Ex-DOJ Lawyer Warns of FBI’s Antifa Indictment as Tensions Rise

BREAKING: A former senior Department of Justice (DOJ) anti-terrorism lawyer has raised alarms over a new indictment labeling “antifa” a “militant enterprise.” This urgent development comes as federal prosecutors charge two men, Zachary Evetts and Cameron Arnold, in connection with a violent attack on an ICE facility in Alvarado, Texas, on July 4.

The indictment, released on Thursday, accuses Evetts and Arnold of providing material support to terrorists, as well as three counts each of attempted murder of federal officers and discharging a firearm during a violent crime. The charges stem from an incident where gunfire erupted at the ICE Prairieland Detention Center, with the government alleging both men are connected to an “antifa cell.”

Former DOJ lawyer Thomas E. Brzozowski, who served under three presidential administrations, expressed significant concern. “The choice of the term ‘enterprise’ is illuminating,” he stated, noting it could allow the FBI to investigate a wide array of activities related to antifa, including membership and funding.

The indictment echoes language from former President Donald Trump, who previously designated antifa as a “domestic terrorist organization.” Attorney General Pam Bondi reiterated this stance on social media, declaring, “Antifa is a left-wing terrorist organization. They will be prosecuted as such.” Meanwhile, FBI Director Kash Patel claimed that under Trump’s administration, over 20 arrests have been made related to this matter.

The indictment identifies a third individual, Benjamin Hanil Song, as “Coconspirator-1,” who is accused of firing at police during the attack, injuring an officer in the neck. Song is separately charged with three counts of attempted murder of federal agents. His actions reportedly included training members of the alleged “antifa cell” in firearms and combat tactics.

Evetts’ lawyer, Patrick McLain, insists his client believed he was attending a peaceful protest, intending only to shoot fireworks. “Mr. Evetts was going to protest,” McLain stated, emphasizing that his client did not fire a weapon during the incident. The police officer involved has since been discharged from the hospital, highlighting the immediate danger faced during this violent occurrence.

The use of § 2339A, a statute expanded under President George W. Bush to cover terrorism, raises critical questions. While Brzozowski did not dispute the charges against Evetts and Arnold, he warned of the implications of defining “antifa” so broadly. “Who’s antifascists? Everybody,” he stated, cautioning that this could lead to criminalizing political beliefs without evidence of violence.

The vagueness of the indictment presents a serious concern. “You never know if you’re going to be swept up in a dragnet,” Brzozowski remarked, stressing the potential for innocent individuals to be implicated simply for being in proximity to protests that escalate.

As legal battles unfold, the implications of this indictment are profound. The federal government’s approach may redefine how political movements are perceived and prosecuted in the United States.

NEXT STEPS: Observers are urged to monitor this situation closely as further developments are expected. The potential for increased scrutiny on political protests is alarming, and the ramifications of this indictment could resonate far beyond Alvarado, Texas.

Stay informed as we continue to provide updates on this urgent story.