Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Biden ‘Threat’ Warnings Designed To Chill Free Speech of Political Opponents

Administration gins up fears of attack from domestic terrorists, the US military, and the PTA

Biden ‘Threat’ Warnings Designed To Chill Free Speech of Political Opponents

Ratcheting up ill- or un-founded fears of violence from people who oppose the current administration’s policies.

Since taking office, the Biden administration has pushed an agenda that appears likely to chill the speech of political opponents while paying lip service to free speech, all in the name of protecting the public from ill-defined threats.

Four times since President Biden took office on January 20, the administration has issued warnings based on unsubstantiated threats of extremist violence:

• On January 27, the Department of Homeland Security issued its first-ever national terrorism bulletin about violent domestic extremists.

• On March 3, with National Guard troops still occupying Washington and the Capitol still surrounded by a fence, DHS, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation reportedly issued a joint bulletin of a possible plot by a militia group to storm the Capitol again.

• On May 14, after state and local governments began loosening lockdown restrictions on the CDC’s advice, DHS warned that “racially- or ethnically-motivated violent extremists… may seek to exploit the easing of COVID-19-related restrictions across the United States to conduct attacks.”

• Two weeks later, an unnamed source supplied NBC with a DHS memo cautioning that “the 100th anniversary of the Tulsa Race Massacre in Oklahoma” was probably an attractive target for “violent extremist-white supremacists…”

None of these warnings cited a specific or credible threat of violence.

During this time period, there was one – and only one – fatal attack on the Capitol. It was not by a white supremacist, but by Noah Green, a black Louis Farrakhan supporter; yet the current administration has shown little interest in exposing or confronting black-nationalist or Islamist violence.

In mid-June, the administration released a 32-page policy paper detailing its strategy for fighting domestic extremism. The paper, “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism,” pays lip service to targeting all ideologies. In the middle of page 13, it notes, “The definition of ‘domestic terrorism’ in our law makes no distinction based on political views – left, right, or center – and neither should we.” Nevertheless, the paper’s focus is on right-wing white supremacism. For example, all incidents cited in the introductory paragraph involved white-supremacist violence. It mentions the Pittsburgh synagogue attack, but ignores other, more recent attacks like the 2019 anti-Semitic murders at a kosher supermarket/school and a Hanukkah party by black perpetrators.

In actual practice, the administration has not cracked down even-handedly. In May, weeks before releasing its policy paper, DOJ dropped charges against several violent protestors in Portland, Oregon. (The following month, Portland’s district attorney brought charges against Antifa rioters who allegedly attacked the Multnomah County Democrats office in Portland.) At the same time, DOJ has zealously (arguably, overzealously) pursued January 6 rioters.

Explaining the new policy, Attorney General Merrick Garland assured that as a “core principle,” the federal government “focused on violence, not on ideology. In America, espousing a hateful ideology is not unlawful. We do not investigate individuals for their First Amendment-protected activities.” To combat domestic extremism, Garland continued, the administration was enlisting the technology sector “to tackle the on-line aspects of this threat” – the sector is “particularly important to countering terrorist abuse of internet-based communication platforms to recruit, incite, plot attacks, and foment hatred.” Working with Big Tech is not just prescriptive. On July 15, White House press secretary Jen Psaki admitted that the administration was working with Facebook to flag “problematic” posts that “spread disinformation” on COVID-19. Former ACLU president Nadine Strossen has suggested that government steering of dominant internet platforms may be “tantamount to government action and hence subject to First Amendment limits,” and argues that “government punishment of disinformation is fundamentally antithetical to democracy.”

What Garland called a “whole-of-government” approach also includes enlisting the military to root out domestic extremism. Weeks after taking office, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin ordered the military to ‘stand down’ to address extremism. The Air Force Academy’s counter-racism efforts include required training touting the virtues of Black Lives Matter ideology.

In the latest critical race theory salvo, Garland issued an October 4 memorandum to the FBI and leaders of the Department of Justice (including its National Security Division) informing them that the Department will announce a series of measures “to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.” What is this alleged criminal conduct, where is it rising, and who is committing it? The memo doesn’t specify. It was evidently issued in response to a complaint letter the National School Boards Association sent to the president, alleging that school officials have received threats at school board meetings and elsewhere.

Exactly what federal interest the AG is trying to vindicate is also unstated. School boards are local authorities and assault is a state law crime.

Despite the lack of any known victim or federal crime, an October 4 DOJ press release invites the public to report “[t]hreats of violence against school board members, officials, and workers in our nation’s public schools” to the FBI’s National Threat Operations Center. The press release also says DOJ plans to create “specialized training… [that] will help school board members and other potential victims understand the type of behavior that constitutes threats,” how to report it, and how to preserve evidence of it.

This echoes the administration’s anti-extremism program, which includes promoting civic education. “The administration said part of its strategy is to improve civic education to promote ‘tolerance and respect for all’ and foster programs that ‘inspire a shared commitment to American democracy.’”

Ratcheting up ill- or un-founded fears of violence from people who oppose the current administration’s policies on promoting critical race theory, COVID lockdowns, and an extended militarization of the capital; banning speech on these and other issues on the supposed ground that it is dangerous “disinformation”; and promoting ideological “education” in the guise of teaching “tolerance”, are not within the president’s remit. Instead, they seem reminiscent of Orwellian threats that “Jones would come back” if the public were to challenge government policies, or of cultural revolution-era struggle sessions. Biden, who took an oath to protect the U.S. Constitution, may himself need a primer on the First Amendment.

——-

Johanna Markind is Research Editor and Counsel at the Legal Insurrection Foundation, which she recently joined.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

They’re gaslighting us, pure and simple.

Telling us we’re crazy while they take our republic apart block by block.

They’re just hoping that we won’t wake up and…

    MattMusson in reply to NavyMustang. | October 8, 2021 at 6:57 am

    Let’s face it. The thing that worries the Elites most is that people will wake up to their graft and self-enrichment and finally build a fence between the hogs and the trough. They will do anything to protect the gravy train.

What parents at school-board meetings need to do to explode some liberal heads: next time they get shut down at a meeting, or have a member hauled out by “security,” they need to join hands, rock back and forth, and sing “We Shall Overcome” at the top of their lungs until security carries them all out. That will look super-great on the news.

bobguzzardi48 | October 7, 2021 at 10:31 pm

excellent article. Good to see Johanna Markind is part of the team.

Here in my neck of the woods in Florida, the local school board passed a mask mandate in spite of the DeSantis order that was recently upheld by a court.

The Board didn’t back down and on Tuesday, while the Board was discussing the issue and what to do, a board member made a comment about two Florida State Representatives. A few people in the crowd shouted something and the Chairperson of the Board called a recess and then cleared the room.

The deputies shoved everyone out and then when the Board resumed the meeting, no one was allowed back into the room. Deputies were shown the law and court cases saying that a public meeting has to be in public and the public cannot be excluded.

Nothing changed the deputies’ or board members mind.

People are calling for criminal charges to be levied against the school board and the deputies. (Qualified immunity won’t protect the officers as there are court cases on point.)

Today (Thursday) the Board was called before the State Board of Education and told they had 48 hours to retract their mask mandate or lose funding from the state that equals all Federal grants and funding. (This because Biden said he would fill in the financial gaps if DeSantis penalized the school boards for violating his order.)

The same penalty was levied against at least two other counties.

It should be noted that of the 5 members of the school board in my county, 4 are registered Republicans and members of the local Republican party group.

    henrybowman in reply to gitarcarver. | October 8, 2021 at 1:23 am

    In other words, a “insurrection.”
    It’s a shame all the penalties (good as they are) are lodged against the school system, and not against the individual board members who defied the state law. That’s what it’s going to take to get these tyrants’ attention.
    As a curious note, that is exactly the makeup of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, who fought the recent audit tooth and nail, Or at least it was before they “canceled” Republican member Chucri for criticizing their first “audit,” which looked at only 2% of the votes, as “bullshit.”

    fscarn in reply to gitarcarver. | October 8, 2021 at 3:53 am

    “Deputies were shown the law and court cases saying that a public meeting has to be in public and the public cannot be excluded.

    “Nothing changed the deputies’ or board members mind.”

    And the value of any oath to the Constitution (which ALL board members must take, as well as ALL LE officers) is 100% WORTHLESS.

      henrybowman in reply to fscarn. | October 8, 2021 at 4:50 am

      My construction of the constitution is very different from that you quote. It is that each department is truly independent of the others, and has an equal right to decide for itself what is the meaning of the constitution in the cases submitted to its action; and especially, where it is to act ultimately and without appeal.
      –THOMAS JEFFERSON (TO SPENCER ROANE)

      You seem to think it devolved on the judges to decide on the validity of the sedition law. But nothing in the Constitution has given them a right to decide for the Executive more than to the Executive to decide for them. Both magistrates are equally independent in the sphere of action assigned to them. The judges, believing the law constitutional, had a right to pass a sentence… But the executive, believing the law to be unconstitutional, were bound to remit the execution of it; because that power is confided to them by the Constitution.
      —THOMAS JEFFERSON (TO MRS. JOHN ADAMS)

      Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others.
      –ANDREW JACKSON

      But number one, our schools have conscientiously avoided teaching our citizens the constitution, much less how to interpret it, leaving them by default in the position of assenting to whatever someone else tells them it means. Gee, why not just let the government make ALL your life decisions? It would be as great as being on Welfare.

      And number two, most public officials are sheeple who are perfectly happy to let their superiors tell them what the constitution “means,” especially when any independent interpretation immediately stops their paychecks.

      alohahola in reply to fscarn. | October 8, 2021 at 9:07 am

      Until the law steps in. Nice to know Florida’s got law.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to gitarcarver. | October 8, 2021 at 4:48 am

    By your use of the word “Chairperson “ I wil
    Assume you mean a chairwoman.

“Let’s Go Brandon” is the new “Who is John Galt?”

I can assure you it would piss of both the Biden administration and the Mainstream Media.

Masks with “Let’s Go Brandon!” on them.

Someone should take the time to do a little investigation of the National School Board Association. They are involved in a lot of politics from opposition to school choice to CRT training for boards and teachers. They even provide searches for school superintendents to their members, which to my surprise was several school districts in my state. That ensures they get their ideologues installed.

And given the extent of their CRT training and seminars, it would be no surprise to find out that they use AG Garland’s son in law’s firm for their materials.

Yes, this organization needs some light shed on it.

Parents speak their mind.
School boards ignore them and continue with the plan to overthrow the republic. Rinse, lather, repeat & nothing changes.

Moms express their frustration and never act beyond some exchanges of speech at meetings where LEO control everything

Solution: everyone come packing heat.
Inform LEO at the beginning they are either patriots or tyrants, there are no other designations, you’re either with us, or designated enemy combatant.

Bring caning equipment
Persons found to have fomented Marxist ideology are immediately taken behind the building and caned with a severity proportional to their participation and the harm to our youth and nation
Anyone who doesn’t want to play can resign and receive a permanent ban from involvement in the education system.

    CommoChief in reply to rduke007. | October 8, 2021 at 9:48 am

    That’s exactly what the d//progressive want you to do in response. Then they can point to it as an example of dangerous, armed extremists which justifies even more heavy handed actions from DoJ.

    Don’t fall for their attempts to provoke you.

It’s predictable, indefensible and contemptible that the vile Dhimmi-crats and their media lackeys won’t give any scrutiny to black, black Muslim, Muslim and Leftist Jew-hate and violence against Jews; Zero response — that I can recall, anyway — from prominent Dhimmi-crats regarding the killings and stabbings mentioned in this post. And, of course, when bands of goose-stepping, Muslim supremacist/terrorist, Dhimmi-crat thugs were attacking American Jews in the streets of multiple cities, months ago, vile dotard Xi-den and his useless, feckless and equally vile Attorney General, Merrick Garland, waited at least one week before issuing a totally tepid, tardy and rote condemnation that made clear that they don’t give a damn about Dhimmi-crat violence against American Jews.

They are less concerned about their current opponents and more concerned about THEIR OWN CONSTITUENTS going over to the other side.

The more they devise and demonize nutty opponent groups, the more they are terrifying moderate and even somewhat liberal Democrats into STAYING IN PLACE.

(I wish I could write the above more articulately. Maybe someone else can give it a shot, because I think it is really important. I once was a moderate Dem at one point, and I can see how this works and see it working even among my once normal friends and co-workers.)

One might think the GOP in the Senate and House would have no trouble quickly and loudly issuing unanimous statements condemning this move by Comrade Biden and Lavrentiy Garland to target parents who object to the political indoctrination of their kids as ‘domestic terrorists’ using the ‘Patriot Act’. One would be wrong.

Terminate the ‘Patriot Act’. Politicians and the government cannot be trusted with this power. Defund the FBI.

And FJB.

Steven Brizel | October 8, 2021 at 2:12 pm

I saw that the anti Semitic incidents in Monsey and Jersey City were studiously not referred to by the DOJ while much ink was devoted to Pittsburg. Clearly, Biden does not consider anti Semitism emanating from the woke left whether in the media, academia or on the street as a clear and present danger to the vitality of a strong Jewish community

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend