[GingisK]

...used the Patriot Act to charge a man ... The FBI acknowledged the incident had no connection to terrorism...

Ah, so how does one charge him under the "Patriot Act", which is meant for terrorism? Any of you people still think these acts are in the best interest of Freedom?

[mrsmith]

"the "Patriot Act", which is meant for terrorism? "

This is the same paper that lied before and said there were no money laundering laws in the Patriot Act.

I'll wait until I see a reputable report on what he was charged with and why.

[dljordan]

He can be charged as a domestic terrorist. I've noticed a trend in the news and by the talking heads in Washington to describe things that used to be crimes as terrorism. It's the new "in" thing.

[Sam's Army]

He won't get 25 years. He should however, be held responsible for his actions, a concept which will no doubt piss the left off.

[Sloth]

How is this not terrorism?

[pennyfarmer]

I agree totally. If the government continues to charge people willy nilly under the patriot act they are going to find themselves out of office.

They should charge him with a crime such as attempted murder or something. Anything not related to the patriot act. They only water down and make the patriot act irrelevant.

[jpsb]

"so how does one charge him under the "Patriot Act", which is meant for terrorism?"

Yup there is that darn slippery slope again.