DOJ demands Facebook information from 'anti-administration activists'

Mods: I'm not sure what forum to put this in.

It looks like Donald Trump's Department of Justice is requesting personal information from Facebook on people that are critical of its administration.

Washington (CNN)Trump administration lawyers are demanding the private account information of potentially thousands of Facebook users in three separate search warrants served on the social media giant, according to court documents obtained by CNN. The warrants specifically target the accounts of three Facebook users who are described by their attorneys as "anti-administration activists who have spoken out at organized events, and who are generally very critical of this administration's policies."

This is exactly the type of thing that I don't want to see happening - it seems like the search warrants are politically motivated, and there is no evidence of danger or even any laws that have been breached justifying these search warrants (further research found that the government is using the pretense of "inciting riots" to justify the warrants).

Is it okay for the Trump Administration to collect personal information like this about its political opponents just because they are political opponents? What about any administration in general?

I realize there are a lot of Trump supporters on ATS, but I hope they can see the government overreach happening here, and not just for the potential of abuse of power, but the actual abuse of power.

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing the three Facebook users, filed a motion to quash the warrants Thursday.

"What is particularly chilling about these warrants is that anti-administration political activists are going to have their political associations and views scrutinized by the very administration they are protesting," said ACLU attorney Scott Michelman.

What does the DOJ plan to do with this information? What justification do they have for seeking it, besides the fact that these are their political opponents?

It looks as if the justification is that the people involved were "inciting riots." It looks like the government will be getting a lot of personal information. They could use it for blackmail, or to find other crimes to arrest people involved with the protests for. This would send a message not to be critical of the administration, or else.

Citing “evidence of rioting or intent to riot”, the sweeping requests ask Facebook to disclose all personal information of the organizers, including their passwords and physical addresses, as well as all activity associated with their accounts, any photos or videos they uploaded or any messages they sent. A separate warrant asks Facebook to reveal information about users who interacted with a page used to plan the protests.

A lot of Republicans don't seem to mind the idea of this sort of totalitarian tactics being used against immigrants, will they look the other way when they are being used on American citizens because of their political views?

Source: CNN
Source: Independent

a reply to: darkbake


Sooner or later, we will see what evidence was used to convince the judge to sign the warrants served on Facebook.

If it turns out to have been political, someone should get charged.


Equally, then surely you support charges being laid against Obama officials who spied on political opponents, right ?

Let me say it doesn't matter WHAT political party you support for this to be a misuse of power.

Unless the DOJ has probable cause for criminal activities there should be no reason a warrant should have been issued. However I "get" that what should be isn't always true.

Can't see how "yet" anyone can pin this on Trump. The DOJ can act independently without direction from the President.

originally posted by: darkbake
Mods: I'm not sure what forum to put this in.

It looks like Donald Trump's Department of Justice is requesting personal information from Facebook on people that are critical of its administration.

Washington (CNN)Trump administration lawyers are demanding the private account information of potentially thousands of Facebook users in three separate search warrants served on the social media giant, according to court documents obtained by CNN. The warrants specifically target the accounts of three Facebook users who are described by their attorneys as "anti-administration activists who have spoken out at organized events, and who are generally very critical of this administration's policies."

This is exactly the type of thing that I don't want to see happening - it seems like the search warrants are politically motivated, and there is no evidence of danger or even any laws that have been breached justifying these search warrants (further research found that the government is using the pretense of "inciting riots" to justify the warrants).

Is it okay for the Trump Administration to collect personal information like this about its political opponents just because they are political opponents? What about any administration in general?

I realize there are a lot of Trump supporters on ATS, but I hope they can see the government overreach happening here, and not just for the potential of abuse of power, but the actual abuse of power.

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing the three Facebook users, filed a motion to quash the warrants Thursday.

"What is particularly chilling about these warrants is that anti-administration political activists are going to have their political associations and views scrutinized by the very administration they are protesting," said ACLU attorney Scott Michelman.

What does the DOJ plan to do with this information? What justification do they have for seeking it, besides the fact that these are their political opponents?

It looks as if the justification is that the people involved were "inciting riots." It looks like the government will be getting a lot of personal information. They could use it for blackmail, or to find other crimes to arrest people involved with the protests for. This would send a message not to be critical of the administration, or else.

Citing “evidence of rioting or intent to riot”, the sweeping requests ask Facebook to disclose all personal information of the organizers, including their passwords and physical addresses, as well as all activity associated with their accounts, any photos or videos they uploaded or any messages they sent. A separate warrant asks Facebook to reveal information about users who interacted with a page used to plan the protests.

A lot of Republicans don't seem to mind the idea of this sort of totalitarian tactics being used against immigrants, will they look the other way when they are being used on American citizens because of their political views?

Source: CNN
Source: Independent

I never quite know how to feel about stuff like this.

On the one hand it’s a massive invasion of privacy and could very well be just a ploy to get all your details and take control RE New world order etc.

On the other hand it could be an effective tactic tool in getting information on crime and terrorism plots etc.

For me it is difficult to comment since it seems a lot of information is missing in the OP. For example, the CNN artice linked in the OP states the following:

One of those users, Emmelia Talarico, operated the disruptj20 page where Inauguration Day protests were organized and discussed; ...

Those protest turned into riots. That fact alone is likely why these warrants were issued. As a riot is not a peaceful protest.
CNN Source

As this person ran a website that organized and coordinated those events, is it any wonder a warrant for her Facebook account information was requested?

a reply to: darkbake

It's tied directly to the disruptj20 facebook page and subscribers to that page. The group was responsible for organizing and conducting violent and destructive unlawful protests on inauguration day. Laws broken were federal and damages were to park service facilities and property, making this request a very valid part of bringing the unhappy idiots to justice.

originally posted by: M5xaz
a reply to: darkbake

Equally, then surely you support charges being laid against Obama officials who spied on political opponents, right ?

The Obama Administration was conducting an investigation into Russian interference in our elections by legally monitoring Russian operatives. They picked up conversations between those operatives and people in Trump's campaign. It was found out that the Russians were actively working to get Trump elected over Hillary through many means. It is only after there was concern about the Trump campaign's connections to Russia that some of Trump's team were unmasked.

There are still investigations going into what happened between Trump and Russia, and I think that they are justified based on the threat to our Democracy.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: darkbake

It's tied directly to the disruptj20 facebook page and subscribers to that page. The group was responsible for organizing and conducting violent and destructive unlawful protests on inauguration day. Laws broken were federal and damages were to park service facilities and property, making this request a very valid part of bringing the unhappy idiots to justice.

Hopefully, this is the real reason for the warrants. However, how come warrants aren't being requested for Trump supporters who incite violence? What about the incident in Charlottseville, where there were "bad people on both sides" but only a white supremacist ended up murdering one woman and leaving 19 others injured after plowing into a crowd with a vehicle?

The actual warrant for anyone interested

SOURCE

I may have missed it but I didn't see where anyone was referred to as "anti-administration activists".

originally posted by: FraggleRock
The actual warrant for anyone interested

SOURCE

I may have missed it but I didn't see where anyone was referred to as "anti-administration activists".

CNN referred to them as "anti-administration activists" and the title of the thread is named after the CNN article. They are called "anti-administration activists" because they are political activists who are against the Trump administration. I'm not sure that information would have been found in the warrant. Thanks for linking to it.

originally posted by: darkbake
CNN referred to them as "anti-administration activists" and the title of the thread is named after the CNN article. They are called "anti-administration activists" because they are political activists who are against the Trump administration. I'm not sure that information would have been found in the warrant. Thanks for linking to it.

The warrants specifically target the accounts of three Facebook users who are described by their attorneys as "anti-administration activists who have spoken out at organized events, and who are generally very critical of this administration's policies."

So it's language used by their attorneys most likely in an attempt to paint this as a blanket targeting of people critical of the Trump administration rather than the specific investigation of individuals who may have been complicit in helping organize and carry out riots.

It may be a counter to facebook willing to release info that could help the Muler/Comey Russian/Trump witch hunt . It would be hard for them to refuse this one as I suspect there may be a Soros mole involved ...

a reply to: darkbake

Maybe because the "White Supremacist" rammed a car into a crowd of White people and killed one White girl.



Think about that.

The "White Supremacists", Nazis, and Fascists in the 20th Century killed 30 or 40 million White people too.

Ironic.

As another poster pointed out, there haven't been any attempts to unmask people on the far-right side of protests that turned violent, so to go after this group alone means it's nothing but politically motivated.

google this

right wing riot arrests

The Public Affairs office where I work must have gotten the smackdown. They were putting out contrary 'news' regarding the Trump Administration on a daily basis. It was very clearly anti-Trump.

It ain't like that anymore. Threaten someone's income ... and they shut their fuggin' moufs pretty quick.

a reply to: darkbake

The "evidence" Obama got to obtain the warrant on Trump was the widely discreditied "dossier", which failed to convince a judge the first time Obama tried to use it - they had to do this TWICE with this "evidence" to get the FISA warrant

Conversely, the Trump DoJ got a judge-signed warrant, in which the reason is plainly stated:

"Any message, photo, video, or other communication or recording which depicts,
describes, or otherwise relates to the rioting or inciting to riot activity'on January 20,2017,leading
to arrests at or near the intersection of 12ft and L Streets, NW, in Washington, DC "

Rioting is illegal, beating people up because you lost the election is illegal, get it ?

Hillary lost all by herself because AMERICANS could easily see her incompetence; most leftists went into narcissistic rage, exposing their true, narcissist, nature...

Judge approves limited search warrant for data on anti-Trump protesters

The government said it sought the data to gather evidence for prosecutions of those involved in violence. The case was filed in a local court because the rioters were charged under District of Columbia law.

Not a Trump supporter but tired of clickbait. Let us hope that is all they want but then again if it was just anti-Trump, they would have went after more sites.

originally posted by: M5xaz
a reply to: darkbake

The "evidence" Obama got to obtain the warrant on Trump was the widely discreditied "dossier", which failed to convince a judge the first time Obama tried to use it - they had to do this TWICE with this "evidence" to get the FISA warrant

Conversely, the Trump DoJ got a judge-signed warrant, in which the reason is plainly stated:

"Any message, photo, video, or other communication or recording which depicts,
describes, or otherwise relates to the rioting or inciting to riot activity'on January 20,2017,leading
to arrests at or near the intersection of 12ft and L Streets, NW, in Washington, DC "

Rioting is illegal, beating people up because you lost the election is illegal, get it ?

Hillary lost all by herself because AMERICANS could easily see her incompetence; most leftists went into narcissistic rage, exposing their true, narcissist, nature...

Besides a right leaning site, do you have proof that the dossier was discredited?

originally posted by: ShawnTBear

originally posted by: M5xaz
a reply to: darkbake

The "evidence" Obama got to obtain the warrant on Trump was the widely discreditied "dossier", which failed to convince a judge the first time Obama tried to use it - they had to do this TWICE with this "evidence" to get the FISA warrant

Conversely, the Trump DoJ got a judge-signed warrant, in which the reason is plainly stated:

"Any message, photo, video, or other communication or recording which depicts,
describes, or otherwise relates to the rioting or inciting to riot activity'on January 20,2017,leading
to arrests at or near the intersection of 12ft and L Streets, NW, in Washington, DC "

Rioting is illegal, beating people up because you lost the election is illegal, get it ?

Hillary lost all by herself because AMERICANS could easily see her incompetence; most leftists went into narcissistic rage, exposing their true, narcissist, nature...

Besides a right leaning site, do you have proof that the dossier was discredited?

nypost.com...

www.dickmorris.com...

americannewsweb.info...

"Dossier" by private firm FusionGPS paid for by Clinton.
FusionGPS refused to voluntarily meet with the Judiciary Committee, a subpoena had to be issued

Finally, FBI failed THREE subpoenaed deadlines to supply to Congress any information supporting the "dossier"