Under no circumstances should this information be given to the agents of the state.
1 Like
I have no sympathy for antifa scum, but you’re right as far as their rights are concerned. I would say requesting IP addresses for those who visited the site(s) is clearly beyond a reasonable search.
And Family Values conservatives. And low national debt conservatives. And Christian conservatives. And free market conservatives.
Thank God for Trump. Dude exposed all the fakes.
They didn’t request thousands of IP’s, the lawyer for one of the people says they would have access to the identity of thousands of people if they got access to their clients account. If the person in question was organizing violence on facebook, which is what I assume they are alleging and they have probable cause for the warrant I don’t see the problem. Just posting a pot pie recipe on those pages isn’t going to get anyone thrown in jail, posting let’s crack some heads open might and should.
They did make a request:
The Justice Department is not commenting on these search warrants, but government attorneys have issued a similar search warrant to the web provider DreamHost seeking wide-ranging information about visitors to the website disruptj20.org, which provided a forum for anti-Trump protestors. In that case, DOJ modified its initial search warrant seeking millions of IP address for the visitors who merely clicked on the disruptj20.org website.
Don’t care, if that address was involved in a violent conspiracy, too bad. They’d still have to prove you did more than visit the page to do anything to you. As long as they follow proper procedure and show cause in court to get a warrant its all good.
That’s the point. It wasn’t all good and they had to revise their request.
Patriot Act defense. “If you didn’t do anything wrong, why should this bother you?”
Ah, so we’re using the “if you’ve got nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear from the government acquiring this information” argument, are we?
No, they had to get a warrant from a judge, if they got one we can assume they had probable cause that there was illegal activity on the page in question.
No, we are using the you don’t get to hide your criminal conspiracy website because some innocent people may have visited it theory.
Yes. Just like Carter Page where no one was upset at all because they went through a judge.
Do you think that meant people were saying warrants should be done away with or what? Can you not take issue with one warrant and not another depending on the justification used to obtain it? I don’t know enough about the one we are discussing here to say whether it was justifiable or not, neither do you. What you can’t say is they shouldn’t be able to get one because some people may have visited the page who weren’t involved in a crime. If the page in question was being used to conspire to commit violence, a warrant is justifiable.
I took your statement to mean that if a warrant is approved by a judge then no one has any reason to complain because it means they had probable cause.
Of course you are free to object to a warrant and appeal to a higher court.
Sometimes. The original warrant included a gag order which prevented the subjects from being told of the warrant. Luckily the administration lost the battle on that one.
Small government conservatism:heart:
