Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/25/2013 5:21:49 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:24:11 AM EST
Nothing to see here, an isolated incident!
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:30:40 AM EST
I prefer uninteresting raids myself.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:32:48 AM EST
Zero/Jarrett didnt like what she was writing
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:33:08 AM EST
The husband is an Ordnance officers with the Coast Guard, but can't own weapons due to a 1986 charge for resisting arrest.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:34:54 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/25/2013 5:36:15 AM EST by LoBrau]
THIS was the pretense for this?
The document notes that her husband, Paul Flanagan, was found guilty in 1986 to resisting arrest in Prince George?s County. The warrant called for police to search the residence they share and seize all weapons and ammunition because he is prohibited under the law from possessing firearms.
View Quote

Something that happened 27 years ago? Does a "resisting arrest" conviction even make you a prohibited person? Holy Stasi, Batman!

ETA: They even did it at 4:30am. Classic.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:35:57 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:36:12 AM EST

And this is how gun laws will be used to achieve political goals.

Want to seize confidential documents identifying news sources inside the government? Search the house for illegal weapons. After all, you're only protecting the children.

Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:36:57 AM EST
wow...that sounds nearly as credible as some amateur YouTube video maker getting hauled in and incarcerated for over a year on a piss-ant probation violation.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:37:11 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By LoBrau:
THIS was the pretense for this?

Something that happened 27 years ago? Does a "resisting arrest" conviction even make you a prohibited person? Holy Stasi, Batman!
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By LoBrau:
THIS was the pretense for this?
The document notes that her husband, Paul Flanagan, was found guilty in 1986 to resisting arrest in Prince George?s County. The warrant called for police to search the residence they share and seize all weapons and ammunition because he is prohibited under the law from possessing firearms.

Something that happened 27 years ago? Does a "resisting arrest" conviction even make you a prohibited person? Holy Stasi, Batman!

Depends on what the police write in the report.

Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:37:17 AM EST
Most 'transparent admin. ever'

LOL
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:38:26 AM EST
Silence, foolish peasant! The State exists for your protection!

On another note, if you have sources inside the regime you need a thousand copies - all written in code - of your material in hidden locations all around the globe, rather than a single copy in your home.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:38:34 AM EST
Hopefully she had a scanner and made copies.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:41:33 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By sebois:
Silence, foolish peasant! The State exists for your protection!

On another note, if you have sources inside the regime you need a thousand copies - all written in code - of your material in hidden locations all around the globe, rather than a single copy in your home.
View Quote

And some kind of deadman switch to publicize them once given parameters are met.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:43:11 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By pale_pony:
wow...that sounds nearly as credible as some amateur YouTube video maker getting hauled in and incarcerated for over a year on a piss-ant probation violation.
View Quote
more info please
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:45:35 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By VrodRay:
more info please
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By VrodRay:
Originally Posted By pale_pony:
wow...that sounds nearly as credible as some amateur YouTube video maker getting hauled in and incarcerated for over a year on a piss-ant probation violation.
more info please

The guy who 0bama and Hillary blamed for Benghazi.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:51:10 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/25/2013 5:57:11 AM EST by 1387Delta]
Come for guns, leave with what you really came for...

But it wasn’t until a month later, on Sept. 10, that Hudson was informed by Bosch that five files including her handwritten and typed notes from interviews with numerous confidential sources and other documents had been taken during the raid. (She should have read the inventory receipt that was left for the property they took. She should have lawyered up).

She said she asked Bosch why they took the files. He responded that they needed to run them by TSA to make sure it was "legitimate” for her to have them.

Díaz explained that the files were taken because they found official government papers, which Hudson had obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.

Here's the gun info:

In July, according to the documents, Bosch interviewed several of Flanagan’s Coast Guard colleagues, who said Flanagan spoke often about being a "firearms collector.” (Husband running his mouth and showing off. Lesson here is don't claim your wife's guns as your collection because your casual acquaintances will throw you under the bus).

"One party that was interviewed remembered distinctly about Flanagan advising he had recently purchased a Bersa .380 handgun, and observed pictures of firearms similar to AK-47 semi-automatic rifles which were identified by Flanagan as being his,” the court documents state.


Hudson told TheDC that the couple had a run-in with the Maryland State Police about six years ago. "A neighbor complained on New Years Eve about one of us shooting a gun off the pier here,” she said. "We live right on the bay.”

Hudson said the police gave them a slap on the wrist then. "They knew then we had these guns,” she said. "If this was a problem — that he wasn’t supposed to be around them — they should’ve told us then.”


out of

Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:52:10 AM EST
In before the good raid and confiscation "her husband was a criminal" crew.

During the raid, the officers also went after Hudson’s three pistols and three long guns, which she obtained legally.
View Quote



Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:56:39 AM EST
I'm shocked.



No, not really. The part about the "machinegun parts" really worries me. They could say an M16 BCG is a machinegun part.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:58:04 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ferretrodeo:
I'm shocked.



No, not really. The part about the "machinegun parts" really worries me. They could say an M16 BCG is a machinegun part.
View Quote

Fully automatic potato gun.. What is that about???
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:58:45 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/25/2013 5:59:09 AM EST by 1387Delta]
On the bright side, it wasn't a no-knock and no dogs were shot
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:59:38 AM EST
Land of the free and home of the brave...
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 5:59:43 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Paul:


Nothing to see. Move along.

The journalist was surprised that when they took her computer and kept her "private" and "confidential" files on it along with her work ones.

Does she even TrueCrypt?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Paul:
“Due to the ongoing criminal investigation and the potential for pending criminal charges at the state and/or federal level, the Maryland State Police will not discuss specific information about this investigation at this time,” spokesman Greg Shipley said in a statement to TheDC.


Nothing to see. Move along.

The journalist was surprised that when they took her computer and kept her "private" and "confidential" files on it along with her work ones.

Does she even TrueCrypt?



Yeah, if you're an investigative journalist these days, you have all your notes and documentation in electronic format, ENCRYPTED and OFFLINE, and keep backups OFF SITE.

I would NOT have let the LEOs touch my computer gear if the warrant didn't specifically say they could. The comment would be "hey jackasses, you're not going to find a Glock or some ammunition inside my laptop." And I would have protested until they either left or removed me. If they removed me, I would find a lawyer to eviscerate whatever department it was. Hell, sounds like the journalist could still do so. If they seized shit not on the warrant, they violated her 4th Amendment rights.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 6:02:23 AM EST
Everything's permissible in the name of HOMELAND SECURITY.

You don't want the terrorists to win......do you?





Link Posted: 10/25/2013 6:04:33 AM EST
This is getting out of hand.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 6:11:44 AM EST
If journalists want to remain free from reprisal, they should not reside in the United States. It's that simple.

Also, more police need to start questioning their orders, and the role of law enforcement in today's society.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 6:12:23 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By LoBrau:
THIS was the pretense for this?

Something that happened 27 years ago? Does a "resisting arrest" conviction even make you a prohibited person? Holy Stasi, Batman!

ETA: They even did it at 4:30am. Classic.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By LoBrau:
THIS was the pretense for this?
The document notes that her husband, Paul Flanagan, was found guilty in 1986 to resisting arrest in Prince George?s County. The warrant called for police to search the residence they share and seize all weapons and ammunition because he is prohibited under the law from possessing firearms.

Something that happened 27 years ago? Does a "resisting arrest" conviction even make you a prohibited person? Holy Stasi, Batman!

ETA: They even did it at 4:30am. Classic.


I just googled the statute. It's classified as a misdemeanor under state law but with a maximum penalty of 3 years, so I think a conviction makes you a prohibited person under federal law.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 6:25:37 AM EST
This has all the signs of a Nazi-like regime, or just a tyrannical government.

1. A midnight raid to take away something that the citizen has a perfect right to use.
2. A "secret police" unit doing the raid
3. And the raid is, of course, just a pretext to steal documents critical to the regime, another fundamental right.
4. A possibly corrupt (or coerced) judge signing off on a warrant.

At least they had a warrant I guess.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 6:27:42 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Dominus:
If journalists want to remain free from reprisal, they should not reside in the United States. It's that simple.

Also, more police need to start questioning their orders, and the role of law enforcement in today's society.
View Quote


If journalists want to remain free from reprisal, they should work together with those who also want to be free, and possibly help get rid of a corrupt government. Of course, that's a behemoth task nowadays.

I agree police need to start questioning the role of law enforcement in todays society.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 6:31:38 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By danno-in-michigan:


I just googled the statute. It's classified as a misdemeanor under state law but with a maximum penalty of 3 years, so I think a conviction makes you a prohibited person under federal law.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By danno-in-michigan:
Originally Posted By LoBrau:
THIS was the pretense for this?
The document notes that her husband, Paul Flanagan, was found guilty in 1986 to resisting arrest in Prince George?s County. The warrant called for police to search the residence they share and seize all weapons and ammunition because he is prohibited under the law from possessing firearms.

Something that happened 27 years ago? Does a "resisting arrest" conviction even make you a prohibited person? Holy Stasi, Batman!

ETA: They even did it at 4:30am. Classic.


I just googled the statute. It's classified as a misdemeanor under state law but with a maximum penalty of 3 years, so I think a conviction makes you a prohibited person under federal law.

Wow, I didn't realize that being convicted of something that's punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year made somebody a prohibited person. What crime beyond a parking ticket doesn't fall into that category anymore? That's insane.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 7:01:27 AM EST
What's old is new again.

Link Posted: 10/25/2013 7:06:58 AM EST
Jack Booted thugs
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 12:27:45 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Dominus:
If journalists want to remain free from reprisal, they should not reside in the United States. It's that simple.

Also, more police need to start questioning their orders, and the role of law enforcement in today's society.
View Quote



This is what's been popping into my head with a lot of these recent stories.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 2:54:32 PM EST
After the search began, Hudson said she was asked by an investigator with the Coast Guard Investigative Service if she was the same Audrey Hudson who had written a series of critical stories about air marshals for The Washington Times over the last decade. The Coast Guard operates under the Department of Homeland Security.
View Quote





Link Posted: 10/25/2013 3:13:18 PM EST


Pure prophecy
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 3:28:38 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By crazytuco:



This is what's been popping into my head with a lot of these recent stories.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By crazytuco:
Originally Posted By Dominus:
If journalists want to remain free from reprisal, they should not reside in the United States. It's that simple.

Also, more police need to start questioning their orders, and the role of law enforcement in today's society.



This is what's been popping into my head with a lot of these recent stories.


You think the people in charge ever give the whole story to the door kickers? The guns angle was all the info the JBTs needed to kick a door in.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 4:20:38 PM EST

Big government thugs, doing big government thug kinda stuff.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 4:31:41 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Army_of_One:
You think the people in charge ever give the whole story to the door kickers? The guns angle was all the info the JBTs needed to kick a door in.
View Quote


If that's all the JBTs knew, then why did they start seizing documents? Wouldn't the warrant specify that they're there to look for guns? I'm no LEO, but I don't understand why a raid that was ostensibly to check for firearms ended up with a bunch of typed and handwritten notes being seized.

Someone, somewhere in the chain of command was told specifically to take those papers. Assuming they could invent a reason as to why a search for firearms involved seizing documents. then what legit reason could law enforcement come up with as to why those papers were seized, but not others?

Do cops not have to justify what they seize as evidence? Does the warrant have to specify, or can they just walk away with whatever they feel like?
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 4:42:48 PM EST
and everyone wonders why the media does exactly what they are told. reporters have their stuff taken that may prove a gov is out of control and doing illegal things sounds like something from a movie, but according to most that isnt possible in real life. funny that all these people who are committing these illegal acts are the same people who swore not to do such things. whats an oath again?
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 6:05:35 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Dominus:


If that's all the JBTs knew, then why did they start seizing documents? Wouldn't the warrant specify that they're there to look for guns? I'm no LEO, but I don't understand why a raid that was ostensibly to check for firearms ended up with a bunch of typed and handwritten notes being seized.

Someone, somewhere in the chain of command was told specifically to take those papers. Assuming they could invent a reason as to why a search for firearms involved seizing documents. then what legit reason could law enforcement come up with as to why those papers were seized, but not others?

Do cops not have to justify what they seize as evidence? Does the warrant have to specify, or can they just walk away with whatever they feel like?
View Quote

The warrant lists the items to be seized. That does not exclude them seizing evidence of another crime that is discovered during the course of the warrant service. They did leave an inventory list of the items taken and the journalist should have read it. If she did, she would have discovered the missing files and notes immediately instead of a month later. That said, I think they suspected her of having a list of whistle blowers and used the guns to lawfully get a warrant and them to "find" the files and seize them.

It almost sounds like the cops were after the guns and the coast guard dude was after the files.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 6:27:03 PM EST
In case you are wondering how things work now.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 5:23:14 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 5:30:20 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 1387Delta:
The warrant lists the items to be seized. That does not exclude them seizing evidence of another crime that is discovered during the course of the warrant service. They did leave an inventory list of the items taken and the journalist should have read it. If she did, she would have discovered the missing files and notes immediately instead of a month later. That said, I think they suspected her of having a list of whistle blowers and used the guns to lawfully get a warrant and them to "find" the files and seize them.

It almost sounds like the cops were after the guns and the coast guard dude was after the files.
View Quote

I would expect that the plain view exception would be limited to things you actually know to be illegal. Grabbing other things because you aren't sure that the owner is allowed to have them or not seems to be a foul.

If you are unsure about the status of something then document it and get another warrant if it is illegal.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 5:30:22 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By aeroworksxp:
http://www.enemiesforeignanddomestic.com/images/bookcover.jpg

Pure prophecy
View Quote
Just finished it. Need to start loading ammo.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 5:36:07 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 6:49:51 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 6:55:53 AM EST
It that story is correct, it sure smells fishy. But, today is Saturday and college football is on. Can we put off the revolution for a few more days?
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 8:04:00 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By LaRue_Tactical:
FedDC ... should be along shortly.
View Quote


Sarcastic post is.....truthful.

We have members here only happen to do their dutiful part in "just following their orders".

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 8:34:52 AM EST
I hope they go after more reporters. I really do
most of these guys were cheerleaders for hope and change, let them have it
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 8:45:51 AM EST
Thugs gonna thug.

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 8:46:45 AM EST
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top