FBI probing Antifa plot to buy guns from Mexican cartel, 'stage an armed rebellion at the border'

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Lukas Mikelionis | Fox News


https://i.imgur.com/Kl4bka7l.jpg

The FBI is investigating a supposed radical far-left Antifa plot to “stage an armed rebellion” and “disrupt U.S. law enforcement and military security operations at the US/Mexican border.”

Word of the probe comes after years of the FBI putting greater emphasis on the threat of Antifa activities, with bureau Director Christopher Wray saying the agency is looking into the ideology and individuals associated with the movement.

But according to a December FBI document obtained by the San Diego Union-Tribune, the agency is now tackling actual alleged plots of possible criminal activities that would affect U.S. homeland security.

The FBI report, which wasn’t posted online because the matter is still active, alleged that the anti-fascist activists were looking into buying firearms from a “Mexico-based cartel associate known as Cobra Commander” that would be used to “stage an armed rebellion at the border.”

It also warns that the Antifa activists “planned to disrupt U.S. law enforcement and military security operations at the US/Mexican border.”

The document reportedly was shared with multiple federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the CIA and the National Security Administration.

Two law enforcement officials told the Tribune that the investigation is still ongoing but no one has been charged. The leaked document, meanwhile, is an information report supposed to be read only by law enforcement officials, though no security clearance is required.

“This is an information report, not finally evaluated intelligence,” the six-page report states, according to the newspaper. “Receiving agencies are requested not to take action based on this raw reporting without prior coordination with the FBI.”

But two individuals named in the report, Cobra Commander Ivan Riebeling and Evan Duke, say that the alleged plot was unlikely and doesn’t make much sense.

“It doesn’t make any sense that someone in the United States would purchase guns in Mexico,” Riebeling told the Tribune.

“And the Hondurans certainly didn’t bring money to buy guns. It doesn’t make any sense; in fact it’s extremely absurd to say the Hondurans wanted to attack the United States at the border.”

[fricnjay]

If any of these bastards do jail time and Jessie Smollett doesnt our justice system is definitely broken.

[PorkChopSandwiches]

This isnt a hate group?

[RBP]

This isnt a hate group?

Joe Biden:
"a courageous group of Americans"
"those with the courage to stand against [hate]"

I have been explaining this... the left decides what is "hate", not you. They can then use any means necessary to fight their self-defined "hate".

[PorkChopSandwiches]

:tup:

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Joe Biden:
"a courageous group of Americans"
"those with the courage to stand against [hate]"

I have been explaining this... the left decides what is "hate", not you. They can then use any means necessary to fight their self-defined "hate".

"courage"

:-k

Is that why they all cover their faces?

[Hal-9000]

I always laugh at people like the Ruby Ridgers and Tim Mcveighs of the world who figure they can bear arms against the US government.

Even if your group can enlist enough people and have the proper firepower (which you won't), you ain't never going to win against an armed government response. Local law enforcement, the military, various arms of the government like the DEA, DOD AND FBI are all trained personnel with access to cutting edge weapons and vehicles.

Unless you can match the numbers and training, your lil group will become a grease spot in the history books.

[RBP]

I always laugh at people like the Ruby Ridgers and Tim Mcveighs of the world who figure they can bear arms against the US government.

Even if your group can enlist enough people and have the proper firepower (which you won't), you ain't never going to win against an armed government response. Local law enforcement, the military, various arms of the government like the DEA, DOD AND FBI are all trained personnel with access to cutting edge weapons and vehicles.

Unless you can match the numbers and training, your lil group will become a grease spot in the history books.

Except you know what those groups are all bad at? Guerilla warfare and urban combat. You know what militias train for?

[KevinD]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Hal, brother, I remember a longish conversation on AS about this. The thing you have to take from your two examples, is that, though you (nor I) necessarily agree with these folks, the US constitution was indeed set up to prevent just those issues, IE, whereas a group of civilians (note the at the time, ALL civilians were considered "Militia") a group that disagreed with he government could have a stand.
There have been many examples of folks who use the constitution as a shield to do nefarious things, and there have been times where the US government has done nefarious things against citizens. Put on your tin foil hat and let's take a ride up a creek, pol

[DemonGeminiX]

I always laugh at people like the Ruby Ridgers and Tim Mcveighs of the world who figure they can bear arms against the US government.

Even if your group can enlist enough people and have the proper firepower (which you won't), you ain't never going to win against an armed government response. Local law enforcement, the military, various arms of the government like the DEA, DOD AND FBI are all trained personnel with access to cutting edge weapons and vehicles.

Unless you can match the numbers and training, your lil group will become a grease spot in the history books.

Except, if the group's cause is just and the majority of aforementioned government organizations agree with them and join them... you know, the people that serve in government and law enforcement are individual citizens too. They each have their own beliefs and opinions that don't always fall in line with what the government says. There have been plenty of cases where law enforcement officials have absolutely refused to enforce a law that law makers have passed. Most recently, in California.

Also, there's this thing called the Posse Comitatus Act, which was passed in 1878. It limits the powers of the federal government from using federal military personnel against the citizens to enforce laws. Long story short, if there's civil unrest, the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines won't be allowed to engage.

The difference between us and other countries, if an armed rebellion rose up with enough people, it might make the elected sit back and think "Maybe we're doing something wrong?" I know, it seems laughable, but not really. You never really hear about stuff like this, but once under Obama's administration and when he had a Democratic majority, they all started talking about gun control. People in the gun community got organized and descended on Washington by the tens of thousands to protest. When that happened, politicians stopped talking about gun control... for a little while. You're not going to find an article about it, the media wouldn't report it, but I know people who went.

As for these idiots, if they're going to try to take on the border patrol... Hell, the Mexican authorities themselves might start shooting at them.

[Muddy]

Joe Biden:
"a courageous group of Americans"
"those with the courage to stand against [hate]"

I have been explaining this... the left decides what is "hate", not you. They can then use any means necessary to fight their self-defined "hate".

Did he really say that about these little terrorists?

[Hal-9000]

Except you know what those groups are all bad at? Guerilla warfare and urban combat. You know what militias train for?


Hal, brother, I remember a longish conversation on AS about this. The thing you have to take from your two examples, is that, though you (nor I) necessarily agree with these folks, the US constitution was indeed set up to prevent just those issues, IE, whereas a group of civilians (note the at the time, ALL civilians were considered "Militia") a group that disagreed with he government could have a stand.
There have been many examples of folks who use the constitution as a shield to do nefarious things, and there have been times where the US government has done nefarious things against citizens. Put on your tin foil hat and let's take a ride up a creek, pol


Except, if the group's cause is just and the majority of aforementioned government organizations agree with them and join them... you know, the people that serve in government and law enforcement are individual citizens too. They each have their own beliefs and opinions that don't always fall in line with what the government says. There have been plenty of cases where law enforcement officials have absolutely refused to enforce a law that law makers have passed. Most recently, in California.

Also, there's this thing called the Posse Comitatus Act, which was passed in 1878. It limits the powers of the federal government from using federal military personnel against the citizens to enforce laws. Long story short, if there's civil unrest, the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines won't be allowed to engage.

The difference between us and other countries, if an armed rebellion rose up with enough people, it might make the elected sit back and think "Maybe we're doing something wrong?" I know, it seems laughable, but not really. You never really hear about stuff like this, but once under Obama's administration and when he had a Democratic majority, they all started talking about gun control. People in the gun community got organized and descended on Washington by the tens of thousands to protest. When that happened, politicians stopped talking about gun control... for a little while. You're not going to find an article about it, the media wouldn't report it, but I know people who went.

As for these idiots, if they're going to try to take on the border patrol... Hell, the Mexican authorities themselves might start shooting at them.

I stand by my post. I'll take the government vs any non recognized group for the reasons I've listed above. The US government will always have the advantage in terms of numbers and equipment, I don't think there's really an argument or debate here.

eg Some home-made militant faction starts making moves, the government has a pool to draw from starting from local law enforcement, then divisions of the military from grunts right up to highly trained SEALS and black ops agents, then three letter agencies from within the government. All of whom will gladly answer that particular call of an armed threat by civilian members of the public.

The home made group will never have the depth vs that pool of government resources.

[RBP]

Did he really say that about these little terrorists?

It was his presidential announcement.

[fricnjay]

https://i.imgur.com/jq4a2vV.jpg

[Muddy]

So tough..!!