>When you see the signs, and they’re all made out of a beautiful, beautiful paper. Beautiful, nice, stiff, very expensive paper with beautiful wood handles all the same. All the same color. They come from very expensive printing machines. These are are people that write out their signs in a basement, that believe in something. These are paid anarchists.
-Trump
This man is a child with questionable critical thinking skills. Now we have agents out running around chasing his imagination because he thinks nice paper and printing is hard to come by.
The political part of the FBI has something LIKE a Palantir dashboard that says, here's a list of people you should talk to, every day, and then the FBI civil service has something LIKE a Jira, that tells agents to go talk to these people, and they do.
Is the FBI being "instructed?" Yes. But it gets "instructed" every day, what has changed? (1) Republicans aren't a no-regulation thing, they are a vague regulation thing. The policies and regulations exist, they just make less sense, they're less visionary, less consistent than the ones that Democrats make. (2) There is better alignment between the tools, like a Palantir dashboard that LLM-reads social media posts, and these vague policies. (3) A list of names cuts through the bureaucratic / administrative friction of vague policy.
The agents may not have learned anything from Serafini, but the visit — which took place one day before the No Kings protest — did accomplish one thing: Serafini decided against going to No Kings. He was spooked.
That is exactly the chilling effect on speech that the FBI investigating political matters risks creating.
Ugh, I might have to start caring about politics again, this is unacceptable.
Not a lawyer, but I would advise anyone in a similar situation to exercise their right to tell these goons to fuck off. You always have the right to remain silent.
I grew up in communist Poland before the fall of the wall in 1989 is just one story among many from this year that sounds like an echo of what my parent's told me they had to grow up with.
That so many Americans, in the self proclaimed land of the free, voted for this reality under the delusion they were against "socialism" is the most historically illiterate thing ever.
Do we ever learn why these posts get censored or is it just going to keep fuelling conspiracies? Unless fuelling conspiracies is actually less bad for the offender because there _is_ a conspiracy!
I can tell you why. There's no conspiracy, not really.
Instead, it's an attitude of "I know what I voted for, and I'd prefer not to be reminded of its negative externalizes, thanks. Also, I'd really prefer it if this sort of news not filter out into the greater consciousness of Hacker News, because it might cause other people to reconsider their support."
One of the biggest lies of HN is that it's a place of open and reasonable debate and discussion. In reality, it is highly curated by the users who have access to the moderation tools in order to shape the conversation. There's no direct coordination or conversations, just a widespread unspoken agreement.
I don't disagree with their decision-making in a vacuum. There's nothing wrong with bias if it's something people are generally aware of, so it can be accounted for. On the other hand, I think that there's a significant moral hazard of a site that pretends to be unbiased but has an unaccountable cabal of users putting their collective thumbs on the scale, and HN very much falls into that camp.
When federal agents, such as the FBI, attempt to question you, it is strongly advised that you do not talk to them without a lawyer present. The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees you the right to remain silent and to have an attorney. There were several instances in this account where Serafini's answers could be used to paint his involvement as not so innocent.
>When federal agents, such as the FBI, attempt to question you, it is strongly advised that you do not talk to them without a lawyer present.
Yes. This. James Duane lays out[0] why this is so important. I strongly encourage everyone resident in the US to view this video as it makes (IMHO) a very strong case for never talking to the police -- they are not (at least in their official capacities) your friends.
All of this, including the video, is hearsay. That is, it is unauthenticated. Not a single part of the title is confirmed.
Neither us nor the author apparently know whether the men shown were real FBI agents. Con men operate the same way - wave a badge and pretend to be someone.
> According to Serafini, the two FBI agents showed him photos of himself at the protest as well as several other protesters — people he knew nothing about.
All this work plus the risk of a charge of impersonating a federal agent... and they didn't ask him for money. Deep grift.
So these FBI imposters knew he went to a protest, where he lives, and want to ask questions? If they were criminals, wouldn't they want something from him?
This comment reads to me like you understand the implications and it makes you uncomfortable so you're deflecting with nonsense. Let's assume they're real FBI agents: what do you think of this action?
28 comments
[ 6.0 ms ] story [ 51.6 ms ] thread-Trump
This man is a child with questionable critical thinking skills. Now we have agents out running around chasing his imagination because he thinks nice paper and printing is hard to come by.
Is FBI being instructed that protesting ice is antifa terrorism?
This is super concerning.
Is the FBI being "instructed?" Yes. But it gets "instructed" every day, what has changed? (1) Republicans aren't a no-regulation thing, they are a vague regulation thing. The policies and regulations exist, they just make less sense, they're less visionary, less consistent than the ones that Democrats make. (2) There is better alignment between the tools, like a Palantir dashboard that LLM-reads social media posts, and these vague policies. (3) A list of names cuts through the bureaucratic / administrative friction of vague policy.
That is exactly the chilling effect on speech that the FBI investigating political matters risks creating.
Ugh, I might have to start caring about politics again, this is unacceptable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministries_in_Nineteen_Eighty-...
Not a lawyer, but I would advise anyone in a similar situation to exercise their right to tell these goons to fuck off. You always have the right to remain silent.
Or for a longer form explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
That so many Americans, in the self proclaimed land of the free, voted for this reality under the delusion they were against "socialism" is the most historically illiterate thing ever.
Instead, it's an attitude of "I know what I voted for, and I'd prefer not to be reminded of its negative externalizes, thanks. Also, I'd really prefer it if this sort of news not filter out into the greater consciousness of Hacker News, because it might cause other people to reconsider their support."
One of the biggest lies of HN is that it's a place of open and reasonable debate and discussion. In reality, it is highly curated by the users who have access to the moderation tools in order to shape the conversation. There's no direct coordination or conversations, just a widespread unspoken agreement.
I don't disagree with their decision-making in a vacuum. There's nothing wrong with bias if it's something people are generally aware of, so it can be accounted for. On the other hand, I think that there's a significant moral hazard of a site that pretends to be unbiased but has an unaccountable cabal of users putting their collective thumbs on the scale, and HN very much falls into that camp.
I think you underestimate the amount of racetards and magas, even on this website.
Me: "Am I under arrest?"
No: "I would like my attorney present before starting this discussion. Please provide me some contact information so we can schedule this."
Yes: "I wish to have my attorney present. I will not be answering any questions or discussing this matter."
Now, I don't know if I'm actually that brave, but I've at least got a plan.
Yes. This. James Duane lays out[0] why this is so important. I strongly encourage everyone resident in the US to view this video as it makes (IMHO) a very strong case for never talking to the police -- they are not (at least in their official capacities) your friends.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
Neither us nor the author apparently know whether the men shown were real FBI agents. Con men operate the same way - wave a badge and pretend to be someone.
All this work plus the risk of a charge of impersonating a federal agent... and they didn't ask him for money. Deep grift.
This comment reads to me like you understand the implications and it makes you uncomfortable so you're deflecting with nonsense. Let's assume they're real FBI agents: what do you think of this action?