This started in my head as a plot device in a story, but I was wondering if it’d actually fly in the real world.

There are many public figures who almost certainly have closets which are positively creaking to bursting point with skeletons. Politicians, especially. Can you hire a private detective to investigate someone without having a clear goal in mind? Like, just “investigate until the money runs out” kinda thing, in the hopes that eventually something incriminating or reputationally hazardous is found?

Is this legal? If so, who should we send the P.I.s after first? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

It would be interesting to see how certain people would behave if they simply heard we were planning this. Like, would JD Vance suddenly start burning shit in a barrel in his backyard if he heard about the army of P.I.s we’ve paid to look into him? We could make that the scheme: go through the motions of crowdfunding an investigation, but the real P.I. will be watching the named individuals and seeing what they do in response to the threat 👀

  • xantoxis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    97
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    Is this legal?

    Yes, it’s called “opposition research” (frequently abbreviated “oppo”) and the political parties do it constantly to one another. Because they’re doing it this much, and because they have a LOT less scruples than you do, they’ve probably already uncovered everything you would. But maybe not all.

    In addition, doing this publicly would put the target on alert, so they’d specifically run interference against whoever you hired. This wouldn’t make their job impossible, but definitely harder.

    And, finally, whatever new dirt you do manage to gather might not matter. The things Trump has done that the public already knows about should be enough to put him in prison for life, and yet he’s still in the current US presidential election instead of incarceration.

    • Makeitstop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      At this point, I’m not sure if he’d lose even 1% in the polls if a recording came out showing him with Epstein, explicitly stating he’ll take the 12 year old girl, then dropping his pants. Most of his supporters would claim it was fake, some would claim it was out of context because they didn’t release any footage of actual sex, and at least a few would argue that there’s nothing wrong with sex with 12 year olds.

      • ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Well yeah, because he would “marry” the girl, then rape her, then divorce her. Perfectly legal and therefore moral. /s

    • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      You publicly announce that you raised enough for the second best private eye in the area, and also secretly hire the number one. Tapping head gif

    • MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      I was thinking the same thing. This seems like investigative journalism that’s more public and without the ethics and rigor part.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 days ago

    When asking yourself such questions, ask what law(s) might be broken. There are plenty I’m sure, but your PI should know exactly how to stay out of trouble. Unless when, maybe later, it comes out that he was up to shenanigans…

    And no, I’m certain no justification is required to contract a PI. Imagine if there was, no one would do the job.

  • CerealKiller01@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Obviously, it would depend on which country you’re asking.

    No idea about the US, but what you’re describing has kinda been done. The PIs were hired for a set amount of time to track some politicians during the day, and were supplemented by freedom of information requests and data from public sources.

    Most of the findings were what you would expect (Some parliament members barely came to the parliament, some had days with mostly political activists/lobbing/business magnate). There were a few “out there” examples, as one parliament member was doing grocery shopping etc. Thing is, this method is pretty good to figure out what politicians work for the public and who works for private interests, but it’s nearly impossible to actually uncover anything that’s even skirting on the illegal. A PI can’t wiretap or search private property.

    A tangent, but In the same spirit, there’s a crowdfunded lobbying agency called Lobby 99.