Elon!

[MonkeyF0cker]

3 minutes ago, HinesWard86 said:

His qualifications are certainly relevant. He's a Congressman on the committee. Just because you may not like him doesn't change the fact that his qualifications are pretty damn relevant.

If you are still serious, then look up some of Christopher Wray's statements regarding social media particularly with regard to FITF and Jan 6. I've posted six links, not going to post much more if you don't want to believe it.

This idiot is so stupid, He thinks people's biased words prove something instead of actual law.

[Jimmy Hoffa]

Just now, HinesWard86 said:

His qualifications are certainly relevant. He's a Congressman on the committee. Just because you may not like him doesn't change the fact that his qualifications are pretty damn relevant.

If you are still serious, then look up some of Christopher Wray's statements regarding social media particularly with regard to FITF and Jan 6. I've posted six links, not going to post much more if you don't want to believe it.

We're going off track on Ted.

Can you show me where the FBI has authorization to review social media and the associated guidelines?

Please don't ask me to review anyone's statements to prove your point...

[MonkeyF0cker]

4 minutes ago, HinesWard86 said:

I'm sure they are. Only real geniuses pay for a card to tell them they are a genius

People like you couldn't afford the test and wouldn't pass it anyway.

So there's that.

The test was fun.  I pay for things that are fun occasionally since I can afford it, brokedick.

It happens to be a great organization for networking.  But I wouldn't expect someone living in the slums who's never done anything notable outside of punching a clock to understand how that's advantageous.

[PatrickBateman]

Hines Fraud is poor and still votes Democrat.

All you need to know.

[Jimmy Hoffa]

2 minutes ago, HinesWard86 said:

If you are looking for an EO, then you should know how few of those are made public. 

I am willing to look any any document that you can share that will prove that the FBI has authorization to review social media, regardless of the source.

Otherwise your statements remain unproved.

I'm not trying to be confrontational, but when someone says "The FBI is..." that isn't necessarily factual without proof.

[HinesWard86]

Just now, Jimmy Hoffa said:

We're going off track on Ted.

Can you show me where the FBI has authorization to review social media and the associated guidelines?

Please don't ask me to review anyone's statements to prove your point...

Christopher Wray is FBI Director. Look them up. I seriously gave you six links. This is the last one I'm going to give. If it doesn't have the exact thing you are looking for then oh well:

There are no constraints – in law or internal rules – on FBI agents’ ability to review publicly available social media content, and agents can access or receive information from closed groups under some circumstances as well. Once criminal activity is suspected, agents can use undercover online identities, as long as they follow FBI policy regarding investigations of political organizations where necessary.

The rules for FBI investigations are set out in the Bureau’s Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide, or DIOG, which implements the Attorney General’s Guidelines for Domestic FBI Operations. These rules limit the collection of First Amendment-protected information; the Bureau is forbidden from basing its conduct “solely on an individual’s legal exercise of his or her First Amendment rights,” while permitting agents to gather information online about constitutionally protected rights if the collection is “logically related to an authorized investigative purpose,” does not interfere with the group’s constitutional exercise of their First Amendment rights, and is the least intrusive alternative that is reasonable in the circumstances.

In practice, the FBI has a long history of targeting First Amendment-protected speech, especially by Black activists and Muslim communities. In 2017, for instance, the Bureau invented a new category of threat it called “Black Identity Extremism” (BIE), which appeared designed essentially to target activists of color; the FBI eventually withdrew it under fire, while subsuming BIE under a different category that simply obscured its surveillance of Black activists. The FBI has also put entire predominantly Muslim neighborhoods under surveillance with no suspicion of criminal activity, and has conducted intensive spying operations against indigenous and other environmental activists.

Before formally opening any kind of inquiry, agents can search and review publicly available social media and other online information (see Appendix L of the DIOG). After initiating the first level of formal FBI inquiry, called an assessment, FBI agents can record and monitor “public, real-time communications,” such as conversations in a public chat room, if recording is both necessary to the assessment and the least intrusive method to obtain the information. Assessments are notoriously lax, requiring only an “authorized purpose” and a “clearly defined objective,” with no reasonable indication, or even allegation, of wrongdoing required.

During an assessment, an agent may also access a private or restricted-access social media forum, such as a private Facebook group or subreddit, if she is given access by a “consenting party” who has authority to access and control content on the site. That person could be a system administrator, or a company official who can direct others regarding the content on the site. It can also be an account holder for the site, including an administrator for a private group. Because any member of a private group could share information with an FBI agent, however, the standard does not impose robust limitations in practice. Moreover, the carve-out for company officials suggests that the FBI could obtain consent from, for instance, certain high-level Twitter, Facebook, or Reddit officials or moderators. An agent cannot, at the preassessment or assessment stage, use a fictitious identity to gain access or connect with individuals online.

Once there is a reasonable indication of criminal activity – which would certainly include an armed attack on the Capitol – an agent may monitor real-time communications in a private chat room or another online forum without the knowledge of the forum members; the person or body who must authorize the monitoring is redacted from the DIOG. The agent must make a two-part showing to do so: first, that the information to be obtained is relevant to the investigation, and second, that “recording the communications is the least intrusive method to obtain the evidentiary information, weighing the investigative value of the evidence to be obtained against the potential collection of First Amendment information.”

An agent may also create an undercover social media account – for instance, to pose as an enthusiast seeking to become involved in the cause – after receiving approval from a Special Agent in Charge (or, in some instances, the FBI headquarters). Once undercover, the FBI employee must take all necessary and reasonable steps to protect potential victims and prevent serious criminal activity if online contact reveals a public safety threat.

When the undercover activity involves a political organization, the agent must solicit approval from FBI headquarters, with an application that includes the length of the operation and “a statement of which circumstances are reasonably expected to occur, what the facts are likely to be, and why the undercover operation merits approval in light of the circumstances.” The Guidelines do not define the term “political organization,” and it is unclear whether the term would cover the Proud Boys. The group, whose leaders have celebrated violence as “a really effective way to solve problems,” has been at the center of previous clashes and earned itself a spot on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of hate groups. At the same time, it identifies itself as a body dedicated not to criminal acts but to “reinstating a spirit of Western chauvinism,” and its members have strongly aligned themselves with President Donald Trump, who famously told them during a presidential debate to “stand back and stand by.” Reports that the FBI had designated the Proud Boys as an extremist group in late 2018 were subsequently refuted.

[MonkeyF0cker]

2 minutes ago, HinesWard86 said:

These rules limit the collection of First Amendment-protected information; the Bureau is forbidden from basing its conduct “solely on an individual’s legal exercise of his or her First Amendment rights,” while permitting agents to gather information online about constitutionally protected rights if the collection is “logically related to an authorized investigative purpose,” does not interfere with the group’s constitutional exercise of their First Amendment rights, and is the least intrusive alternative that is reasonable in the circumstances.

So you've just proven that the FBI broke the law in AT LEAST the NY Post suspension.

Thanks for playing as always.

[HinesWard86]

4 minutes ago, MonkeyF0cker said:

People like you couldn't afford the test and wouldn't pass it anyway.

So there's that.

The test was fun.  I pay for things that are fun occasionally since I can afford it, brokedick.

It happens to be a great organization for networking.  But I wouldn't expect someone living in the slums who's never done anything notable outside of punching a clock to understand how that's advantageous.

Dude, you paid for a test to say you were smart. You don't know the difference between censorship and moderation. That's bad.

You keep swinging and missing when it comes to me. Own my own business and haven't punched a clock in almost 12 years at this point. Keep trying though. Maybe you'll find something that sticks 

[KingRevolver]

Sorry... just picked myself up off the floor.  I was laughing at the Mensa claim. 

[MonkeyF0cker]

Just now, HinesWard86 said:

Dude, you paid for a test to say you were smart. You don't know the difference between censorship and moderation. That's bad.

You keep swinging and missing when it comes to me. Own my own business and haven't punched a clock in almost 12 years at this point. Keep trying though. Maybe you'll find something that sticks 

You keep saying that thinking your reading comprehension is beyond that of a four year old.

It's continuous hilarity.

Thanks much.

[Jimmy Hoffa]

1 minute ago, HinesWard86 said:

Christopher Wray is FBI Director. Look them up. I seriously gave you six links. This is the last one I'm going to give. If it doesn't have the exact thing you are looking for then oh well:

There are no constraints – in law or internal rules – on FBI agents’ ability to review publicly available social media content, and agents can access or receive information from closed groups under some circumstances as well. Once criminal activity is suspected, agents can use undercover online identities, as long as they follow FBI policy regarding investigations of political organizations where necessary.

The rules for FBI investigations are set out in the Bureau’s Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide, or DIOG, which implements the Attorney General’s Guidelines for Domestic FBI Operations. These rules limit the collection of First Amendment-protected information; the Bureau is forbidden from basing its conduct “solely on an individual’s legal exercise of his or her First Amendment rights,” while permitting agents to gather information online about constitutionally protected rights if the collection is “logically related to an authorized investigative purpose,” does not interfere with the group’s constitutional exercise of their First Amendment rights, and is the least intrusive alternative that is reasonable in the circumstances.

In practice, the FBI has a long history of targeting First Amendment-protected speech, especially by Black activists and Muslim communities. In 2017, for instance, the Bureau invented a new category of threat it called “Black Identity Extremism” (BIE), which appeared designed essentially to target activists of color; the FBI eventually withdrew it under fire, while subsuming BIE under a different category that simply obscured its surveillance of Black activists. The FBI has also put entire predominantly Muslim neighborhoods under surveillance with no suspicion of criminal activity, and has conducted intensive spying operations against indigenous and other environmental activists.

Before formally opening any kind of inquiry, agents can search and review publicly available social media and other online information (see Appendix L of the DIOG). After initiating the first level of formal FBI inquiry, called an assessment, FBI agents can record and monitor “public, real-time communications,” such as conversations in a public chat room, if recording is both necessary to the assessment and the least intrusive method to obtain the information. Assessments are notoriously lax, requiring only an “authorized purpose” and a “clearly defined objective,” with no reasonable indication, or even allegation, of wrongdoing required.

During an assessment, an agent may also access a private or restricted-access social media forum, such as a private Facebook group or subreddit, if she is given access by a “consenting party” who has authority to access and control content on the site. That person could be a system administrator, or a company official who can direct others regarding the content on the site. It can also be an account holder for the site, including an administrator for a private group. Because any member of a private group could share information with an FBI agent, however, the standard does not impose robust limitations in practice. Moreover, the carve-out for company officials suggests that the FBI could obtain consent from, for instance, certain high-level Twitter, Facebook, or Reddit officials or moderators. An agent cannot, at the preassessment or assessment stage, use a fictitious identity to gain access or connect with individuals online.

Once there is a reasonable indication of criminal activity – which would certainly include an armed attack on the Capitol – an agent may monitor real-time communications in a private chat room or another online forum without the knowledge of the forum members; the person or body who must authorize the monitoring is redacted from the DIOG. The agent must make a two-part showing to do so: first, that the information to be obtained is relevant to the investigation, and second, that “recording the communications is the least intrusive method to obtain the evidentiary information, weighing the investigative value of the evidence to be obtained against the potential collection of First Amendment information.”

An agent may also create an undercover social media account – for instance, to pose as an enthusiast seeking to become involved in the cause – after receiving approval from a Special Agent in Charge (or, in some instances, the FBI headquarters). Once undercover, the FBI employee must take all necessary and reasonable steps to protect potential victims and prevent serious criminal activity if online contact reveals a public safety threat.

When the undercover activity involves a political organization, the agent must solicit approval from FBI headquarters, with an application that includes the length of the operation and “a statement of which circumstances are reasonably expected to occur, what the facts are likely to be, and why the undercover operation merits approval in light of the circumstances.” The Guidelines do not define the term “political organization,” and it is unclear whether the term would cover the Proud Boys. The group, whose leaders have celebrated violence as “a really effective way to solve problems,” has been at the center of previous clashes and earned itself a spot on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of hate groups. At the same time, it identifies itself as a body dedicated not to criminal acts but to “reinstating a spirit of Western chauvinism,” and its members have strongly aligned themselves with President Donald Trump, who famously told them during a presidential debate to “stand back and stand by.” Reports that the FBI had designated the Proud Boys as an extremist group in late 2018 were subsequently refuted.

That's a statement completely unsupported by any law on the books. A statement is only verification of someone's ability to speak.

The old ACLU would have had this policy on the steps of the Supreme Court before the ink was dry.

That policy doesn't stand up to anything close to constitutionality.

 

Hines you've failed to show legal authority for FBI surveillance of social media.

[HinesWard86]

2 minutes ago, MonkeyF0cker said:

So you've just proven that the FBI broke the law in AT LEAST the NY Post suspension.

Thanks for playing as always.

Dumbest poster on the website save Raise. Maybe if you stopped trying to give your neighbor's golden retriever a rimjob you could be up to date on current events

[PatrickBateman]

1 minute ago, HinesWard86 said:

Dude, you paid for a test to say you were smart. You don't know the difference between censorship and moderation. That's bad.

You keep swinging and missing when it comes to me. Own my own business and haven't punched a clock in almost 12 years at this point. Keep trying though. Maybe you'll find something that sticks 

You live in a shared laundry housing unit.

You're not winning.

[MonkeyF0cker]

25 minutes ago, KingRevolver said:

Let me see. 🍿

Here you go.

 

[HinesWard86]

Just now, Jimmy Hoffa said:

That's a statement completely unsupported by any law on the books. A statement is only verification of someone's ability to speak.

The old ACLU would have had this policy on the steps of the Supreme Court before the ink was dry.

That policy doesn't stand up to anything close to constitutionality.

 

Hines you've failed to show legal authority for FBI surveillance of social media.

It's there Jimmy. If you don't believe it, write your Congressman. Don't know what else to tell you at this point. If the FBI doesn't have legal authority and all this has come out, you have the story of the century on your hands

[MonkeyF0cker]

2 minutes ago, HinesWard86 said:

Dumbest poster on the website save Raise. Maybe if you stopped trying to give your neighbor's golden retriever a rimjob you could be up to date on current events

That's a really well-formed argument.  You really defeated the fact that you just proved that the FBI went far beyond their scope to CENSOR the NY Post.

Did you learn your debating skills at your community college or while drinking a 40 in front of a burning barrel?

[HinesWard86]

Just now, MonkeyF0cker said:

That's a really well-formed argument.

Did you learn your debating skills at your community college or while drinking a 40 in front of a burning barrel?

It was actually while reading about you trying Mr Hands

[KingRevolver]

2 minutes ago, MonkeyF0cker said:

Here you go.

 

Not bad, pal, but I'm 90% from the line.  Mexican Steve Nash.

[MonkeyF0cker]

1 minute ago, HinesWard86 said:

It was actually while reading about you trying Mr Hands

Another zinger.  Man, you're good at this debating stuff.  LOL.

Surrender noted.

[HinesWard86]

2 minutes ago, MonkeyF0cker said:

Here you go.

 

Lmaoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. 

[MonkeyF0cker]

1 minute ago, KingRevolver said:

Not bad, pal, but I'm 90% from the line.  Mexican Steve Nash.

Feel free to post a video.  Always love competition.

Unfortunately, this thread hasn't give me much of that.

[MonkeyF0cker]

1 minute ago, HinesWard86 said:

Lmaoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. 

What's funny?  The fact that you would have as much chance on the basketball court against me as you've shown you have here?

[MonkeyF0cker]

I forget how in Tampa, all of the drug addicts can shoot over 80% from the stripe in their 40's.

[HinesWard86]

Just now, MonkeyF0cker said:

Another zinger.  Man, you're good at this debating stuff.  LOL.

Surrender noted.

Is that what you tell your neighbor's golden retriever when you finally have her pinned down? Poor dog is screaming and howling and trying to get away, but because Monkey lost an internet argument and needed to feel better about himself he chases the poor dog down and cruelly says, "Surrender noted" as the dog whimpers. Pretty sick stuff Monkey

[HinesWard86]

1 minute ago, MonkeyF0cker said:

What's funny?  The fact that you would have as much chance on the basketball court against me as you've shown you have here?

 

Just now, MonkeyF0cker said:

I forget how in Tampa, a lot of drug addicts can shoot over 80% from the stripe in their 40's.

Swing and a miss again! Also, don't get it twisted, you and Raise are the meth heads here.