O'Keefe had already returned it, as I recall.

Right. It wasn't to recover the diary, it was an investigation into how they acquired it (which appears to have been clearly illegal given that you can't buy stolen goods, even if you're a journalist).

▲

BryantD 5 hours ago | parent [-]

I would not say that Project Veritas acted illegally in this case, although I have absolutely no love for them and I think they have acted illegally and immorally in other cases. In the end the Justice Department did not bring charges.

You absolutely can't offer someone money to steal documents. That's clear. Even providing advice on acquiring documents is probably going to be unlawful. And if possession of the document itself is otherwise illegal (i.e., CSAM) there's no protection there.

It isn't necessarily illegal to offer money for a document, particularly if you don't have knowledge of how the document was acquired. I'm not familiar enough with this case to have a strong opinion other than knowing the DoJ elected not to bring charges.

And, yes, it was Trump's DoJ. In this case I'm unaware of any evidence that the decision was politically motived and I still have some confidence that whistleblowers would speak out, particularly given the recent wave of resignations due to directives in Minneapolis. I think people of good will could disagree with me there for sure.

▲

estearum 5 hours ago | parent [-]

It is unambiguously illegal to pay for goods you know to be stolen. In all 50 states and federally.

Most courts would assume someone who purchased a private diary of a living person would know that it was stolen.

▲

BryantD an hour ago | parent [-]

"particularly if you don't have knowledge of how the document was acquired."

	▲	estearum 23 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Correct, and there's no way that the private diary of a still-living daughter of a politician was acquired by any method other than theft. Prosecutors don't need to prove the buyer actually dispositively knew the document was stolen, only that reasonable person would have known it to be such. Which would be obvious in this case.