I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that there must be some sort of conspiracy to commit whatever crimes, across state lines.

bobbranco said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

oh no said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

...Antifa isn't an organized group though.

---

yeah, neither is Hamas


you leftists love your terror, don't you?

---

Wtf are you talking about? Hamas is an organized group with a literal council of leaders.

---

ANTFA is organized and funded. It's well documented

---

Who are the leaders of antifa and who is funding them?

---

A leader is not required to be an organization. Soros is one of those funding them.

---

You have a source for that?

---

Here you go gaslighter.

https://capitalresearch.org/article/exclusive-soros-open-society-gave-80-million-to-pro-terror-groups/

---

Thank you. And James Clapper would call that the "kill shot".

Pylon Cam said:

---

Ah yes, designating protest groups we don't like as terrorists so we can use deadly force on them. Do y'all seriously not see how this is an issue?

---

Yes, they fit the definition.

Another thing about these marxist/communist type groups is many of them have criminal records and mental health issues, which is standard for groups trying to splinter a society. These types are used until they are no longer needed

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Ag_of_08 said:

---

There are now organized groups under the antifa heading, cooperating/conspiring with each other.

They, by all appearances, are operating in a very similar manner to the PIRA of decades past ... a common goal/ideology but with isolated cells( the PIRA called them bridgades).

Yes the ANTIFA thing started as an ideology, but it has now coalesced into groups acting very publicly and calling themselves "antifa".

---

I understand people call themselves "Antifa" just like people call themselves "Christian Nationalists", but that is the ideology, not an organization.

---

So you cant simply call yourself antifa and act in that name? You have to go get a membership card first or something?

If you call yourself that and act in that name, you are now considered a domestic terrorist. Its not hard

---

You're being obtuse. If someone commits a crime while hoisting the 'antifa' flag, that's 1 thing...but what about someone who is merely engaging in an 'anti-facist' protest of the Trump administration? Are they domestic terrorists? If I were to walk the public streets of where I live with a sign that says "Trump is a facist, I'm anti facist" is that domestic terrorism?

That's why the single leadership structure matters, because grouping people without association other than a common ideology (hating fascism) is dangerous.

Here's a thought exercise: Let's assume for the sake of argument that there are two groups... both call themselves antifa, but one is planning violence and one is just peacefully protesting. Both are anti fascist, but only one is violent. Are both groups domestic terrorists? Or just 1?

---

Engaging in a protest? No. If a person communicates with, conspires with or acts with the intent to commit violence in the name of Antifa, that would make one a terrorist subject to arrest and punishment under those laws.

One more thing. Since Antifa gets funding from Soros and other foreign agents, that means FISA can be employed to spy on them.

backintexas2013 said:

---

Didn't have someone defending Antifa on my bingo card. Left has defended Antifa and also celebrated the killing of CK. What a time to be alive.

---

it's actually kindof a scary time to be alive. the mentally ill fringe are going around vandalizing, committing arson, assault, and even assassinating the "normies" and the mainstream left is celebrating it and defending it. afterall, it's the mainstream left that has been inciting it, knowing a lot of people in their tent are mentally ill and calling all normies who don't vote for the socialist regime nazis, fascists, racists, transphobes, deplorables, garbage, extremists, etc.

they've been calling right wingers "domestic terrorists" for years, yet all the domestic terror you ever see is from "ideas" that aren't organized. and shouldn't be investigated. give me a fng break.

fixer said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Ag_of_08 said:

---

There are now organized groups under the antifa heading, cooperating/conspiring with each other.

They, by all appearances, are operating in a very similar manner to the PIRA of decades past ... a common goal/ideology but with isolated cells( the PIRA called them bridgades).

Yes the ANTIFA thing started as an ideology, but it has now coalesced into groups acting very publicly and calling themselves "antifa".

---

I understand people call themselves "Antifa" just like people call themselves "Christian Nationalists", but that is the ideology, not an organization.

---

So you cant simply call yourself antifa and act in that name? You have to go get a membership card first or something?

If you call yourself that and act in that name, you are now considered a domestic terrorist. Its not hard

---

You're being obtuse. If someone commits a crime while hoisting the 'antifa' flag, that's 1 thing...but what about someone who is merely engaging in an 'anti-facist' protest of the Trump administration? Are they domestic terrorists? If I were to walk the public streets of where I live with a sign that says "Trump is a facist, I'm anti facist" is that domestic terrorism?

That's why the single leadership structure matters, because grouping people without association other than a common ideology (hating fascism) is dangerous.

---

Terrorist organizations don't always have to have a leadership structure that passes your specific litmus test.

Too easy: well you see this group here doesn't have a vp of operations so it can't possibly be a terrorist org despite the fact that they are setting buildings on fire and threatening cops with murder.


What matters is violent behavior and coordination in pursuit of menacing the public based on a specific set of causes.

Quote:

---

Here's a thought exercist: Let's assume for the sake of argument that there are two groups... both call themselves antifa, but one is planning violence and one is just peacefully protesting. Both are anti fascist, but only one is violent. Are both groups domestic terrorists? Or just 1?

---

If the protesting group has the same flag, symbols, slogans, clothing, and by your own experiment the same name-then there is precious little to separate them from the group that carries out violent tactics.

By your thinking we can have Al qaeda or Hamas March down our lovely streets and neighborhoods threatening to bring down the US, death to Jews, but as long as they are not actively committing a crime , they can't possibly be a terrorist group.

This is a very tortured take and sounds highly contrived to fit a specific narrative that antifa is just an idea. A concept that has been so thoroughly derided it gives second hand embarrassment to see someone actually use this in a discussion.

---

No, you cannot march down the street threatening ANYONE. That is NOT a protected class of free speech. NO ONE is allowed to threaten anybody, regardless of your ideology. If individuals marched under the banner of Hamas or Al Qaeda but did not incite violence, threaten others, or engage in criminal activity, their speech would still be protected (See the National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977)), however distasteful or disturbing it may be. That's not a loophole. This isn't tortured logic. It's constitutional law. And it's the same principle that protects civil rights activists, religious minorities, and political dissidents from being lumped in with extremists simply because of shared symbols or rhetoric.

It's a core principle of a free society: the government cannot punish people for their beliefs or associations alone. Being 'Anti-Facist' is like being Anti-Feminist; it's a political ideology, not membership of a (terrorist) organization.

Again, to be clear, I'm not advocating for anyone who commits vandalism, terror, or violence...but the Constitution doesn't play favorites when it comes to Free Speech. It protects dissenters, radicals, and provocateurs just as fiercely as it does poets and professors.

Conflating the ideology "antifa" with the organizations that are clearly forming and identifying themselves as "antifa" isn't going to save the latter if or when they act violent.

How convenient for antifa and trantifa.

Logos Stick said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Ag_of_08 said:

---

There are now organized groups under the antifa heading, cooperating/conspiring with each other.

They, by all appearances, are operating in a very similar manner to the PIRA of decades past ... a common goal/ideology but with isolated cells( the PIRA called them bridgades).

Yes the ANTIFA thing started as an ideology, but it has now coalesced into groups acting very publicly and calling themselves "antifa".

---

I understand people call themselves "Antifa" just like people call themselves "Christian Nationalists", but that is the ideology, not an organization.

---

So you cant simply call yourself antifa and act in that name? You have to go get a membership card first or something?

If you call yourself that and act in that name, you are now considered a domestic terrorist. Its not hard

---

You're being obtuse. If someone commits a crime while hoisting the 'antifa' flag, that's 1 thing...but what about someone who is merely engaging in an 'anti-facist' protest of the Trump administration? Are they domestic terrorists? If I were to walk the public streets of where I live with a sign that says "Trump is a facist, I'm anti facist" is that domestic terrorism?

That's why the single leadership structure matters, because grouping people without association other than a common ideology (hating fascism) is dangerous.

Here's a thought exercise: Let's assume for the sake of argument that there are two groups... both call themselves antifa, but one is planning violence and one is just peacefully protesting. Both are anti fascist, but only one is violent. Are both groups domestic terrorists? Or just 1?

---

Engaging in a protest? No. If a person communicates with, conspires with or acts with the intent to commit violence in the name of Antifa, that would make one a terrorist subject to arrest and punishment under those laws.

---

Alright then, if someone marches peacefully under the banner of 'ANTIFA' you and I agree that is not engaging in domestic terrorism and is protected under the 1st Amendment right.

All the X dem pushers are going all in on Antifa. If all the known funded influencers are defending antifa, i'm 100% sure they are now funded and controlled by the democrat party.

There are plenty of your fellow lefties who protest in support of terror organizations on college campuses and nothing has been done to them.

Now, if you are here on a student visa, your butt is gone.

backintexas2013 said:

---

Didn't have someone defending Antifa on my bingo card. Left has defended Antifa and also celebrated the killing of CK. What a time to be alive.

---

No one is defending violent offenders in the name of any belief.

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Didn't have someone defending Antifa on my bingo card. Left has defended Antifa and also celebrated the killing of CK. What a time to be alive.

---

No one is defending violent offenders in the name of any belief.

---

just mad the feds will be attempting to vouch and trace their funding. Wouldn't want all the destruction and anarchy to stop.

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

fixer said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Ag_of_08 said:

---

There are now organized groups under the antifa heading, cooperating/conspiring with each other.

They, by all appearances, are operating in a very similar manner to the PIRA of decades past ... a common goal/ideology but with isolated cells( the PIRA called them bridgades).

Yes the ANTIFA thing started as an ideology, but it has now coalesced into groups acting very publicly and calling themselves "antifa".

---

I understand people call themselves "Antifa" just like people call themselves "Christian Nationalists", but that is the ideology, not an organization.

---

So you cant simply call yourself antifa and act in that name? You have to go get a membership card first or something?

If you call yourself that and act in that name, you are now considered a domestic terrorist. Its not hard

---

You're being obtuse. If someone commits a crime while hoisting the 'antifa' flag, that's 1 thing...but what about someone who is merely engaging in an 'anti-facist' protest of the Trump administration? Are they domestic terrorists? If I were to walk the public streets of where I live with a sign that says "Trump is a facist, I'm anti facist" is that domestic terrorism?

That's why the single leadership structure matters, because grouping people without association other than a common ideology (hating fascism) is dangerous.

---

Terrorist organizations don't always have to have a leadership structure that passes your specific litmus test.

Too easy: well you see this group here doesn't have a vp of operations so it can't possibly be a terrorist org despite the fact that they are setting buildings on fire and threatening cops with murder.


What matters is violent behavior and coordination in pursuit of menacing the public based on a specific set of causes.

Quote:

---

Here's a thought exercist: Let's assume for the sake of argument that there are two groups... both call themselves antifa, but one is planning violence and one is just peacefully protesting. Both are anti fascist, but only one is violent. Are both groups domestic terrorists? Or just 1?

---

If the protesting group has the same flag, symbols, slogans, clothing, and by your own experiment the same name-then there is precious little to separate them from the group that carries out violent tactics.

By your thinking we can have Al qaeda or Hamas March down our lovely streets and neighborhoods threatening to bring down the US, death to Jews, but as long as they are not actively committing a crime , they can't possibly be a terrorist group.

This is a very tortured take and sounds highly contrived to fit a specific narrative that antifa is just an idea. A concept that has been so thoroughly derided it gives second hand embarrassment to see someone actually use this in a discussion.

---

No, you cannot march down the street threatening ANYONE. That is NOT a protected class of free speech. NO ONE is allowed to threaten anybody, regardless of your ideology. If individuals marched under the banner of Hamas or Al Qaeda but did not incite violence, threaten others, or engage in criminal activity, their speech would still be protected (See the National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977)), however distasteful or disturbing it may be. That's not a loophole. This isn't tortured logic. It's constitutional law. And it's the same principle that protects civil rights activists, religious minorities, and political dissidents from being lumped in with extremists simply because of shared symbols or rhetoric.

---

I'm talking about your thought experiment.

Two groups who call themselves antifa . One is planning violence, the other is peacefully protesting. Only one of these is a terrorist threat.

Since this is two different groups who bizarrely are sharing the same name , then there can be no constitutional way to differentiate between " speech" and a threat to public safety.

So the conclusion is that there can be almost no possible way for there to be a definition of terrorism without running afoul of the first amendment.

Therefore:

Hamas can be protesting one minute , then carrying out beheadings the next. Yet somehow they can't be a terror organization because they have an idea they are expressing periodically.

Or they have a protest division of their structure that carries out marches and demonstrations seeking to advocate for eradication of Jews from earth.

And they have a direct action division that carries out Oct 7th missions.

Yet still Hamas can't be a terror organization because their other division is just expressing ideas.

If the groups in your thought experiment have the same name and the same goals, but one group does the violence and the other group does the protests, how is anyone to be reasonably expected to know the difference?

If it walks like antifa, and talks like antifa, and shoots people like antifa….

I can't stand ANTIFA, and state governments should have taken kinetic actions against them multiple times in the last 10 years, BUT this is a bad, bad precedent.
You're kidding yourself, if you don't think this action by the Executive Branch won't be used against conservative groups in the future.

It will come full circle for the Right, and it won't be pretty.

Which similar group on the right will be taken down?

This. Hamas has multiple arms, and not all of them are militant. They have political and "charitable" arms as well.

At the end of the day though, anyone in any of those roles aligns themselves with hamas and is by definition a member, whether they directly engage in terrorism or not, and fair game. Anyone wanting to align themselves with antifa is in the same boat. If you want to align yourself with a group that engages in terrorism even if you don't, then you're still pay of a terrorist group and fair game.

Here's the thing, guys.
Now that the precedent has been sent, some joker like Joe Biden will decide that Turning Point is generating hate speech or some garbage.
Bondi is already titling the first amendment to define hate speech as the admin sees fit.

I like Trump, so I can't imagine what a left leaning Executive will do.

Good luck with that. This isnt about hate speech. This is about organized violence

oh no said:

---

ScottishFire said:

---

I can't stand ANTIFA, and state governments should have taken kinetic actions against them multiple times in the last 10 years, BUT this is a bad, bad precedent.
You're kidding yourself, if you don't think this action by the Executive Branch won't be used against conservative groups in the future.

It will come full circle for the Right, and it won't be pretty.

---

you're kidding yourself if you missed Obama's IRS going after religious and conservative orgs and Biden's operation Arctic Frost going after conservatives as well as corrupt FBI pressuring tech platform monopolies to censor and ban conservatives.

You're also kidding yourself if you see all the anarchy and destruction by antifa and equate them to the good guys.

---

You misrepresenting what I said as if ANTIFA is equal to any conservative group. They're more militant than the Proud Boys and Patriot Front combined.
I'm saying the precedent has been set, and the boomerang will prove painful.
The left already says the most dangerous group in America is white men; that opens them up to attack Lio

deddog said:

---

ScottishFire said:

---

Here's the thing, guys.
Now that the precedent has been sent, some joker like Joe Biden will decide that Turning Point is generating hate speech or some garbage.
Bondi is already titling the first amendment to define hate speech as the admin sees fit.

I like Trump, so I can't imagine what a left leaning Executive will do.

---

Were you asleep for the Obama and Biden administrations?
Do you think Charlie Kirk was murdered because Democrats thought he was peaceful?
Democrats HAVE been calling turning point as a radical, nazi organization.

I have seen two posts, TODAY, on Texags, calling Trump Hitler.
Wake up. This has been going on for the last 12 years under Democrat Presidents. They have demonized everyone who doesn't agree with them politically.

---

I'm very awake, homey.
Just tired of pretending that the continuous, vast expansion of Executive powers is the way forward.

Nah, this is necessary. Throw a strike and deal with the consequences

ScottishFire said:

---

Here's the thing, guys.
Now that the precedent has been sent, some joker like Joe Biden will decide that Turning Point is generating hate speech or some garbage.
Bondi is already titling the first amendment to define hate speech as the admin sees fit.

I like Trump, so I can't imagine what a left leaning Executive will do.

---

Pay no attention to Bondi. She is clueless and has been corrected. If the next Dem admin goes after orgs for speech, that would be completely unprecedented. Trump is not doing that. There is no precedent here.