Glenn Greenwald
Politics • Culture • Writing
New DOJ Indictments Criminalize Dissent—Weaponizing the Very Censorship Tactics They Condemned in Russia
Video Transcript
April 24, 2023
post photo preview

Note: The following is the transcript of a recent episode of System Update. Watch the full episode at the link below:

placeholder

 

A new indictment from the Biden Justice Department is one of the most disturbing and extremist yet in the ongoing attempt by the U.S. government – under the guise of a domestic War on Terror – to criminalize any real dissidence and any real dissent. In one sense, these charges are just yet another manifestation of the dreariest and most cliched Russiagate paranoia, seeing Russians under every bed. But if you look under the hood of these charges just a bit, as we'll do along with you tonight, you'll see that the framework being constructed is dangerous and extreme, nothing less than a tactic for empowering the federal government to transform its harshest critics into felons. At its core, the indictment targets numerous American citizens, five of whom are part of radical black leftist groups. As such, they have very harsh words for Joe Biden and his administration, harbor contempt for U.S. foreign policy in the U.S. Security State, including the FBI, and are very vocal opponents of U.S. proxy war in Ukraine, even going so far as to argue that the provocations of the U.S. and NATO in Ukraine render the Russian invasion justifiable as a legal and ethical means for combating Western control over their border and violent anti-Russian extremism in the provinces in Eastern Ukraine. You may not agree with those views, but it's certainly not a crime in any way to express them. 

Yet those charged today, in addition to those views, often denounce many of the same police brutality cases on which more mainstream liberal and Black Lives Matter activists, such as Michael Brown and George Floyd, but from a radical black lens. So how does an American citizen, or five of them, end up criminally charged by the Justice Department for expressing these views? Because prosecutors, in this case, can't claim that they were acting on behalf of the Russian government by disseminating messaging designed to, “sow discord” among Americans, all because they received trivial amounts of funding that the DOJ claims emanated from the Russian government. None of that is a crime either. You're allowed to receive funding from other governments the way dissidents in those countries often receive funding from the United States government. So, the indictment really amounts to a claim that these Americans failed to file the proper paperwork notifying the government that they were agents of a foreign power, which means they now face ten years in prison for that offense and another five years in prison for allegedly inducing others to do the same without their knowledge. 

So why is this indictment so threatening? Because, as we will show you, the charges are so plainly motivated by the political dissent of these American citizens and not by concern that they failed to file the right forms, and much less so by the belief that these are somehow real Kremlin agents who are doing anything other than expressing the views they have long held. Quite tellingly, the U.S. government and the media and think tank elite to serve it have frequently denounced every enemy state, starting with Russia, China and Iran, for doing exactly what the Biden administration’s Justice Department is doing in this case, namely using the laws that require, “foreign agents” to register to turn dissidents into criminals. 

We'll go through the indictments and the implications of this case and then speak with Nick Cruse of the Revolutionary Blackout Network, who has been a frequent guest on System Update, about these groups that have been indicted or the individuals who have been indicted and why this indictment is so menacing to the right to dissent. 

As a reminder, System Update is available in podcast version. We post the shows 12 hours after they first appear, live, here on Rumble, they are on Spotify, Apple and every other major podcasting platform. 

For now, welcome to a new episode of System Update starting right now. 

 


One of the issues on which I focused journalistically most in the first year of the Biden administration is the fact that a top priority for Joe Biden and his leading foreign policy and domestic advisers was to create a new War on Terror in the United States. Only this one, unlike the first one, would have as its primary focus, not foreign enemies, and al-Qaida or ISIS but, instead, domestic enemies right here at home. And in fact, this priority of the Biden administration was announced well before January 6. He emphasized it during the campaign and then, when he was declared the winner of the election, in the transition, before January 6 ever happened, The riot on January 6 obviously gave the Biden administration the pretext it needed to implement what has been a real new War on Terror. Only this time, the enemies are American citizens. And they've done that in multiple ways. 

I spent the first year of my reporting in the Biden administration probably focused on that issue more than any other. The official position of the U.S. Security State and of the Biden administration is that the greatest threat to American national security comes not from foreign terrorist groups like al-Qaida or ISIS, or from foreign adversaries like China or Iran, or Russia, but from violent domestic extremists here at home. The definition of what an extremist is is incredibly broad – it basically includes anybody who in any way is a real critic of establishment pieties. If you're somebody who supports the establishment wings of the Republican Party or the Democratic Party, if you're somebody who stays within what President Obama once called “playing within the 40-yard lines,” meaning the establishment wings of all parties, about which President Obama rightly observed have far more in common with one another than differences with one another, then you have nothing to worry about. You're not considered a dissident. If you want to support Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney or Nikki Haley or Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton or people of that nature, you're well within the guidelines set by the government and by their supporters of where people can safely reside without being regarded as an enemy. They don't mind at all the power switches back and forth between those two wings because they know that the fundamental precepts will remain the same. What they really fear, especially now, is actual dissidents. And, as I said, this idea was in place long before January 6. January 6 became the pretext, just like neocons used the attack on September 11 to justify a war in Iraq, a regime-change war in Iraq, that if you go back and look before 9/11, they were long advocating war and craving. They used the 9/11 attacks as a tool for ushering in what they long had planned. That is the same with this new domestic War on Terror that the Biden administration has been craving for a long time and has successfully implemented. This indictment today is an extension of it. It cannot be understood simply by looking at it in isolation. The context is critical. 

Just to take a look at that history, we have an article from The Wall Street Journal, the headline is “Biden Administration Urged to Take Fresh Look at Domestic Terrorism.” This is an article from The Wall Street Journal on November 13, 2020. So just a few days after the 2020 election, obviously two months or so before the riot on January 6. The Wall Street Journal reported about the Biden administration, what they were thinking two months before January 6:

 

The first-ever White House post and more funding to combat violent extremists floated by a working group that advised [president-elect team]. President-elect Joe Biden, who has said he plans to make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism, has also been urged to create a White House post overseeing the fight against ideologically inspired violent extremists, increasing funding to combat them, according to people who have advised his team. 

 

A proposal for the Biden presidency's first 100 days, now with Mr. Biden's transition team for consideration, also calls for passing more red flag laws, which allow authorities to temporarily take guns from people deemed dangerous, some of the people said. 

While domestic terrorism spans extremist ideologies across the spectrum […]

 

I think that's an important point. When they talk about domestic terrorism or domestic extremism, it usually ends up targeting the right, under the Biden administration. But it also sometimes, as this indictment today targets the left. The idea is to create a precedent or a framework to criminalize either upon any win. The Wall Street Journal says: 

 

[…] it has been predominantly a far-right phenomenon in recent decades, according to researchers, according to researchers, who also say attacks by anti-fascist and other leftist groups rose this year. 

 

Mr. Biden has said he decided to run for president after the 2017 Charlottesville, Va., rally, during which an avowed neo-Nazi killed a woman and injured scores of other people. According to a campaign website, Mr. Biden intends to work “for a domestic terrorism law that respects free speech and civil liberties, while making the same commitment to root out domestic terrorism as we have to stop international terrorism.”

 

 That is the key part. What they explicitly wanted to do, as they said right here, is take the same tactics that were used against al-Qaida and ISIS and other international foreign terrorist groups – not just mass spying, but theories of detention and punishment without due process – and invoke them, weaponize them when aimed at American citizens they deem dangerous. That is the official posture of the United States government. 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
25
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Answering Your Questions About Tariffs

Many of you have been asking about the impact of Trump's tariffs, and Glenn addressed how we are covering the issue during our mail bag segment yesterday. As always, we are grateful for your thought-provoking questions! Thank you, and keep the questions coming!

00:11:10
In Case You Missed It: Glenn Breaks Down Trump's DOJ Speech on Fox News
00:04:52
In Case You Missed It: Glenn Discusses Mahmoud Khalil on Fox News
00:08:35
Listen to this Article: Reflecting New U.S. Control of TikTok's Censorship, Our Report Criticizing Zelensky Was Deleted

For years, U.S. officials and their media allies accused Russia, China and Iran of tyranny for demanding censorship as a condition for Big Tech access. Now, the U.S. is doing the same to TikTok. Listen below.

Listen to this Article: Reflecting New U.S. Control of TikTok's Censorship, Our Report Criticizing Zelensky Was Deleted
Submit Your Questions for Glenn! Plus: A Milestone

Leave your questions for Glenn in the comments below! He'll be answering them on tomorrow's show. Or, if you're feeling brave, send in a video question (must be under 60 seconds) to https://studio.rumble.com/inbox/ImttRNXpfDaTHoVx. Glenn will also be interviewing Curt Mills tomorrow; it's going to be a great conversation!

Also, we are happy to announce that we now have 400,000+ subscribers on YouTube. Rumble is, of course, the superior free speech platform, but we are always grateful to reach new audiences. The next goal: 100k followers on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@systemupdate__

15 hours ago

Glenn, Lab-grown meat is not "perfectly safe." Please read what the Center for Food Safety had to say about potential dangers and company secrecy (2020).
https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/blog/6458/is-lab-grown-meat-healthy-and-safe-to-consume

Watch Glenn knock it out of the park on the RBN Live podcast. It was very entertaining to see Nick and Glenn dish it out and expose political hypocrisy:

post photo preview
Jake Tapper Pretends He Didn't Know About Biden's Decline; Trump's Saudi Arabia Speech: A New Foreign Policy?
System Update #454

The following is an abridged transcript from System Update’s most recent episode. You can watch the full episode on Rumble or listen to it in podcast form on Apple, Spotify, or any other major podcast provider.  

System Update is an independent show free to all viewers and listeners, but that wouldn’t be possible without our loyal supporters. To keep the show free for everyone, please consider joining our Locals, where we host our members-only aftershow, publish exclusive articles, release these transcripts, and so much more!

AD_4nXdQrpX0DhTOjXaHgxx_8pmT4g0HqKkkYgv2y7g6F5KMVnNmqmnqXOoivqK49ANRiE-R5ototNxvN6bPwwASRg46RsDJywhnWiJfgBBMVCcw8mlbciVa7W4fLD6lrghYW6KNetklbQ5hqOfb0iJNiA?key=PznXErAzPOrBW-J7hCIN9g

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
Edan Alexander Release: Is the Trump/Netanyahu Split Becoming More Real? Are Republicans Moving Toward Populist Economics? With Matt Stoller
System Update #453

The following is an abridged transcript from System Update’s most recent episode. You can watch the full episode on Rumble or listen to it in podcast form on Apple, Spotify, or any other major podcast provider.  

System Update is an independent show free to all viewers and listeners, but that wouldn’t be possible without our loyal supporters. To keep the show free for everyone, please consider joining our Locals, where we host our members-only aftershow, publish exclusive articles, release these transcripts, and so much more!

AD_4nXebtV_VInCG6EEzInXSdASEiZ3Pd7lGqGurZKLZsrvLDle1w7MfjJEHvPMpBwvIn8eC3j4b9U7Cn0v7RDf9_6t1WVRWe9xSq0Gd70etysK_6PvFL1mm7V1LGzBUxesGH6SS8SM1W63JhRhHIqKi34w?key=y-1_PmU3hnbL0fXFUWV3kw

 On our program last week, we asked whether there was anything really authentic or meaningful about various reports suggesting a growing rift between Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. There was some evidence to substantiate that suspicion, but as we noted last week, far more than that would be required before believing that there has been a split between any Israeli Prime Minister and any American president, let alone one as surrounded and funded by Israeli loyalists, as Donald Trump has been and still is. 

Now, this is still my view: I want to see far more proof before concluding that this divergence or even animosity between the two governments is both real and enduring. But the evidence for this view is now far more ample and concrete than it was when we reviewed it last week. This split extends to several different Middle East regions and a variety of different agenda items for both Washington and Tel Aviv. 

We'll show you all of that evidence and also review the latest in the U.S./Israel relationship, including what that might mean for Gaza, the West Bank, Iran, and beyond. 

Then, we’ll have Matt Stoller, one of the most knowledgeable analysts on the U.S. government's fight against Big Tech's antitrust violations, to discuss President Trump’s executive order reducing the price of medication and other pharmaceutical products for Americans, who have long paid significantly more than anyone else in the world for pharmaceutical products. 

 
AD_4nXebtV_VInCG6EEzInXSdASEiZ3Pd7lGqGurZKLZsrvLDle1w7MfjJEHvPMpBwvIn8eC3j4b9U7Cn0v7RDf9_6t1WVRWe9xSq0Gd70etysK_6PvFL1mm7V1LGzBUxesGH6SS8SM1W63JhRhHIqKi34w?key=y-1_PmU3hnbL0fXFUWV3kw

AD_4nXeCh9VnPNJeiI6Elt7nSRrY_XnSVVdhtxFsC-6VDQzmnga2875Zlbf0f8IgtEPZVluT_Ug0KnQtyT7bDCJ07VRiRa7_P6smnxtVh4rpYJpHuRAZ4XZL4efFnJj0e8UbG3sV0oiR5nnNsuCEPrxOvA?key=y-1_PmU3hnbL0fXFUWV3kw

In terms of the U.S. role in the world and its foreign policy, there have been few aspects or components of the U.S. government more significant than its relationship with Israel. You can certainly make a case that the relationship with Israel, that inextricable link with Israel, has brought the U.S. into numerous different wars over the years. 

It has also resulted in a contract of dependency by which the United States not only gives Israel $4 billion every year, in a deal negotiated by Obama on his way out the door with Netanyahu, most of which is spent on buying U.S. weapons – so it's like a gift certificate to the Israelis – but not all of it. 

So, if that were ever to change in any way, it would be momentous. The consequences would be difficult to overstate. Yet, that's precisely why there's so much money, so much power, and so much organized pressure brought to bear on American politicians to make sure that doesn't ever happen. And it hasn't happened for decades. 

The last time it happened was in the Bush 41 administration, which had Bush's Secretary of State James Baker, who was just an old foreign policy hand and very much believed in a realist view that U.S. interests should come first. He worked with the national security advisor, Brent Scowcroft, who was also a realist, about whom Obama once said was one of his favorite foreign policy officials, because Obama wanted to adopt a realist view of foreign policy as well.

Both of them understood that one of the main problems for the United States in the Middle East, and generals have said this over the years, all kinds of national security officials, was the fact that the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is ongoing. The United States is so overwhelmingly, exclusively on one side of that conflict, namely fueling and funding Israel, that the entire Arab world always watched the Israelis killing innocent Palestinians, blowing up their children, Israel bombing Lebanon, Israel bombing Syria, taking land, and that entire part of the world understands that we're at fault for that because we're the ones enabling it with our arms and money. 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
Former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis: On Global Trade and Tariffs, EU Arming of Israel, Israeli Destruction of Gaza, & More
System Update #452

The following is an abridged transcript from System Update’s most recent episode. You can watch the full episode on Rumble or listen to it in podcast form on Apple, Spotify, or any other major podcast provider.  

System Update is an independent show free to all viewers and listeners, but that wouldn’t be possible without our loyal supporters. To keep the show free for everyone, please consider joining our Locals, where we host our members-only aftershow, publish exclusive articles, release these transcripts, and so much more!

AD_4nXeEPjcHLd9ITT4_C70QqQHVBQ9Rh9Ov64HkhEyLERcj0fJ6SPwOVIBUc92slZXtGvmAfLRFZsJYVYFiSXo0JDQRjXvdJVMqZ6qqg-ys1gARtZ_0m3neyTFgthcXxNm_6fUmUDg4jKXY2j8mtesTNvE?key=kwQxdomNV3oPRWlQKkpsfA

Yanis Varoufakis is on the show to discuss a wide range of issues, including what lessons he took away from that bruising 2015 battle with the IMF and the EU; his thoughts on Trump's current tariffs policy, which is a reaction that was far more nuanced than one might expect, given his association in the public mind with the left; the trends in the EU regarding their claim determination to want to massively increase military spending and turn themselves into an independent military power; the Israeli destruction of Gaza and EU support for that, and much more. 

Yanis Varoufakis is a prominent Greek Australian economist, politician, and activist. As Greece's Finance Minister in 2015, he gained global recognition during the negotiations surrounding the Greek debt crisis. He led the charge against attempts by the neoliberal globalist institutions – such as the IMF, the European Central Bank and the EU – to force Greece to take out more high-interest loans to pretend to pay back its national debt. He most vociferously fought against attempts to impose massive suffering on the Greek people, the already quite beleaguered Greek people, through mandatory austerity measures, which Brussels was attempting to impose on Greece. 

As is true of most people who try to challenge or defy these sorts of neoliberal power centers, Varoufakis ultimately failed in the sense that he resigned from his government and his position when they began to make concessions that he regarded as "surrender." He did, however, succeed in convincing the Greek population to reject a referendum that would have ratified the EU's demands. Of course, the government ended up ignoring the will of the people as it often does. In the process, he also drew international attention to the way these financial institutions crush the lives of ordinary citizens (a dynamic that continues to drive right-wing populist movements in the EU, the U.S. and throughout the world) and he ended up, whether he wanted to or not, with a massive platform, widely regarded as one of the most informed and most independent analysts of economic and geopolitical debates. 

We certainly regard him as that, and thus we are very glad that he has that platform and has agreed to come on our show tonight. 

Varoufakis is currently a professor at the University of Athens, where his academic work centers on global economic systems, game theory and critiques of neoliberalism. He leads the MeRA25, the European Realistic Disobedience Front, co-founded the DiEM25 movement for democratic reform, and is a bestselling author. His latest book is “Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism” (2023), which examines how technology has transformed global economies. 

 

AD_4nXcAefhhsl7Gb9UQmpBVubEZ1605c4wopv2j3fjgRahrWhmCkxuydqI3g3xpf9jWXU28tR5gnQSdEP2OQnqiWXbpo966G0lW9CDSxWKwijo9ylPnjyg8w6mX8dDtbs6FCH4oFmseIJOOk9VD3rSlq8I?key=kwQxdomNV3oPRWlQKkpsfA

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals