Is there any question the person who was baselessly charged with CSAM, then terrorism when they realized it was so obviously untenable, as a pretense to detain him would've been treated differently if he were on a different "side"?

▲

gruez 8 hours ago | parent [-]

>the person who was baselessly charged with CSAM, then terrorism

Source? Are we still talking about Samuel Tunick? The article doesn't mention it, and so far as I can tell he was only charged at the border crossing for obstruction.

	▲	SauciestGNU 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Not "charged" as in indicted but the search was based on an accusation that he had CSAM on the device. But his political proclivities make it pretty transparent that CSAM was an invented excuse to investigate and punish a political dissident.