As I noted earlier, there�s a lot of concern from parents that the
Biden administration may be targeting them for their objections to
Critical Race Theory and or pandemic restrictions in schools with the
announcement of Attorney General Merrick Garland that he would be
coordinating a federal law enforcement effort looking into �threats�
against schools and school boards.

One of the concerns raised was the terminology in the National School
Boards Association (NSBA) letter requesting that Joe Biden involve the
federal government. They characterized the �threats� as something which
�could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate
crimes.� They also appealed to Biden to employ things like the PATRIOT
Act in the response.

Fox�s Peter Doocy asked White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki about the
troubling aspects of that request.

Psaki defends the DoJ acquiescing to teachers unions who want
parents treated like �domestic terrorists�: �These were threats
against public servants, threats against members of the school
board. Regardless of the reasoning, threats & violence against
public servants is illegal� pic.twitter.com/nPF6ZsVN4E

� Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) October 6, 2021

�A week ago, the National School Boards Association wrote to the
president to say that their teachers feel like some parents protesting
recently could be equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism,� Doocy
said. �Then the attorney general put the FBI in the case. So does the
administration agree that parents upset about their kids� curriculums
could be considered domestic terrorists?�

Psaki failed to actually respond to the question, saying the NSBA
wasn�t part of the U.S. government and she cited the Attorney General�s
letter saying, �threats against public servants are not only illegal,
they run counter to our nation�s core values�.These were threats
against public servants, threats against members of the school board,�
she claimed. �Regardless of the reasoning, threats and violence against
public servants is illegal, that�s what he was conveying, from the
Department of Justice.�

But even if there are actual real threats � and they haven�t shown
anything more than a handful of actions � she didn�t explain why they
necessitated federal action.

So Doocy continued, asking about the NSBA�s request that the DOJ
consider employing the PATRIOT Act and other acts they might have at
their disposal in response. �So would the administration be okay with
the FBI using the PATRIOT Act to surveil these parents if that is what
they decide?�

�I don�t speak on behalf of the National School Boards Association, I
speak on behalf of this government,� Psaki said. She continued that the
AG will �take actions they take and I will point you to them for more
information.� So she totally avoided the question.

It�s concerning that Joe Biden doesn�t seem to be at all concerned
about the right to protest when it comes to anyone who disagrees with
him, even including members of his own Democratic Party like Kyrsten
Sinema when she disagrees with him.

But it�s even more concerning when you have an action like this that
could employ such an invasive action like the PATRIOT Act against
parents on such a flimsy premise and the Biden team think they can just
avoid talking about it.

Where�s the concentrated DOJ investigation of Antifa � you know, an
actual movement seeking to attack state, federal, and local government
with tons of violent actions to its credit? We�ve yet to see that.

Here�s a reminder of why Garland didn�t think BLM/Antifa attacking
federal courthouses qualified as �domestic terrorism.�

Yikes: @HawleyMO asks Merrick Garland whether Antifa's attacks
in Portland and Seattle are acts of domestic terrorism.

Garland essentially says no, because the attacks occurred at
night, didn't disrupt cases, and weren't "a core attack on our
democratic institutions:" pic.twitter.com/qKYg1T2p21

� John Cooper (@thejcoop) February 23, 2021

Is it any wonder people are concerned about the weaponizing of the
justice system under the Democrats?

--
Trump won.