Idiot Frauditors need to spend some time behind bars

[Noodlegawd]

@3:18 in the video:

 

[Cardinal]

I'm not certain you know what a "frauditor" is.

As I understand it, the business model of these people is to create forced engagements with police that are likely to result in arrests that'll be later dropped because the D.A. has bigger fish to fry. The frauditor begs for money from his audience to pay for bail, which he gets back by returning to trial. The frauditor keeps the bail money. All in the name of standing up for our constitutional rights.

 

[Drowning Man]

As I understand it, the business model of these people is to create forced engagements with police that are likely to result in arrests that'll be later dropped because the D.A. has bigger fish to fry.

Depends on the situation. Auditors are regularly arrested on bogus charges, misinterpretations of the law, and simple disregard of the law. This is called, "contempt of cop".

The frauditor begs for money from his audience to pay for bail, which he gets back by returning to trial.

Generally not. Some have gofundme's, but most auditors rely on selling ads on Youtube and "merch" stores.

The frauditor keeps the bail money. All in the name of standing up for our constitutional rights.

I think there is another component to it. Auditors regularly sue the local police / government, and settle out of court.

I have no problem with any of that. Even settling out of court, eventually the government gets the clue that they can't act with disregard to the law and must respect the rights of the people.

Where they become frauditors is when the local government has changed, they aren't falling for the auditor's game any more, and the frauditors use baiting tactics to force an interaction. They harass cops on the job, taunting them with insults or not staying at even a minimum distance to allow them to do their jobs. They harass citizens (even legally) to get them to call the cops and force an interaction with law enforcement. They even go so far as to call the cops on themselves (as in the video in the OP). For them, civil rights are a distant memory. They are looking for the confrontation and the likes on Youtube.

 

[Cardinal]

Depends on the situation. Auditors are regularly arrested on bogus charges, misinterpretations of the law, and simple disregard of the law. This is called, "contempt of cop".



Generally not. Some have gofundme's, but most auditors rely on selling ads on Youtube and "merch" stores.



I think there is another component to it. Auditors regularly sue the local police / government, and settle out of court.

I have no problem with any of that. Even settling out of court, eventually the government gets the clue that they can't act with disregard to the law and must respect the rights of the people.

Where they become frauditors is when the local government has changed, they aren't falling for the auditor's game any more, and the frauditors use baiting tactics to force an interaction. They harass cops on the job, taunting them with insults or not staying at even a minimum distance to allow them to do their jobs. They harass citizens (even legally) to get them to call the cops and force an interaction with law enforcement. They even go so far as to call the cops on themselves (as in the video in the OP). For them, civil rights are a distant memory. They are looking for the confrontation and the likes on Youtube.

There is an actual category of these people that I recognize as first amendment auditors. The thing that I'm calling a "frauditor" rides the coattails of these people in order to defraud their following. And of course I recognize that they make money from lawsuits (that almost always fail) and advertising on youtube, such as it is. The bail scam appears to be central to their game, however.

 

[Peter King]

As I understand it, the business model of these people is to create forced engagements with police that are likely to result in arrests that'll be later dropped because the D.A. has bigger fish to fry. The frauditor begs for money from his audience to pay for bail, which he gets back by returning to trial. The frauditor keeps the bail money. All in the name of standing up for our constitutional rights.

Or insult police officers to get clicks, go where you can go legally and act like an asshole to interfere in the proper process at that location (post office, city office, banks, easements, outside of parking lots, etc. etc. etc.) so that law enforcement is called and that allows them to act like toddlers so that their live streams can get loads of clicks and can get maybe sponsors to line their pockets.

It seems like some of these people do this in lieu of working their jobs, maybe they are hoping a poorly trained officer arrests them, books them and then he can sue them for violating his constitutional rights and then milk this to get some cash from the government. If he gets hit he can make his lawsuit even worse.

 

[Fledermaus]

I'm sorry, maybe I'm not getting what you're referring to. If you're talking about the original video that I posted the OP, sorry and you're right, I completely agree. I was just responding to the second video where the guy was filming in the Post Office and had that in my head when I responded to you.

But, if you're talking about the guy filming the in the Post Office, I disagree. One is testing to make sure that your rights are respected, the other is contemplating an illegal action. I think those are completely different motivations.

The Post Office can and does restrict the right to film. Filming may be done on approval and that may be revoked at any time. Frauditors refer to "Poster 7" while ignorant of what is actually says.

And the Post Office can and does trespass people.

And they (frauditors) aren't doing it to protect anyone's rights. They are doing it for clicks and the potential lawsuit. Hence the fraud part of the name.

 

[Cardinal]

Or insult police officers to get clicks, go where you can go legally and act like an asshole to interfere in the proper process at that location (post office, city office, banks, easements, outside of parking lots, etc. etc. etc.) so that law enforcement is called and that allows them to act like toddlers so that their live streams can get loads of clicks and can get maybe sponsors to line their pockets.

It seems like some of these people do this in lieu of working their jobs, maybe they are hoping a poorly trained officer arrests them, books them and then he can sue them for violating his constitutional rights and then milk this to get some cash from the government. If he gets hit he can make his lawsuit even worse.

The only civil rights violations I can remember off the top of my head are shown on the Audit the Audit channel, and those instances were recorded by regular people who had no desire to have negative encounters with the police. Those are the instances that result in the types of lawsuits (often successful) that Drowning Man is referring to. I think I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times a first amendment audit resulted in an actual civil rights violation. Almost all of them create the problem, break a law, get arrested, and then beg for bail money (which they then keep). At most they end up revealing unprofessional behavior of the cops rather than civil rights violations.

This is such a video. The auditor creates the problem, the cop behaves unprofessionally (though legally) and I love every second of it. (Go to 1:33 to skip the intro).

 

[Peter King]

The only civil rights violations I can remember off the top of my head are shown on the Audit the Audit channel, and those instances were recorded by regular people who had no desire to have negative encounters with the police. Those are the instances that result in the types of lawsuits (often successful) that Drowning Man is referring to. I think I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times a first amendment audit resulted in an actual civil rights violation. Almost all of them create the problem, break a law, get arrested, and then beg for bail money (which they then keep). At most they end up revealing unprofessional behavior of the cops rather than civil rights violations.

This is such a video. The auditor creates the problem, the cop behaves unprofessionally (though legally) and I love every second of it. (Go to 1:33 to skip the intro).

I love assholish behaving auditors/frauditors/sovcits who get bracelets from the police. Most are at things like the DMV or at traffic stops. It is almost always illegal to demand an ID from a passenger in a car, and they have the right to refuse that but then the officer gives them a lawful order (simple, get out of the car, which is a legal/lawful order) and outside of the car you can still refuse to give them your ID but you cannot ignore the order to get out of the car. That is where most covcits come a cropper, not only do they refuse to hand over their insurance and drivers license, they then refuse to obey a lawful order (get out of the car, open the door so that I can arrest you) and that often gets them a nice broken window and some bracelets.

The problem is often the level of violence used by the officers. Resisting arrest without violence cannot be a justification for some of the violence perpetrated on obstructing people. Like the kid who was sitting on the sidewalk as ordered by the officer and did not fully extend his legs and rather than warning him that if he refuses he is going to get cuffed, he immediately tasered him.

I am not adverse to a bit of pain compliance when there is a valid reason to do this but often this is also done because there is only one officer on the scene. That is a problem, for an obstructive person you need 2 officers. A person can feel they have a 50/50 chance against one officer, if they have 2 officers immediately to contend with, your odds of successfully resisting drops massively.

It also makes it necessary for the sole officer to use more violent means to get someone to comply. At least that is my view. All police officers should ride with 2 people, it gives you 4 eyes, 2 extra arms and 1 extra body to deal with difficult people. That is why we do not have so many really violent arrests. Sure they are still happening but with 2 cars you have 4 officers, that usually means no problem with the arrest. Also no tasing, ndo pepperspray needed.

The other problem that makes US traffic stops more difficult than necessary is the having to sign to promise to get into contact with the judge/court, etc. etc. In the Netherlands the officer can look into the traffic history of the person he stopped. If it is his first offense he gets a ticket, in this day and age you don't even get a copy of the fine. About 6 weeks later you get a transaction form with which you can pay the fine. Or you can decide to appeal the ticket.

That is a much more efficient way IMO, it does not force people to sign documents (another moment of dealing with the officer that can lead to problems) and it save court times. It saves the ticketed person from having to make appointments, go to court, etc. etc. rather than just paying the fine and not getting the court involved. We also do not have a real traffic court as most people just pay the fine.

 

[Fledermaus]

The only civil rights violations I can remember off the top of my head are shown on the Audit the Audit channel, and those instances were recorded by regular people who had no desire to have negative encounters with the police. Those are the instances that result in the types of lawsuits (often successful) that Drowning Man is referring to. I think I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times a first amendment audit resulted in an actual civil rights violation. Almost all of them create the problem, break a law, get arrested, and then beg for bail money (which they then keep). At most they end up revealing unprofessional behavior of the cops rather than civil rights violations.

This is such a video. The auditor creates the problem, the cop behaves unprofessionally (though legally) and I love every second of it. (Go to 1:33 to skip the intro).

I liked Schrodinger's Cat's narratives on his videos. He was a major Frauditor buster. He passed away recently

 

[What if...?]

I'm not certain you know what a "frauditor" is.

Sounds like they’re trying to redefine the term to divert from the election fraudits.

 

[Cardinal]

I liked Schrodinger's Cat's narratives on his videos. He was a major Frauditor buster. He passed away recently

I think he had health problems. You could hear it in his breathing.

He was the best of the anti-frauditor you-tubers. He knew exactly how much commentary to do, while everyone else is insufferable.

 

[Peter King]

Sounds like they’re trying to redefine the term to divert from the election fraudits.

Schroedinger's cat's youtube already has been using frauditor from 2015, that is because they call themselves first amendment auditors but some of them are actually first amendment frauditors because they do not care about first amendment auditing, they do it because they are unemployed scam artists who are doing it for a quick buck.

 

[Drowning Man]

The Post Office can and does restrict the right to film. Filming may be done on approval and that may be revoked at any time. Frauditors refer to "Poster 7" while ignorant of what is actually says.

I think you’re the one who is ignorant

Poster 7 does allow for photography. It stems, ultimately, from a court case where the federal government was sued and lost. DHS has since put out guidelines for photography on Federal property here: https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/f...-002-2018 Photography and Videotaping ....pdf

And the Post Office can and does trespass people.

Being public property rather than private, it is still possible to trespass people but the standards are much higher. A private business can trespass someone because they feel like it. The Post Office cannot

And they (frauditors) aren't doing it to protect anyone's rights. They are doing it for clicks and the potential lawsuit. Hence the fraud part of the name.

Yeah, excuse me if I don’t take your misinformed views as sacrosanct.

 

[Fledermaus]

I think you’re the one who is ignorant

Poster 7 does allow for photography. It stems, ultimately, from a court case where the federal government was sued and lost. DHS has since put out guidelines for photography on Federal property here: https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/f...-002-2018 Photography and Videotaping ....pdf

Being public property rather than private, it is still possible to trespass people but the standards are much higher. A private business can trespass someone because they feel like it. The Post Office cannot

Yeah, excuse me if I don’t take your misinformed views as sacrosanct.

What does Poster 7 say?

Photographs for news purposes may be
taken in entrances, lobbies, foyers, corri-
dors, or auditoriums when used for public
meetings except where prohibited by
official signs or Security Force personnel
or other authorized personnel or a federal
court order or rule. Other photographs may
be taken only with the permission of the
local Postmaster or installation head.

News purposes.

Clue:. YouTube Frauditors aren't the press.

May be taken... Unless authorized personnel say no.

And the last sentence says it all.

And the Post Office can trespass people.

Period.

 

[Drowning Man]

What does Poster 7 say?

Photographs for news purposes may be
taken in entrances, lobbies, foyers, corri-
dors, or auditoriums when used for public
meetings except where prohibited by
official signs or Security Force personnel
or other authorized personnel or a federal
court order or rule. Other photographs may
be taken only with the permission of the
local Postmaster or installation head.

News purposes.

Clue:. YouTube Frauditors aren't the press.

Who gets to decide who i or isn’t the press? What laws or criteria back this up?

May be taken... Unless authorized personnel say no.

Again, who are the “authorize personnel”?

And the last sentence says it all.

”Other photographs”…that is, ones not taken for news purposes

And the Post Office can trespass people.

Period.

Post Office property is Public Property

Period.

 

[Fledermaus]

Who gets to decide who i or isn’t the press? What laws or criteria back this up?

Again, who are the “authorize personnel”?

”Other photographs”…that is, ones not taken for news purposes

Post Office property is Public Property

Period.

Multiple court cases have determined YouTube posters are not "media" or "journalists". Frauditors say "I am working on a story" which never sees light of day. Frauditing =/= Journalism

Authorized people include local postmasters, supervisors and/or those working in that capacity.

Other photographs is what frauditors fall under

And the Post Office authorities can trespass people.

Period.

 

[Drowning Man]

Multiple court cases have determined YouTube posters are not "media" or "journalists". Frauditors say "I am working on a story" which never sees light of day. Frauditing =/= Journalism

Name them.

Authorized people include local postmasters, supervisors and/or those working in that capacity.

Prove it.

Other photographs is what frauditors fall under

Again, I call bullshit. Back it up.

And the Post Office authorities can trespass people.

Period.

Yes, they can. But again, it's not up to a whim. Usually the standard is that the person committed a crime when it comes to public property.

 

[Fledermaus]

Name them.

Prove it.

Again, I call bullshit. Back it up.

Yes, they can. But again, it's not up to a whim. Usually the standard is that the person committed a crime when it comes to public property.

Washington Supreme Court Holds That YouTuber Is Not a Member of the “News Media” | Miller Nash LLP

With over 140 attorneys across a variety of industry and practice areas, we have the depth and bench strength to handle the most complex litigation work.

www.millernash.com

Prove what? Authorized people are authorized people. Derp. Who do you think authorized people would be in a post office?

I did back it up. Derp. Read poster seven.

Yes. They can. Period. Trespass is a crime.

 

[Drowning Man]

Washington Supreme Court Holds That YouTuber Is Not a Member of the “News Media” | Miller Nash LLP

With over 140 attorneys across a variety of industry and practice areas, we have the depth and bench strength to handle the most complex litigation work.

www.millernash.com

Er...that's a state case, and would have absolutely no bearing on federal public property, like a Post Office. Also, that case had to do with a public records request -- a very limited scope. Also, I'm betting that ruling would be struck down by the SCOTUS.

Try again?

Prove what? Authorized people are authorized people. Derp. Who do you think authorized people would be in a post office?

So...nothing. Usually Postal Inspectors have that ability, not Post Masters. Postal Inspectors are higher in the chain and are not at the local level.

I did back it up. Derp. Read poster seven.

Your skewed reading of Poster 7 doesn't prove a damn thing.

Yes. They can. Period. Trespass is a crime.

Nope. Wrong again. (it's a common theme with you)

 

[Fledermaus]

Er...that's a state case, and would have absolutely no bearing on federal public property, like a Post Office. Also, that case had to do with a public records request -- a very limited scope. Also, I'm betting that ruling would be struck down by the SCOTUS.

Try again?

So...nothing. Usually Postal Inspectors have that ability, not Post Masters. Postal Inspectors are higher in the chain and are not at the local level.

Your skewed reading of Poster 7 doesn't prove a damn thing.

Nope. Wrong again. (it's a common theme with you)

You said "Name them". There is one. YouTube =/= Journalist/News Media.

You asked who authorized people were. Asked and answered.

Nothing skewed about it. Frauditors are not the News Media. And even news Media can be asked not to film.

And yes. The Post office CAN trespass people. And if they don't leave they can be (and often do get) arrested. That is fact. Reality. Truth.

Period.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

Sounds like they’re trying to redefine the term to divert from the election fraudits.

That was my take as well. How many different "big lie"s have they tried now?

 

[reflechissez]

As I understand it, the business model of these people is to create forced engagements with police that are likely to result in arrests that'll be later dropped because the D.A. has bigger fish to fry. The frauditor begs for money from his audience to pay for bail, which he gets back by returning to trial. The frauditor keeps the bail money. All in the name of standing up for our constitutional rights.

10% of the bail is paid to the bail bondsman who is taking the risk that you will show up in court. You don't get that money back.

ETA: After thinking about it, it's possible that -- if the full bail is paid in cash to the court -- that it is fully refunded.

 

[Cardinal]

10% of the bail is paid to the bail bondsman who is taking the risk that you will show up in court. You don't get that money back.

ETA: After thinking about it, it's possible that -- if the full bail is paid in cash to the court -- that it is fully refunded.

Essentially yes. I say "essentially" because I don't know about any of the extraneous court fees you don't expect in the process.

 

[noonereal]

Idiot Frauditors need to spend some time behind bars​

Yes, until this happens, they will continue to undermine democracy.

 

[Peter King]

Yes, until this happens, they will continue to undermine democracy.

All these Moorish fools, covscits and frauditors are a threat to the safety of individuals too. They waste police time and staff with their antics and cost the US millions in time spent dealing with these idiots.