home

The F.B.I. Comes Calling

The New York Times today has a lengthy article on the FBI's recent visits to those they think may be political troublemakers at the Republican Convention. The story first surfaced in the Rocky Mountain News at the time of the Democratic Convention. We wrote about it here.

The FBI says they are just calling on those they think may be involved in criminal acts, not those who just might want to express dissent. Several of those who received the lawmen's visits disagree. From today's NY Times article:

"The message I took from it," said Sarah Bardwell, 21, an intern at a Denver antiwar group who was visited by six investigators a few weeks ago, "was that they were trying to intimidate us into not going to any protests and to let us know that, 'hey, we're watching you.' ''

Who's behind this new intrusion? According to the New York Times, which has obtained documents, it's the Department of Justice:

The unusual initiative comes after the Justice Department, in a previously undisclosed legal opinion, gave its blessing to controversial tactics used last year by the F.B.I in urging local police departments to report suspicious activity at political and antiwar demonstrations to counterterrorism squads. The F.B.I. bulletins that relayed the request for help detailed tactics used by demonstrators - everything from violent resistance to Internet fund-raising and recruitment.

In an internal complaint, an F.B.I. employee charged that the bulletins improperly blurred the line between lawfully protected speech and illegal activity. But the Justice Department's Office of Legal Policy, in a five-page internal analysis obtained by The New York Times, disagreed.

This is the same Justice Department office that issued the since-retracted memo authorizing torture. In okaying the FBI visits, the opinion held:

....any First Amendment impact posed by the F.B.I.'s monitoring of the political protests was negligible and constitutional. The opinion said: "Given the limited nature of such public monitoring, any possible 'chilling' effect caused by the bulletins would be quite minimal and substantially outweighed by the public interest in maintaining safety and order during large-scale demonstrations."

That's Ashcroft for you. Another four years?

< Protest Guide to the RNC | McGreevey's Alleged Paramour Denies Being Gay >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort: