[xrd]

Up until now these crazy cases have been rejected by the courts. But this feels like a crack in the dam. A judge actually sentenced someone to 30 years for hiding zines, zines that had been published for years. This was under the pretense hiding those zines was hiding evidence of criminality. And the criminality was worth 75 years. For someone who was at a protest where a federal agent was shot, but was not the shooter.

Does anyone have a link to details on the case because there must have been more details, like these two were accused of planning a murder in advance, because otherwise this seems insane. It seems insane no matter what, but if this was a judge making a bunch of logical leaps while guided by DOJ lawyers, something is really broken

[daedrdev]

If you think that this was a protest then yeah it's worrying.

The feds case, which they did win convictions based on, was that they were terrorists who set off fireworks to lure police into an ambush, and there weren't more casualties because one of the members shot early and only injured one cop. An accessory to this who hid evidence is also part of the crime in the Feds case

Is this embellished by the Feds? I think so, it seems some of the group did not think this was the plan. But there did seem to be a plan and it did involve bringing guns, setting off fireworks, opening the gate and trying to break out the prisoners, and "not going quietly"

[aprilthird2021]

The pardoned Jan. 6 rioters had a lot of far worse plans that were foiled which could have resulted in more casualties. There was lots of evidence several of them planned to kidnap sitting congressmen and women.

Do you know why they were pardoned and this zine hider got 30 years? Must just be a quirk of the justice system...

[tkel]

"Lure police into an ambush" is quite a stretch. It's quite normal to do noise demonstrations outside jails/prisons to show solidarity with the captives, the captives will often times knock on the windows to communicate back. In fact there were noise demonstrations outside the Delaney Hall ICE jail in New Jersey just this month, which you may have heard about. The mischaracterization of fireworks as "explosives" is also a huge stretch by the government in order to pursue their antifa conspiracy.

[blockmarker]

Fireworks are explosives, and people are hurt by misusing them. Just because they are less harmful than grenades doesn't mean that they are harmless, and throwing them at someone is clearly with the intention of harming them. And well, shooting them with rifles is also clearly intended to harm them.

[piltdownman]

Reducto ad absurdum. Up there with declaring Placards or Air Horns as 'offensive rioting equipment' as people can (and are) hurt through their misuse, and arguing that just because they're less harmless than an ICBM doesn't mean they're harmless.

Fireworks are first and foremost Pyrotechnics - it's only a specific subset of fireworks that contain any sort of 'explosive' element. Short of Simpsons-esque escapades involving cherrybombs and toilets, or m-80s and mailboxes, this use-case simply doesn't exist in real-life. Indeed both cherrybombs and m-80s are federal felonies to possess in the U.S. without an explosives license, alongside anything with 50 milligrams or more of flash powder.

Tannerite sits amongst dozens of other explosives you can buy OTC in the US with a drivers licence - one which generally necessitates shooting at with a rifle to ignite. Plenty of videos on youtube of enthusiasts blowing up a car or similar sized object using it.

[tanseydavid]

How many people get injured each year in the US by Placards or Air Horns? And then answer the same question about fireworks...

[mc32]

The fireworks were a distraction tactic. It wasn’t the main tool in the attempt to main injure and kill. Things went sideways for them; however the intent was there. I think that’s what the issue was. Obviously the feds always go overboard with charges in order that there be a higher likelihood of conviction and long term punishment for the convicted.

[tkel]

All this hypothetical grandstanding is so obnoxious. Have you seen the video? There was just a few fireworks, regular ones purchased from a roadside stand. They went into the air, FAR from the facility. There was no damage. It's called a noise demonstration. The prisoners were watching from inside and cheering in response. Please go outside on the 4th of July while people are setting off fireworks and touch grass.

[mattmaroon]

If you don’t think fireworks are explosives you’re buying the wrong ones.

[saghm]

Or the right ones. Maybe celebrating a holiday or whatever doesn't need explosives...

[mattmaroon]

I bet you’re real fun at parties.

[appreciatorBus]

I think all of this hinges on whether or not you think it was a protest. If they had been peacefully sitting outside the facility holding signs, I think you'd have a case that the sentencing is insane. But if they were actively planning a break-in & preparing to use deadly force, that's quite another matter. I haven't spent a lot of timing reading about it, but what I have read suggests it was much closer to the latter.

[devmor]

From what I read, the person who was arrested for transporting zines was not even at the protest or part of the group - just the husband of one of the protestors.

[lelandfe]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention...

[snvzz]

Do not just link some Wikipedia article.

Express your point.

[reverius42]

The parent comment has a lot of "if this" and "if that", but the linked Wikipedia article has a thorough sequence of events. The point is clearly: we don't need to surmise.

[ipython]

Unfortunately, the administration wants it both ways- if you were on the Capitol grounds on January 6, 2021, you were simply part of a "peaceful tour group". If you stand to the side of an ICE agent in Minneapolis, you are a "domestic terrorist", deserve to be murdered in cold blood, and any attempts to investigate further will be stonewalled.

So it's hard to take their characterization seriously when they have demonstrated that there is a clear double standard, depending on whether you are a FoT (Friend of Trump).

[selectodude]

“For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law.”

Oscar R. Benavides

[felixgallo]

'they' is doing a lot of work. This guy wasn't even there.

[BobbyJo]

You don't have to be present for the act to be part of the conspiracy...

[saintfire]

You presumably need to convict the conspirator on evidence that doesn't consist of having published documents on your person.

[shimman]

What hogwash. Resistance is as American as the founding of the country, acting like there is a "right way" to protest is deeply antihuman.

[Manuel_D]

The "protestors" shot someone, if that's not the wrong way to protest then what is?

[wak90]

The "officer" was chasing people on foot and drew his weapon. He was then shot.

Given the Pretti and Good murders, in my opinion this is a clear cut case of self defense.

[Manuel_D]

Resisting arrest isn't a justification for shooting a law enforcement officer. The law enforcement officer had a pretty solid reason to draw his firearm, given that the rioters also had firearms.

I'm really baffled by the line of reasoning here. People, armed with guns, tried to break into a government facility. The law enforcement officers proceeded to try and arrest the rioters, and the rioters shot one of the officers.

In what world is this justifiable self defense?

[wak90]

Your interpretation of the facts and institutions here are thoroughly alien to me.

There's so much unpacking to be done I'm not sure I have the time on my smoke break but I'll give it a shot.

First, law enforcement as a concept is not static. It is a social construct. For me, the only acceptable reason for LE to draw a firearm is to exercise deadly force to protect civilians from a deadly force. For you, it seems you find it justifiable for agents of the state to exercise deadly force against people for vandalism and protest. I do not accept your view. Calling people rioters doesn't really change any facts except to bias the reader against them. Stating that the protesters were armed is not a good argument either. In Texas it is legal to open carry firearms so that is not a justification for deadly force.

You don't actually know that these people tried to break into a government facility. The case centers around the protesters allegedly luring law enforcement out of the facility. Sort of the opposite. Then the prosecution said the intent was to create an ambush.

But all of that is "well technically". The root here is that ICE is now an unaccountable irregular military equipped occupation force. When someone, anyone, raises a firearm toward you, you can either get shot to death and hope they get convicted after the fact (and again I point to Pretti and Good) or you defend yourself and then deal with survivor problems later.

Just because someone has a badge and a uniform does not mean you don't have a right to defend yourself from them, even if the courts are not honoring that right.

[xdennis]

Why the scare quotes? Are you denying he was a cop?

[wak90]

They were protesting an ICE facility. Sort of famous for not wearing uniforms and hiding their faces. Maybe you think these tactics are justified but it has led to a lot of police impersonation.

[Griffinsauce]

This depends a lot what evil you're protesting.

[thunderfork]

An individual shot someone, unless you think multiple people were helping pull the trigger.

[Manuel_D]

This was a coordinated group of people who procured body armor, radios, and firearms, and planned to break into a Federal facility. Responsibility for this incident doesn't rest exclusively on the hands of the shooter.

An analogy is Enrique Tarrio's arrest in the wake of January 6th. Right wingers complained that he wasn't even in the capital during the riot. But of course that's not evidence his innocence. Even though he didn't personally participate in the putsch, he was still held responsible for organizing it (not for long on account of his pardon, unfortunately, but he was still rightfully convicted).

[thunderfork]

Responsibility is a separate question from correctly reporting on the events that occurred. "A protestor shot someone" is correct, "a protestor shot someone and the group is culpable" could be argued, but "the protestors shot someone" is simply untrue.

[the_real_cher]

America shot a bunch of people in the 1700s protesting the King of England

[Manuel_D]

No, the colonies didn't protest the rebelled. The colonies procured arms, raised an army, and fought attempts by the British to reassert control.

It wasn't a protest, it was a war.

[the_real_cher]

Are there wars where one party isnt protesting?

[totetsu]

All the best discussion of this is on sites that I wouldn’t want to link to on HN incase It puts me on a list in line for a 30 year prison sentence

[vrganj]

Will you look at that, the authoritarian suppression of opposition speech is already working!

[sourcecodeplz]

prob zerohedge, i can say it. no need to link it.

[totetsu]

No I wasn’t thinking far-right libertarian I was thinking far-left anarchistic, haha

[nylonstrung]

Insane to think they'd have gotten a small fraction of the sentence had they been distributing CSAM they produced instead

Apparently Marxist film reviews and gardening tips are more criminal than child pornography

[jmyeet]

This isn't even a theoretical comparison. Consider the case of popular far-right influencer Dom Lucre. In 2023, he uploaded screenshots from what is apparently a "known" CSAM video. Not only that but he watermarked the screenshots, showing he had the screenshots on a computer he had access to and likely had access to the source video itself. Mere possession of this should land you in jail.

One side of the story is that Elon Musk personally intervened to unban him for this [1], which is a whole other aspect to this. But the Feds, as far as we know, never charged him. This leads many (including myself) to believe Dom Lucre is an asset to the FBI already.

Jeffrey Epstein was charged for his pedophile ring. Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted but is now sitting in a Work camp she should never be in for her crimes. And she was charged with trafficking. To whom exactly? Nobody has ever been charged or even named as being who minors were trafficked to. At least 4 presidents have sat on a mountain of evidence of this and done precisely nothing. The last president (Biden) and his AG (Garland) even sat on these files when the current president was credibly implicated.

And of course there are the January 6 ringleaders who were convicted of seditious conspiracy (22, 18 and 18 years) for attempting to overthrow the government and storming the Capitol. All pardoned now of course.

But sure, 30 years for moving a box of zines.

[1]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/07/27/twitter-...

[throwawayffffas]

> ... like these two were accused of planning a murder in advance, ...

The 30 years is for evidence tampering. The rest have been convicted of various terrorist charges. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention...

It's really funny because all of this has played out in the past with people that actually conspired to do all that and more and walked away free. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Smith_sedition_trial

That case, the incredibly bad handling of Ruby Ridge and Waco put a real freeze on the FBI dealing with domestic terrorism, and then the focus moved outward with 9/11.

But now "domestic terrorism" is priority number 1. Enjoy your choices folks.