Small Kansas newspaper says co-owner, 98, collapsed and died after police raid
cbsnews.com
cbsnews.com
"EM: So the backstory that we haven't told, because we don't wanna get in trouble, is that we've been investigating the police chief [Gideon Cody]. When he was named Chief just two months ago, we got an outpouring of calls from his former co-workers making a wide array of allegations against him saying that he was about to be demoted at his previous job and that he retired to avoid demotion and punishment over sexual misconduct charges and other things.
We had half a dozen or more different anonymous sources calling in about that. Well, we never ran that because we never could get any of them to go on the record, and we never could get his personnel file. But the allegations—including the identities of who made the allegations—were on one of the computers that got seized. I may be paranoid that this has anything to do with it, but when people come and seize your computer, you tend to be a little paranoid." [0]
[0] https://thehandbasket.substack.com/p/a-conversation-with-the...
The judge signing a search warrant without a probable cause affidavit, the judge issuing a search warrant against the press violating federal law, the connections between the court and the hotel that houses Keri Newell's restaurant, the batshit public response Keri Newell posted, the fact she got a liquor license with a DUI, a claim that she had her identity stolen at a city council meeting.
The fact the cops raided a paper for a story they didn't publish, even though they would have been fully protected to do so at all.
It's not being widely covered by a city council woman's house was also raided. They took her phone and computer as well, leaving her and her sick husband alone with no way to call for help. Cops are scum.
Marion is about 2 hours away from where I'm staying now. It might be a good thing I don't have a car. I'm furious. Going to be stopping by the KBI office today, I'm sure that's going to go well. (The KBI is under Kris Kobach and has said in response to this raid that "the press is not above the law".)
I have no idea why they get exempt from any kind of consequences for their actions, either private (getting sued) or criminal. Person X requested something without having probable cause, person Y signed that, both people have (or should have) the knowledge of what is needed to either sign or get the signature, neither did the required, both should lose their jobs and be liable for damages caused to the people affected. A bartender gets punished more for not checking IDs than those people.
This is why having judges be an elected position seems so crazy: at what point do they learn what they are and are not legally allowed to do?
https://www.wwltv.com/article/news/crime/us-court-of-appeals...
The issue is not speech — the raid was illegal! — but rather that we have a cultural reverence for the police. We’ve insulated them from accountability so much that they can basically do shit like this with impunity.
Who watches the watchmen? Mostly nobody. And a lot of us seem to like it that way.
there is a growing number of people who espouse the belief that grievances towards the police/government/military are by their very nature anti-patriotic, and there is a pretty real history of coercion towards 'under-reporting' on certain stories in the media; it's not real surprise to me that this exists on the lower scales of local municipality/etc, as well.
'chilling' is a very real concept, and it seems to snowball.
Other countries protect cops more than regular citizens yet don't experience the same level of police raids and death by cop.
I think the problem is rather that sheriff's departments in the US are run like small businesses; fining people, raiding and confiscating.
Preemptive brutality is a sign that these people are not first and foremost protectors, but have to meet a quota.
Mercenaries.
You have Michigan passing laws that people can face 5 years in prison for "offending" someone.
"...willful course of conduct, involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested, and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened."
I'm not sure how that is twisted to being "offended". News flash: intimidating, threatening, and harassing someone is illegal in the US and has been for a long time.
Pay attention to this part - "individual to FEEL terrorized, frightened, or18 threatened"
This is a subjective law based on the FEELING of the "victim". No one has a legal right to not FEEL threatened, what in the world are you talking about? Nothing is being "twisted". Don't gaslight me. If it has been illegal there would be no reason for new law .
Either you're a moron or you have malicious reasons for pretending there's no implication to basing a law on how the victim feels due to things said to them. I'm guessing it's the latter. I have no idea how in the world a semi-intelligent person could not see that as a direct threat to the 1st amendment.
I also like that you completely ignored the UK article which shows exactly what the Michigan law would result in. Have a nice day.
Just because you think there is some nefarious big bad cult coming to get you, doesn't mean there is.
I'm sorry you don't recognize that harassment very much depends on the person harassed FEELING harassed. I'm sorry you feel insecure about the word "feel". Feel free to take it to court.
I'm tired of your bad faith and personal attacks. I will not be responding again.
That's my point bud. You don't believe in the 1st amendment, that's the problem, not the interpretation of the law. You cannot have free speech and have a law that bases prison time on subjective FEELINGS by the victim. You cannot be that dumb, therefore you're malicious in intent and gaslighting me. You're an authoritarian and anti-1st amendment and that's why this is hard for you to understand. There's no "twisting" going on other than your belief system.
The irony here is you're just proving what I originally said every time you comment. Free speech rights are no longer respected and you're just living proof of the trend.
If I might go to jail on the whim of how a person feels towards what I say on a specific day because they're in a bad mood then the 1st amendment doesn't exist.
Here's the federal definition:
https://www.eeoc.gov/harassment
And since you don't seem to be a big reader, I'll point out the passage that makes you look most like a fool.
> Petty slights, annoyances, and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not rise to the level of illegality. To be unlawful, the conduct must create a work environment that would be intimidating, hostile, or offensive to reasonable people.
Every time you respond you look more and more like a demagogic tool. Now run along.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37105764 (200 points, 101 comments)
Related: