Advertisement
U.S. markets closed
  • S&P 500

    5,254.35
    +5.86 (+0.11%)
     
  • Dow 30

    39,807.37
    +47.29 (+0.12%)
     
  • Nasdaq

    16,379.46
    -20.06 (-0.12%)
     
  • Russell 2000

    2,124.55
    +10.20 (+0.48%)
     
  • Crude Oil

    83.11
    -0.06 (-0.07%)
     
  • Gold

    2,254.80
    +16.40 (+0.73%)
     
  • Silver

    25.10
    +0.18 (+0.74%)
     
  • EUR/USD

    1.0778
    -0.0015 (-0.14%)
     
  • 10-Yr Bond

    4.2060
    +0.0100 (+0.24%)
     
  • dólar/libra

    1.2621
    -0.0001 (-0.01%)
     
  • USD/JPY

    151.3550
    -0.0170 (-0.01%)
     
  • Bitcoin USD

    70,260.71
    +606.11 (+0.87%)
     
  • CMC Crypto 200

    885.54
    0.00 (0.00%)
     
  • FTSE 100

    7,952.62
    +20.64 (+0.26%)
     
  • Nikkei 225

    40,420.60
    +252.53 (+0.63%)
     

DOJ accelerates federal crackdown on looting and vandalism

On Sunday, Attorney General Bill Barr promised a federal crackdown on any violent and criminal activity occurring during peaceful protests against police brutality. Days later, that crackdown is in full force.

Over the last week, the department has charged more than two dozen people with federal crimes that coincided with protests, including a man who allegedly brandished a gun before a protester tackled him and a right-wing trio who allegedly plotted to incite violence during protests. And the Department of Homeland Security has warned state and local law enforcement officials of domestic extremists’ attempts to co-opt those protests, which erupted after George Floyd, a 46-year-old black man, was killed while in custody by a white Minneapolis police officer.

In a press conference Thursday, Barr said extremists from a variety of backgrounds were capitalizing on the protests, noting authorities had made 51 arrests for federal crimes related to violent behavior.

"There are some groups that don’t have a particular ideology other than anarchy, there are some groups that want to bring about a civil war," he said. "So we are dealing with, as I say, a witch’s brew of a lot of different extremist organizations.”

It's an initiative that is in line with Trump's pledge to "dominate" the streets after a week of protests across the nation. And supporters say there is symbolic importance in showing the government's commitment to helping state and local authorities prevent vandalism and looting. But the move has also raised questions among some legal specialists — including former DOJ officials — about whether federal authorities are overcharging behavior that would not typically be treated as a federal crime.

The protests, which have been overwhelmingly peaceful during the daytime, have drawn praise and support from civil rights leaders and elected officials across the political spectrum, including President Donald Trump's first Defense secretary, Gen. James Mattis.

But looting and vandalism have broken out in some cities after dark, including New York and Washington, D.C., where roaming crowds have smashed storefront windows and made off with everything from sunglasses to iPhones.

Over the weekend, Attorney General Bill Barr blamed domestic terrorists for the crimes, singling out antifa — a loose cohort of antifascist activists who sometimes use violent and destructive tactics. And he promised a crackdown on theft and property destruction that has coincided with the protests. That crackdown now appears to be underway, and a Justice Department official said scores of investigations are underway.

The Justice Department has brought charges ranging from possession of destructive devices and unregistered firearms to interstate commerce violations and malicious destruction of property. The individuals charged include a Chicagoan who allegedly lit a police car on fire; an Illinois man who allegedly violated interstate commerce, arson and explosives laws to participate in looting and vandalism in Minnesota; and two Minnesota men who allegedly threw Molotov cocktails into a county government building. Local police put out a fire in the building that coincided with “rioting and looting” during protests, according to the complaint.

Some former federal officials said the Justice Department should leave these cases to state and local authorities for prosecution. Others said the assistance may be welcome at a time when law enforcement resources are stretched, and praised the symbolism of aggressive federal enforcement.

The criminal charges come after Attorney General William Barr delivered harsh condemnation of the loosely affiliated left-wing activist cohort called antifa. Over the weekend, he called the group domestic terrorists and committed to targeting them. He also announced that the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Forces would help coordinate federal, state and local responses to crimes committed during the protests.

Justice Department officials have described their aim as differentiating between peaceful demonstrators and opportunists seeking to cause mayhem or loot stores. By bringing federal charges, said former federal prosecutor Elie Honig, DOJ is “definitely sending a message and trying to create a deterrent effect.”

“Getting charged by DOJ is a much more serious proposition than getting charged by the state,” Honig said.

Federal charges can often come with lengthier prison sentences than charges brought by other authorities.

On a conference call with governors on Monday, Barr described the administration’s approach.

“We need to have people take control of the streets so that we can go out and work with law enforcement, say hello to the law enforcement,” he said. “And identify these people in the crowd, isolate, pull them out, prosecute.”

On the same call, Trump offered some more colorful guidance, telling the governors, “You’ve got to arrest these people and you’ve got to judge them, and you can't do the deal where they get one week in jail. These are terrorists, these are terrorists, they're looking to do bad things to our country. They’re antifa and they’re radical left.”

Trump has also tweeted that he would designate antifa as a terrorist organization. It’s a move he cannot legally make, since, under existing law, the U.S. only designates foreign entities as terrorist groups.

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security has flagged concerns to state and local law enforcement about extremists’ efforts to infiltrate and co-opt the protests. In an unclassified intelligence note dated May 29, reviewed by POLITICO, officials said militia extremists and white supremacists — who are predominantly far-right — and anarchist extremists — predominantly far-left — had been connected to violent threats during the protests.

In separate DHS intelligence notes obtained by POLITICO dated June 1 and June 2, the department’s intelligence and analysis unit warned that “organized violent opportunists” were becoming more emboldened in targeting law enforcement and critical infrastructure nationwide.

“DHS remains committed to protecting the American public from violence and protests that pose a threat to our country and we continue to work on keeping our nation safe, secure and resilient,” Alexei Woltornist, a DHS spokesperson, said in a statement. “Our intelligence arm remains vigilant in looking for any kind of emerging threat to the homeland and we continue to work closely with our partners, including law enforcement and state and local officials, to hold those responsible for the unrest accountable.”

The June 2 memo cautioned, however, that “some of the observed suspicious behaviors include constitutionally protected activities and should not be reported” unless officials can articulate facts that indicate the activities may become violent.

That distinction is key factor that may complicate federal officials’ work monitoring and charging protesters, said Chuck Rosenberg, a former federal prosecutor and DOJ veteran.

“Federal law enforcement numbers are relatively small in some big cities compared to the number of state and local law enforcement authorities,” he said. “Are they actually supplementing local agencies that are under-resourced, or is it simply a show of federal force directed against citizens exercising their First Amendment rights?”

The ultimate question that needs to be answered, Rosenberg said, is whether federal authorities would be charging these cases in the absence of the protests.

“If an individual was vandalizing a store in their hometown, apart from a protest, would they be charged with a federal crime or state crime?," he asked. "If the answer is that they would be charged with a state crime, why charge them with a federal crime, here? Are they charging individuals federally because they are also participating in a protest? I hope not.”

Meanwhile, David Rivkin — an official at DOJ headquarters during the Reagan administration — said the symbolism is the point.

“Ninety-five percent of what you do as a prosecutor is properly shaped, properly animated by symbolic considerations,” he said. “Why do you crack down on certain crimes? Because they’re viewed as particularly obnoxious, particularly damaging to body politic. Why do you go after some people based on an offense that you wouldn’t have gone after other people for? Because you want to make a point. Making a point is not wrong. Making a point, provided it’s a right point, a righteous point, is at the heart of law enforcement.”

Social media has helped the department identify suspects.

On June 1, the DOJ filed a criminal complaint against Matthew Lee Rupert, an Illinois man who allegedly traveled to Minnesota and participated in looting and violence. The complaint also charged Rupert with possession of unregistered destructive devices. It alleged that he brought and distributed explosives, which he encouraged others to throw at police. It also said he looted businesses and apparently lit a building on fire — and, according to the charging document, he captured it all on Facebook Live.

“At time stamp 1:41:40, RUPERT asked for lighter fluid,” the complaint reads. “RUPERT then enters a Sprint store and, at time stamp 1:45:17, RUPERT stated, ‘I lit it on fire.' RUPERT then goes to a nearby Office Depot and, at time stamp 1:55:54, stated ‘I’m going in to get shit.’ At time stamp 1:54:59, RUPERT videos himself taking items from the store.”

A separate complaint against Wesley Somers — who federal prosecutors in Tennessee charged with malicious destruction of property for allegedly trying to light Nashville City Hall on fire — noted that "numerous pictures and videos of the incident were posted on social media websites, on the websites for news outlets, and on other Internet sites.”

Advertisement