• artyom@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    the DOJ is saying it simply wants to “go out, knock on doors, potentially interview these ballot workers and poll workers.”

    The govt will never send people to your home to knock on your door for a fun chat. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. So say nothing. You have nothing to gain by talking to them.

    If you are or know one of these workers, don’t open the door, demand to see a warrant. If they don’t have one, tell them to go away and ignore then. Actually that applies to everyone, but especially these workers.

    • frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      They will probably just break in anyway, and knowing how bad they are at investigating, they will probably break into homes where the workers don’t even live anymore.

      • artyom@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        They may do that but if they do, nothing they find will be admissible in court. If you let them in, that doesn’t apply.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          True, but that’s assuming the proper use of the justice system is the intent. No. The goal here is obviously to promote fear for political gain (literally the definition of terrorism). They want to ensure these poll workers, and others like them, know the Trump administration will come after them. Only the ones who support the regime are safe.

          • artyom@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            18 days ago

            Listen, I get it, our criminal justice system is anything but just. But these are things you can do that will probably protect you. So maybe stop arguing against it.