I think what irked me, specifically, is the way the question was phrased, as though guilt was the default assumption, which is absurd to me.

I interpreted "What alternatives exist for getting this info?" as "What other way would big brother be able to violate your rights, except through this?" which I now realize is not what he was trying to say.

Has there been any evidence linking the users of this site directly to this riot? My core issue is that this seems to me to be a case of attacking political opponents through the legal system.

What evidence do they have that there is relevant information in those records directly tied to someone who committed a crime? I fail to see anything in this article that actually mentions a valid reason for this search.

Their original request covered over a million users. How could that possibly be reasonable?