Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday March 26 2017, @12:01PM   Printer-friendly
from the good-luck-with-that dept.

In a filing, prosecutors have said that they are currently extracting data from locked phones seized from over 100 alleged rioters:

In new filings, prosecutors told a court in Washington, DC that within the coming weeks, they expect to extract all data from the seized cellphones of more than 100 allegedly violent protesters arrested during the inauguration of President Donald Trump. Prosecutors also said that this search is validated by recently issued warrants. [...] "All of the Rioter Cell Phones were locked, which requires more time-sensitive efforts to try to obtain the data," Jennifer Kerkhoff, an assistant United States attorney, wrote.

Also at BuzzFeed, CNET, and The Verge.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Sunday March 26 2017, @01:17PM (6 children)

    by Nerdfest (80) on Sunday March 26 2017, @01:17PM (#484351)

    Nice to see. That's how it's supposed to work.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:12PM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:12PM (#484357)

      And if Soros is behind it?

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday March 26 2017, @09:39PM (2 children)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 26 2017, @09:39PM (#484444) Journal

        Burn Soros, naturally. If it can ever be proven that he is paying rioters to riot, it would fall under racketeering laws. RICO act, I think it is . . . lemme double check . . .

        he Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO, is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.

        Most jurisdictions also have laws against inciting riot. Of course, those laws don't have any real teeth, compared to RICO.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 27 2017, @03:55AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 27 2017, @03:55AM (#484517)

          Fake News.

          • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday March 27 2017, @06:57AM

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday March 27 2017, @06:57AM (#484540) Journal

            Oh, really?

            How about, you are partisan, and you choose which storied to believe, and which to not believe. Soros is dirty, like the Koch brothers are dirty. Soros stirs the cesspool in the US, the Koch brothers stir the cesspool in Ukraine and eastern Europe.

            WTF did you think people DO with all that money? Leave it in the bank to draw interest? Soros amused me after Trump's election, when he lost some billions, betting against the market. He tried the same thing that more "conservative" investors did when Obama was elected, and lost.

            But, whatever, you continue believing that Soros is benevolent. I know that he would sell all of us to the highest bidder, just like the Koch brothers, if he could get away with it.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @07:19PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @07:19PM (#484422)

      Don't be naive.
      Celibrite or another has already unlocked all those phones by now.

      What they say and what they do are two completely different things altogether!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 27 2017, @11:25AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 27 2017, @11:25AM (#484573)

      What exactly is happening here that's "how it's supposed to work".

      These phones were seized/stolen months ago, without any warrants. If these people were 'violently protesting' then I assume the cops have evidence of that BEFORE they arrested all of them and before starting to seize property. Since they are still called 'alleged rioters', no such evidence probably exist, hence the phishing expedition on the phones. Yes, they are "doing it by the book", but that's just to make sure whatever they can come up with next will 'stick'.

  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday March 26 2017, @01:35PM (7 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Sunday March 26 2017, @01:35PM (#484353)

    If the protesters were even half-clever, they exchanged messages like: "let's keep it clean out there, peaceful protest." "WTF pig just bashed J in the head for no reason." "Mary wasn't doing anything and she just got maced!!!!" "People, this has gone south - lay down your signs and get away if you can."

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by KiloByte on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:01PM (5 children)

      by KiloByte (375) on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:01PM (#484355)

      And that matters, how? Once your phone is in possession of an adversary, they can put anything there.

      --
      Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
      • (Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:27PM (4 children)

        by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:27PM (#484363)

        Sounds very high risk unless the social group is completely and perfectly closed.

        "Your honor let me point out that we ran an analysis of all texts on the defendants phone and 100% of incriminating texts the defendant claims never to have entered are sent to a phone that was seized an lexical analysis shows someone at the verbal level of Gawker wrote it whereas 100% of the texts to phones not seized do NOT contain incriminating evidence and lexical analysis shows an entirely different person wrote those texts and that author appears to be the defendant and interestingly this applies to all OTHER seized phones also..."

        You have to realize the antifa people are extremely violent and arrogant because they are the establishment in many areas.

        • (Score: 5, Interesting) by KiloByte on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:00PM (3 children)

          by KiloByte (375) on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:00PM (#484392)

          I'm afraid you're a starry-eyed idealist when it comes to the rule of law.

          No one cares what the law says, only how much clout you have to enforce it.

          I have less knowledge about examples from the US, so here's a bunch from Poland -- a NATO and EU member that's on similar level as the US when it comes to respect to law.

          • Several years ago, father of then-head of the Department of Justice had heart issues diagnosed as fatal. As such animals are more equal than others, he received care from an all-star team of top heart surgeons, every one of them with a worldwide fame and hundreds of publications (Poland stands quite well in this field). Despite their efforts, they did not manage to save the guy. Anyone sane would accept such an outcome -- yet somehow, our hero wants "revenge" for his father's death. He sued for not only malpractice but also intentional harm, and had the doctors arrested for murder. The government has changed in the meantime, so the lawsuit went quite as expected, with every single expert testifying that all procedures were done according to medical arts. The doctors even were granted damages. Yet before the apellate process has run its course, the government changed again and our hero is back to being the head of the Department of Justice. Experts who testified are now accused of fraud for taking their fees for delivering "false" opinions.

          • The head of our Department of Defense was travelling from one non-government matter to another, drastically above all speed limits, in a car convoy. The convoy was not even legally privileged -- to have priority, they'd need to use both light and sound signals; loud sounds apparently are too undelicate for such an important person. They plowed into five cars properly stopped at a red light. Guess who's guilty according to the police?

          • Our beloved Prime Minister was travelling, at even more ridiculous speeds (as measured by dividing the distance by her last known timestamped whereabouts), also without sound signals. At a place with a tight speed limit (50kph) and just after a roundabout (where you need to slow down to nearly walking speed), her driver clipped a car (who properly made evasive action to let the idiots pass but had no space to make enough room), then her car went off the road and hit a tree. The police presented speed recorder data which, despite what all witnesses say, shows that the car was going below the speed limit. Please explain to me by what miracle an armoured car can be totalled at such a speed. Obviously, the guy whom they first hit is now criminally liable for causing the accident.

          Now, back to the US. Do you wonder why Trump, despite promises of sending Hillary to a federal correctional unit, hasn't done so yet? Despite her being so obviously, thoroughly guilty? Perhaps, just perhaps, it has something with Pence's emails, and the real risk of Democrites returning the favour if he puts her to jail, once they regain power?

          --
          Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday March 27 2017, @02:54AM (2 children)

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday March 27 2017, @02:54AM (#484507)

            H guilty of what, exactly? Doing her job as SofS without following IT security procedures? As Secretary, it is bloody well at her discretion if she should follow procedure, or just rewrite them to except herself. There are enough laws in any country over 100 years old that _everybody_ breaks laws on a regular basis, even some with big penalties, and when you move in matters of state, the definition of Treason is not black and white at all. Is taking illegal campaign financing from an adversarial foreign state a serious crime? Depends on who you ask.

            Your example of the doctors and the flip-flopping trial is both sad, and believable. However, returning to the question of: what does it matter what's on the phones? If the system is to have any credibility, there are a network of diverse individuals who each have knowledge of what is found in evidence searches, electronic and otherwise, otherwise the very problem you imply is all too possible. The arresting officer on the scene perhaps has the most latitude to "plant" evidence, especially if his partner is away - or complicit. After that, the web of evidence handlers is _supposed_ to spread, if it doesn't, the system is in jeopardy of becoming a farce, well, a bigger farce than it currently is perceived to be.

            --
            🌻🌻 [google.com]
            • (Score: 3, Funny) by BK on Monday March 27 2017, @03:55AM (1 child)

              by BK (4868) on Monday March 27 2017, @03:55AM (#484516)

              H guilty of what, exactly? Doing her job as SofS without following IT security procedures? As Secretary, it is bloody well at her discretion if she should follow procedure

              Woosh!

              You missed his point and then made it. Well done.

              --
              ...but you HAVE heard of me.
              • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday March 27 2017, @01:00PM

                by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday March 27 2017, @01:00PM (#484586)

                Perhaps, perhaps not... some readers would take the "oh so absolutely guilty" at face value.

                --
                🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:23PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:23PM (#484361)

      I see a lot of possible scenarios and driving forces behind these riots, but I'm extremely hard pressed to find any scenario where the people who actually carried out the actions were anything short of complete dolts. The only question is the one of their idiocy - genuine idiots, or useful idiots?

  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:14PM (20 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:14PM (#484358)

    I, subjectively, like this news since I think it's highly probable that these events were organized and there is at least a reasonable chance evidence of said orchestration will be found on the founds. That brings this from rioting to criminal conspiracy. If they were supported by third parties, it would also enable them to be held accountable as well. People who disrupt peaceful political movements with violence are some of the worst we have. Not only are their actions materially destructive, but they also work to cause substantial political damage to, what is ostensibly, 'their side.'

    On the other hand is it reasonable for police to search a person's digital property on a hunch? I don't mean legal - America seems to have decided there's no such thing as an unreasonable search when it comes to digital property. I mean reasonable as in does this match with the rest of our systems of values? I think it probably does since property of an individual who has already engaged in one crime is probably fair game, but I'm not sure if this is some sort of cognitive dissonance on my part. I'm not sure if these people were detained for a reason I was less disgusted by, if I'd be so enthusiastic about the police digging into their property so much as possible.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:19PM (18 children)

      by Nerdfest (80) on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:19PM (#484359)

      I, subjectively, think you're delusional. The reason people were protesting this inauguration is that it was for a racist, fascist, sexist, sociopath, of lower than average intelligence. The only organization required was that of ones thought processes.

      • (Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:21PM (6 children)

        by Nerdfest (80) on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:21PM (#484360)

        My apologies if you're insinuating that the violent protesters were organized by a third party to make the peaceful protesters look bad. More conceivable, but still not likely.

        • (Score: 2) by schad on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:11PM (5 children)

          by schad (2398) on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:11PM (#484397)

          I think the point he's making is just that the violent protesters were more likely to have been organized. Not necessarily that they had the intent to discredit the entire protest.

          I think that's probably backwards, though. I know a lot of people who became unhinged at Trump's election. Very strongly. Many of them genuinely believed that the literal end of civilization was going to happen in the first few weeks of Trump's presidency. Get a bunch of people like that all in the same area... you need organization not to get riots. Mob mentality is a very real thing.

          Honestly, I'm amazed that Trump hasn't been assassinated yet. The level of hate is astonishing. I think the only thing keeping him alive is that people are more afraid of Pence than they are of Trump. Better an incompetent madman than a competent devil, I guess.

          • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Sunday March 26 2017, @07:00PM

            by cubancigar11 (330) on Sunday March 26 2017, @07:00PM (#484417) Homepage Journal

            As someone who was very recently involved with political movements, which is what it is - if you know a person who is genuinely angry, then you know a person whose anger has been genuinely compromised by his/her favorite political movement - the organization is real. Believe me, 10 people can be passionate about having a beer party on a weekend but it is almost impossible for 10 people to get together on a weekend without a person taking charge of planning. So there is always planning. Secondly, it is impossible to not know that, with emotions running that high, and with all the recent data pointing to masked hooliganism and property damage/rioting, that something unsavory won't happen! If you actually look at the videos of riots, you will find tacit support of the violent elements in the protest. The violence happens, and suddenly the masked asshole vanishes behind a crowd and the crowd openly claims nothing happened.

            Now on to the topic at hand, I am personally torn between a well policed state and an unpoliced state. Let us see what they find. I am very sure there is nothing stopping the state in putting down its foot, the left has worked very hard to make that sure.

          • (Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Sunday March 26 2017, @08:36PM (3 children)

            by Nerdfest (80) on Sunday March 26 2017, @08:36PM (#484431)

            The sort of people who would assassinate a president are the same sort of people who voted for him. He's relatively safe.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @09:58PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @09:58PM (#484454)

              Anything can happen. Remember that time John McCain went to Starbucks? [latimes.com]

            • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday March 26 2017, @10:13PM (1 child)

              by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 26 2017, @10:13PM (#484459) Journal

              WeatherSo, you are claiming that only republicans and conservatives resort to violence? Surely you jest. Hearst and the Symbionese Liberation Army? (Oh, my bad - the official story is, she was kidnapped, and forced to wave a gun around, blah blah blah) The Unabomber? Bill Ayers? Ancient history, you say? How about this story - https://medium.com/@trentlapinski/the-berkeley-riots-were-a-cowardly-act-of-domestic-terrorism-2bcafbb32ff0 [medium.com]

              If you try, you can probably make a case that conservatives are statistically more likely to resort to violence than progressives and liberals. But, the problem is, the corrupt media won't give you the stories when the stories embarrass the liberal movement.

              • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday March 27 2017, @01:54AM

                by jmorris (4844) on Monday March 27 2017, @01:54AM (#484494)

                If you try, you can probably make a case that conservatives are statistically more likely to resort to violence than progressives and liberals.

                Only if you lie, but since that is the core of Progressivism I suppose it is easy enough for them. Conservatives are too fixated on the Rule of Law, even now as they can clearly see the other side is utterly lawless. "We can't descend to their level, that isn't who we are" they cuck as the other side boycotts their businesses, doxes and disemploys them, even beats them up on the street. The Left ARE the power in this country and they are lawless, obeying only the Will to Power yet a Conservative would rather die than even think of any measure beyond voting. Hence their rapid ongoing replacement by the Alt-Right. Right now they are contenting themselves with making a hero out of one guy with a stick who whacked some Antifa. It won't stop there unless the Left is willing to deescalate, and pretty soon.

                Now before somebody does something stupid and trys to rebut my assertion that the Left in the U.S. is far more lawless and violent, read This history [status451.com] of the violence of the Left that their media operations have shoved into the memory hole. All documented in the media of the day, and utterly unknown in a modern history book and never mentioned now. That is why I say the Left are the uncontested power today, they control the present and thus they control the past and if they are not stopped will control the future... until reality asserts itself in the total destruction their ideas always lead to.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by VLM on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:33PM (6 children)

        by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 26 2017, @02:33PM (#484364)

        Interesting thing about leftist support for political violence in the streets...

        Something that always held back right wing death squads in the USA was "we don't do stuff like that in the USA" but now that its normalized by the other side, good times are ahead.

        Remember there was a lot of left wing violence in the streets in Germany during the Wiemar era. I have to congratulate the modern day leftists for keeping us faithfully on the path to better times. Almost makes you wonder who's working for who...

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @03:16PM (2 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @03:16PM (#484369)

          Kindly provide a link to the leftist death squads in US. Brietbart [sic] doesn't count btw.

          • (Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:21PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:21PM (#484401)

            Deathsquads do not happen at first. Socialist Brownshirts used intimidation and threats at first too. Even the Antifa logo LOOKs like one of the of the logos used before WW2. The dudes organizing it are laughing at how ignorant everyone is about it.

            It would take only a nudge to turn BLM and Antifa into deathsquads. You know it to be true. Do not play 'oh but its not' games with us. These people are as fake american as it gets.

            • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @09:46PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @09:46PM (#484450)

              It starts with the wild horses. [indigenousamerican.info]

        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @03:23PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @03:23PM (#484371)

          Interesting thing about leftist support for political violence in the streets

          No such thing, we do not condone these totalitarian assholes.

          Something that always held back right wing death squads in the USA was "we don't do stuff like that in the USA" but now that its normalized by the other side, good times are ahead.

          Glorified football hooligans justify death squads? You sir are unhinged. Get help.

          Almost makes you wonder who's working for who...

          If I was a conspiracy nutter, I'd say the antifa are working for the Heritage Foundation. The SJWs are doing a better job at promoting the right than anyone on the republican side these days.

        • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday March 26 2017, @05:53PM (1 child)

          by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday March 26 2017, @05:53PM (#484390) Homepage

          Bring it on. * Loads 30-round magazine into Mini-14 *

          • (Score: 2) by tibman on Monday March 27 2017, @07:17PM

            by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Monday March 27 2017, @07:17PM (#484802)

            Man, 30 rounds is really going to stress that mag spring. Maybe 28 (max)? Unless you really do rotate them and exercise them regularly.

            --
            SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @03:41PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @03:41PM (#484375)

        Destroying property and attacking people is not "protest", it's criminal behavior. Anybody who does or encourages this, for whatever the reason, ought be punished to the fullest extent possible under the law. Like I mentioned elsewhere the only question is whether these individuals were genuine idiots or useful idiots. And unfortunately I'm expecting it was probably the former.

        It seems to me that many people don't really understand how their actions are seen and I think social media echo chambers are to blame for this. They view their reactions in terms of their social media circles which are, in most cases, complete echo chambers. And that is completely counter productive. These sort of actions ought drive empathy and support from people who do not necessarily already support you. In this case it's quite the opposite. With the increasing extremism, intolerance, and regularity of violence in these protests - I think most individuals are being driven squarely in the opposite direction.

      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:02PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:02PM (#484393)

        Going back to the first Bush at minimum, every Republican candidate has been called racist and sexist. It gets old. Is there also a wolf? Would you like to cry "Wolf!" to warn us? Nobody cares anymore.

        Specifically desiring a first black president or a first female president though... that couldn't be racist or sexist, could it? It's only showing preference for a race or sex, which isn't the same thing... as showing preference for a race or sex. Oh wait. Hmmm.

        He could be racist for calling black people "superpredators"... oh wait, Hillary Clinton did that. He might be sexist for biting a woman while raping her... oh wait, Bill Clinton did that to Juanita Broderick. Um, ankle monitor and sex offender list?

        Your other insults are also suspect. Dumb people don't turn $millions into $billions. He's such a cruel fascist that nobody dares say anything bad about him, right? Hillary wouldn't happen to fit the definition of "sociopath" now, would she? Oh, I just looked up the definition to be sure, and yeah... it's a description of her. It especially matches up with the reports from former secret service agents who had to deal with her, and with the "private position" and "public position".

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:38PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:38PM (#484406)

          http://c8.alamy.com/comp/D18GJM/italian-anti-nixon-demonstrators-march-in-anticipation-of-president-D18GJM.jpg [alamy.com]
          https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cx557jPXAAQ26mz.jpg [twimg.com]

          Calling Republicans nazi's is just what they do. If they read what a real nazi (aka the National Socialist German Workers' Party) is they would see it more closely aligns to their thought process. But that would mean being slightly introspective.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmabteilung [wikipedia.org]
          What they really miss is that they are expendables. For example once Hitler was done with the brown shirts he ruthlessly eliminated them and replaced them with the SS. Stalin did similar things in Russia using the KGB. They somehow think they would be favored in the new regime. They would quickly realize they have been used they become a force against said new gov and must be taken care of before that happens. Why? They have already shown they can be bought and do not tolerate those who do not think exactly like them.

          Nothing will happen to the Clintons. They could curb stomp a baby on live TV and the media would gaslight us into thinking the baby deserved it because it kinda smiled at Trump. If they actually wanted to get people to watch they would do real investigative journalism instead of the gotcha tabloid style BS they are doing now.

          I would say she is more a overt narcissist with sociopath tendencies. But at that point we are just arguing semantics.

      • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:50PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:50PM (#484413)

        There *was* some organization going on. Look no further than the signs they have. Hell the 'hats' they all wore. The planes of people getting paid to fly there. Just drop them all together like you said and get them going. Then there are paid agitators. They exist. There are DNC people who are on tape saying as much. The money and scope is not 'grass roots'. Even before the election there were many craigslist ads on joining in on these things. The going rate seems to be about 1500 a week and lodging for the higher up ones. So put a bunch of pissed off people together get them going and hope for 'the best'.

        Even the 'spontaneous' protest for the new SCOTUS judge. They announced it and suddenly with in a few mins there were printed signs. That took organization that was in no way spontaneous. They pre-printed the possibles just so they could protest. This is not some dude with a stick, tape, paper, and a marker.

        What is even more amazing to me is that the current president is probably the most flexible one we have had in a long time. He loves to make deals. If you are there to muck things up he ignores you. If you are there to cut a deal and make things better he will hear you out. Even the healthcare bill he basically forced it to fail because he knew it was crap. He has now forced the R's and D's to come up with something before AHA eats itself with the implications 'better be better'.

    • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday March 27 2017, @02:46AM

      by Thexalon (636) on Monday March 27 2017, @02:46AM (#484506)

      There is some organization of some protesters, but in more than a few cases the violent aspects of the protest were organized not by any protest organization but by the police. This well known agent provocateur tactic has been around since at least the 1960's: the idea is to put a few undercover cop in the crowd of protesters, have the cops throw rocks or something, and then the the uniformed cops can now legally move in to attack and/or arrest any protesters nearby. As an added bonus, the news story now becomes "police stopped a violent protest and arrested 5,000 troublemakers", not "an estimated 100,000 people were on the streets today demanding _______".

      There is also the substantial problem in this case of several journalists and random bystanders being arrested and having their phones confiscated for the heinous crime of standing on the sidewalk filming and reporting near where other people were allegedly committing crimes.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
  • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:40PM (4 children)

    by linkdude64 (5482) on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:40PM (#484408)

    IIRC, this is a result of rules set forth by Barack "Peace Prize" Obama regarding protests at which the Secret Service is present.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:51PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @06:51PM (#484414)
      How many times now have the democrats given themselves more power...
      while forgetting that they won't always be the ones using it?

      We're lucky they're none too bright on thinking ahead.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @08:57PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @08:57PM (#484433)

        We're lucky they're none too bright on thinking ahead.

        I disagree. I think we're unlucky that both sides are shit about being forward thinking since ALL OF US pay for it in the end.

      • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday March 27 2017, @01:25AM

        by jmorris (4844) on Monday March 27 2017, @01:25AM (#484492)

        All 'Right Thinking People' had drunk the Flavor-Aid and believed demographic destiny had already come. After Obama would be Hillary (of course) and then a never ending string of vibrant diversity hires as far as the eye could see. No Republican would ever have the White House again, and soon even the Congress would be beyond their hope. So if the theory is right there is no reason not to go all out and seize as much power to the Executive as possible and send the rest to the Judiciary since that was already swinging Left and would soon enough be nine solid Progressives if the WH is staying in Democratic hands. Just getting Garland would have given them five solid Prog votes and with Kennedy call it 5 1/2.

        Somebody should have looked at a census report. Yes, if things continue on the current path we get there, but it ain't happened yet. There is still a very narrow path to victory for the American side.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @11:26PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @11:26PM (#484468)

      And subsequently part of why his party successor lost the election.

  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @11:45PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @11:45PM (#484475)

    ...is that more than 100 people attended the inauguration.

  • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday March 27 2017, @02:06AM (1 child)

    by jmorris (4844) on Monday March 27 2017, @02:06AM (#484496)

    Rioters were arrested. I know that normally doesn't happen, but is it shocking when the police actually do their job? Anything a criminal is carrying when arrested is seized as evidence, this tradition is very old so this can't be the story we are supposed to discuss, right? The police even went to the extra bother of getting warrants to look at the contents of the phones, they really didn't need to do that so again, this isn't the story. We know law enforcement has ways to get into most phones, especially if given sufficient time so nope, that isn't the story. So what the heck is the story angle we should be discussing? Anyone? Bueller?

    I think it is great, we should roll up as much of Antifa as possible, document their terrorist activities and get them listed as a domestic terror organization so we can seize every damned asset within reach of law enforcement. I'd love to see a direct line back to Soros himself and him in orange but unless he is a moron that won't happen. But that can't be what we are supposed to be discussing, can it?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 27 2017, @11:10AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 27 2017, @11:10AM (#484570)

      I'd love to see a direct line back to Soros himself and him in orange but unless he is a moron that won't happen.

      He funds Antifa the same way he funds BLM and Ukrainian neo-nazi's. He donates to a charity (Tides Foundation in Antifa's case), and the charity hands out the money. One count of this would be plausible deniability, 3 separate violent groups funded by one shithead using the same tired ploy to avoid culpability... not really.

(1)