Dallas, TX, Oct. 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — While the Trump administration and FBI Director Kash Patel have characterized recent Antifa-related terrorism indictments as “historic,” former federal prosecutor John Helms says the charges are actually “run of the mill” cases using statutes that have been on the books for decades—raising questions about whether the political framing serves prosecutorial or publicity purposes.
Please review the source on the Law Office of John M. Helms blog: Video: John Helms – Understanding Antifa
Video John Helms Dallas Federal Criminal Defense Attorney John Helms Understanding Antifa –
In a detailed legal analysis now available on his website, Helms—a former Assistant United States Attorney and current criminal defense attorney in Dallas—breaks down why the July 4th ICE facility attack indictments are being portrayed as groundbreaking despite relying on routine criminal statutes.
KEY FINDINGS FROM HELMS’ ANALYSIS:
• Not charged for being Antifa members : The defendants face terrorism charges for alleged violent acts, not for membership in any organization. “They were not indicted because they were members of Antifa. They were indicted for the violent acts that they’re accused of committing,” Helms explains.
• Trump’s terrorist designation is legally irrelevant : The alleged conduct occurred before President Trump’s declaration, and the underlying criminal statutes predate the designation by many years.
• Political messaging may influence conservative jury : With the trial in Fort Worth, Texas, Helms suggests mentioning Antifa repeatedly in the indictment—despite it not being legally necessary—could sway politically conservative jurors.
• “Publicity for the Trump administration” : Helms states directly: “I think really the main motivation for this is publicity for the Trump administration and their supporters.”
The two defendants face up to life in prison on charges including material support of terrorism, attempted murder of federal officials, and discharging firearms in connection with violence. According to Helms, any administration would have prosecuted the alleged shooting of a local police officer responding to fireworks being shot at the ICE detention facility in Alvarado, Texas.
“We can see that [the political motivation] because of how they’ve tried to portray this as a historical indictment when really it’s a run of the mill case,” Helms notes in his analysis.
ABOUT JOHN HELMS
Law Office of John M. Helms
John Helms is a criminal defense lawyer in Dallas, Texas, with extensive experience in federal and state criminal defense. As a former Assistant United States Attorney in Dallas (federal prosecutor), Helms brings an insider perspective on how the Justice Department operates and when political considerations may influence case presentation.
His practice focuses on all types of federal and state criminal defense in the Texas area, and he is recognized for his ability to decode complex legal issues for both clients and the media.
INTERVIEW AVAILABILITY
John Helms is available for interviews to discuss:
– The legal vs. political dimensions of the Antifa indictments
– Whether Trump’s domestic terrorism designation has legal teeth
– How political messaging in indictments may affect jury perception
– The difference between prosecuting violent acts vs. prosecuting ideology
– What makes this case “routine” despite administration claims
– Potential outcomes and sentencing implications
READ THE FULL ANALYSIS:
https://johnhelms.attorney/video-john-helms-antifa-podcast/
MEDIA CONTACT:
John Helms
Criminal Defense Attorney
Dallas, Texas
214-666-8010
William@johnhelmslaw.com
EDITOR’S NOTE: John Helms is available for phone, video, or in-person interviews. High-resolution photos and additional background materials available upon request.
