"What is going on in Minneapolis "

This I am trying to post off my kinda smart phone.

I also believe that this was kicked off to cover the billions of dollars stolen by fraud and the people involved funnel a lot of money to the donks.

 This is going to be long and I know most people only have a 30 second attention span, but if you will read it thoroughly, it will make sense. 

What is unfolding in Minneapolis is not protest activity.

It is the deliberate construction of a coordinated, low-level resistance infrastructure designed to interfere with federal law enforcement operations. The organization, discipline, and operational security being observed are not consistent with spontaneous civil unrest.

Multiple indicators point to structured command-and-control, segmented communication cells capped for scale control; assigned operational roles including surveillance, vehicle tracking, dispatch coordination, and rapid mobilization; standardized intelligence reporting formats; vetting procedures; timed message deletions to frustrate forensic recovery; and decentralized coordination nodes to avoid a single point of failure.

These are not accidental behaviors. They reflect study, rehearsal, and intent.

When civilian networks conduct real-time surveillance of federal officers, compile and share vehicle and personal data, coordinate pursuit and obstruction, and escalate from observation to direct interference, this surpasses civil disobedience. It constitutes organized resistance activity operating below the threshold of overt violence while still producing real-world harm.

The structure closely mirrors early-stage urban insurgent models observed in foreign conflict zones like we saw in Iraq.  Such as cells, redundant communications, narrative shielding, and the avoidance of identifiable leadership. The objective is not immediate confrontation, but sustained pressure, intimidation, and operational paralysis.

The most serious element is that this activity is domestic and enabled by individuals and institutions within the same society the targeted law enforcement agencies serve. That normalization creates strategic risk. Once such infrastructure is established and validated through perceived success, it does not dissolve organically. It certainly doesn’t help when you have a lieutenant governor and other politicians involved in this dangerous activity. 

History shows that failure to identify and address this insurgency phase early allows the network to mature, expand, and entrench. Right now just like you saw with Cam Higby, their command station appears to be on signal. 

This is not a call for escalation.

It is a warning grounded in precedent.

If this continues to be mischaracterized as mere activism, the structures will harden, replicate, and spread, making eventual containment far more difficult and far more costly.

What is often missed is that this kind of network can be countered, but only if it is correctly identified and treated as organized interference rather than protest activity. We are well beyond the protest phase. We’re in the military phase. 

Law enforcement already has lawful tools for this phase, but they must be used deliberately and early.

First, disrupt the infrastructure, not the crowd.

The center of gravity here is communications, coordination, and logistics, not mass participation. Court-authorized investigations and arrests focused on individuals coordinating surveillance, doxxing, obstruction, vehicle tracking, and harassment are lawful and effective. When those nodes are removed, the network degrades quickly.

Second, treat coordinated interference as conspiracy, not speech.

Speech is protected. Organized efforts to surveil, track, obstruct, intimidate, or interfere with federal officers are not. Existing statutes already cover conspiracy, obstruction of justice, interference with federal operations, stalking, and the use of interstate communications to facilitate criminal conduct. These cases must be built carefully and prosecuted visibly to restore deterrence.

Third, restore information dominance.

These movements rely on narrative control to maintain public tolerance. Silence creates space for misinformation. Law enforcement leadership must clearly explain what is happening, what laws are being violated, and why enforcement actions are necessary. Transparency preserves legitimacy.

Fourth, reassert jurisdictional clarity.

Federal operations cannot function under political ambiguity. Clear coordination between federal agencies, state authorities, and compliant local departments is essential. Where local institutions obstruct or enable interference, that failure must be documented and addressed through lawful oversight and accountability mechanisms.

Fifth, protect officers and their families.

Doxxing and vehicle tracking are not protest tactics, they are intimidation. Dedicated counter-doxxing resources, rapid response to threats, and protective measures for affected personnel are necessary. Allowing this behavior to persist signals vulnerability.

As for the military. The armed forces are not a crowd-control tool. However, military intelligence, training, and advisory capabilities exist precisely to analyze and counter organized, sub-threshold threats. Within legal boundaries, supporting civil authorities with pattern analysis, infrastructure assessment, and threat modeling is appropriate when domestic actors adopt foreign-style resistance structures.

None of this requires escalation.

It requires clarity, resolve, and early action.

History is consistent on this point, once these networks believe they can operate with impunitonce, hesitation is interpreted as weakness and the cost of restoring order rises exponentially.

Recognizing what this is does not make it worse.

Failing to recognize it does.

Tori Branum 

Marine Veteran

Republican candidate for George’s congressional district 12