News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I don't see any "FBI raids location" statements on that page. It's all arrests and other conclusions.
The dude is gone. No one knows where he is.
Plus, there should be public records related to some of this stuff. I don't actually know how it works if someone's presenting a FISA warrant or something for a search of a physical location, but even in that case, I think the woman or her lawyer would at least be able to give a brief statement to the press explaining what they can and can't talk about.
But definitely for the arrest of the dude itself, there should be a public record and a warrant signed by a judge. If he was arrested by the normal federal-court-inclusive-of procedure.
Plus, why is his employer pretending he never existed? That seems like a whole new chapter in this whole unfolding nightmare that we are progressively entering into.
Any university that accepts federal funds is beholden to the federal government. And since universities need that money, they will do everything they can to keep Big Brother happy.
I wasn't expecting "pretending the guy that the feds disappeared had never existed" to appear on the bingo card quite this soon.
Some people were lecturing me just a few days ago about how we shouldn't freak out and exaggerate and say that someone had been "disappeared" just because they were in ICE custody without any charges being filed and no one knew where they were for a few days. They might have had a point or they might not. But... maybe there are some details I'm not aware of, but on first hearing, this really does sound like they just disappeared this person in the full literal historical sense. And the university is going along with it.
Correction. Want, not need. American universities are not lacking in money.
Yes and no. The money given to universities is mostly earmarked for very specific things, as designated by those who donate the money. It’s not like they have a huge tower of gold that they can swim in to their liking. They have a lot of oversight and auditing to make sure money goes where it’s suppose to. And if they want to keep their many accreditations - and they do - then they need that money to jump through whatever hoops their accreditors require.
Historically, the government and university systems have worked symbiotically to produce useful technologies and professional experts for each others' benefits.
This isn't simply cash-for-service. There has historically been a big revolving door between state agencies and academic institutions.
The Trump Admin is both cutting financial support to universities and purging state officials with friendly school ties.
This is not just because of the Trump administration. If a university wants federal money, it has to follow certain rules for that money. Its not as symbiotic as you would think. The government can fund research from other, non-academic, institutions.
It makes sense that the rules aren’t arbitrary; e.g., university must accommodate the ADA. But, as we’re seeing these days, nothing stops them from imposing new rules; e.g., Executive Order 13985.
You're just describing a grant. This goes well beyond the rules surrounding grant applications. Kidnapping students off of campus and shipping them to black sites in defiance of court orders is entirely outside the scope of securing university research grant funding.
I work at a university that is also part of a state system with their own rules (also driven by federal regulations).
You’re conflating the government coming on campus and exerting the power of the law with universities having to comply with said laws. And yes, universities will comply because they have no choice.
Is that what they're doing? Quite a few judges seem to believe differently