Remember when freedom of press was put on the back burner to protect the Biden family? Seems like it happens often doesn’t it? In my opinion, the day the FBI raided James O’keefe was one of the scariest days in American history. Call it hyperbolic I do not care. The FBI raiding and unlawfully seizing materials from a journalist’s home is well over the line.

But then remember how quickly that story faded away? The “diary” didn’t exist, and even if it did who cares because fuck James O’keefe anyways right? Anybody who discussed it was a trump loving conspiracy nut? Well today, back in the real world, the people who stole the diary are convicted of a felony and will likely do time.

Project Veritas was responsible with the information, could not confirm it’s authenticity and did not publish a single word. Back when o’keefe was raided, those with even half a brain knew that action authenticated the material, yet we’re still deemed Trump loving conspiracy people. Here is a story that confirms yet another conspiracy, and will surely die in the shadows very quickly.


https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2022/08/25/two-plead-guilty-to-trafficking-ashley-bidens-diary-property-00053770



Oh seems mark Zuckerberg just admitted the fbi had them suppress toe laptop story as well. But that’s just a sidebar, we knew that.

This post was edited by YeeHaw on Aug 26 2022 09:33am

the zuck confirmed their team was notified an influx of Hunter laptop stories were coming. they weren't directed to censor it.

this is shown by twitter removing all laptop posts, but facebook instead just ratio'ing it on trending boards, but not removing any posts.

Don’t fall while you toe that line dude.



Wink, nod.

This post was edited by YeeHaw on Aug 26 2022 10:22am

i was personally surprised that the FBI takes such a lenient stance on this, i always assumed there was far more oversight and direction.

then again there's another aspect at play, there is what the FBI did under Trump during the closing of the election, and there's what the FBI did under Biden when the story broke again.

in both cases Twitter and Meta did the same thing, suggesting procedures haven't changed. or if they have that meta/twitter aren't legally compliant to direction in either case.

Those stories did not disappear. People just don’t care about those stories enough to share or retweet.

Also private companies can censor whatever they want. 1st amendment just protects you from government censorship.

This post was edited by foxnews on Aug 26 2022 10:38am

This topic isn’t about what Facebook did, that’s just the only thing the communist guy wants to talk about because it isn’t technically against the law.

Let’s talk about the James o’keefe raid and the diary that never existed, but was damning enough to illegally raid a journalist. Keep in mind he could not verify the diary, and turned it into law enforcement before being raided.

Another side bar the NYT was tipped off that o’keefe was being raided as well. Sketchy.

Also it is incredible how “nobody cares enough to discuss”. A journalist was raided by the fucking FBI because of something he didn’t even report on and wasn’t in possession of.

This post was edited by YeeHaw on Aug 26 2022 10:55am

Did the raid have a warrant? because that's what makes a raid legal, not what the raid finds.

They removed items containing contents of confidential discussions between o’keefe and his lawyer(s).

I love how you are going to relentlessly pick this apart just to avoid admitting how fucked up the situation is. Bravo sir!

There's a reasonable argument that the sources in the story committed theft.
Its an unreasonable argument by prosecutors that it was felony theft
And there's no argument that a journalist, receiving and vetting and then refusing to publish such documents, would be criminally liable, without treading all over the first amendment in dramatic fashion.

The DoJ's account here and scant details seem to line up with what we already knew at the time- that Ashley Biden left her junk behind at a rental property, and when other renters moved in they found it and sold it to the media. So the 'theft' is of materials that were left in your keeping, but pretty clearly without the intent of transfer of ownership. That's reasonable enough. What's unreasonable is assessing the value of that property at what a media organization would pay for it, to claim it amounts to felony theft, rather than what the materials actually held in value in and of themselves. Its obvious that what these two were trying to sell Project Veritas was not a physical diary, but a story, and the diary was mere evidence for that story. It wasn't a collectors item of renown appraised by insurers, its a teenage girl's diary. If some teenage boy steals a girl's diary in bumblefuck suburbia, the police don't bust down his door in the middle of the night an haul him away on felony theft charges. Its a petty crime, a misdemeanor at worst, and using the value of a political story as if its the value of a physical item, is itself a bit of an infringement on the 1st amendment.

But that's all an aside, its all clearly an attempt to plea bargain out the yokels so they can make a political crusade against journalists and try to justify gestapo tactics
Merrick Garland's DoJ takes after Gilliam's Brazil

privileged discussions between PV and their lawyers about their ongoing lawsuit against the NYT
which the FBI then immediately turned around and leaked, that same night, to the NYT
because the FBI is an apolitical entity that exists for serious law enforcement purposes


I mean, nevermind the part that the FBI provably committed far more serious and blatant crimes during that raid even under their own absurdist interpretation of the law, which they simply failed to investigate or prosecute whatsoever. Who cares if you leak attorney-client privileged communications to interfere with a court process and deny a fair trial, when we've got storm troopers with battering rams to go after people who took a teenage girl's diary

This post was edited by Goomshill on Aug 26 2022 11:06am