In the January 6th matter, the DOJ investigated and prosecuted people who were not even present in Washington DC, on the theory that they encouraged it or were "co-conspirators" to "insurrection."
What should happen to Goldman Sachs, then?
A New York City nonprofit that received more than $12 million from Goldman Sachs' charitable arm encouraged anti-Israel activists to re-create the violent protests of "the summer of 2020," just hours before rioters stormed and occupied a building on Columbia University's campus.
More than 100 masked and keffiyeh-clad activists convened in the People's Forum's Manhattan office Monday evening to plan their next moves as anti-Israel protests reach a fever pitch across the country. The meeting, which was scheduled to start at 6:45 p.m., was delayed to give protesters from Columbia time to make it downtown.
Once the Columbia protesters arrived, People's Forum executive director Manolo De Los Santos urged the group to "give Joe Biden a hot summer" and "make it untenable for the politics of usual to take place in this country." Los Santos praised Columbia students for "decid[ing] that resistance is more important than negotiations," and urged those assembled at the People's Forum to "support our students so that the encampments can go for as long as they can."
Los Santos also ranted about the "Zionist" Columbia administrators who "want to be more like their masters in Israel."
...
The People's Forum's operations are made possible in large part by a $12 million donation from Goldman Sachs's charitable arm. The source of that money is likely Neville Roy Singham, a communist who has "long admired Maoism."
Singham, an American businessman who lives in China, reportedly helps finance the Chinese Communist Party's "propaganda worldwide," according to the New York Times. His wife, Jodie Evans, is the leader of the activist group Code Pink. Under her leadership, the group has celebrated China as "a defender of the oppressed and a model for economic growth without slavery or war."
"As with any donor advised fund, the prior donation was made with the client's money, at the client's direction," a Goldman Sachs spokesman told the Free Beacon. "This was not firm money."
Groups like the People's Forum stand to lose their charity status if they are found to be party to riots and violent protests, experts told the Free Beacon. The IRS's charity guidelines state that groups may lose their charity status if they engage in "planned activities that violate laws" or "induce the commission of crime."
Security policy expert Kyle Shideler writes that these violent "protests" may be alienating voters, but the far left doesn't care -- because their goal is to mau-mau the Democrat Party elite into submission, and it's working.
Kyle Shideler
@ShidelerK
"But this is an election year! They risk splitting their base and losing." Sure. IF you care about that kind of thing, which revolutionaries do not, but the establishment does. "Give us everything we want, or you get the Bad Orange Man again" is implictly part of the threat.
The threat of Trump Reascendant is essentially a Kornilov coup. It exists as a specter in the distance, to force the progressives more fully into the radical camp for fear of a counter-revolution.
The radicals deliberately nostalgia bomb the establishment with 1968 language and actions as well. Because 1. the establishment is sympathetic to those prior radicals (or literally were them.) and 2. The implict warning is, you will give us what we want, or you get Nixon.
Why do radicals think that this would work? Because it almost ALWAYS works. And they have the further evidence of the BLM kneeling and siding with Antifa against federal law enforcement in 2020.
Add to this that the same mega-donors who are funding these protests are major level Democrat donors. Why are they funding an upheaval aimmed at the very people they support? Because they want to push them further left. They want to move the Overton Window.
In the same way that "abolish the police" became a mainstream Democrat "Defund the police" on the backs of riots, the Democrat position on Israel has moved to what would have been previously unthinkable. And they will continue to move leftward.
But it's not really about Israel at all. This is about sawing off legs of a stool. The more you cut out from under the target, the more reliant upon you they become. Eventually when you step aside, they topple.
"Don't they know they're losing pro-Israel Jewish Democrats!" Yes. Duh. That's the point. This is a major leg of the party stool, and the radicals intend to cut it away.