‘Little army’ of 31 masked Patriot Front members arrested

[RiverDog]

Now this is scary:

Police in Coeur d’Alene arrested 31 masked members of a white nationalist group suspected of conspiring to riot in the city’s downtown on the same day as a scheduled Pride in the Park event nearby.

The arrested men of “Patriot Front” arrived in Coeur d’Alene inside a U-Haul truck that police pulled over. Only one was from Idaho. The rest came from Washington, Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia and Wyoming. Among the arrested is the national leader of the group, Thomas Rousseau, according to the Kootenai County Jail roster.

The men were jailed and are scheduled to be arraigned Monday.

Coeur d’Alene Police Chief Lee White said the group evidently “came to riot downtown.” White said the group also had “paperwork” that appeared similar to a police or military operations plan.

Police were tipped off by a citizen who said they saw a large group of people wearing masks and donning shields “like a little army” jump into a U-Haul truck Saturday afternoon at a hotel parking lot, White said.

About 10 minutes later, police pulled over the truck as it traveled toward downtown on Northwest Boulevard. Police also seized a smoke grenade and what White described as riot gear from the truck.

“I don’t think this would have been as successful had we not had one extremely astute citizen who saw something that looked very concerning to them and reported it to us,” White said.

The Pride in the Park event had drawn many other people to the downtown area to celebrate the LGBTQ community.

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2022/ ... ur-dalene/

This bust was made by local police and as stated, they were tipped off by an astute citizen. This was a well organized group that had links to the "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville back in 2017, and as indicated, their members were scattered from all over the country. What the hell is the FBI doing? Why weren't they all over this?

[c_hawkbob]

What the hell is the FBI doing? Why weren't they all over this?

"Some of those that work forces are the same that burn crosses" ... and maybe that let some things slide under the radar.

[RiverDog]

What the hell is the FBI doing? Why weren't they all over this?

"Some of those that work forces are the same that burn crosses" ... and maybe that let some things slide under the radar.

I'm not following you. Could you please explain.

My comment was directed in part to ASF, who holds this belief that our government has the ability to track and respond to 'lone wolves' that become active shooters and intervene before they go on a rampage. If the FBI can't track the movements of a very well known white nationalist hate group and intervened before they got as far as they did, I find it hard to believe that they have the capability to monitor individuals whose only action is that they legally bought a large number of guns.

I think it only fair to point out that even though it's still early to determine exactly what the group's objective was, it doesn't appear to have involved the use of deadly weapons. But given the riot gear, smoke grenades, and military-like plans, it certainly could have resulted in serious injuries and perhaps fatalities and is something that at the minimum should have become known by the FBI's our surveillance network, if it is as robust as claimed, and information relayed to local law enforcement agencies.

[Aseahawkfan]

I'm not following you. Could you please explain.

My comment was directed in part to ASF, who holds this belief that our government has the ability to track and respond to 'lone wolves' that become active shooters and intervene before they go on a rampage. If the FBI can't track the movements of a very well known white nationalist hate group and intervened before they got as far as they did, I find it hard to believe that they have the capability to monitor individuals whose only action is that they legally bought a large number of guns.

I think it only fair to point out that even though it's still early to determine exactly what the group's objective was, it doesn't appear to have involved the use of deadly weapons. But given the riot gear, smoke grenades, and military-like plans, it certainly could have resulted in serious injuries and perhaps fatalities and is something that at the minimum should have become known by the FBI's our surveillance network, if it is as robust as claimed, and information relayed to local law enforcement agencies.

Seems they got caught before they did anything. F.B.I. isn't focused on militias at the moment. Why are you painting these guys like they're something when the Unite the Right group has been mostly filled with a bunch of incompetents who can't even cause problems for local law enforcement. For all the talk about White Supremacy groups and the like, they sure don't seem to be doing much. They're like Fox's favorite boogieman on the left Antifa, a whole lot of nothing real happening but we see them in the left wing press a lot.

I explained this to you: the technology to catch these people has not been turned internally yet. Right now it is focused externally on counterrorism on a global level. Right now if someone says Jihad United States on any computer network or cellphone worldwide, our system is tracking them. Which was what the whole hullabaloo with Snowden was about and the lawsuits in other nations that I guess you missed. We tracked hundreds of millions of people daily outside the United States as well as using ground intelligence.

So not sure why you think a system not currently in use internally a few weeks after a mass shooting is even operating. How about you wait and see if they start using it before you start acting like the technology doesn't work? This would be a much better question then.

Even in the 90s, the F.B.I. didn't focus on militias until after the Oklahoma City bombing. Once they did focus, they ripped them apart. As far as I know the current fight after these mass shootings is far more focused on gun control and far less focused on turning law enforcement heavily on these folks. Neither Party seems to want to give the F.B.I. the ok to go to town on mass shooter suspects. They still seem focused on counterterrorism and apparently political investigations against their opponents.

[RiverDog]

Seems they got caught before they did anything. F.B.I. isn't focused on militias at the moment. Why are you painting these guys like they're something when the Unite the Right group has been mostly filled with a bunch of incompetents who can't even cause problems for local law enforcement. For all the talk about White Supremacy groups and the like, they sure don't seem to be doing much. They're like Fox's favorite boogieman on the left Antifa, a whole lot of nothing real happening but we see them in the left wing press a lot.

How do you know that the FBI is focused on global terrorism? Except in a very general sense, their primary function is domestic crime/terrorism. For one thing, they've spent the last 1.5 years tracking down and arresting participants and groups involved in the Capitol riot.

And I wouldn't downplay this incident. It had the potential to be very deadly. There were other groups, protesters and counter protesters, planning on attending this gay pride celebration. From the linked article:

At McEuen Park, about 100 people, including Panhandle Patriots and former Washington state Rep. Matt Shea, walked to several downtown buildings to protest the Pride event and support freedom of speech, guns and other values. “We do not hate the person,” Gabe Blomgren, pastor at On Fire Ministries in Spokane, said through a megaphone outside the Coeur d’Alene Public Library. “God, but we hate the sin of homosexuality … this is the grooming of children.”

Sounds to me like that event was a potential powder keg.

Even in the 90s, the F.B.I. didn't focus on militias until after the Oklahoma City bombing. Once they did focus, they ripped them apart. As far as I know the current fight after these mass shootings is far more focused on gun control and far less focused on turning law enforcement heavily on these folks. Neither Party seems to want to give the F.B.I. the ok to go to town on mass shooter suspects. They still seem focused on counterterrorism and apparently political investigations against their opponents.

If they aren't going after these groups, then they should be. Trying to find a lone wolf possible active shooter is like trying to find a needle in a haystack. The members of these militia groups are spread all over the country, meaning that they have to communicate with each other. Compared to trying to figure out a puzzle like the LV shooter, tracking a militia is a walk in the park.

[c_hawkbob]

What I mean is that there are likely those within the FBI that sympathize and perhaps are willing to turn a blind eye to these groups (if not actually help facilitate) their agenda. Their have been numerous examples of high ranking government and law enforcement officials "burning crosses". I was answering your "why aren't they all over this" question with a possibility.

And BTW, by design FBI = domestic, CIA = global. Always. And there are severe penalties for one or the other straying across those lines. Domestic terrorism is 100% the FBI's job.

[RiverDog]

What I mean is that there are likely those within the FBI that sympathize and perhaps are willing to turn a blind eye to these groups (if not actually help facilitate) their agenda. Their have been numerous examples of high ranking government and law enforcement officials "burning crosses". I was answering your "why aren't they all over this" question with a possibility.

Well, at least you mentioned it only as a possibility. To be honest, the same criticism comes from those on the right, that the FBI sympathizes with the leftist agenda and intentionally overlooks those types of militant groups.

And BTW, by design FBI = domestic, CIA = global. Always. And there are severe penalties for one or the other straying across those lines. Domestic terrorism is 100% the FBI's job.

I agree. They obviously cooperate in sharing information and perhaps some resources, but the FBI, since the days of the Untouchables, has been dedicated to domestic crime. The CIA got its roots in WW2 as the OSS and is an intelligence gathering and special ops organization. They are not a law enforcement agency like the FBI is.

[RiverDog]

Some more developments in this case:

Jun. 13—Coeur d'Alene police received numerous death threats and warnings that officers would be doxed in the aftermath of the department's Saturday arrest of 31 men suspected of being members of the white nationalist "Patriot Front" group conspiring to riot in the city.

Police Chief Lee White said that his department was going through about 150 voicemails, about half of which contained ominous messages directed at law enforcement, including the doxing threat of publicly posting the private information of police officers, such as their addresses and names of family members. The calls were from all over, including as far away as Norway, he said.

White said the group likely came to Coeur d'Alene as a result of the heated rhetoric that was sparked last month between the Pride in the Park event and members of the Panhandle Patriots group. A video surfaced last month of one of the Panhandle Patriots' members saying they needed to "go head-to-head" with the Pride event.

https://news.yahoo.com/coeur-dalene-pol ... 00285.html

The more I read and hear about this, the more I wonder how in the heck this activity could escape the attention of the FBI. It seems like there were some warning flags that went unheeded. This could have easily have turned into an ugly blood bath.

[c_hawkbob]

To be honest, the same criticism comes from those on the right, that the FBI sympathizes with the leftist agenda and intentionally overlooks those types of militant groups.

Sorry no, not to nearly the same degree. LE, much like the military, is overwhelmingly Republican. "Leftist" sympathizers are a bit of a unicorn in those circles.

[RiverDog]

To be honest, the same criticism comes from those on the right, that the FBI sympathizes with the leftist agenda and intentionally overlooks those types of militant groups.

Sorry no, not to nearly the same degree. LE, much like the military, is overwhelmingly Republican. "Leftist" sympathizers are a bit of a unicorn in those circles.

I beg to differ. While I agree that the military and other non federal LE agencies tend to vote Republican, the same does not hold true with federal agencies. Here's one example:

Employees of the Department of Justice, which investigated Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of State, gave Clinton 97 percent of their donations. Trump received $8,756 from DOJ employees compared with $286,797 for Clinton. From IRS employees, Clinton received 94 percent of donations.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3 ... -campaign/

There's approximately 100,000 employees of the DOJ, of which about 35,000 work for the FBI, and with a donation figure skewed by a 30-1 margin, it's pretty clear that at least as far as campaign donations go, the vast majority of FBI employees that contribute to political candidates do so for the Democrats.

It's only fair to mention that this was a Clinton vs. Trump comparison done in 2016, and the numbers could vary some depending on which specific candidate is receiving the donations and in which election cycle. But with a 30-1 margin, it would take one helluva flip to make a significant difference.

[Aseahawkfan]

How do you know that the FBI is focused on global terrorism? Except in a very general sense, their primary function is domestic crime/terrorism. For one thing, they've spent the last 1.5 years tracking down and arresting participants and groups involved in the Capitol riot.

And I wouldn't downplay this incident. It had the potential to be very deadly. There were other groups, protesters and counter protesters, planning on attending this gay pride celebration. From the linked article:

At McEuen Park, about 100 people, including Panhandle Patriots and former Washington state Rep. Matt Shea, walked to several downtown buildings to protest the Pride event and support freedom of speech, guns and other values. “We do not hate the person,” Gabe Blomgren, pastor at On Fire Ministries in Spokane, said through a megaphone outside the Coeur d’Alene Public Library. “God, but we hate the sin of homosexuality … this is the grooming of children.”

Sounds to me like that event was a potential powder keg.

Because that is their current mandate. They are focused on domestic terrorism, but mostly of the kind from a global source. To my knowledge this directive has not changed since 9/11, which is why we have our intelligence network built out. One act of global terror like 9/11 dwarfs a hundred mass shootings. Another global terror event like 9/11 or worse must be stopped.

If they aren't going after these groups, then they should be. Trying to find a lone wolf possible active shooter is like trying to find a needle in a haystack. The members of these militia groups are spread all over the country, meaning that they have to communicate with each other. Compared to trying to figure out a puzzle like the LV shooter, tracking a militia is a walk in the park.

They likely already monitor many of the known militia groups. Even if they don't announce they are doing something, the might privately call someone. For all you know this astute citizen was a member of the intelligence community alerting local law enforcement while not providing a "how they knew" because there are a lot of privacy issues with the technology I am recommending. If you wanted to skirt the legal issues with notifying law enforcement using illegal scanning, then you could just put in a phone call. But this is pure speculation on my part that I couldn't possibly confirm.

The use of this technology I find interesting. I had this discussion with a libertarian lawyer about 6 or 8 years ago. He was very concerned about privacy issues with electronic devices because of the Patriot Program instituted during the Bush Jr. administration. The one Snowden leaked. I learned a lot of our electronic surveillance capabilities, which are absolutely ridiculously powerful. We can apparently scan the entire electronic network worldwide on a continuous basis picking out key words or terms that might be considered "dangerous" and also scan all electronic transactions and anything connected to a data base, then that information is fed into an A.I. threat assessment software that can immediately provide threat assessments to intelligent teams who have to vet them to see if we should action them.

Our drone assassination program is based on use of this software as well as confirmation via ground intelligence. We still assassinate a ton of people a year using drones based on intel drawn form this electronic program combined with human intelligence.

What I found out is for privacy reasons, we cannot use this software internally. There is a real question as to whether a Right to Privacy really exists. This was the more interesting discussion on the Constitution. The Founders never provided a right to privacy and there is no rhetoric indicating they cared about privacy. Most of the Amendments involve very public speech and public assembly. So that was an interesting discussion as to whether Americans really were intended to have a right to privacy, even though we do have this right under the First and Fourth and Fifth amendments. Illegal search and seizure and right to not incriminate and free speech. It governed wire taps technology back in the day. It now has been used to government electronic surveillance.

But what I also found out which should have been obvious, but I imagine most Americans don't think about it much is the Bill of Rights applies only to American citizens. It does not apply to foreign citizens or nations which are governmed by treaties. If we don't have a treaty of some kind with you, we can scan the crap out of your nation and citizens. And we do.

I'm still not sure I support a right to privacy. I don't see that it was intended by the Founders. There are enough other protections in place for citizens that I think they should allow the F.B.I. and N.S.A . to scan internally and develop threat assessment software for mass shooters. Mass shooters are lone wolves who aren't part of an organization usually. That makes them extremely difficult to track with human intelligence. It would be far easier for a sleepless software program that can engage in constant threat assessment at a population level to be used instead of waiting for some call from some person saying a loon might go crazy. A software scanning program can constantly monitor social media, phone use, computer use, track data bases for gun purchases, ammunition, registration, and the like to form immediate threat assessments including locations and proximity to school and population centers so law enforcement or whoever tracks this can notify law enforcement or the like.

The real key is getting Congress and the President to use it internally. It might get a lot of resistance from the libertarians who don't want to be monitored.

This libertarian guy I knew was even in the process of trying to become a Gray Man. https://readytogosurvival.com/gray-man/

I've never been overly concerned with surveillance as I've never been of the mind that the Constitutional Amendments were created to protect criminal activity or that the population would allow something to be considered a crime that is obviously evil, though we did have that occur for some time with slavery and racial discrimination which would have been more terrible with modern electronic surveillance. I guess it could be a problem if misused like anything humans do I imagine. I would still use the digital system to track possible lone wolves myself. I don't think we have a better means of population level threat assessment than a digital system that can do the work of thousands to tens of thousands of man hours in seconds.

[Aseahawkfan]

Sorry no, not to nearly the same degree. LE, much like the military, is overwhelmingly Republican. "Leftist" sympathizers are a bit of a unicorn in those circles.

I tend to agree with c-bob on this one. Nothing is absolutely obviously, but military guys voting Democrat or liberal is a bit like teachers voting Republican. It's rare or at least lower percentage. What percent, I have not looked deeply. But Republicans can usually count on military and law enforcement support. Democrats can usually count on teachers and labor union support from non-police unions.

[RiverDog]

Sorry no, not to nearly the same degree. LE, much like the military, is overwhelmingly Republican. "Leftist" sympathizers are a bit of a unicorn in those circles.

I tend to agree with c-bob on this one. Nothing is absolutely obviously, but military guys voting Democrat or liberal is a bit like teachers voting Republican. It's rare or at least lower percentage. What percent, I have not looked deeply. But Republicans can usually count on military and law enforcement support. Democrats can usually count on teachers and labor union support from non-police unions.

First of all, the FBI is not military. They are a federal government agency. You can't even compare them with traditional law enforcement as their mission is decidedly different. As the name implies, they are investigators that solve riddles, not cops walking a beat or writing traffic tickets. Sure, they occasionally use traditional LE/military tactics when they go to make an arrest, but they're not going after the small time hoods that are ripping catalytic converters off of cars. It's a different mindset.

Secondly, if what you say is true, how do you reconcile the article I linked that shows DOJ employees, about 1/3 of which work for the FBI, donate to Democratic candidates at a rate 30 times greater than Republican candidates?

[Aseahawkfan]

First of all, the FBI is not military. They are a federal government agency. You can't even compare them with traditional law enforcement as their mission is decidedly different. As the name implies, they are investigators that solve riddles, not cops walking a beat or writing traffic tickets. Sure, they occasionally use traditional LE/military tactics when they go to make an arrest, but they're not going after the small time hoods that are ripping catalytic converters off of cars. It's a different mindset.

Secondly, if what you say is true, how do you reconcile the article I linked that shows DOJ employees, about 1/3 of which work for the FBI, donate to Democratic candidates at a rate 30 times greater than Republican candidates?

The F.B.I. and DoJ may have more Democrat supporters. I'm agreeing more with c-bob for blue collar law enforcement and likely Marines and Army, maybe the Navy. I wouldn't be surprised if the Air Force tended to vote more Democrat.

Marines I know for sure are hardcore Republicans a lot of them. Army and Navy may be more split. Air Force I'm not sure about.

It's likely overall more diverse than we think and might have some ties to how long a president of a particular party holds office. Obama held office for eight years and likely seeded the F.B.I. with leadership that tended to favor Democrats. We all know the DoJ was used to investigate Donald Trump and the agents doing so were definitely leaning Democrat. The F.B.I. is probably one of the more political law enforcement agencies and probably tend to flip a bit depending on how long a president of a particular party holds office. The F.B.I. and DoJ will often be told to implement government policy on law enforcement because they are Federal.

That would be my limited, minimal research opinion on the subject. I haven't looked real deep into these matters to be honest with you and can't take a super strong position one way or the other.

[RiverDog]

First of all, the FBI is not military. They are a federal government agency. You can't even compare them with traditional law enforcement as their mission is decidedly different. As the name implies, they are investigators that solve riddles, not cops walking a beat or writing traffic tickets. Sure, they occasionally use traditional LE/military tactics when they go to make an arrest, but they're not going after the small time hoods that are ripping catalytic converters off of cars. It's a different mindset.

Secondly, if what you say is true, how do you reconcile the article I linked that shows DOJ employees, about 1/3 of which work for the FBI, donate to Democratic candidates at a rate 30 times greater than Republican candidates?

The F.B.I. and DoJ may have more Democrat supporters. I'm agreeing more with c-bob for blue collar law enforcement and likely Marines and Army, maybe the Navy. I wouldn't be surprised if the Air Force tended to vote more Democrat.

Marines I know for sure are hardcore Republicans a lot of them. Army and Navy may be more split. Air Force I'm not sure about.

It's likely overall more diverse than we think and might have some ties to how long a president of a particular party holds office. Obama held office for eight years and likely seeded the F.B.I. with leadership that tended to favor Democrats. We all know the DoJ was used to investigate Donald Trump and the agents doing so were definitely leaning Democrat. The F.B.I. is probably one of the more political law enforcement agencies and probably tend to flip a bit depending on how long a president of a particular party holds office. The F.B.I. and DoJ will often be told to implement government policy on law enforcement because they are Federal.

That would be my limited, minimal research opinion on the subject. I haven't looked real deep into these matters to be honest with you and can't take a super strong position one way or the other.

I don't necessarily disagree with your take, but that's not what the OP was about. What I said in the OP was that I wondered why in the hell the FBI wasn't on top of this event in Idaho, to which C-bob replied that it might have something to do with the FBI's political allegiance. IMO it's pretty clear that, if anything, the FBI has a very strong liberal slant to them, meaning that it wouldn't explain why they were asleep at the switch in the Idaho event.

IMO the FBI really needs to get more engaged in these domestic terrorist groups. The emails and voice mails that the CdA police department has been receiving is completely unacceptable and needs to be ferreted out. And I say that about extremists on both sides of the political spectrum. To hell with the active shooters and the Capitol rioters. These groups need to be pursued. They are evil.

The FBI took on the KKK back in the late 60's, 70's and early 80's and defeated them. They need to do the same with these modern day terrorist groups.

[c_hawkbob]

C-bob replied that it might have something to do with the FBI's political allegiance

Not the FBI as a whole, or institutionally, but individuals within the FBI. Thus "Some of those that work forces", as the song goes.

[RiverDog]

C-bob replied that it might have something to do with the FBI's political allegiance

Not the FBI as a whole, or institutionally, but individuals within the FBI. Thus "Some of those that work forces", as the song goes.

Sure, any large organization is going to have individuals that are rouge or mavericks and go outside their boundaries.

But that's not what you said and not what I'm contesting. I said "To be honest, the same criticism (of political bias) comes from those on the right, that the FBI sympathizes with the leftist agenda and intentionally overlooks those types of militant groups." to which you replied

Sorry no, not to nearly the same degree. LE, much like the military, is overwhelmingly Republican. "Leftist" sympathizers are a bit of a unicorn in those circles.

The FBI is not "overwhelmingly Republican." To the contrary, their employees donate heavily to Democratic causes/candidates. If a bias does exist within the agency, it's going to be a liberal one.

[Aseahawkfan]

I don't necessarily disagree with your take, but that's not what the OP was about. What I said in the OP was that I wondered why in the hell the FBI wasn't on top of this event in Idaho, to which C-bob replied that it might have something to do with the FBI's political allegiance. IMO it's pretty clear that, if anything, the FBI has a very strong liberal slant to them, meaning that it wouldn't explain why they were asleep at the switch in the Idaho event.

IMO the FBI really needs to get more engaged in these domestic terrorist groups. The emails and voice mails that the CdA police department has been receiving is completely unacceptable and needs to be ferreted out. And I say that about extremists on both sides of the political spectrum. To hell with the active shooters and the Capitol rioters. These groups need to be pursued. They are evil.

The FBI took on the KKK back in the late 60's, 70's and early 80's and defeated them. They need to do the same with these modern day terrorist groups.

I don't think they were viewed as much of a threat myself. Sounds like they were a bunch of yahoos getting built up as more than they are same way Fox News builds up Antifa as more than they are. I deal with Antifa or whatever anarchists in my job, they mostly engage in vandalism or sensationalistic protests. They rarely engage in violence. The videos of them dressing up in masks and acting militant is more for show than reality.

That's how I see it. F.B.I. focuses on real threats and still very focused on globally inspired domestic terrorists and apparently being used in political infighting as I stated earlier.

[RiverDog]

I don't necessarily disagree with your take, but that's not what the OP was about. What I said in the OP was that I wondered why in the hell the FBI wasn't on top of this event in Idaho, to which C-bob replied that it might have something to do with the FBI's political allegiance. IMO it's pretty clear that, if anything, the FBI has a very strong liberal slant to them, meaning that it wouldn't explain why they were asleep at the switch in the Idaho event.

IMO the FBI really needs to get more engaged in these domestic terrorist groups. The emails and voice mails that the CdA police department has been receiving is completely unacceptable and needs to be ferreted out. And I say that about extremists on both sides of the political spectrum. To hell with the active shooters and the Capitol rioters. These groups need to be pursued. They are evil.

The FBI took on the KKK back in the late 60's, 70's and early 80's and defeated them. They need to do the same with these modern day terrorist groups.

I don't think they were viewed as much of a threat myself. Sounds like they were a bunch of yahoos getting built up as more than they are same way Fox News builds up Antifa as more than they are. I deal with Antifa or whatever anarchists in my job, they mostly engage in vandalism or sensationalistic protests. They rarely engage in violence. The videos of them dressing up in masks and acting militant is more for show than reality.

That's how I see it. F.B.I. focuses on real threats and still very focused on globally inspired domestic terrorists and apparently being used in political infighting as I stated earlier.

If the FBI didn't view this as a threat, and I think your assertation that they didn't could very well be true, they should have. There were other groups besides this one that were planning on demonstrating at this event:

Area law enforcement agencies coordinated a large, visible presence in downtown Coeur d’Alene Saturday, due to threats of a planned, armed protest organized by the Panhandle Patriots Riding Club.

Originally dubbed “Gun d’Alene,” the protest was later rebranded as “North Idaho Day of Prayer.” Members of the riding club spoke publicly of plans to “confront” those celebrating Pride.

https://shoshonenewspress.com/news/2022 ... s-shoshon/

Those 'yahoos' could have lit the fuse to a powder keg. They had riot gear, smoke grenades, and a military-like plan. It almost looked like if they were going to impersonate law enforcement. It is clear that they were up to something. Whatever their motivation, it was a scary, dangerous situation that IMO the FBI should have been heavily involved in.

I would like to know just how much, if any, intelligence on the movements of these groups that the FBI passed on to state and local LE. From what I'm reading, it looks like that there wasn't much, if anything, that the FBI had. Maybe I'm wrong, but it looked like that the only communication that occurred with the FBI and local officials was after the fact.

[Aseahawkfan]

If the FBI didn't view this as a threat, and I think your assertation that they didn't could very well be true, they should have. There were other groups besides this one that were planning on demonstrating at this event:

Area law enforcement agencies coordinated a large, visible presence in downtown Coeur d’Alene Saturday, due to threats of a planned, armed protest organized by the Panhandle Patriots Riding Club.

Originally dubbed “Gun d’Alene,” the protest was later rebranded as “North Idaho Day of Prayer.” Members of the riding club spoke publicly of plans to “confront” those celebrating Pride.

https://shoshonenewspress.com/news/2022 ... s-shoshon/

Those 'yahoos' could have lit the fuse to a powder keg. They had riot gear, smoke grenades, and a military-like plan. It almost looked like if they were going to impersonate law enforcement. It is clear that they were up to something. Whatever their motivation, it was a scary, dangerous situation that IMO the FBI should have been heavily involved in.

I would like to know just how much, if any, intelligence on the movements of these groups that the FBI passed on to state and local LE. From what I'm reading, it looks like that there wasn't much, if anything, that the FBI had. Maybe I'm wrong, but it looked like that the only communication that occurred with the FBI and local officials was after the fact.

I don't agree. They were apprehended by local law enforcement. That likely means they suck, weren't particularly well organized, and didn't have much will to fight if 31 couldn't fight local law enforcement.

You want to know who scares the F.B.I.? The Oklahoma City bomber. The two guys armed with assault rifles armored with bullet proof vests robbing banks who nearly killed the F.B.I. agents going after them because they would rather die than go to jail. Shooters like Stephen Paddock and the Uvalde and Sandy Hook shooters. And child killers and kidnappers. 9/11 terrorists. The list is long and these guys are likely pretty low. If they were for real, you'd be reading a story about 31 guys who killed a bunch of local law enforcement in a gun fight.

For all the insane crimes that make it through the net, the F.B.I. probably catches 10 others that were about to do the same thing. These 31 guys were small fries compared to what the F.B.I. tracks.

Remember this incident? I remember watching a movie on this incident as a kid. These dudes were not going quiet with the F.B.I. Did you see the movie based on this incident? It was pretty well done for a T.V. movie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout