We Made It To The FBI Terrorist List!

Weaponizing the FBI! Tell me what terrorist acts have trans people done?

Trump counterterrorism strategy targets ‘violent left-wing extremists’ with ‘transgender ideology’

The strategy focusing on left-wing groups reverses the Biden-era concentration on right-wing extremism.

Politico

By Diana Nerozzi

05/06/2026

“Violent left-wing extremists” and “extremist transgender ideology” are among the most concerning threats facing the country, according to the Trump administration counterterrorism strategy released Wednesday.

The strategy, the first released in President Donald Trump’s second term, underscores how Trump’s priorities differ from predecessors, listing “violent left-wing extremists” as one of its top three focuses, alongside “narcoterrorists” and “Islamist terrorists.”

[...]

“We see a threat, we will respond to it, and we will crush it, whether it is the cartels, the jihadists, or violent left-wing extremists like antifa and like the transgender killers, the non-binary, the left-wing radicals who killed my friend Charlie Kirk, we will take them on, head on,” senior director for counterterrorism Sebastian Gorka told reporters on a call Wednesday.

Whoa "Transgender Killers!"

Psycho Killer

Qu'est-ce que c'est?

Fa-fa-fa-fa, fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa, better

Run, run, run, run, run, run, run away, oh-oh-oh

Psycho Killer

Qu'est-ce que c'est?

Fa-fa-fa-fa, fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa, better

Run, run, run, run, run, run, run away, oh, oh, oh, oh

Ay-ya-ya-ya-ya-ya, ooh

Psycho Killer Talking Heads

Tell me, how many terrorists have been "trans"? Four or five? How many terrorists have been "cis"? How many were right-wing terrorists... hundreds?

Besides the obvious attempt to make a whole community suspect, I see it as a form of political marginalization. This comes on the heels of Trump calling for Democrats to cut back on their rhetoric.

The far-left Mother Jones wrote,

Wednesday’s document, masterminded by White House “counterterrorism czar” Sebastian Gorka, does not mention far-right violence at all. It identifies “Violent Left-Wing Extremists, including Anarchists and Anti-Fascists” as a security threat of equal severity to “Legacy Islamist Terrorists” and “Narcoterrorists and Transnational Gangs.” The administration will now apparently “prioritize the rapid identification and neutralization of violent secular political groups whose ideology is anti-American, radically pro-transgender, and anarchist.”

In a bizarre but familiar turn, the document also blames transgender people for the shooting of Charlie Kirk. “Americans have witnessed the politically motivated killings of Christians and conservatives committed by violent left-wing extremists, including the assassination of Charlie Kirk by a radical who espoused extreme transgender ideologies.”

This is scary! They are weaponizing the government against us; it is a dangerous form of political scapegoating that uses valuable government resources to persecute us!

But the document reads less like a plan than a list of targets. Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), the House Committee on Homeland Security’s ranking Democrat, noted in a press release that the document left out the far right—the group most likely to commit violent acts against civilians on US soil—“despite years of data proving that right-wing extremism has presented the most persistent and deadly threats to Americans for decades.”

I also want to point out that last week, the feds went after the Southern Poverty Law Center charging them with allegations that the organization defrauded its donors by secretly funneling money to the very extremist groups it claimed to be fighting.

This follows threats made by Brendan Carr, the head of the Federal Communications Commission, to yank the licenses for ABC network stations over the TV show The View

History is repeating itself... Hungary, Belarus, Russia, and going back to the 1930s and early 1940s!

We saw it when they passed Paragraph 175, a law that criminalized "unnatural indecency" between men, and we see it now in the governments of Russia and Belarus, and until recently in Hungary. They scapegoat a minority and control the press, and now we are seeing it here!

Rainbow Warriors

Republicans often used phrases like:

• “Get government off your back”
• “Less government, more freedom”
• “Lower taxes, smaller government”

Now they want more funding for domestic terrorists! You remember in Minneapolis during the ICE occupation Pam Bondi the Attorney General and the border czar Tom Homan both labeled the peaceful protesters “domestic terrorism.”!

Trump’s new budget turns the FBI into the gender police

The plan casts opposition to “traditional values” as terrorism and raises fears of political targeting.

The Advocate

Jack Walker

Apr 13, 2026

A new budget proposal from the Trump administration seeks to increase federal counterterrorism funding targeting what it describes as “domestic terrorism,” including a focus on gender “extremism.”

President Donald Trump submitted a fiscal year 2027 budget request to Congress earlier this month, seeking a $166 million increase for the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s counterterrorism efforts. The proposal pairs that funding increase with language urging federal authorities to scrutinize ideological movements the administration casts as threats to national security.

They mean us!

The proposal claims that “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity” constitute emerging national security concerns. It includes “domestic terrorists” who practice “extremism on migration, race and gender,” or who oppose “traditional American views on family, religion and morality.”

The question is whose “traditional American views on family, religion and morality.” the families that toss LGBTQ members aside or the families that accept their children as they are? The Washington Blade reports...

Central to the proposal is the creation of a new “NSPM-7 Joint Mission Center,” a direct follow-up to the September 2025 National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7). The directive instructs the Justice Department, the FBI, and other national security agencies to combat what the administration defines as “political violence in America,” effectively reshaping the Joint Terrorism Task Force network to focus on “leftist” political ideologies, according to reporting by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein.

[...]

The proposed mission center would include personnel from 10 federal agencies tasked with targeting “domestic terrorists” associated with a wide range of ideologies. Among them is what the administration labels “extremism” related to gender, alongside categories such as “anti-Americanism,” “anti-capitalism,” “anti-Christianity,” and “support for the overthrow of the U.S. government.” The document also cites “hostility toward those who hold traditional American views” on family, religion, and morality — language LGBTQ advocates have increasingly warned could be used to frame queer and transgender rights movements as ideological threats.

What the hell is “anti-Americanism" it sound like a catch-all term for anything anti-Republican!

The FBI is Requesting Funding for a Disturbing Crime Center

By: LDF Staff

Apr 10, 2026

IN BRIEF: In its budget request to Congress for next year, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is seeking funding for a ‘domestic terrorism’ center that targets and tracks Americans who have vaguely characterized beliefs, such as:

• Anti-Americanism
• Anti-capitalism
• Extremism on race, gender, and migration
• Hostility toward those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality

WHY IT MATTERS: Following the issuance of a September 2025 presidential memo, the Trump administration has expanded the weaponization of the term “domestic terrorism.” For example, Alex Pretti and Renee Good were both killed by federal officers in Minneapolis and falsely called domestic terrorists by some administration officials with no evidence.

The request for funding argues that domestic terrorists “exploit” social media platforms, smaller websites, and encrypted chat applications — platforms that millions of Americans of all ages and backgrounds use — to rally support for their causes and in-person actions.

The sweeping efforts by the Trump administration to categorize dissent as domestic terrorism — and to mobilize federal resources to punish this dissent — is part of a chilling slip into authoritarianism.

I agree!

Bogus “Antifa” Designations and FBI Warrantless Access to Americans’ Communications

Guarding FISA Section 702’s “Back Door”

Just Security

By Ryan Goodman

April 14, 2026

Congress faces a choice later this month over the FBI’s access to Americans’ email, text, and phone conversations. A surveillance program created nearly twenty years ago – Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) – will sunset on April 20 if Congress does not reauthorize it. Section 702 allows U.S. intelligence agencies to collect the email, text, and phone communications of foreign nationals located outside the United States. As a byproduct, Americans’ communications are caught in the net as well. Subject to limitations that Congress introduced in 2024, the FBI can dip into that vast database to look for derogatory information on Americans – without a warrant and without probable cause of wrongdoing.

That “back door,” allowing access to Americans’ communications, is ripe for abuse especially in the context of the administration’s campaign to paint “antifa” as an international and domestic terrorist threat (see Section II below). Any expert of national security surveillance law following the government’s escalating actions on “antifa” can connect the dots to FISA electronic surveillance and other counterterrorism and intelligence authorities. Very recent reporting by the New York Times and Puck News points in that direction as well.

Because it is amorphous and untethered to the facts, the “antifa” label creates a framework for bringing peaceful civil society organizations and everyday Americans exercising their right to protest into the Section 702 surveillance net. Hence, the question of whether Congress should reauthorize Section 702 but with a requirement that the FBI obtain a warrant from a federal judge to look at Americans’ communications.

New York Civil Liberties Union reports that,

In September, President Trump issued a National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM-7) called “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence” with chilling implications for political speech in America. The memorandum appears to be designed to crack down on activists and non-profits. And based on the list of political views the document targets, the Trump administration could use NSPM-7 to go after pretty much anyone who isn’t a MAGA faithful.

Under the logic of NSPM-7, the Trump administration categorizes views it equates with “anti-Americanism,” “anti-Christianity,” “extremism on migration,” “extremism on race,” “extremism on gender,” or opposition to what it regards as “traditional American views on family, religion, and morality” as domestic terrorist threats.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with these views, the First Amendment undoubtedly protects them. And no matter what Trump and his allies think, NSPM-7 cannot override our constitutional rights, which still protect freedom of speech and association.

Our fear is that, under NSPM-7, constitutionally protected speech could become the grounds for criminal investigation by the Trump administration. There is no federal crime of “domestic terrorism.” But the memo seems designed to allow First Amendment protected speech to be the basis for beginning law enforcement investigations that could lead to other criminal charges, and chill free speech and association. In other words, NSPM-7 could open the door to criminalizing those who have viewpoints the Trump administration doesn’t like.

Tell me one thing... Do you trust Trump and his cronies to with this power?

---

Update: 2:00PM

I just found this from the ACLU, How NSPM-7 Seeks to Use "Domestic Terrorism" to Target Nonprofits and Activists.

Nonprofits, their donors, and activists striving for a more equal, just, and fair country and world are core components of American civil society. Yet on September 25, President Donald Trump issued a National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM-7) called “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence,” essentially adding them to an ever-growing list of what he calls the “enemy within.”

Civil society nonprofits and activists thus join segments of academia, the legal profession, public health professionals and scientists, and so many others President Trump sees as his political opponents and critics. For all of us seeking to uphold the Constitution, fundamental human rights, and civil liberties, it’s almost a badge of courage and honor.

On its face, NSPM-7 is chilling to read: If anyone needed proof that “terrorism” and “political violence” are slippery and fraught categories subject to political, ideological, and racial manipulation and bias—well, this is it.

]...]

The bottom line in cutting through the noise of reprehensible and irresponsible presidential rhetoric and actions is this: No president can rewrite the Constitution and the safeguards we have under it. These safeguards most emphatically include our First Amendment-protected freedoms of belief, speech, and association; our Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures; our Fifth Amendment right to due process; and our right to Equal Protection under the laws of this country. Under the 14th Amendment, these due process and equal protection rights apply equally to actions taken by federal and state agencies against tax-exempt nonprofits.

I wouldn't doubt that I'm on that list because of all the advocacy work I have done.

This Crosses The Line

It’s called extortion. Why is the Trump administration creating files on members of Congress and secretly investigating them?

Members of Congress demand DOJ stop tracking lawmakers' Epstein files searches

Attorney General Pam Bondi took a document referring to Rep. Pramila Jayapal's search history to a House Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday.

NBC News

By Megan Lebowitz, Kyle Stewart and Daisy Conant

Feb 12, 2026

Members of Congress sharply criticized the Justice Department over allegations that it was tracking what lawmakers were searching for as they viewed unredacted versions of the Jeffrey Epstein files.

A Reuters photo showed Bondi at a congressional hearing Wednesday holding a document labeled “Jayapal Pramila Search History.” The document listed Epstein files that the Democratic representative from Washington confirmed she searched.

The DOJ began allowing lawmakers this week to view unredacted Epstein files. The review process could take place in person at the Justice Department on DOJ computers. In a letter from the Justice Department to lawmakers obtained by NBC News, it said that it “will keep a log of the dates and times of all members’ reviews.”

The backlash from lawmakers adds to growing outrage over the department's handling of its Epstein records. At Wednesday's oversight hearing with the House Judiciary Committee, Bondi faced criticism from Democratic lawmakers and two Republicans who accused the department of mishandling survivors' information, improperly redacting files that named prominent individuals, among other concerns.

The Constitution establishes three equal branches of government as a system of checks and balances. When one branch is secretly investigating another, that shattered those checks and balances.

"Bondi showed up today with a burn book that held a printed search history of exactly what emails I searched," Jayapal continued, referring to a stack of documents that Bondi read off of during the hearing. "That is outrageous and I intend to pursue this and stop this spying on members."

Jayapal told NBC News that she spoke to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and confirmed "that that was my search history that she had it in the binder, that there’s a photograph of it that it matched what I searched, and that it was unacceptable."

All the warning signs of a dictatorship are there...

• Attacking the press,
• Attacking higher education,
• Attacking voting rights and limiting who can vote,
• Using legal attacks on political opponents,
• Using unaccountable paramilitary police,
• Replacing nonpartisan career officials with loyalists,
• Using government transport for private trips.

"Danger, Will Robinson! Danger!"

Stalin? Mao Zedong? Kim Jong Un?

[Editorial]

Whose giant picture is all over the capitol city?

Those dictators?

No! It Trump!!!!

On the front of the Department of Labor

You imagine huge leader portraits on government buildings are commonly associated with authoritarian or totalitarian regimes — like those in China, Russia or in North Korea!

Big Brother is watching you!

Then we have the case of the Kennedy Center,

Maria Shriver’s Tweet About Renaming The Kennedy Center Is Seriously Chilling

"Next thing perhaps he will want to rename JFK Airport, rename the Lincoln Memorial, the Trump Lincoln Memorial. The Trump Jefferson Memorial. The Trump Smithsonian. The list goes on."

by Matt Stopera

BuzzFeed Staff

December 19, 2025

Remember way back in July when Republicans advanced an amendment to rename the "John F. Kennedy Opera House" to the "First Lady Melania Trump Opera House?"

Yeah, so that never happened.

However, on Thursday, we got news that it would be renamed to the "Trump-Kennedy Center."

Maria Shriver wrote;

"The Kennedy Center was named after my uncle, President John F Kennedy. It was named in his honor. He was a man who was interested in the arts, interested in culture, interested in education, language, history. He brought the arts into the White House, and he and my Aunt Jackie amplified the arts, celebrated the arts, stood up for the arts and artists."

"It is beyond comprehension that this sitting president has sought to rename this great memorial dedicated to President Kennedy. It is beyond wild that he would think adding his name in front of President Kennedy’s name is acceptable. It is not."

"Next thing perhaps he will want to rename JFK Airport, rename the Lincoln Memorial, the Trump Lincoln Memorial. The Trump Jefferson Memorial. The Trump Smithsonian. The list goes on."

"Can we not see what is happening here? C’mon, my fellow Americans! Wake up! This is not dignified. This is not funny. This is way beneath the stature of the job. It’s downright weird. It’s obsessive in a weird way. Just when you think somone can’t stoop any lower, down they go…"

You picture dictators doing this, not someone in the White House!

Then we have the commemorative "Trump Dollar"!

Senate Democrats introduce bill to block Trump from putting face on dollar coin

The Hill

by Alexander Bolton 

12/09/25

Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) introduced legislation Tuesday to prevent President Trump or any sitting or living former president from being featured on U.S. currency, a bill that would thwart the U.S. Treasury’s plan to issue a commemorative $1 coin with Trump’s image on it.

The bill, titled the Change Corruption Act, is cosponsored by Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden (Ore.) and Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) and states: “No United States currency may feature the likeness of a living or sitting president."

The bill’s authors note the historical precedent of the United States not featuring a living or sitting president on a circulating coin.

The U.S. Mint may announce a decision as soon as this week on issuing a Trump coin to coincide with the nation’s 250th birthday.

“President Trump’s self-celebrating maneuvers are authoritarian actions worthy of dictators like North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, not the United States of America,” Merkely said in a statement. 

[/Editorial] 

---

Update: 12/22 @ 3:30AM

Trump Now Shares One More Thing in Common With History’s Worst Dictators

Slate

By Paul Finkelman

Dec 20, 2025

On Thursday, the board of the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts voted to rename the center “the Donald J. Trump and the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts.” Weirdly, the board of the center, mostly picked by President Donald Trump, does not seem to understand that a “memorial” center is named for someone who is deceased, and thus the new name implies that Trump is dead. By Friday, Trump’s name was physically added to the building at the behest of his handpicked board. Don’t be fooled by the absurdity of Trump’s vanity and the obsequiousness of these government officials: This is not an at all an innocuous move.

American political culture has long rejected the idea that sitting officer holders, or even living persons, should be honored with buildings or institutions named for them, or have their names and faces on currency, coins, or postage stamps. This sort of behavior is alien to a republic and a democracy. It is common, however, in dictatorships. Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Francisco Franco had heir faces on stamps, currency, and coins during their respective despotic reigns. Josef Stalin appeared on numerous stamps while he was the dictator of the Soviet Union and renamed a major city Stalingrad, after himself. Kim Jong-un sometimes appears on North Korean stamps.

[...]

Which brings us to the Kennedy Center. The idea of a national cultural center had bounced around American politics for three decades before President John F. Kennedy pushed for legislation to create it, using both public and private money. The center opened in 1971, nearly eight years after JFK was assassinated. It was formally named the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts. Richard Nixon, a Republican, was president when it opened. In fact, Kennedy had beaten Nixon in the 1960 presidential election, but Nixon did not try to change the name. He did attend a performance there in the Eisenhower Theater, which also opened in 1971. Bipartisanship and honoring deceased leaders were etched into the building, literally.

Now Trump has physically etched a different, more sinister tradition into its walls.

A Tale Of Two States

One Republican and one Democrat and the opposite directions that are going! First the Republican state.

Missouri anti-LGBTQ+ laws linked to population loss and decline in tax revenue, studies find

Researchers and business leaders warn that discriminatory laws are pushing LGBTQ+ Missourians and employers to leave, hurting the state’s economy

Missouri Independent

By: Annelise Hanshaw

November 7, 2025

When Rob Connoley shut down his award-winning St. Louis restaurant last year, business was thriving.

Tourists and locals alike lauded Bulrush as a destination for Ozark cuisine, making its way into local and national publications as a top restaurant. Profit margins were beyond national averages, and Connoley was a newly awarded James Beard Award finalist.

But it didn’t feel right.

During a trip to London to represent Missouri in an international food festival, Connoley realized he couldn’t be an ambassador for a state that didn’t respect him.

“It felt egregious and awkward to be promoting a state in a region that was actively working against my own personal interests,” he told The Independent.

Connoley, who is gay, pointed to an onslaught of anti-LGBTQ+ laws. The final push was when the Missouri Attorney General sought out transgender kids’ medical records.

As I have said before... what is this country coming to where we don't feel safe from the police in our homes that we have to flee!

Analysis by the Movement Advancement Project estimates that around $362 million to $879 million in household income has left the state, a number that is expected to increase.

The estimate is based on a survey conducted by MAP in collaboration with The Trevor Project, a mental health nonprofit for LGBTQ+ youth. Their research shows that among LGBTQ+-identifying people ages 13 to 24, around 39% have considered moving to a different state and 4% have already moved because of policies targeting gay and transgender people.

“There is good reason to suspect this 4% estimate may be even higher in Missouri,” the report says.

A separate study conducted by the National Center for Transgender Equality and released in 2024 found 47% of transgender people have thought about moving to a different state because of discriminatory state laws, and 5% had completed a move for that reason.

Missouri is one of 10 states highlighted in the study as having a higher proportion of respondents moving away.

Now lets take a look at Illinois, the governor there just gave a speech to the legislature! NBC Ch5 Chicago reported on the governor's State of the State address in February...

Pritzker questioned what the president will do next, with uncertainly surrounding DOGE, the future of federal programs and more in the balance.

"After we’ve discriminated against, deported or disparaged all the immigrants and the gay and lesbian and transgender people, the developmentally disabled, the women and the minorities – once we’ve ostracized our neighbors and betrayed our friends – After that, when the problems we started with are still there staring us in the face – what comes next?" he said. "All the atrocities of human history lurk in the answer to that question. And if we don’t want to repeat history – then for God’s sake in this moment we better be strong enough to learn from it."

He ended his address with another Holocaust mention.

"If you think I’m overreacting and sounding the alarm too soon, consider this: It took the Nazis one month, three weeks, two days, eight hours and 40 minutes to dismantle a constitutional republic," he said. "All I’m saying is when the five-alarm fire starts to burn, every good person better be ready to man a post with a bucket of water if you want to stop it from raging out of control... Tyranny requires your fear and your silence and your compliance. Democracy requires your courage. So gather your justice and humanity, Illinois, and do not let the 'tragic spirit of despair' overcome us when our country needs us the most."

People fleeing their homes, people being persecuted for who they are... this is something out of a fascist dream!

Fear! Suspicion! Distrust!

Have you heard of National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (“NSPM-7”)? You should... we are labeled a terrorist organizations! The full name is NSPM‑7 is a National Security Presidential Memorandum titled “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence"

The libertarian think tank, The Cato Institute writes,

 Yesterday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order laying out plans to use law enforcement and regulation to “investigate and disrupt networks, entities, and organizations” that, according to him, are responsible for encouraging acts of political violence. The order envisages the use of government power to crack down on a vaguely specified mix of organizational, associational, and individual speech and action, much of which is properly seen as protected by the First Amendment. 

Among the announced targets of the order, entitled “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence,” are “campaigns of … radicalization,” that is, speech persuading people to adopt radical ideas, grounded in a range of aims that include wanting to “change or direct policy outcomes.” Another way of describing nonviolent speech that agitates to transform opinion so as to “change… policy outcomes” might be “petitioning for the redress of grievances.”

[...]

The executive order goes on to target the practice of “doxxing,” that is, the accurate reporting of persons’ identities and details about them, without acknowledging that many instances of such reporting by itself constitute speech protected by the First Amendment, most especially as applied to employees of the state acting in the name of the public, such as law enforcers.

The article ends with...

As with Trump’s wave of prosecutions instituted over the objections of professional prosecutors, we now have a signal for all willing to listen that federal law enforcement is being turned into the instrument of one man’s zeal for revenge and appetite to accumulate power.

I received an email about what LGBTQ+ organizations can do to protect themselves. We haven't seen the likes of this since Senator Joseph McCarthy's House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) conducted their witch hunts of anti-communist activities. And then his attackes on the Gay and Lesbian communities known as the  Lavender Scare, the National Archives put it this way,

Beginning in the late 1940s and continuing through the 1960s, thousands of gay employees were fired or forced to resign from the federal workforce because of their sexuality. Dubbed the Lavender Scare, this wave of repression was also bound up with anti-Communism and fueled by the power of congressional investigation.

We are now living in the Lavender Scare II.

Things are so bad that warning are being issued... watch your backs! The email says in part...

Prepare for legal and policy action

•     Identify legal partners and constitutional law allies in case agency actions under NSPM-7 threaten organizational standing, expressive rights, or funding.
•     Follow these partners to track how similar government efforts have been challenged (e.g., on First Amendment grounds) and position your organization to benefit from strategic legal precedent.

Closing Note

NSPM-7 introduces troubling ambiguity in how the federal government may scrutinize nonprofit, advocacy, and civil rights work. Yet our communities are stronger when we do not shrink under ambiguity — when we act with both courage and care. We affirm that LGBTQ+ organizations have a vital role in advancing justice, and we will hold fast to our responsibility to protect and uplift our communities.

The purpose of all of this is create fear, suspicion, and distrust among or community: "That new member? Is he a spy for the FBI" Will this blog show up on the FBI's most wanted list?

Some of the tools and mechanisms NSPM-7 includes:

Empowering Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs) to have a domestic focus and coordinate investigations. 

• Directing the Treasury to identify and disrupt financial networks that fund “domestic terrorism” and political violence, and issuing guidance to financial institutions to file suspicious activity reports (SARs) when financial flows appear tied to illicit (political violence) activity. 
• Mandating the IRS to ensure that tax-exempt entities are not directly or indirectly financing political violence or domestic terrorism, and to refer such organizations (and their officers/employees) to DOJ for possible investigation. 
• Allowing the Attorney General to recommend designating groups or entities whose activities meet the definition of domestic terrorism. 
• The memorandum also describes certain “motivations” or “indicia” that might be considered when assessing risk, such as anti‑capitalism, anti‑Christianity, anti‑Americanism, hostility toward traditional morality, extremism on gender or race, support for overthrowing the government, etc

Do you remember Trump speech to the generals? “We should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military," is this what he was talking about?

Mini-Post: A Video Blog.

Jon Stewart interview a Noble Prize winner on Authoritarian. Sit back and take 15 minutes to watch this on the how we are heading toward authoritarian and the cycle can be broken.

This Is Sick!

Why do they hate us so much?

This is unbelievable and dripping with animosity... Why?

Republican Sen. Mike Lee's pornography ban is moving forward in the Senate

Utah Senator Mike Lee's bill that would ban all pornography federally is advancing within the Senate.

The Advocate

By Ryan Adamczeski

August 12 2025

A Republican bill that would ban all pornography federally is advancing within the Senate.

Utah Senator Mike Lee's Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA) has been referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation for review. If approved, it will go to the U.S. Senate for voting.

The law would alter the Miller Test, which was established in the 1973 Miller v. California Supreme Court decision that determined "obscene" speech is not protected by the First Amendment. The test defines obscenity as material that "appeal[s] to prurient interests as judged by the average person; depict[s] sexual conduct in a patently offensive manner; and lack[s] serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

The IODA would remove the “community standards” benchmark for determining obscenity, and would remove the provision clarifying that sexual conduct must be depicted in a “patently offensive” manner to be considered obscene — labeling all phonographic content as obscenity and rendering it illegal nationally.

Banning pornography that is American as apple pie. But as they say the "devils in the details" but in this case the lake of details.

The bill instead defines obscenity as material that “taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion; depicts, describes, or represents actual or simulated sexual acts with the objective intent to arouse, titillate, or gratify the sexual desires of a person; and taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”

That is where it gets dicey... whose standards? Are they going to hold a nationwide survey to come up with "A standard" and how will they do it? Have us look at "naughty" pictures that get naughtier and naughtier until the majority says "Stop?"

Sen. Mike Lee’s obscenity bill is a free speech nightmare straight out of Project 2025’s playbook

The Utah Republican introduced the Senate version of the “Interstate Obscenity Definition Act” (IODA) — a recycled attempt to ban online pornography nationwide.

MSNBC

By Jacob Mchangama

May 13, 2025

A new bill in Congress threatens to dictate what Americans can read, watch and say online. On May 8, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah and Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill.,  introduced the “Interstate Obscenity Definition Act” (IODA) — a recycled attempt to ban online pornography nationwide.

While concerns about pornography, including moral and religious ones, are part of any healthy public debate, this bill does something far more dangerous: It empowers the federal government to police speech based on subjective values. When lawmakers try to enforce the beliefs of some Americans at the expense of others’ rights, they cross a constitutional line — and put the First Amendment at risk.

[...]

The IODA seeks to sidestep the Supreme Court’s long-standing three-part test for obscenity, established in the 1973 case Miller v. California. The material must appeal to a prurient interest, depict sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

Lee’s bill would scrap that standard and replace it with a broader, far more subjective definition. It would label content obscene if it simply focuses on nudity, sex or excretion in a way that is intended to arouse and if it lacks “serious value.”

I wasn't joking on who gets to decide, it is a real problem. The bill says Congress should set the standard. The Advocate goes on to say,

LGBTQ+ identities are included within "obscene materials" in some states. Under Kansas criminal law, obscene material deemed "harmful to minors" that requires identification to view includes nudity and "sexual content," which is defined in part as "acts of masturbation, homosexuality, or sexual intercourse."

Will we be going back to pre-Stonewall, to the era of the Black Cat Tavern, Compton's, and Dewey's when the police raid LGBTQ bars? So where did this bill originated from? News.com.au writes,

Under current US law, a charge of obscenity can only be laid if a “reasonable person” would find it “patently offensive”.

The Christian conservative Heritage Foundation wants to redefine both.

“Look at America under the ruling and cultural elite today: Inflation is ravaging family budgets, drug overdose deaths continue to escalate, and children suffer the toxic normalisation of transgender-ism with drag queens and pornography invading their school libraries,” it proclaimed during the 2024 US election campaign.

The Washington DC think-tank authored Project 2025: Mandate for Leadership – The Conservative Promise. This 920-page document forms the basis of many of Trump’s policies, ranging from tariffs, slashing government spending, ending anti-discrimination efforts and renewing bans against the LGBTQ+ community.

Did you catch that? Project 2025.

Do you know where else they have laws like this? Russia passed a law banning the "propaganda of non‑traditional sexual relationships" directed at minors. It broadly prohibited any positive or neutral portrayal of LGBTQ topics, in Hungary Anti‑LGBTQ Legislation law making it illegal to present or promote sex reassignment or homosexuality, spanning schools, media, advertising, and family content—echoing Russia’s earlier law, and in China doesn't have an explicit “anti‑LGBTQ bill” but enforces stringent content restrictions through censorship, regulatory pressure, and punitive actions which as you can guess we are included.

I asked Chat GPT aI: Tell me what do these countries have in common?

ChatGPT said:

Great question—and the answer reveals a clear pattern. Despite different cultures, religions, or political systems, the countries that restrict or criminalize LGBTQ+ expression tend to share several key characteristics:

---

🔍 What These Countries Have in Common

1. Authoritarian or Illiberal Governance

• Power is concentrated in a small ruling group or leader.

• Judicial independence, media freedom, and civil liberties are weakened.

• Political dissent is discouraged or criminalized.

Examples: Russia (Putin), China (CCP/Xi Jinping), Hungary (Orbán), Iran, Uganda.

---

2. State-Controlled or Restricted Media

• Governments control or heavily influence TV, newspapers, and online platforms.

• Independent media and journalists face surveillance, censorship, or shutdowns.

• LGBTQ+ stories are either banned or re-framed as "Western propaganda" or "immorality."

---

3. Use of “Traditional Values” or Religion to Justify Control

• LGBTQ+ people are portrayed as threats to the "natural family," "national identity," or "morality."

• Religious narratives (Islamic in Iran/Nigeria, Christian in Uganda/Hungary, Confucian in China) are used politically—not just spiritually.

• “Protect the children” is a common rallying cry.

---

4. Weaponization of Law Against Minorities

• Laws are written vaguely—terms like “obscenity,” “abnormal,” “propaganda,” or “promotion” let governments target a wide range of content or behavior.

• LGBTQ+ people are made symbolic targets to distract from corruption, economic issues, or unpopular policies.

---

5. Suppression of Civil Society and Dissent

• LGBTQ+ organizations, Pride events, and advocacy groups are shut down, banned, or surveilled.

• Online speech is monitored and punished.

• Broader human rights defenders—feminists, journalists, students—are often attacked too.

---

6. Populism and Nationalism

• These regimes often promote a version of “cultural purity” or national rebirth.

• Anything “foreign” (especially progressive Western ideas about gender and sexuality) is labeled as a threat.

---

🧠 Why This Matters

Laws targeting LGBTQ+ people are rarely just about sexuality or gender. They’re about control:

• Over bodies

• Over thought

• Over speech

• Over resistance

That’s why what starts as “just a bill about obscenity” or “protecting children” can quickly morph into a system that criminalizes difference.

And once LGBTQ+ rights are weakened, other rights often follow: free speech, privacy, education, reproductive rights, freedom of assembly.

---

🧭 So if the U.S. passes IODA?

It joins a global trend—away from democracy and toward authoritarianism. Not because the bill says “LGBTQ people are illegal,” but because it creates a legal and moral framework that erases them from public life.

---

So if the U.S. passes this bill we would be in good company with other authoritarian countries!