Category: Bureaucraps

The judge’s concurring opinion in a case that enjoins the bureaucraps of ATF redefining what a ‘receiver’ is:

The Final Rule is limitless. It purports to regulate any piece of metal or plastic that has been machined beyond its primordial state for fear that it might one day be turned into a gun, a gun frame, or a gun receiver. And it doesn’t stop regulating the metal or plastic until it’s melted back down to ooze. The GCA allows none of this. I concur in the majority’s opinion holding the Final Rule is unlawful. And I further concur that the matter should be remanded to the district court to fashion an appropriate remedy for the plaintiffs.

Andrew S. Oldham
U.S. Circuit Judge
VanDerStok v. Garland
November 9, 2023

‘Ghost Guns’ Rule Exceeds ATF Authority, Appeals Court Holds

A federal appeals court Thursday tossed part of a rule targeting build-at-home “ghost guns” in a case advocates brought, holding the regulation exceeds “limits on agency authority in the name of public policy.”

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part a lower court ruling that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives final “frame or receiver” rule targeting privately made firearms without serial numbers conflicts with the Gun Control Act.

“ATF, in promulgating its Final Rule, attempted to take on the mantle of Congress to ‘do something’ with respect to gun control. But it is not the province of an executive agency to write laws for our nation. That vital duty, for better or for worse, lies solely with the legislature,” Judge Kurt D. Engelhardt wrote for the court.

ATF must operate within the statutory text’s limits until Congress acts, the judge said. “The Final Rule impermissibly exceeds those limits, such that ATF has essentially rewritten the law,” Engelhardt said.

Continue reading “”

SCOTUS Grants Cert to Bump Stock Case

The Supreme Court will decide whether the Trump administration’s ban on bump stocks, implemented by the ATF in 2018 after the Route 91 music festival shootings in Las Vegas, was a proper exercise of agency authority or an overreach on the part of the administration. On Friday the Court granted cert in a case known as Garland v. Cargill; one of several cases that have been bouncing around the lower courts since the ban was first put in place.

The Court’s granting of the case wasn’t exactly a surprise, for a couple of reasons. The Solicitor General had sought Supreme Court review, but there are also splits in the federal appellate courts over the legality of the ban. The Fifth Circuit has ruled the bump stock ban was improperly put into effect, while the D.C. Circuit, Sixth Circuit, and Tenth Circuit have all allowed the ban to remain in effect.

The question before the Court is whether a bump stock can be considered a “machine gun” under the statutory definition provided by the National Firearms Act; “any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.”

Continue reading “”

Republican spending bill would block gun background check rule
Proposed rule would implement a provision in the first bipartisan anti-gun violence package passed in years

As the Biden administration reiterates calls for tougher gun measures in response to the mass shooting in Maine last week, House Republicans updated a fiscal 2024 spending bill with provisions that take the opposite track.

House Republicans are looking to use the appropriations process to block a proposed rule to implement a provision included in the first bipartisan anti-gun violence package passed in years.

That gun package, which received the support of Republican senators such as Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, widened the definition of engaging in the business of firearm dealing, according to the Justice Department.

The law was enacted in the aftermath of a shooter killing 19 students and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, and another shooter killing 10 Black people at a grocery store in Buffalo, N.Y.

A proposed rule the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives published Sept. 8 would clarify the circumstances in which a seller would be required to obtain a federal firearm license and run background checks.

A new version of the House fiscal 2024 Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill, posted on the House Rules Committee website, adds a provision that would prohibit federal funds from being spent to enforce that rule, along with at least two other provisions that would roll back ATF enforcement against firearms dealers.

Continue reading “”

ATF Director Calls for “Assault Weapons” Ban, But Won’t Define the Term

ATF Director Steve Dettelbach wants Congress to pass an “assault weapons ban”. Just don’t ask him to define what an “assault weapon” actually is.

While speaking at Harvard University’s Institute of Politics this week, Dettelbach was asked what’s on his “wishlist” of legislation that he’d like to see Congress adopt. Dettelbach, who was Joe Biden’s second choice to head up the ATF after it became clear that gun control activist and former ATF agent David Chipman didn’t have the votes to get confirmed, didn’t talk about increasing penalties for straw purchases or thefts from gun stores. Instead, he acted like Biden’s loyal lapdog by backing the president’s call for a ban on so-called assault weapons while declining to define the term.

“I think it would be helpful if we had universal background checks in this country. I think that’s something that makes some sense,” Dettelbach said.

He added that he supports a ban on assault weapons.

“The president has also said, and I agree, that we should consider and reinstate a ban on certain types of assault weapons,” he said.

“I am not trying to be cute when I say this. It is emphatically the job of the United States Congress to write a definition” of assault weapons, he added.

Oh, I don’t think too many people will think he’s being cute with his response. Duplicitous? Sure. Evasive? Absolutely. Cute, not so much.

If Dettelbach believes that “assault weapons” should be prohibited, then surely he must have some idea about what guns would be covered by such a ban. If Congress defined “assault weapon” as “long guns possessed by federal agencies like the ATF”, for example, Dettelbach’s support for a ban would vanish in an instant. So why won’t Dettelbach offer up his own definition of what makes a gun an “assault weapon”?

If nothing else, Dettelbach’s refusal to define the term is proof positive that the phase “assault weapon” has no real definition at all. It’s the opposite of a term of art; a catchphrase with no specific meaning beyond “a gun I want to ban”. California, for instance, has revised its “assault weapons” ban multiple times since lawmakers first adopted a ban back in 1989, and state-level bans vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Some states like Massachusetts ban guns based on both features and by specific models, while other states impose prohibitions based solely on the presence of one or more features like an adjustable stock or a flash suppressor.

So how would Dettelbach himself determine whether a particular firearm is an “assault weapon”? He won’t say, but my guess is it would be as expansively as possible, especially given some of his other comments at Harvard.

Dettelbach said an overemphasis on individual rights, including the Second Amendment right to bear arms, impairs the ability to address gun violence as a public safety issue.

“People who have the view that their rights, their individual rights, are the only thing that should be taken into account — it is just not who we are as Americans,” he said. “We care about our rights, of course, but we respect other people’s rights, too.”

That’s a helluva straw man that Dettelbach constructed on stage. If you don’t support a gun ban, however it might be defined, you’re just selfish; more concerned with your individual rights than public safety, obsessed with your guns and blithely unconcerned about violent crime or mass murder.

Dettelbach simply can’t accept that many of us understand that more gun control won’t make us safer. The promise of increased safety at the expense of our individual rights is simply false, and you only have to look at the sky-high homicide rates in cities like Washington, D.C. and Chicago over the decades when those locales had banned the possession of handguns.

I’m sure Dettelbach’s job would be much easier if the ATF could ignore our Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights, but that is not who we are as Americans. I’d say that we also don’t blame law-abiding citizens for the actions of violent criminals, but unfortunately that’s not true… at least for the anti-gunner-in-chief, his lackeys, and those Americans hoping we can ban our way to safety.

US Halts Exports Of Most Civilian Firearms And Ammunition For 90 Days

Now the US has halted the exports of a lot of civilian firearms and ammunition for a total of 90 days citing national security. It has been claimed that the halts are going to cover most of the guns and ammunition that can be purchased in the United States gun store. This news has been officially claimed by Johanna Reeves who is a lawyer who specializes in export controls and firearms with the law firm Reeves and Dola in Washington, D.C. This is a very shocking announcement which has been made by a lawyer. Now to know everything that the lawyer has shared with us, read this entire article without missing anything.

According to the Commerce Department, the United States has officially stopped issuing export licenses for most civilian firearms and ammunition for a total of 90 days for all non-government users. Commerce Department officially claimed this statement on 27th October 2023, Friday, citing national security and foreign policy interests. The Commerce Department (CD) has not given more details regarding the pause as it also includes shotguns and optical sights. However, the CD has claimed that the review is going to assess the risk of the firearms that are being diverted to the activities and entities that have promoted regional instability, fueled criminal activities, and violated human rights.

On Friday, The Commerce Department declined to give any statement on the posting on its website. A famous lawyer who specializes in export control and firearms with the law firm Reeves and Dola in Washington, D.C., Johanna Reeves has officially given a statement in which she has claimed that the halt covers most of the ammunition and funds that can be purchased from the United States gun stores. She has also claimed that she has never seen the Commerce Department taking a sweeping action like this. They might have some individual country policies but there is nothing like this.

According to the experts, the license exports for Israel Ukraine, and some other close allies are going to be exempted from the temporary halt in the exports. The US companies that sell the firearms are Strum Ruger & Co., Vista Outdoor, and Smith & Wesson Brands they might face a big impact because of the ban on exports. The exporters can submit, the license requests at the time of the pause but the requests are going to be held without the action till the pause is lifted.

As I understand it, the ‘gray area’ law letters got the ATF bureaucrap’s attention and the destroyed Russian AK-12 ‘parts kits’ were the cherry on top of the sundae.
Trying to play fast and loose with U.S. code and regulation can be hazardous, as the federal bureaucraps do not like the peasantry devising ‘inventive’ ways to circumvent their restrictive regulations

United States of America v. Larry A. Vickers
Famed Delta Force veteran faces 25 years in a federal prison.

Special operations combat veteran, firearms industry consultant, tactical instructor and YouTube personality with more than a million loyal followers, Larry Allen Vickers, pleaded guilty last week to a multi-count federal indictment that accused him of conspiring to illegally import and obtain machineguns and other restricted firearms, and conspiring to violate U.S. sanctions against a Russian arms manufacturer.

Vickers, 60, faces up to 25 years in prison, according to a press release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Maryland. The judge overseeing the case has not yet scheduled a sentencing date.

Vickers’ influence on the firearms industry was massive — especially for all things tactical — because he had the right combination of training, real-world experience and business acumen. Vickers and other operators participated in Operation Acid Gambit — a hostage rescue operation to free American Kurt Muse, a CIA operative who was being held in a Panamanian prison. Today, actual hostage-rescue missions are rare, even for Tier One operators.

Vickers’ expertise was much sought after by small arms manufacturers. He developed improvements, innovations and accessories for Wilson Combat, Aimpoint, Glock and most notably, Heckler & Koch. He helped the German firm with their redesign of the M16, which led to the HK416 — the rifle of choice for special operations units around the world.

Vickers was also a firearms historian and scholar. His Vickers Guide series offered unique insight into the 1911, German small arms of World War II, the AR-15 and he wrote two volumes about the AK-47. He became a voice for AK proponents, and his advocacy led to new design features that improved the rifle’s ergonomics.

Vickers was one of the country’s most successful firearms instructors. A series of television shows and YouTube videos helped reinforce this brand. Although some will say much of his training was pre-9/11, he was one of the first Delta Force retirees to train civilians and law enforcement. His classes almost always sold out.

Vickers high profile and service to this country did not go unnoticed by federal law enforcement, especially the ATF.

The defendants    

Federal agents first raided Vickers’ home in October 2021, while Vickers was battling cancer. They seized 245 NFA weapons from his personal collection, including museum pieces some described as “priceless.” Many of the rare guns baffled ATF investigators, who referred to them on forfeiture paperwork as “unknown machinegun,” which they then valued at $1,000.

At the time, multiple sources said Vickers let his Special Operation Tax (SOT) payment lapse, which prompted the raid. But the federal indictment unsealed last week draws this conclusion into question.

“That indictment alleges that beginning in June 2018 to March 2021, the defendants conspired to acquire machineguns and/or other restricted firearms, such as short-barreled rifles, by falsely representing that the firearms would be used for demonstrations to law enforcement agencies, including the Coats Police Department and the Ray Police Department.

Continue reading “”

You simply can not make up such a lie as this bureaucrap’s affidavit.

ROCKY MOUNTAIN GUN OWNERS, V. THE TOWN OF SUPERIOR Yurgealitis Report

I kid you not:

1) “Assault weapons” are too complicated to use in self-defense because you may have to use a charging handle, turn off the safety, and load a magazine
2) AR-15s are too heavy and require two hands, which is why he recommends people use a pump-action 12-gauge shotgun with buckshot instead
3) You should store your shotgun with the internal magazine loaded
4) You should use a revolver with hollow-point bullets instead of a semi-auto pistol for self-defense because “there are no complicated safety mechanisms” and speed loaders are easy to use
5) AR-15s are just as lethal as full-auto M-16s

RMGO_v_Town_of_Superior_Yurgealitis_Report-1-90

 

Corrupt bureaucraps…but I repeat myself.

Former U.S. firearms investigator illegally trafficked guns to Mexico, government document alleges
Jose Luis Meneses, who worked as an investigator for ATF, admitted to buying firearm parts online and at a California gun store and then trafficking them to Mexico.

A former investigator for the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is accused of smuggling guns into Mexico while employed by the agency in 2017, according to a letter sent to ATF’s head this week by U.S. Senator Charles Grassley.

Jose Luis Meneses, a Mexican national who worked as an investigator for ATF at the U.S. Consulate in Tijuana, admitted to buying firearm parts online and at a California gun store and trafficking them into Mexico for profit back in 2017, according to the letter and an ATF memo from the time obtained by Reuters.

The case has not been previously reported.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
The lower the threshold for taking away a person’s guns, the more likely it is that guns will be taken away from innocent people.

Feds Want SCOTUS To Let Judges Strip Gun Rights, Even When There’s Been No Crime

The Supreme Court has now received all the briefs for a case it will hear on Nov. 7 that could seriously affect how courts evaluate the constitutionality of gun-control laws. The Biden administration asked for a review of the Fifth Circuit Court’s decision not to deprive Zackey Rahimi of his right to own guns.

Rahimi is not a sympathetic character. He is a drug dealer with a long, violent criminal record. But instead of prosecuting Rahimi for his violent crimes or imposing sufficient bail to keep him in jail, prosecutors merely obtained a domestic violence protection order based on a 2020 assault against his girlfriend. The protection order was imposed without a hearing, and because he was not being criminally prosecuted, Rahimi was not provided with a lawyer.

The question before the court is: What is the standard of evidence needed to strip someone of their constitutional right to keep and bear arms? People lose their right to a gun when convicted of felonies and some violent misdemeanors. But should they lose that right after a mere noncriminal, civil decision — in the absence of a public hearing and a lawyer?

Continue reading “”

Obammy started a program where, if the VA decided vets had to have their financial matters handled by a ‘representative payee’ or conservator, the vet’s name was sent to the FBI to be put in NICS as a prohibited person for gun possession. There was no requirement for even a court decision or adjudication, just if the VA made a decision, on their own. Trump canned the program, but SloJoe reinstituted it.

Kennedy Says Deal Reached to Protect Veterans’ Gun Rights

There’s a joke about the VA: It gives veterans a second chance to die for their country.

We’re not big fans of how the VA does a lot of things. One of the things we’ve seen, though, is particularly alarming. That’s the idea of the VA having the authority to take action against their patients with regard to their gun rights.

Sure, I get the desire to do something for someone who is suicidal or whatnot, but this wasn’t limited to just that. It included people who simply needed some help with their finances or who were physically disabled.

Now, though, a deal has reportedly been reached that will put an end to that threat.

Sens. John Kennedy and Chuck Schumer have worked out a deal on a bill to protect veterans’ gun rights, according to the Hill.

At issue was an amendment proposed by Kennedy, R-La., that would allow military veterans, who have to enter a conservatorship, the ability to keep their firearms.

“I just left Chuck’s office. I think we got it worked out,” Kennedy told The Hill. “We’re going to hotline some new language. Frankly, I think it makes my amendment stronger. Now, not everyone’s going to be happy.”

Kennedy’s amendment was proposed as part of the Senate’s “minibus” appropriations bill that would fund the departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Veterans Affairs and Agriculture.

“The original position was they wanted me to pull my amendment down and I said ‘no,’” he said.

If this does go through, it promises to protect the gun rights of veterans throughout the nation.

The thing about a conservatorship is that it’s not always because someone is mentally incompetent. If they are, then they can be adjudicated as such and their gun rights can be revoked that way, but it’s not the VA’s place to determine if a veteran is incompetent or not.

Many people enter conservatorship because of various reasons, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re unable to responsibly exercise their gun rights.

Either way, veterans aren’t going to be interested in utilizing VA services if their gun rights are going to be in danger. It’s one of the issues with red flag laws with regard to therapists. If people think their rights are at risk, they simply won’t get the help they need.

Kennedy’s bill seeks to fix that, to keep the VA from screwing over veterans like that.

What we need to be careful about now is that the deal actually goes through. I know what Sen. Kennedy said, but this is Schumer we’re talking about here. He’s not exactly gun-friendly, now is he? Could there have been a miscommunication there? Maybe. Or maybe Schumer just wants to get this bill through and if it has to swallow something that protects gun rights for veterans, then so be it.

Either way, we need to wait and see how this actually plays out, but I’m hopeful that this will become law. Our veterans deserve it and so much more.

ATF Seeks to Muzzle Gun Owners of America Advocacy Group

In 2021, AmmoLand News disclosed documents that indicated the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) had been using the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to surveil Americans without proper authorization. Often, these individuals were monitored solely based on associations rather than concrete evidence of misconduct. This revelation prompted the Gun Owners of America (GOA) to seek further details via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

In a 2021 exposé, reporter John Crump unveiled that leaked ATF records showed a secretive surveillance operation targeting numerous legal gun buyers. This was accomplished by monitoring all gun transactions processed through the NICS system, as detailed by GOA.

After facing potential legal actions and a year of persistence, ATF released some information concerning the initiative. However, inconsistencies in redaction led GOA to seek complete versions of these records. Upon realizing their oversight, the ATF pressed GOA to erase all obtained records.

Yet, GOA resisted. They had legally received the documents from ATF and believed they had every entitlement to retain and utilize them for public awareness regarding unauthorized surveillance. In a subsequent move, the ATF sought a legal directive against GOA, demanding the deletion of the records and a commitment to silence.

This situation mirrored a prior incident involving AmmoLand News in the AutoKey Card case. In that instance, backed by GOA-funded legal support from Stephen Stamboulieh, AmmoLand News successfully resisted ATF’s efforts to silence them. Now, with the tables turned, GOA has enlisted Stamboulieh to challenge another ATF attempt at suppression.

GOA firmly maintains that since they legally acquired the documents, they have full rights over them. They are willing to eliminate personal details like social security numbers but will resist a comprehensive deletion mandate. They allege that ATF’s primary intention is to conceal their clandestine surveillance.

GOA’s legal briefing emphasizes the importance of upholding First Amendment rights, highlighting the extraordinary nature of ATF’s request and labeling it as potentially unconstitutional.

While ATF asserts a motive of privacy protection for its subjects, GOA counters this by pointing out the inherent irony. The ATF’s very operation intrudes upon individual privacy. GOA’s intention is to make these records available to Congress, suggesting that ATF might be keen on keeping this information away from its regulators.

GOA’s briefing also notes, “It’s a profound paradox that while ATF claims to safeguard gun owners’ privacy, they are the very entity spying and collecting personal data on these individuals.” GOA has urged the judiciary to uphold their First Amendment rights and dismiss ATF’s claims against public interest.

With the ATF fervently attempting to suppress details about this operation, many are left pondering, “What is the ATF concealing?”

Continue reading “”

BLUF
So what is the FBI and the rest of the intelligence/law-enforcement apparatus missing now? When we find out, it will be too late.

Israel’s intelligence failure is a warning for America’s politicized agencies

Some people are calling it “Israel’s 9/11.”

That makes sense, in that Hamas’ massacre was a totally unexpected massive terrorist attack with a huge body count of innocent people.

Not as many people died as on 9/11 (though proportionately to Israel’s population it was worse than 9/11 was for America).

Because the assault involved shootings, rapes and kidnappings, it seems somehow more personal than the jets of 9/11.

But there’s one way in which it was identical, and that’s the “totally unexpected” part.

Like American intelligence agencies before 9/11, Israel’s security services were caught flat-footed.

Both American and Israeli officials have said it was a complete surprise.

Continue reading “”

Maybe if the bureaucraps wouldn’t have been infiltrating Churches, Parent’s Groups and ‘MAGA” rallies, instead of doing their Constitutional duty to protect each of them (the states) against Invasion by these Jumpin Jihadis, we wouldn’t have this to worry about.

FBI director warns of rise in terror threats against Americans, potential copy-cat attacks on US soil.

The head of the FBI is ominously warning there is a rising number of terror threats against the US — and that the biggest concern involves potential lone wolves pulling off Hamas copy-cat attacks here.

Agency chief Christopher Wray, 56, urged law enforcement to be extra cautious about ripple effects from the raging Israeli-Palestinian conflict during an address at the International Association of Chiefs of Police annual conference in San Diego on Saturday.

“History has been witness to antisemitic and other forms of violent extremism for far too long,” he said, according to an FBI transcript. “We remain committed to continue confronting those threats.

“In this heightened environment, there’s no question we’re seeing an increase in reported threats, and we’ve got to be on the lookout, especially for lone actors who may take inspiration from recent events to commit violence of their own,” he added.

Wray’s warning came a day after former Hamas chief Khaled Meshaal’s designated a “Day of Jihad” on Oct. 13.

The FBI director did not divulge any specific domestic threats that the bureau may be grappling with directly stemming from the war but rather issued the broad warning.

Continue reading “”

House GOP launches inquiry into Biden ATF gun sales rule: ‘Universal gun registry’

EXCLUSIVE — Rep. Roger Williams (R-TX), chairman of the House Small Business Committee, is launching an investigation into a new rule from the Biden administration making single-sale gun sellers subject to gun dealing licenses.

In September, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives proposed a change to the definition of “engaged in the business of selling firearms” to include anyone who sells a firearm with the “predominant purpose” of profit.

A letter from Williams to ATF Director Steven Dettelbach, obtained exclusively by the Washington Examiner, notes the proposed rule would force nearly 25,000 new persons to legally register for a Federal Firearms License, “functionally turning them into a small business.”

“The ATF’s new rule would force thousands of gun enthusiasts to register as Federally Licensed Firearms Dealers,” Williams told the Washington Examiner. “Criminals will simply ignore this new requirement while law-abiding citizens will be forced to submit their information to the ATF as another backdoor attempt to make a universal gun registry. This ridiculous new requirement will do nothing to improve public safety and only shows the Biden Administration’s contempt for the Second Amendment.”

The new rule would require a gun owner who wishes to sell only one of their firearms to register as an FFL if they plan to make a profit, the letter states. It also notes that many gun owners do not wish to become businesses and are also not prepared to do so.

“ATF has determined that this proposed rule would impact unlicensed persons who would now have to become licensed dealers to lawfully operate as a small business,” the proposed rule states. “Because some of these unlicensed persons may transact in low-volume firearms sales to predominantly earn a profit, the costs to become an FFL could have an impact on their overall profit from firearms transactions.”

Williams and the committee are demanding answers from the ATF on the rule’s effect on small businesses, much of which was left out of the rule, the letter launching the inquiry states. One item requested is the cost in fees from small businesses to the ATF imposed by the new rule.

It also states that the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires government agencies to consider less costly, suitable alternatives to regulations on small businesses, for which Williams is requesting a detailed audit of their considerations as well as an explanation as to why the ATF did not include this analysis in the proposed rule.

The committee is also requesting an accounting of how many of the 25,000 new persons the ATF believes will stop selling firearms altogether due to the new rule.

The ATF declined to comment but confirmed it received the letter from Williams.

Thoughts on Proclamation 7463, or ‘Digital McCarthyism’ on the Move

On September 14, 2001, George W. Bush, exercising “the power vested in [him] as President of the Untied States,” issued Proclamation 7463, a “Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks.” That got the ball rolling on the construction of the surveillance state.

At the time, the extreme measure seemed justified. Three days earlier, the United States had suffered its most devastating terrorist attack in history.

But how about this: On September 8, 2023, Joe Biden quietly renewed the Bush era emergency measures for another year. I was told there would be no math, but that makes 22 years and counting that a vast array of surveillance assets have been mobilized against—against whom?

When George W. Bush was president, they were focused on al Qaeda and kindred groups. Today?

Today, that fearsome governmental power is still assembled. Increasingly, however, it seems to be focused against those the administration fears or dislikes.

Traditional Catholics, for example, or parents upset with their local school boards.

At the head of the list of potential “domestic extremists” are the tens of millions of people who support Donald Trump (not to mention, of course, Trump himself). A couple of days ago, Hillary Clinton took to CNN (it would be CNN) to say that something needed to be done to silence those misguided people who supported Trump. “Maybe,” she said, “there needs to be a formal deprogramming” of MAGA “cult members.”

Apparently the FBI agrees. According to a much-cited article in Newsweek, the agency has created a “new category of extremists that it seeks to track and counter: Donald Trump’s army of MAGA followers.” That article suggests that the FBI is struggling to combat genuine threats without attacking people who simply support Trump and other populist candidates. I wonder, though, how scrupulous they are being in protecting people’s Constitutional rights to free speech and political dissent.

Actually, I do not wonder. It is quite clear, as The New York Post observed, that the agency is deploying “some of the same counterterrorism methods honed to fight al Qaeda” in its scrutiny of Trump supporters and “AGAAVE,” i.e., “anti-government, anti-authority violent extremism” (an acronym that, as the Post suggested, “looks like a typo for a sugar substitute”).

Continue reading “”