Un-Reasonable: Feds Declare War on Web Commenters

Liberty Leading the People
Liberty Leading the People (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I’ve previously written about Ross Ulbricht, an American political prisoner sentenced to life for the “crime” of running a business without the US government’s permission. Among libertarians, the response to Ulbricht’s abduction and show trial has been, in some cases, less than polite and temperate. Now, the state is moving against its critics.

Last week, as Ken White of Popehat reports, the US Department of Justice served Reason — a popular libertarian magazine and web site — with a grand jury subpoena demanding that it provide “any and all identifying information” it possesses regarding certain commenters on reporter Nick Gillespie’s coverage of Ulbricht’s sentencing.

Some of those commenters, it seems, waxed less than respectful of Katherine Forrest, the thug — er, “judge” — who ratified Ulbricht’s abduction and ordered it extended for life.

One or two of those commenters suggested that she should suffer the torments of hell, either in the afterlife or this one. Others referenced the use of a wood chipper to dispose of a body in the film Fargo as fitting punishment for her actions.

Just to be perfectly clear here, I agree 100% with the tone of those comments. While I have not publicly made such suggestions — I’ve limited myself to suggesting that she be thoroughly ostracized, that all persons of good character shun her — I really can’t think of any penalty that goes too far for what she has done and, presumably, intends to continue doing.

I have every right to such an opinion, and to its expression. So do you. Those rights are even enshrined in “the supreme law of the land” in which Forrest committed her atrocities (it’s in the First Amendment to the US Constitution).

This is, in a word, an outrage. But it gets worse.

The feds wanted Reason to keep the subpoena secret. It’s unclear whether they’ve issued a formal “gag order” in connection with the subpoena, but the document itself says that “[t]he Government hereby requests that you voluntarily refrain from disclosing the existence of the subpoena to any third party.”

So: The US government is trying to track down people who say things it doesn’t like — things which no reasonable person could construe as “true threats” — for possible prosecution (grand juries don’t subpoena people to offer them coffee and donuts). And it doesn’t want you to know it’s doing that.

Let that sink in. If you’ve ever doubted for a minute that America is becoming a police state, this chain of events should settle the question once and for all. The US government has declared war on free speech and the free press. It has declared war on YOU. Will you fight back?

[hat tip — Wendy McElroy]

Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

AUDIO VERSION

 

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

  • Peaceful commerce and expressing your mind are crimes, and kidnapping and caging people for decades is justice.

  • Oso_Politico

    Thug + Judge = Thudge

  • BruceMajors

    If Ross Ulbricht can go to prison for managing a platform where people sold illegal drugs, why can’t any internet platform manager go to jail if people there threaten someone? Indeed can’t we see both the Ulbricht case and the reason subpoena, along with announcements that the government plans to study anti government people on social media and regulate “trolls” who threaten women etc. as a plan for government thought control?

    • Ronney

      Fuck them and I will gladly give them my email address my phone no# etc.

  • Hey, Thomas. An underplayed aspect of this travesty, IMO, is that libertarians are being targeted. I’m not sure what the correct response is…to be more cautious? To be more audacious? Perhaps there is no correct response, only the many and varied personal reactions that fit each individual’s personality and circumstances. We are not dealing with our parents’ police state. We are dealing with the real thing and I have no real advice to give anyone at this time because I am still feeling my way toward how I am going to respond.

    • Wendy,

      Well, I’m no expert … but I’ve personally decided that being more audacious is both the safest AND most effective course.

      They’re going after anonymous/pseudonymous commenters who say things of flexible interpretation first because it’s easy to make them look sinister. Better to put one’s name/face on what one says, and to be very specific and forthright. Let the state be the sinister-looking party.

      Of course, the stuff here at Garrison has limits precisely because it’s intended for publication in the somewhat cautious mainstream media. I’m a little friskier over at my blog 🙂

      • This sound much like Ernest Hancock’s general methodology. He talks with local police before he engages in any activity that the media might characterize as provocative open carry activities.

      • Tom…you just answered a question that was implicit in my response to Ronney. I happen to disagree with you because I believe there are many, many ways to make the same point, the same resistance without being legally or provocatively (to police) audacious. We really need to go out and eat good Mexican food late into the night, my friend. Maybe neither of us will be convinced…but, hey *good* Mexican food.

        • Wendy,

          You’ll never catch me saying no to good Mexican food!

          I agree that there are many ways to go about things, and I don’t begrudge anyone their choices as to which methods to use (except, of course, any involving initiation of force).

          But my own opinion is that we’re past the point where getting legally or provocatively audacious is called for — at least on the part of those who are interested in doing so.

          • Thomas…it has been a while since I’ve given a lot of thought to strategy but your response illustrates a basic truth which I think many people miss. I vividly remember the LP-anarchy debate in terms of “strategy” rather than morality, etc. The question kept being asked, “what is the most effective strategy for liberty?” And I thought the question 100% missed the point…well, on several levels…but let me address merely one of them.

            Effective cannot possibly be evaluated without knowing the personality, preferences, and the entire package that *is* the activist involved. Voting is a seriously limp strategy when espoused by the likes of me who thinks it is a fraud…and that’s even if you could convince me it was moral and effective. I’d hate promoting “get out the vote!.” But give me a podium, a protest sign, a blank sheet of paper (or computer screen) and I’m a screaming piece of potent activism! In short, there is no such thing as the most effective strategy without asking who is the person actualizing it.

          • Wendy,

            I agree! “Strategy” smacks of central planning, and central planners always want everyone else to ride the hobbyhorse of the planners’ choosing.

            I’m always full of suggestions, of course, but ultimately regarding “strategy” I have no problem with anything anyone wants to do that doesn’t initiate force.

    • Ronney

      Hello,
      No I want them to know, when they have pushed to far someone is going to push back with a vengeance they cannot even comprehend. They know just how much wrath one motivated Marine can bring upon them. They are so naïve in their thinking, that a little show of force and we will bow to them. I got a little news for them I thrive on the odds being in their favor. And I want them to know it.

      • Ronney. It is not that I do not understand your reaction. I have worked for liberty for over four decades now, with much of the labor in the intellectual saltmines being unpaid and targeted for criticism rather than any kind of reward, much of the activism had some risk to it, including confrontations with the police during protests. I know that this can be thankless, brutal business.

        But, especially in light of the problems experienced by Reason, you might want to think twice before posting anything to Tom’s forum that could cause him legal problems. It is up to Tom, however. What you said is absolutely justified but it is no more (and no less) a threat than the comments at the end of Nick G.’s article. I’m not saying “back down.” I’m saying “change tactics.”

  • Danny S.

    Agree with the dictators or go to jail ? hmmm

  • Peatro Giorgio

    I wholeheartedly agree.
    Secrecy is not a legal action under the constitution unless it is in the national interest to protect the nation’s secrets.
    From foreign enemies. 1st amendment. The right to assemble freedom of religion, free exercise of speech. And the US supreme court concludes the right of its citizens to face their accusers,the right of a fair and impartial jury. A fair trial,
    .Further more the public informations act covers exactly the crap the FBI is trying and has pulled.
    Is it not any wonder why the American people are becoming more hostile toward the government Authorities ?. I would suggest and highly recommend they take a huge step back, Rethink their lawlessness. Step back on the side of the Bill of rights. For they may suspect a complete breakdown of law and order. Though they really have no understanding of how soon its coming and to what extent it shall be.
    Yes they may believe their prepared. But fools they shall prove themselves to be. The rage boiling up across the nation is now just below the surface. Turn that flame up just slightly and civil war it shall be. Certainly it won’t be the electorate turning on each other. No on the contrary the rage will be directed at those responsible. The justice system, the legislatures,state houses, congress, the white house and all the bureaucracies. I just can’t imagine how freaking arrogant ,how utterly stupid these fools are. Not to open their eyes and read the writing on the walls. What do they think the Article V. Constitutional Convention of the states is all about. With the high rise in the crime rates are all about. Yes they for now;they may be able to manipulating the situation,divert and deflect attention from themselves.
    That is not a long range well thought out strategy. The shit is going to hit the fan and they shall be the ones buried in shit. ( My opinions my thoughts,) these thoughts and opinions are derived based on history. History we all know repeats itself when memories of the past have faded in to darkness.

    • “Secrecy is not a legal action under the constitution unless it is in the national interest to protect the nation’s secrets.”

      1) I don’t see anything in the US Constitution that gives the US government a power to keep secrets from the people it expects to pay the bill for ANY reason.

      2) “The nation” doesn’t have secrets, nor does it have an interest. The government is not the nation.

      • Peatro Giorgio

        Have you not ever heard of the war powers act .? Which by the way falls under the realm of the Commander and chief. Just a tad bit short sighted on your part. I to wish to overlook the commander and chief part, Especially with the cowardice, stupid prick in the white house nowadays Yes our nation does have its secrets .Or should I say Had its secrets.

        • Yes, I’ve heard of the War Powers Act (technically it’s the War Powers Resolution).

          It’s neither in the Constitution, nor constitutional. And if you can find any language in it authorizing the president (or anyone else) to keep secrets from their alleged bosses, you’ve got better eyes than me (here’s the full text, knock yourself out).

          So even if I was a constitutionalist (I’m not), and even if I did believe in the superstition of “the government as ‘our nation'” (I don’t), I still wouldn’t find the argument persuasive.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            My friend I had been reading the war powers act at the time I wrongly directed you to it. Should I say I had totally lost focus .I had intended to direct you To Acticale1. Section 8 of the us Constitution. From that if you read slowly and deliberately you shall draw the exact same conclusion I have. As well as The United states Congress. They are in fact the determining factor here.

          • OK, read Article 1, Section 8.

            Nope, no authority to keep secrets from the bosses in there.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            I guess you do not grasp, Congressional power to regulate then. To prescribe roles ,or to establish standards, or to write laws. Here’s my suggestion . Hillsdale University offers a free online 14 week course . The title of this course is The U.S. Constitution 101. Those Professors and lecturer are far more capable then I to explain . How the three branches of our Federal government works ,what their rolls and functions are . Their limitations and their powers of Authority. Now after having completed that course you may next consider taking their 10 week free online course known as the Federalist Papers. They may help you in determining . What ,how and by what Authority our government has to retain secrets. Though I have known a few though a rare few who continue to deny that such Authority exists.

          • Peatro,

            Oh, I grasp. I’ve studied the US Constitution forward and backward. I’ve read the Federalist Papers (and quite a bit of anti-Federalist material).

            While I do deny that you’ll find any magic authority in the US Constitution for the US government to keep secrets from the people they expect to pick up the check, I also deny that it would matter if that authority was included.

            The US Constitution was an illegal rebellion against the Revolution. Even if it could possibly be binding on anyone at all, it sure as heck couldn’t be binding 200+ years later on someone who hasn’t agreed to it.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            Then I would suggest you look else where for a government more suitable to your liking. Now Under the freedom of information act .there exist grants and 9 particular exemptions . Again here was and is the Authority of Congressional power. Now I don’t like,yes even hate the over barring over arching national government we now have. For it has fallen well away from the Constitutional Republic our Forefathers designed. And Yes I am willing to give my life and all my fortune to return to those ideals.

          • I have no intention of moving from where I live just because a fairly nasty criminal gang (“the US government”) says it’s part of their turf.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            Well then I would assume your a brother Patriot. A Libertarian, much like myself. A Tea- Party ,fiscal conservative, Libertarian leaning independent. Not attached to a scumbag establishment club.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            Thomas!
            While it appears to me my Friend : you seem to have and utilize the exact same rhetoric with which; The John Birchers use. Which by the way I once long ago was a member. Up and until I actually began educating myself on the Constitution, as well the pro-and anti federalist papers, which are all merely opinion pieces, placed in add’s of local papers,magazines and pamphlets; Of the day. Though they are truly of great value in determining what our forefathers thoughts, Ideas beliefs and opinions of the day where. How it was they had come to design our nation. Today the John birch society,is little more than a fear mongering group with a false perspective of both the Constitution , and its legality, They continue in their false claims ,by making truly ridiculous assumptions and assertions on the Article V Constitutional conventions of states. Your truly so very wrong The constitution is binding 9 of the thirteen original colonies ratified the Convention.13 of the original colonies agreed to the convention 2/3 as agreed by all 13. ( RULES.)

          • Peatro,

            No, I’m not a Bircher, and am only mildly familiar with their stuff.

            As you point out, the Constitution was only binding on, AT MOST, 9 of the original 13 colonies. And in reality, it was only binding on the people from those colonies who were permitted a vote in its ratification.

            I do no live in any of the original 13 colonies, nor was I a participant in its ratification. So how could it possibly be binding on me? If you sign a contract to rent a U-Haul, I’m not the one who’s responsible for cleaning it out or paying the bill.

            A good late-19th-century take on the subject is Lysander Spooner’s “Constitution of No Authority.”

          • Peatro Giorgio

            Actually he is a fraud. In order for the the following 41 states to have been accepted into statehood those states chosen delegates must accept the articles of the Convention the formation and corporation of the United states and Its Constitutions (period) Therefore whether you or I like it or Not. Our state’s delegates chosen by our states forefathers made the decisions for us. It is that plain and simple .Period end of story my brother. We are a legal and binding Constitutional republic ,leastwise we once were.

          • 1) I never assigned authority to any “delegate” to ratify a Constitution on my behalf.

            2) I live in Florida now and was born in Tennessee, but I’ve spent most of my life in Missouri, which seceded in 1861 and has never applied for re-admission to the United States.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            My Brother what your saying then is you have no logical reason to follow or obey any laws of the state county or township you presently reside in. If that’s the case then maybe . You should follow my advice given you over ten postings ago.Actually my friend Missouri had agreed to the enter state hood under the Constitution. There succession . Had not with drew them from the Union. As you may think and believe. Who won the civil war. Why yes of course it was the Union . Does not your state pay into the coffers of the federal revenue flow. Why yes it does. And finally they only state which to this day has the slightest chance of leaving with out much conflict is Texas. Though that state to would face one hell of an upwards battle.

          • “Does not your state pay into the coffers of the federal revenue flow. Why yes it does.”

            No, it doesn’t — because I don’t HAVE a state.

            States are overgrown street gangs. While it’s true that one of those gangs claims the area I live as part of “its turf,” it does not follow from that that I am a member or supporter of said gang. It’s not “mine,” any more than the local car theft ring is.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            Do you pay sales tax,property tax ,income tax, capital gains taxes. If you answer yes to even one of those then my friend. You recognize authority and domination over your individualizum.

          • The fact that I and the people I do business with are sometimes caught in the gang’s extortion rackets does not mean that I “recognize” those rackets as legitimate. If you mug me at gunpoint on the street, you may get my wallet, but that doesn’t make you anything other than a mugger.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            So then what your actually saying is . You real do believe the laws are Just right and correct. Other wise my friend there are two very different logical approaches to your beliefs one way is. To freely go to jail. The other is to totally live off the grid. Make an manufacturer every single item your self. Through the process of gather available natural resources and making building and providing those things one needs to sustain life. Other wise It’s all talk and frankly bull crap. You An I both know it. O and for your information the last pathway to true freedom is the only way. And one I personally lived for a brief time . It gets awfully lonely after about 8 months. But it can be done . If one desires not to have preceding generation.

          • No, what I am actually saying is what I am actually saying.

            It is perfectly logical for me to avoid muggers and extortionists where possible, to give in exactly as much as I have to when I can’t avoid them, to only fight them if I think I can win, etc.

            What’s illogical is to pretend that the muggers and extortionists are your benefactors and that you owe them a duty of obedience.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            Nice try . But your still the very slave you wish not to be. Your still under Authority not of your own choosing. Like I said before There truly is only one path to true freedom your to weak to have even tried it I was to weak to stay there.

          • Peatro,

            You know less about me than you think, but yes, you are correct: I live under a system I oppose.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            My friend it is not about knowing the individual. It is about understanding the mind set. I’ve had sufficient interaction, dialogue,” if you will “, to clearly understand that you’re emotionally where I had been during my youth.
            We all tend to deceive ourselves,we all at times refuse and reject what we do not yet fully understand. What we refuse to accept. All your banterings are a reflection of you rejection of the Pro federalist papers and a recrugatations of the anti federalist. They to lost by a vast majority. They even lost in their state’s legislature

          • Yes, they lost the battle.

            The war, however, never ends. And I’ve chosen my side.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            No they lost the war during the constitutional congress 1786 they also lost in 1865. and had the won in 1865 the still would have had a southern states constitution. Which by the way would have reflected well upon the one we have today. Therefore your side would have lost not just at every turn but every turn there after. For your side is truly a minority of a minority. as I’ve stated . Majority rules whether or not we like it. Yes their is a way a means to end It one bullet in one’s brain. or complete withdrawal from society.

          • Peatro,

            Again: The war never ends. It started long before the American revolution, and it will rage on long after the US government as we know it has ceased to exist (which will probably be before 2050).

          • Just came across an applicable quote in a new article by Bill Buppert at Zero Gov:

            “I issue a standard challenge to everyone within earshot: show me one government or nation state which became smaller and smaller over time and increasingly less injurious to the freedom and liberty of individuals. Again, I hear the bleating of the usual suspects on the alleged Right who claim that new-found respect for the Constitution will set everything right and we will all skip down the yellow brick road of the small government paradise known as America. You are either a coercionist or a individualist, there is no middle ground.”

    • danE DanE

      Are you saying that any war cannot begin until all the treasonous sob’s are hung from the highest tree?

      • Peatro Giorgio

        From where my friend do you derive such an opinion. For I made no such claim, nor had I promulgated such thought. It’s rather ridiculous, don’t you think. No The treasonous slobs are the ones we shall be at war with. Please follow the dialogue more closely. Try not jumping in while only having read from the center on. Ya missed much.

        • danE DanE

          “No on the contrary the rage will be directed at those responsible. The justice system, the legislatures,state houses, congress, the white house and all the bureaucracies.”

          • Peatro Giorgio

            Yes however you left out the most important part. (The beginning.) Turn up the flame just a bit and civil war. Will ensue.

    • Baker

      The national interest has been used to cover up more government crimes then we could think possible.

      • Peatro Giorgio

        Yes and especially ; This White house and its administration. Though they are not the only corrupt admin. They truly are the worst.

        • Administrations seem to clump together in badness even across party lines.

          LBJ and Nixon were a lot alike.

          Reagan, Bush 41 and Clinton were very similar.

          Likewise, Obama seems to have served Bush 43’s third and fourth terms. Not a lot of daylight between them.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            I am no fan of G.W.Bush But to compare him with in the same breath as the lunatic coward now residing in the white house is absurd,to say the list. Yes The Patriot act was signed into law under Bush. yes Bush’s economic policy left much to be desired. I would must admit he was a pretty damn good War time president. And his coalitions were real not ambiguous,Unlike the scum of the earth we have presently as commander of faggots, lunatic,racist anonymous .

          • As “war presidents” go, I don’t know if Bush was the worst, but he was pretty bad. It takes a unique combination of hubris and stupidity to get into, and lose, two ground wars in Asia in only eight years.

            Bush also presided over the single largest entitlement expansion since the Great Society (Medicare Part D). ObamaCare surpassed that, but then ObamaCare was proposed by Republicans (Nixon and Gingrich) and implemented by a Republican (Romney) before Obama stole it from the Republicans, so they should really get the credit.

            About the only thing Bush was even halfway decent on was immigration, and his own party said “no, we have to continue being stupid on that.”

          • Peatro Giorgio

            Are you daft. My friend ! Bush won both ground wars. It is Obama
            That has lost all territory won by the Bush Coalition. Obama that with drew. Well before a coalition government was prepared to go it alone. Even after Gen. Patereous . And nearly everyone in the intell. community warned him other wise. My friend your sense of revisionist history portrays you as much a neophyte. In both history as well politics. Might I suggest you pull your self away from the troll site progressive bloggerspere. And review Bushes record from neither a left or right point of view. But actually from a true historical non political view. Stop looking for what you think or may wish to see and search for what is actually the facts . No one wins a debated or wins over others by staying steadfast on false hoods. Hence the very reason I am and forever shall be an Independent. There is logic and we’ll thought or reasoning behind my Independence. I search for truth . I accept no one’s tales or claims. Search find and verify.

          • Obama withdrew from Iraq based on the Status of Forces Agreement created and signed by Bush.

            But the Iraq war was lost long before that. It was was a bad idea in the first place, but it was lost the instant Bush decided to occupy Iraq after defeating its regime, and irrevocably so as soon as the occupation authority told several hundred thousand seasoned Iraqi troops “you’re fired — hope you can find a job other than being an insurgent.”

            Afghanistan was, if anything, even worse. The supposed reason for the war was to kill bin Laden and liquidate al Qaeda. Instead US forces fucked around in the lowlands for six weeks overthrowing the Taliban and setting up for 15 years of “nation-building” while bin Laden and friends casually picked up and moved out to continue their operations at leisure.

            At least Bush’s dad had the brains to get the hell out of there as soon as a reasonably well defined mission was accomplished in 1991 instead of smirking and dancing on the graves of 3,000 dead on 9/11 and another several thousand troops dead in Iraq and Afghanistan. Militarily, Bush was a complete idiot.

          • Peatro Giorgio

            I noticed you failed to mention the Shiet Government,of Iraq the Iraq prime minister who failed to include the Sunnis into the governing bodies. Which had been a large part of the status of forces agreement . Which by they way Obama had not contested, For it is logical to reason. Just who had the power to stay .Even with the status of arms agreement in place .For it was the Iraq government who failed to meet its requirements with in that agreement. How ? By not joining with the Sunnies. As well treating the Kurds as unwanted guest. Yes you and the bloggers sphere fringe may wish to dig deeper much much deeper. Truth is much deeper than where your looking My Brother. Yes there is truth in some of what you’ve stated but partial truth is not the whole truth. ( You know it and I know it.) There are many direction from which to seek the truth .One must join all the truths together to come up with the complete picture. You have an out line. That’s the beginning not then end.

  • Robert Piper

    This exemplifies the need to elect conservatives to office. Especially President and Congress. The liberal arm of the Democrat Party is trying to turn this country into a socialist dictatorship. If we do not stop them soon they will get the job done. Once that happens it is permanent. There will be no turning back without an out and out revolt. That would be a mess none of wants to face.

    • Actually, it exemplifies the fact that it makes no difference whether “conservatives” or “liberals” are elected to office. Authoritarians of all kinds are the problem, not the solution.

    • USPatriotOne

      I am a conservative and the first thing the GOP did, when they got Congress back in their hands last November, was renew CommieCare, and they promised they would not renew CommieCare..!!! The GOP and the Demorats are just 2 different sides of the same COIN..!!!! God help us, PLEASE!

      • Peatro Giorgio

        It is then quite obvious; you allowed yourself as many others had , to be deceived by the rinos in the establishment. I say good job to the uneducated & the easily distracted by shiny objects flashed before your eyes.

  • adrianvance

    The mark of the despot is the suppression of comment.

    Google “Two Minute Conservative” for clarity.

  • antiliberalcryptonite

    Bring it MFr’s. We’ll put you down just like we did the British. They had to learn the hard way, and apparently so must you.

  • Terry Rhyne

    Every day that passes the gov are taking your rights and throwing them in the trash. The government that supposedly works for us deals in the dark and shadows to wield their power. I love this country but when they are patting you on the back while pissing on your foot always keep one eye open.

  • Joseph L. Light

    No one said the fed’s had a brain; they even have to ask permission to go to the bathroom…

  • malcolm7172

    Well I guess there is a first for everything. Hey kiss my you know what federal government. This is my First Amendment Right and don’t forget that or this could cause a civil war.

  • USPatriotOne

    Hitler pull this very same Cr*P…right out of the Communist Manifesto..!!!

  • Lorraine E

    Has this government or this administration decided to no longer adhere to the first amendment? Have they decided that the first amendment is no longer valid and they can prosecute people who say or write things that they don’t like? Have they created a new law that we don’t know about which states that it is a crime to say or write things that they don’t like? Have they discussed this with our representatives or the supreme court? Or perhaps they are now setting a precedent which will be referred to justify prosecuting citizens in future cases who say or write things which they don’t like. Would it be that easy to eliminate the first amendment?

  • bhndr

    And exactly how does the author think he can decide a true threat? Facts are that a threat is a threat and there are real cases of wood chippers being used to dispose of a body. These threats are certainly conceivable and also possible. Anyone that thinks they have a right to threaten others, especially a judge, needs lessons on what is free speech. Yelling fire in a theater without a fire is not a right, neither is making a threat toeards a judge.

    Nothing but taking an issue and blowing it out of proportion just to sell politics…

    • Peatro Giorgio

      No one shouldn’t threaten. One should merely act.

  • Paul Boore

    Makes me wonder who they will be coming after next. Those who speak out against the IRS, the Justice Dept, the POTUS, etc. I’m sure my name will be on their list…..

  • rbblum

    War on web commenters is implemented in part by eliminating any/all public comments from even being posted.

    • Robert

      That’s why they wanted control of the internet, soon you will not be able to say anything that is critical of our government no matter which party is in office. Wake up Americans is that something you want?

  • Granny Filec

    Lying to the people should be a crime. Its what the CIC does all the time. Are we to believe that its alright to lie, but not alright to tell the truth the way the United States see the CIC.

  • Burton Pauly

    In my opinion anyone that has something to contribute to the debates needs to stick to their principles, and let it all hang out.. Who knows the numbnuts may gain a bit of respect for that person…

  • Coastie49

    “Gov’t. IS NOT reason; it IS NOT Eloquence, it IS Force !!, making for a reluctant servant and a Fearful Master.”
    Geo. Washington.
    – He knew it then….and Americans are
    the worse for it now..
    Semper Paratus.

  • Kinch

    Sounds like ‘The Return of Hitler’. It’s worse that the Repubs have done nothing about Pinocchiobama.

  • dltaylor51

    Hey Obama and company,kiss my ass,prosecute that you rotten SOB’s.

  • 3Curmudgeon3

    We’ve all seen what the Justice System can do or doesn’t do as the case may be. Judges to me are just glorified lawyers with the authority to make decisions that can be interpreted one way or the other, but that is just it, they have the power. Disagreeing with them is an American Constitution given right, but when a threat is implied, then that is a whole other issue. It is taking the law into your own hands and that is not allowed and cannot be tolerated. That being said, it is very frustrating when it appears justice is not done, defies common sense and the only option is to comment with vindictiveness. Choose your words carefully and do not imply violence in your response..

    • “when a threat is implied, then that is a whole other issue”

      Well, no.

      Even if you’re not a “free speech absolutist,” setting the bar at “threat implied” is setting it FAR too low and leaves FAR too much discretion to these power-hungry types.

      The very lowest reasonable standard on speech vis a vis threat is only a “true threat” stops being speech and starts being assault (“offer to do harm,” the first element of “assault and battery,” battery being the over act).

      A “true threat” is explicit and plausible. If it isn’t both, it’s just free speech.

      • 3Curmudgeon3

        Yeah, good luck with that.

  • william g munson

    We the people declare that congress do not had over the internet control to the government and if they have then take it back from them now PERIOD

  • Whippit

    “Those that make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.” —JFK

    The Swine That Rule killed him for a couple of reasons:
    NUMBER ONE: He took the power to issue currency, the vile institution’s core power, away from The Federal Reserve Bank gang of vampire pirate nation wreckers and restored it to The Treasury.
    #2: He saw the futility in the SouthEast Asia platter of crap that he inherited from Eisenhower and the Dulles brothers; and wanted to end the misadventure early in its misbegotten life.
    Big Oil that wanted the goodies under The Mekong Delta and French (Michelin) commercial interests didn’t like that.
    #3: He was going to rein in and breakup The CIA because of their uncontrolled and unaccountable planetary Hitman activities in service to The Ruling Swine.
    #4: JFK couldn’t be bought; unlike the very many corner whores now in Klowngress and Gubbamint.

    We have now devolved as a nation from having someone like JFK at the helm of The Ship of State, to having a planted, manufactured, propped up, managed-by-swine, Teleprompter dependent, Mulatto cokehead pervert Communist puppet that isn’t even an American citizen and was likely born in a Canadian free clinic while its white skin colored, slut trashcan female spawner was enrolled at The University of Washington. It’s co-conspirator Grandparents called in the birth announcement to the newspaper; a practice that endures to this day and is milked by Asians to fraudulently establish Ameribabwe citizenship for their offspring.

    American Revolution v 2.0 can’t come soon enough.

  • 1462

    They are running from the TRUTH and want to stop it They do not want the SHEEPLE to Awaken!

    Especially
    concerning the TTP and giving Control of our Internet to our enimies
    and attempting to sign away our Sovereignty and take away our rights to
    bear arms…………..

    Constitution is clear…even if Obama
    Wannabe Dictator were legit and he is NOT, PROVEN and validated, but,
    (ignored with Criminal Intent) Neither the President nor Congress nor
    the Senate nor the Supreme Court nor the Federal Courts nor the States
    nor their Governor’s and Mayor’s even through Laws, Bills, Amendments,
    Executive Orders, and yes even through Treaties they STILL DO NOT
    POSSESS the Power or the Authority to USURP the Constitution, the Bill
    of Rights, or our Sovereignty….The Constitution weather they chose to
    ignore it is the Law of the land and they are BOUND to it Article 6
    Section 3….all they do is NULL and VOID not to mention they have been
    Criminally DeFacto since 1871! Everything that has been done since 2008
    is NULL and VOID as well as everything that has been done since 1871!

    The States possess the POWER and AUTHORITY to tell the Federal
    Government to go straight to hell!! The Federal Government does not tell
    the people what to do for they are nothing but Public Servants to the
    people who derive their power from the people not the other way around!
    The Constitution gives the PEOPLE, the 4th Branch of Government and the
    Last line of Defense the POWER and AUTHORITY to if neccessary, when all
    peacefull means have failed to physically remove them all from office by
    any and all means neccessary……NOT….. to destroy our government
    but to remove those that PERVERT IT!

    Obama is a known proven Criminal Fraud USURPER he has no power to do
    anything! A USURPER Obama possesses no Legal, Lawful or Constitutional
    power to
    do anything! Everything that has been done since 2008 is NULL and VOID!
    All of Obamas Documents are FRAUDULANT. His SS was issued out of the
    State of Conneticuit and belongs to someone who has long since been
    dead… These things have been validated by legitimate Law
    Enforcement British Intelligence and others yet you deliberately ignore
    what else would Traitors and Tyrants do…….there is MOUNTAINS of
    Evidence….. Pelosi, Reed and the DNC Defrauded the American people
    filed fraudulant Documents, and just about every Politician has admitted
    to British Intelligence they know Obama is a FRAUD including McCain and
    the Clintons…..

    Just because you say the Things your passing is the Law does NOT make it the Law! Obama,
    Congress the Senate our entire National Security Apperattis are
    all clearly operating outside the Constitution and thus all they do is NULL
    and
    VOID! They are all secretly operating behind the backs of the American
    people and in violation to the Logan Act and thus everything they do is NULL and VOID!

    This Globalist Strategy for North America is the NWO Agenda and
    anyone who supports this is GUILTY of Open High Treason Against the
    United States and their Sworn Oath Article 6 Section 3 to which they are
    BOUND! They need to be immediately Arrested! They are also guilty
    of
    Violating the Logan Act meeting in Secret behind the backs of the
    American people with Foreign Governments and enemy agents making secret
    agreements and contracts for which they have no power to do for the sole
    purpose of Overthrowing the United States. This was admitted Publically
    and Published and has spewed out of the mouths af many Public Servants.

    This is TREASON!

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/19296-cfr-globalists-outline-strategy-for-north-american-community?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_campaign=a0842ce969-The_Editors_Top_Picks_3_12_143_12_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8ca494f2d2-a0842ce969-289799865

    Constitution is CLEAR….

    Article
    1 Section 7 Clause 2 ……………. Of the Constitution ….. The
    Origional 1776 Pennsylvania Constitution of our ForeFathers….NOT…..
    the illegally created and re written USA CORPORATION Constitution 1871
    created illegally and forced upon the people without their knowledge and
    consent by King George and his whores in the 41st Congress.
    Article 1 Section 7 Clause 2 was deliberately re written because the
    NWO Left does not want you to kn ow these things and here below is the
    origional:

    No laws of Congress are valid

    “Congress
    can pass no law while a usurper pretends to occupy “the Office of
    President. ”The Constitution provides that “[e]very Bill which shall
    have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before
    it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States

    (Article I, Section 7, Clause 2). Not to a usurper posturing as “the
    President of the United States,” but to the true and rightful President.
    If no such true and rightful President occupies the White House, no
    “Bill” will or can, “before it become a Law, be presented to [him].” If
    no “Bill” is so presented, no “Bill” will or can become a “Law.” And any
    purported “Law” that the usurper “approve[s]” and “sign[s],” or that
    Congress passes over the usurper’s “Objections,” will be a nullity.
    Thus, if Obama deceitfully “enters office” as an usurper, Congress will
    be rendered effectively impotent for as long as it acquiesces in his
    pretenses as “President.””

    Furthermore, Obama Could
    not be Removed Except by Force. As a USURPER posturing as “the
    President,” Congress cannot even impeach Obama because, not being the
    actual President, he cannot be “removed from Office on Impeachment for,
    and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and
    Misdemeanors” (see Article II, Section 4). In that case, some other
    public officials would have to arrest him—with physical force, if he
    would not go along quietly—in order to prevent him from continuing his
    imposture. Obviously, this could possibly lead to armed conflicts within
    the General Government itself, or among the States and the people.

    ALSO,
    Bear in mind, that as an imposter Commander–in-Chief of the Armed
    Forces, “he will be entitled to no obedience whatsoever from anyone in
    those Armed forces and Law Enforcment. Indeed, for officers or men to
    follow any of his purported “orders” including law enforcement will
    constitute a serious breach of military discipline—and in extreme
    circumstances even charged with “war crimes.” In addition, no one in any
    civilian agency in the Executive Branch of the General Government will
    be required to put into effect any of Obama’s purported “proclamations,”
    “executive orders,” or “directives” (Viera, J.).

    UNDERSTAND Just becasue they say its “The Law” does not make it the law …

    Obama
    is a known proven Criminal Fraud USURPER Every one in our Government
    has been approached and have all acknowledged they know but refuse to do
    anything to remove Obama and continue to deny it to the public because
    they are all on the same team they are all whores to the NWO, and are
    all Criminally in Collussion.
    This is the TRUTH these NWO Whores want to keep from you……. Documented History!
    http://djosiris.blogspot.com/2011/09/in-1871-united-states-constitution-was.html

    Mr.
    Brown you and everyone else supporting this Criminal USURPER and the
    NWO Agenda need to know your GUILTY of Treason of the Highest Order and
    Form…….

    If Obama trys as a Criminal FRAUD USURPER to Declare
    an ILLEGAL BOGUS MARTIAL LAW for the sole purpose of trying to Disarm
    the American people and Overthrow these United States please know
    this…… it will ……FALL UPON DEAF EARS… because it has
    absolutely NOTHING to do with “Continuity of Government”, but in fact
    has everything to do with “Continuity of their Criminal Enterprise, the
    illegally created USA CORPORATION illegally created and FORCED upon the
    people without their “KNOWLEDGE and CONSENT” 1871,….. 2 things
    required to make anything legally binding!

    Obama admits he was born in Kenya

    Revealed; The Men Who Own and Run the U S Governmen

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKwO1onXAaIAgenda 21

    http://commieblaster.com/

    MUST WATCH
    http://wn.com/martial_law