438
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
438 points (97.6% liked)
Not The Onion
11028 readers
1381 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm not a lawyer, so I'm probably wrong, but wouldn't that be obstructing justice, or something?
It is the exact textbook definition of obstruction of justice. It doesn't get any more obstruction of justice than to literally hide identities with the express stated goal of obstructing the work of the Department of Justice.
He's taking a page out of Trump’s "it's not a crime if you brag about it on tv" playbook.
Hey everybody, we doin' crimes and shit. Whatchu gonna do about it
You have the perfect username to make that comment 😆👌
He killed me with a sword, how weird is that
Signal still going though, though, so you were vindicated on THAT 🤷
Fortunately for the FBI, and for anyone who still believes in democracy, most of these idiots brought their smartphones with them so video hasn't even been necessary to secure convictions. And lots of them recorded video themselves, OF themselves, in order to brag about their crimes online.
Of course, why take precautions? They didn't expect to lose. They expected King Trump to be crowned and bring his chosen people to paradise, and they wanted to make sure they weren't left out.
Yeah, although something tells me that a lot of them aren't exactly the type who think very far ahead regardless of what they expected the outcome of that day to be.
They then uploaded the videos to parlor which had no security on their API, so anyone with the address could download every video.
That's hilarious, I forgot about that part. Parlor probably didn't bother to strip out the metadata either, did they? So, full GPS coordinates with every image and video... hahahaha
Worse, DOJ certainly had them before Congress so it makes no sense.
This is the dumbest part about this whole thing. It's just grandstanding.
Edit: He's already recanted it. Instead saying they are blurring to protect their identities from the public.
Meanwhile, any little suspect from small time crime gets their face plastered all over local news anyways.
Its grandstanding and posturing.
But there is actually a good argument. Someone who the DOJ have decided wasn't worth the hassle to properly investigate might still be identified and reported by a co-worker or neighbor. Which then begins to force the DOJ's hand (they are still cops so they might ignore it but...). I personally think everyone who crowded outside the building deserves to be locked up, but I can see an argument that only people who entered the building or who actively caused damage should be charged.
Because yes, facial recognition and DMV databases are already a thing. But, much like with a red light ticket, a decent lawyer can work wonders to argue out "a robot claims that I commit a crime". Whereas having a human in the loop removes that gotcha. Hell, if my cousin is any indication, you don't even need a lawyer to argue against a red light camera or an automated speed trap and just need to care enough to show up to the courthouse for a few hours.
Also, regardless, this is indeed (attempted) obstruction of justice to protect insurrectionists.
Or people think they recognize faces in the crowd, and we get a whole slew of Richard Jewells and Sunil Tripathis
Only if they're black or hispanic. There's a narrative to push, don't you know.
It’s theater for their deep state struggle fundraising. Gotta shake down the marks for the cash. You think he’s got a sugar daddy? He’s not a Supreme Court justice………
He said this at a press conference, was there no push back from any journalist, or was that edited out?
That's the murmur sound you hear at the very end of the clip as he's about to finish talking: a slew of reporters either pointing out that he just casually admitted to a serious criminal conspiracy or lauding him for protecting the conspirators, defending on the specific media outlets they're from.