2019-10-16 - Federal Grand Jury Subpoena

[Kulee Baba]

I understand that the US has a law right now where the popo can just roll up to your home and take your freedom cannons. At what point will you burgers be having your boating accident? Asking for a some friends.

Cop: We have a complaint that you could be a potential threat to yourself and/or others, please relinquish your guns over now.

Americans:

 

[JoshPlz]

View attachment 985835

So retaining the data for 24h is required by US law and that's the reason KF still has to log IP's at all?
I have been wondering why that would still be the case, after christchurch and the leak.

Do we know fag0t's country of residence? Would be interesting to know how fucked he is.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Ask them why Cuckerberg gets exempt from all this first

Because Facebook lets the FBI access everyones information without a warrant. Why can they do that? Because back in the 1970's the police figured out who some crazy stalker in Texas was by asking the phone company whose phone number was calling some rando lady and the court said that info was not his, it was the phone companies and a warrant was not needed.

So because of one autistic sped in Texas 40 years ago the government claims they no longer need things like warrants or probable cause to seize every iota of information related to your digital activities.

Depending on how contrarian @Null is feeling, he could in theory challenge the whole supposition and do what that Phone Company should have done all those decades ago and demand an actual warrant rather then a strongly worded demand for evidence production. Companies like facebook never oppose subpoenas because why would they? The Government would just get pissy with them and cost them more money. Of course, a big multinational like Facebook is in a much better position to have a dick measuring contest with Federal Prosecutors then the KiwiFarms is, and the heroic stand would most likely just end in a full butt fucking.

 

[Shady Attorney]

KF retains information to allow the public to understand what happened at the Christchurch shooting
US: oh that’s nice. We need that info. Can we have it?

KF retains information to allow the public to understand what happened with the Halle, Germany shooting
US: throws subpoena We need the info of everyone that’s ever even looked at the site. Can we have it?

Why such a different reaction?

 

[Null]

@Null: You talked about your intention to move to Poland a while ago, that's another thing where relocating "Lolcow LLC" could prove beneficial.
Running a small business/tech startup is one way to get a permanent work/residence permit in Russia, for instance.
I'd imagine they have somewhat similar requirements in Poland; that might be something worth looking into.

Bro, you can't just hide from the US. Regardless of all the bullshit the US law is still the most favorable to this site.

To get self-employment status in RusFed/Ukr/Poland, you need thousands of dollars of foreign investment on top of paying for a lawyer to handle the absolute hell that is post-soviet bureaucracy. Then, congratulations, you're in a country that will probably extradite you to the US regardless of a formal treaty (See: Taiwan, USA, Cody Wilson). Countries hostile to the US with the capabilities of saying no (China, Russia) may still extradite you in exchanges, and neither of those countries have laws friendlier to the site and its purpose than the US does.

On top of that, all my banking is US based. Not having a US bank account sucks. I can still technically, legally, sell T-Shirts - even though finding a payment processor is hell. If you're wanted in the US, you can't. Bank accounts will be frozen, assets stolen, t-shirts unsold. If the financing situation is bad now, it would be a new level of total nightmare if I had to rely on things like Yandex.Wallet and Bitcoin exclusively.

I get it's a really funny joke to say "haha Null is on the run wowee, good luck enforcing THAT ONE dumb Amerifats!" but that's fucking ridiculous and you're an idiot if you think that's how it works. There is no place in the world safe enough to harbor a high value target. Even with Snowden, if he still posed a threat to the US national interests, they'd just kill him.

 

[Ellesse_warrior]

Because Facebook lets the FBI access everyones information without a warrant. Why can they do that? Because back in the 1970's the police figured out who some crazy stalker in Texas was by asking the phone company whose phone number was calling some rando lady and the court said that info was not his, it was the phone companies and a warrant was not needed.

So because of one autistic sped in Texas 40 years ago the government claims they no longer need things like warrants or probable cause to seize every iota of information related to your digital activities.

Depending on how contrarian @Null is feeling, he could in theory challenge the whole supposition and do what that Phone Company should have done all those decades ago and demand an actual warrant rather then a strongly worded demand for evidence production. Companies like facebook never oppose subpoenas because why would they? The Government would just get pissy with them and cost them more money. Of course, a big multinational like Facebook is in a much better position to have a dick measuring contest with Federal Prosecutors then the KiwiFarms is, and the heroic stand would most likely just end in a full butt fucking.

It's more that criminal law trumps privacy law. You can't use a privacy law as an excuse for not providing information requested as part of a criminal investigation. Facebook does frequently oppose subpoenas.

 

[Mushroom Soup]

And this is why you should only post nice things.

 

[Son of Sparda 84]

I'm completely lost. What the hell is the issue

 

[Gustav Schuchardt]

And this is why you should only post nice things.

Niceness - so important it's now mandatory.

I'm completely lost. What the hell is the issue

Someone download the Halle shooter's manifesto. The US DOJ subpoena Josh to hand over any information he had on the uploaded to a Federal Grand Jury in New York City and to appear.

Though actually the subpoena is a bit unclear. On page 2 it says to appear and on page 3 it says personal appearance is not required if the documents are provided.

This link reckons the bit on the first page about not disclosing is not valid, though this is not the same as saying it is OK to disclose.

The Federal Grand Jury: Ten Tips for the Unwary | Solomon L. Wisenberg. | Washington D.C.

Contact white collar criminal defense lawyers Solomon in Washington, D.C. office of Solomon L. Wisenberg.

www.wisenberglaw.com

Federal grand jurors, grand jury court reporters and the prosecutors running the grand jury are under a strict duty to keep any "matter occurring before the grand jury" a secret. This duty is codified in Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Violations of this rule can result in sanctions or criminal contempt charges against a prosecutor. But the rule of secrecy does not apply to federal grand jury witnesses. If you are a grand jury witness, you have the right to tell the whole world about your grand jury testimony. Of course, it may not be in your interest to do this-you may want to keep your appearance before the grand jury under close wraps. You need to understand, however, that it is your call-not the government's. But some federal prosecutors attach cover letters to grand jury subpoenas, informing the witness that revealing the contents, or even the existence, of the subpoena "may impede" a criminal investigation. These cover letters then "request" non-disclosure of the subpoena (and/or the documents requested in the subpoena) and ask the witness to notify the prosecutor if the witness has any "problems" with non-disclosure. You should by no means put up with this nonsense. If you receive a cover letter like this, you should consider having your attorney write a polite response to the prosecutor or the case agent including the following language: "Your cover letter requests non-disclosure of the subpoena (and/or the documents requested in the subpoena) and asks to be notified if there are problems with such non-disclosure. I am reluctant to have my client take on a formal affirmative obligation, regarding either non-disclosure of the subpoena or notification of problems with such non-disclosure, beyond the requirements, if any, found in Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e) or in some other statutory or court authority you can point me to. Rest assured, however, that my client has absolutely no desire to compromise your investigation or to publicize the existence of either the subpoena or your investigation."

It ends with this ominous note

10. Be Careful.
Other than violating certain testimonial and constitutional privileges, the federal grand jury can pretty much do what it wants. Federal grand jury subpoenas are almost never quashed on grounds that they call for irrelevant information or go beyond the grand jury's authority. Federal grand juries have a maximum of 23 members, 16 of whom must be present to form a quorum. Indictments are returned by a vote of 12 or more members. Federal grand juries typically sit for a term of 18 months and meet at regular intervals. As a practical matter, a grand jury will almost always return an indictment presented to it by a prosecutor. This is the basis for Judge Sol Wachtler's famous saying that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to "indict a ham sandwich." Testifying or providing documents to such a powerful body entails grave risks. You should never attempt to face these risks without the help of an experienced white collar criminal defense attorney.

Like most legal procedures it is full of traps for the unaware. For example if you testify twice and the two testimonies are inconsistent, that is in itself a crime which they can prosecute you for!

Some federal prosecutors like to call witnesses back to the grand jury to testify on multiple occasions. This is dangerous, because it can cause you to inadvertently give inconsistent testimony under oath. Under §1623(c) of the federal criminal code, the government can prosecute you for testifying to two irreconcilably contradictory statements under oath, and the government does not even have to prove that either of the statements in question was false. When you are called back to the grand jury to testify for a second time, your attorney should insist on your right to review ahead of time the official tran of your first session. In this way, you can refresh your recollection as to your earlier testimony, correct any mistakes, and prepare yourself for the upcoming session. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently ruled that grand jury witnesses, even if they have not been called back to testify for a second time, have an inherent right to review a tran of their earlier testimony.

Even a slippery bastard like Bill Clinton could be caught up like this - he was done for lying to a grand jury.

 

[mindlessobserver]

It's more that criminal law trumps privacy law. You can't use a privacy law as an excuse for not providing information requested as part of a criminal investigation. Facebook does frequently oppose subpoenas.

The issue is not that criminal investigations should not happen, the issue is that what happens now frequently amounts to fishing expeditions. They don't know if a crime has been committed but for one reason or another they think one MAY have been committed, or they just really want to nail someone to floor. In which case they go rooting though everything to try and turn up something they can use to build a case. A case for what? Well they don't know. But they will find "something", of that you can be sure.

These are the sorts of practices the 4th amendment is supposed to prevent. A frequent and recurring problem had been that when a citizen pissed off the great and the good, they would immediately start digging through the persons shit to try and find something they could use to charge them with. And since nobody is a saint you are always able to find "something". The 4th Amendment requires the government to actually know what it is they are looking for before they go looking for it. If you suspect someone of murder, you get a warrant to search their house for the murder weapon, or collect DNA, and you can explain to a judge why you reasonably suspect this person of Murder. What they are doing now though is simply showing up at your house randomly to check if you got any dead bodies in it. And if they happen to find your weed stash as they do it, well bully to you.

 

[zyclonPD]

From his Wikipedia article of "Greatest Hits."

Major prosecutions announced by Berman

U.S. v Jeffrey Epstein[63][64]

So the guy that let Epstein slip through the cracks is back to fight on behalf of Germany's feelings about an internet shitpost.

>World leaders are all pedophiles, nah man.
>An internet forum made fun of a shooter? I got dis

 

[AmpleApricots]

I doubt they give a shit about the Halle shooting, I'd more interpret this as an attack on free-speech zones on the internet like kiwifarms. Shootings like from the Halle tard are a godsent to governments anywhere because they can clamp down on freedoms in the name of "security".

I'm also very sure my government is barely aware that a place like kiwifarms exists. That's also why Null didn't get a nasty letter to take the shit off the godamn internet. The US gov is on it's own in this thing.

EDIT: The unfiltered internet is a scary thing to people in power everywhere, because it enables people to exchange information without having it filtered through their buddies in the mass media. They can't put a favorable slant on forum posts.

 

[James Edwin]

"provide all information including...
7. Cookies"

I... don't think they understand how this internet stuff works

Billing information makes it sound like a fucking scam email

 

[Hyperbolic Steroids]

The issue is not that criminal investigations should not happen, the issue is that what happens now frequently amounts to fishing expeditions. They don't know if a crime has been committed but for one reason or another they think one MAY have been committed, or they just really want to nail someone to floor. In which case they go rooting though everything to try and turn up something they can use to build a case. A case for what? Well they don't know. But they will find "something", of that you can be sure.

These are the sorts of practices the 4th amendment is supposed to prevent. A frequent and recurring problem had been that when a citizen pissed off the great and the good, they would immediately start digging through the persons shit to try and find something they could use to charge them with. And since nobody is a saint you are always able to find "something". The 4th Amendment requires the government to actually know what it is they are looking for before they go looking for it. If you suspect someone of murder, you get a warrant to search their house for the murder weapon, or collect DNA, and you can explain to a judge why you reasonably suspect this person of Murder. What they are doing now though is simply showing up at your house randomly to check if you got any dead bodies in it. And if they happen to find your weed stash as they do it, well bully to you.

As it stands I agree, I don't know what they could possibly be looking for and I don't think they do either. This is some Minority Report tier thought crimes prosecution going on. I cannot see where the crime in reposting this manifesto is when uncle Google can reveal the same info in a quick google search. Also that "suspected felony" bit... what fucking suspected felony? Could you be any more vague with these proceedings?

 

[Gustav Schuchardt]

"provide all information including...
7. Cookies"

I... don't think they understand how this internet stuff works

Billing information makes it sound like a fucking scam email

It's probably a form letter that just lists all the data that a website may have which would be useful to law enforcement to track down a user. The fact that Kiwi Farms accepts donations via Visa giftcards and crypto, encourages VPN use and only keeps data for 24 hour is not something they're going to look into. They'll just send out the form letter and leave it to the recipient to explain how they don't have that sort of info.

 

[thismanlies]

I'm confused, is the US Government trying to pull a New Zealand and get information on a guy for sharing information about a terror attack?

If that's the case, that sounds unconstitutional. How many times has the mass media shown footage of airplanes hitting the Twin Towers on 9/11?

 

[Your Weird Fetish]

How the fuck is this even illegal? Fuck New York.

 

[Null]

I strongly believe they send these letters out en masse without any consideration to what they actually fucking want and it should be illegal for them to operate like this.

The terminology "neoprint" and "photoprint" seems to be exclusively used terminology between Facebook and the DOJ. This leaked internal PDF from Facebook Corporate about handling LEO inquiries is the only other document I can find that talks about neoprints.

It's literally fucking nonsense to me, and without this LEAKED document I'd have no fucking clue what the dipshits were even asking for.

 

[MelloYello]

Even with Snowden, if he still posed a threat to the US national interests, they'd just kill him.

I really don't anticipate nations without an extradition agreement would extradite for... what, running a somewhat controversial website?
Much less some sealed indictments about hypothetical, not otherwise specified, third-party felonies.

Maybe I'm too optimistic on this issue, but I just don't think we've reached that level of clownworld yet.
There's no globally enforcable thought-policing, for now.

 

[Null]

I really don't anticipate nation without an extradition agreement would extradite for, what, running a somewhat controversial website?
Much less some sealed indictments about hypothetical, not otherwise specified, third-party felonies.

Maybe I'm too optimistic on this issue, but I just don't think we've reached that level of clownworld yet.

What did Cody Wilson do to get extradited out of fucking Taiwan?
Did you even read the paragraph about bank accounts?

The question many people are asking right now is how much bullshit I am willing to tolerate.