SMOKING GUN: You Won’t Believe Who Biden’s DOJ Wanted To Arrest As ‘Domestic Terrorists’

Recent revelations indicate that the Biden Justice Department was actively seeking ways to justify federal intervention against parents who voiced concerns about their children’s education, even while being aware that such parents were protected under the First Amendment.

These documents, acquired by America First Legal (AFL), demonstrate how Department of Justice officials were racing to find legal grounds just days before former Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a controversial memo on October 4, 2021, branding concerned parents as potential “domestic terrorists,” according to The Federalist.

In an email dated October 1, Kevin Chambers, then an associate deputy attorney general, expressed in a communication, “We’re aware; the challenge here is finding a federal hook. But the White House has been in touch about whether we can assist in some form or fashion.”

This correspondence coincided with the Biden administration’s collaboration with the National School Boards Association (NSBA) to draft a letter urging the Justice Department to take action against parents opposing COVID mandates, critical race theory, and gender ideology in schools — many of whom were already mobilizing through grassroots efforts and sharing their concerns in viral videos nationwide.

Career Department of Justice staff at the time raised red flags, saying there was no legal basis for federal involvement and that most parental speech was constitutionally protected. Some officials even warned that the majority of cited incidents had nothing to do with threats or violence and instead involved nothing more than passionate dissent at public meetings.

AFL says the newly released emails complete the timeline of what it calls a coordinated effort between the Biden administration, DOJ, and NSBA “to deprive parents of two fundamental rights — the right to speak, and the right to direct the upbringing of their children,” according to AFL president Gene Hamilton.

“They did so with political intentions,” Hamilton said, “most immediately by attempting to influence the Virginia gubernatorial election, and to more broadly chill dissent across the United States.”

The internal scramble continued into the weekend. On Saturday, October 2, Sparkle Sooknanan — then in the associate attorney general’s office and now a Biden-appointed federal judge — asked if the Civil Rights Division could help respond to the NSBA letter.

By Saturday night, DOJ staff admitted there wasn’t much to go on. A Civil Rights Division attorney wrote on Sunday that the effort was “ramping up an awful lot of federal manpower for what is currently a non-federal conduct.”

“It appears to me that the vast, vast majority of the behavior cited cannot be reached by federal law,” the attorney wrote. “Almost all of the language being used is protected by the First Amendment.”