Jump to content
TedderVision
Russ

Defeat of Internal Threats Act

Recommended Posts

Mr. Shultz, with thanks to Mr. Schneider, submits
A BILL

To authorize dedicated domestic terrorism offices within the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to analyze and monitor domestic terrorist activity and require the Federal Government to take steps to prevent domestic terrorism.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Defeat of Internal Threats Act”.

 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) White supremacists and other right-wing extremists are the most significant domestic terrorism threat facing the United States.

(2) An unclassified May 2017 joint intelligence bulletin from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security found that “white supremacist extremism poses [a] persistent threat of lethal violence,” and that White supremacists “were responsible for 49 homicides in 26 attacks from 2000 to 2016 … more than any other domestic extremist movement”.

(3) According to the New America Foundation, since September 11, 2001, 77 Americans have died in terrorist attacks by domestic extremists in the United States. Eighty-nine percent were killed by far-right-wing extremists.

(4) The fatal attacks described in paragraph (3) include—

(A) the August 5, 2012, mass shooting at a Sikh gurdwara in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, in which a White supremacist shot and killed 6 members of the gurdwara;

(B) the April 13, 2014, mass shooting at a Jewish community center and a Jewish assisted living facility in Overland Park, Kansas, in which a neo-Nazi shot and killed 3 civilians, including a 14-year-old teenager;

(C) the June 8, 2014, ambush in Las Vegas, Nevada, in which 2 supporters of the far right-wing “patriot” movement shot and killed 2 police officers and a civilian;

(D) the June 17, 2015, mass shooting at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina, in which a White supremacist shot and killed 9 members of the church;

(E) the November 27, 2015, mass shooting at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, Colorado, in which an anti-abortion extremist shot and killed a police officer and 2 civilians;

(F) the March 20, 2017, murder of an African-American man in New York City, allegedly committed by a White supremacist who reportedly traveled to New York “for the purpose of killing black men”;

(G) the May 26, 2017, attack in Portland, Oregon, in which a White supremacist allegedly murdered 2 men and injured a third after the men defended 2 young women whom the individual had targeted with anti-Muslim hate speech; and

(H) the August 12, 2017, attack in Charlottesville, Virginia, in which a White supremacist allegedly killed one and injured nineteen after driving his car through a crowd of individuals protesting a neo-Nazi rally, and of which Attorney General Jeff Sessions said, “It does meet the definition of domestic terrorism in our statute.”.

(5) The Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism found that right-wing extremists were responsible for 150 terrorist acts, attempted acts, and plots and conspiracies that took place in the United States between 1993 and 2017. These attacks resulted in the deaths of 255 people and injured more than 600.

(6) According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, in 2015, for the first time in 5 years, the number of hate groups in the United States rose by 14 percent. The increase included a more than twofold rise in the number of Ku Klux Klan chapters. The number of anti-government militias and “patriot” groups also grew by 14 percent in 2015.

(7) In November 2017, the Federal Bureau of Investigation released its annual hate crime incident report, which found that in 2016, hate crimes increased by almost 5 percent, including a 19-percent rise in hate crimes against American Muslims. Similarly, the previous year’s report found that in 2015, hate crimes increased by 6 percent. Much of that increase came from a 66-percent rise in attacks on American Muslims. In both reports, race-based crimes were most numerous; more than 50 percent of those hate crimes targeted African Americans.

(8) In January 2017, a right-wing extremist who had expressed anti-Muslim views was charged with murder for allegedly killing 6 people and injuring nineteen in a shooting rampage at a mosque in Quebec City, Canada. It was the first-ever mass shooting at a mosque in North America, and Prime Minister Trudeau labeled it a terrorist attack.

(9) Between January and July 2017, news reports found 63 incidents in which American mosques were targeted by threats, vandalism, or arson.

 

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act—

(1) the term “Director” means the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation;

(2) the term “domestic terrorism” has the meaning given the term in section 2331 of title 18, United States Code;

(3) the term “Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee” means the committee within the Department of Justice tasked with assessing and sharing information about ongoing domestic terrorism threats; and

(4) the term “Secretary” means the Secretary of Homeland Security.

 

SEC. 4. OFFICES TO COMBAT DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

(a) Authorization Of Offices To Monitor, Analyze, Investigate, And Prosecute Domestic Terrorism.—

(1) DOMESTIC TERRORISM UNIT.—There is authorized a Domestic Terrorism Unit in the Office of Intelligence and Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security, which shall be responsible for monitoring and analyzing domestic terrorism activity.

(2) DOMESTIC TERRORISM OFFICE.—There is authorized a Domestic Terrorism Office in the Counterterrorism Section of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice—

(A) which shall be responsible for investigating and prosecuting incidents of domestic terrorism; and

(B) which shall be headed by the Domestic Terrorism Counsel.

(3) DOMESTIC TERRORISM SECTION OF THE FBI.—There is authorized a Domestic Terrorism Section within the Counterterrorism Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which shall be responsible for investigating domestic terrorism activity.

(b) Joint Report On Domestic Terrorism.—

(1) ANNUAL REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and each year thereafter, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall submit a joint report authored by the domestic terrorism offices authorized under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a) to—

(A) the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and

(B) the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Homeland Security, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives.

(2) CONTENTS.—Each report submitted under paragraph (1) shall include—

(A) an assessment of the domestic terrorism threat posed by White supremacists, including White supremacist infiltration and recruitment of law enforcement officers and members of the Armed Forces;

(B) (i) in the first report, an analysis of incidents or attempted incidents of domestic terrorism that have occurred in the United States since April 19, 1995; and

(ii) in each subsequent report, an analysis of incidents or attempted incidents of domestic terrorism that occurred in the United States during the preceding year; and

(C) a quantitative analysis of domestic terrorism for the preceding year, including the number of—

(i) domestic terrorism related assessments initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including the number of assessments from each classification and subcategory;

(ii) domestic terrorism related preliminary investigations initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including the number of preliminary investigations from each classification and subcategory, and how many preliminary investigations resulted from assessments;

(iii) domestic terrorism related full investigations initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including the number of full investigations from each classification and subcategory, and how many full investigations resulted from preliminary investigations and assessments;

(iv) domestic terrorism related incidents, including the number of incidents from each classification and subcategory, the number of deaths and injuries resulting from each incident, and a detailed explanation of each incident;

(v) Federal domestic terrorism related arrests, including the number of arrests from each classification and subcategory, and a detailed explanation of each arrest;

(vi) Federal domestic terrorism related indictments, including the number of indictments from each classification and subcategory, and a detailed explanation of each indictment;

(vii) Federal domestic terrorism related prosecutions, including the number of incidents from each classification and subcategory, and a detailed explanation of each prosecution;

(viii) Federal domestic terrorism related convictions, including the number of convictions from each classification and subcategory, and a detailed explanation of each conviction; and

(ix) Federal domestic terrorism related weapons recoveries, including the number of each type of weapon and the number of weapons from each classification and subcategory.

(3) CLASSIFICATION AND PUBLIC RELEASE.—Each report submitted under paragraph (1) shall be—

(A) unclassified, to the greatest extent possible, with a classified annex only if necessary; and

(B) in the case of the unclassified portion of the report, posted on the public websites of the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

(c) Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee.—There is authorized a Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee, which shall—

(1) meet on a regular basis, and not less regularly than 4 times each year, to coordinate with United States Attorneys and other key public safety officials across the country to promote information sharing and ensure an effective, responsive, and organized joint effort to combat domestic terrorism; and

(2) be co-chaired by—

(A) the Domestic Terrorism Counsel authorized under subsection (a)(2)(B);

(B) a United States Attorney or Assistant United States Attorney;

(C) a member of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice; and

(D) a member of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

(d) Focus On Greatest Threats.—The domestic terrorism offices authorized under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a) shall focus their limited resources on the most significant domestic terrorism threats, as determined by the number of domestic terrorism related incidents from each category and subclassification in the joint report for the preceding year required under subsection (b).

 

SEC. 5. TRAINING TO COMBAT DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

(a) Required Training And Resources.—The State and Local Anti-Terrorism Program, funded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance of the Department of Justice, shall include training and resources to assist State, local, and tribal law enforcement officers in understanding, detecting, deterring, and investigating acts of domestic terrorism. The training shall focus on the most significant domestic terrorism threats, as determined by the quantitative analysis in the joint report required under section 4(b).

(b) Requirement.—Any individual who provides domestic terrorism training required under this section shall have—

(1) expertise in domestic terrorism; and

(2) relevant academic, law enforcement, or other experience in matters related to domestic terrorism.

(c) Report.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act and once each year thereafter, the Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance shall submit an annual report to the committees of Congress described in section 4(b)(1) on the domestic terrorism training implemented under this section, which shall include copies of all training materials used and the names and qualifications of the individuals who provide the training.

(2) CLASSIFICATION.—Each report submitted under paragraph (1) shall be unclassified, to the greatest extent possible, with a classified annex only if necessary.

 

SEC. 6. COMBATTING DOMESTIC TERRORISM THROUGH JOINT TERRORISM TASK FORCES AND FUSION CENTERS.

(a) In General.—The joint terrorism task forces of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and State, local, and regional fusion centers, as established under section 210A of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 124h), shall each, in coordination with the Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee and the domestic terrorism offices authorized under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 4(a) of this Act—

(1) share intelligence to address domestic terrorism activities;

(2) conduct an annual, intelligence-based assessment of domestic terrorism activities in their jurisdictions; and

(3) formulate and execute a plan to address and combat domestic terrorism activities in their jurisdictions.

(b) Requirement.—The activities required under subsection (a) shall focus on the most significant domestic terrorism threats, as determined by the number of domestic terrorism related incidents from each category and subclassification in the joint report for the preceding year required under section 4(b).

 

SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Department of Homeland Security such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Speaker,

I agree with the underlying content of this bill, but believe that laying out a specific set of findings, findings which appear to attack the right-wing alone as an enemy of the people, is irresponsible and wrong-headed.

I hate to hearken back to September 11, 2001, the deadliest terrorist attack in American history, but I believe it is appropriate to at least remind this body of the great threat posed by radical Islamic jihadists, both at home and abroad. In other developed nations, we have seen no shortage of home-grown radical Islamic terror. To set our sights on one subset - a tiny fraction of the population - of potential terrorists is shortsighted and wrongheaded.

Yes, I heartily condemn white nationalists who don't see a place in society for all of our brothers and sisters. But to insinuate, as this bill does, that the right-wing is responsible for these attacks is wrong. I would like to be able to vote yes on this final bill, but in order to get me on board, I would ask that the following two separate amendments be made. To that end, I move to:

  • Strike Section 2, Findings; and
  • Strike Section 4(b)(2)(A), Contents of the Joint Report on Domestic Terrorism.

I yield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Russ said:

Mr. Speaker,

I move for UC.

I yield.

Mr. Speaker,

If my speech wasn't clear enough, I object to unanimous consent, although I am more than willing to withdraw this objection if my two amendments are adopted.

I yield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Recks said:

Mr. Speaker,

I agree with the underlying content of this bill, but believe that laying out a specific set of findings, findings which appear to attack the right-wing alone as an enemy of the people, is irresponsible and wrong-headed.

I hate to hearken back to September 11, 2001, the deadliest terrorist attack in American history, but I believe it is appropriate to at least remind this body of the great threat posed by radical Islamic jihadists, both at home and abroad. In other developed nations, we have seen no shortage of home-grown radical Islamic terror. To set our sights on one subset - a tiny fraction of the population - of potential terrorists is shortsighted and wrongheaded.

Yes, I heartily condemn white nationalists who don't see a place in society for all of our brothers and sisters. But to insinuate, as this bill does, that the right-wing is responsible for these attacks is wrong. I would like to be able to vote yes on this final bill, but in order to get me on board, I would ask that the following two separate amendments be made. To that end, I move to:

  • Strike Section 2, Findings; and
  • Strike Section 4(b)(2)(A), Contents of the Joint Report on Domestic Terrorism.

I yield.

Mr. Speaker,

I second these amendments.

I yield. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Speaker,

I object.

I find it strange that we should be removing the portion of the bill that deals with the facts of these cases. It is simply a fact that the vast majority of terror attacks in this country are carried out by people who espouse ideas that are far-right. This isn't a bill targeting the Right wing at all: it targets those who amongst them who carry out violent acts. Acts I know my two colleagues here object to.

I yield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Speaker,

I too despise terrorism on all sides, but I don’t think one political group should be singled out. For instance, Antifa and other leftist terror groups should be scrutinized as well. 

I also wish to express my objection to using the unreliable and politically biased Southern Poverty Law Center as a source within the findings of this bill.

I yield. 

Edited by SWMissourian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Speaker,

I would like to point out to this body that 71% of domestic extremism was committed by right-wing extremists. The gentleman from Missouri says we should be scrutinizing left-wing extremism but if we look at the data, only 3% of domestic extremism was committed by left-wing extremists. If the gentleman were to offer language to provide for his concerns then please, I will support it if it's sensible. But the fact of the matter is, right-wing extremism and domestic terrorism is a big problem in this country. I will not support this amendment because I think it is stupid to strike the facts from this bill. The facts being that 77 Americans have been killed in the past by these groups. You can condemn racism and white supremacy all you want but at the end of the day, if you don't do anything of substance to stop white supremacy then you are enabling them. Now I highly doubt that anyone in this body is a racist or white supremacist, but we should start acting like we actually want to solve this problem.These are peoples lives we are talking about. People like Heather Heyer who have been killed by white supremacists. Lets put aside this partisan bickering and let's save some lives with this bill. 

The gentleman from Wyoming also talks about not wanting to label the alt-right as the enemy of the people. But why? They are the enemy of the people. They are murders and bigots and racists. We should be labeling them as the enemy of the people because that is exactly what they are. Once again, if the minority wants to put in language labeling left-wing extremists as bad because they definitely are, please do, I will support it. But we shouldn't have an all or nothing mentality in this. So, in conclusion, I will support this bill but I cannot support the amendment offered. 

I yield. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Speaker, 

I find it abhorrent that the other side of the aisle would recognize domestic terrorism so irresponsibly. First of all, there is a big problem when the language of the bill targets one wing of a political party, while groups like ANTIFA on the other side are just as guilty of perpetuating acts of violence. If we are going to create a task force to deal with domestic terrorism, lets do that. Let us not attach labels to it. I support the amendments brought before us, and I will only consider the bill if the amendments are adopted. I wouldn't support legislation dedicating a task force to target murderers and rapists who were registered republicans... I would support a task force for murderers and rapists. Same thing in this instance. The author and co-sponsors aught to be ashamed of themselves to target criminals based on political ideology. This is the direction they want to take us. Its sad. If we are going to do it, let's do it right. Vote AYE on the amendments. 

I yield. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Speaker,

My colleagues are treating this bill as though its an attack on the entire American Right. Nothing is further from the truth and I submit to the record Section 6 b, which requires a focus on the most significant threat based on number of attacks in the preceding year. That means whoever is the responsible for the most attacks will feel the most heat from law enforcement. That is based on what the FBI finds.

And, for the gentleman from Missouri, the findings are not just based of a left-leaning group's findings. Those certainly helped compile the statistics but most of what is included above comes from the FBI, which, I will remind everyone, is a non-partisan organization devoted to serving and protecting all Americans.

And as of right now, the current statistics demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that the bulk of terror attacks in this country were committed by individuals who espouse either white supremacist or far-right viewpoints. That is not a condemnation of the right-wing. It is a condemnation of the individuals who use the Right as a shield when retribution is brought upon them. Calling them out specifically by name is necessary. 

I was one of the first Americans to deploy to Afghanistan nearly eighteen years ago, immediately after 9/11. We made it clear to the world who our enemy was. We didn't muck about with vague platitudes but then again we didn't have to. We had a specific target and we weren't afraid to say who we were fighting against.

Not confronting these people directly, as we did with the Taliban and Al Qaeda will merely embolden them. If they are allowed to believe that the full weight of the law will not be brought down on them, they will become emboldened. And if they are emboldened, God have mercy upon us all. The people I fought in Afghanistan were exactly like the people this act deals with. They were violent, bad, evil men who espoused an ideology and worldview I and everyone here today find abhorrent. And they sought to undermine their government just as these terrorists seek to undermine ours.

Now, more than a decade later, I am here in this Congress. This threat has gone unconfronted for far too long. These people, who meet the definition of terrorism, have been allowed to think that their actions can go unpunished for long enough. I did not come back from that fight to watch them go unpunished over here.

I yield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Russ said:

Not confronting these people directly, as we did with the Taliban and Al Qaeda will merely embolden them. If they are allowed to believe that the full weight of the law will not be brought down on them, they will become emboldened. And if they are emboldened, God have mercy upon us all.

Mr. Speaker, 

If the gentleman doesn't want to embolden anyone by not confronting them, I would advise him to recognize the destruction and hatred coming from left wing groups. The gentleman and his side FEAR taking on those groups because they are worried it will hurt them politically. So, his argument is completely null and void. Biased, if I may. It makes absolutely no sense to include one domestic terror group in the language, and not another, AND claim that we are emboldening groups by not recognizing their destruction. if the gentleman was serious about taking on domestic terrorism, he'd agree to the bipartisan amendment before us, targeting all domestic terrorists regardless of political affiliation.

I yield.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ADG said:

Mr. Speaker, 

If the gentleman doesn't want to embolden anyone by not confronting them, I would advise him to recognize the destruction and hatred coming from left wing groups. The gentleman and his side FEAR taking on those groups because they are worried it will hurt them politically. So, his argument is completely null and void. Biased, if I may. It makes absolutely no sense to include one domestic terror group in the language, and not another, AND claim that we are emboldening groups by not recognizing their destruction. if the gentleman was serious about taking on domestic terrorism, he'd agree to the bipartisan amendment before us, targeting all domestic terrorists regardless of political affiliation.

I yield.  

Mr. Speaker,

First of all, the gentleman should cite cases of "destruction and hatred coming from left-wing groups." Either he presents proof or it didn't happen. And no, a dozen thugs in black pajamas carrying bike locks or throwing gravel and firecrackers does not count. Nor does a random twitter account that posts incendiary content.

Second, I'm a decorated veteran and I've been in combat. I'd advise the gentleman to think very carefully before accusing me of either bias or cowardice. 

Third, I will not agree to such a ridiculous amendment. First, because its removal would change nothing pertaining to the content of the bill. My bill makes it clear that any terrorist group will be hunted down and destroyed by law enforcement. Something anyone could have figured out by reading sections 4 through 6. Not defining the threat though is an implicit message. It tells them that we are unwilling to confront them. We've wasted no time in calling out Islamic extremists in the past. When over 70% of terrorist activity comes from far-right extremists and white supremacists, its time to call them out. Our Republican colleagues should be grateful. This bill allows them to remove any claim by far-right extremists or white supremacists that the GOP is a good home for them.

I yield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Russ said:

And no, a dozen thugs in black pajamas carrying bike locks or throwing gravel and firecrackers does not count.

Mr. Speaker, 

I'm not sure what the gentleman is referencing here, however, I point him to the ANTIFA protests in Berkely in 2018. Members physically beating non members, lighting torches and throwing them at dumpsters and buildings trying to catch things on fire. If the gentleman doesn't consider this destruction and hatred, I would consider him a bona fide lunatic. 

I yield. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Speaker,

There we have it. After all the protestations, after all the claims of bias, the gentleman can only cite one instance of "Left wing violence." First of all, the gentleman has described a riot, which, by the way, was appropriately condemned by my party and myself.

But, second, does this meet the definition of terrorism? Terrorism is a deliberate tactic, which uses violence and destruction to sow terror amongst a group for the purposes of advancing a political ideology. So we now go to the Berkley protest. Was it violent? Absolutely. They beat people. Did they destroy property? Yes they did.  Were the protests political in nature? Maybe though I personally doubt it. But was it a deliberate tactic? Almost certainly not. Terrorism is premeditated violence aimed at deliberate intimidation of a group. A riot is violent, spontaneous action. 

Compare this to the terror attack on September 11, 2001. That was violent and destructive, 3000 people were killed and the World Trade Center was destroyed, aimed at sowing terror amongst a group, the American people, for the purpose of advancing a political ideology, militant Islamic extremism. Nearly everyone here would agree with this assessment and classify this as terrorism.

This bill deals with terrorism, not riots. And because of that, it is important to note who has carried out the vast majority of violent acts that meet the definition of "terrorism." And that is why it is important to distinguish who is responsible. My colleagues, probably not intentionally certainly not maliciously, seek to broaden the scope of the definition to anything violent, which takes away from the main issue at hand. It is important to distinguish between premeditation and spontaneity.

I yield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Speaker, 

So the gentleman believes that the members of ANTIFA don't coordinate their efforts to target what they believe to be fascists? That they do not prepare demonstrations, pre-determine locations, pre-determine targets, etc? They are just a group of naïve young adults who want to light things on fire, with no political motives? The gentleman is living in another world. Every ANTIFA protest, which includes violent beatings and the like, are premeditated acts. They know where they're going, why they're going there, and who they're going to physically attack. They target conservatives, and anyone who they believe to be a "fascist." To claim that because the death toll is not 3,000 and the perpetrators aren't Muslim, the attacks are not substantiated Is absurd.

I yield. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Russ said:

Mr. Speaker,

First of all, the gentleman should cite cases of "destruction and hatred coming from left-wing groups."

Mr. Speaker,

Left-wing terrorism runs much deeper than just Antifa. There's a long history of it in our country. 

I can cite a number of cases going back to the 1970's.

The 1973 murder of Oakland school superintendent Marcus Foster by the Symbionese Liberation Army. 

The 1974 kidnapping of publishing heiress Patricia Hearst by the Symbionese Liberation Army.

The 1974 Hibernia bank robbery by the Symbionese Liberation Army.

The 1975 Crocker bank robbery by the Symbionese Liberation Army.

The 1983 bombing of the United States Senate by the May 19th Communist Organization.

20 bombings and 9 bank robberies carried out by the United Freedom Front from 1975 to 1984. 

Numerous arsons committed by the Earth Liberation front from 1998 to 2009, leading them to be classified in 2001 by the FBI as the top domestic terror threat.

The Chris Dorner shootings of 2013 that killed 4 police officers.

The 2014 New York City hatchet attack.

And of course the 2017 Congressional baseball shooting.

I yield.

Edited by TexAgRepublican
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×