Constitutional lawyer KrisAnne Hall has a warning for Americans. The FBI is now secretly changing “rules” that seriously infringe on our Constitutional rights. The federal government is currently and massively expanding the power of the federal government with the occasional help of Congress.
The HR H.R. 4401: ALERT Act of 2016 demonstrates how Congress does help. This bipartisan bill passed the House on February 29th but it was not done by vote so you can’t find out who voted for or against it. This was approved with an up and down vote.
Legislation with representation cannot be possible if it is done in secret. We do not have a representative government when Congress is allowed to act in this manner.
Did anyone read the bill?
The Act is allegedly intended to train and counteract “violent extremism”. The devil is in the details and in the definitions, however. It is supposed to deal with foreign terrorist organizations but the definition, located in another section of the code, makes it clear that it includes “domestic terrorism” and “domestic violent extremism”.
Now it’s no longer just foreign, it’s domestic thanks to the definition.
The government puts definitions in several locations so it’s hard to find out what is really going on.
You have to go to a different section of the code for the definition of “domestic”.
What is “domestic terrorism” and “domestic violent extremism” according to the federal government who will be using this definition to train agents?
The definition involves: “acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any state.” Vague?
Section 5B: “These acts appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce civilian populations, to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.” [italics are mine]
How do you develop probable cause that “appears to be intended”. This is not the basis for probable cause, this is the basis for a fishing expedition and conjecture.
How do you define “appears to be intended”? It’s not defined. The agents get to decide.
A person who the DoJ has labeled as a “violent domestic extremist” is made clear from their 2013 training program manual. It includes “extremist ideologies” , i.e. “a set of political beliefs about the nature of people and society. People who are committed to an ideology not only seek to persuade but to recruit others to their beliefs.” Their examples included, “the colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”. This comes directly from their training manual.
The Founders are violent extremists according to our federal government under the Marxist Obama government.
The DoJ’s official paper, published in 2011, “right wing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups and adherents that are primarily hate oriented, based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”
If you are anti-abortion or anti-amnesty or even anti-Islamic terrorism, if you believe the Founding Fathers were right, you support a violent extremist ideology according to their documents.
How many of you readers fit this definition and could be arrested should the feds decide they want to do exactly that?
The DoJ’s Strong Cities Network is meant to build a globalist network to build “cohesion” and to fight a “sea of hatred”, according to Loretta Lynch. This effort to combat “domestic terrorism” will include advice, recommendations, perhaps funding from all over the globe. That should set off some alarms.
The FBI is quietly revising their NSA rules at the same time. It will affect our communications and it was accepted in secret. You are not allowed to know what the secret rules are which have been approved by a secret court.
This is the Fourth Amendment that is under serious attack because of bills like this and because of the rewriting of rules and definitions in secret by the government. The Fourth Amendment reads:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized…
The Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Amendments guarantee our due process, our right to a jury trial, the government’s obligation to provide a speedy trial, and prohibits excessive punishment. They all depend on the Fourth Amendment and once the Fourth is destroyed, the others fall. The Fourth constrains the government and secures your property.
Property covers more than physical possessions. It is your rights to freedom of speech, religion, the sweat of your brow, your thoughts.
The Fourth protects all of these rights and possessions and we are all safe from unreasonable searches and seizures because of it. Reasonableness requires “Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized” and all five must be present for due process.
Without this, the government can seize anything, imprison anyone.
If this can be violated, nothing else is safe.
That is true of all our Amendments. If one falls, they all fall.
Fortunately, there is currently only a 25% chance of being enacted – right now – but it’s little consolation when you realize the direction they are headed.
It was only last year that AG Lynch told Muslim parents to call the DoJ if their children are bullied and that she would prosecute so-called “hate” crimes.
For more, go to KrisAnne Hall’s website