A 20-year-old Chicago man faces up to 20 years in federal prison — not for plotting an attack on the White House, but for deleting an encrypted messaging app off his phone after an FBI agent called to ask him about one.
Alexander Iniguez Mercado was arrested Thursday and charged with one count of obstruction of justice, according to an indictment made public Friday. Prosecutors don't allege he planned or carried out any violence. They allege he was an administrator of Signal messaging groups where others discussed a planned attack on the June 14 UFC event at the White House South Lawn, and that he uninstalled the app after an FBI agent contacted him by phone on June 13 — the day before the event. The indictment says Mercado denied plans to travel to Washington, declined to meet with the agent, and disconnected the call. Then he deleted Signal, making the message data unavailable.
That's the entire charge. No terrorism count. No conspiracy. No weapons possession. A young man refused to talk to the FBI and wiped an app off his phone — and the federal government wants to put him away for two decades.
Seven other defendants across multiple states — including Ohio, Missouri, Nebraska, and California — have been charged in connection with the alleged plot, which authorities say involved explosive-laden drones and snipers targeting the UFC event attended by President Trump and thousands of others. The New York Post reported that one of those defendants, 19-year-old Ohioan Tycen Proper, spent $3,000 of graduation money on an arsenal including an AR-15, a shotgun, plate carriers, loaded magazines, and over 1,000 rounds of ammunition stored at a family member's home.
But the details in Proper's case raise as many questions as they answer. His father told law enforcement that Proper quit his job to meet up with people he encountered online who conducted "missions" and "recons" together, according to a criminal complaint. His own mother called 911 to report him. Who were these people Proper met online? Were any of them informants or undercover agents? The outlets covering the story don't ask, and the FBI isn't volunteering.
The FBI says it learned of the plot on June 10 — just four days before the event — and moved with state and local partners to disrupt it. Newsweek reported that officials "emphasized that the arrests underscore the seriousness of the threat and the speed with which investigators responded." The Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times repeated the government's claims about drone strikes and sniper ambushes without scrutiny. The Sun-Times did note, almost in passing, that U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros currently faces controversy over how his office has secured grand jury indictments — a detail that didn't make any other outlet's coverage.
Here's the pattern that ought to concern every American who remembers how this works: the FBI infiltrates online spaces, informants recruit and encourage, the agency announces a dramatic foiled plot, and the press prints the press release. Mercado's charge is obstruction — the same go-to count prosecutors use when they can't prove the underlying crime. He wouldn't meet with the FBI and he deleted an app. Whether that's criminal concealment or a young man's panicked reaction to a federal agent on the phone is what a trial should determine.
The question isn't whether violent plots should be stopped. It's whether the FBI is stopping plots — or manufacturing them, then locking people up for covering their tracks when the feds come calling.
