I don't think the SWAT team apprehension was inappropriate, per se. Good on the part of the law to avoid a barricaded-in situation.
But I still have a major problem with the government action. The charge that justified the raid in the first place is sedition, making war against the United States. The charge is based on an alleged plot to kill local law enforcement. The issue I have is based on the simple fact that getting over on local law enforcement is emphatically NOT waging war against the United States.
Not that I'm defending plans to get over on local law enforcement by way of deadly force, etc. - that sort of attitude is a problem, not uncommon among criminal gangs, etc. And even against federal agents, for example in the international narco-trade, or moonshining - none of those are elevated to the level of "waging war against the United States."
And that headline is the one sought. That "right wing militias aim to topple the US government by use of force."
‘The charge that justified the raid in the first place is sedition, making war against the United States. The charge is based on an alleged plot to kill local law enforcement. The issue I have is based on the simple fact that getting over on local law enforcement is emphatically NOT waging war against the United States.”
.................
According to this piece the Agent can’t even remember the facts of the case AND didn’t even listen to all the tapes.
Seems a case of profiling was in effect. If I had heard such threats being made I would REMEMBER THAT.
You are assuming the headline is factual. We shall see. The Judge seems to be suspecious.