they were blowing the whistle on.
Bzzt thanks for playing. (Trap door opens and you find yourself floating in rancor pit)
Where can you hide your stuff that law enforcement cannot find it if they try hard enough?
Not telling.
The government can find any excuse to raid you if they want (in this case, because in 1986 her husband was found guilty of resisting arrest).
No they can't.
And once they do find an excuse, what can you do when an elite, armored team shows up at your doorstep?
Shurikens?
so they were not allowed to take them
A search warrant has to list what is being searched for. If it's not on the list it can't be taken.
Now they did see official-use-only documents that they took, and presumably they could attempt to justify this as being evidence of other illegal activity (stealing documents). However they also took her handwritten notes which clearly were not official government documents.
Not only that, they did not make it clear to the journalist that documents were even taken, who only found out about this a month later.
These notes were then passed on to the TSA who has no jurisdiction in the matter.
Basically there was a long string of mistakes being made by the law enforcement. Enough so that you could use this in a cadet training program as an "identify everything illegal in this search procedure" exercise.
According to the article summery, the claim is that the files were taken specifically because they didn't know if the TSA would allow her to have them.
So evidently, they did read the notes and knew they had nothing to do with the purchase/maintenance/use of guns.
This entire fiasco leaves the impression that the warrant was a bogus excuse to get at the notes and discover who the sources were. From what I can tell, resisting arrest is not even a disqualifying crime in Maryland so her husband wouldn't be bared from owning or possessing a firearm anyways. Perhaps it is something in the new gun law just passed by that would imply the older convictions would be grandfathered in.
Do a Google search for the title of the article and you will come up with who is running with this story:
- The Daily Caller
- WorldNetDaily
- The Blaze
- Pajamas Media
- Free Republic
- American Thinker
* Others
And, this woman worked for the "Moonie" Times a freelancer for Newsmax.
Starting to see a pattern?
I'm now *very* skeptical of the truth of this story.
======
* I had not head of the other sites they include:
Topix (News aggregator for Gannet)
Some "top secret" / security blogs
And, for extra credit, how many criminal convictions were handed out for all this illegality?
"None?"
That's right, TImmy! You get an A!
"No Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause..."
Thank you. You saved me the trouble of typing that all out and explaining it. The key word here is "particularly".
However, I don't think you went far enough here:
Bullshit. A prima facie examination of a document is all that would be required.
Probably no examination at all necessary. If it doesn't reach out and scream at you "I AM EVIDENCE OF ILLEGAL GUNS", it almost certainly was not covered in the warrant and would therefore be in illegal seizure.
Now they did see official-use-only documents that they took, and presumably they could attempt to justify this as being evidence of other illegal activity (stealing documents).
Certainly NOT. No matter how the documents were marked, if it wasn't something covered by the warrant, then they would have to AT LEAST have had probable cause to believe the documents were stolen FIRST, before it would be legal to seize them. Law enforcement simply DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to seize documents in order to later try to find evidence of something illegal. That's called a "fishing expedition" and it is illegal as hell.
A disgraceful abuse of power. We need to start holding thugs like this criminally accountable or it will never stop.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[1]"
Note 'particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized'.
People were familiar with this trick a long time ago.
How much more are we going to sit back and look at and just..talk about?
How much longer? Where's the threshold where we collectively get off our asses and do something?
The longer we sit, the bolder they'll get. They'll push as far as we let them, and so far, all I see is a lot of noise, but no action. And that's all they see too, so they just keep doing what they're doing. Why shouldn't they? No one is stopping them.
Their names were never published, and only discovered in an illegal search. If I write down in my notebook 'Cowboy Neal has inappropriate sexual relations with his water bottle', and never tell anyone what I have written, and never publish it, than what exactly am I guilty of?
END COMMUNICATION
The powers that be don't even seem to care about even a pretense of constitutionality.
They may not care that the evidence won't stick to a non-crime (assuming that the story is as reported in the submission). They may care more about nailing down the leak to save their jobs in the near term. Of course, long term, there may be no prosecution, and a long and winding tort that they can afford to spend money on since it's not their money and if they settle, it's not their money. She could go broke trying to get an apology from them.
That being said, if the story is as reported. Let's wait a bit for the facts to solidify.
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
It seems the founders forgot to include teeth in the constitution. It clearly says what the government can and can not do. However it fails to list penalties for government officials who violate those rules. So this reporter may go to court and get her stuff back due to unconstitutional seizure, but the cat is out of the bag about her sources. What judge is going to slap them for violating her first amendment right to freedom of the press? And the sources? They're screwed because nobody violated their rights at all. For as much as some of the founders talked about issues like corruption or limiting government power, they seemed to assume people would follow the rules they laid down. Oops.
Sue them? And watch as they use state sovereign immunity to brush you off?
I am not a lawyer. this is not legal advice but of course you can sue the Feds for unlawful arrest, and even win.
Yes, actually, it does. If a warrant says "search and seize guns", and you find something that's not a gun, you don't get to mess with it.
Unfortunately there is the plain sight doctrine or plain view doctrine. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/plain_view_doctrine
And at the hands of the DHS and others inclined to felony.
Well, this is the state of living in the USA.
Although the Obama Regime is STILL harping on immigration reform, truth be known that illegal immigration has tanked thanks to the killings by the Boarder Security Forces (mostly those stationed against Mexico).
Still to be said is the effects on people trying to escape the USA!
What I see, and this is my opinion, is the USA is becoming a version, i.e. mirror of East Germany in the 1950s.
And all for the worse. :-(
If you voted for this Obama piece of shit, which I am embarrassed to admit
I did, you cannot feel anything but a profound sense of betrayal.
At least Bush didn't pretend to be your buddy and lie about his
motives and principles.
Obama deserves a place in the lake of fire, for eternity. If only such things actually
existed.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/25/armed-agents-seize-records-reporter-washington-tim/
why would spelling matter in this situation you'd want grammar-checks and checks for the checks. if your gonna fuckupp english or whatever you may as well do it right.
That example seems a little fucked up. In a country that (supposedly) guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, I would think that simply seeing a gun would be insufficient evidence to justify seizing said gun on the basis of unlawful possession.
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
The files are PAPER FILE FOLDERS. With notes ON PAPER. The very first thing in the article is a PICTURE of said PAPER FILES. On PAPER.
"But it wasn’t until a month later, on Sept. 10, that Hudson was informed by Bosch that five files including her handwritten and typed notes from interviews with numerous confidential sources and other documents had been taken during the raid."
http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/25/exclusive-feds-confiscate-investigative-reporters-confidential-files-during-raid/2/
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
If they wanted papers related to gun purchases they should have asked for them. In particular to give the judge a chance to carefully specify what papers they might have and what safeguards would separate out the other papers.
In other words, they had no legal purpose in taking or keeping those papers. They were obtained outside the scope of a warrant.
Note that even if the warrant covered papers related to gun ownership, handwritten notes about the TSA and air marshals would obviously not be included. They would have been required to return those immediately.
US of A is almost there. Wait for economic situation deteriorate a bit more, supply of 3-rd world countries still having something to steal dry out (a.k.a "bring democracy - US style"), US public image to deteriorate enough to not be worth defending and you'll see US government hand in hand with US corporations exterminating its own citizens just to steal their belongings. The only thing that keeps US thugs from doing this is publicity. Given current situation, rapidly deteriorating economic situation and rapidly deteriorating public image of USofA around the world, it is only matter of time. Until things won't change radically, which - given Obama administration busy codifying Bush' transgressions, killing its own citizens abroad and jailing its own domestic critics and journalists - won't happen soon.
That's not the way the courts have decided it.
Actually, as a computer security 'expert' I'm going to have to disagree, at least when your target is 'Uncle Sam' with NSA in his employ.
Too many operating systems are compromised, too many encryption systems and codes. If they want they'll simply hit your computer with a non-disclosed zero-day exploit and steal your encryption key/password.
No, in this case paper files make sense. However any and all names should be encoded pseudonyms for her informants.
I don't read AC A human right
At least in my case I'm upset about multiple things, but since slashdot hit on the lack of encryption first thing, it's what we're talking about. Personally, my thought is encoded pseudonyms like 'deep throat' was.
Is this theft an outrage? Yep. Should government officials be going to jail? Yep. But right now my concern, as pointed out in the article, is the safety/security of the informants. I'm afraid that the wrong people are going to end up in jail.
I don't read AC A human right
How? They're her private notes. It doesn't count as fraud until she deliberate releases them trying to frame them. Since she didn't deliberately release them...
I don't read AC A human right
1) Nowhere. Not written down anywhere.
2) Not in a bank safe
3) Never at your place
4) Micro USB card, in a 'junk mail' envelope addressed to yourself. If they take and open your sealed mail, that should be pretty serious. Write classified marking on you readers digest mail too inside another sealed envelope. Set them up for an indefensible lawsuit.
5) Lots of places to hide usb cards
6) Huge buried concrete block with 'false' cables coming out of it. You can even run gas pipes through it or add a few primers to discourage removal. Add False usb ports, with a charged capacitor at one end. Don't store anything on it, but put it where you would like your future swimming pool installed.
7) Now learn all about encryption, but assume a keyboard logger will somehow get installed.
8) Well, I guess it is #1 or nothing.
This is the sort of government that they envisioned when they made up the amendment about the right to bear arms. Unfortunately, that right isn't very useful against this sort of government any more. What other rights would the USA need to conquer this sort of threat to her very being?
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
Corrupt bastards. Enough said.
We are not in a "police state" yet.
Sure could have fooled me.
I think there's some merit to blaming the reporter for being negligent. But it's important to note that that does not in any way, shape or form excuse the behavior of the police in this matter.
Frankly, I think individual officers in cases like these should be held personally responsible for infractions they commit, even if they're just following orders, and even if they didn't know any better. It happens all too frequently that some anonymous police or other organization gets blamed, and the consequences to anyone personally are then irrelevant at best. Perhaps some committee harasses those involved; or the police pays some fine (but that's really the taxpayers paying it, after all) - but at the end of the day, the actual people that in all likelihood intentionally violated other's rights get away scott free.
And there's no pushback from inside the organization, because, well, nobody ever got fired for following orders when there's even a whiff of plausible deniability here. Nobody is taking responsibility for their own actions; so it shouldn't surprise anyone that the police act irresponsibly and unethically despite the fact that most people involved only ever had the best of intentions. If you want it to be normal for the officers in a raid to question the need for it, the circumstances in which it is made, the force with which it is executed, or the damage that is done to those they raid, then there's got to be an incentive for officers to push back and do what's right. Right now, we reward officers for doing what's wrong and punish them for thinking and having a conscience, and that is deeply disturbing.
Which, when combined with including receipts or bullets in the warrant, lets them search just about anywhere to find things.
There is no longer any doubt that we live in a police state. Looks like we are down to using our last box.
Worst US government ever. Obama has been downright tyrannically oppressing.
I agree. The Maryland police officers and the DHS people need to be prosecuted. This isn't a minor procedural snafu - this is an intentional illegal act.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Welcome to the United Soviet Socialist States of America. But wait! There's more.. FOr just a little extra safety, we will require a 2 way TV in all housing tuned to the same channel with big brother watching.
Understanding is much like a 3-edged-sword. in this: there are always 2 sides and the truth.
no longer is.
Seriously. An American living outside the U.S. for quite some time, born in late 60s.
I was deeply shocked when I first heard the use of the term "Homeland Security", it being the only time I have ever heard anything similar to the terms used by Germans/Russians. My second big shock is nobody else has voiced any discomfort about it. Except there is a grimace or numbing of the voice.
This is most definitely not the U.S. I knew. Not the one I grew up in the 70s and 80s, and not even that of the first half of the 90s. After that bets are off but I think even up to 2000 is was not total batshit fascists running the place, could be wrong on that score though. Is it possible that everyone else who has not moved overseas has been like the frog in the pot, just taking the heat as it gets turned up, while any frog shouting about the thermostat is marked a troublemaker?
It's like ever since I was a kid I expected the U.S. to one day just pick some stupid reason and go invade and take over / "clean out" the middle east and take over all the oil. I always wondered when that would happen. Didn't everybody? It just required the neocons or whatever they are called to get voted in. The U.S. (if reality is as reported by the Internet) has turned into a nightmare of tasing, corrupted cops; utterly cynical and corrupt lawmakers, utterly cynical top 0.0000001% running robo-drone executive office holders, and finally utter disregard for maintaining the potemkin village illusion that things are run according to any kind of ethical belief by anyone who ever tells the truth. The important elections seems to be totally rigged. Is that really true? Power has been consolidated and anybody on the outside is not anybody anymore. This is what it looks like to someone who reads the Internet and nothing much else. Maybe it's not a realistic view?
Of course, posting as an AC I expect this to be picked up by the national network slurp (ever wonder how much bandwidth and electricity that takes?) and tied to my based on my IP but heck, I'd like to come home. Quit changing the country on me! I wouldn't mind a reality check from others but some people mention similar views. I think it is really too bad since the U.S. used to be the greatest country on earth (so we were taught) but now it is a bit of a laughing stock. One thing always got me though. U.S. television never showed what it looks like in cities other than U.S. ones. James Bond doesn't count. There are no shows in my memory that just showed what it is like to walk around towns not in the U.S. Such footage exists in other countries' televisions. Why is that I wonder?
This is all out war on journalism. Freedom of the press is a key protection. This is a power grab by the government. I should say yet another in a long line of power grabs. We want our constitution back.
They seem to be criminals themselves:
http://www.defraudingamerica.com/fbi_murderous_culture.html
Using the NDAA, made the law of the land by imperial decree, all they had to do is declare her a "terrorist" and they could legally make her disappear forever, outside of the legal system.
You haven't heard of this happening to anyone critical of the administration, because they can't talk.
If you really think this can't happen you are not paying attention. The full power of the Federal government IS being used against the Administration's political enemies. A few folks have been caught, sure, but where is the outrage? Only in comment boards, and Fox News, and the odd story here and there, quickly swept under the rug by the next manufactured crisis.
In any other time in our history, this would, and has led to immediate calls for impeachment from the press. They aren't calling for it, because they are afraid.
The thing that struck me the most while reading the comments was that many of the comments seemed to make the journalist the bad person here. That it is somehow was her fault in what has transpired. Are you kidding? Why are not the comments focused on the fact that there is what appears to be ANOTHER breach of our constitution? Why are not the comments focused on ANOTHER act that is out to punish a whistle blower? Will there be an article shortly about how the journalist's sources are either on the unemployment line or worse yet, facing criminal charges based on the all encompassing "Homeland Security" violations?
gosgog:
TSA ....A fucking Joke, but better than the security Airports had before, who reminded me of middle eastern mixture who were gas station attendants in the 80's. And today's U.S. GOVERNMENT, well Thomas Jefferson would probably recommend another revolution, if he was alive today, to get rid of 99% of the idiots in Congress, the Senate & the Whitehouse!
The U.S. rocket program immensively benefited by retaining Wernher von Braun (one of the principal engineers of the V2 rocket employed against Britain). Von Braun was seminal to let the U.S. nudge ahead of the Soviet Union in the Space Program.
In contrast, by executing Hermann Göring they lost decades in the race to totalitarianism. The Soviet Union got way ahead, and the U.S.A. has only managed to overtake them in recent years. Of course, they had to defund the Space Program in order to get there, but then addressing problems on Earth is more important.
Get and read the book: Three Felonies A Day
It's interesting to read all the posts on whether the reporter should or shouldn't have encrypted their notes.
Come on ... "warrant to search for guns" and they took the reporters paper notes!?!? How is that even legal?
America the land of the free? Yeah right! With each passing day/story America is sounding more and more like one of "those" other countries they love to hate on.
Unless said item is illegal in and of itself, I don't agree with the courts. If the police officer stops a person for speeding and seeing a pile of cocaine in the back seat, no problem. If there's a machine gun in the back seat, I can see having an issue with that. But if we are going to take legal items like handguns and let the officers assume that they are illegal then what's to stop an officer from noticing that the driver has hands and therefore might beat someone to death? Or noticing that the driver is a woman or a man and therefore has the potential to be a prostitute or have paid for prostitution? Worst of all: The driver has eyes and ears, right? They could have used those to view/listen to copyright infringing material!!!
Then again, "court system" and "common sense" go together far less often than I'd like.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
So are you saying that if the files had been encrypted, they wouldn't have been confiscated, all of this would not have happened?
What else precautions one should make not to become the victim of one's own government? Is leaving home allowed? Is there a list of approved websites to visit?
You are making the case that the government is a bullying criminal. And while you can and perhaps should avoid getting the attention of a hooligan/bully/criminal, the government is at least in principle there for you. And in my mind this makes the situation completely different. One shouldn't bow to bullies, but having a bullying government is worse.
And yes, of course the files should have been encrypted. I wonder if they would have detained her in that case.
If the files had been encrypted (after transcription, if needed), then this would be a case about overreaching warrants and illegal government actions, not a case about overreaching warrants, illegal government actions, and wrongful terminations, as that last item will undoubtedly be the end result of the intelligence DHS has collected on the whistle-blowers.
You are right in that she shouldn't have to protect herself and her informants from the government, but such is the imperfect world we find ourselves in while we try to dig our way out of it. She failed her informants. She should have known better than to depend on legal principle to protect her informants from the current administration.