But think about who else could be accused of trying to “influence govt policy by intimidation or coercion.”
This could EASILY extent to, say, BLM protests.
And we already see a push to describe BLM and antifa (which has killed no one) as dangerous, violent groups.
So why do we need these laws? According to Lawfare, for the messaging: lawfareblog.com/its-time-congr…
But again, see the double edge here: this would allow a Trump DOJ to table BLM “terroristic.”
![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EBZKmp_WkAEfTbc.jpg)
This is about symbolism. Symbolism that is easily redirected in problematic directions.
Criminal laws will inevitably be written broadly, and that breadth will inevitably mean they will expand their reach.