[America] Domestic violent extremism

[Smoove_B]

Since it's now official

Press Sec. Psaki announces Biden has requested a comprehensive threat assessment on domestic violent extremism:

EDIT: I'd originally titled the thread "Domestic terrorism" but apparently that doesn't match the language used by the Press Secretary, so I changed it. Not sure what the deal is there.

[coopasonic]

I was trying to figure out what Domestic Violence Extremism was specifically, but then figured out I was thinking about the wrong Domestic. We need better words.

[Defiant]

Or just a better order?

Violent domestic extremism?

[Jaymann]

[Holman]

Wouldn't "Domestic Terrorism" be clearer?

Can extremism be violent without also being terrorism (especially since we've broadened rather than narrowed what "terror" means)?

[malchior]

Wouldn't "Domestic Terrorism" be clearer?

Can extremism be violent without also being terrorism (especially since we've broadened rather than narrowed what "terror" means)?

It can but in the end it is because snowflakes be whining.

[Paingod]

In my mind, the difference is terrorists take action and destroy property and/or kill people. Extremists "simply" rally people and radicalize them against something but may never take action.

I'm comfortable calling January 6th a terrorist action because property was destroyed and people were killed. All the nutter-butters in the woods grumbling about the government and spending every weekend playing soldier are extremists that may never do anything other than bitch to each other, but it could absolutely lead to terrorism.

[Alefroth]

Extremism might not always be terrorism, but isn't terrorism always extremism?

[Defiant]

Wouldn't "Domestic Terrorism" be clearer?

Can extremism be violent without also being terrorism (especially since we've broadened rather than narrowed what "terror" means)?

Extreme sports going really badly?

[Holman]

Extremism might not always be terrorism, but isn't terrorism always extremism?

It's the "violent" part that makes it terrorism.

I suppose someone could commit political violence in the name of aggressive centrism, and that would still be terrorism.

[LawBeefaroni]

Wouldn't "Domestic Terrorism" be clearer?

Can extremism be violent without also being terrorism (especially since we've broadened rather than narrowed what "terror" means)?

"Terrorism" elevates things legally. Do we really want a blanket authorization to surveil and extraordinarily rendition US citizens?

[Smoove_B]

Do we really want a blanket authorization to surveil and extraordinarily rendition US citizens?

Are they engaging in domestic terror?

[ImLawBoy]

Do we really want a blanket authorization to surveil and extraordinarily rendition US citizens?

Are they engaging in domestic terror?

Based on whose standards? What happens when another Trump like being is in power and decrees that BLM protests are domestic terrorism?

[Little Raven]

Needless to say, my left-wing friends are not happy about this. Patriot Act Mk II was one of their primary fears of a Biden adminsitration.

[Smoove_B]

Based on whose standards? What happens when another Trump like being is in power and decrees that BLM protests are domestic terrorism?

Fair points, but I feel like if we come down hard now on domestic terrorists (what I personally think they are), we diminish the risk of Trump 2.0 (in whatever form he chooses) returning to power and finishing what OG Trump tried. I hate to sound overly dramatic here, but I it kinda feels like we were just given an extra life (to borrow from gaming) to try and figure this out. If whatever we do this time doesn't work, I'm confident that whatever rules and regulations we have in place won't matter - because our existing ones barely held during this attempt - and we still have politicians complaining and looking to absolve Trump. I feel like if we use the globally accepted definitions of terrorism, we can at least say we tried. Which might or might not provide solace when Trump 2.0 rolls around, but it's something.

[Holman]

Do we really want a blanket authorization to surveil and extraordinarily rendition US citizens?

Are they engaging in domestic terror?

Based on whose standards? What happens when another Trump like being is in power and decrees that BLM protests are domestic terrorism?

Based, I hope, on reasonable standards: extremist groups planning violence towards political ends.

Would Biden refraining from the category somehow prevent another Trump from decreeing that BLM are domestic terrorists?

[Smoove_B]

Just seeing this:

WASHINGTON POST (1/19): Federal Law Enforcement Uncovers Massive Early-January Plot to Murder All of Congress; Plotters with Military Backgrounds, Who Had Trained to "Storm the Capitol," Planned to Gas Members of Congress in the Tunnels Beneath the Capitol

If that's not domestic terrorism "domestic violent extremism", I don't know what is.

[Holman]

U.S. authorities charged an apparent leader of the Oath Keepers extremist group, Thomas Edward Caldwell, 66, of Berryville, Va., in the attack, alleging that the Navy veteran helped organize a ring of dozens who coordinated their movements as they “stormed the castle” to disrupt the confirmation of President-elect Joe Biden’s electoral college victory.

“We have about 30-40 of us. We are sticking together and sticking to the plan,” co-defendant Jessica Watkins, 38, an Army veteran, said while the breach was underway, according to court documents.

I was told they were just random Good Old Boys taking an unauthorized tour.

In charging papers, the FBI said that during the Capitol riot, Caldwell received Facebook messages from unspecified senders updating him of the location of lawmakers. When he posted a one-word message, “Inside,” he received exhortations and directions describing tunnels, doors and hallways, the FBI said.

Some messages, according to the FBI, included, “Tom all legislators are down in the Tunnels 3floors down,” and “Go through back house chamber doors facing N left down hallway down steps.” Another message read: “All members are in the tunnels under capital seal them in. Turn on gas,” the FBI added.

[LawBeefaroni]

Based on whose standards? What happens when another Trump like being is in power and decrees that BLM protests are domestic terrorism?

Fair points, but I feel like if we come down hard now on domestic terrorists (what I personally think they are), we diminish the risk of Trump 2.0 (in whatever form he chooses) returning to power and finishing what OG Trump tried. I hate to sound overly dramatic here, but I it kinda feels like we were just given an extra life (to borrow from gaming) to try and figure this out. If whatever we do this time doesn't work, I'm confident that whatever rules and regulations we have in place won't matter - because our existing ones barely held during this attempt - and we still have politicians complaining and looking to absolve Trump. I feel like if we use the globally accepted definitions of terrorism, we can at least say we tried. Which might or might not provide solace when Trump 2.0 rolls around, but it's something.

It's the difference between branding an entire movement terrorists based on heebie-jeebies vs.branding individuals/groups terrorists based on evidence. Once you apply the big T there's no going back.

[Jaymann]

So what will Hawley say? "Oh, they meant laughing gas. It was just a prank."

[malchior]

Based on whose standards? What happens when another Trump like being is in power and decrees that BLM protests are domestic terrorism?

Fair points, but I feel like if we come down hard now on domestic terrorists (what I personally think they are), we diminish the risk of Trump 2.0 (in whatever form he chooses) returning to power and finishing what OG Trump tried. I hate to sound overly dramatic here, but I it kinda feels like we were just given an extra life (to borrow from gaming) to try and figure this out. If whatever we do this time doesn't work, I'm confident that whatever rules and regulations we have in place won't matter - because our existing ones barely held during this attempt - and we still have politicians complaining and looking to absolve Trump. I feel like if we use the globally accepted definitions of terrorism, we can at least say we tried. Which might or might not provide solace when Trump 2.0 rolls around, but it's something.

It's the difference between branding an entire movement terrorists based on heebie-jeebies vs.branding individuals/groups terrorists based on evidence. Once you apply the big T there's no going back.

Also part of the reason is that there is no definition of 'domestic terrorism' in the United States. There is no clear statutory authority to declare it, or identify it as 'domestic terrorism'. The Patriot Act gave the federal government some of the same tools as used to protect against international terrorism but did not create a new crime of 'domestic terrorism'. And the FBI itself has created a 'threat category' for it but calls out it is not a charging statute so they often have to detect or wait for a report of the underlying crimes -- whether being planned or acted upon -- before being able to act.

[Kurth]

Needless to say, my left-wing friends are not happy about this. Patriot Act Mk II was one of their primary fears of a Biden adminsitration.

We should all be concerned. There were some pretty good reasons our system had built in guardrails to hold back federal policing of “domestic terrorism.” Then again, considering that the agencies involved appear, for all intents and purposes, to have blown right through those guardrails, maybe that ship has already sailed.

I do hope that our new focus on domestic terrorism will include a significant crackdown on the extreme leftists and anarchists that continue to make my Portland (and parts of Seattle) a difficult place to live.

These idiots are a plague.

[ImLawBoy]

Do we really want a blanket authorization to surveil and extraordinarily rendition US citizens?

Are they engaging in domestic terror?

Based on whose standards? What happens when another Trump like being is in power and decrees that BLM protests are domestic terrorism?

Based, I hope, on reasonable standards: extremist groups planning violence towards political ends.

Would Biden refraining from the category somehow prevent another Trump from decreeing that BLM are domestic terrorists?

Well, Trump didn't do it last time. He certainly pushed every boundary, legal and otherwise, to try to (think of the unmarked vans pulling people off the streets). If there were actually more legal/easier methods for doing that kind of stuff? Look out.

I would have to look at what's being proposed to get a better idea of what they're proposing. Off the top of my head, I'm unclear why current laws are insufficient to deal with domestic terrorism/violent extremism. Generally speaking, I'm not in favor creating more laws to criminalize behavior that is already criminal.

If this ends up being a thing where they simply refocus existing efforts and resources to more efficiently address domestic terror, that's one thing. If they create new laws and try to enhance surveillance/erode privacy, that's another. Trump wouldn't have been able to do the latter without controlling both houses of Congress. If the Democrats clear that roadblock for Trump 2.0, however, it's that much easier for him. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and what not.

[Kurth]

Exactly. It’s all well and good to have government take on additional powers and authority when you’re reasonably happy with who is holding on to that power. But we just had the perfect, terrible example of what things can look like when that power is held by people who are fundamentally unfit for office.

Part of what got us through Trump was the systemic checks on federal power. We should be REALLY cautious about endorsing expansion of that power, especially if it’s eroding civil liberties, even if it’s nominally in the service of fighting Q and MAGA extremists.

[Paingod]

Part of what got us through Trump was the systemic checks on federal power. We should be REALLY cautious about endorsing expansion of that power, especially if it’s eroding civil liberties, even if it’s nominally in the service of fighting Q and MAGA extremists.

I laughed when they made new laws to run down the morons in red hats waving blue flags.

I cringed when they used the same laws to run down my neighbors for speaking out against the government.

I'm crying now that those laws have been applied to me for believing in something different than the ruling party.

[Daehawk]

It should be nipped in the bud and quickly with harsh penalties. Not foo foo'd away. You cant let idiots like Hawley run rampant either. He is a mouthpiece for this.

[Zarathud]

I do hope that our new focus on domestic terrorism will include a significant crackdown on the extreme leftists and anarchists that continue to make my Portland (and parts of Seattle) a difficult place to live.


These idiots are a plague.

What bullshit. The FBI has a long history of surveilling and threatening “liberal” activists for their free speech. Ask Malcom X or Martin Luther King. Or even John Mulvaney about being investigated just for his SNL joke about how Caesar was back-stabbed by the Roman Senate.

Literally the police state needs no reason to harass and beat the left.

Fucking crocodile tears.

[Combustible Lemur]

Part of what got us through Trump was the systemic checks on federal power. We should be REALLY cautious about endorsing expansion of that power, especially if it’s eroding civil liberties, even if it’s nominally in the service of fighting Q and MAGA extremists.

I laughed when they made new laws to run down the morons in red hats waving blue flags.

I cringed when they used the same laws to run down my neighbors for speaking out against the government.

I'm crying now that those laws have been applied to me for believing in something different than the ruling party.

Fwiw, most serious national security expert/ pundits Ive heard the last two weeks says new laws arent really necessary, just actually paying attentiom to the intel/ data and reprioritizing.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[Paingod]

Fwiw, most serious national security expert/ pundits Ive heard the last two weeks says new laws arent really necessary, just actually paying attentiom to the intel/ data and reprioritizing.

I wasn't trying to be a tinfoil extremist myself; I get that it's a reorientation, but anytime we've reoriented it seems like something extra gets swept up in the tray.

[hitbyambulance]

I do hope that our new focus on domestic terrorism will include a significant crackdown on the extreme leftists and anarchists that continue to make my Portland (and parts of Seattle) a difficult place to live.

These idiots are a plague.

it's the 'anarchist' (and i say that with quotes) equivalent of single-issue voting - any excuse or cover to throw garbage at police is a good one - BLM was just the latest excuse to do so.

[Kurth]

I do hope that our new focus on domestic terrorism will include a significant crackdown on the extreme leftists and anarchists that continue to make my Portland (and parts of Seattle) a difficult place to live.


These idiots are a plague.

What bullshit. The FBI has a long history of surveilling and threatening “liberal” activists for their free speech. Ask Malcom X or Martin Luther King. Or even John Mulvaney about being investigated just for his SNL joke about how Caesar was back-stabbed by the Roman Senate.

Literally the police state needs no reason to harass and beat the left.

Fucking crocodile tears.

I think we're talking past each other here and maybe that's why you appear to be triggered.

I'm not suggesting the government doesn't have a long history of going after leftist activists and groups. And it extends back before Malcom X and MLK. McCarthyism and the "Red Scare" were truly horrible, dark times for this country and perfect examples of excesses and abuses of power.

My only point was that I hope the pursuit of the MAGA insurrectionists doesn't totally distract from going after the people who keep busting up downtown Portland. I get that we need to prioritize the people that stormed the Capitol, but I hope the asshats we have here in abundance in the Pacific NW get some attention at some point, too.

[malchior]

My only point was that I hope the pursuit of the MAGA insurrectionists doesn't totally distract from going after the people who keep busting up downtown Portland. I get that we need to prioritize the people that stormed the Capitol, but I hope the asshats we have here in abundance in the Pacific NW get some attention at some point, too.

I think we're all going to be pretty disappointed here. That piece in the nation indicates that the DOJ has divisions over whether they should potentially overwhelm the courts prosecuting the entirety of people who entered the Capitol on the 6th. We saw similar outcomes in the summer. It was a game of constant 'catch and release' which was partly BS arrests and partly unwillingness to prosecute people. Call it another indicator that things are simply not right. If we don't have the capacity to hold extremists accountable...what does that say by itself?

An estimated 800 people stormed the Capitol building on January 6 in a violent insurrection aimed at overturning the results of the presidential election. Five people, including one Capitol Police officer, died. Many more were injured. On the day of the putsch, we all witnessed the privilege and restraint that law enforcement extends to white criminals. A few officers have already been placed on leave for appearing to encourage the mob. A single white insurrectionist was shot; had the mob been predominantly Black, we all know the cops would have released tanks, drones, and a barrage of bullets.

Now, we’re seeing that same racist permissiveness from the Department of Justice and the FBI. Riley June Williams, the white woman accused of stealing Nancy Pelosi’s laptop during the insurrection, was released last week to the custody of her mother, pending trial. Eric Munchel, the “zip tie guy” who showed up to the Capitol ready to take Congress members hostage, was released on bond after his buddy paid his bail. But Emanuel Jackson, pretty much the only Black face anybody has seen breaching the Capitol, will be held in prison until trial.

Every single person who breached the Capitol that day committed a crime. Every single person who breached the Capitol is, presumably, on video, captured by security cameras, committing that crime. At a minimum, every single person who breached the Capitol must be arrested, charged, and held accountable for that crime—just as they would be if they were Black.

But the vast majority of those 800 criminals were white, which means the vast majority are walking around free, at least for now. Reports indicate that only around 125 people have been arrested so far. Most of them have been charged with relatively minor offenses. A maddening report from The Washington Post suggests that there is internal division among some in the Justice Department about whether authorities should even bring cases against all 800 insurrectionists. For some reason, people at Justice are leaking to the press that they’re worried that bringing cases against these people would “overwhelm” the courts.

[Isgrimnur]

WKRN

The U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. has blocked the release of U.S. Capitol riot suspect Eric Munchel of Nashville.

The ruling comes less than two days after a magistrate judge in Nashville ordered that Munchel, known as “Zip Tie Guy”, could be released Monday. Munchel is still currently in custody and will be transported from Tennessee to Washington, D.C. for further proceedings.

A motion filed Wednesday in the U.S District Court in Nashville argues Munchel would be a danger to the community and a flight risk if he were to be released.

[Kurth]

Why is this guy not being charged with a crime?

From Navy SEAL to Part of the Angry Mob Outside the Capitol

In the weeks since Adam Newbold, a former member of the Navy SEALs, was identified as part of the enraged crowd that descended on the Capitol on Jan. 6, he has been interviewed by the F.B.I. and has resigned under pressure from jobs as a mentor and as a volunteer wrestling coach. He expects his business to lose major customers over his actions.

But none of it has shaken his belief, against all evidence, that the presidential election was stolen and that people like him were right to rise up.

It is surprising because Mr. Newbold’s background would seem to armor him better than most against the lure of baseless conspiracy theories. In the Navy, he was trained as an expert in sorting information from disinformation, a clandestine commando who spent years working in intelligence paired with the C.I.A., and he once mocked the idea of shadowy antidemocratic plots as “tinfoil hat” thinking.

He's threatened violence. He helped organize "frontline" insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol. He's unrepentant. And, from what I can tell, he's continuing to threaten violence:

in a video posted six days after the riot, when it was known that people had died, Mr. Newbold said that at the Capitol he had felt “a sense of pride that Americans were finally standing up.” He did not rule out turning to violence himself.

“I make no apologies for being a rough man ready to do rough things in rough situations,” he said. “It is absolutely necessary at times, and has been throughout our history.”

I don't care that he's a former Navy SEAL. He would seem to represent a clear and present danger in need of criminal prosecution.

[Isgrimnur]

WFMJ

According to a report from ABC News, the FBI had questioned a retired U.S. Navy SEAL from Lisbon about his activities during the attack on the U.S. Capitol last week.
...
After telling followers that police and National Guard members are not their enemies and hoped to bring them into the “fold,” Newbold said that the group was not looking for a fight.
...
According to ABC News, Newbold said the FBI has interviewed him about his Washington activities and has asked for a second interview.

"I am cooperating with the FBI," Newbold told ABC News in a 45-minute interview in which he expressed remorse for his actions and said of the attack on the Capitol that "it was all taken too far."

Newbold denied that he ever assaulted police officers guarding the Capitol or penetrated the building himself, according to the ABC report.

[Jaymann]

They also sedate who only sit and wait.

[Smoove_B]

Maybe instead of your state governor offering to pay a PR firm $50+ million to get people from the coasts to relocate to your state, consider dealing with your anti-government hate groups

Ohio has 31 active anti-government groups – the second-highest number of extremist anti-government groups in the country, according to a new report from the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The study identified more than 560 extreme antigovernment groups that were active nationwide in 2020, nearly 170 of which were militias.

Seventeen of Ohio's 31 antigovernment groups were considered militias in 2020. The Southern Poverty Law Center did not include the Ohio State Regular Militia in its list, though the FBI says that militia group is a "dues-paying subset" of the Oath Keepers.

[hitbyambulance]

A majority of the people arrested for Capitol riot had a history of financial trouble

(and if WaPo is paywalled, here's a reprint: https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-wor ... l-trouble/ )

The participation of people with middle- and upper-middle-class positions fits with research suggesting that the rise of right-wing extremist groups in the 1950s was fueled by people in the middle of society who felt they were losing status and power, said Pippa Norris, a political-science professor at Harvard University who has studied radical political movements.

Miller-Idriss said she was struck by a 2011 study that found household income was not a factor in whether a young person supported the extreme far right in Germany. But a highly significant predictor was whether they had lived through a parent’s unemployment.

“These are people who feel like they’ve lost something,” Miller-Idriss said.

Going through a bankruptcy or falling behind on taxes, even years earlier, could provoke a similar response.

“They know it can be lost. They have that history — and then someone comes along and tells you this election has been stolen,” Miller-Idriss said. “It taps into the same thing.”

[malchior]

Income/Wealth inequality is potentially a significant factor?!? Who would have thought it?

[Smoove_B]

Nearly 300 arrests, FBI is still looking for hundreds more.

Sounds like a good start.

Here’s what is known so far about the arrests:

Most people face charges that could send them to prison for anywhere from one to 20 years, but their trials could be delayed for months as the federal court system labors under the coronavirus pandemic.
An assistant U.S. attorney said in court last week that no plea offers have been made.
The FBI is expanding its online wanted gallery, with photos of more than 200 suspects, most of them wanted for physical violence against officers and the news media. The bureau shares it heavily on social media, hoping to keep those tips coming.
Dozens of other rioters have been identified after acknowledging being in the Capitol on social media or in interviews with journalists but haven’t been arrested.

I missed that they identified the pink hat lady last month. Her story is...something else.

I'm thinking that whatever manual the FBI is using to guide and keep track of domestic threats will likely be significantly updated after this is over.