The Trump regime is taking steps to label all demonstrations against its policies as terrorism. And there’s currently a test case in Texas. The DoJ is putting an alleged “Antifa” cell — I’m serious — on trial on charges of terrorism. The plan appears to be to claim that everyone protesting Trump’s policies are “members” of Antifa, which the DoJ has identified as an actual terrorist organization.
The incident for which protesters are being tried happened on July 4 in Prairieland, Texas. Some young people were protesting an ICE facility. They shot off fireworks and graffitied cars. At some point a police officer allegedly was shot in the neck. He survived. The police arrested everyone they could catch, and those people are now the “cell” on trial. Read background at TPM.
Brandy Zadrozny writes at MS NOW:
Prosecutors characterize the events that night as an “antifa attack” on the federal government. The defense calls it a protest gone wrong. But the implications of this trial extend beyond the fate of one group of activists: For the first time, federal prosecutors are seeking to convict protesters — most of them American citizens — on charges related to domestic terrorism. The outcome will test whether President Donald Trump’s yearslong campaign to brand leftist activists as terrorists can succeed in the courts.
“This is the first indictment in the country against a group of violent Antifa cell members,” acting U.S. Attorney Nancy Larson said in a November press release.
Since charges were filed, senior members of the Trump administration have held up the Prairieland case as a proof point in their wider campaign against anti-government organizing, arguing that local activism and demonstrations are coordinated attacks by domestic terrorists. Trump’s Department of Justice portrays antifa — a contraction of “anti-facist” long understood as a loose left-wing ideology, not an organization — as a structured “militant enterprise” comparable to foreign terrorist organizations, one that calls for the overthrow of the U.S. government and poses a national security threat.
Some of the protesters did engage in property damage, and one of them, identified as Ben Song, is accused of shooting the police officer. But this case appears to be a first step in criminalizing all anti-Trump activism. If the DoJ can pretend Antifa is a real terrorist organization, and that everyone who demonstrates in opposition to Trump belongs to it, they will give themselves permission to arrest peaceful protesters.
The next No Kings day will be March 28, btw. If you possibly can, show up.
Some of the defendants in Texas have pleaded guilty to providing material support to terrorists, which I wonder was part of a plea deal or even coerced.
Elsewhere — Today Paul Waldman’s new Cross Section column is headlined MAGA White Supremacists Are a Bunch of Pathetic Losers. Well, yeah, So much of MAGA bubbled up from the depths of racism and misogyny. And I want to add a bit to what Waldman wrote.
The little town I grew up in in the 1950s and 1960s was a “sundown town,” There was a big notice at the bus depot declaring that any Black person caught within town limits after sundown was subject to arrest (worded somewhat differently). So, yeah, it was all White stretching everywhere. I doubt there were any nonwhite people residing in the county. During the 1960s I heard the grownups worry that some day Martin Luther King was going to show up with a bunch of Those People, and they were terrified. But of course that didn’t happen because why would it? It was a little mining town in the Ozarks with not much going for it. Hardly anyone ever moved there. You had to be from there to belong.
Paul Waldman writes that White supremacists are “whiny and stupid and weak, their ideas whither under even a moment’s scrutiny or questioning, and their fantasies of oppression are pathetic.” Well, yeah. It’s a really good column and worth reading. I just want to throw in a couple of my own observations.
Something I realized while I was still a Young Person: The hard-core White supremacists, the one who are really into it, are the most ordinary people you can imagine. As a rule they are not notably successful, intelligent, or accomplished at anything. There’s nothing about them to make them special, except that they are White. And they cling to that with all they’ve got. It’s the core of their identifies, the one thing they can point to to claim validation for their existence. They’re White, by gawd, so they are owed respect and status. And if they don’t get that, it’s oppression. This is not to say that people with education and accomplishment can’t believe in White superiority, too, but as a rule it’s not as important to them.
The other observation, which I picked up from social psychology journals, is that White bigots sincerely believe all White people feel as they do about race. White people who say otherwise and who denounce racism are phonies, or “just being PC.” If the bigots ever got it in their heads that a lot of us Other White People think White supremacists are contemptible, stupid goobers, their heads would probably explode.
Also — Noting the passing of Jesse Jackson and Robert Duvall. RIP.
One characteristic of the Trump DOJ is overreach. Bondi will be running this by remote control according to directives from the Oval Oriface. The two points that hurt the case are a shooting and vandalism. It's tempting to think stupidity is the exclusive property of the right, but no. We have our share of idiots – a bunch of them are in TX.
Without details, it's hard to know, but I'm guessing that the judge allowed the defendants to be held without bail and in solitary confinement because a cop was shot.Again, guessing that the defendants who pleaded to (maybe) misdemeanor charges of whatever were allowed out of jail. No, the article does not say so, but the DOJ could play dirty before Trump took over. The prosecutor will say that any confession to conspiracy proves there was a conspiracy. That it was a confession of terrorism proves all the accused are terrorists. Saying it doesn't make it so. In my case, the judge cried "BS" to a written submission before my public defender had the chance to reply. IMO, there's a cattle car element to the prosecution that weakens the prosecutor's case. Trump wants to be able to lock up anyone who protests. (Opinion) He wants the fact that a cop was shot by someone to be proof of intent for everyone charged. Fireworks on the 4th are not bombs. If they don't have a weapon with matching ballistics that they can match to a shooter with certainty, the case falls apart, except as a bunch of misdemeanor vandalism that has to be proven individually, not collectively. If the DOJ gets any kind of a conviction of the group, I see grounds for appeal.
On FB, I have been a complete prick and I do not apologize. If I'm at a demonstration, I have my phone out to use the camara. I'm on alert for MAGA and ratfuc*ery, MAGA doing violence to allow cops to claim there was an ANTIFA riot. And I've said on FB, I am opposed to violence and vandalism – if I see it or get pics I will turn them over to the cops. If he's a liberal idiot, he can spend his time in prison considering where he screwed up. But I will not give him one ounce of protection.
Some have found my position, extreme. Did you watch Andor? Off the top of my head, the rebel 'good guys' blew away four of the people on their own side at the moment they became a liability. A rebellion for freedom is no game – I am in it to win. If Trump can call out the US military against US civilians, and IF the Army belives we are the bad guys, opposed to the US Constitution, we're screwed. If the top levels in the US military see Trump, MAGA, and ICE as Nazis, the Army will not mobilize on orders to take over elections. Trump is deadly serious. He'll slaughter us if that's what it takes to win, but excessive force and public opinion forced ICE to back down in Minneapolis. Trump was getting blamed for civilian deaths. Non-violence does not guarantee there won't be victims. It's a strategy that allows the person on the sidelines to figure out who the bad guys are. If you want to fuck up that picture, you are my enemy – I don't care how you registered or voted.
Aaargh. Yes, it's important to contain and de-escalate violence at demonstrations but what are options besides " if I see it or get pics I will turn them over to the cops"? What are options besides relying on the carceral state? The cops are not your friends and there is plenty of reason to assume they will not use the photos the way you expect them to. Look for the marshals who took training and are volunteering their time to deal with these situations as they unfold.
"Look for the marshals who took training and are volunteering their time to deal with these situations as they unfold."
What are these "marshals" to which you refer?
Planned demonstrations very often include people serving as marshals and wearing an arm band or yellow vest or other distinctive apparel. They are members of the organization(s) that called the demo and are trained in de-escalation; some have EMT skills and/or carry first-aid supplies.
Let me be clear. I am in this to win. If you pull stuff that makes it harder for me to win, you are an obstacle. I will remove you. To jail is fine – I will lose no sleep.
What entitles me to make that determination? I've worked with some of the best people in activism who have worn out shoe leather in protests. THEY studied MLK and Gandhi. I pulled off the most successful one-man demonstration in decades, making a statement without injury or property damage. Exactly a year after that, I worked with a genius in organization in the largest civil disobedience action in DC since MLK. Thousands were arrested in non-violent protest at the US Capitol. I know this stuff, and I've worked with people who know way more than I do. NONE of them are advocating rioting, vandalism, or violence.
The struggle we're in is the most serious threat to democracy in the US of my lifetime. Bozos who think shooting cops or vandalizing cars or burning down buildings are providing aid and comfort to the fascists. Trump needs the judiciary to support a plausible excuse to bring out the military and declare martial law.
This has to do with a thing called strategy. If you're a reactionary nitwit, stay home. Stupid and violent stunts can reverse the momentum we've built. I'm doing you a favor by warning you in advance – at BEST, a jail cell awaits. Don't do it!
What Doug said… and:
The reason I asked the question was because the phrase "…the cops are not your friends…" triggered me. I am not naive, but there is an underlying belief of mine that I think is worthy of consideration: In anything and everything, it is always both incorrect and unproductive to paint any individuals or any sub-group with a broad brush. (At some point, I hope to do a deep dive on this general principle here on Mahablog, to get some feedback and refine my thinking.)
For now, I'm aware that there are plenty of bad cops, and I'm aware that the "career" of policing within the function of law enforcement tends to attract extremist authoritarian individuals who want to go that way for the wrong reasons. But that does not mean every police department everywhere has nothing but those kind of individuals. For sure there is community policing going on in many communities in this country. So it's a mixed bag.
The important thing is this: Our cause is advanced by non-violent demonstrations. And one of the roots of that is our dedication to the rule of law instead of the rule of the powerful. Any act by any individual that amounts to "taking things into our own hands" is entirely counter to that, and, in fact, reduces our power drastically, not to mention playing into the hands of the would-be dictators who are looking for an excuse to declare martial law.
Clearly, if, in a sizeable group of non-violent demonstrators someone notices and individual who is wearing a back Covid mask and sunglasses, and is dressed in black with "ANTIFA" emblazoned on their black hoodie, running around clearly trying to provoke an altercation with an ICE or BP agent, the situation is rather complicated and problematic. I don't have a prescription for the solution to dealing with someone who is either a radical leftist or an agent provocateur from the right. But I think the best answer ought to include involving the local police, even if they seem to be mostly on the other side. Because the demonstrating group needs some kind of official record showing that it doesn't condone that kind of confrontation. Perhaps Doug can shed some light on this.
First, I agree that you don't know what you are getting when the local police get involved. I've been arrested twice in DC, and both times the cops were professional. The first time, they were scared shitless that I had a bomb in the early moments. IMO, training dictated that they would not use force until/unless I was a threat. According to testimony in Congress, it was a close thing. That's my read of what to expect from local cops – with the caveat that there are bad eggs in every force. Luck plays a part but the odds are good that they will be professional.
That's just the first phase. If you did something illegal, even just breaking windows, you'll be arrested if caught. When the windows were part of a government building, the stakes go up fast. The burden of proof falls on the prosecution, and recent events show that juries take the proof thingie seriously. "Sandwich Guy" can explain it. If you didn't do it, or if there was no harm more serious than pickles and mayo, the justice system will free you. But IMO, a jury will view violence in a different light. MLK got this totally.
Ultimately, it's a PR war. We are changing public opinion, not Trump, not ICE. When the press is bad for ICE, and the polls reflect a loss for the GOP and Trump, either policies will change or the administration will. November.
The perception of voters has to be clear. Trump's people try to muddy the waters of public perception daily. Brain-dead liberals who think shooting members of ICE will change things are right, but the change is entirely bad for us.
Love you Doug!
Profascist is a word. Normal definitions simply state it's meaning as for fascism. One deviates a bit and adds "often used to describe political ideologies, speeches, articles, or policies that promote authoritarianism, xenophobia, or totalitarianism".
That does more than say that pro means for. Yet it uses or not and/or with the three words one "promotes.
Only the word xenophobia is not listed as a synonym for authoritarianism as are many others including totalitarianism and fascism. Why is there this redundancy? Authoritarianism is kind of defined vis-vis Totalitarianism as Totalitarianism-lite. I suppose perhaps fascism ultra-lite might work here. Anyway, the difference is the extent of governmental control and restriction of individual freedom.
Xenophobia is of course the fear of that which is considered alien or foreign. Intense fear is called terror.
I'm going with Profascist defined as a proponent of fear of that considered alien and/or foreign combined with support of high levels of governmental control and restrictions on individual freedom.
I'd go with that sounds like something to avoid.
We are dominated and ruled by broken people. From the bottom up we have the freakish, arrogant dummies that use religion to get one up and over on us and from the top down, the same.
Check out this very prescient vie of the "elite":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsrAWydJAb0
awesome video…
@borderdenizen – independent of your post, that video found me last night. It's truly stunning in its depravity, at the most elite institution in the land. Everyone needs to see it. Told by a great storyteller. I commented that she was lucky to get out of there intact.
I've been thinking a lot about the saying, "the fish rots from the head". I don't know about fish in the sea, but it certainly applies to where the corruption is located in our own country. It's what happens when generational wealth is allowed to accumulate, creating children who have no empathy or clue about what life is like at the bottom.
Back in the weeds I go. Having only words to use as tools, I attempted to use the word profascist and define it. I went there because I assume antifa is short for antifascist. I was surprised to find profascist was a word. This is the best definition of it I could come up without using paywall references.
The Trump regime does exist as an organization unlike ANTIFA which is largely a fictional organization at this time in this country. I have proof it is fictional. Never have I gotten a request for funds from any organization with that name or using it in its pitch for funds. If it existed, I certainly would have gotten one or heard of someone who had. That is not conclusive proof, but it is enough proof for me.
I am also going to content that the Trump regime is not a fictional organization and one that is profascist by the definition above. It also has a pattern of accusing its opposition of what it itself is trying to get away with. This is but another example of that nefarious behavior pattern. Is it a terrorist organization? Only fools tread in weeds that tall. It is, it seems, a profascist organization.
You are right: proof positive that antifa is not an organization is that I have never, even once, gotten a letter from them asking for money.
But I admit that I am paid to protest, by none other than Miss Liberty, the Goddess of Democracy. She pays me in freedom.