Police stage ‘chilling’ raid on Marion County newspaper, seizing computers, records and cellphones

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The newspaper had received a tip about the restaurant owner having a DUI, which would put the existing liquor license at risk.

The newspaper didn't run the story, because they thought they were being set up to run a false story.

Police version- we thought the newspaper was guilty of identity theft and hacking.

Newspaper version- the police were either upset after we didn't fall for their fake sting, or they wanted to see who leaked us this story, which would have involved a law enforcement officer abusing access to databases.

Sounds like the woman's ex leaked the document, which may have been part of her divorce proceedings.

But what preceded the event is so weird. The woman, a restaurant owner, hosted a meet-and-greet for a US congressman. She asked the police chief to kick out a reporter and the editor from the paper. They did write about that incident. But they did not write about the DUI.

And then it turns out that they were investigating the police chief's termination from KCPD for sexual misconduct. Another story they investigated but did not report, because according to the editor they had not established enough evidence to print.

Following this, somebody apparently FB messaged them this document about the DUI. If it's the ex, undoubtedly some sort of revenge.

But if it’s not the ex, it’s someone who wanted the rule of law.

But we still have a judge who signed off on an un-American warrant.

A DUI is public record. If someone wanted the rule of law, it would not have been difficult for them to provide a legal, publicly available source for the same information. That's why revenge is the most likely motive. Because nobody had to hack a system to get the DUI record from the court database.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe "lawfare" is going to start going both ways.

LOCK HER UP

[Anonymous]

I guess they did TRY THAT IN A SMALL TOWN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The newspaper had received a tip about the restaurant owner having a DUI, which would put the existing liquor license at risk.

The newspaper didn't run the story, because they thought they were being set up to run a false story.

Police version- we thought the newspaper was guilty of identity theft and hacking.

Newspaper version- the police were either upset after we didn't fall for their fake sting, or they wanted to see who leaked us this story, which would have involved a law enforcement officer abusing access to databases.

Sounds like the woman's ex leaked the document, which may have been part of her divorce proceedings.

But what preceded the event is so weird. The woman, a restaurant owner, hosted a meet-and-greet for a US congressman. She asked the police chief to kick out a reporter and the editor from the paper. They did write about that incident. But they did not write about the DUI.

And then it turns out that they were investigating the police chief's termination from KCPD for sexual misconduct. Another story they investigated but did not report, because according to the editor they had not established enough evidence to print.

Following this, somebody apparently FB messaged them this document about the DUI. If it's the ex, undoubtedly some sort of revenge.

Add in the press were invited to the meet and greet. Maybe it was a trap to get all the press in one location? I could see republicans doing that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe "lawfare" is going to start going both ways.

Explain, please.

The FBI raided James O'Keefe, and was leaking materials seized to The New York Times, who is in a lawsuit with James O'Keefe.

The FBI went after O’Keefe because he had stolen property.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe "lawfare" is going to start going both ways.

Explain, please.

The FBI raided James O'Keefe, and was leaking materials seized to The New York Times, who is in a lawsuit with James O'Keefe.

The FBI went after O’Keefe because he had stolen property.

Thanks. I thought there may have been more to the story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe "lawfare" is going to start going both ways.

Explain, please.

The FBI raided James O'Keefe, and was leaking materials seized to The New York Times, who is in a lawsuit with James O'Keefe.

The FBI went after O’Keefe because he had stolen property.

He commissioned the stealing of President Biden’s daughter diary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe "lawfare" is going to start going both ways.

LOCK HER UP

Who? Kari Newell from Marion, Kansas?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe "lawfare" is going to start going both ways.

Explain, please.

The FBI raided James O'Keefe, and was leaking materials seized to The New York Times, who is in a lawsuit with James O'Keefe.

The FBI went after O’Keefe because he had stolen property.

He commissioned the stealing of President Biden’s daughter diary.

What's the spin on Assange?

You saying it's spin that O'Keefe had stolen property?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe "lawfare" is going to start going both ways.

Explain, please.

The FBI raided James O'Keefe, and was leaking materials seized to The New York Times, who is in a lawsuit with James O'Keefe.

The FBI went after O’Keefe because he had stolen property.

He commissioned the stealing of President Biden’s daughter diary.

What's the spin on Assange?

You saying it's spin that O'Keefe had stolen property?

The prior poster claimed O'Keefe commissioned the stealing of the diary, which was a flat out lie intended to slander O'Keefe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe "lawfare" is going to start going both ways.

Explain, please.

The FBI raided James O'Keefe, and was leaking materials seized to The New York Times, who is in a lawsuit with James O'Keefe.

The FBI went after O’Keefe because he had stolen property.

He commissioned the stealing of President Biden’s daughter diary.

What's the spin on Assange?

You saying it's spin that O'Keefe had stolen property?

The prior poster claimed O'Keefe commissioned the stealing of the diary, which was a flat out lie intended to slander O'Keefe.

Was he in possession of stolen property?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe "lawfare" is going to start going both ways.

Explain, please.

The FBI raided James O'Keefe, and was leaking materials seized to The New York Times, who is in a lawsuit with James O'Keefe.

The FBI went after O’Keefe because he had stolen property.

He commissioned the stealing of President Biden’s daughter diary.

What's the spin on Assange?

You saying it's spin that O'Keefe had stolen property?

The prior poster claimed O'Keefe commissioned the stealing of the diary, which was a flat out lie intended to slander O'Keefe.

It's a fact that project Veritas sent the now-convicted thieves back to the residence to gather more material. It's also a fact that even the Trump campaign wouldn't take possession of the diary when offered it, because it was so hot.

[Anonymous]

The newspaper editor's very elderly mother was so traumatized by the police raid, she dropped dead in the middle of it.

Can y'all imagine? I don't like the media when they don't do their job properly, and I like cops when they do their job properly, but in this case it's plain and simple police corruption and judicial system malfeasance.

The blood of a vulnerable and frail old lady is on their hands.

I hope the editor sues them into the next century.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe "lawfare" is going to start going both ways.

LOCK HER UP

Who? Kari Newell from Marion, Kansas?

No. PP suggests "lawfare" is going to START going "both" ways??? Do you remember entire crowds at Trump rallies chanting "lock her up"? Don't talk to me about the newly created phenom of "lawfare".

[Anonymous]

so will they un-die the mother?