We Should Be Very Worried About Joe Biden’s “Domestic Terrorism” Bill

Source: Jacobin.

Media hysteria over the non-events* of Jan. 6 is clearly a pretext for new expansions of federal power at the expense of civil liberties. Even the socialist magazine Jacobin recognizes the danger.

*The Capitol incursion was not an insurrection, it was not sedition; the protesters were not a murderous mob seeking to overthrow the U.S. government, etc.

33 thoughts on “We Should Be Very Worried About Joe Biden’s “Domestic Terrorism” Bill

  1. …” the non-events* of Jan. 6 “…

    The opinions of those who see the violent attempt to overthrow the legitimate election as a “non-event” are antithetical to the idea of law and order and not worth the screen time to read.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Well, that “non-event” will be seen as a watershed moment in history when the people of this country woke up to the fact that the greatest threat to the Rule of Law in our country comes from home grown terrorists. Professionals in Homeland Security have been telling us that for years now, but there is nothing like the desecration of sacred ground, chants of hanging the Vice Pence and organized murderous attacks on law enforcement to drive home the message.

    One effect of this “non-event” will be a new impetus to curb the distribution of weapons of war. Maybe a new Brady Bill. Hopefully something stronger. And rightfully so. People who will abuse the First Amendment will not hesitate to abuse the Second.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. “ The Capitol incursion was not an insurrection, it was not sedition; the protesters were not a murderous mob seeking to overthrow the U.S. government, etc.”

    The point of the rally just before the electoral vote declaration in Congress was designed to pressure Pence to break his oath of office. To his credit, he did not do that.

    The point of the planned, financed and executed attack was to force that outcome at gun point. As we know from transcripts of texts and other communications, killing some or even all legislators was not off the table.

    A desperate attempt by an ignorant man and his enablers has exposed an emboldened right wing supremacy movement.

    So if security gets a bit tighter, one can only blame the disgraced ex-president.

    Liked by 2 people

          1. Well, that might be two who are suggesting the obvious: that the rioting Trump fans who said “the president told us to come in” are radicalized.

            The same as ISIS adherents.

            A few decades in federal prison for sedition, insurrection and ignorance are on the slate for many.

            Following a cult leader can be deleterious to one’s welfare.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. Had no idea you were referring to a Don Lemon rant.

            Do I now trot out Hannity et al to push back?

            How about just consider stopping the us vs them way of thinking which was my point?

            Liked by 2 people

    1. “… to keep them safe from Liberty”

      Does that make sense? It is not obvious that it does.

      So, exactly who is calling for a police state? Is it not a legitimate function of government to protect people from the violence of evil men. We will all be safer if we let the police handle such criminals rather than turning this country into the armed camp of your daydreams. Do you really think that the proper response to White Supremacist and racist militias is for the formation of countervailing militias? Like Antifa but with guns? What could possibly go wrong?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The goal of gun control is to protect evil men.

        Consider that the VCDL has had Lobby Day every January for a decade. Some years there were only a few hundred armed citizens there, others there were up to 20,000. And there has not been a single act of violence, even when people trued to provoke them. You could not have a better proof of the safety of armed citizens.

        And yet, Democrats in control of the Capitol grounds had to resort to deception and abuse of power to prevent them from gathering this year.

        So, evil does not live in the hearts of 2nd Amendment advocates, they seek peace and freedom. But the gun control advocates have shown their hand, they seek raw power over others, by any means.


        1. Your describing armed people surrounding government buildings as peaceful protestors is a good example of the lop-sided thinking that leads you to call the murderous traitors attacking the Congress “trespassers.”

          “The goal of gun control is to protect evil men.”
          Uh, no. The goal of gun control is to protect the 30,000 – 40,000 or so people killed by guns every year. And now that DHS is seeing the threat of domestic terrorism – such as the murderous assault on the Congress – going through the roof there is even more reason to see that the militia is well-regulated. For example, any person who has used social media to plan or threaten violence should lose their Second Amendment rights IMMEDIATELY and whatever weapons they have should be confiscated pending their trial for seditious conspiracy.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Of those 30 to 40K deaths, how many were at the hands of CHP holders?

            About 2/3rds of those deaths are suicides. Most of the intentional homicides are at the hands people who already cannot legally possess a firearm.

            The tiny fraction of deaths at the hands of citizens who hold, or could qualify for, a CHP is smaller that then number of homicides with hammers.

            The people you seek to burden with regulation simply are not the problem. So, no, you are not seeking to protect 10s of thousands, you are simply seeking power over people with whom you disagree.

            And that is the attitude that makes it necessary to be armed. as a deterrent to that lust for power over others.


          2. So predictable!

            It is simple. And not hard for rational people to understand. Guns are too easy for maniacs and dangerous “trespassers” to get. So we need better regulations to see that it is less easy. Think of the “burden” as the price for living in a civil society where governments are not to be changed by “trespassers.”

            Liked by 1 person

        2. …”had to resort to deception”…

          What deception? That there was credible evidence of violent extremists infiltrating the peaceful annual protest by VCDL?

          Last year, the extremists were detected and caught prior to the event, preventing what could have been your worse nightmare: The Lobby Day rally becoming a bloodbath.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. There was no violence at last year’s Lobby day, and we have a chance to exchange views on firearms with BLM and Black Panther contingents.

            The potential for a bloodbath is just projection.

            The deception is well documented.

            The capitol square is available for rallies on a reservation basis, 1 hour at a bite. For a decade, there was a gentleman’s agreement that VCDL would reserve 11AM and CAHV would reserve 1PM, and other pro and con groups would reserve the others. Reservations were available 6 months in advance.

            But this year, when Philip Van Cleve called at 8 AM on the appointed reservation day to reserve our 11AM spot, he found that Speaker Eileen Filliercorn, had changed the rule with no announcement and had allowed anti-gun groups to reserve ALL of the spots immediately after last year’s rally.

            So, the VCDL organized a caravan of well marked vehicles to lobby by driving by the capitol. But on the morning of the rally, the Richmond police blocked the roads and diverted the caravan so it never got in sight of the capitol.

            Just another case of silencing opposing views when you can’t defeat them


          2. So the “trespassing” at the Capitol Building, and the on-line chatter following calling for massive, potentially violent protests at state capitals across the country was nothing?

            I actually gave credit to VCDL for the conduct on Rally Day last year. I also pointed out that agitators who were planning to disrupt that rally were CAUGHT BY LE before they could descend on Richmond. How convenient of you to forget about that.

            It was not about silencing opposing views. It was about protecting our state capital from a very real threat. If you have an issue with security, then maybe you should convince those who want to disrupt peaceful rallies that they are not welcome.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. So, Ms Fillercorn knew a year ago that there would be a riot in DC and thus changed the rules?

            If so, she must be one of the planners and the FBI should be alerted.


          4. Well, if the reason for her deception a year ago was because of the capitol building riot, she would have had to have known in advance, wouldn’t she?

            Or more likely, a year ago she didn’t like seeing citizens express an opinion she didn’t like and took steps to silence them this year.


          5. You know the old saying, “Elections have consequences.”

            While I agree that she changed the rules, she had the power to do so. However, if she felt threatened by the POSSIBILITY that again this year agitators would attempt to infiltrate the PEACEFUL VCDL rally and NOT get caught in the planning, she did so with higher intentions than what you give her.

            And she did not prevent the rally; she just protected the space.


    2. …”and calling for a police state to keep them safe from Liberty.”

      had to look hard at this statement. Are you saying that the riotous mob that stormed the Capitol were doing in the name of “liberty”? If that is the case you have a much different view of what liberty is than most of us do.

      Attempting to overturn an election that was free from rampant fraud is NOT Liberty. it is insurrection. And you appear to be cheering for the death of the Constitution that you claim to hold dear. SMH.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s