Slashdot Mirror
Justice Department Demands 1.3 Million IP Addresses Related To Anti-Trump Website (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: In a blog post today, online web hosting provider DreamHost disclosed that it has been involved in a months-long legal battle with the Justice Department over records on visitors to an anti-Trump website. The dispute focuses on a Justice Department demand for information on data related to disruptj20.org, which describes itself as a group of activists "building the framework needed for mass protests to shut down the inauguration of Donald Trump and planning widespread direct actions to make that happen." DreamHost is taking issue with a warrant issued by the department for "all files" related to the website, which DreamHost says would compel them to turn over electronic data like visitor logs. That would include IP addresses and other information that could be used to identify anyone who visited the site. "The request from the DOJ demands that DreamHost hand over 1.3 million visitor IP addresses -- in addition to contact information, email content, and photos of thousands of people -- in an effort to determine who simply visited the website," the company said in its blog post. The warrant, DreamHost argues, would also require it to hand over any communications that are even tangentially related to the website.
"In essence, the Search Warrant not only aims to identify the political dissidents of the current administration, but attempts to identify and understand what content each of these dissidents viewed on the website," the company said in a legal filing arguing against the warrant. A hearing on the situation is set for Friday in Washington, DC Superior Court.
"In essence, the Search Warrant not only aims to identify the political dissidents of the current administration, but attempts to identify and understand what content each of these dissidents viewed on the website," the company said in a legal filing arguing against the warrant. A hearing on the situation is set for Friday in Washington, DC Superior Court.
However: Would like a little bit more background here. Too much conspiracy theory going on now..
Simply sniffing out all who disagree with the current administration (raises hand), and would protest it (raises other hand), stinks of police state tactics.
Now, why are both my hands in the air again?
Silence is a state of mime.
You should start with 127.0.0.1. They're the worst.
This guy again?
https://www.rt.com/business/399645-soros-stock-market-bet-trump/
And what's missing from the summary? That, the site in question was used by the people who rioted in Washington, DC. (or this link for those that get upset because 'fox') That those 230 people were tied in some way to the disruptj20 site, according to the requested info which the verge happily leaves out. You can find it easily enough with a search.
But it seems like they want all the info, which isn't a surprise. After all, this is relating to felony rioting. And it wouldn't surprise me if it has something to do with the other idiots that wanted to use a chemical attack at several other events in the DC area.
Om, nomnomnom...
This clearly isn't an incredibly broad overreach by an administration that shows that it hates being questioned or criticized at all.
Oh shit, did I have sarcasm enabled?
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
Unlike obama just illegally unmasking them ignoring all rules of law?
And he still hasn't used the IRS to target people he doesn't like?
Sounds good. Better than the last few decades.
The request from the DOJ demands that DreamHost hand over 1.3 million visitor IP addresses -- in addition to contact information, email content, and photos of thousands of people -- in an effort to determine who simply visited the website," the company said in its blog post.
As the web hosting company for the (suspected) criminal website for the group 'Resistance' where are they going to get visitor's pictures?
I think dreamhost is trying to fan the flames around this issue. If this were a suspected white supremacist group, or a suspected child porn ring, would they mount the same principled court battle? The Feds have reason to believe the site was used to plan violence at numerous public events, which is a crime.
Ken
How dare the Trump Administration go through the Justice Department and obtain a warrant for information related to its political opponents? I am sorry, but that is flat out unacceptable.
What they should have done is follow the morally pure example set by the Obama administration. They should have had the NSA spy on their opponents (directly or indirectly) and then used a questionable procedure of obtaining their identities via unmasking requests by people like US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley. Because, you know, their political opponents could be colluding with a foreign power.
Oh, wait...
They'll discard everything not relevant to their investigation, being conscionable proponents of justice and privacy.
Aaaahahahahahahahahahhahahahhahhahahhahahhahahahahahahahah.
Sorry.
Aaahaahahahahahhahahahahhhahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
NO CARRIER
Exactly!
... and if "they" did it, "we" can do it, cause two wrongs makes a right!
Oh, wait...
See folks, over the last few decades, the Executive branch with plenty of enabling from Congress has been chipping away at our most important rights - our Civil Liberties.
We are fucked now. All because most of the population was scared of the big bad terrorists, child molesters, and the war on drugs.
People are short sighted and stupid.
Yeah okay so this is a patently obvious example of a site used to coordinate and execute terrorist activities. Using violence to intimidate and coerce a change in political direction is the definition of terrorism.
And before you accuse me of being an alt-right republican, let me say that I am actually a life long socialist democrat. But, unlike the people who tried to burn down DC after Trump got elected, I'm not a terrorist.
Sarcasm escapes your notice. And you do humor poorly.
I see you believe two wrongs make a right. You must be a conservative.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
So, that's a valid excuse for this abuse of Executive power? This dragnet?
Yeah, let's ignore the violent right wing assholes in Charlottesville.
And let's ignore the fact that you are using violence as an excuse for the implication of eradication of our rights - the weapon of the right wing. "Oh noes!! Terrorists - violence! Let's eliminate our civil liberties!!"
Keep in mind sir, that as we chip away at the First and Fourth amendment, it weakens the Second - the Second is just for show now. The government KNOWS everyone who got the guns . The storm troopers from the DOJ will raid the houses with the guns, take them, and good luck in the courts.
And as far this issue is concerned, you can bet good money that the courts will eventually side with the government - they usually do - even in "liberal" areas.
At least sometimes now, when the justice department trounces on our rights, we hear about it.
The Trump administration is collecting the names of these people so he can finally prove there were actually 1,3 million people at his inauguration.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Trump is merely looking for proof of his massive inauguration crowd size.
Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
...
As you conveniently ignore the violence of the left-wing assholes at Charlottesville.
Or the left-wing assholes in the Obama Administration that flagrantly ignored the first, fourth AND second amendments and even more all to your self-righteous applause because "liberalism"
...right here:
int octet1 = 0;
while ( 256 > octet1 ) {
int octet2 = 0;
while ( 256 > octet2 ) {
int octet3 = 0;
while ( 256 > octet3 ) {
int octet4 = 0;
while ( 256 > octet4 ) {
println('Anti-Trump IP: %s.%s.%s.%s', octet1, octet2, octet3, octet4 );
octet4 += 1;
}
octet3 += 1;
}
octet2 += 1;
}
octet1 += 1;
}
The violent left just executed a terrorist attack over the weekend. It's understandable that the government would want to crack down on them. I fully support the government cracking down on literal terrorists like antifa and these so-called "anti-Trump" movements.
Important to understand:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ma...
We're going to fucking kill you.
Unsurprisingly, there are violent, stupid people on both sides of a political issue. The question is not whether that symmetry somehow justifies or endorses the extreme actions of the "other side", but what the rest of us, the non-violent middle, are going to do about it. If all you're doing is saying "See, the 'other side' does it too!" or "Look, some of these people are violent!" then I don't see the point. I already knew that, and such people should be put in jail for their actions regardless of political stripe. There is no value to violence in a democracy when trying to make a political point.
It doesn't justify sweeping surveillance-related fishing expeditions. Such intrusions into private information should only be carefully targetted and rigorously overseen by the judiciary.
Which left-wing asshole drove a car into a crowd and killed an innocent woman?
AFAIK, seeking out child porn is a crime in and of itself. If so, this case is not comparable. Everyone visiting a child porn site is breaking the law. I doubt 1.3 million people rioted at the inauguration, though that would explain his obsession over the crowd size.
The FBI should scrape the public site, determine who was planning violence, and subpoena those IP addresses so they can track them down in meatspace. Y'know, actually investigate.
This overly-broad request for information is becoming a pattern. His voter suppression commission is requesting a ton of information that is irrelevant. These kinds of actions are what fuels gun owners' fears that the government is going to keep a list and come for their guns. Maybe that's his goal?
Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
Rofl no you're not
The site shouldn't be keeping that data in the first place!
Would prevent potential abuses like this.
Which right wing assholes flung their bodies at and damaged an innocent car?
So why again is your stat relevant at all?
I believe his name was James Alex Fields Jr. Keep in mind people looking at his online postings saw that he was actually an anti-Trump leftist prior to them being deleted and the media smear campaign against Unite The Right started.
This is the result of a government with a low level of voter representation and it's one that many predicted.
Antifa’s perceived legitimacy is inversely correlated with the government’s. Which is why, in the Drumpf era, the movement is growing like never before. As the president derides and subverts liberal-democratic norms, progressives face a choice. They can recommit to the rules of fair play, and try to limit the president’s corrosive effect, though they will often fail. Or they can, in revulsion or fear or righteous rage, try to deny racists and Drumpf supporters their political rights. From Middlebury to Berkeley to Portland, the latter approach is on the rise, especially among young people.
The less representative our government becomes, the more violent the general public will become. Rigging a game so that you win will not prevent the other person from flipping over the table.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
she was hardly innocent. she was on the street with violent leftists.
And you believe a search warrant to find the identities of people blatantly conspiring to riot is a wrong.
Oh - you mean James Hodgkinson?
Where was the violent outrage when Obama allowed the vast majority of the public to be stopped and searched for the hell of it at inland border checkpoints?
And you think Trump is the issue...
"prior to them being deleted" - yeah, you forget we're not as gullible as your usual crowd
Looks like we got an internet tough guy here folks. Move along nothing to see.
Not excusing Trump, but if anyone had even hinted at using an Obama-ccentric website to organize violence against Obama, riots would have ensued, heads would have rolled. Embracing the opposite extreme is just as dumb as accepting a bad status quo. If politics weren't a consideration, and this were just a site to sow seeds of general discord and organize violent acts, how would you feel then? Psst - that's essentially what our domestic terrorist groups are doing. They don't fight for causes but for themselves and their own juvenile comfort levels, they don't actually give anything or contribute anything to anyone. Straight up hate. You can't kill hate with hate, and these kids wouldn't last five seconds in a legitimate war zone.
these streets are ours! these streets are ours! :BAM:
nope!
Oh yeah you are. In fact you're MORE gullible because you suck down the kool-aid and don't even point out that the video shows the car stopping, being swarm with people with baseball bats who bash and shake the car and smash the windows and THEN he drives into the crowd. Oh yes... you're quite gullible.
If there are threats (posted) to the life of the POTUS the secret service has the right to the data.
You would say the same if Obama was the target.
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
A whole million IP addresses! A few of which may be unique, and some of which might match the phones of people arrested at the scene of the crime.
Do you somehow not know that archive.org exists?
Define the problem, isolate the problem and then provide the final solution.
And Obama outright asked the people to turn in names of people they knew who weren't on board with Obamacare. In addition his IRS attacked individual citizens based on their political affiliations
Things that never happened for $200, Alex. Stop with the #fakenews.
Fuck Trump, but more importantly:
Fuck you.
The rise of white identity will be the death of this nation.
I'm all for people talking smack, after all we can all have our own opinions.
But taking action to disrupt things purposely, especially through riots, deserves prison time.
They'll come for you too soon enough.
Yeah she was guilty, of being in the path of a murdering Nazi's car.
Fuck you very much, Nazi AC.
And what's missing from your post? That of those 230 people arrested some were journalists, lawyers, and medics, not protesters. DC police basically cordoned off areas and indiscriminately arrested everyone there. Which you seem to happily leave out.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Wow, what a bunch of sore "winners"*.
* Electoral College, not the popular vote
A much better article than the attention-grabbing headline originally left me to suspect. The most important piece of the article to me:
Masked protesters smashed store windows during multiday demonstrations following Trump’s election. In early April, antifa activists threw smoke bombs into a “Rally for Trump and Freedom” in the Portland suburb of Vancouver, Washington. A local paper said the ensuing melee resembled a mosh pit.
When antifascists forced the cancellation of the 82nd Avenue of Roses Parade, Trump supporters responded with a “March for Free Speech.” Among those who attended was Jeremy Christian, a burly ex-con draped in an American flag, who uttered racial slurs and made Nazi salutes. A few weeks later, on May 25, a man believed to be Christian was filmed calling antifa “a bunch of punk bitches.”
The next day, Christian boarded a light-rail train and began yelling that “colored people” were ruining the city. He fixed his attention on two teenage girls, one African American and the other wearing a hijab, and told them “to go back to Saudi Arabia” or “kill themselves.” As the girls retreated to the back of the train, three men interposed themselves between Christian and his targets. “Please,” one said, “get off this train.” Christian stabbed all three. One bled to death on the train. One was declared dead at a local hospital. One survived.
The cycle continued.
There are no clean hands here. Those claiming this is all (or mostly) the fault of "the other side" are a part of the problem, regardless of which side they claim to represent.
And Obama outright asked the people to turn in names of people they knew who weren't on board with Obamacare. In addition his IRS attacked individual citizens based on their political affiliations
Things that never happened for $200, Alex. Stop with the #fakenews.
Right here are the citations for you — something the anonymous OP should've included in his post, of course:
Obama's Whitehouse asking people to "flag" opponents of Obamacare:After people got outraged about this solicitation, the above text was eventually removed.
The IRS really did target conservatives:Two out of two things you dismissed as "fake news" are in fact true and indisputable. Good score, keep it up!
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Actually including obama the IRS has been used by 7 presidents to attack their enemies.
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/DC-Decoder/2013/0517/Playing-the-IRS-card-Six-presidents-who-used-the-IRS-to-bash-political-foes/President-Calvin-Coolidge-R
Don't you ever get tired of being WRONG?
More USAPATRIOTACT Fallout.
Perhaps the gummint would like to issue us all mandated, always-on bodycams...
This is regular police work. This is no different from going through all people mentioned in a suspect's rolodex/phonebook of old, for example.
Contrary to the title, this is not about an "anti-Trump" web-site, such are a dime-a-dozen. This is about a "pro-riot" web-site, which indicates its purpose — organizing a conspiracy to commit a crime (rioting) — in its very name.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
What is the charge? Nothing... Hm...
Well, then we have just "opinions", 1.3 millions vs. few guys from GOUVT.
The case may rest, 1.3 millions oppinions should have "priority" ofer one elected and few appointed. REALLY they SHOULD?
And Obama outright asked the people to turn in names of people they knew who weren't on board with Obamacare.
In addition his IRS attacked individual citizens based on their political affiliations
Things that never happened for $200, Alex. Stop with the #fakenews.
Right here are the citations for you — something the anonymous OP should've included in his post, of course:
Obama's Whitehouse asking people to "flag" opponents of Obamacare:After people got outraged about this solicitation, the above text was eventually removed.
The IRS really did target conservatives:Two out of two things you dismissed as "fake news" are in fact true and indisputable. Good score, keep it up!
I'm sorry, but no....
The original accusations were...
- Obama outright asked the people to turn in names of people they knew who weren't on board with Obamacare.
This is False. Even the quote that you provided proves that it's false. The Obama administration request was to provide copies of articles, news stories, etc. that seemed to be inaccurate or questionable. This was so that they could develop a marketing program to address false rumors. At no point did the Obama administration ask for names, email addresses, etc. Granted, most people would not have been smart enough to scrub the email of personal identification which causes privacy issues. But the fact is that they didn't request names, just stories.
- The IRS attacked individual citizens based on their political affiliations
This is badly worded or deliberately misleading. The IRS did discriminate against certain political groups by performing deeper audits. But, to the best of my knowledge, they didn't target individual citizens.
Was going to post, but don't want to be on any other list.
Generally, I expect warrants to be specific - for specific people. Anything less is a fishing expedition.
Rounding up suspects is how totalitarian govts work. The USA is better than that.
How is getting a warrant to find criminals wrong? That is the right way to do this sort of thing. WTF are you trying to say?
Do you know the evidence which was used to justify the warrant ? If so then why does the justice department disagree with your assessment that it is "wrong"?
So, that's a valid excuse for this abuse of Executive power?
The executive isn't acting alone and had a warrant.... I don't understand. How in any way is this abuse by the executive when they went through the proper channels obtain a warrant?
This dragnet?
If you have a server that is potentially hosting illegal activity, would you limit the warrant to be only known criminals or would you try to find conspirators and associates to known criminals? Particularly so when some of the crimes are conspiracy to riot.
you can bet good money that the courts will eventually side with the government -
Well then I look forward to your thesis and system that is better than warrants and a separate judiciary.
This is the result of a government with a low level of voter representation and it's one that many predicted.
Particularly so with local elections and governments. In addition to expecting the federal government to handle the personal issues of citizens that are better handled by local governments.
He isn't saying ignore the violent right.
He's just saying pay attention to those committing violence, like the right and now left.
But her emails!
The storm troopers from the DOJ will raid the houses with the guns, take them, and good luck in the courts.
If it comes to that, they'll raid houses -- the occupants will fight back, win or lose, and they'll be branded 'home-grown terrorist extremists' and evidence against them will be fabricated. Of course long before it gets that bad I'll either be dead or I'll be watching it all happen on TV, north of the border.
Even the quote that you provided proves that it's false. The Obama administration request was to provide copies of articles, news stories, etc. that seemed to be inaccurate or questionable.
Read it again: "These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation . Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."
That language absolutely covers individual emails, blog posts, etc., not just "articles and news stories."
Yours is a very charitable explanation and does not at all qualify for "fact". Both forwarded e-mails and links to news-stories would've identified the dissenters: people, who, unlike those conspiring to commit the crime of felony rioting, have done nothing illegal.
This is, what they admitted to — after getting caught. It is perfectly reasonable to suspect them of going after individuals too — because the same exact motive would play, the same means and mechanisms can be (and likely were) used by the same people in all such cases:
Whether the IRS limited their abuses "only" to groups, or gone after prominent individual "haterz" too is not even relevant. You are trying to find a distinction that makes no difference — it was an outrageous thing to do and far worse than DoJ is even suspected of doing in the case being discussed today.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
not until I tire of winning, which I haven't yet.
There are plenty of terrorists and communists who hatch their terrorist plots behind the cover of public blogs. In the current threat climate, it is prudent to vet these people in order to find out just who they are and what they are up to. It stands to reason if you haven't done anything terror related, ipso facto then you have nothing to worry about.
I just added my IP address to the list by visiting the site. I encourage everyone to visit the site to corrupt the data and make it useless.
And Obama outright asked the people to turn in names of people
Oooohh...why didn't you say so in the first place. If the democrats are doing it too it must be okay.
Keep going - you still several to do!
Yeah, right.
If an Obamacare supporter sent a link to a critical article, how would that identify a dissenter? Is it possible you're an illogical and rather stupid person?
This is badly worded or deliberately misleading. The IRS did discriminate against certain political groups by performing deeper audits. But, to the best of my knowledge, they didn't target individual citizens.
They targeted me, personally. Because my wife was involved in politics (Campaign for Liberty State Director), but already had her 501c before the targeting started. So they went after me personally.
Of course there was no "proof", just a lot of audits and requests and demand for information. Somehow EVERY response I sent them was "lost" or "not received," even when I sent by mail AND fax.
Exactly one week after the "investigation" was concluded and the IRS was deemed to have done "nothing wrong," I got a call from an agent that said she "just received my case on her desk." She gave me a fax number, I sent my documents, and the whole thing went away.
I'm not buying into the idea that they were not targeting people. There is no way all that happened by accident.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Keep in mind sir, that as we chip away at the First and Fourth amendment, it weakens the Second - the Second is just for show now. The government KNOWS everyone who got the guns . The storm troopers from the DOJ will raid the houses with the guns, take them, and good luck in the courts.
So the DOJ has enough "storm troopers" to simultaneously disarm the entire US population within about 30 minutes?
Because unless they can magically do that, the first wave of victims will spread the word, and the second-nth waves will be ready and waiting. Enjoy your instant civil war. FWIW, no one that I know that's been in the US military would support such a move, either.
Even if the details were due to ineptitude by the parties involved, allowing that level of clear ineptitude in the first place is absolutely malicious.
Constitution of United States of America 1789 (rev. 1992)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; OR "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
How dare the Trump Administration go through the Justice Department and obtain a warrant for information related to its political opponents who suborn violence?
FTFY.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
The name and other credentials of the article's author would then be known to the White House. Once the same article is forwarded a certain number of times, its author could be put on the list of people to target (such as by additional IRS to scrutiny, for example). In addition (or stead) the same can be done to the publication the author works for.
It is possible, though unlikely. With you, on the other hand, both are certain...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The government snooping through millions of people could end up with those people being placed on a list to harass. Are you going to stand by the two wrongs make a right position?
Holy shit, you're retarded.
mi literally proved the AC's claims right before your eyes and you refuse to see it.
The website self-describes as "protests to shut down the inauguration of Donald Trump and planning widespread direct actions to make that happen." What comprises a "direct action"? What is the intention of a person who visits that website? What about a person who signs up for a newsletter? What should you assume about a person who indicates that s/he will attend future events sponsored by this group?
I'm still amazed at the cognitive dissonance of Trump Derangement Syndrome sufferers. Just because public death threats against the President of the US have been normalized in the public square doesn't mean they are any more acceptable now than they were before Trump's election. The Far Left now owns the Democratic Party, or at least the message of it that permeates mainstream culture. If you are a rational Liberal, you should own up to that (at least enough to understand that people whom you lump into the "deplorable" bucket are lumping you into this Far Left bucket).
If you don't want the State to crack down on you, stop threatening the state *with violence*. Or, to put a finer point on it, stop conflating "peaceful protests" with *rioting*. Or to put it another way, your destruction of cities and property is *not free speech*.
The principle of respecting and protecting human life and property forms the basis of one set of political beliefs, and opposition to that principle forms the other. Most political issues can have their sides classified by their stands on that principle.
The "non-violent" is not the middle. To the extent that a person does not initiate violence, or advocate or support the initiation of violence, that person respects and protects human life and property, and that is an extreme. It is more fundamental and more important than most political labels.
Socialism, fascism, Nazism, and communism all have in common opposition to respecting and protecting human life and property.
Democracy is a mechanism, and as such has no specific stand on this principle, although there is implicit respect for human life in the idea that "everyone votes."
Capitalism is explicitly based on the respect and protection of human life and property.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Downmod anything honest that harms _your_ side. Disgusting problem on /. and growing worse.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
It's pretty much irrelevant. A white, European-derived identity was the norm 100, 200, 300, and 400 years ago, and it hasn't been "the death of this nation."
The deliberate promotion of racial groups over Americanism is a big problem, and it benefits nobody except the leading rabble rousers, who gain power and money.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Do you somehow not know that can easily be altered.
Jay walking is illegal.
Ugh. This "both sides do it" false equivalency shit is getting old. Learn a new argument! I'll even settle for a different logical fallacy. Don't even get me started about "ignoring judicial rulings." Have you even been paying attention for the last seven months?!
Did we watch the same video? The people did that because he was driving down an empty street TOWARDS protestors. They were trying to stop him. But you ignored that part didn't you? How convenient.
The article is the answer to the question:
"If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear."
This is for the people who don't care about privacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Any evidence that Obama did this?
You are insane.
Then why did the IRS apologize for "targeting groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names"? Just playing footsies?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
my default online posture is to surf exclusively through a VPN tunnel.
The left is much more efficient, preferring to shoot their political opponents.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
My hands are clean.
(Posting as AC so as not to undo previous moderation.)
David_Hart pointed out:
- The IRS attacked individual citizens based on their political affiliations
This is badly worded or deliberately misleading. The IRS did discriminate against certain political groups by performing deeper audits. But, to the best of my knowledge, they didn't target individual citizens.
It's deliberately misleading. Full stop.
The IRS did not "discriminate against certain political groups". They performed audits of those applicants for 501c(3) status because they had political designators in their organization's names. Section 501(c)(3), in addition to setting out the types of exempt purposes which may qualify an organization for tax-exempt status, also specifically states:
it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.
An organization with a name that provides reason for the IRS to expect that it does or intends to engage in political campaigning as a central purpose invites scrutiny by the Agency to determine whether it does or intends to do so to such an extent that those sponsored and/or funded actions/contributions would make that organization ineligible for 501(c)(3) status by law.
In fact, a very large percentage of the applicant organizations the IRS "targeted" in this initiative were found to be in gross violation of their elegibility for tax-exempt status, specifically because they were entirely dedicated to political campaigning.
If your organizaiton seeks tax-exempt status AND it intends to engage in specifically political activity as its principal purpose, the relevant section of IRS code is 527, not 501(c). Organize and apply for exemption under that section and the IRS will devote no more than ordinary attention to you.
I'm not surprised I have to explain this, because IRS code is Byzantine and recondite. That's why there are lawyers who specialize exclusively in tax law.
--
Check out my novel ...l
Its not "both sides do it". Its Obama blatently broke the law frequently to attack political opponents. Trump got a warrant to look at people who rioted and caused violence at his inauguration.
Not even close to "both sides do it". I was asking why this is even an issue with all the worse stuff Obama did that I was told wasn't an issue.
The government KNOWS everyone who got the guns . The storm troopers from the DOJ will raid the houses with the guns, take them, and good luck in the courts.
I thought Obama took them all already?
THE SOFTWARE, IT NO WORKY!!!
You won't be alive three months from now?
We'd love to think that, but it won't happen.
"Evil Terrorists" will be getting arrested in a major sting operation. Telecommunications will be hampered enough that the families and friends of each individual in that first wave of victims has little to no information beyond "your husband/son/etc has been arrested for domestic terrorism and possibly also child pornography". The second or third wave of arrests will be enough to make people realize what's going on - not that the rest of the world won't have picked up on it with the first bunch - but by then the tanks will be rolling in the streets.
You can't just WAIT until they've got everything in place and have actively begun removing the population (they'll start with the most dangerous elements; notably those capable of getting the word out and/or organizing the populace) in order to fight back. The smoke is there, the door is hot, but if you wait to lynch all of these monsters (and there are a *LOT* of them across the country now) until you yourself are on fire, it's too late. It's always too late for every population that's ever waited half that long.
Obumma used the IRS....
Or it was simply due to the same IRS bureaucracy and incompetence that has plagued them since inception.
Correlation, causation, anecdotal evidence, etc.
Sure, it was ALL just a big coincidence. It's a much longer story than that, the demands for money, the locked bank accounts, etc., etc. The timing was instructive, as was the switching and dead ends I was lead to during phone calls.
You would have certainly looked for an explanation yourself, if it happened to you. Of course the orchestrated it to ensure they had plausible deniability.
Oh, and fuck you for defending them.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
So opponents of Obamacare are unfairly targeted because they can't come up with any information that does not seem fishy?
Apologies are cheap, and more virtuous than say, endless denials even when confronted with reality.
See Trump's press conference today. Another example of costly mistakes.
Just remember, months of Congressional investigation produced zero criminal charges. They could have found more crimes investigating Dennis Hastert.
Do you know what a "fishing expedition" is? Do you know why courts all over the free world, and also in America, forbid them?
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
it was an outrageous thing to do and far worse than DoJ is even suspected of doing in the case being discussed today.
Yeds...enforcing the law they are tasked with enforcing is an absolutely outrageous thing to do.
how dare they to ensure only non-partisan groups apply for the non-partisan 501c tax exempt status, and that partisan groups apply for the proper, separate, 501d tax exempt status.
what were they thinking?
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
I also believe that the IRS issue started when the Feds noticed that a bunch of political groups applied for nonprofit status. Many had the words "Tea Party" or something similar in their names. So the IRS started looking closely at other nonprofit applications with Tea Party in their names.
Makes sense to me.
BTW nonprofits can advocate for issues. They often understand social issues from their work. What nonprofits can NOT do is advocate for candidates. That is somewhat of a simplification but it is a good rule of thumb.
The Second has just been for show since 1986. That was the year it was made illegal to buy a nice new infantry rifle. (If the "militia" clause means anything at all, it means that individuals have the right to equip themselves with the same equipment soldiers get.)
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I'm sure you can come up with examples of the judicial branch asking for and receiving (perhaps with a lot of judge shopping) a warrant that was part of executive overreach.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Fascism (including National Socialism) was not against human property, as long as it belonged to people the government liked. It did oppose respecting and protecting human life. Communism was opposed to protecting either. They share the political attributes of collectivism and authoritarianism. So, these are common to the extreme left and the extreme right.
Socialism is a much more mixed bag. Communists were Socialists, but most Socialists aren't Communists. In the meantime, Socialism has changed its meaning from having the workers control the means of production to wanting society to take care of the less fortunate in various ways, since most people have realized that capitalism is necessary to run a modern economy.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Indeed, and if there are solutions to that those can be discussed. However, it is much better than allowing the NSA free reign and parallel construction.
Justice Dept and Anti Trump:
The United States Department of Justice is attempting to seize the information of every person who ever visited the anti-trump website disruptj20.org.
RATING
TRUE
Get out your tinfoil hat folks, this proves the conspiracy against conservative white males is REAL!
You are a complete waste of everyone's time, including your own. I feel sorry for your anyone that has to listen to this utter nonsense you spew. Turn off your TV and computer, they're rotting your brain.
I told you before. The right isn't associated with Fascism. You can't say Nazi without saying socialist. Nazis are left. It was clearly a mentally ill person. Hardly someone to associate with any party, unless you have a whole party full of nuts like the Democrats seem to lately. Those that are still Democrats.
Sure. I notice that the warrant is being contested in court, so the system is working, at least so far.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Were you expecting something different from one election? Or when other executive actions are being contested in court?
It seems like you are pessimistic about the system. The sad thing is that the attacks on the system itself by the left since the election do more harm than one president.
Replace Trump's name with Obama. We should ALWAYS protect our President!
Given long enough, the system can be distorted. One Presidential term isn't long enough to do that. The courts were some of the last effective groups upholding law in the Third Reich.
During Obama'x, I kept reading how the system wasn't working from all sorts of right-wing people. If people attacking the system were going to hurt it, it would be in ruins by now.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I kept reading how the system wasn't working from all sorts of right-wing people.
Indeed and now the left has rediscovered the value of things like states rights because that is the grounds to argue many of their lawsuits.
If people attacking the system were going to hurt it, it would be in ruins by now.
I disagree. The feature of the government is to move slowly or stall during disagreement. But each time the system is attacked to gain a political advantage will be used as precedent by future politicians. Boiling water with frogs and what not.
Obama did set a number of precedents when he didn't get his way. Trump has undid those decisions in many instances but the precedent remains. It doesn't matter if Trump uses it or not because a future president can use Obama's actions to justify executive overreach. Similarly to the 9th circuit in their zeal to stop Trump from legal actions the executive can take have set a precedent that can make the executive weak for things it needs to be strong. Luckily, the Supreme Court has disagreed with the 9th but for that kind of... overreach and zeal to stop political differences is unsettling.
Indeed and now the left has rediscovered the value of things like states rights because that is the grounds to argue many of their lawsuits.
And now the right has embraced the value of "executive authority" and "federal supremacy" because that is the grounds to argue their lawsuits.
Easily demonstrating the biggest problem with focusing on a method-based system, when the dynamics are mutable.
I disagree. The feature of the government is to move slowly or stall during disagreement.
That's not a feature, that's a bug.
But each time the system is attacked to gain a political advantage will be used as precedent by future politicians.
You think precedent matters? It doesn't. Precedent is just an excuse, manufactured as convenient, to do whatever somebody desires to do.
But then, so is the preservation of the system. It is an excuse, used as a shield or weapon, as suits the moment.
Boiling water with frogs and what not.
You know what we have for pots? LIDS. Or you know, you can cut the frog's throat before cooking it.
Obama did set a number of precedents when he didn't get his way.
Yeah, that's what they ranted and railed about. But...then we saw that was just an excuse, and they did what they wanted anyway.
Trump has undid those decisions in many instances but the precedent remains.
Nope. Trump has created all new actions, and merely blamed Obama when and as convenient for him. This is not unprecedented, mind you, but you should pay close attention to it.
It doesn't matter if Trump uses it or not because a future president can use Obama's actions to justify executive overreach.
Nope, it doesn't even matter if Obama did it or not, when you have a president like Trump, who will do what he wants, as he wants, and only others will restrain him, if they are willing and able.
See, that's what you don't seem to be know, that Trump justifies himself all he wants, and even if you can forgive him for telling fake stories as he might be a dupe, there's plenty he's concocted on his own.
Similarly to the 9th circuit in their zeal to stop Trump from legal actions the executive can take have set a precedent that can make the executive weak for things it needs to be strong. Luckily, the Supreme Court has disagreed with the 9th but for that kind of... overreach and zeal to stop political differences is unsettling.
Actually, the real lesson you should learn is that the Supreme Court has harmed the country by relying on precedent quite often, or rather, quite often the manufactured precedent that suited the person making the decision. Dred Scott may be the most well known, but there are others. The problem is a lack of zeal and earnestness, because the virtuous know restraint, while the maleficent are unconstrained in their acts.
You see, that's the problem with being miseducated in terms of ethics. Often enough, you learn the lessons somebody wants to use against you. You should sit down, and really think it over. Or read from some 19th Century philosophers.