It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
“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 Department of Justice has requested information on visitors to a website used to organize protests against President Trump, the Los Angeles-based Dreamhost said in a blog post published on Monday.
Dreamhost, a web hosting provider, said that it has been working with the Department of Justice for several months on the request, which believes goes too far under the Constitution.
DreamHost claimed that the complying with the request from the Justice Department would amount to handing over roughly 1.3 million visitor IP addresses to the government, in addition to contact information, email content and photos of thousands of visitors to the website, which was involved in organizing protests against Trump on Inauguration Day.
“That information could be used to identify any individuals who used this site to exercise and express political speech protected under the Constitution’s First Amendment,” DreamHost wrote in the blog post on Monday. “That should be enough to set alarm bells off in anyone’s mind.”
When contacted, the Justice Department directed The Hill to the U.S. attorney's office in D.C.
originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: xuenchen
This is not unprecedented, Obama did this and sent gag
orders along with, so the website owners could not
even mention it.
But Obama surely had a just reason lol, sure right.
Like the unmasking to weaponize the IC for political
purposes, which is unconstitutional.
I think this would be great if The DOJ can use this
info to find Soros money and indict him for inciting
Illegal rioting.
originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: xuenchen
I see the word "demand"
Then I see "request"
So which is it?
i guess trump's still mad the protests drew more people than his inauguration...
-OP
“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,”
So what about content? Can they see what pages on that Web site you visited, and what you wrote in that e-mail? Yes, they can, if they choose to do so. But that's a lot of work with very little return for them. And there are legal limits.
For instance, in the United States, ISPs can only share content with the government (I'll let you decide if you find that comforting). On the other hand, there are no such restrictions on with whom they can share your metadata.
originally posted by: Nyiah
Geez, this sounds rather familiar. Who else do we know who tracks down their online dissidents?
Oh yes, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, among others. The same folks we rail against for doing it to their own citizens. Are we taking pages from their book now? My, my, America. That was a hefty fall down the freedom ladder.
originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: xuenchen
I see the word "demand"
Then I see "request"
So which is it?
originally posted by: Nyiah
Geez, this sounds rather familiar. Who else do we know who tracks down their online dissidents?
Oh yes, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, among others. The same folks we rail against for doing it to their own citizens. Are we taking pages from their book now? My, my, America. That was a hefty fall down the freedom ladder.
originally posted by: dreamingawake
-OP
“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,”
So what about content? Can they see what pages on that Web site you visited, and what you wrote in that e-mail? Yes, they can, if they choose to do so. But that's a lot of work with very little return for them. And there are legal limits.
For instance, in the United States, ISPs can only share content with the government (I'll let you decide if you find that comforting). On the other hand, there are no such restrictions on with whom they can share your metadata.
Source
What's sites are next? IMO conspiracy leaning sites could be on the radar too.