TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @billybinion
@billybinion - Billy Binion
A judge has unsealed the memo ordering the detention & deportation of Rümeysa Öztürk. It confirms the sole evidence against her was that she co-wrote an op-ed the government disliked. Here she is being arrested by men in plainclothes. Over an op-ed.
@billybinion - Billy Binion
The government acknowledged it has no evidence Ozturk engaged in antisemitism or expressed support for Hamas. The files on her cite her student op-ed and a post from Eyal Yakoby about stickers that were allegedly seen around Tufts campus. https://www.bostonglobe.com/2026/01/22/metro/federal-judge-unseals-court-records-related-immigrant-students-free-speech-case/
@billybinion - Billy Binion
People should read Ozturk's op-ed, which led to a 6-week stint in jail & possible expulsion from the US. Everyone is entitled to disagree with its message. But the entire point of free speech is that it doesn't just protect ideas the government likes. https://www.tuftsdaily.com/article/2024/03/4ftk27sm6jkj
@billybinion - Billy Binion
When Ozturk was jailed, many insisted the State Dept must have had some reason beyond her op-ed. But by the government’s own admission, it appears the op-ed really is it. What’s the argument for deporting someone based solely on their published opinions?
@billybinion - Billy Binion
@ProfDBernstein The memo does not, in fact, say that. It notes that the government *accused* her of being associated with Students for Justice in Palestine, but then immediately admits DHS was not able to produce any evidence of an actual link. https://t.co/tUpYWTyHo4
@billybinion - Billy Binion
@KathrynPaisner That same document then concedes that DHS was not able to provide any evidence that Ozturk 1) was involved in SJP, 2) engaged in any antisemitic activity, or 3) expressed support for terrorism (as the government initially claimed last year) https://t.co/fIe0Y1xDJZ
@billybinion - Billy Binion
@NotTodayJoe There is no visa requirement that you promise not to share ideas that might offend the government
@billybinion - Billy Binion
@DB32779065 Where did she insult the United States? Did you read the op-ed?
@billybinion - Billy Binion
This is Joseph Ruiz. In 2021, the FBI seized his life savings—$57,000—from his safe deposit box in LA. He could no longer afford his medical treatments & he struggled to buy food. The kicker: He wasn't suspected of a crime. There are many other victims in this saga. A thread.
@billybinion - Billy Binion
In early 2021, the FBI raided US Private Vaults, a business in LA that offered a place to store valuables. The gov't thought USPV might be engaged in illegal activity. But they were specifically told *not* to seize innocent customers' safe deposit boxes. They did anyway. /2
@billybinion - Billy Binion
This is Don Mellein. To ensure he'd be secure in retirement, he invested in gold coins worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. The FBI seized them all. When he fought to get them back, the FBI "lost" 63 of them—worth over $100,000. He was never suspected of a crime. /3
@billybinion - Billy Binion
This is Paul & Jennifer Snitko. In their box, they kept very personal belongings: their kid's baptismal certificate, their marriage certificate & more. The FBI took it all—as if the feds had any reason to seize a...baptismal certificate. They were never suspected of a crime. /4
@billybinion - Billy Binion
In total, the FBI took about *$86 million* in their raid on U.S. Private Vaults—after the warrant explicitly told them not to search & seize innocent people's boxes. This is life-ruining stuff. Aaaaand it gets worse. /5 https://reason.com/2023/12/06/the-fbi-seized-their-safe-deposit-boxes-now-a-federal-court-will-hear-the-case/
@billybinion - Billy Binion
In depositions, FBI agents admitted that they planned to seize cash & valuables from innocent people's boxes. Naturally, they omitted that from the warrant application. Then last year, a federal court ruled that the FBI's actions were legal. OK. /6 https://reason.com/2023/12/06/the-fbi-seized-their-safe-deposit-boxes-now-a-federal-court-will-hear-the-case/
@billybinion - Billy Binion
Let's review: 1) The FBI misled a judge to get a warrant. 2) Then they violated the terms of that warrant by stealing millions in assets from innocent people. 3) And then they got a pass. Legalized larceny. /7 https://reason.com/2023/12/06/the-fbi-seized-their-safe-deposit-boxes-now-a-federal-court-will-hear-the-case/
@billybinion - Billy Binion
After lengthy legal fights, some victims got their stuff back. I waited outside the courthouse the day one couple picked up their property—& federal agents threatened to arrest me b/c I didn't have a "media permit." Never underestimate government's aversion to accountability. /8
@billybinion - Billy Binion
Most importantly, a federal appeals court is now considering whether or not the FBI violated the 4th Amendment when it broke the terms of the warrant & seized innocent people's property. Common sense makes that sound like a slam dunk case. And yet. /9 https://reason.com/2023/12/06/the-fbi-seized-their-safe-deposit-boxes-now-a-federal-court-will-hear-the-case/
@billybinion - Billy Binion
Another ruling in favor of the FBI would tell law enforcement that they're free to violate your rights with impunity if they can find a thinly veiled excuse to do so. The government works for us. It should not be able to steal from its own citizens. /end https://reason.com/2023/12/06/the-fbi-seized-their-safe-deposit-boxes-now-a-federal-court-will-hear-the-case/