Thread by @amy_riveter

Reporting: Amazon & IPI (a spinoff of Iconiq - Zuckerberg, @jack, & Reid Hoffman’s fund) have a neat legal trick, using federal law enforcement & public storytelling. Step 1: Accuse people of a crime to the FBI. A thread. /1 bit.ly/345o7s1

(Bonus points if company destroys documents in 30 days, so they can whatever story. As @JeffBezos says: ''I love E-mail. The problem is somebody can take it out of context and use it against you, and we have to guard against that.'' /2 nyti.ms/3HjH88n

Step 2: When there isn’t an indictment, sue the people you accused. Step 3: In complaints, mention the FBI investigation that YOU started 114 times. (114!) But do NOT say that you made the accusations & provided selective evidence. /3 bit.ly/3zakEUs

Guess what? Using this tool, Amazon secures a $21M injunction - a # not tied to any amount paid by Amazon to ANYONE related to its allegations. The basis? Judge finds that Amazon’s *success on the merits is likely since the FBI had probable cause to get a search warrant.* /4

See that neat circle? Amazon & IPI alleged crime to FBI, gave selective evidence, FBI got warrant, then Amazon sued, then got injunction *because FBI had probable cause* based on Amazon & IPI's allegations. /5

But if something so bad happened, why didn’t Amazon & IPI sue? Why *first* spend months trying to get FBI to charge a crime? And sue only when they don’t & AFTER a defendant threatens to sue Amazon & IPI? /6

A bit on IPI: A billionaire party-fund. It partnered with Northstar, who it later accused, to build data centers that Amazon leased. Amazon still leases these exact data centers & sells cloud computing from them. For billions. /7 bit.ly/3JlSL03

How do we know Amazon & IPI made the allegations? Well, Northstar sued IPI. IPI kicked Northstar out of their partnership on 4/2/20. (The same day the FBI executed the search warrant that the judge later used as the basis for the civil injunction.) As a result of this... /8

This left IPI as the sole owner & landlord of the Amazon data centers. How much did IPI profit by virtue of kicking our Northstar? Over $100M. Anyway, in that lawsuit, IPI said: /9

So: why did IPI & Amazon choose to go to the FBI? Well, IPI kicked out Northstar from their joint venture. Without notice, without anything. Look at the contract language & it makes sense. Only way to kick out Northstar w/out a cure period: A FELONY. /10

Why Amazon got involved? They’re still a tenant in the data centers & don’t claim they pay less in rent, the only $ ever owed by Amazon in relation to the criminal allegations they made. (One filed exhibit in Amazon’s case indicates they pay MORE to IPI now, which is weird.) /11

But: IPI gives us a hint. IPI says in IPI/Northstar litigation that Amazon *required them* to kick out Northstar, which would make Amazon liable to Northstar, too, if there isn’t a felony. (Weird that a tenant can force a landlord to renegotiate ownership of HIS building?) /12

There is so much more to this unfolding story. But I think it’s crazy that this circle worked so perfectly for Amazon and IPI - and if any other big co has similar access to federal law enforcement, they can do the same. /13
politi.co/312oORD

On top of this, the govt seized millions via civil forfeiture from those Amazon & IPI accused. While they keep making billions on the data centers, the civil forfeitures have led to the closing of multiple companies, loss of 50 jobs, and 3 family homes. This is POWER. /14

It's interesting - this power - because the funds seized by the government related never belonged to Amazon or IPI. No one claims that. And these are the only non-drug forfeitures I can find in YEARS in the district where Amazon & IPI made their accusations. /15

Of course, as a former fed prosecutor told @politico: “If a company is able to put together a case well, they can serve it up on a silver platter ... to law enforcement to make it very easy for federal law enforcement to take.” /16

And with Amazon's 70+ former FBI/prosecutors on staff: "former government officials “do get a head start in terms of credibility” . . . “[Prosecutors] are less likely to believe someone’s coming in and misleading [them] if they’re a former FBI agent,” Goelman said./17

These are all facts, as slowly told and put together from many court records & reporting from various articles over 25 years. I'm a lawyer and I can understand this. What do people do who can't? This system is flawed. Thanks for reading. /18