GIVE JEH JOHNSON NO POWERS YOU WOULDN'T GIVE RUDY GIULIANI.

Glenn Greenwald fears that the futile and stupid gesture at the Federal Capitol will lead to active measures against domestic dissidents.

We have witnessed an orgy of censorship from Silicon Valley monopolies with calls for far more aggressive speech policing, a visibly militarized Washington, D.C. featuring a non-ironically named “Green Zone,” vows from the incoming president and his key allies for a new anti-domestic terrorism bill, and frequent accusations of “sedition,” “treason,” and “terrorism” against members of Congress and citizens. This is all driven by a radical expansion of the meaning of “incitement to violence.” It is accompanied by viral-on-social-media pleas that one work with the FBI to turn in one’s fellow citizens (See Something, Say Something!) and demands for a new system of domestic surveillance.

Yes, and with the public health officials scaring citizens into ratting out bartenders for daring to serve beer inside, these could be dangerous times to seem contrarian.

With Americans still reeling from the January 6 Capitol riot, the Biden administration will begin its term amid a rapidly escalating "tough on domestic terror" mood.

That's never a good influence no matter which ruling party is in office, and perhaps especially bad in times of intense partisan conflict. There are a few things both Democrats and Republicans can almost always come together on, and limiting civil liberties in the name of national security is chief among them. But worse, Biden has never backed away from hysterical policy reactions to perceived crime and terror threats.

On the other hand, part of the Democrats' coalition isn't on board. "Democratic Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib of Michigan on Tuesday sent a letter to House and Senate leaders in which she and nine colleagues argued against expanding the national security state and further curtailing civil liberties in the aftermath of the deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol by a pro-Trump mob."  The co-signers?  Her fellow "squad" members.

Several initiatives throughout the nation's history were "sold as being necessary to fight extremism but quickly devolved into tools used for the mass violation of the human and civil rights of the American people," the ten legislators asserted, including the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Counterintelligence Program (COINTELPRO), the USA Patriot Act, and the FBI's anti-Black Lives Matter Operation Iron Fist.

"While many may find comfort in increased national security powers in the wake of this attack, we must emphasize that we have been here before and we have seen where that road leads," they wrote.

The lawmakers stressed how quickly "expanded national security and surveillance powers [are] turned on law-abiding Americans," especially individuals who are non-white and/or anti-capitalist. They noted that "to expand the government's national security powers once again at the expense of the human and civil rights of the American people would only serve to further undermine our democracy, not protect it."

Their stance is the same as one taken by 135 "civil rights organizations," including many ordinarily in the position of arguing with Democrats, then voting for them.  Where there's sufficient existing legislation, is new legislation, or a new agency, really necessary?