DOJ Brief says “Proud Boy” Defendant Committed Act of “Terrorism.” This is what Trump Incited

from Glenn Kirschner, …with Team Justice

[ Editor’s Note: In yesterday’s posting on this news Glenn was on vacation, so he was just giving a heads up on the news of some of the charged January 6ers being asked about contacts with Congressional people, which would mean not only official Congressmen and women, but their staff.

I have done some bolding below on the parts I felt were most appropriate for the insurrectionists, or free speech advocates as a judge or jury might rule.

In layman’s terms, this statute seems to be a RICO version of “running a continuing criminal enterprise”…but where stopping the election certification was the prime goal, and attacking the police to get inside was not only engaged in, but prepared for and coordinated by some of the groups… Jim W. Dean ]

Jim's Editor’s Notes are solely crowdfunded via PayPal
Jim's work includes research, field trips, Heritage TV Legacy archiving & more. Thanks for helping. Click to donate >>

Video is a rerun from yesterday if you did not see it.

First aired … June 19, 2021

In a recent Department of Justice brief in the prosecution of insurrectionist defendant Robert Gieswein, DOJ stated that what the defendant did qualifies as “a federal crime of terrorism” as that term is defined in the federal criminal code (18 USC section 2332b(g)(5)).

This determination arguably ups the criminal ante for those who organized, encouraged and incited the insurrection, given that those who carried out the insurrection committed an act of terrorism, per DOJ prosecutors.

JD Note: Here is the Full Monty on the statute:

18 U.S. Code § 2332b – Acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries

(a)Prohibited Acts.—

(1)Offenses.—Whoever, involving conduct transcending national boundaries and in a circumstance described in subsection (b)—

(A) kills, kidnaps, maims, commits an assault resulting in serious bodily injury, or assaults with a dangerous weapon any person within the United States; or

(B) creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to any other person by destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States or by attempting or conspiring to destroy or damage any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States;

in violation of the laws of any State, or the United States, shall be punished as prescribed in subsection (c)

(2)Treatment of threats, attempts and conspiracies.—

Whoever threatens to commit an offense under paragraph (1), or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished under subsection (c).

(b)Jurisdictional Bases.—

(1)Circumstances.—The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are—

(A) the mail or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce is used in furtherance of the offense;

(B) the offense obstructs, delays, or affects interstate or foreign commerce, or would have so obstructed, delayed, or affected interstate or foreign commerce if the offense had been consummated;

(C) the victim, or intended victim, is the United States Government, a member of the uniformed services, or any official, officer, employee, or agent of the legislative, executive, or judicial branches, or of any department or agency, of the United States;

(D) the structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property is, in whole or in part, owned, possessed, or leased to the United States, or any department or agency of the United States;

(E) the offense is committed in the territorial sea (including the airspace above and the seabed and subsoil below, and artificial islands and fixed structures erected thereon) of the United States; or

(F) the offense is committed within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

(2)Co-conspirators and accessories after the fact.— Jurisdiction shall exist over all principals and co-conspirators of an offense under this section, and accessories after the fact to any offense under this section, if at least one of the circumstances described in subparagraphs (A) through (F) of paragraph (1) is applicable to at least one offender.


(1)Penalties.—Whoever violates this section shall be punished—

(A) for a killing, or if death results to any person from any other conduct prohibited by this section, by death, or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life;

(B) for kidnapping, by imprisonment for any term of years or for life;

(C) for maiming, by imprisonment for not more than 35 years;

(D) for assault with a dangerous weapon or assault resulting in serious bodily injury, by imprisonment for not more than 30 years;

(E) for destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property, by imprisonment for not more than 25 years;

(F) for attempting or conspiring to commit an offense, for any term of years up to the maximum punishment that would have applied had the offense been completed; and

(G) for threatening to commit an offense under this section, by imprisonment for not more than 10 years.

(2) Consecutive sentence.— Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the court shall not place on probation any person convicted of a violation of this section; nor shall the term of imprisonment imposed under this section run concurrently with any other term of imprisonment.

(d)Proof Requirements.—The following shall apply to prosecutions under this section:

(1)Knowledge.— The prosecution is not required to prove knowledge by any defendant of a jurisdictional base alleged in the indictment.

(2)State law.— In a prosecution under this section that is based upon the adoption of State law, only the elements of the offense under State law, and not any provisions pertaining to criminal procedure or evidence, are adopted.

(e)Extraterritorial Jurisdiction.—There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction—

(1) over any offense under subsection (a), including any threat, attempt, or conspiracy to commit such offense; and

(2) over conduct which, under section 3, renders any person an accessory after the fact to an offense under subsection (a).

(f)Investigative Authority.— In addition to any other investigative authority with respect to violations of this title, the Attorney General shall have primary investigative responsibility for all Federal crimes of terrorism, and any violation of section 351(e)844(e)844(f)(1)956(b)13611366(b)1366(c)1751(e)2152, or 2156 of this title, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall assist the Attorney General at the request of the Attorney General. Nothing in this section shall be construed to interfere with the authority of the United States Secret Service under section 3056.

(g)Definitions.—As used in this section—

(1) the term “conduct transcending national boundaries” means conduct occurring outside of the United States in addition to the conduct occurring in the United States;

(2) the term “facility of interstate or foreign commerce” has the meaning given that term in section 1958(b)(2);

(3) the term “serious bodily injury” has the meaning given that term in section 1365(g)(3); [1]

(4) the term “territorial sea of the United States” means all waters extending seaward to 12 nautical miles from the baselines of the United States, determined in accordance with international law; and

(5)the term “Federal crime of terrorism” means an offense that—

(A) is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and

(B)is a violation of—

(i) section 32 (relating to destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities), 37 (relating to violence at international airports), 81 (relating to arson within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction), 175 or 175b (relating to biological weapons), 175c (relating to variola virus), 229 (relating to chemical weapons), subsection (a), (b), (c), or (d) of section 351 (relating to congressional, cabinet, and Supreme Court assassination and kidnaping), 831 (relating to nuclear materials), 832 (relating to participation in nuclear and weapons of mass destruction threats to the United States) [2] 842(m) or (n) (relating to plastic explosives), 844(f)(2) or (3) (relating to arson and bombing of Government property risking or causing death), 844(i) (relating to arson and bombing of property used in interstate commerce), 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a Federal facility with a dangerous weapon), 956(a)(1) (relating to conspiracy to murder, kidnap, or maim persons abroad), 1030(a)(1) (relating to protection of computers), 1030(a)(5)(A) resulting in damage as defined in 1030(c)(4)(A)(i)(II) through (VI) (relating to protection of computers), 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the United States), 1116 (relating to murder or manslaughter of foreign officials, official guests, or internationally protected persons), 1203 (relating to hostage taking), 1361 (relating to government property or contracts), 1362 (relating to destruction of communication lines, stations, or systems), 1363 (relating to injury to buildings or property within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States), 1366(a) (relating to destruction of an energy facility), 1751(a), (b), (c), or (d) (relating to Presidential and Presidential staff assassination and kidnaping), 1992 (relating to terrorist attacks and other acts of violence against railroad carriers and against mass transportation systems on land, on water, or through the air), 2155 (relating to destruction of national defense materials, premises, or utilities), 2156 (relating to national defense material, premises, or utilities), 2280 (relating to violence against maritime navigation), 2280a (relating to maritime safety), 2281 through 2281a (relating to violence against maritime fixed platforms), 2332 (relating to certain homicides and other violence against United States nationals occurring outside of the United States), 2332a (relating to use of weapons of mass destruction), 2332b (relating to acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries), 2332f (relating to bombing of public places and facilities), 2332g (relating to missile systems designed to destroy aircraft), 2332h (relating to radiological dispersal devices), 2332i (relating to acts of nuclear terrorism), 2339 (relating to harboring terrorists), 2339A (relating to providing material support to terrorists), 2339B (relating to providing material support to terrorist organizations), 2339C (relating to financing of terrorism), 2339D (relating to military-type training from a foreign terrorist organization), or 2340A (relating to torture) of this title;

(ii) sections 92 (relating to prohibitions governing atomic weapons) or 236 (relating to sabotage of nuclear facilities or fuel) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2122 or 2284);

(iii) section 46502 (relating to aircraft piracy), the second sentence of section 46504 (relating to assault on a flight crew with a dangerous weapon), section 46505(b)(3) or (c) (relating to explosive or incendiary devices, or endangerment of human life by means of weapons, on aircraft), section 46506 if homicide or attempted homicide is involved (relating to application of certain criminal laws to acts on aircraft), or section 60123(b) (relating to destruction of interstate gas or hazardous liquid pipeline facility) of title 49; or

(iv) section 1010A of the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (relating to narco-terrorism).

(Added Pub. L. 104–132, title VII, § 702(a)Apr. 24, 1996110 Stat. 1291; amended Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, § 601(s)(1), (3), Oct. 11, 1996110 Stat. 3502Pub. L. 107–56, title VIII, § 808Oct. 26, 2001115 Stat. 378Pub. L. 107–197, title III, § 301(b)June 25, 2002116 Stat. 728Pub. L. 108–458, title VI, §§ 6603(a)(1), 6803(c)(3), 6908, Dec. 17, 2004118 Stat. 3762, 3769, 3774; Pub. L. 109–177, title I, §§ 110(b)(3)(A), 112, Mar. 9, 2006120 Stat. 208, 209; Pub. L. 110–326, title II, § 204(b)Sept. 26, 2008122 Stat. 3562Pub. L. 114–23, title VIII, §§ 805, 811(d), June 2, 2015129 Stat. 309, 311.)


We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.


  1. “It is entirely a false equivalence to compare the 6er’s with protesters as many are attempting to do, and I think the worse step, is to label them terrorists,” – There is no attempt to label all the protestors 6ers, as many were just wandering around inside, and there is the issue of the video with capitol cops making no attempt to block them. The courts don’t have time for them so they will get misdeomeanor plea deals and take them. The terrorist issue in play now is for all those on video engaged in violence, and all those involved in planning that was clearly to stop the certification, and yes, using violence to do so. That is what, as a layman, I see the statute saying, and I am surprised it came out this late. It is a sign that the DoJ, wants to make an example of all the real planners and instigators, especially the political people, who deserve the worst punishment for their betrayal.

    • In last 20 years we are being witness of arbitrariness and abuse of the “terrorism” concept use for anything the power want. In my humble opinion, tagging to Robert Gieswein as “terrorist” is put him on an equal footing with Timothy McVeigh or Mohamed Atta, when there is not any difference between Gieswien and anyone other felon doing a breaking and entering and murdering a cop in any other location and circunstance, instances which already are covered by common laws without the need to make use of “terrorism” Acts.

    • I simply meant, the right wing media really wants to paint the 6ers as protestors, which I find disingenuous, and a far left crowd that wants the terrorist label to stick,…
      I do think the decision of what charges to bring will have future ramifications no matter which one they choose. The only prediction I have about it,. is at some pint there will be people at the DOJ who generally do not drink slamming straight whiskey out of a high baller in a back office upon the announcement. By not arresting Trump immediately they have chewed off this problem and we’ll see if they can swallow it.

  2. Hey Jim don’t be curious about why after 20 years ‘They’ are letting out semi-viable GB inmates and talking about shuttering Operations in ‘Cuba’. Is someone afraid of such a special jailing?

  3. People believe themselves to be patriots like their revolutionary heroes, and when some have the brass to emulate their revolutionary heroes one should not be shocked or surprised at all at the potential outcomes.

  4. This Act was enacted at April 24, 1996, as a result of “alleged” Timothy McVeigh bombing in Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City at April 19, 1995, one year before.

    • David, people across the world were subjected to this because this Act it’s so ambiguous in scope confering much discretionary authority, that lawmakers thought were entitled to arrogating to themselves the authority to reach even conduct occurring outside of the US.

    • It is entirely a false equivalence to compare the 6er’s with protesters as many are attempting to do, and I think the worse step, is to label them terrorists, because when the republicans get power next time, they will use it on protestors as they have already been trying to do.
      Imagine the next trump labeling anyone he dislikes a terrorist… it is a sloppery slope and we just watched for 20 years as people across the world were subjected to this…to do it here is not a good plan,. the definition above looks a little to broad and too easily applied for my taste. Aside from the label, and sentencing, it appears redundant.

Comments are closed.