DU refuses Secret Service request for info on death-threat posters
posted at 4:12 pm on October 26, 2006 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Abortion, terrorism, assassination: nothing brings out a strong pro-privacy stance in the DUers like the prospect of a body count.
HERE IS WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW:
The administrators of Democratic Underground take the privacy of our visitors very seriously. Even though the two people in question had already been banned from our website, we will not hand over any personal information from them or from any of our visitors unless we are legally compelled to do so.
I.e., they’re going to make the Secret Service go get subpoenas.
One hundred comments and counting in that thread thus far, by the way. I didn’t read them all but I did skim them. If there’s even one calling on them to turn over the information, I missed it.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
It should take the Secret Service almost no time at all to get a subpeona. Asking them, probably just made it easier.
americanpundit on October 26, 2006 at 4:18 PM
But don’t question their patriotism.
EEprom on October 26, 2006 at 4:20 PM
OMG,what a whine fest this will be! I’m not making light of the charges,but it should be hilarious.
bbz123 on October 26, 2006 at 4:21 PM
Privacy is so important to them… Unless you are Conservative, then you deserve to have everyhting about you, your family, and you dog posted on the internet for all the “peace-loving” world to see…
Graceless on October 26, 2006 at 4:22 PM
And I just saw this post which others have agreed with:
So even if the SS does get a subpeona to investigate a threat against the President; these nutroots want to… what? Fight back with the ACLU?
dalewalt on October 26, 2006 at 4:31 PM
Was the poster who threatened gonna “sthlap Buth Sthilly?”
DwnSouthJukin on October 26, 2006 at 4:32 PM
They did ban these guys and call them trolls. Of course, they had to be trolls because their views were so divergent from the average DU poster. Bwaaaahaaaaahaaaaa.
Valiant on October 26, 2006 at 4:35 PM
They’re also convinced that it was some “crazy RW’ers” whose only reason for posting the threat was to get DU in trouble.
“They’re coming to take me away, ho ho, they’re coming to take me away, hee hee”
dalewalt on October 26, 2006 at 4:35 PM
They’ve blamed the Secret Service, “freepers”, the government in general, probably President Bush himself( I havent seen it…yet.) Like usual, the monologue-ists blame everyone but one of their own.
BTW, That’s only the second time ever, I’ve visited/seen DU…but blame it on me if you see this, DUmmies, that’s fine.
shooter on October 26, 2006 at 4:35 PM
If by “level-headed” you mean “stark raving lunatics”.
I was a DU member once. It was a good day.
jdpaz on October 26, 2006 at 4:35 PM
That is the weird thing. Some of them will call themselves globalists, world citizens, etc.
But the one thing that seems to freak them out a lot is if you do question their patriotism.
Which can either mean that they really believe they are patriots in their heart of hearts.
Or they see that question as something that can really threaten them.
Either way, they are loopy.
Remember, I support the troops by sending aid to the other side in Falluja! I am DU patriot, hear me roar!
EFG on October 26, 2006 at 4:36 PM
Hate to be DUish with this, but it’s possible that some of these threats were trolls playing pied piper to get someone there to agree with them. I don’t have access to the original threads, so I have no way of telling.
spmat on October 26, 2006 at 4:37 PM
Those moonbats have already decided they were “Right wing shit eaters” who simply registered and posted threats against the POTUS to get the website in trouble. The admins of the DU forums tend to agree. They top it off by extolling the virtues of “level headed” liberals -who would never say or do anything that stupid- and they further denounce the “righty trolls” as being “dumb asses” for going through the trouble of causing a “disturbance” on the DU… but only getting themselves in trouble at “their homes”.
It’s another conspiracy theory, with absolutely no source or proof. While it is not beyond the realm of possibility, the whole trouble they’re experiencing with the Secret Service is soley the fault of right-winged trolls… it couldn’t possibly be their own.
pa-thet-ic
SilverStar830 on October 26, 2006 at 4:38 PM
I question the timing.
Readymade on October 26, 2006 at 4:39 PM
Ya know, if they believed it was the work of trolls, or drive-by’s or RWers, they would’ve rolled and given it up in an instant.
shooter on October 26, 2006 at 4:40 PM
And?
Allahpundit on October 26, 2006 at 4:41 PM
It was Rove and Cheney - had to be. It’s all part of the plan.
Rick on October 26, 2006 at 4:42 PM
AP, why do you hate DUers, righty trolls playing pied piper, the Secret Service, and people of all color, race, creed, gender, ability, age, height, religion, temperment, and economic status?
Seriously though, who DIDN’T expect the DU to turn this into yet another masturbatory self-congratulation session about what enlightened beings they think they are?
OHNOES on October 26, 2006 at 4:46 PM
They are totally freaking out over there about having their site monitored, and in another thread are discussing the very real possibility of what will happen should they lose in the upcomming elections.
Call it Pre-Election Stress Trauma.
DannoJyd on October 26, 2006 at 4:46 PM
And it’s much more likely that this is just some whacked-out liberals who wanted to ‘make a name for themselves’.
As far as DU being “spied upon”; uh, have they ever heard of Google? I’d be surprised if the SS didn’t search the internet the old-fashioned way to look for threats. (The DU’ers think the SS is grabbing ISP records to track them :-)
dalewalt on October 26, 2006 at 4:47 PM
This may sound facetious (and it sort of is) but shouldn’t death threats be protected under the 1st Amendment? Everyone knows you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater…actually, why can’t you yell fire in a crowded theater? Sure, it’s obnoxious, but being obnoxious isn’t unconstitutional.
But philosophically speaking, shouldn’t the 1st Amendment protect incitement to murder? Is there any Supreme Court precedent here? I’ve always thought that the 1st Amendment was designed to protect truly hateful, deplorable, vile speech. I mean, no one needs to protect speech we all agree with and find tasteful, right?
Any thoughts? Or is that just too stupid to even consider? I have lots of stupid ideas…
Enrique on October 26, 2006 at 4:49 PM
Enrique, no, a death threat, or indeed any threat to cause bodily harm, is considered assault (or is it battery; I know it’s one or the other).
And you’re not allowed to yell fire because that action can cause injury or even death (think mad stampede to escape the fire)
What’s that saying? The Constitution isn’t a suicide pact!
dalewalt on October 26, 2006 at 4:52 PM
Scary, I ALMOST wrote the very same thing!
shooter on October 26, 2006 at 4:53 PM
Uh, just re-read your post… do you not consider a death threat “hateful, deplorable, vile speech”???
dalewalt on October 26, 2006 at 4:53 PM
Plenty of precedent. There are certain narrowly defined exceptions to the First Amendment for speech that would lead to violence: “fighting words,” incitement to riot, and threats are among them.
Allahpundit on October 26, 2006 at 4:54 PM
Shush…there is no “the plan” so it shouldn’t be mentioned.
Benaiah on October 26, 2006 at 4:55 PM
Let’s see how long DU continues to exist given their pandering to “assassination chic?”
Let’s see: One search and siezure order for their computers. Another S&S for the finances. A third for their membership list. A fourth for all “back up” tapes. And a fifth for all their computer logs. Yep. It’d be hard to stay up once the feds grab all your stuff.
Followed by arrest warrants for the two goofs involved and possible indictments, including obstruction of justice, perhaps.
And a plethora of names to add to the “no-fly list,” and the list of people that get closely watched whenever the President or Vice President comes to their towns.
They’ll be off the ‘net for weeks.
Yes. I know all about the 4th Amendment and the 1st as well. And yes, DU is within their rights to ask to see a warrant before turning over the records.
If this were a simple tax case, or possible a civil defamation one, that’d be perfectly ok.
BUT, the allegation is that two DU subscribers threatened the life of the President of the United States. No one knows if it was bullshit rantings, or if a real plot is in progress. There is a distinct possibility that a human life could be taken by an assassins bullet, if the investigation is delayed.
If it had been me, I’d have given the Secret Service names and email addresses and log data. Why? Threatening the life of the President is a FELONY. If two of my subscribers had made threats against the life of the President, the last thing I want to do is get in the way OR impede an investigation that might prevent an attempt on the President’s life. Besides, obstructing the investigation could result in an obstruction of justice charge, or possible a charge for being an accessory, if an actual attempt is made.
Believe me, I’m NOT going to go to the wall for two goofs whom I allowed to register to use my blogsite, and who I had no control over.
The left is STUPID, as well as traitorous.
georgej on October 26, 2006 at 4:55 PM
DU could have done this quickly and quietly, but chose instead to make it known to all DUers so they look good - after all, DU stood up to the Bush administration all in the name of civil liberties.
Rick on October 26, 2006 at 5:02 PM
If they get the guys from DU, do you think they can pick up Kos on the way back?
quax1 on October 26, 2006 at 5:05 PM
Just a point of order, I went just a few comments down and found a couple for turning the information over:
If they all think they’re trolls, why not turn over the information?
frankj on October 26, 2006 at 5:07 PM
Go to DU and post a similar threat towards Clinton/Hillary/Kerry etc. and see how fast they turn you in to the SS.
EF on October 26, 2006 at 5:10 PM
Where the hell is Jack Bauer when you need him? (ohhhhhh……..taking a cruise to China…….can’t this government do anything right?)
Kick in the friggin door, put out a waterboard, and send what is left home to momma(bubba).
Limerick on October 26, 2006 at 5:11 PM
But can you yell allahu akbar in a crowded theater?
Skinner has to earn some liberal street cred. When your customer base is as paranoid as his, giving up troll IP addresses won’t go over so well.
rw on October 26, 2006 at 5:12 PM
Enrique,
The 1st Amendment was designed to protect speech for two primary reasons. Are you ready? Religious and political. When a group of like-thinking people have the majority of the power in the nation, it would have been possible for them to suppress opposition argument from publication without the 1st Amendment.
It does not protect speech which is obscene, or is an inctement to crime or public panic. Scaring people into a dangerous public panic is far beyond obnoxious, it can lead to injury and death. Speech which threatens (or suggests violence against) a member of the federal government is not protected, nor should it be.
And yes, there are mountains of Supreme Court precedents establishing the boundaries and limitations of protected speech.
Not quite so. No one needs to (nor should) protect speech that we all find hateful and vile. On the other hand, speech that I find hateful (see Rosie O’Donnell), but many others don’t, becomes a subjective issue and is protected by default. Proclaiming on national TV that the 2nd Amendment isn’t really a law might be stupid, but Rosie is free to say it. If she went on the air tomorrow and said that she would pay anyone willing to murder the elected leader of this nation, she would be guilty of a crime, and would not be protected by the 1st Amendment.
/tutorial
Freelancer on October 26, 2006 at 5:13 PM
What is the privacy policy at Hot Air? Wondering, just in case someone threatens President Hillary Clinton in 2009.
Valiant on October 26, 2006 at 5:16 PM
We should simply take what we want from them. I suggest a vertical assault by a couple of rifle platoons from an Airborne Division. And just to ensure that we don’t violate anyone’s freedom of speech rights . . . they will be free to say anything they like to the paratroopers in their midst.
rplat on October 26, 2006 at 5:16 PM
I was a DU member once. It was a good day.
jdpaz on October 26, 2006 at 4:35 PM
I didn’t even last an afternoon over there. As I recall, and its been a while, death threats and generally tasteless remarks were all the norm in any thread about President Bush or anyone in his administration.
BuckLEA on October 26, 2006 at 5:17 PM
(clank-clank-clank)
DU Dork: hey! do you hear something?
(clank-clank-clank)
2nd DU Dork: Wanna hit?
(clank-clank-clank)
DU Dork: yeah
Limerick on October 26, 2006 at 5:20 PM
Go to DU and post a similar threat towards Clinton/Hillary/Kerry etc. and see how fast they turn you in to the SS.
EF on October 26, 2006 at 5:10 PM
Exactly … purely a partisan maneuveur. If the threat had been against a democrat, they would have allowed the SS unfettered access.
darwin on October 26, 2006 at 5:23 PM
What georgej said.
JammieWearingFool on October 26, 2006 at 5:23 PM
Why stand up to the Secret Service? They have no dog in any political fight. Their job is simply to protect the President. Stupid DU.
darwin on October 26, 2006 at 5:27 PM
This will feed into their concept of what a fascist state is, which is anything that is not their little dream world utopia of no personal responsibility for any and all actions they may feel like engaging in on somebody else’s dime.
bbz123 on October 26, 2006 at 5:30 PM
frankj, a few posts below that show’s other DU’ers saying “no, even if they’re trolls, we shouldn’t start a precedent”. Imagine, starting a precedent of cooperation with the Secret Service.
And Valiant, I would imagine that HA would help the Secret Service in any way they can.
dalewalt on October 26, 2006 at 5:34 PM
I agree dalewait, they are probably like me ,if the guys in black sunglasses show up, I’m all “Yes Sir, No Sir, I’ll keep my hands where you can see them,Sir” .
bbz123 on October 26, 2006 at 5:38 PM
Remember when Indy media tried that crap? The feds got search warrants and seized their servers. Hopefully, they will do the same to the DUmmies.
EF on October 26, 2006 at 5:39 PM
How sure are we that there was any “request”… They could just be manufacturing this whole thing to generate outrage in their little minds. I wouldn’t put it past them!
TBinSTL on October 26, 2006 at 5:39 PM
I think an effective teacher giving a basic civics course at each of their high schools would go a long way to eliminating incidents like this. God knows I could’ve used a civics class at my HS. Would have saved me a lot of headache at the library trying to decipher me some rudimentary poli-sci through unguided self-research.
‘Course, they’d just accuse me of wanting to “round them up for re-education camp.”
Kadnine on October 26, 2006 at 5:41 PM
OMG! You’ve got to love this from the post on DU …
Yeah. We all know THAT to be true. Gag
The only “rules” they actually have for the DU is … “no alternative viewpoints allowed. Any person posting an alternative viewpoint will have the post immediately removed and account deleted.”
Gregor on October 26, 2006 at 5:55 PM
Oh, c’mon.
To be a threat, a DUer would have to leave their parents’ basement. What are the odds of that happening?
At least now I know what the DUmmieFUnnies will be discussing tomorrow. :)
Professor Blather on October 26, 2006 at 5:56 PM
Please tell me you’re making that up.
Please tell me that’s not coming from the party of “tolerance” and “diversity” and “free thought.”
Please. You’re kidding. Right?
You must be. No one could embrace that level of hypocrisy. No one.
Right?
Professor Blather on October 26, 2006 at 5:57 PM
It’s not actually posted on their rules, but I’m not making it up. They DO immediately delete anything that does not agree with them. Have you ever tried posting in there. Have you noticed they never have any opposing viewpoints? If you look through their threads … you’ll find several messages that state “message deleted.” Usually, immediately following that message is a few other messages making fun of conservatives for daring to post.
That’s why liberals believe the crap they do. They don’t even hear the other side. That’s what they’re all about.
Look at the Google bombing. Pure censorship.
Gregor on October 26, 2006 at 6:04 PM
Silly trolls forgot that if they assassinate W, Darth Cheney becomes POTUS.
That’s what’s REALLY upsetting DU.
Radish on October 26, 2006 at 6:17 PM
I’ll say it again, for the newbies and , well I just like saying it.
They are all MONOLOGUE-ISTS, the lefts new moniker. Think about it.
shooter on October 26, 2006 at 6:18 PM
All this google-bombing talk must have the NSA’s computers humming loudly.
shooter on October 26, 2006 at 6:21 PM
I like this comment:
It brought a tear to my eye. You know, because I was laughing so hard.
Yep - take away the communists, social democrats and trade unionists, and there’s no one left. I mean left, not left. Maybe I do mean left.
John from WuzzaDem on October 26, 2006 at 6:31 PM
Wow, libs having death fantasies about the President? That’d be new. These two just apparently took it a little farther than most. And to echo some others, if the ones making the threats were trolls, why protect them? This would have been an ideal time for DU to show that they a)Aren’t rabid Bush-hating lunatics, and b)Actually are patriotic. Not that either statement would be true, or that anyone would be fooled, but it would be a bit of good PR, anyway. Plus all that not obstructing justice stuff might be nice. But I guess their new slogan is
“Democratic Underground: We put the DU in DUmbass!”
ReubenJCogburn on October 26, 2006 at 6:55 PM
Here’s the law covering threats to the POTUS et al.:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000871—-000-.html
SilverStar830 on October 26, 2006 at 7:00 PM
May I ask for a PREVIEW COMMENT button once again, please?
SilverStar830 on October 26, 2006 at 7:01 PM
Sweet about DU. Let’s see if they go after UberTube next.
Coronagold on October 26, 2006 at 7:06 PM
I agree with all comments about the inanity that is, nay defines, DU. Close-minded nutbags, pretty much top to bottm.
That said, I have no problem with them asking the Secret Service to get a subpoena, and don’t consider them doing so to indicate anything bad about their intentions. I’d have a far greater problem with them simply giving up the information, uncompelled, because they disliked the posters in question.
I do question the need for them to have made a post on the matter, however. Chum in the water, under the circumstances, is unseemly.
Patton on October 26, 2006 at 7:32 PM
They said they’re going to give him “such a look!”
Jaibones on October 26, 2006 at 7:48 PM
If you’ll notice, our resident liberals that post here are awfully silent on this topic.
I wonder why?
georgej on October 27, 2006 at 1:09 AM
Man, that Law of Unintended Consequences can be a real bitch, can’t it?
p.v. cornelius on October 27, 2006 at 1:51 AM
DU? Aren’t they also known as DUmmies? Hmmm…. Somehow I think I’ve heard of them before.
pjcomix on October 27, 2006 at 9:39 AM
funny stuff pjcomix. It almost writes itself.
jdpaz on October 27, 2006 at 10:23 AM
Just some liberal bastards taking sides against America, nothing new here, move along please…
JackM on October 27, 2006 at 2:57 PM
If you’ll notice, our resident liberals that post here are awfully silent on this topic.
I wonder why?
=========================
Our resident libbies may support the traitors at DU, but they cannot defend the traitors at DU.
JackM on October 27, 2006 at 3:01 PM
oh, buncha Clever Charlies; wondering if the “KGWB” is after ‘em.
*sigh*
Claire on October 27, 2006 at 11:03 PM
Yeah, like maybe make a movie about assassinating a sitting president?
OK. As long as they are conservatives, then it’s OK with DU’ers to go after them, release their info, ’cause we all know such types are not “worthy of protection”.
/sarc
Maybe they could use it as an excuse for going the way of Air America?
(I am new at this, so I hope the qutoes above display properly.)
IrishEyes on October 28, 2006 at 2:14 PM