So, Biden is building 20 miles more wall with Trump-era funding, a wall he "did not want"? Is it the biometric entry-exit border wall Trump signed an EO for right after he got inaugurated?

The Biden Administration is trying to claim two things at once:

1. A border wall won’t work.
2. We need to build a border wall to "prevent unlawful entries."

During the WH press conference with Karine Jean-Pierre, Peter Doocy asked exactly how both of these claims could be made at the same time.

Doocy: "If you have to build a border wall but you don't think that it's gonna work, then once it's done, are you just gonna tear it down?"

KJP: "I'm not getting into hypotheticals from here... The facts are that DHS is complying with the law."

Yesterday, Mayorkas said the following:

"There is presently an acute and immediate need to construct physical barriers and roads in the vicinity of the border of the United States in order to prevent unlawful entries into the United States.."

Hypocrisy clowns of doublespeak idiocracy.

"So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot." - George Orwell



Biden administration waives 26 federal laws to allow border wall construction in Texas



Biometrics entry-exit clause in Trump’s executive order could cause logistical problems



Trump Executive Order 13769

Actually, it wasn't Trump's idea either, though he signed an EO expediting it right after he was inaugurated, referencing the 9/11 commission report. It wasn't even Obama's idea or George W. Bush either. This plan goes all the way back to a 1996 law signed by...Bill Clinton.

Quote:This report describes CBP’s Entry/Exit Transformation Strategy and the progress made to date in improving existing entry/exit operations. In fulfillment of the reporting obligation contained in Div. F. Title I of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 114-113), this report also describes CBP’s plan for expanding implementation of a biometric entry/exit system, based on technological and operational lessons derived from past, ongoing, and planned pilots, and utilizing the funding authorized in Title III of the FY 2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act. The Secretary of Homeland Security has directed CBP to redouble its efforts to achieve a biometric entry/exit system, and to begin implementing biometric exit, starting at the highest volume airports, in 2018.
....

Senate Report 114-68 states:

EXIT

DHS has been required by multiple statutes to implement a comprehensive biometric entry-exit system for the purpose of enhancing national security and improving the integrity of our immigration system, while facilitating travel. The introduction of the fingerprint-based biometric capability for visa issuance and entry revolutionized our immigration system and greatly enhanced our security posture. Further, progress has been made in collecting and matching biographic data from both entry and exit such that 97 percent of departing aliens can be matched to their arrivals. Yet, the Department has failed to implement a fully biometric entry-exit system.

Comprehensive Biometric Entry/Exit Plan

Long article so see the link if interested. I lived in Texas and had a few close Mexican friends who were DEA, Border Control, or people who had relatives who were cartel members. Cartel members with dual citizenship and traveled back and forth from the states to Mexico regularly.. Some of the Cartel upper management were trained at Fort Brag and then decided drugs and thuggery was better than a few pesos a month as a Major in the Mexican Army. What the USA has done and is doing is like a fly bothering a horses ass as the cartels grow stronger and richer year after year.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/americ...6afa&ei=23

Quote:In the early dawn's orange glow, a Texas Rangers commander briefs a heavily armed invasion force.
They're preparing to seize a remote, 170-acre Mexican cartel-controlled island in the middle of the Rio Grande River overlooked by sniper nests and potentially booby-trapped.
Some of the dozens of assembled men shift from one foot to another or reposition their M-4 rifles as they listen to their commanders' instructions.

'Keep a close eye on those structures up there that have height advantage on us,' he warns.
'In case we do get engaged and someone is shot' medical evacuation plans are in place and there are blood bags if the wounded need a transfusion, he assures them.
Any questions?
This may seem like a scene from a far-flung warzone.

It's that time of year again and there's no shortage of Doomsday articles.

I see in the ongoing censorship campaign that X/twitter imperator has removed URL/Headlines/Descriptions whenever you post a website link. Just an image like so:

Quote:American Apocalypse? 71% Don’t Trust U.S. Government To Prevent Doomsday

CHICAGO — U.S. politics continue to be a chaotic subject, and a new poll finds the majority of Americans are rapidly losing faith in their country’s leaders. From the ousting of the Speaker of the House to the mounting controversies engulfing the current president and his predecessor, over seven in 10 people say there’s no one they trust to save them from an end-of-the-world event. Such problems only push the so-called “Doomsday Clock” to tick closer to end times.

Established in 1947 by a group of atomic scientists, including the revered Albert Einstein, the Doomsday Clock serves as a barometer for humanity’s proximity to global annihilation. It is a metaphorical measure of humanity’s vulnerability to cataclysmic events, such as nuclear war, climate change, pandemics, or asteroid impacts. The closer the clock’s hands are to midnight, the closer we presumably are to a doomsday scenario.

According to a survey of 6,200 Americans conducted by BonusFinder.com, 71.2 percent of Americans say they have no faith in the U.S. government to save them or prevent a doomsday event. Even more unnerving, many respondents believe Doomsday could come within the next year.

Over half the poll (55.8%) think Doomsday will come in the form of a climate change-related catastrophe, while a third believe another virus will sweep the globe and a quarter of respondents fear the start of World War III. Another seven percent are betting on an alien invasion, while the same number believe 2024 will finally be the year zombies walk the Earth.



When it comes to the lack of faith in the U.S. government, researchers found that this growing distrust appears to be a bipartisan issue. Researchers found that a staggering 82 percent of respondents in the swing state of Arizona don’t trust the government to protect them from Doomsday. Moreover, 43 percent of these Americans have stored up supplies for a potential disaster.

Following Arizona, the top five states with the least amount of trust in the government include Kansas (78%), Alabama (78%), Pennsylvania (77%), and Oregon (76%).




As for what’s causing so many people to get ready for the potential end of the world, over 16 percent of respondents say social media and the content they consume on these platforms has convinced them to take action. One in 10 say watching the news led them to start doomsday prepping, while 7.7 percent cite their family and 4.6 percent credit watching certain movies.

Who is Doomsday prepping in America?

If you’re thinking of creating your own Doomsday checklist, researchers found that the most popular items people are stocking up on include water (41.2%), warm clothing (39.3%), and extra food (38.2%). Interestingly, one in five are making sure to have extra pet food ready and one in 10 think they’ll need some extra cash when the world ends.

To decipher which U.S. states are prepping for doomsday, surveyors examined the extent of Americans’ preparations and survival plans. A “resilient citizen,” as defined by The Prepared, can survive over 31 days without external aid or utilities. The study utilized this metric to assess the number of resilient citizens in each state.

Leading the pack, Nebraska emerged as the most prepared, with 51.35% of respondents indicating they’ve begun or are considering doomsday preparations. Additionally, 37.84% of Nebraskans are classified as resilient citizens, having stored enough provisions for at least a month.

Montana and New Mexico also rank highly on the list of states preparing for catastrophic events, with 50% and 47.50% of their residents, respectively, making or contemplating preparations. However, in both states, only 30% can boast the status of resilient citizens. On the flip side, Oklahoma appeared least prepared with a mere 28.38% of respondents indicating they’ve stored or intend to stockpile supplies. Idaho followed closely with only 29.41% contemplating preparations.

Interestingly, while Nebraska tops the preparedness chart, it also emerged as the state most confident in surviving a doomsday event. An impressive 64.86% of Nebraskans believe in their survival capabilities in such an event.

Diving deeper into demographics, the survey revealed that men are more likely to prep for doomsday than women, with 18.1% of male participants indicating preparedness compared to 8.8% of female participants. Financially, the majority of respondents invested between $1,000 to $4,999 in disaster preparations, with a few in states like Montana and New Mexico splurging up to $10,000. For those feeling the urgency to prepare, researchers emphasize the importance of storing water, food, shelter, medical supplies, and hygiene items.

Survey methodology:

BonusFinder.com conducted a uStats.org survey of 6,200 Americans between the dates of Wednesday, May 3, 2023 and Monday, May 8, 2023.

*Please note the following states have been excluded due to less than 20 respondents:

• Vermont
  
• Wyoming
  
• Alaska
  
• North Dakota
  
• South Dakota
  
• Delaware
  

I live in the boonies. But not for much longer. Time and progress has caught up with me. A city is building up around me at the speed of light. Less than 20 years ago, it was nothing but 1 lane dirt roads and miles and miles of trees. Now it is 4 to 6 lane paved roads and houses.

Time waits for no one. I can't change what is coming. I can't even run from it. But the one thing that is being destroyed that we will need more than ever, is neighborhood and community.

We live in a time where people have become dependent on the government. A huge mistake. 

Things are heating up. Literally. The only way many are going to survive is through their own actions and the actions of their neighbors and community.

Living in the boonies in South Florida, I have been through more than my share of disastrous moments.
I have gone as long as 3 months without electricity, because us poor folk that live in the woods are not a priority. But I learned a lot from that experience.

I would have been completely trapped in, 5 miles from a paved road or a way out, if it had not been for neighbors working together and looking out for each other.

All bad blood and past fights and arguments put on the back burner, to get what needed to be done done.

This long video shows a little of what is coming and how important community will be. But it starts with us. We can't wait for someone else to come to the rescue or "do something". It starts with you. 



The signs are all around us. Time to take heed. Time to act. If not for yourself for those you leave behind.

For your family, be a Noah.

A powerful speech but I doubt he will win the election..?

https://twitter.com/WallStreetSilv/statu...7593720883

Quote:Klaus Schwab Announces The End Of Car Ownership "You will use an app like uber but not anymore to call some driver" "A self driving car will come to your hotel or wherever you are" By 2030 there will be no more private cars. Highways will become parks” -Klaus Schwab World Economic Forum

It shall be interesting to see if they abide by the court or just ignore it and violate the law anyway since they can get away with it.


https://hotair.com/ed-morrissey/2023/10/...er-n582325

Quote:In a unanimous ruling yesterday, the Fifth Circuit expanded bars on the Biden administration’s Big Brother censorship activities, blocking the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) from any speech-policing communication with private-sector media platforms.

 The unanimous ruling reinforces Doughty’s original findings that nearly every government agency cited by plaintiffs in Missouri v Biden engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint suppression (except for NIAID), and that pressure by officials at all of these agencies transformed the private social-media platforms into agents of government censorship:

Quote:The Plaintiffs allege that federal officials ran afoul of the First Amendment by coercing and significantly encouraging “social-media platforms to censor disfavored [speech],” including by “threats of adverse government action” like antitrust enforcement and legal reforms. We agree.
The government cannot abridge free speech. U.S. Const. amend. I. A private party, on the other hand, bears no such burden—it is “not ordinarily constrained by the First Amendment.” Manhattan Cmty. Access Corp. v. Halleck, 139 S. Ct. 1921, 1930 (2019). That changes, though, when a private party is coerced or significantly encouraged by the government to such a degree that its “choice”—which if made by the government would be unconstitutional, Norwood v. Harrison, 413 U.S. 455, 465 (1973)—“must in law be deemed to be that of the State.” Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991, 1004 (1982); Barnes v. Lehman, 861 F.2d 1383, 1385– 36 (5th Cir. 1988).9 This is known as the close nexus test.10

And this time, the court makes clear the “daylight” involved:

Quote:It is true that the officials have an interest in engaging with socialmedia companies, including on issues such as misinformation and election interference. But the government is not permitted to advance these interests to the extent that it engages in viewpoint suppression. Because “[i]njunctions protecting First Amendment freedoms are always in the public interest,” the equities weigh in Plaintiffs’ favor.

In other words, the government is free to enter the public square and offer its opinions on truth and error. But they cannot pressure these platforms into censoring speech, let alone directly order the silencing of Americans involved in political debate.
The ruling goes on to confirm their earlier ruling vacating all but section 6 of the original injunction while adding CISA to the agencies enjoined. This appears to be the Fifth Circuit’s attempt to remedy the CISA question, but also to clarify its earlier ruling when the Supreme Court takes up discussion of the government’s appeal. Jonathan Turley sees it as a “major victory for free speech” on its own merits:

Quote:Jen Easterly, who heads the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, extended her agency’s mandate over critical infrastructure to include “our cognitive infrastructure.” The resulting censorship efforts included combating “malinformation” – described as information “based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.”
Easterly is now barred from taking any action to T“coerce or significantly encourage” tech companies to remove or reduce the spread of posts. The Supreme Court may now have an opportunity to weigh in after the Justice Department appealed the injunction.

Hmmmmm

Why do I think "Darwin Awards" on this one?

Taking bets, what "baffling strange bad things" are going to suddenly happen to this guy and his family?


DC Attorney General Launches Investigation Into Left-Wing Dark Money Juggernaut

https://dailycallernewsfoundation.org/20...uggernaut/

Quote:Washington D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb subpoenaed records from Arabella Advisors and the network of liberal groups it manages as part of an investigation into reports alleging violation of tax laws, the Washington Free Beacon reported Tuesday.

Schwalb is seeking records that would shed light on whether Arabella illegally profited from the New Venture Fund, a nonprofit organization it manages, according to the Free Beacon. The attorney general also issued subpoenas relating to reports that allege the New Venture Fund used charitable funds to direct the partisan activities of Secure Democracy, a 501©(4) nonprofit that pushed lawmakers to expand mail-in voting in 2020 and 2021, according to the Free Beacon.
Also being investigated are the North Fund and the Sixteen Thirty Fund, both of which bankroll liberal activist causes while being managed by Arabella, according to Influence Watch.
The North Fund spent millions to promote pro-abortion and anti-Electoral College groups as well as groups intent on expanding the Supreme Court, according to Influence Watch. It also gave $4.1 million to Somos PAC, which worked to get Democrats elected, in 2022.
The Sixteen Thirty Fund similarly works to facilitate liberal activism, according to Influence Watch. The group spent millions to defeat Donald Trump during the 2020 presidential election and operates liberal groups as projects, according to Influence Watch.
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had concerns dating back to 2006 that Arabella may have been illegally extracting profits from the New Venture Fund, the Free Beacon reported.
The IRS inquired about the New Venture Fund not taking competitive bids for administrative services before entering into a management contract with Arabella, the Free Beacon reported. These concerns were assuaged when the New Venture Fund said its contract with Arabella would expire after one year.
The New Venture Fund’s relationship with Arabella continued beyond what it had told the IRS, the Free Beacon reported. The nonprofit organization has paid Arabella $230 million for management services since 2006 and has raised billions in donations, according to the Free Beacon.
The D.C. attorney general is also investigating conservative legal activist Leonard Leo and his network of nonprofits, according to Politico. Leo told Axios in 2020 that his network of nonprofits was inspired by Arabella’s network.
Spokespeople for the New Venture Fund, Arabella Advisors and the Sixteen Thirty Fund told the Daily Caller News Foundation that they are complying with the attorney general and maintain that they did not break the law.
A spokesman for Arabella Advisors told the DCNF that the organization is “confident in the systems we have in place to ensure our business conforms with legal and regulatory requirements.”
The D.C. attorney general’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

By the way... they never required vaccinations, never booted 8,000 soldiers from the military for not taking the vax, or told people they would be fired in their jobs and are not responsible if people got fired "if they did"..... None of that EVER happened, you are all crazy and it is right wing lies!

Quote:Now let’s fast-forward to the present day. I will begin with this profound statement that keeps churning over in my head:

Quote:They must really think we are stupid!

The “they” is our government (federal and state). The “we” is you and me, and the other 300+ million Americans across our country.


Alas, here we are, entering the final quarter of 2023, and we have the United States government, and many state governments (including New York’s former Governor Andrew Cuomo, current left-wing Governor Kathy Hochul, and the super-majority Dem legislature) proclaiming for all to hear that they did not force anyone to do anything detrimental these past 3.5 years. UNBELIEVABLE! Did you hear this? They are actually saying with straight faces that they didn’t force you to wear a mask, or lock down and shutter your businesses, or choose between taking an experimental drug or losing your job… Nope! They did none of that. And you – well, you are flat out crazy if you think they did. You are lying. You are exaggerating and totally overreacting. 


Unfortunately for Big Brother, ooops, I mean unfortunately for our 100 percent reliable, never-lies-to-us government, we have actual documents (including lawsuits), news stories, social media posts, and videos of the government at all levels mandating and forcing us to do all of those things, and more. Here’s just one example of Biden himself, the “Big Guy,” mandating the C19 shot:

Quote:Biden is not alone. No, no. His entire administration is right there with him. His head of OSHA, Douglas Parker, is also now lying through his teeth about the OSHA mandate that REQUIRED (not suggested) that all employers in the entire nation with 100 or more employees force their employees to get the C19 shot, otherwise they had to wear a mask and test constantly for C19. (That OSHA mandate was struck down by SCOTUS last year because it was unconstitutional, by the way). Then there’s the head of HHS, Xavier Becerra, saying there was never a mask mandate. What?! Another blatant lie. 



Please take the 2 minutes to watch this Congressman Kevin Kiley clip. You truly won’t believe your ears with the bullsh#* these Biden agency heads are spewing! As Congressman Kiley says in the video, the government is trying to tell us that “2 + 2 doesn’t equal 4.” You don’t get much more Orwellian than that!

A big long article on the subject. Yes, I also believe this Stasi like move by the Democrats is a direct weaponization of Federal agencies against their political opponents. Now half the country. 


Exclusive: Donald Trump Followers Targeted by FBI as 2024 Election Nears

https://www.newsweek.com/2023/10/13/excl...31836.html

Quote:Republicans, on the other hand, see the FBI's focus on January 6th and the law-breaking associated with it as "weaponization" on the part of the Biden administration, to suppress GOP voters, to stigmatize the right wing and to transform what they see as principled dissent against societal norms—for example with regard to abortion, about what children are taught in public schools or in rejection of transgender categorizations—as extremism.

The left sees these same numbers as proof that Donald Trump and his supporters are not just dangerous to democracy but also that the government isn't doing enough. Michigan Senator Gary Peters, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, consistently argues that the FBI is failing to fight the "full scope of white supremacist terrorist attacks." Others argue that the FBI (and law enforcement in general) is too sympathetic to white supremacists, a view punctuated by an assumption made by many after January 6 that a disproportionate number of protesters and those arrested were veterans or members of law enforcement (an allegation that isn't true when compared to their numbers in the general population).

Some experts, such as Brian Michael Jenkins, question whether conceiving of disgruntled Americans as terrorists is even a helpful exercise. "These are not people who are going underground," he says, referring to domestic terrorist organizations of the past such as the Black Panthers, the Weather Underground or the IRA or Red Brigades overseas. As Jenkins sees it, those we label as domestic terrorists—people marching with guns or those wearing military-like uniforms—are more performative than indicative of some true terrorism class in America. "This is not the '60s or '70s," when radical groups, even the civil rights and peace movements, were driven to violence," Jenkins says. "I don't think terrorism is a particularly useful framework for viewing this problem."

Quote:"Trump's army constitutes the greatest threat of violence domestically...politically...that's the reality and the problem set. That's what the FBI, as a law enforcement agency, has to deal with.

The revelations that some Trump supporters are being specifically targeted by the FBI fits with accusations from among them that the Bureau has them in its sights and is the political tool of a repressive deep state in Washington, D.C., bent on preserving the hold of the political establishment at the cost of democracy.

Such views are not only from the furthest fringe. Some of Trump's Republican allies in Congress have called for the FBI to be defunded over such accusations and the prosecution of Trump supporters over the January 6 attack. The fight over the FBI is in itself helping to stoke the political temperature ahead of the 2024 election.

Classified numbers seen by Newsweek substantiate the FBI public claims while also showing that a significant part of the increases in 2020 and 2021 were related to protests after the murder of George Floyd and during COVID as well the elections and January 6. That said, the data show clearly that the main targets of the investigations and cases open were of Trump supporters. While the number of investigations in 2021 almost doubled from 2020 to around 9,000, the number of "full investigations" that led to arrests was only 1,446, not much more than the number of 1,146 January 6 protesters who have been charged with a crime, according to the Justice Department.

Virtually all of the 2021 increases are specifically related to these events, including the enormous growth in what the FBI calls "assessments," which more than doubled from 2019 to 2021 and are revealed here for the first time.

Assessments are the most speculative of any FBI investigation, where a special agent or intelligence analyst only suspects wrongdoing because of association or encounter and further looks into someone's background. Assessments are the closest thing to domestic spying that exists in America and generally not talked about by the Bureau.
The data from the FBI shows a significant decline in the number of investigations and cases opened in the past year, in 2022, below 2020 levels—including a drop in the number of anti-government and anti-authority extremists (AGAAVEs) as a result of the closure of so many January 6-related cases.
And, according to FBI data obtained by Newsweek, 31 percent of its investigations now relate to AGAAVEs and 60 percent of all investigations include cases categorized as AGAAVE and "civil unrest"—marking a significant shift away from investigations associated with race-related causes or armed militias. Drilling further into the individual cases behind the numbers, nearly two-thirds of the FBI's current investigations are focused on Trump supporters and others suspected of violating what the FBI calls "anti-riot" laws.

Quote:The federal government believes that the threat of violence and major civil disturbances around the 2024 U.S. presidential election is so great that it has quietly created a new category of extremists that it seeks to track and counter: Donald Trump's army of MAGA followers.

The challenge for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the primary federal agency charged with law enforcement, is to pursue and prevent what it calls domestic terrorism without direct reference to political parties or affiliations—even though the vast majority of its current "anti-government" investigations are of Trump supporters, according to classified data obtained by Newsweek.

"The FBI is in an almost impossible position," says a current FBI official, who requested anonymity to discuss highly sensitive internal matters. The official said that the FBI is intent on stopping domestic terrorism and any repeat of the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. But the Bureau must also preserve the Constitutional right of all Americans to campaign, speak freely and protest the government. By focusing on former president Trump and his MAGA (Make America Great Again) supporters, the official said, the Bureau runs the risk of provoking the very anti-government activists that the terrorism agencies hope to counter.
"Especially at a time when the White House is facing Congressional Republican opposition claiming that the Biden administration has 'weaponized' the Bureau against the right wing, it has to tread very carefully," says the official.


[b]What the FBI Data Shows[/b]

From the president down, the Biden administration has presented Trump and MAGA as an existential threat to American democracy and talked up the risk of domestic terrorism and violence associated with the 2024 election campaign.
"Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans are a threat to the very soul of this country," President Biden tweeted last September, the first time that he explicitly singled out the former president. "MAGA Republicans aim to question not only the legitimacy of past elections but elections being held now and into the future," Biden said.
Biden's Homeland Security Advisor Liz Sherwood-Randall said: "The use of violence to pursue political ends is a profound threat to our public safety and national security...it is a threat to our national identity, our values, our norms, our rule of law—our democracy."
For Attorney General Merrick Garland: "Attacks by domestic terrorists are attacks on all of us collectively, aimed at rending the fabric of our democratic society and driving us apart."
Though the FBI's data shows a dip in the number of investigations since the slew of January 6 cases ended, FBI Director Christopher Wray still says that the breach of the Capitol building was "not an isolated event" and the threat is "not going away anytime soon." In a joint report to Congress this June, the Bureau and the Department of Homeland Security say that "Threats from...DVEs [domestic violent extremists] have increased in the last two years, and any further increases in threats likely will correspond to potential flashpoints, such as high-profile elections and campaigns or contentious current events."
The FBI and DHS report concludes: "Sociopolitical developments—such as narratives of fraud in the recent general election, the emboldening impact of the violent breach of the U.S. Capitol, conditions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and conspiracy theories promoting violence—will almost certainly spur some domestic terrorists to try to engage in violence."
The threats listed in that paragraph are all clearly associated with America's right and in particular with Trump's MAGA supporters. Right after January 6, the FBI co-authored a restricted report ("Domestic Violent Extremists Emboldened in Aftermath of Capitol Breach, Elevated Domestic Terrorism Threat of Violence Likely Amid Political Transitions and Beyond") in which it shifted the definition of AGAAVE ("anti-government, anti-authority violent extremism") from "furtherance of ideological agendas" to "furtherance of political and/or social agendas." For the first time, such groups could be so labeled because of their politics.
It was a subtle change, little noticed, but a gigantic departure for the Bureau. Trump and his army of supporters were acknowledged as a distinct category of domestic violent extremists, even as the FBI was saying publicly that political views were never part of its criteria to investigate or prevent domestic terrorism. Where the FBI sees threats is also plain from the way it categorizes them—a system which on the surface is designed to appear nonpartisan. This shifted subtly days after the events of January 6 when it comes to what the Bureau calls AGAAVE.
"We cannot and do not investigate ideology," a senior FBI official reassured the press after January 6. "We focus on individuals who commit or intend to commit violence or criminal activity that constitutes a federal crime or poses a threat to national security."
But the FBI went further in October 2022 when it created a new subcategory—"AGAAVE-Other"—of those who were a threat but do not fit into its anarchist, militia or Sovereign Citizen groups. Introduced without any announcement, and reported here for the first time, the new classification is officially defined as "domestic violent extremists who cite anti-government or anti-authority motivations for violence or criminal activity not otherwise defined, such as individuals motivated by a desire to commit violence against those with a real or perceived association with a specific political party or faction of a specific political party."