Local police and the FBI are using a new tactic: “knock and talk.” A pair of operatives show up at the doorsteps of American citizens, unannounced, uninvited, and always without a warrant, intent on intruding. For what exactly? information. visual surveillance. Property search. And does the Fourth Amendment protect against warrantless searches? Officials don’t seem too concerned.
by Rutherford Institute, “Knock and talk” acts are often initiated at civilian homes without warning, early in the morning or late at night. “‘Knock and Talk’ most often results from anonymous, unsubstantiated, or hearsay information held by police that illegal activity may be occurring at a particular home.”
These surprise visits are now frequently carried out based on anonymous “tips” received by the FBI and other agencies, often resulting from social media posts.
Zach Bonfiglio of San Antonio, Texas, was the recipient of such a visit around 10:30 a.m. on February 29th. Two FBI agents wanted to question him about his social media activity.
Bonfiglio, known online as the “Misfit Patriot,” was not at home when the special agent rang his doorbell, but was able to respond remotely from his workplace. After the agents identified themselves and presented their badges, Bonfiglio gave Special Agent Tristan Hyland his phone number.
Immediately after receiving Agent Hyland’s call, Mr. Bonfiglio was informed by an FBI agent that the visit was related to his social media activity. Ms. Bonfiglio asked if this was about a specific social media post. “No,” Hyland answered. “We looked at your social media and didn’t find anything illegal. We’re here to check a box. It’s a procedure.”
Ms. Bonfiglio instructed her agent to speak with an attorney. He then explained that his lawyer contacted the FBI “five seconds after I hung up.” Bonfiglio told Blaze Media that his attorney had tried to contact Hyland for six weeks without success.
However, at 11:45 a.m. on April 2, Hyland left a voice message on Bonfiglio’s phone and provided it to Blaze Media. “I called to continue a conversation we had a few weeks ago,” the agent said. “I’m wondering if you’ve been able to contact your lawyer yet? I haven’t heard anything from you or them, so I’d like to put something in the book.”
Bonfiglio acknowledged that his attorney has made further attempts to contact Hyland, but as of press time has not yet received a response from Hyland.
Bonfiglio says he doesn’t know what the FBI wants from him. He denies posting any threatening or inflammatory language. He said the only post that might have triggered a “tip” to the FBI was a series of comments he made on X (formerly Twitter) in response to pro-Palestinian protester Aaron Bushnell’s self-immolation. I’m guessing.
Bushnell set himself on fire on February 25th outside the gates of the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C., sparking an uproar online. Bonfiglio shared screenshots of some of the responses, which have now been deleted. These include the following statement and response by Bonfilio:
This man is a murderer. He didn’t “dedicate” his life to anything. He took his own life and committed suicide. He killed the man in order to advance a political agenda supporting those who chanted “Death to America.” He was literally a domestic terrorist.
Don’t even think about feeling bad for him. He got what he wanted, a martyr to the pro-terror group and a hero to Hamas. He is no different from a suicide bomber.
I stand by what I said earlier and have no more sympathy or excuses for supporting terrorism. If you take his 100 concussions and start chanting from the river to the sea, you can set yourself on fire, even if I only care.
In response to another X user who described Bushnell as a “hero” of the Palestinian cause, Bonfiglio wrote: You guys are retarded. ”
Bonfiglio said the comments did not contain any threats of violence, but were as “offensive” as anything he had previously posted on social media. He noted that the FBI visit came just days after he posted his comments about Bushnell.
Humorously, two FBI agents are seen looking down at Bonfiglio’s doormat while waiting for an answer when the doorbell rings. It says, “Please come back with a warrant.” One of the agents said, “That’s pretty interesting.”
Kyle Serafin, a former FBI special agent turned whistleblower, said that “knock-and-talk” visits are typically based on information received through the FBI’s “e-Guardian system”; , said to be carried out by low-level, young or inexperienced investigators.
“Unfortunately, FBI agents must use critical thinking to determine, based on the nature of the threat, whether this is First Amendment protected activity or whether the person should be interviewed. “We are not allowed to judge whether or not,” Serafin said.
The problem with “check the box” visits is that agents “don’t have the power to shut down leads,” Serafin explained. Because they are investigating constitutionally protected activity, there is no logical investigative procedure for agents to follow.
“And that’s the real problem with having an FBI that doesn’t think anything,” he said.
Serafin said Bonfiglio responded appropriately to the FBI’s questions. “The right answer is always not to answer the question,” he said. The only sensible civilian response to an attempted “knock-and-talk” visit is to direct questions to an attorney.
Blaze Media has reached out to FBI Special Agent Hyland directly for comment. A spokeswoman for the FBI’s San Antonio field office declined to comment on Bonfiglio’s case.
