Journalists Covering Inauguration Protests Face ‘Felony Riot’ Charges

Luciana · January 24, 2017, 09:17:34 PM

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/24/journalists-charged-felonies-trump-inauguration-unrest

Trump's administration is having journalists that covered the riots on inauguration day charged with felonies, apparently

Hello, fascism.

Ian · January 24, 2017, 09:18:53 PM

What news outlets went into detail over it?

Luciana · January 24, 2017, 09:24:05 PM

Quote from: Ian on January 24, 2017, 09:18:53 PM

What news outlets went into detail over it?

None to my knowledge

Turkey · January 24, 2017, 09:26:35 PM

Quote from: Luciana on January 24, 2017, 09:17:34 PM

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/24/journalists-charged-felonies-trump-inauguration-unrest

Trump's administration is having journalists (...) charged with felonies

What exactly does Trump's administration have to do with it? They were arrested and arraigned by the city.

Ian · January 24, 2017, 09:28:05 PM

So every major news outlet is having their journalists arrested? Funny how Spencer said the new administration wants to have friendlier relations with the media. The White House also warned about making fun of Barron Trump.

Korra · January 24, 2017, 09:53:34 PM

ΚΑΤΑΝΑΛΩΤΗΣ · January 25, 2017, 12:02:43 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Flee · January 25, 2017, 03:25:48 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Mr. Psychologist · January 25, 2017, 07:32:16 AM

The first souls to be sacrificed to the Golden Throne.

In death they find a greater purpose than their lives.

Anonymous (User Deleted) · January 25, 2017, 09:11:13 AM

Quote from: H. T. on January 24, 2017, 09:26:35 PM

What exactly does Trump's administration have to do with it? They were arrested and arraigned by the city.

Quote from: Flee on January 25, 2017, 03:25:48 AM

This. Trump probably has a decent amount of influence over the Attorney General's decisions, but this seems to be all local law enforcement and judiciary. I don't think it's fair to pin this on Trump.

>be an obvious authoritarian
>be a "law & order" president (his words)
>supports private prison industry
>blames media for being liars even when they're observably correct
>wants to sue the media out of business for doing their job

It's hard for me to not see a trickle-down effect here. Law enforcement (especially the FBI) loves Trump since he'll let them take the gloves off. All the better if the pesky media is afraid or otherwise unable to do their job as watchdog.

DAS B00T x2 · January 25, 2017, 09:14:41 AM

And people think I'm reactionary... Turkey is absolutely right and this is just Metropolitan Police freaking out and arresting anyone near the scenes of disturbance.

Alternative Facts · January 25, 2017, 09:26:50 AM

Quote from: DAS B00T x2 on January 25, 2017, 09:14:41 AM

And people think I'm reactionary... Turkey is absolutely right and this is just Metropolitan Police freaking out and arresting anyone near the scenes of disturbance.

For once I agree with Das.

Turkey · January 25, 2017, 10:24:40 AM

Quote from: Kupo & the Two G-strings on January 25, 2017, 09:11:13 AM

Quote from: H. T. on January 24, 2017, 09:26:35 PM
What exactly does Trump's administration have to do with it? They were arrested and arraigned by the city.
Quote from: Flee on January 25, 2017, 03:25:48 AM
This. Trump probably has a decent amount of influence over the Attorney General's decisions, but this seems to be all local law enforcement and judiciary. I don't think it's fair to pin this on Trump.
>be an obvious authoritarian
>be a "law & order" president (his words)
>supports private prison industry
>blames media for being liars even when they're observably correct
>wants to sue the media out of business for doing their job

It's hard for me to not see a trickle-down effect here. Law enforcement (especially the FBI) loves Trump since he'll let them take the gloves off. All the better if the pesky media is afraid or otherwise unable to do their job as watchdog.

I see a lot of correlation and zero causation.

Ian · January 25, 2017, 11:04:56 AM

To be fair on this one, the media did objectively lie during his President-elect status. They fucking said he had a piss fetish with Russians. I'd be anal about the media too if they were running off with stories like that.

Quote from: Kupo & the Two G-strings on January 25, 2017, 09:11:13 AM

>blames media for being liars

Anonymous (User Deleted) · January 25, 2017, 11:44:41 AM

Quote from: DAS B00T x2 on January 25, 2017, 09:14:41 AM

And people think I'm reactionary... Turkey is absolutely right and this is just Metropolitan Police freaking out and arresting anyone near the scenes of disturbance.

Quote from: H. T. on January 25, 2017, 10:24:40 AM

I see a lot of correlation and zero causation.

Mass arrests are questionably legal and probably a civil rights violation. We don't need to normalize this behavior.

Law and order NY mayor Rudy Giuliani, Trump surrogate and cybersecurity advisor, thought it perfectly fine to break the law to defend the NYPD.

Quote

Eric Adams, co-founder of 100 Blacks in Law Enforcement Who Care, said he was particularly outraged that Mr. Giuliani and Mr. Safir released details from Mr. Dorismond's criminal record from 1987, when he was a juvenile and the case file was sealed by the court.

Trump surrogate, transition helper and mass surveillance magnate Peter Thiel thought it perfectly fine to use his company's apparatuses to launch a smear campaign against journalists who hurt their industry.

Quote

Palantir gained notoriety in 2011 after the hacking collective LulzSec dumped thousands of hacked emails from HBGary Federal, a firm collaborating with Palantir to pitch clients, revealing plans to use Palantir’s data analysis tools on a project to spy on labor unions, journalists, and activist groups on behalf of business interests. The proposal detailed a variety of surveillance techniques, including a PowerPoint presentation calling for the use of malware to steal data from target computers.

Palantir and HBGary Federal denied that the plans were acted upon and said they were merely part of an ongoing discussion, though the hacked emails revealed that the chief executive and board of Palantir signed off on the proposal.

I'm not a fool. I don't need to see Trump personally cheering on arrests to see the impact he has and will have on policing.

Quote from: Ian on January 25, 2017, 11:04:56 AM

To be fair on this one, the media did objectively lie during his President-elect status. They fucking said he had a piss fetish with Russians. I'd be anal about the media too if they were running off with stories like that.

I mean, it's not like the media didn't invite that anger and skepticism towards themselves. But it's also sort of a pot/kettle scenario.

Flee · January 25, 2017, 11:47:35 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

DAS B00T x2 · January 25, 2017, 11:59:31 AM

They'll be let off with no charges and free to sue the district for wrongful arrest soon enough, Kupo.

Anonymous (User Deleted) · January 25, 2017, 12:02:57 PM

Quote from: Flee on January 25, 2017, 11:47:35 AM

I'm not seeing it. Gotta disagree with you fully. The protests and arrests took place before Trump was even president. This happened in DC, a left-leaning stronghold. I'd be the first to call out Trump on his bullshit if I thought he was actually involved, but I see zero causation here.

Reporters got caught up in protests at the biggest political event in years. Thousands of protesters, riots and violence was expected. The police acted firmly and took aim at the most unruly and violent ones. And as unfortunate as it is, these people got caught up in the crowd and were mistaken for something they're not. In the middle of the tensions and the mess, I can't honestly blame the police for this either.

Biggest thing here is their appearance. These guys don't look like reporters in the traditional sense. They don't wear jackets with "PRESS" on them. They're not standing at the sideline with a crew, van and cameraman. These people were independent freelance journalists, documentary producers and even "live-streamers". They're running in the middle of protesting and out of control crowds with nothing more than a smartphone in their hand to stream, tweet or record what's going on, which is exactly what thousands of non-journalists were doing that day too.

>police identify rioters and excessive protesters
>take the entire group down and arrest them
>"dude I'm press can't you tell by the fact I'm holding an iphone and am flashing you a card?"
>ok buddy, no time for this so you're just going with the others because you were undistinguishably a part of this crowd

If they are indeed just press they should definitely get off and anything else would be unacceptable. But blaming this on Trump? Nah man, these were just reporters that didn't look any different from the protesters and rioters so they got caught up in the police arresting parts of the crowd. You can say it's excessive, but I don't agree with what you've said so far.

See my previous post. Lack of personal involvement is a rather arbitrarily high standard to set when the subject is a public figure, and also POTUS.

Something about 'not dressed like a journalist' sounds like bullshit somehow. They're not supposed to stand out to begin with, at least because 1) that makes them a target for law enforcement (this does not apply solely to journalism in oppressive nations) and 2) anyone could 'dress like a journalist' and do some false flag op.

It's not like 'access journalism' where you dress up, get an ID card, sit in the comfy White House briefing room and be a stenographer.

Alternative Facts · January 25, 2017, 12:25:18 PM

Quote from: Ian on January 25, 2017, 11:04:56 AM

To be fair on this one, the media did objectively lie during his President-elect status. They fucking said he had a piss fetish with Russians. I'd be anal about the media too if they were running off with stories like that.

Quote from: Kupo & the Two G-strings on January 25, 2017, 09:11:13 AM
>blames media for being liars

Only one 'reputable' media outlet reported that detail from what I saw - every other outlet reported what CNN said, which is that President Obama and Trump were given a two page summary of the claims, without going into detail.

Trump and his team lumped both together, when they shouldn't have.

Ian · January 25, 2017, 12:31:56 PM

The media said that there was high credibility to those claims though. Basically they wanted to run the story but wanted to be absolved of responsibility so we heard nonstop "The sources from Buzzfeed are very much credible!" without actually telling us what makes it credible. All the while no one would report all the debunking that was going on. There was so much wrong with the "Report" but the fact no one would point that out shows how much they were praying for it to be true.

Quote from: Icy on January 25, 2017, 12:25:18 PM

Only one 'reputable' media outlet reported that detail from what I saw - every other outlet reported what CNN said, which is that President Obama and Trump were given a two page summary of the claims, without going into detail.

Trump and his team lumped both together, when they shouldn't have.

Alternative Facts · January 25, 2017, 12:39:19 PM

Quote from: Ian on January 25, 2017, 12:31:56 PM

The media said that there was high credibility to those claims though.

High credibility to the claim that "POTUS and PEOTUS were briefed on the dossier." None of the media organizations with actual credibility (Sorry Buzzfeed) ran with the story of "TRUMP LIKES TO BE PISSED ON", and most of them even went out of the way to say that they've investigates said claims for months and were unable to verify them. A handful of them did link to the Buzzfeed article when saying that it was published, but none outright claimed that the dossier was accurate or credible.

Everyone from CNN, to the NYT, to WaPo, to even MotherJones outright said they did not condone what Buzzfeed did, that it violated every journalistic ethic out there, and that the story they were running was congruent from the original CNN story.

Quote from: Ian on January 25, 2017, 12:31:56 PM

Basically they wanted to run the story but wanted to be absolved of responsibility so we heard nonstop "The sources from Buzzfeed are very much credible!" without actually telling us what makes it credible.

Again, wrong. They weren't claiming that the Buzzfeed sources were credible (At least from my recollection. If you have stories saying otherwise, go ahead and post).

They were saying that the intelligence sources that stated "Trump and Obama were briefed on this" were credible, because you had people like Kellyanne Conway and other Trump advisors vehemently denying any intel briefing had these claims and tying CNN and Buzzfeed together.

Of course, ironically, Conway and other Trump advisors couldn't definitely know whether the briefing contained the dossier summary because they weren't there either.

Go back and read the claims of credibility, or better yet, watch the Anderson Cooper segment on the topic - it wasn't Buzzfeed credibility they defended, but their intelligence sources that said "Trump was briefed on this with two pages attached to the briefing."

Quote from: Ian on January 25, 2017, 12:31:56 PM

All the while no one would report all the debunking that was going on.

Again, go back and read the reports. The actual media organizations reporting was not about the contents of the dossier - but that Trump had been briefed on it. The actual story was never about the contents of the 35 pages.

Ian · January 25, 2017, 01:23:22 PM

The New York Times

Keep in mind they did mention Trump receiving the report of the allegations, but they did cover what was in the "report" and and went into detail. It wasn't just briefing Trump on the memo. They also mention that the intelligence agencies find the leaker highly credible, even if they can't verify the claims; CNN does this as well.

Oddly enough, I can't get anything out of the WaPo at all. The only mention of the event comes from a blog post on urine jokes trending after it occurred. Either WaPo removed their articles on the subject or they have odd search specifics to get to their important articles because keywords such as "Trump Russia Memo" doesn't bring up anything on their site other than recent post-inauguration events and the blog post mentioned earlier.

Alternative Facts · January 25, 2017, 01:41:21 PM

Quote from: Ian on January 25, 2017, 01:23:22 PM

The New York Times

Keep in mind they did mention Trump receiving the report of the allegations, but they did cover what was in the "report" and and went into detail. It wasn't just briefing Trump on the memo. They also mention that the intelligence agencies find the leaker highly credible, even if they can't verify the claims; CNN does this as well.

Interesting, I stand corrected that the NYTimes reported on the contents. I'll give it a bit more of a read once my class lets out.

Quote from: Ian on January 25, 2017, 01:23:22 PM

Oddly enough, I can't get anything out of the WaPo at all. The only mention of the event comes from a blog post on urine jokes trending after it occurred. Either WaPo removed their articles on the subject or they have odd search specifics to get to their important articles because keywords such as "Trump Russia Memo" doesn't bring up anything on their site other than recent post-inauguration events and the blog post mentioned earlier.

WaPo search has always been bad. I'll see if I can find it.

Flee · January 25, 2017, 02:05:32 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

PSU · January 25, 2017, 03:30:18 PM

Quote from: H. T. on January 24, 2017, 09:26:35 PM

Quote from: Luciana on January 24, 2017, 09:17:34 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/24/journalists-charged-felonies-trump-inauguration-unrest

Trump's administration is having journalists (...) charged with felonies

What exactly does Trump's administration have to do with it? They were arrested and arraigned by the city.

Everything is trumps fault, don't you know?

Turkey · January 25, 2017, 06:34:57 PM

Quote from: Kupo & the Two G-strings on January 25, 2017, 11:44:41 AM

Mass arrests are questionably legal and probably a civil rights violation. We don't need to normalize this behavior.

I can't think of a better way to normalize it than by directing that outrage onto a scapegoat president rather than the city officials actually responsible -- though I don't think the article you linked has anything to do with this whatsoever, since it calls out numerous arrests without probable cause; the "journalists" arrested here were not members of the press, but plainclothes writers using cell phones and handheld cameras, in an unlawful riot in which police rightly assume anyone not attempting to get away are active participants or instigators. As others have said, I can't imagine any of these people will actually be convicted of anything due to a lack of physical evidence.