Public Trust in Government, Media, and the Church Has Fallen. Is There Hope for Change in 2025?

With President-elect Donald Trump’s landslide victory and a Republican majority in both the Senate and the House, 2024 seems to be ending on a high note for conservatives. And yet, polls show that there is a significant lack of public trust in government. Not only that, but Americans are increasingly losing confidence in the media. What kind of obstacles or difficulties could this bring going into 2025?

Americans are navigating “through a rapidly evolving cultural and political landscape,” guest host Jody Hice said on Thursday’s episode of “Washington Watch.” Already, “there are certain … trends that reveal that we have both challenges as well as opportunities facing us.” As Hice explained, Americans seem to be going through a bit of a mental and spiritual crisis, with “Gen Z … bucking the downward trend of Bible engagement … [and] a troubling rise in things like anxiety and depression and suicide rates.”

Hice continued, “I look at 2025 right now on the horizon, [and there’s] no doubt there are many changes that are coming.” Most notably is the Republican control of the White House during “a time when overall confidence in government is probably at historic lows.” He asked, “Is there any way that we might see an increase in trust among the American people with the government?” George Barna, senior research fellow for the Center for Biblical Worldview at Family Research Council, joined the conversation.

“Well,” he said, “there are a couple of ways of looking at that.” In one sense, it “could easily get higher because it’s so low right now. There’s not too much lower that it can drop.” However, Barna admitted that any increase in the trust Americans have in their government likely won’t come easily. “[C]an it get higher?” he asked. “Yes, it can. But it’s going to take some significant steps forward. One of those would be casting a compelling vision of the future for our nation, and describing ways in which everyone in government is going to work together to see that happen.”

“People are tired of the standstill in government, of all the obstacles that they’re seeing … the outrageous amounts of money being spent, [and] the debt that’s being piled up,” Barna noted. Many Americans “also have this perception that a huge proportion of public officials are corrupt. And so, if we want to change people’s sense of trust in their government, they’re going to have to address those issues full on. They’re going to have to see actual leadership skills demonstrated.” Hice agreed, stating how “that’s a big hill to climb in the current environment.” But beyond Congress, he added, trust in the media has dwindled as well.

In fact, Hice explained how this year saw a significant increase in people who relied on social media platforms for gathering information. With this in mind, he asked, “Is that likely to change or not change in the coming year?” According to Barna, it is unlikely to change. Rather, as he put it, “I think what we’re going to see is a continued movement away from traditional sources of media … toward independent media.” Barna argued that this is because mainstream media now comes across as more subjective and biased than before. So, Americans are “going to look elsewhere,” he argued, further asserting that this also explains why podcasts, for instance, have “skyrocketed in terms of their popularity.”

Barna added, “Is traditional media going to be able to win back their popularity and the sense of trust of Americans? I don’t really see that happening in the next three or four years at least, because people now have set their minds to the point where they’re saying, ‘I can’t trust them. There’s no reason for me to even listen to them.’”

There’s one more notable area where people seem to be losing trust, Hice observed. “I hate to even bring this up, but there’s also seemingly … an increasing distrust for churches, a lack of trust. What do you think this next year holds for the church? Is there anything that they can do to become a greater influence in our culture?”

“[I]t’s interesting,” Barna replied, “because when you look at what’s going on with churches, in some ways it’s very similar to what’s happening with government, where people have less and less trust in the leadership of their churches.” Additionally, he explained how many Christians “feel like they’re not getting real value from their churches. And as we’ve been evaluating that, one of the things that’s become clear is that, often, that’s because they feel they’re not being given practical advice, practical guidance — real, tangible value for their life. … [This] come[s] from preaching God’s word on a consistent basis and breaking it down for people so that they know how to apply God’s truth principles in their personal life.”

But if churchgoers feel that church is not serving them, the question becomes why is that the case? Barna contended that a lot of it boils down to how churches “evaluate their success in ministry … based on how many people show up, how many programs they offer, how many … people they’ve hired, how much money they’re raising, [and] how much square footage they’ve built out.” This is problematic, Barna argued, because “if you think about those five objectives that most churches in America consistently measure to evaluate their ministry effectiveness, one conclusion we can come to is … [that they’re] bound to fail as a set of measures.”

“Why?” he asked. “Because Jesus didn’t die for any of those. That’s not what His life, His ministry, [or] His teaching is all about.” At the heart of the matter, Barna contended, is that “we’ve gotten away from the Bible not only in what we’re teaching, but even in how we’re measuring success and impact in ministry. … [I]n the last five years … half of all adults in America attending a church at least once a month on average [has gone] down to roughly one third of Americans. That’s a huge drop in a short period of time. And … the reason is they’re not getting biblical value from churches.”

“Wow,” Hice sighed. “[T]his is an extremely important issue because the well-being of our whole culture ultimately comes down to the spiritual health of the culture, which ultimately obviously rests upon the health of the church.” Considering this, he asked, “What does the church need to do to get people to come back to church? What kind of changes need to be taking place within a church body to fulfill the mission that God has given them to do?”

According to Barna, it “comes back to the whole issue of worldview. Why is it that young people in particular would say that they often are struggling with fear, depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts? … [I]t comes back to their perspectives about how life works. When you’ve got a young adult who doesn’t believe that there’s a God who’s all knowing, all powerful … merciful … just … involved and engaged in their lives, [and] when you’ve got generations of people who say that they don’t believe that there’s anything that happens after they die,” he urged that “it’s imperative that if … churches or families want to be uplifting [and] … a source of strength and hope and optimism, particularly for younger adults, well, then they’ve got to get back to God’s word.”

“[O]ur entire culture [is moving] in the wrong direction,” Barna warned, “and it’s up to churches and parents to raise their children up, to understand the truths of Scripture … to trust the Bible, to know God, to trust Jesus personally, [and] to understand that we’re sinners.” People must understand that “success in life isn’t by your material goods. … It’s not by your fame. It’s not by your popularity. It’s not even by feeling good. It’s about consistent obedience to God.” Another part of this issue is due to a lack of discipleship, he argued, and disciples who aren’t properly equipping themselves.

For anyone grappling with fear, anxiety, or depression, Barna concluded that “Jesus is the antidote. … The Bible shows us an alternative way of living,” and “the more that we can address worldview issues, the more that we can not only rebuild the church, but we can bring back a sense of life and hope and optimism to all Americans.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Assassination, an Extreme Form of Censorship

“Every two years the American politics industry fills the airwaves with the most virulent, scurrilous, wall-to-wall character assassination of nearly every political practitioner in the country – and then declares itself puzzled that America has lost trust in its politicians.” —  Charles Krauthammer

“Censorship reflects society’s lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime.” — Potter Stewart

“Nearly all Americans felt they knew JFK intimately, his charm and wit regularly lighting up the television screen at home. This is why polls showed that millions of Americans took his assassination like a ‘death in the family.'” — Vincent Bugliosi


It’s plain as day, the Stalinist Deep State wants Donald J. Trump dead.  How can any thinking person deny what we’ve seen?!

Jonathan T. Gilliam, 20-year US Navy SEAL, former FBI Special Agent, Federal Air Marshal, private security contractor, police officer, public speaker, and expert media commentator, was on Fox’s Stuart Varney show recently and was bumped off by Varney for telling the truth about the assassination attempts.  Gilliam stated that the Democrat Party wants Trump dead.

Watch the two-minute video:

Gilliam responded on Facebook: “The Marxist game of rhetoric proves the wanting motivation of the democrat party, while the repeating fatal funnels created by the secret service repeatedly leave wide open avenues of approach for assassins. These actions are consistent with willful and intentional negligence for the purpose of creating an opening for attackers.

“Add to this the past actions of the DOJ in falsifying evidence against Trump, using the court system as a weapon against Trump, putting prosecutors and agency directors in place who repeatedly display hate for Trump, all add to the totality of circumstances that lead to the conclusion of my analysis.”

In another post, Gilliam commented, “Palm Beach County Sherriff Ric Bradshaw, a democrat, said today that the Secret Service was “limited” in protection it was able to offer Donald J. Trump since he is not the sitting president.

“This is a repulsive comment, and an excuse for the Palm Beach Sheriff’s office failure to secure the vulnerable perimeter themselves. The tree line and fence where the shooter was hiding is only about 20 feet from a road that had zero monitoring by law enforcement.”

Vitriolic Hatred of Trump

It’s fine to dislike someone’s policies and argue against them in civil discourse while discussing the merits and consequences of their proposals.  But demonizing and diminishing the character of a candidate so that outliers receive the message of vitriolic hatred, intended or not, to physically harm a candidate, is unacceptable and dangerous political rhetoric. The Left is far too adept at this nefarious and vile oratory.

Dan Goldman (D-NY) recently stated, “Trump needs to be eliminated.”

Hillary Clinton has said many times that “Trump is a danger to our country.”

Every Democrat and mainstream media pundit have echoed the statement, “He’s a danger to our democracy.” They all must love democracies, which our founders hated. We are not a democracy, but a Representative Republic.  We don’t pledge allegiance to the democracy for which we stand, we pledge allegiance to the Republic.”  Their very utterances are lies.  Repeat a lie often enough and the people will believe it.

How many Stalinist Democrats have compared him to Nazi dictator Hitler because he wanted our border secured?  To compare someone to Hitler or any other despot shows not only a lack of civics education but a total failure to understand the depths of depravity Hitler and his ilk possessed.

Former bartender, Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez openly stated that Trump had “concentration camps” on the border for illegals, and there was no such thing. Yet, President Obama actually had cages.

Family Research Council reported that nearly a fifth of Americans wish former President Donald Trump had been slain by an assassin’s bullet. In a Rasmussen poll, 17% of surveyed voters answered “Yes” when asked if the U.S. would be “better off if Donald Trump had been killed…” Nearly 70% of voters responded “No” and 14% said that they were “not sure.”

Just the News reported that 28% of Democrats think America would be better off if Trump had been assassinated.

Demands for violence against Trump by Del. Stacey Plaskett, the Democrat non-voting delegate from the U.S. Virgin Islands, said, “He needs to be shot … stopped.”  You can listen to this moron here.

And if that’s not bad enough, check out this 2.20-minute video of the Left explicitly calling for political violence against Trump.

Biden has described Trump as the dangerous leader of an extremist movement as well as telling America to “put him in the bullseye” prior to the Crooks’ assassination attempt.

Harris tells us, “Trump is a danger to our troops, our security, and our democracy. The former president masterminded the worst attack on democracy since the Civil War.”

What an unbelievably stupid statement. Up to 850,000 Americans lost their lives in that war.

Harris screams, “Trump is a threat to our democracy and fundamental freedoms.”

There’s more.  The Daily Signal reported 12 influencers who called for violence against Trump, from Joe Scarborough and Rachel Maddow to Robert DeNiro and Linda Ronstadt.  Scarborough said last November that Trump “is running to end American democracy as we know it.”  Good!  Like our founders, we hate democracies.

Scarborough continued, “He will imprison, he will execute whoever he is allowed to imprison, execute, drive from the country. Just look at his past. It’s not really hard to read.”

Right Joe, this is exactly what the Left, your side Joe, has done to Trump.

Maddow compared Trump to Hitler and Mussolini…

Will Stancil, then a candidate for MN House of Representatives said, “So is there any reason Biden couldn’t just drone strike Trump and end this?”  He then deleted this post on social media.

“I’m hoping Trump’s right, that he IS treated worse than Lincoln,” Keith Olbermann said. “As I’ve said for 9 years: THAT HE’S CONVICTED, THEN DIES IN PRISON.”

Convicted of what?  Trying to save America from cultural Marxism?

A Democrat caller was cut off on CSPAN after praising the attempted assassinations of President Trump.

Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals wins again.  He told his followers, “Accuse your opponent of what you are doing, to create confusion and to inculcate voters against evidence of your own guilt.”

The constantly spewed hatred by the Left is called “psychological projection,” and it has found its target in the minds of deliberately dumbed down Marxist influenced Americans.  All they want is to achieve and maintain power. They seek to gain control over the population, and that starts by controlling the message, the narrative.

Is It Any Wonder Trump is a Target?

Both attempted assassins were not in BlackRock commercials, but both Crooks and Routh made donations to the Leftist organization, ActBlue. It is a leftwing dark money fundraising operation.  Donations to various front organizations are laundered through ActBlue and forwarded to Democrat candidates and causes, after ActBlue rakes off a nominal fee. It allows far left groups and Democratic politicians to fundraise without setting up an online donation infrastructure themselves.

Another ActBlue donor was arrested for allegedly threatening to torture and slaughter 6 Supreme Court justices.

The second assassination attempt occurred at Trump’s Florida Golf Course on September 15th.  The Secret Service admits the golf course wasn’t searched before the attempt. Acting SS head, Ronald Rowe, said the perimeter wasn’t searched because the golf outing wasn’t on Trump’s official calendar.

The DOJ just released a letter by Routh promising $150,000 to anyone who succeeds in assassinating President Trump.

Apparently, the SS isn’t to be held responsible if the protégé changes plans.

In a startling development, former Navy SEAL and Republican Congressman Eli Crane has issued a grave warning to former President Donald Trump, suggesting the presence of a mole within the Secret Service that could be jeopardizing his safety.

John Solomon of Just the News reported, “Congressman Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., said Thursday that a senior Homeland Security Department official approached him as a whistleblower shortly before the second assassination attempt on Donald Trump’s life and alleged U.S. officials are aware that five different “assassination teams” are pursuing the former president.”

Gaetz said he believes three of the teams are foreign inspired and two are domestic based.

Ryan Wesley Routh had set up a sniper nest twelve hours prior to President Trump’s arrival.  Routh dropped his rifle and took off in his SUV after SS spotted his rifle and took a shot at him.  Routh has a criminal record.

“My father hates Trump,” said the son of the would-be assassin, “like every reasonable person does.”

Martin County Sheriff William Snyder gave a press briefing and asked how Routh knew he’d be at the golf course and did he act alone or is he part of a supportive conspiracy.

CNBC reported that Routh had stalked Trump for months.  Routh also wrote a chilling letter, indicating he intended to kill Trump, months before the assassination attempt.  He had urged Iran to kill Trump as stated in his book, “Ukraine’s Unwinnable War.”

In an interview with Roger Stone, Jack Posobiec points out that the arrested shooter, had spent time in Ukraine as a mercenary and therefore there was a high likelihood that he had ties to the CIA and the national security apparatus.  Stone also expressed doubt that the House Republican investigation authorized by Speaker Johnson was sufficiently aggressive or motivated to get at the truth about who tried to kill the former president.

In a 2023 interview, Routh decried hurdles to get foreign soldiers for Kyiv.  In May 2022, Routh appeared in a propaganda video for Ukraine’s violent and notorious extremist-anti-Russian neo-Nazi Azov Battalion, allegedly supported by the CIA.  Zelensky put the Azov Battalion into the Ukrainian Army at the beginning of the war.  That fact was cut from the first Fox interview with Zelensky.

Mike Crispi asked on X why members of the Biden-Harris Administration, like Chef Jose Andres, was posing for photos with the would-be Trump assassin?  The chef was tapped by Biden to lead the President’s Council on Sports, Fitness and Nutrition.  He is also friends with Vladimir Zelensky and has cooked for Harris and Walz.

FBI Investigation

Jeffrey Veltri, special agent in charge, was ordered by superiors to scrub his social media accounts of anti-Trump vitriol before he was promoted last year to head the Miami field office, an FBI whistleblower reported to Congress.

Mr. Veltri is now leading the FBI’s investigation into Sunday’s second assassination attempt on President Trump in two months.

In the wake of a second assassination attempt against former President Donald J. Trump, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) unveiled a new, 22-page whistleblower report detailing the failures of the United States Secret Service in connection with the July 13 attempted assassination of the former president.

The House Judiciary Committee, led by Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH), heard from a whistleblower who came forward about the extreme bias that Veltri had toward Trump.

The whistleblower alleged that FBI Director Christopher Wray, Deputy Director Paul Abbate and Executive Assistant Director Jennifer Moore were involved in directing Veltri to clean up his social media prior to his promotion.

American Liberty News reported that the whistleblower said the bureau leaders weren’t concerned about Mr. Veltri’s “bias against Trump” but whether “information related to Veltri’s political bias can be removed from the public domain.”

He added that Mr. Veltri, who served as acting deputy assistant director of the Bureau’s Security Division until March, also oversaw efforts to suspend agents’ security clearances if they were right-wingers…i.e., they refused the Covid injections or voted for Trump, etc.

“The whistleblower’s allegations are serious and deserve further investigation,” said Chris Swecker, a lawyer and law enforcement professional who served as assistant director of the FBI’s criminal investigative division during the George W. Bush administration.

The Leftist corruption in the FBI and Secret Service goes right back to President Obama and his minions, Jarrett, Brennan, Clapper and Holder. Over the eight years of Obama’s presidency, they weaponized not only the federal intelligence community, but the entire federal government.  It was The Culmination of Marxist Infiltration.  The full story of this treason can be found in J. Michael Waller’s book, Big Intel: How the CIA and FBI Went from Cold War Heroes to Deep State Villains.

Jordan Schachtel asks seven questions about the second assassination attempt, one of which is, “Why can’t/won’t the federal government protect President Trump?”

The federal government spends trillions of dollars per year, and yet, the Republican candidate for president remains vulnerable.

Deliberate or negligence?

We know the answer.

Conclusion

Mike Waller tells us, “Diagramming today’s American intelligence community without labels might lead an old-school Sovietologist to guess it was an organizational chart of the old KGB, with every imaginable security and intelligence function permeating every corner of society.

“And then came the merger with Big Tech, quantum computing, billions of cameras and microphones, and the overwhelmingly ubiquitous Internet of Things.  Warnings of abuses, censorship, and illegal spying brushed off as the apoplectic mania of the hateful and the paranoid, turned out to be true.

“A combination of these transformations, the centralization of safely dispersed agencies, domestic intelligence with police powers, the merger with the world’s most powerful tech and social media conglomerates, and the internal politicization of totalitarian mindsets among all professional personnel—created the most threatening machinery of human control outside Communist China.

“The great institutions designed to protect us against the threat of Soviet Communism, in the end, absorbed and re-weaponized the most subversive Soviet plot ever launched.”

©2024. Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

Bill Gates says he has no plans to retire, ever, while joining the chorus for crackdowns on online speech

Much work still to be done for man who talks about need for depopulation while investing in toxic mRNA shots under guise of ‘saving’ lives. Now he’s demanding digital IDs to rein in ‘misinformation’. 

For Bill Gates, the thought of growing older and having to scale back his work to less than full-time scares him to death.

In fact, he says he wants to work another 20 to 30 years.

Gates, who recently turned 68, says he hopes to follow in the footsteps of his longtime friend Warren Buffett, who serves as chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway at age 94 and has no imminent plans to retire. Buffet has donated at least $43 billion to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation over the years, roughly half of all the money taken in by the foundation, so it’s easy to see why Bill Gates considers Buffett such a good friend.

Gates told CNBC:

“My friend Warren Buffett still comes into the office six days a week. So, I hope my health allows me to be like Warren.”

Gates told the outlet he still has so much he wants to accomplish. He remains a technology advisor for Microsoft and spends much of his time using his net worth — estimated at $128 billion— to fund potential solutions for the global issues he sees as most pressing. These include creating new synthetic mRNA “vaccines” for nearly every disease known to man, ending poverty, and pushing the climate change agenda, part of which involves a war on food (at least real food) and global depopulation.

Gates has openly called for depopulating the earth by “10 to 15 percent.”

So, unless the Lord decides otherwise, the world apparently has many more years to endure Bill Gates.

Folks like Gates, Fauci, Buffett, George Soros, Henry Kissinger, Klaus Schwab, they don’t tend to take their billions and ride off into the sunset. They stay busy. Kissinger lived to 100 and worked a full schedule almost to the end.

What’s that saying? Evil never rests?

Gates has also gone public recently with his antagonistic view of the First Amendment’s free speech protections, which he says hinder efforts to combat online “misinformation.”

According to Reclaim the Net, Gates erroneously cited the example that shouting “fire” in a crowded theater as an exception to free speech protections, a misrepresentation that has been clarified legally over time to be more nuanced in its application.

In his discussions, highlighted in an upcoming Netflix series and through dialogue with Stanford experts, Gates argues in favor of digital IDs to verify online identities to help curb this “misinformation.”

Reclaim the Net reports that the Gates Foundation has donated money to digital ID projects in the pastusing parts of Africa as a testing ground. The outlet writes:

“Gates’ proposed approach ostensibly aims to curb the spread of fake content and ensure that only verified individuals can publish information which means that online content can be matched to real-life identities.

“However, this raises significant concerns about privacy and the potential for excessive surveillance and control over digital spaces, something Gates has never been too keen to defend.”

Gates explained, as reported by CNET:

“The US is a tough one because we have the notion of the First Amendment and what are the exceptions like yelling ‘fire’ in a theater.”

Reclaim the Net rightly notes that Gates’ commentary on the First Amendment, using the flawed “fire in a theater” analogy suggests a readiness to dilute foundational free speech principles to implement digital solutions.

Gates added:

“I do think over time, with things like deepfakes, most of the time you’re online you’re going to want to be in an environment where the people are truly identified, that is they’re connected to a real-world identity that you trust, instead of just people saying whatever they want.”

Imagine that. People “saying whatever they want.” That used to be a bedrock American freedom that everyone took for granted — the right to express one’s opinion, anonymously or not.

Gates is just one of many elitist globalists in the West who have decided it’s time to declare war on freedom of speech.

France just recently arrested Telegram CEO Pavel Durov, because his platform does not allow the government to have a back door into the Telegram system for censorship.

Brazil just banned Elon Musk’s X platform.

Antony Blinken, the U.S. Secretary of State, recently admitted his federal agency is working on a project to use A.I. to monitor the internet and flag content considered by the federal government to be “misinformation.”

The United Nations has called for a crackdown on “misinformation” as has Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum.

Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, a notorious globalist, has also taken up the cause, calling in a recent interview for further restrictions on online speech.

Now is the time to speak up louder and more boldly than ever in favor of free speech. It might not be around much longer even in the limited doses we see today.

©2024. Leo Hohmann. All rights reserved.


Please visit Leo’s Newsletter Substack.

CBS Journalist in Gaza Tied to Terror, Investigation Finds

News producer for CBS praised terrorists, had contacts with terrorists as a member of the Gaza City municipality council.

A CBS News journalist in Gaza praised terrorists at an official event of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and had contacts with terrorists as a member of the Gaza City municipality council, an HonestReporting investigation revealed.

Marwan al-Ghoul has been working as a CBS News producer in Gaza for more than two decades, and his affiliation with a proscribed terror group, as well as his official public role in the Hamas-ruled Strip, raise alarming questions regarding the network’s journalistic standards.

Here are the details of what HonestReporting has discovered, based on Arabic media reports and Al-Ghoul’s Facebook page. It is the latest in a series of exposes unmasking Gaza’s biased reporters.

PFLP Links

In 2018, Al-Ghoul was among the speakers at an official PFLP event commemorating one of the prominent members of the terror group who was also Al-Ghoul’s relative.

According to the PFLP website, Al-Ghoul spoke on behalf of the family, which “expressed their gratitude to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and their esteemed comrades everywhere in the Palestinian land . . . for their . . . commitment to continue the struggle.”

Al-Ghoul praised the group’s terrorists, emphasizing his relative’s dedication to “maintaining the noble national values established by the leading martyrs, such as Al-Hakim, Abu Ali Mustafa, and Wadie Haddad, and those who followed their path of struggle and martyrdom.”

The PFLP is a proscribed terror group whose members were involved in deadly attacks against Israelis, including suicide bombings, stabbings and shootings.

The fact that Al-Ghoul was invited to address an official event of the group suggests his (and his family’s) affiliation with it is deep. The effect such an affiliation might have on his “journalistic” work cannot be underestimated.

Official Role

Al-Ghoul also cozied up with the terror group’s officials as a member of the Gaza City municipality council.

In 2022, a news report showed him smiling next to Gaza City mayor Yahya Sarraj as they hosted a PFLP delegation to discuss “issues of concern to citizens and ways of cooperating.”

What could possibly be discussed in such a meeting? How to better embed terrorists amid the civilian population?

That would not be far-fetched to assume, considering that back in 2022, the IDF revealed that an Islamic Jihad rocket was launched from a location owned by the Gaza City municipality. It misfired and killed two Palestinians.

Referring to the Gaza City mayor, the IDF spokesperson’s unit said at the time that “Sarraj chose to take care of the terrorist organization Islamic Jihad more than the residents of the city he heads, and he abused public space that belongs to the residents of the city for terror. This is how he harmed his citizens directly.”

According to an announcement on his Facebook page, Al-Ghoul resigned from his membership in the city council in November 2022. It’s not clear how long he served, why he resigned, whether he got paid to do the job, and if so by whom.

But according to a Fatah official quoted by WAFA, Gaza municipal council members are appointed by Hamas. And according to Reuters, Hamas is the body in charge of paying public sector workers.

The Palestinian Authority’s Ministry of Local Government may be in charge on paper, but de-facto, Hamas runs the show.

In any case, AL-Ghoul’s profile photo still appears on the official website of the Gaza city municipality, with a bio that presents him as a “media professional working with several Arab and international channels,” as well as a “member of the Municipal Council.”

What’s clear is that such a public role, in an enclave ruled by terrorists and where terrorists are hosted by the mayor, cannot be done without problematic ties. Especially for a journalist who needs to cover political and civilian issues objectively.

Celebrated Journalist

None of that seemed to bother CBS News, which either turned a blind eye to Al-Ghoul’s activities, or had no idea about them.

The network relied heavily on his work at the beginning of the Israel-Hamas war and praised his “journalism.”

Unsurprisingly, Al-Ghoul’s reports from Gaza are typical — they include destruction and victims, not Hamas terrorists.

Perhaps this is because he prayed for the “victory” of these terrorists in a Facebook post on October 7, as they massacred Israeli women and children:

And it might also be because, as the head of the Mayadeen media Group, Al-Ghoul had long lasting ties with the Hamas-run Government Media Office. In 2008, he delivered a panel in a workshop organized by the office on “the freedom of journalistic work under the Israeli occupation” (although Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005.)

Al-Ghoul is not a journalist. Like many other Gaza “reporters” who work for respected Western media outlets, he is a propagandist, at best, or a terror collaborator, at worst.

CBS News should not celebrate his work, but be ashamed of it.

EDITORS NOTE: This Honest Reporting column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Europe’s Free Speech Crackdown Could Be Coming For Americans Next, Advocates Warn

The arrest of Telegram’s founder endangers the future of free expression and privacy rights, multiple civil liberties advocates told the Caller.

Durov’s arrest was spearheaded by France’s OFMIN, the agency tasked with protecting children from violence. Various governments — the U.S., U.K. and the European Union (E.U.) — have advanced legislation aimed at protecting children online. However, critics say these policies could be weaponized to chill freedom of speech and greenlight government censorship.

“[Kid’s] safety is a very useful pretext for censors,” the Foundation for Freedom Online (FFO) told the Caller in a statement, comparing the issue to a “trojan horse.”

“Unlike other common excuses, like ‘disinformation’ and ‘hate speech,’ it is a real issue that the public is strongly concerned about.”

OFMIN issued the arrest warrant for a preliminary investigation into allegations of drug trafficking, fraud, cyberbullying, “organised crime and promotion of terrorism,” France 24 reported. Durov was ultimately charged Wednesday with complicity in the spread of sexual images of children.

Civil liberties groups decried the arrest and expressed concerns about the shaky future of free expression.

“Communications platforms like Telegram are a vital part of internet architecture and fundamental drivers of free speech,” Joe Mullin, Senior Policy Analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), said in a statement.

He noted that if Durov was arrested for Telegram’s moderation policies, it jeopardizes the privacy and free speech rights of users. Mullin commented on the lack of details about Durov’s arrest, noting how Telegram is used by “hundreds of millions” of individuals globally.

“Those users’ rights to free expression are at stake,” he concluded.

France’s Tribunal Judiciaire De Paris released a statement Monday listing out the 12 charges facing Durov.

The French government investigated Telegram because of the site’s moderation policies and lack of cooperation with authorities, arguing Telegram was “complicit” in certain illegal activities, according to the French outlet TF1 Info.

“I think Pavel’s arrest is concerning,” Toby Young, Founder and General Secretary of the U.K.-based Free Speech Union (FSU) told the Caller. “Would you arrest the head of the telephone company if someone made a threatening phone call? Pavel cannot be held responsible for everything that’s said on Telegram.”

He added that although some individuals will abuse Telegram’s lack of censorship, the platform provides people with the freedom to criticize authoritarian regimes.

Durov was born in Russia and is also a citizen of France and the United Arab Emirates. He fled Russia in 2014 after he refused to hand over encrypted data from the Russian social network VKontakte (VK) — which Durov founded — to authorities. He also denied a request by Russian authorities to ban opposition parties from the platform. 

“The specific nature of the charges against Durov are unclear at this time,” Aaron Terr, Director of Public Advocacy for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), told the Caller in a statement. “But to the extent Durov was arrested simply for failing to moderate Telegram more aggressively, that raises concerns about government control over online speech.”

Telegram released a statement claiming it adheres to E.U. regulations like the Digital Services Act (DSA).

The objective of the DSA is to “prevent illegal and harmful activities online and the spread of disinformation,” according to the European Commission.

“Arresting platform executives because of their alleged failures to sufficiently moderate content, even content as disturbing and harmful as content that harms children, starts us down a dangerous road that threatens free expression and gives too much power to the government to suppress speech,” Kate Ruane, the Director of the Center for Democracy and Technology’s (CDT) Free Expression Project, said in a statement to the Caller.

She explained how his arrest paves the way for governments to escalate censorship, threatening the privacy and freedom of expression of users.

“The dangers are all the more acute in the context of end-to-end encrypted services, where platforms do not even have access to the content of messages,” Ruane added.

The arrest of Durov is not the first time governments have taken action to address harmful online content, specifically for children.

A 2023 E.U. document obtained by WIRED detailed a proposal to force tech companies to scan users’ private messages for illegal content, potentially jeopardizing end-to-end encryption and digital privacy.

In the US, the Senate passed the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) — a bill aimed at protecting children from harmful content online — in July. Republican Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul wrote a letter to his colleagues warning of the possible dangers of KOSA. He claimed it would stifle the First Amendment. Paul pointed to the bill’s vague text, also calling it a “trojan horse.”

“Protecting children from serious harm is crucial, but governments too often try to achieve that goal through overly broad and vague regulations that open the door to unchecked censorship,” FIRE’s Aaron Terr told the Caller.

Critics attacked KOSA as overly broad legislation that posed threats to online anonymity. KOSA would be overseen by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), thus subject to the whims of whichever administration is in power. (RELATED: Jonathan Turley Slams ‘Global Censors,’ Says Americans Should Be Afraid After Telegram Arrest)

“Consult the text of KOSA and similar bills in other countries, and you’ll find vaguely defined prohibitions against online ‘bullying’ and ‘harassment’ – both tried-and-true fig leaves for suppressing political speech,” FFO stated.

Similarly, the U.K. instituted the Online Safety Act in 2023 to implement protections for adults and children online. The bill was criticized for potentially enabling government censorship of the internet.

After riots swept across the U.K. this summer, the government is considering enhancing the Online Safety Act to tackle “incitements to violence or hate speech,” Reuters reported.

The FSU’s Toby Young said there are methods for platforms to protect people online, including age verification for children and adjustable safety settings for adults.

“People are the best judges of what’s ‘safe’ for them to see, not governments,” Young told the Caller.

AUTHOR

Eireann Van Natta

General assignment reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

FLASHBACK: Arrested Telegram Founder Pavel Durov Told Tucker US Government Wanted To Spy On His Users

REPORT: Telegram Founder Pavel Durov Arrested At French Airport

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Why did Zuckerberg come clean on his collusion with feds to silence the voices of conservative Americans?

Mark Zuckerberg says he suddenly “regrets” that his company, Meta, bowed to the Biden regime’s pressure to censor content on Facebook, saying in a letter that the interference was “wrong” and he plans to push back if it happens again.

Should we take him seriously? Is this a genuine mia culpa?

According to an article in Politico, Zuckerberg aired his grievances in a letter Monday to the House Judiciary Committee in response to its investigation into content moderation on online platforms. Zuckerberg detailed how senior administration officials leaned on the company to censor certain posts about Covid-19, including humor and satire, and “expressed a lot of frustration” when the social media platform resisted.

Zuckerberg wrote:

“I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it. I feel strongly that we should not compromise our content standards due to pressure from any Administration in either direction — and we’re ready to push back if something like this happens again.”

Zuckerberg also expressed regret in the letter for his company’s disgusting effort to memory-hole content related to coverage by the New York Post about Hunter Biden ahead of the 2020 election. This is the story, you will remember, that the FBI falsely warned may have been planted as “Russian disinformation.”

“It’s since been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we shouldn’t have demoted the story,” he wrote.

Republicans on the committee, led by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, celebrated the letter in a long series of posts on X, calling it a “big win for free speech.”

But is it? What, if anything, is Congress going to do about this revelation of guilt, which proves what we already knew about how the government outsources its violations of the First Amendment to its partners in the private sector known as Big Tech.

Robert F. Kennedy has an active lawsuit against the federal government and has explained to Tucker Carlson in a recent interview just how involved the feds were in monitoring the social media platforms and then pressuring them to delete or downplay information that the government didn’t want American citizens to know. It didn’t even matter if the information was true. In fact, it was the truth about Covd and the 2020 election that the government feared the most.

In the video below, fast-forward to the 15:47 mark and listen for the next five minutes or so.

<

If you look at Zuckerberg’s history, he tends to play ball with whatever government holds the reins of power. He cooperates with Chinese communists as easily as he does American globalists. Whatever he needs to do to keep raking in the billions.

Perhaps this is why Zuckerberg decided to come clean at this moment in time. He knows RFK Jr. has teamed up with Trump and the super-lawyer RFK will bring the receipts to the table regarding government censorship if given half a chance. What if Trump wins and makes RFK his attorney general? If Trump wins, Zuckerberg can now say he’s come clean and changed course. This is Zuckerberg covering all his bases. He is no friend of the First Amendment.

©2024. Leo Hohmann. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Facebook Founder Confesses Censorship of Conservatives Was Ordered by Biden-Harris Admin.


Please visit LeoHohmann.com for:

Investigative reporting on globalism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism and where politics, culture and religion intersect.