A Digital Cult in Plain Sight
Why DOJ’s Rare Warnings About the 764 Network Should Alarm Every American Parent
By The Craig Bushon Show
The Truth Is Not Hate Speech
For years, federal law enforcement has avoided speaking publicly about active extremist investigations involving minors. Silence has been the rule, discretion the norm. That is why the recent public warnings from career officials at the U.S. Department of Justice should stop every parent, policymaker, and platform executive cold.
When prosecutors and domestic terrorism coordinators step out from behind sealed indictments to describe an online network as “as serious a threat as you can imagine,” they are not engaging in hyperbole. They are signaling that something has gone profoundly wrong in the digital spaces where American children live much of their social lives.
The network is known as 764. And the arrest records now tell a story far darker than most Americans realize.
What 764 Actually Is—and Why It Defies Old Categories
764 is not a single group, website, or organization in the traditional sense. It is a decentralized online extremist network that operates across mainstream platforms—Discord, Telegram, gaming ecosystems, and private encrypted chats—using psychological coercion as its primary weapon.
According to federal prosecutors, 764 and its offshoots groom children, extract compromising material, and then escalate demands. Victims are coerced into self-harm, animal abuse, explicit content production, and, in some cases, threats of suicide or mass violence. Within the network, cruelty functions as currency. Status is earned not through ideology alone, but through demonstrated harm.
This is not random deviance. It is ritualized.
Career DOJ officials have likened the content produced and shared within these circles to something beyond even the darkest fictional imagination. That comparison matters, because it underscores what makes 764 distinct: the normalization of extreme psychological violence against minors, carried out collaboratively and remotely.
The Arrests That Forced DOJ to Speak
By late 2025, the scope of the problem could no longer be contained behind court filings.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is now running more than 350 active investigations nationwide tied to 764 and related networks, spanning every FBI field office. Arrests connected to these cases surged an estimated 350 to 500 percent in 2025 alone, a rate more commonly associated with major organized crime crackdowns than online abuse cases.
The Department of Justice has charged dozens of individuals, often stacking statutes: child sexual exploitation, cyberstalking, racketeering under RICO, and, in at least one unprecedented case, terrorism-support conspiracy.
Consider just a sampling.
In December 2025, Alexis Aldair Chavez, a 19-year-old administrator of a 764 offshoot subgroup, pleaded guilty to racketeering conspiracy and multiple child pornography charges. Prosecutors detailed how Chavez coerced minors into escalating self-harm and animal cruelty, attempted to persuade a victim to overdose, and allegedly killed and recorded his own cat to gain access to higher-level chats.
In November, Erik Lee Madison, 20, was indicted for sexually exploiting and cyberstalking multiple minor girls, some as young as 13, over an extended period. The conduct was systematic, not impulsive.
That same month, federal authorities charged five men across multiple states in connection with “Greggy’s Cult,” a precursor network to 764, for operating an online extortion ring targeting children as young as 11.
Earlier in 2025, alleged leaders were arrested both domestically and overseas. One California teenager was indicted for animal crushing and sexual exploitation. In Arizona, Baron Cain Martin became the first known 764 affiliate charged with terrorism-support conspiracy, marking a turning point in how prosecutors classify the threat.
Across these cases, the pattern is consistent: victims aged 9 to 13, coercion escalating in stages, and a deliberate effort to isolate, degrade, and control.
The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children reported more than 2,000 abuse tips linked to these dynamics in the first nine months of 2025, double the prior year. That number reflects only reported cases.
Why the Law Is Playing Catch-Up
One of the most sobering admissions from DOJ officials is not about the cruelty itself, but about the law’s limitations.
Much of U.S. criminal law was written for a world where harm required physical proximity. Coercion statutes assumed tangible threats. Child exploitation laws focused on production and distribution of illegal images, not digital psychological manipulation designed to drive victims to harm themselves.
As a result, prosecutors have been forced to stretch existing statutes—cyberstalking, exploitation, racketeering—to fit conduct that clearly causes catastrophic harm but does not always map cleanly onto the code.
This is why bipartisan legislation is now being discussed to explicitly criminalize online coercion of minors to self-harm or commit violence. The goal is not to expand government power indiscriminately, but to close a gap that predators have learned to exploit with precision.
The Platforms Are Not Bystanders
764 does not operate on the dark web alone. It recruits, communicates, and controls through mainstream platforms used daily by millions of children.
Law enforcement officials acknowledge that tips from platforms and proactive monitoring have led to many arrests. That is the good news. The harder truth is that these networks thrive in environments optimized for anonymity, rapid connection, and minimal friction.
Gaming ecosystems, chat servers, and social platforms were not designed to function as unmoderated psychological battlegrounds. Yet that is what they have become for a small but highly dangerous subset of users.
This raises uncomfortable questions. What level of responsibility do platforms bear when their systems are repeatedly used for coercive harm? How transparent should moderation and reporting processes be when minors are involved? How much delay is acceptable when warning signs are visible but not yet criminal?
These questions are no longer abstract.
What Parents and Communities Can Do Right Now
While policymakers debate reforms, prevention remains critical.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has published guidance for parents, caregivers, and educators on recognizing grooming, sextortion, and coercive online networks. Red flags include sudden withdrawal, fixation on new online “friends,” unexplained injuries, drastic mood changes, and secrecy around devices. Suspected exploitation should be reported immediately via tips.fbi.gov or a local FBI field office.
The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children operates the CyberTipline at report.cybertip.org, which accepts anonymous reports and remains one of the most effective tools for triggering rapid intervention.
Through Homeland Security Investigations, Project iGuardian provides free educational presentations to schools and communities focused on online coercion, self-harm encouragement, and extremist grooming.
Experts consistently advise basic but essential steps: strict privacy settings, disabled location sharing, regular review of friend lists, and open conversations about online boundaries and mental health. When there are signs of distress or self-harm, immediate action matters. The 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline remains a critical resource.
Why DOJ’s Warnings Matter More Than the Headlines
Career DOJ officials do not go public unless silence has become riskier than disclosure. Their warnings about 764 are not about panic. They are about recognition.
This network represents a convergence of digital anonymity, psychological extremism, and legal blind spots. It weaponizes attention, shame, and fear against children who are often isolated long before the abuse begins.
The arrests show progress. But they also reveal scale.
The question now is whether Americans will continue to treat this as a niche internet horror or recognize it as a systemic threat operating in plain sight, demanding legal clarity, platform accountability, and parental vigilance.
Ignoring it will not make it disappear. The evidence suggests the opposite.
Disclaimer:
This op-ed is for informational and public-interest purposes only. It does not allege guilt beyond what has been established in court records and public filings, nor does it substitute for legal advice. Parents or guardians concerned about a child’s safety should contact local law enforcement or appropriate federal authorities immediately.
