1/29
It is *SHOCKING* how little the mainstream news is talking about this memoranda right now.
They've glossed over just how bad it is!
It expands on the "Antifa" EO, but if allowed to stand then it is the *SINGLE* biggest power grab against rights since the Patriot Act!
It is *SHOCKING* how little the mainstream news is talking about this memoranda right now.
They've glossed over just how bad it is!
It expands on the "Antifa" EO, but if allowed to stand then it is the *SINGLE* biggest power grab against rights since the Patriot Act!
2/29
Unlike an Executive Order, a Presidential Memoranda does *not* have to be published in the Federal Registrar.
They are designed to fly more "under the radar" for "administrative issues" and they've used that here with good reason.
Unlike an Executive Order, a Presidential Memoranda does *not* have to be published in the Federal Registrar.
They are designed to fly more "under the radar" for "administrative issues" and they've used that here with good reason.
3/29
They've essentially used this memoranda to expand on their "Antifa Terrorist Designation" executive order, by putting the details into the memoranda instead.
Remember the context of that EO:
1) Claim Antifa is a thing.
2) 2) Designate it a "Domestic Terrorist Org"
They've essentially used this memoranda to expand on their "Antifa Terrorist Designation" executive order, by putting the details into the memoranda instead.
Remember the context of that EO:
1) Claim Antifa is a thing.
2) 2) Designate it a "Domestic Terrorist Org"
4/29
In the new memoranda they first make the claim that these "terrorist" actions are:
-"Not isolated incidents"
and are
-"Organized campaigns"
This paragraph otherwise seems benign, but its not.
There is a dangerous reason they make this claim - so keep it in mind!
In the new memoranda they first make the claim that these "terrorist" actions are:
-"Not isolated incidents"
and are
-"Organized campaigns"
This paragraph otherwise seems benign, but its not.
There is a dangerous reason they make this claim - so keep it in mind!
5/29
They then claim that all of this happens under an umbrella term of "anti-fascist" attempting to use that rhetoric to call for "violent revolution"
And suggest that these run counter to "American Principles" which they claim include things like "support for law enforcement"
They then claim that all of this happens under an umbrella term of "anti-fascist" attempting to use that rhetoric to call for "violent revolution"
And suggest that these run counter to "American Principles" which they claim include things like "support for law enforcement"
6/29
Based on these claims they direct the Joint Terrorism Task Force to focus new programs on various acts.
Investigating political violence, terrorism or conspiracy against rights, are all good and fair things.
But there is a problem...
Based on these claims they direct the Joint Terrorism Task Force to focus new programs on various acts.
Investigating political violence, terrorism or conspiracy against rights, are all good and fair things.
But there is a problem...
7/29
It's this word.
Claiming that "radicalizing" someone to these "anti-fascist" views is the same as partaking in political violence and should be investigated.
There is no legal standard for what "radicalizing" means
It's this word.
Claiming that "radicalizing" someone to these "anti-fascist" views is the same as partaking in political violence and should be investigated.
There is no legal standard for what "radicalizing" means
8/29
BUT, it gets worse when we look at what they consider to be the "radical" "anti-fascist" positions.
According to them, if you were to express views of "hostility" against "traditional American views on family, religion, or morality" that IS a radical indica of violence.
BUT, it gets worse when we look at what they consider to be the "radical" "anti-fascist" positions.
According to them, if you were to express views of "hostility" against "traditional American views on family, religion, or morality" that IS a radical indica of violence.
9/29
Same with views against Americanism (what?), capitalism, Christianity or views that THEY consider to be "extremism" on gender, race or migration - which of course is anything that does not conform to their belief system.
Same with views against Americanism (what?), capitalism, Christianity or views that THEY consider to be "extremism" on gender, race or migration - which of course is anything that does not conform to their belief system.
10/29
Post a pro-LGBTQ post on social media?
They could technically argue that you were radicalizing some terrorist because you went against views on gender, family and religion.
But, what does this have to do with your rights?
Post a pro-LGBTQ post on social media?
They could technically argue that you were radicalizing some terrorist because you went against views on gender, family and religion.
But, what does this have to do with your rights?
11/29
The memoranda says that the DoJ should "designate" you as part of a "domestic terrorist organization" under 18 U.S.C. 2331(5).
But there is an issue with that.
It's not really a designation process like the FTO.
The memoranda says that the DoJ should "designate" you as part of a "domestic terrorist organization" under 18 U.S.C. 2331(5).
But there is an issue with that.
It's not really a designation process like the FTO.
12/29
This is a definition (which is different than a designation), that is used as reference in different crimes to change their penalty and deal with jurisdictional matters.
But, the reference *IS* used in one other important place: **The Patriot Act**
This is a definition (which is different than a designation), that is used as reference in different crimes to change their penalty and deal with jurisdictional matters.
But, the reference *IS* used in one other important place: **The Patriot Act**
13/29
Under The Patriot Act, the FBI can perform warrantless-surveillance on American's with NO judicial involvement through the use of "National Security Letters" (NSLs)
These letters let the FBI request data about American's without warrants, and under gag orders
Under The Patriot Act, the FBI can perform warrantless-surveillance on American's with NO judicial involvement through the use of "National Security Letters" (NSLs)
These letters let the FBI request data about American's without warrants, and under gag orders
14/29
An NSL requires:
-No judge approval
-No threshold of proof
-No requirement of probable cause
BUT, it does require one thing, the FBI can ONLY issue an NSL if they can articulate that it relates to:
-Counterintelligence
OR
-Counter-terrorism
An NSL requires:
-No judge approval
-No threshold of proof
-No requirement of probable cause
BUT, it does require one thing, the FBI can ONLY issue an NSL if they can articulate that it relates to:
-Counterintelligence
OR
-Counter-terrorism
15/29
The goal of this memoranda is to create legal cover for Kash Patel to create NSLs to investigate *ANY* person who expresses anti-Trump, anti-MAGA or anti-fascist rhetoric.
All without a warrant.
Simply by saying "they had the *indica* of a known terrorist group"
The goal of this memoranda is to create legal cover for Kash Patel to create NSLs to investigate *ANY* person who expresses anti-Trump, anti-MAGA or anti-fascist rhetoric.
All without a warrant.
Simply by saying "they had the *indica* of a known terrorist group"
16/29
This lets them compel records from other federal departments, as well as private companies, just by saying they "had to" investigate you to rule out you were a terrorist.
Requesting logs through ALL the KYC/AML bank monitoring programs and the IRS
This lets them compel records from other federal departments, as well as private companies, just by saying they "had to" investigate you to rule out you were a terrorist.
Requesting logs through ALL the KYC/AML bank monitoring programs and the IRS
17/29
They EXPRESSLY are using this to dig up dirt on people, both directly, and in pursuit of larger charges.
Just as we saw with Fed Governor Cook, the Trump administration tries to use made up crimes, in the court of public opinions to bully detractors into silence.
They EXPRESSLY are using this to dig up dirt on people, both directly, and in pursuit of larger charges.
Just as we saw with Fed Governor Cook, the Trump administration tries to use made up crimes, in the court of public opinions to bully detractors into silence.
18/29
That's *one of* the reasons that this memorandum expressly requires that the IRS and the Treasury department produce financial records, tax filings, and all financial reports, related to any one that the JTFF/FBI investigate under this "terrorist" label.
That's *one of* the reasons that this memorandum expressly requires that the IRS and the Treasury department produce financial records, tax filings, and all financial reports, related to any one that the JTFF/FBI investigate under this "terrorist" label.
19/29
BUT, the other reason is *MUCH* more dangerous.
And it's a the end of this paragraph, when they reference Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq) which is more commonly known as "RICO"
BUT, the other reason is *MUCH* more dangerous.
And it's a the end of this paragraph, when they reference Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq) which is more commonly known as "RICO"
20/29
The RICO charge was created as a way to deal with organized crime (the Mafia, Bike Gangs, etc) where you could collectively charge everyone in the group with a crime, even if they themselves didn't carry out the violent act, so long as you could prove the group enabled it.
The RICO charge was created as a way to deal with organized crime (the Mafia, Bike Gangs, etc) where you could collectively charge everyone in the group with a crime, even if they themselves didn't carry out the violent act, so long as you could prove the group enabled it.
21/29
For this to stick, you have to prove:
-The group has a shared purpose, even if loosely defined
-There is a relationship among the participants
-They have committed at least 2 violent crimes in a 10 year period
-Have a pattern of "coordination"
For this to stick, you have to prove:
-The group has a shared purpose, even if loosely defined
-There is a relationship among the participants
-They have committed at least 2 violent crimes in a 10 year period
-Have a pattern of "coordination"
22/29
Normally, donating to a domestic organization, even if they later commit a crime is not an offense, so long as you did not *know* the proceeds would be used in a crime.
BUT, with RICO, if no formal org exists, then that line gets hazy.
Normally, donating to a domestic organization, even if they later commit a crime is not an offense, so long as you did not *know* the proceeds would be used in a crime.
BUT, with RICO, if no formal org exists, then that line gets hazy.
23/29
Technically you can argue:
-Anyone who coordinated, recruited, funded, donated, or provided other support for people was part of that org.
Technically you can argue:
-Anyone who coordinated, recruited, funded, donated, or provided other support for people was part of that org.
24/29
If you helped organize a protest, or donate to its permits, or tweeted about it, and someone there committed a violent act, OR someone there had previously committed a violent act, they could use that to bring RICO charges against you.
If you helped organize a protest, or donate to its permits, or tweeted about it, and someone there committed a violent act, OR someone there had previously committed a violent act, they could use that to bring RICO charges against you.
25/29
And by letting the FBI use NSLs to go after ALL your bank records and IRS records, AND your social media and phone metadata, WITHOUT you knowing and WITHOUT a court order...
...Means they will find everyone you ever interacted with or donated to, to cast a wide net.
And by letting the FBI use NSLs to go after ALL your bank records and IRS records, AND your social media and phone metadata, WITHOUT you knowing and WITHOUT a court order...
...Means they will find everyone you ever interacted with or donated to, to cast a wide net.
26/29
This memoranda, in combination with the previous EO, if allowed to stand is the WORST violation of American privacy in >20 years.
They are giving legal cover Kash Patel to surveil ANYONE who publicly disagrees with the President's agenda.
This memoranda, in combination with the previous EO, if allowed to stand is the WORST violation of American privacy in >20 years.
They are giving legal cover Kash Patel to surveil ANYONE who publicly disagrees with the President's agenda.
27/29
And then they are setting the stage to use RICO charges, to clamp down on protest and dissent, by using the swaths of data they gathered.
While many of these cases likely wont hold up to court scrutiny - IT DOES NOT MATTER.
They just want to stop this:
And then they are setting the stage to use RICO charges, to clamp down on protest and dissent, by using the swaths of data they gathered.
While many of these cases likely wont hold up to court scrutiny - IT DOES NOT MATTER.
They just want to stop this:
28/29
The fear of that charge, the risk of it sticking, the cost of the proceeding, is enough to quash dissent - and they know that.
They are trying to use fear and threat to coerce your silence.
Because tyrants thrive when fear masks their weakness.
The fear of that charge, the risk of it sticking, the cost of the proceeding, is enough to quash dissent - and they know that.
They are trying to use fear and threat to coerce your silence.
Because tyrants thrive when fear masks their weakness.
29/29
The irony is, they complain about overseas laws attacking and criminalizing speech.
And then they enact programs 1000x worse, aimed at monitoring and silencing any American who DARES to disagrees with them.
Dissent is NOT terrorism.
Dissent is FREEDOM.
The irony is, they complain about overseas laws attacking and criminalizing speech.
And then they enact programs 1000x worse, aimed at monitoring and silencing any American who DARES to disagrees with them.
Dissent is NOT terrorism.
Dissent is FREEDOM.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
