The government is a bunch of clowns. What gives them the right to tell him what he can or can’t do with his own personal device?
To be clear I don’t agree with this statement, but the steelman counterargument would be something like: if the president of the United States were to destroy evidence of a crime, shouldn’t that also be a crime?
Have to be accused of a crime first for this to apply. The victim here was purely the target of extra customs search due to his support of a politically unfavored cause
deleted by creator
Can’t bother to read the article?
He has, and as far as I know he hasn’t been held accountable, so I guess this guy’s fine, right?
If this goes through it sets a precedent for the government declaring someone a criminal for being in a political organisation simply unfavorable to them. He couldn’t destroy evidence if he wasn’t a criminal could be the take-home-message between the lines they intend to propagate.
Story has already changed. Originally it was him giving border agents the kill code which they entered.
