The New (Statist) Fascists: Congress!

There's a lot of silly chatter from the Press and the Democrats (BIRM) about "fascists."  Trump's a fascist, his supporters are fascists, anyone who approves of the US is a fascust, .....you know the drill.

So when REAL Fascists show up, it's hard to tell.  Remember that Mussolini was a Fascist, and his watchword was "all within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."

Now comes a bi-partisan proposal to define and Federally criminalize "domestic terrorism."  How do we know it's bad?  For openers, it's "bi-partisan," which almost always means "against ordinary citizens."

...Proposed bills in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate will help the FBI confront domestic terrorism on the terms it favors....

Oh, goodie!!  The very same FBI which employed Comey, McCabe, Strzok (and his whore), and several others who have resigned or were fired for illegal, un-Constitutional, anti-American, seditious, and perjurious acts.  They also "violated policy", (unlike Lon Horiuchi, who cold-bloodedly murdered a mom holding her infant, but who followed FBI policy, see?)

THAT "FBI".  Don't you feel better already???

...Republican Sen. Martha McSally of Arizona and Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California have introduced bills that would provide federal law enforcement with similar tools to combat domestic terrorism. The bills mirror a proposal advocated by former acting U.S. Assistant Attorney General for National Security Mary B. McCord and former State Department counterterrorism official Jason M. Blazakis....

"Former....." means an Obama and/or Clinton apparatchik.  That should give you great confidence, just like "Schiff", "McSally," and "FBI."  

...The McSally and Schiff bills are virtually identical in substance, and both have two important provisions. Both would create a new crime of domestic terrorism, making it illegal to kill, kidnap or assault another person; create a substantial risk of serious bodily injury by intentionally destroying or damaging property; or threaten to do so “with the intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion[,] or affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping,” in the language of the House bill. The wording of the Senate bill is substantively similar....

Our friend Ticker 'splains all that for us.

...What this bill does, should it be passed and signed, is make getting in someone's face, if said person is a public official of some form a terrorist act even though no actual violence has taken place.

Note that you do not, under that language, have to threaten to kill or kidnap someone, nor threaten an act of mass-destruction (e.g. blowing up a building, shooting up a meeting, etc.)

You merely have to put a public official in a position where they believe you might strike them in any form or fashion, even if said belief is nothing more than your physical crowding leading them to believe you may strike them with, for example, your blunt body (e.g. shoving them with your chest, etc.)  Not even an attempt to swing a fist or slap with an open hand is required.
That act, formerly a minor misdemeanor, now becomes a serious felony.

Further, anyone who provides any sort of "material aid or comfort" to a person who does such a thing can also be charged under the "material support" provision.  Got a son or daughter who does this to any elected official and they live at home?  You go to prison....

Want to tell Schiff exactly where to go?  Welcome to Club Graybar!!