Organize for Attack!

On Independence Day, nearly a dozen black-garbed individuals, some equipped with body armor and firearms, allegedly orchestrated a premeditated ambush on law enforcement outside the Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas. According to the federal criminal complaint, the group began firing on the center with fireworks and spray-painting anti-ICE and pro-Antifa slogans on vehicles until law enforcement moved to secure the area. Once law enforcement came out of the building, two assailants opened fire with AR-15s, firing 20-30 rounds and wounding at least one officer.

The attack was entirely foreseeable. Antifa militants motivated by virulent rhetoric have repeatedly doxxed and targeted ICE, going all the way back to Antifa member Willem Von Spronsen’s 2019 attack on a Tacoma, Washington, ICE detention facility. Spronsen was killed by responding officers and became a popular anarchist martyr.

What are these attackers seeking to achieve with their violence? Most people believe that terrorism of this sort is intended to create support from the public. But the majority of Americans, including legal immigrants, support deporting illegal aliens, especially dangerous criminals. Do Antifa militants think they can win over the public with acts of violence?

Some answers to the alleged attackers’ motivations might be found in literature captured by law enforcement. One pamphlet seized by police is entitled “Insurrectionary Anarchism: Organizing For Attack!” which was authored anonymously in 2003 (and is available online).

The pamphlet traces a history of insurrectionary anarchist thought. It begins with early anarchist thinker Mikhail Bakunin in 1871 and then goes to Luigi Galleani, an Italian-American anarchist who popularized the concept of “propaganda of the deed,” and Italian anarchist Alfredo Bonnano, whose “Why we are Insurrectionary Anarchists” is cited in its entirety.

Central to insurrectionary anarchist thinking is the notion that the violent terrorist act is simultaneously a means and an end. The attack and the propaganda are a unified whole.

The author writes, “It is through acting and learning to act, not propaganda, that we will open the path to insurrection—although obviously analysis and discussion have a role in clarifying how to act. Waiting only teaches waiting; in acting one learns to act.”

Put bluntly, the message of attempting to murder ICE agents is that ICE agents should be murdered and that others should be encouraged to do the same.

Insurrectionary anarchism contains within its logic an inherent critique of other leftist, and especially Marxist-Leninist, organizing principles. Leninists emphasize determining the “correlation of forces,” an analysis of the total historic, economic, and material differences between the warring classes before acting. Maoists seek to ensure they have the correct “mass line”—that is, remaining in step with “the people” amongst whom the Maoist guerrilla seeks to hide.

But for the insurrectionary anarchist, the events that provoke and sustain revolutions cannot truly be understood, and attempts to do so result in wasted opportunities. The author writes that

contrary to the mathematicians of the grand revolutionary parties, it is never possible to see the outcome of a specific struggle in advance. Even a limited struggle can have the most unexpected consequences. The passage from the various insurrections—limited and circumscribed—to revolution can never be guaranteed in advance by any method, nor can one know in advance that present actions will not lead to a future insurrectionary moment.

These differences in perspectives may seem like meaningless revolutionary navel-gazing to the outsider. But since the 2020 George Floyd Uprising (as they call it), there has been growing hostility between the anarchists who overwhelmingly provided the street muscle for the violent riots and the Communist Party organizers who utilized the riots to build up structures and organizations.

Anarchists argue that Marxists and progressives took advantage of their bloodshed to “organize” and fundraise, wasting the opportunity the riots were intended to create. As a group of black Insurrectionary Anarchists wrote in a 2022 manifesto entitled “Black Armed Joy,”

Despite lifting up figures such as Assata, they label any sort of Black rebellious activity as “too fast” or “not ready” or complain about the ultra-left “ruining” their plans for revolution despite the rebellious actions of Black youth in the summer of 2020. They do not want black people to study the Black Liberation Army’s tactics. They wish to erase [Black Liberation Army member and Black anarchist] Kuwasi Balagoon and his rebellious ways. They wish to erase how Assata Shakur was liberated. They wish to erase the general strike of the Slaves. They wish to ignore the Maroons. They just want us to participate in their reformist campaigns to “Defund the Police” or “Community Control of the Police.” The Black insurrectionary must reject these positions.

These accusations of betrayal reached a fever pitch in the aftermath of the Los Angeles anti-ICE riots. Unity of Fields, a pro-terrorism propaganda outlet currently promoting a crowdfunding effort for the alleged perpetrators of the Alvarado attack, labeled the allegedly Chinese-funded Maoist Party for Socialism and Liberation, which helped organize the L.A. protests, as part of a “left counterinsurgency” because it failed to fully back calls for violence against ICE in Los Angeles.

While such apparent infighting might seem like a general sign of the radical Left’s weakness, in reality such conflicts are common during waves of increasing left-wing activation. Despite their internal disagreement, the various revolutionary factions can often advance their cause(s) against shared enemies, and eventually coalesce around shared gains.

While there are historic examples of anarchist-Communist infighting that sink prospective revolution (think the Spanish Civil War), there’s also a historical record of anarchists helping breach a hole through which the forces of revolution can pour through (the Russian Revolution comes to mind). In neither case does it typically end well for the anarchist, but that’s small comfort to the rest of us.

In the meantime, it should be understood that Antifa and their fellow anarchist extremists mean exactly what they say when they say “Kill ICE.”

Originally published by The American Mind.

AUTHOR

Kyle Shideler

Director and Senior Analyst for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Securty Policy column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Meet The Hyper-Lib Taking Over The White House Press Corps

A new president took the helm of the White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) on Tuesday, but CBS News’s Weija Jiang’s tenure seemingly won’t be much of a departure from the reign of her predecessor.

Jiang has served as CBS’ Senior White House correspondent since 2018 and will serve as president of the WHCA for a year. She was first elected to a three-year WHCA board position in 2023. She is taking over as president from Eugene Daniels — formerly Politico’s White House correspondent and now MSNBC’s senior Washington correspondent.

Daniels’ tenure was marked by cries that the Trump administration was a major threat to press freedom, even while President Donald Trump made himself readily available for gaggles, press conferences, briefings, and interviews.

Jiang’s reporting history suggests it’s unlikely she will take a much different posture toward the Trump administration.

The CBS News correspondent sparred with Trump amid the 2020 Covid pandemic. She and the president got into a back-and-forth over the rapidity of his administration’s response in April that year, with her tacitly alleging that Trump had delayed widespread Covid testing to hide the total number of cases.

“Did your delay in embracing wide-spread testing have anything to do with a desire to suppress the official number of U.S. cases and deaths as you try to re-open the country?” Jiang asked.

“No, we just wanted to make sure that we had the proper machinery apparatus and everything else out there before people started wasting money,” Trump replied. “Method of saving money.”

Jiang also claimed a White House official called the virus the “Kung-Flu” to her face and insinuated administration officials might be making racist comments behind closed doors.

“Makes me wonder what they’re calling it behind my back,” she wrote on X in March 2020.

During the Biden administration, however, Jiang served as a useful parrot for the president and his staff’s preferred narratives.

In February 2024, Biden bumbled a question about the Israel-Hamas war by mixing up the presidents of Mexico and Egypt. Biden referred to Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi as “the president of Mexico.”

Jiang opted to exclude this mistake in her coverage of Biden’s press conference, instead merely noting that Biden had elsewhere offered his  “sharpest criticism yet of Israel.”

In March 2024, Jiang excused Biden’s apparent inability to remember key details while speaking with Special Counsel Robert Hur in a probe about Biden’s mishandling of classified documents. Hur alleged in a report about the interview that the president could not remember the year his son Beau died and whether or not he was Vice President in 2009.

Jiang, however, accused Hur of lying about Biden’s memory lapses in an X post following the release of the interview transcript.

“The President was fired up about Hur’s claim that he couldn’t remember when his son Beau died… because it was false,” Jiang wrote. “He immediately said the date, according to the interview transcript.”

Jiang doubled down during an on-air hit on CBS News.

“Many of the details that Biden couldn’t recall, such as how boxes were packed up, how they were transported, those are things that would likely be tricky for anyone to remember decades later,” Jiang said. “It is notable though that [Special Counsel Robert] Hur wrote that Biden could not remember when his son Beau died. That’s just not true.”

The Hur transcript, however, indicates that while Biden remembered the date — May 30 — when Beau died, but could not recall the year.

“He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died,” Hur wrote.

More recently, Jiang covered events at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) during last year’s presidential election and praised then-Vice President Kamala Harris for her appeals to Gen-Z voters.

Jiang pointed to pop star Charli XCX’s June 2024 “kamala IS brat” tweet, unflinchingly parroting Gen Z explanations as to why the comparison resonated.

“It’s a vibe,” Jiang said, describing how others explained the term to her. “It is a spirit that you encompass that really addresses the feminine spirit, the feral-ness of women using their voices, and of being unapologetically yourself.”

“That is a compliment for anybody who might have questions,” Jiang continued. “It’s really about owning who you are and being able to roll with that, even if sometimes it means laughing at yourself, being a little self-deprecating, being a little bit fun.”

Jiang praised Tim Walz during additional coverage at the DNC. remarking on his ability to be “an attack dog” who “has a way of attacking, but still coming across as joyful and jolly.”

Daniels indicated he is proud to pass the torch to Jiang.

The association is in amazing hands w/ @weijiaShe will lead with strength, perseverance, humility and love,” Daniels wrote in a send-off post on X. 

AUTHOR

Tayte Christensen

Contributor

RELATED ARTICLES:

White House Press Selects Queer, Anti-Racist ‘Comedian’ To Host Trump’s Correspondents’ Dinner

The White House Correspondents’ Dinner Was A Monument To Corporate Press’ Self-Importance And Left-Wing Cronyism

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

The Dr. Rich Swier Report for July 17, 2025

The Dr. Rich Swier Report for July 17, 2025

View this email in your browser

100% of 2025 Job Growth Went to Americans Thanks to Mass Deportations

‘You Can’t Use This Feature Right Now’ — How Meta’s Facebook Censors Americans using the ‘Spam Scam’

‘Woke,’ ‘Weak,’ and ‘Out of Touch’: The Crisis of the Democratic Brand

Republicans Advances Recission Bill—With Vice President Vance Breaking Tie Vote

VIDEO: Exodus Cry Films launches July 30, 2025—World Day Against Trafficking in Persons

Dismantling Judeo-Christian Values, One Case at a Time?

VIDEO OF THE WEEK
Scottie Scheffler: “I’d much rather be a great father than a great golfer.”

Twitter   Facebook  Website

Copyright © DrRichSwier.com, LLC, All rights reserved.

Iran: Political Death Sentences Surge in Brutal Crackdown on Minorities

The Iranian government is rapidly increasing its use of the death penalty as a political weapon to crush dissent, terrorize restive ethnic minorities, and tighten its grip on power following its recent conflict with Israel, the Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI) said today.

In recent weeks, courts have sentenced numerous political prisoners—many of them Kurds and Arabs, but also participants in the 2022 Woman, Life, Freedom protests—to death on alleged national security charges, following grossly unfair trials where forced “confessions” extracted under torture replaced any real evidence, according to research undertaken by CHRI.

“These are not trials. They are state-orchestrated performances meant to deliver death and instill fear,” said Bahar Ghandehari, CHRI’s Director of Advocacy.

“We are witnessing a coordinated state campaign to terrorize Kurdish and Arab communities who have not only endured decades of systemic state persecution, but have also stood at the forefront of many peaceful anti-government protests demanding freedom, justice, and dignity,” Ghandehari said.

“They now find themselves singled out as scapegoats by a regime desperate to reassert control after the massive Woman, Life, Freedom protests of 2022 and its military confrontation with Israel in 2025,” she added.

These executions violate not only domestic constitutional protections but also numerous international legal standards to which Iran is bound. Halting this systematic wave of executions must become an urgent global demand.

CHRI urges the UN and governments to forcefully condemn these death sentences and:

  • Demand that the Iranian authorities immediately halt all pending executions and institute a moratorium on all political death sentences;
  • Call for independent investigations of any allegations of torture or trial violations;
  • Impose targeted sanctions against Iranian judges, intelligence agents, and other officials involved in these violations, including through mechanisms such as the Magnitsky Act;
  • Governments should also pursue prosecution of responsible officials in national courts under the principle of universal jurisdiction.

“Given the scale and systematic nature of these crimes, particularly when targeted against specific ethnic and political groups, such actions may fall under the definition of crimes against humanity as outlined in Article 7 of the Rome Statute,” said Saeid Dehghan, a prominent human rights lawyer and director of the Parsi Law Collective.

“There is an urgent need for immediate international action, including a resolution by the UN General Assembly and a call on the Human Rights Council to establish an independent investigative committee,” Dehghan said.

Five Kurdish Protesters Condemned to Die: No Evidence, Just Torture

On July 6, 2025, the Revolutionary Court in Urmia, presided over by Judge Reza Najafzadeh, sentenced five Kurdish protestors—Ali (Soran) Ghasemi, Pejman Soltani, Kaveh Salehi, Rezgar Beigzadeh Babamiri, and Teyfour Salimi Babamiri—to multiple death sentences, for a total of 11 death sentences, in addition to lengthy prison terms and heavy fines. These individuals were arrested during the Woman, Life, Freedom protests and tried in a case with multiple other defendants.

Additionally, a separate court in West Azerbaijan Province had earlier sentenced Pejman Soltani to death under qisas (retribution) for the alleged murder of a security officer. Rezgar Beigzadeh Babamiri was sentenced to 15 years for allegedly ordering the murder, and Ghasemi to over 10 years for aiding and abetting. Kaveh Salehi was acquitted in that case.

These individuals were also sentenced to 5 to 15 years in prison and ordered to pay combined monetary penalties of 358 million tomans for offenses such as alleged “collaboration with Israel,” “smuggling Starlink satellite devices,” “propaganda against the state,” and “conspiracy to disrupt national security.”

Additionally, eight other defendants in the same case—Siamak Hiyasi, Sowareh Azizzadeh, Heyman Kermanj, Hossein Hosseinzadeh, Jalil Moloudi, Ahmad Mamehzadeh, Javanmard Mamkhosravi, and Salar Daghdar—were sentenced to prison terms and fines on charges including “membership in a rebel group,” “collaboration with a hostile government,” and “insulting the Supreme Leader.” Seven of them had previously been released on bail.

According to CHRI’s findings, all of these defendants’ cases, which together totaled 14 cases, were built solely on reports by the Intelligence Ministry and forced “confessions” obtained under torture during detention, with no independent or credible evidence presented in court. All of the accused were denied access to legal counsel and family visits during the first four months of detention.

“There is no actual evidence. All charges rely on forced confessions.”

Dr. Salahuddin Ahmadi, another defendant, was acquitted but now faces a separate criminal case for allegedly “financing terrorism.” A source told CHRI, these accusations stem from his provision of medicine to injured protesters.

A source familiar with the case told CHRI:

“Aside from a few seized Starlink devices, there is no actual evidence. All charges rely on forced confessions. Some of the accused were simply satellite dish installers. One of them, a pharmacist, was charged with ‘financing terrorism’ for providing medicine to injured protesters—an accusation applied to seven others in the case for similar reasons.”

“Blindfolded and handcuffed, I was tied to a chair while agents applied electric shocks.”

In a letter from Urmia Central Prison dated April 10, 2025, Rezgar Beigzadeh Babamiri, who was also arrested for providing medical aid to injured protesters during the Woman, Life, Freedom protests, detailed the torture he endured, including mock executions, waterboarding, electric shocks, and sleep deprivation, to extract forced confessions. He added that his formal complaint against the perpetrators was ignored.

“Handcuffed, shackled and blindfolded, I was continuously mocked while they pulled the triggers of their weapons, telling me, ‘We haven’t registered your name anywhere as a prisoner, so when you die under interrogations, it’ll be easy to dump your body like those of the rioters (protesters), in the sewage canals, lakes and mass graves.’

“Blindfolded and handcuffed, I was tied to a chair with a rope, while intelligence agents applied electric shocks to my earlobes, testicles, nipples, spine, sides, armpits, thighs, and temples, inflicting unbearable pain to force me to write or say what they wanted on camera.

“They would suddenly take me to an unknown room in the middle of the night and force me to stand on a stool with a noose around my neck for hours on end and threaten to secretly and anonymously execute me, attempting to intimidate me as much as possible.

“For several consecutive days and nights, Intelligence Department agents kept disturbing me, making noise, shouting insults, entering my cell, beating me, and using any means to keep me from sleeping. Their goal was to break my resistance so that I would write their dictated scenarios and repeat it on camera. All the while, my only crime was helping fellow human beings.

“During the 130 consecutive days of detention and torture, aside from bruises all over my body, I lost hearing in my left ear due to the blows to my head by the interrogators and couldn’t hear for three months. Later, the ruptured eardrum in my left ear gradually regained some hearing, but during the recovery period, it became severely infected multiple times.”

Judge in response to reports of torture: “Did you expect them to serve you kebab?’”

Beigzadeh Babamiri added that the judge was aware of the torture endured by him and his co-defendant:

“How could the Urmia Revolutionary Court and Judge Reza Najafzadeh, despite the legal briefs submitted by me and other defendants detailing the types of torture suffered by the 14 defendants in this case, respond in court by simply saying the shameful sentence: ‘Did you expect them to serve you kebab?’

“Judicial independence is nothing but a myth in this country. The torturer is fully protected while the victim is placed under threat, pressure, and additional punishments. The goal of the security forces is not to maintain public safety, but rather to serve their superiors and exercise blind ethnic and sectarian prejudice. Torture and fabricated cases are standard practices and tools of oppressive forces.”

Breakdown of the death sentences against 5 protesters: 

  1. Ali (Soran) Ghasemi has been sentenced to three death sentences by a Revolutionary Court in Urmia for the charges of “armed rebellion,” “enmity against God,” and “leading and forming a rebel group.” In a separate ruling by the criminal court, he was also sentenced to 10 years and 1 day in prison for aiding and abetting murder.” In addition, he received further prison time and a financial fine on alleged charges such as “cooperation with Israel,” “smuggling Starlink satellite equipment,” and “propaganda against the state.”
  2. Pejman Soltani has received three death sentences: two for “armed rebellion” and “enmity against God,” by a Revolutionary Court in Urmia and one from the juvenile criminal court for premeditated murder (qisas). He was also sentenced to multiple years of imprisonment and a financial fine for alleged charges such as “cooperation with Israel,” “smuggling Starlink satellite equipment,” and “propaganda against the state.”
  3. Kaveh Salehi was sentenced to two death sentences by a Revolutionary Court in Urmia on charges of “armed rebellion” and “enmity against God.” He was acquitted of murder charges in the separate case but was still sentenced to additional years in prison and fined for security-related charges similar to those faced by the others.
  4. Rezgar Beigzadeh Babamiri was sentenced to three death sentences for “armed rebellion,” “leading a rebel group,” and one for “spying for Israel.” He also received 15 years in prison from the criminal court for murder, and additional prison terms and fines for alleged charges such as “cooperation with Israel,” “smuggling Starlink satellite equipment,” and “propaganda against the state.”
  5. Teyfour Salimi Babamiri, who had previously been temporarily released on bail, was sentenced to one death sentence for allegedly leading the same “rebel group.” He also received further prison time and a fine for alleged charges such as “cooperation with Israel,” “smuggling Starlink satellite equipment,” and “propaganda against the state.”

In July 2024, the Tasnim News Agency, affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), published footage of forced “confessions” of four of the detainees, despite their consistent claims that these statements were made under physical and psychological torture.

Arab and Lur Political Prisoners Next in Line for Execution

The recent crackdown is not limited to Kurdish activists. On July 11, it was reported that three Arab political prisoners—Ali MojadamMoein Khenfari, and Mohammadreza Mojadam—were transferred from the general ward of Sepidar Prison in Ahvaz to solitary confinement on June 25, 2025. They were sentenced to death on charges that included “collaboration with anti-regime groups” and “acting against national security.” They had previously endured prolonged solitary confinement, violent interrogations, and forced “confessions.”

The three were reportedly able to make brief phone calls to their families on July 13, after 17 days of complete incommunicado detention.

On July 11, Branch 1 of the Ahvaz Revolutionary Court, presided over by Judge Adibimehr, sentenced Farshad EtemadifarMasoud Jamei, and Alireza Mordasi each to two death sentences and one year in prison on charges of “corruption on earth,” “membership in rebel groups,” and “propaganda against the regime.” Jamei and Alireza Mordasi belong to Iran’s Arab ethnic minority, while Etemadifar is from the Lur ethnic group.

A source familiar with the case told CHRI:

“The judicial process for these individuals was marked by violations of fundamental fair trial principles, including lack of effective access to legal counsel, security pressures, and confessions obtained under duress.”

In the same case, two others—Saman Hormatnejad and Davood Hormatnejad—received prison sentences of 12 and 15 years, respectively. All five were arrested in 2023.

Masoud Jamei’s case is especially dire. A former employee of the National Iranian Oil Company, Jamei, 47, suffers from stomach cancer, liver disease, high blood pressure, and a severe internal infection. He was arrested in August 2023 and reportedly subjected to intense torture, and has since been denied critical medical treatment during his 13 months of detention in Sheiban Prison.

In March 2025, Jamei and his wife Zeinab Hezbahpour and their children Nahid (22), Dalal (20), and Roghieh (16) were tried in the Bavi Revolutionary Court on charges of alleged affiliation with anti-government groups. Details of their legal proceedings and charges remain unknown.

A Call for Global Red Lines

The Islamic Republic of Iran is now running one of the world’s most aggressive execution campaigns targeting peaceful protesters, political dissidents, and minority communities, under the pretense of national security. These death sentences, based on torturefabricated charges, and ethnic profiling, amount to state-sponsored murder. The international community should not remain silent as the Iranian government escalates this war on its own citizens, CHRI stressed.

“The Iranian regime is testing the world’s moral boundaries. Every death sentence issued under torture and false confession is a challenge to international law, and every silent response from the global community is a tacit green light for further executions,” said Ghandehari.

“The international community must act now—not after the gallows have done their work and these voices are permanently silenced,” she added.

This press release was updated to reflect that Massoud Jamei and Alireza Mardasi are from Iran’s Arab minority, while Farshad Etemadifar belongs to the Lur ethnic group.

©2025 , All rights reserved.


This report was made possible by donations from readers like you. Help us continue our mission by making a tax-deductible donation.

EXCLUSIVE: Epstein-Funded MIT Lab Hosted Panel On Giving Pedos Child Sex Robots

A Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) lab previously funded in part by Jeffrey Epstein hosted a panel where attendees openly discussed the idea of using “child-size sex robots” to treat pedophiles.

The MIT Media Lab’s July 2016 conference on research questions without “social and moral constraints” included a panel discussion arguing that pedophilia should not be seen as a “moral failing” but rather a medical condition and that the development of “child-size sex robots” is an inevitability, a transcript and video of the event shows.

The Media Lab’s ties to the disgraced financier span a 17-year period in which the lab readily accepted Epstein’s cash donations and facilitated introductions with its scientists on-campus and off, according to a 2020 fact-finding report commissioned by the university. The lab’s director contemplated inviting Epstein to one of its conferences in July 2016, the report states, the same month of the conference where the child-size sex robots were proposed, the only conference the lab hosted that month, according to its website.

“Once child-size sex robots hit the market, which they will, is the use of these robots going to be a healthy outlet for people to express these sexual urges and thus protect children and reduce child abuse? Or is the use of these robots going to encourage, normalize, propagate that behavior?” said one panelist. “We can’t research it [because of reporting restrictions]. But I do wonder whether they’re doing more harm than good in these cases. Because as much as people want these sexual urges — the urges, not the act — to be a moral failing, they are a psychological issue.”

“The issue of normalization, as you brought up. How does that change of society as a whole, and the acceptance of certain kinds of behavior?” another panelist said, while warning about the possibility of the robots being diverted to a black market for entertainment. “The notion of studying sexual deviance and actual normal humans interacting with these things can provide the basis for a deeper understanding of how that operates.”

The previously unreported panel comes to light as the public’s gaze once again fixates on Epstein’s ties to academia, Wall Street and government amid the Trump administration’s move to close the book on investigating the matter any further. The Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation announced in a July 7 memo that they had uncovered no “client list” and would not make further disclosures, spurring incredulity among the president’s supporters and driving a fracture between U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino. The memo also stated “Epstein harmed over 1,000 victims.”

MIT did not answer questions from the Daily Caller News Foundation about whether the MIT Media Lab had considered inviting Epstein to the conference where “child-size sex robots” were discussed.

“The panel referenced occurred nearly a decade ago, and we can’t comment on individual programming decisions a department made. Thousands of events take place on our campus each year,” said MIT spokesperson Kimberly Allen in a statement to the DCNF. “As a general practice, we also don’t comment on the individually held and freely expressed views of any particular community member. The views of any individual community member are their own.”

“Following the independent investigation and report you reference, MIT took a number of steps, including institutional reforms to our gift acceptance processes and donating to four nonprofits supporting survivors of sexual abuse,” Allen said.

MIT shuttered its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) office on May 28 amid President Donald Trump’s crackdown on the Ivy League. But MIT has previously received congressional scrutiny for research on censoring what researchers deemed to be “dangerous digital content” aimed at American conservatives.

A slide from a presentation at the 2016 “Forbidden Research” conference hosted by MIT Media Lab.

The July 2016 conference coincided with frequent contact between Epstein and the Media Lab through then-MIT Media Lab Director Joi Ito, who accepted money from Epstein for the media lab and for his private venture capital funds. Ito also visited Epstein’s properties, including the island of Little St. James. Epstein donated $525,000 to the lab from 2013 to 2017, well after his 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from someone under the age of 18, according to the 2020 fact-finding report.

Ito did not respond to a request for comment. In a 2019 public statement, Ito apologized for his “error in judgement” and said he never heard Epstein discuss his sexual crimes. In that statement, he also promised to “raise an amount equivalent to the donations the Media Lab received from Epstein and will direct those funds to non-profits that focus on supporting survivors of trafficking. I will also return the money that Epstein has invested in my investment funds.”

Epstein’s name was mentioned in connection to a July 2016 conference in the 2020 report, with Ito asking Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman – a member of the lab’s advisory council – whether to invite the disgraced financier to a conference that same month out of concerns he’d be recognized. People may “see him and maybe know he’s involved,” Ito wrote, per a footnote in the report. The conference where the “child-size sex robots” concept was pitched was the only conference in July 2016, the lab’s website shows. Epstein ultimately did not attend.

LinkedIn Co-founder Reid Hoffman and Former MIT Media Lab Director Joi Ito are pictured awarding the labs “Disobedience Awards” in 2018. Photo credit: (MIT Media Lab, Flickr, Creative Commons)

Epstein did visit the MIT campus at least nine times between 2013 and 2017, the report states. Hoffman joined one of these meetings. The report states Epstein brought “assistants” who were young women “on some visits” to campus, including a visit in 2016, which made staff uncomfortable.

Ito and Hoffman remain connected. On July 11, 2025, Ito announced a “Radical Transformation Award” and $68,000 cash prize underwritten by Hoffman at Chiba Institute of Technology in Japan. Neither Hoffman nor the Chiba Institute responded to requests for comment.

The July 2016 conference also introduced for the first time the idea of a “Disobedience Award” – a $250,000 award underwritten by Hoffman, along with an orb-shaped trophy designed by former MIT Media Lab Associate Professor of Media Arts and Sciences Neri Oxman. Epstein himself received one of these orbs for his status as a donor to the MIT Media Lab, the Boston Globe reported. 

Oxman did not respond to a request for comment.

A 2018 Disobedience Award (Photo credit: Mediated Matter Group, Creative Commons)

The MIT Media Lab began giving the Disobedience Awards at the subsequent summer conference, renamed from “Forbidden Research” to Defiance in 2017. The Media Lab hosted a ceremony honoring more Disobedience Awards recipients in November 2018.

Epstein said in a 2017 interview with Science Magazine that he supported the MIT Media Lab because the researchers there are “rebels who don’t fit in.”

“The MIT [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] Media Lab is a good example,” Epstein said. “I would say 25% of the kids there are autistic, on the spectrum. They don’t really work in groups.”

“It’s my natural bent to move toward the maverick and rebels who don’t fit in,” he said. “They were probably overlooked [in school]. They were definitely never class president.”

Epstein claimed in emails to have facilitated $7 million in donations from former Apollo Global Management CEO Leon Black and Microsoft CEO Bill Gates in 2014, according to the 2020 fact-finding report. Gates has denied that claim. Black has acknowledged giving to Epstein-linked charities but has not addressed the alleged connection to MIT directly, the report states. Requests for comment from Gates through the Gates Foundation and Black through Apollo were not responded to.

The 2020 MIT-commissioned report said that “perhaps” the July 2016 conference to which Ito and Hoffman discussed inviting Epstein was an event with the lab’s fellows.

The lab’s fellows were announced in July but it’s not clear that announcement resembled a conference.

The report’s uncertain suggestion that Ito may have weighed an Epstein invitation to the low-key “announcement of the Media Lab Directors’ Fellows” may have distracted the public from the lab’s annual summer event — the flashier conference on pushing moral boundaries that same month — according to former MIT Media Lab research scientist Babak Babakinejad, who is suing the university over allegations of research fraud.

Babakinejad purportedly blew the whistle on an agriculture project one tech blog dubbed “Theranos for Plants.”

He told the DCNF that his lawsuit should reveal documents related to Epstein as Ito sought funding from Epstein for the agricultural project’s principal research scientist, per the 2020 report.

The Media Lab’s connections to Epstein predate Ito. Ito was introduced to Epstein in February 2013 by Linda Stone, a former member of the Media Lab’s Advisory Council, at a TED Conference in Long Beach, California. Epstein was also close to MIT Media Lab Co-founder Marvin Minsky, an early artificial intelligence researcher, he told Science.

“As you might know, I was very close to Marvin Minsky for quite a long time [and] I funded some of Marvin’s projects,” Epstein told the outlet in 2017.

DCNF co-founder Tucker Carlson was critical of billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman at a public event on July 11, prompting a reply from Ackman on X in which he acknowledged that Oxman, who is his wife, had received $125,000 in funding from Epstein as an artist at the MIT Media Lab.

“I never met Jeffrey Epstein, flew on his planes, went to any of his parties and/or properties, or interacted with him ever,” Ackman said. “When my wife was a professor at MIT, she received a $125,000 grant from Epstein (prior to my knowing of her existence). She met Epstein once for 45 minutes at the request of the head of the MIT MediaLab. […] If this is why Tucker thinks I am in Jeffrey Epstein’s constellation, it’s clear he doesn’t know anything about astronomy.”

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

AUTHOR

Emily Kopp

Investigative Reporter

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Compares ‘Jeffrey Epstein Hoax’ To Russiagate, Blasts ‘Past’ Supporters

MIT Lobbied Against Reviewing Foreign Funds Flowing Into Universities, Emails Show

MIT Bans Diversity Statements For Faculty Hires

Meet The New WHCA President, Just As Lib As The Last WHCA President

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

Child Sex Traffickers and Non-Governmental Organizations

Let’s be clear about the term non-governmental organization. According to Wikipedia:

non-governmental organization (NGO) is a typically nonprofit organization that operates partially independent of government control, though an NGO may get a significant percentage, or even all of its funding from government sources. NGOs often focus on humanitarian or social issues but can also include clubs and associations offering services to members. Some NGOs, like the World Economic Forum, may also act as lobby groups for corporations. Unlike international organizations (IOs), which directly interact with sovereign states and governments, NGOs are independent from them.

The term as it is used today was first introduced in Article 71 of the newly formed United Nations Charter in 1945. While there is no fixed or formal definition for what NGOs are, they are generally defined as nonprofit entities that are independent of government management or direction—although they may receive government funding.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was established in 1961 by executive order of President John F. Kennedy. Its mission was defined as a global program of technical and financial development assistance to low-income countries to be administered under the direction of the Secretary of State. Between 1961 and 2025, USAID morphed into a political arm of the increasingly radical leftist Democrat party that funded anti-American policies and programs both internationally and domestically.

USAID was involved in the funding and fomenting of anti-American policies through educational indoctrination and the culturally abhorrent practice of intentionally sexualizing children to destroy families and collapse America from within. But there is more. USAID was also actively involved in child sex trafficking and exploitation through its payments to NGOs.

On April 26, 2023, Health and Human Services (HHS) whistleblower Tara Lee Rodas testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement. The hearing titled, “‘The Biden Border Crisis: Exploitation of Unaccompanied Alien Children’ will examine the unprecedented surge of unaccompanied alien children at the southwest border and how open-border policies enable the exploitation of children.” Excerpts from Tara Lee Rodas’ chilling testimony:

Today, children will work overnight shifts at slaughterhouses, factories, restaurants to pay their debts to smugglers and traffickers. Today, children will be sold for sex. Today, children will call a hotline to report the[y] are being abused, neglected, and trafficked. For nearly a decade, unaccompanied children have been suffering in the shadows.

I must confess; I knew nothing about their suffering until 2021 when I volunteered to help the Biden Administration with the crisis at the Southern Border. As part of Operation Artemis, I was deployed to the Pomona Fairplex Emergency Intake Site in California to help the HHS Office of Refugee Resettlement [ORR] reunite children with sponsors in the US.

I thought I was going to help place children in loving homes. Instead, I discovered that children are being trafficked through a sophisticated network that begins with being recruited in home country, smuggled to the US border, and ends when ORR delivers a child to a sponsor – some sponsors are criminals and traffickers and members of Transnational Criminal Organizations. Some sponsors view children as commodities and assets to be used for earning income – this is why we are witnessing an explosion of labor trafficking.

Whether intentional or not, it can be argued that the US Government has become the middleman in a large scale, multi-billion-dollar, child trafficking operation run by bad actors seeking to profit off the lives of children. …

Realizing that we were not offering children the American dream but instead putting them into modern-day slavery with wicked overlords was a terrible revelation. These children are a captive victim population, with no access to law enforcement or knowledge of their rights. They are extorted, exploited, abused, neglected, and trafficked. This is why I blew the whistle.

Over a year later, on November 19, 2024, Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) lead a stunning House Homeland Security Committee hearing, “Trafficked, Exploited, and Missing: Migrant Children Victims of the Biden-Harris Administration.” The stupefying testimony of Retired Border Patrol agent J.J. Carrel is archived in an Economic Times YouTube video titled “‘Child Traffickers use NGOs and sponsors…’: Witnesses make sensational claim at US Congress hearing.” The entire transcript is available on the Homeland Security website.

It is very difficult for the civilized mind to process the malevolence of the Biden-Harris facilitation of child sex trafficking through its policies for unaccompanied migrant children, but incredulity cannot stop the abuse. Prosecution of the perpetrators can.

During his testimony J.J. Carrell explains that the year 2021, Joe Biden’s first year in office, was Carrell’s last year in the U.S. Border Patrol, a federal law enforcement agency under the United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP):

On his [Biden’s] first day in office, I watched in disbelief as 94 executive orders cascaded down from Washington DC obliterating every immigration policy that had been provided, the most secure border in America’s history. Border patrol agents were forced to carry out unconstitutional orders that violated every law in the Immigration Nationality Act. President Biden, through Department of Homeland Security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, created policy out of thin air, ignored Federal immigration law and facilitated the largest mass Invasion into America that the world has ever seen. The United States of America will have spent hundreds of billions of dollars in four years to fund the needs of over 50 million illegal aliens that populate our nation. Between 1 and 6 and 1 in 7 residents in America is an illegal alien. America has suffered the greatest demographic shift in modern history. …

After serving in the United States Border Patrol for 24 years, spending a year researching and writing a bestselling book entitled Invaded: The Intentional Destruction of American Immigration System, and filming two documentaries, I state with complete certainty that Biden, Harris, and Mayorkas intentionally, strategically, and purposely, weaponized illegal immigration and used it as a tool to fundamentally transform America. Inside this invasion the unspoken evil of child trafficking, and more specifically child sex trafficking, has flourished. At the end of this current [Biden] Administration the number of children trafficked will have grown to over 550,000 unaccompanied alien children, children known as UACs. This horrific number of children will have been arrested, released into America, and then lost. …

Unaccompanied alien children were being handed off to total strangers. Then they disappeared into the darkness of labor and sex trafficking. …

In August of 2024 the Inspector General with oversight over DHS issued a report stating that the number of lost UCAs was not 85,000 [as previously reported] it was over 320,000. …

The evil of child sex trafficking is difficult to digest and understand. However, after conducting numerous interviews with officers, agents, and whistleblowers from every alphabet agency and department, it was made clear to us that the federal government knowingly and actively facilitated these criminal acts. After several exhaustive months of filming, interviewing, and then editing this documentary, I state without reservation that the United States federal government is the world’s largest child sex trafficking organization in modern history.

Readers will wonder about the Biden-Harris administration’s specific culpability in the unspeakable horror of its child sex trafficking industry. Chairman Higgins provides the answer:

Historically the cartels would bring their product, human beings and drugs, to the southern border. It’d be some level of interaction by CBP by federal law enforcement, state or local law enforcement, and then unaccompanied children would be processed through HHS and turned over to non-government organizations, where they would be turned over to family sponsors, either family or non-family, but sponsors that were vetted in some manner.

This is a memorandum of understanding that operated for a long time. It was quite significant between the Office of Refugee Resettlement [ORR] and the United States Department of Health and Human Services [HHS]. The beginning process by which unaccompanied children were delivered to sponsors that were vetted. Because of the volume of children that would be coming across in the last four years, and a part of that the HHS and DHS joint statement of termination of this agreement in this is from March of 2021.

My brothers and sisters this was a policy decision to step away from the strict means by which the children were monitored and controlled. And what we were what it was replaced with was this “Sponsor Care Agreement.” There’s nothing to this. It’s three and a half pages, two pages of nothing that that the criminal networks can easily take advantage of. So, we have now delivered hundreds of thousands of unaccompanied children to unvetted sponsors that have enslaved them across our country.

Readers will also wonder how the child sex trafficking industry was funded. It is a stupefying realization that American taxpayers were funding child sex trafficking through USAID payments to non-governmental organizations both here and abroad. This exchange between committee member Mr. Luttrell and J.J. Carrell explains:

[Mr. Luttrell] Mr. Carrell and anybody else who would like to answer this. Can you name some of these NGOs that have specifically taken these hundreds of millions of dollars and not used it to protect these children.

[J.J. Carrell] Catholic Charities, Lutheran Family Services, Jewish Family Services. I spoke to a gentleman that works in DHS. He actually sends the electronic fund transfers, and I asked him, “Sir, tell me who you work, who do you send, who are you responsible for? And how much is the largest check you cut?” He said, “I’m over at Jewish Family Services and I cut a check for $600 million.” And I said is that for like three years, and he told me, “J.J. get in the game, that’s two or three months, and it’s renewable.” That’s one NGO and I say well Catholic Charities is bigger than Jewish Family Services. Yes, they get the same, they get the same or more. You’re talking about billions upon billions of dollars given to NGOs to further the trafficking of all of everyone crossing the border to include children.

Incoming President Donald Trump’s response was immediate. On January 24, 2025, President Trump’s fourth day in his second term, he froze almost all foreign aid, and on January 27, 2025, USAID’s government website was shut down. On February 3, 2025, Elon Musk, in his capacity as head of President Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), explained that he and President Trump were shutting down USAID because it had become a “criminal organization” and was “beyond repair.” Reporter Sarah Fortinsky quotes Elon Musk in The Hill, February 3, 2025, “Musk: Trump ‘agreed’ USAID should be shut down“:

If you’ve got an apple that’s got a worm in it, maybe you can take the worm out, but if you’ve got actually just a ball of worms, it’s hopeless. And USAID is a ball of worms. There is no apple. And when there is no apple, you’ve just got to basically get rid of the whole thing,” Musk said.

“That is why it’s got to go,” he added. “It’s beyond repair.” … “USAID is a criminal organization. Time for it to die.”

In a live-streamed cabinet meeting on April 30, 2025, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. agreed saying:

We have ended HHS as the role, as the vector — the principal vector in this country for child trafficking. During the Biden administration, HHS became a collaborator in child trafficking and for sex and for slavery. And, we have ended that, and we are very aggressively going out and trying to find these children — the 300,000 children that were lost by the Biden administration. …

As of July 15, 2025, the DOGE website reports that DOGE has saved American taxpayers $190 billion, approximately $1,180 per taxpayer. It has choked off the money supply to USAID and interfered with its depraved and degenerate child sex trafficking industry. The Trump administration is dedicated to ending the scourge of the Biden-Harris child sex trafficking industry. In a pre-election Truth Social post on July 21, 2023, President Donald Trump vowed to pass legislation to institute the death penalty for human traffickers who carry women and children across the border. It is time to bring the perpetrators to justice.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: Epstein-Funded MIT Lab Hosted Panel On Giving Pedos Child Sex Robots


Visit Linda’s pundicity page: goudsmit.pundicity.com  and website: lindagoudsmit.com 

Order Linda’s book Space Is No Longer the Final Frontier––Reality Is is available in paperback, hardback, and ebook formats on barnesandnoble.comamazon.com, and directly from Ingram in paperback.

The Spiritual Leader Of The Syrian Druze, Hikmat Al-Hijri, Calls On Trump, Netanyahu, Bin Salman And Abdullah II To Save The Druze Of The Al-Suwayda Governorate From The Syrian Government

Syria | Special Dispatch No. 12080

On July 13, 2025, clashes broke out in Al-Suwayda Governorate in southern Syria between Druze factions and Bedouin tribes following several mutual kidnapping incidents. The new Syrian government headed by Ahmed Al-Sharaa (aka Abu Mohammad Al-Joulani) quickly seized this escalation as an opportunity to intervene militarily in the governorate, which is not under its full security control, and sent troops to “enforce security” there.

In light of damage caused to its image by the massacres perpetrated against Alawite civilians on the Syrian coast in March 2025, with the participation of government forces,[1] the government stressed that the Syrian soldiers and security officers had been instructed to protect civilians and avoid harming them in any way.[2] But in practice, there were many documented incidents of Syrian forces firing indiscriminately at civilians, looting their property, torching their homes and humiliating them.[3] Dozens of Druze have been killed so far, including women and children.[4]

These developments prompted Hikmat Al-Hijri, the prominent spiritual leader of the Druze community in Syria, who is based in Al-Suwayda and is a known opponent of the Al-Sharaa government, to issue a statement on June 16 calling on world leaders – including U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu[5] – to “save Al-Suwayda.”

It should be noted that, in a statement he issued one day earlier, Al-Hijri actually called on the Syrian government to extend its control over the Al-Suwayda Governorate, welcomed the arrival of its forces there, and exhorted all the local armed factions to cooperate with these forces.[6] However, a short time later, when the government forces’ violence against the Druze civilians continued, he released a statement claiming that his previous “humiliating” statement had been issued “under coercion from Damascus and pressure from foreign countries.” He added that Al-Suwayda was facing a war and called to confront it.[7]

It should also be noted that this is not the first time the Syrian Druze have been attacked by the forces of the new government. In late April, following extreme incitement, armed action was perpetrated against them in the Damascus area and in southern Syria.[8]

The bodies of members of the Radwan family in the city of Al-Suwayda, 13 of whom were killed in their home by Syrian security forces (Source: T.me/nahermedia/49455, July 15, 2025)

The following is a translation of Al-Hijri’s July 16, 2025 statement:

“The Spiritual Leadership of the Monotheistic Muslims,[9] the Druze

“We call upon the free world and all the forces operating within it, upon [U.S.] President Donald Trump, [Israeli] Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, [Saudi] Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman and His Royal Highness the [Jordanian] King Abdullah II, and upon anyone who has a voice and influence in the world, to save the Suwayda [Governorate].

“Our people are being exterminated and murdered in cold blood. The murderers do not distinguish between young and old, woman and child, doctor and sheikh. They destroy churches and houses of worship. These massacres are being perpetrated in front of the entire world, and silence continues to kill. We hold the international community fully responsible for fulfilling its humanitarian and moral duty of stopping this systematic [killing].

“The mask has fallen from the face of the oppressive and tyrannical gang that rules [Syria]. We call upon our Sunni brethren to take a clear stand on what is happening to their fellow Syrians, for we have never been enemies or rivals and we can no longer coexist with a regime that can only rule with iron and fire and [wield] power through violence and abuse.

“Our call to you is not political, but humanitarian and moral. [Act] before it is too late. Save a people that is being murdered simply for asking to live in dignity.”[10]

SOURCES:

[1] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 11872 – Syrian Journalists Warned Before HTS’ Massacres Against The Alawites: The New Regime Is Allowing Acts Of Vengeance Against Them; International Intervention Is A Necessity, March 11, 2025.

[2] T.me/sana_gov/133658, July 15, 2025; X.com/Murhaf_abuqasra, July 14, 2025.

[3] Facebook.com/Suwayda24, July 15, 2025.

[4] Syriahr.com, July 16, 2025.

[5] After the advent of the Al-Sharaa government, Israel declared that it would protect the Syrian Druze from any abuse by his forces. On several occasions it indeed attacked Syrian forces who were acting against the Druze, including in the present round of clashes.

[6] Facebook.com/profile.php?id=100089249525829, July 15, 2025.

[7] Facebook.com/profile.php?id=100089249525829, July 15, 2025.

[8] Facebook.com/Syriatvnews, April 30, 2025; T.me/news7al/39449, May 12, 2025.

[9] “Monotheistic Muslims” is a term the Druze apply to themselves.

[10] Facebook.com/profile.php?id=100089249525829, July 16, 2025.

RELATED ARTICLES:

IDF Protects Syrian Druze From Syrian Government

BLOODBATH: Islamic Regime’s Brutal Genocide of Druze in Syria, Only Israel Comes to Their Defense

What Should the Druze in Syria Do in the Long Run?

The massacre of the Druze

Syrian Jihadi Group ‘Ansar Al-Sunnah Battalions’ Threatens To Target Druze, As Other Syrian Jihadis Call To ‘Close Druze File,’ Reject Coexistence

Online Reactions To Bedouin-Druze Clashes In Suwayda, Syria: Islamic State (ISIS) Supporters Criticize ‘Docile’ Syrian Government Response As Pro-Government Channels And Jihadi Clerics Describe Druze As ‘Enemies Of Sunnis’ And ‘Betrayers Of The Nation’

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

‘Woke,’ ‘Weak,’ and ‘Out of Touch’: The Crisis of the Democratic Brand

The summer hasn’t done much to break the heat that Democrats are feeling from voters. The party of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris is about as popular as a rush-hour traffic jam, according to the latest surveys. Unfortunately for Minority Leaders Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), time hasn’t helped the dismal approval ratings — nor, most Americans would point out, has the party’s supposed “self-reflection.”

In the eight months since Election night, Democrats have spent countless hours and dollars on meetings, strategy sessions, focus groups, and autopsy reports only to turn around and ignore the lessons they teach. “Woke,” “weak,” and “out of touch” was how one survey described the party that paid for the poll. With the GOP eating into the once-impressive margins that Democrats enjoyed with Hispanics, the working class, and white men, Schumer and company are looking at a pretty dismal approval rating — just 35% across those key demographics.

Equally as frustrating, there’s little to no hope in the base that things will change. Asked how optimistic they are about the future of the party, dejected Democrats have all but resigned to their fate in the political wilderness. Only 35% think things will turn around in the future — an almost 20-point drop from the 57% last July. Much to Jeffries’s and Schumer’s displeasure, congressional Democrats are taking a severe beating in the polls. A late June YouGov/Economist survey found a sharp drop in Americans’ approval of their House and Senate members: a -32 favorability rating, compared to -15 when Donald Trump took office in January.

And while insiders are quick to call these results “striking,” they’re just as quick to dismiss them. “Americans have a pretty sour view of everyone in Washington right now,” Democrat pollster Matt McDermott rationalized. But, he rightly pointed out, “It’s important to note that the favorability of the opposition party has never been a reliable barometer for midterm results. Voters don’t need to like the ‘out’ party to vote for change — they just need to be fed up with the incumbents,” he observed. “I see parallels in the current climate. Trump’s presidency (or second presidency, in this case) has mobilized a lot of anger and opposition.”

Republicans might be tempted to cheer the opposition’s fall from grace or draw premature conclusions about how this could impact the 2026 elections — but they shouldn’t. The reality is, Donald Trump will always be more unpopular in the Democratic base than Democrats themselves — and he, not Jeffries or Schumer — is what will motivate them to turn out in the midterms. To think that the base’s exasperation with the Left will keep them home is to underestimate their general hatred for the president. Once Trump is gone, the party will have a real crisis on its hands. Without the president to drive the protest vote, Americans will be forced to evaluate Democrats on what they actually stand for. And that’s where the party’s tenuous hold unravels.

“Part of the problem for Democrats is that there is little consensus about what exactly the party stands for in concrete policy terms,” David Walsh vents in the Boston Review. Or maybe the problem is that people do know what the Democrats stand for — radical gender ideology, open borders, DEI, abortion until birth, the “global intifada,” and general lawlessness — and reject it on its face. That, more than anything, is what’s given rise to a quiet countermovement in the Democratic Party, a growing determination to give voice to the marginalized — but more broadly appealing — centrists in the base.

Fed up with the off-putting narrative driving the Democrats’ messaging, the party’s “middle” is hosting events like WelcomeFest to bridge the gap that voters see between Jeffries’s Squad and the average American. “In the wake of their 2024 loss,” Jeremiah Johnson writes in The Dispatch, “a significant portion of Democratic leadership seems to believe that what the party really needs is to change the messaging. They need more aggressive PR, better catchphrases, more viral stunts. They need to go on more podcasts!” Sure, he agrees, a better messaging strategy might help. “But the core thing that held Democrats back in 2024 wasn’t PR strategy. It was the party’s beliefs and policies. If Democrats want to win the kind of large and durable majorities that will allow them to really govern, they’re going to have to rethink those policies.”

He’s referring, of course, to the party’s insistence on clinging to fringe views that reject everything from the sanctity of girls’ sports to parental rights in education, legal immigration, and empowering law enforcement. “Democrats,” Johnson agrees, “continue to deviate from public opinion — afraid to denounce the 20 end of an 80/20 issue in the polls for fear of offending an interest group.” And, he continues, “Democrats do themselves no favors by not loudly condemning the excesses of wokeness, which are real.”

There’s a way to thread that needle, Johnson argues. “They can get visibly tougher on illegal immigration while still advocating for more legal pathways and the fair treatment of immigrants. They can focus on the LGBT rights that matter like non-discrimination in the workplace, non-discrimination in housing, and access to health care — rather than dying on dubious and unpopular niche issues like trans athletes in women’s sports. They can loudly denounce the excesses of DEI (such as mandatory diversity statements for technical STEM research) while preserving diversity and inclusion ideas that still make sense (such as honoring civil rights heroes like Jackie Robinson),” he reiterates. “They can advocate for intelligent police reforms while still taking a hard stance against public disorder, crime, and anti-social behavior.”

And yet, every time a Democrat attempts to moderate their stance, they’re later rolled, repentant, or ostracized. California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) and Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) tested the waters on girls’ sports, suggesting it wasn’t fair for America’s daughters to lose titles and positions to men, only to retreat once the party’s woke overlords and fundraisers get their hooks in.

Or take Senator John Fetterman (D-Pa.), the hoodie-wearing castoff who’s staked out a rational position on Israel, IranICE, and immigration, and who’s become, in CNN’s words, “isolated” for agreeing with most voters. While he’s tried to embrace a practical view on some of the Democrats’ biggest messaging liabilities, his effort rarely goes unpunished. Even now, the party’s growing frustration with his independent thinking is helping to fuel a bitter primary race in Pennsylvania, where Fetterman’s overall approval is still a +4 positive at 41%.  Ironically, Republicans, who’ve grown to appreciate his ability to break with the Left, give him even higher marks: 45% approval. “My values haven’t changed,” the senator wanted people to know recently. “But I think in some cases, I think our party’s values have changed.” Instead of seeing Fetterman as a senator who can help Democrats reach voters, he’s become a pariah.

Even Fetterman’s suggestion that the party at least sound more civil while pushing these outlandish agendas was ignored. “I think their primary currency was shaming and scolding and talking down to people and telling them ‘Hey, I know better than you, or you’re dopes, or you’re a bro, or you’re ignorant or, how can you be this dumb? I can’t imagine it. And then, by the way, they’re fascists. How can you vote for that?’” Fetterman asked.

“I know and I love people that voted for Trump, and they’re not fascist. They don’t support insurrection and those things. And if you go to an extreme, and you become a boutique kind of proposition, then you’re going to lose the argument. And we have done that,” he lamented about Democrats.

FRC Action Director Matt Carpenter could only shake his head at the party’s refusal to adapt to the cultural and political winds. “The problem is much deeper than a facelift on their advertising and an update to their talking points,” he told The Washington Stand. “The Democratic Party’s base wants their leaders in Congress to double down on opposing President Trump and the Republican Congress wherever they can. This places the Democratic Party in a desperate position,” he warned. “They can try to stanch the bleeding among key demographics by moderating in some places and risk their base turning on them — or they can lean into the anger of their base and watch their numbers continue to decline among men and working-class voters.”

At the end of the day, it’s their choice. “To win votes, you can’t have wildly different views from the public,” Johnson underscored. “That’s a lesson Democrats seem to have forgotten.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED VIDEOS:

New Yorkers BLASTS Socialist Zohran Mamdani’s crazy plan to change the city

Tampon Tim Walz’s $250 million COVID Scam is the single biggest in American History!

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 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.

Another Hamas Propaganda Victory: The Truth Behind the Tampa ‘Businessman’ Killed in Judea and Samaria

A Palestinian-American man from Tampa, Florida, was killed near the Jewish community of Ateret in Judea and Samaria (also known as the West Bank) this month, prompting yet another round of sympathetic coverage in U.S. media outlets. News reports described him as a “beloved businessman,” the owner of an ice cream parlor, a harmless young man who liked comedy and beaches. What they did not report, however, is far more telling — and more damning.

Let’s start with the so-called ice cream business.

The victim has been widely described as the owner of “Ice Screamin,” a supposed dessert shop. But a check of business records shows otherwise. There are two other individuals tied to the business. Only one of them, Ibrahim Mujahid, appears to have a meaningful entrepreneurial history. Mujahid previously operated Rani Express, a transportation and warehousing company in Georgia that is now defunct. He also operates Caring Angels, a home care service in Minnesota that is still in business.

That’s the real owner of “Ice Screamin.” Not the man killed in Judea and Samaria. Which explains why every news profile has skipped the usual “humble beginnings to business success” narrative. There’s no inspiring small business story. The man in question was no upstanding, hardworking American entrepreneur.

It gets worse.

Nearly every outlet has failed to report that the incident took place in Ateret, a Jewish “settlement.” This is true—and completely ignored also is the fact that Ateret has existed since 1981, long before the victim was even born. Yet the press claims that this man was killed while he was “defending his land.” But where is this land? Did this Palestinian own land within the Jewish settlement? Is there a deed? Proof of purchase? Coordinates? Or are we once again expected to accept such claims on faith, simply because they come wrapped in keffiyeh-colored pathos?

This incident is being used precisely as Hamas intended: to paint every defensive Israeli action as an unjustified killing, and every Palestinian casualty as a peaceful victim of “settler violence.” It’s media theater — an information operation dressed up as local tragedy. Hamas, or those working in tandem with it, have perfected this script.

And of course, the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)  has predictably leaped to the microphone. CAIR has made a public show of outrage over the death of an American citizen. But let’s be clear: CAIR has shown no comparable concern for the Americans who are currently being held hostage by Hamas. No press conferences. No letter-writing campaigns. No breathless appearances on CNN. Evidently, not all American lives are worth the same level of outrage — at least not when it’s Hamas doing the killing.

That’s what this story is — a Hamas narrative dressed in the language of American civil rights and entrepreneurship. And the Western media, as always, plays along.

Don’t be fooled.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

The two ‘Palestinians’ supposedly killed by ‘Israeli settlers’ were carrying out coordinated jihad terror attack

JIHAD IN AMERICA: Senator Ted Cruz Introduces Legislation to Designate Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Organization

Did Israeli ‘Settlers’ at Sinjil Really ‘Brutally Beat a Palestinian to Death’? 

Over 350 Muslim Religious Leaders Endorse Oct. 7 Massacres

Syria’ Kaleidoscope of Death

Iran, Israel, the Jinn, and Other ‘Occult Forces’

India Delhi High Court Stays Release of Film About a Jihad Murder After Muslim Groups Complain

Jihadist Movements in Turkey: Evolution, Threats, and Responses

Syria: Israel vows to protect Druze communities in violent outbreak with Bedouins

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Iranian Regime Still Living in an Alternate Universe

The Islamist regime that governs Iran is still behaving as if it did not just lose a devastating war. Over the past two years, Israel has systematically destroyed Iran’s terrorist proxies, air defense, and missile capabilities, and then Israel and the U.S. set back its nuclear weapons program by years or decades in an intensive air bombardment. Already, the vanquished is presuming to engage with the victors on an equal footing.

The most recent example came in a speech Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi gave this weekend to diplomats in Tehran, in which he condescendingly allowed that Iran is ready to re-engage with the U.S. in talks over the future of its nuclear program and potential sanctions relief — but only if all of Iran’s conditions are met. He demanded “assurance … that, in case of a resumption of talks, the trend will not lead to war.”

“First of all,” Araghchi insisted, “there should be a firm guarantee that such actions [as the U.S. bombing of its nuclear facilities] will not be repeated. The attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities has made it more difficult and complicated to achieve a solution based on negotiations.”

On June 21, the U.S. military executed a stunning campaign that dropped high-powered bombs on Iran’s top three nuclear sites, burying the bunkers deep under rubble without Iran ever knowing what hit them. In an interview published Monday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian admitted the U.S. airstrikes so damaged the sites that Iran still has not been able to assess the extent of the destruction.

The stunning operation came after months of fruitless negotiations, in which Iranian negotiators would agree to little more than the next meeting. Despite the strict deadline President Trump imposed up front, the Iranian regime never budged from the position that it would continue enriching uranium to nearly-weapons-grade levels as fast as possible.

In other words, Araghchi’s remarks were merely a crude attempt to rewrite history. There never was any hope “to achieve a solution based on negotiations.” The only solution acceptable to President Donald Trump is one in which the Iranian regime gave up its nuclear weapons program and stockpiles of enriched uranium. The only solution Iran envisioned is one in which it would become a nuclear-armed power.

Only after this impasse became abundantly apparent did President Trump resort to bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities. Far from “difficult and complicated,” this presented an easy and simple solution to the problem, at least so far as America’s priorities went.

Furthermore, with Iran’s nuclear weapons program set back by years, there was no longer any point to America continuing the negotiations, nor offering the possibility of sanctions relief. Negotiations were not an end in themselves, but merely a tool that served as a means to the end of eliminating Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Trump found another, easier means to that end, so further negotiations would be, from the American perspective, a means to nothing.

Araghchi offered to re-enter negotiations with the U.S., on the condition that America pledge not to bomb their nuclear sites again. In other words, he demands that America voluntarily forgo the most effective means to dismantle Iran’s nuclear weapons program, in exchange for another means that never offered much promise. This gets the priority of the objectives exactly backward, pretending that the negotiations were an end in themselves, and not a means to achieve something else.

The one possible advantage to a negotiated solution is that it would offer a more permanent resolution. Instead of setting Iran back by years or decades, at which point their nuclear program would again become a threat, a negotiated solution would cause Iran to desist from its efforts to build a nuclear weapon, thus eliminating the future threat.

But this would require the Iranian regime to operate in good faith in negotiating and implementing the dissolution of its nuclear weapons program, something they have not demonstrated a willingness to do.

Ever since 2003, Iran has quarreled with U.N. nuclear inspectors over the lack of transparency in its program — a quarrel that culminated in June when the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors officially found Iran in non-compliance. Iran reacted defiantly by declaring its intention to expand its non-compliance by opening yet another uranium enrichment site, at which point Israel began its devastating bombardment. Even since America’s bombing run literally buried the program, Iranian officials have repeatedly declared their intention to exhume and resuscitate the country’s nuclear program.

Iranian lawmakers revealed the regime’s true intentions last month, when they enacted legislation to suspend cooperation with the IAEA, thus violating their obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. As the bill received final approval, lawmakers broke out into chants of “Death to America!” and “Death to Israel!” — suggesting that any proposals to find “a solution based on negotiations” with the regime’s two great adversaries are insincere.

Fortunately, President Trump does not seem to be giving any serious consideration to Iran’s silly offer. Last week, a reporter asked, “What might make you have the desire to do another strike on Iran?” (The answer is painfully obvious — a revival of Iran’s nuclear weapons program — but perhaps the reporter is in the habit of asking questions to which she knows the answer.)

In response, Trump declined even to engage the idea of sidelining America’s most important piece of leverage, responding, “I hope we’re not going to have to do that. I can’t imagine wanting to do that. I can’t imagine them wanting to do that. They want to meet. They want to work something out.” As for America, Trump already achieved the objective of taking Iran’s nuclear threat off the table, and he wouldn’t be afraid to do it again.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Whitewashing Anti-Israel Campus Protests

750 tons of Iranian weapons bound for Houthis intercepted, CENTCOM says Source: CBS News

RELATED VIDEO: Farahanipour Vs. Yaghoubian: Is the Iran Conflict Similar to Iraq and Afghanistan?

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 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.

Undocumented Children Found Working at Newsom-Backed Cannabis Farm

Last week’s raids of two of the several Glass House Farms-owned marijuana farms in California led to the arrest of over 300 illegal aliens, including children. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said on X, “[DHS] law enforcement rescued 14 children from potential forced labor, exploitation, and trafficking. They arrested 319 illegal aliens.” Of these children, ICE reported that at least nine of them were unaccompanied.

Among the arrested unlawful immigrants was a child predator, Roman Izquierdo, “who has been convicted of kidnapping, attempted rape and attempted child molestation” and was “previously deported” by ICE in 2006, as well as illegal alien Juan Duarte-Velasquez “who has been convicted of rape and a DUI.”

The four-hour raid began on Thursday, July 10, and led to violent exchanges between protestors and federal agents. Protestors were reportedly throwing rocks at federal agents and their vehicles, forcing agents to deploy tear gas to control the crowds. The FBI is also launching an investigation — with a 50,000-dollar reward — against an unknown man who was supposedly shooting agents from the crowd. Amidst the chaos, one worker died after attempting to scale a 30-foot greenhouse.

When asked about the protestors who interfered with ICE, border czar Tom Homan said “[Protestors] have been emboldened by even members of Congress who compare ICE to Nazis, racists, and terrorists. … If people want to complain about the job ICE is doing, go complain to Congress.”

Linking a video of the raid, Newsom posted on his X account: “Kids running from tear gas, crying on the phone because their mother was just taken from the fields.” Homan responded during a Fox News interview. “We’re looking for over 300,000 missing children. We’ve already found 10,000. … This should be a non-partisan issue,” he insisted. “…We’re rescuing thousands of children.”

“Why are there children working at a marijuana facility, Gavin?” asked the DHS.

“Yesterday, Glass House Brands received immigration and naturalization warrants. As per the law, we verified that the warrants were valid and we complied. Workers were detained and we are assisting to provide them legal representation,” Glass House Brands posted on X in response to the raids. “Glass House has never knowingly violated applicable hiring practices and does not and has never employed minors.” But U.S. Customs and Border Patrol Commissioner Rodey Scott posted on X that the company is now “under investigation for child labor violations.”

Graham Farrar, co-founder, president, and board director of Glass House Farms donated $10,000 to Gavin Newsom’s 2018 campaign for governor of California, according to public campaign finance records, and has also overwhelmingly supported multiple Democratic campaigns, and a few Republicans, who have shown “support for liberalizing cannabis laws.”

“This is quickly becoming one of the largest operations since President Trump took office, and we’re only getting started,” said the DHS.

AUTHOR

Caily Shriver

Caily Shriver serves as an intern at Family Research Council.

RELATED ARTICLES:

L.A. Subsidizes Lawlessness with Latest Anti-ICE Move

Trump Getting More Done with Smaller, Less Costly White House Staff

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 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.

Trump laughs off latest death threat from Islamic Republic of Iran: ‘I don’t sunbathe’

It’s remarkable that Tucker Carlson and others have denied that the Islamic Republic of Iran has threatened to kill Trump. They’ve issued this threat repeatedly.

“Trump mocks Iran official’s Mar-a-Lago attack threat: ‘I don’t sunbathe,’” Iran International, July 9, 2025:

“Trump has done something so that he can no longer sunbathe in Mar-a-Lago,” Mohammad-Javad Larijani, a former senior advisor to Iran’s Supreme Leader had told Iranian state TV in remarks first reported in the English language media by Iran International.

“As he lies there with his stomach to the sun, a small drone might hit him in the navel. It’s very simple,” added Larijani, whose two brothers are among the Islamic Republic’s most powerful political figures.

Fox News reporter Peter Doocy read the comments to Trump at a press conference, adding, “Do you think that’s a real threat? And when is the last time you went sunbathing anyway?”

Trump, smiling, retorted: “It’s been a long time. I don’t know, maybe I was around seven or so. I’m not too big into it. Yeah, I guess it’s a threat. I’m not sure it’s a threat actually, but perhaps it is.”

Iranian clerics have previously called on Muslims to kill Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in retaliation for their threats on the life of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei during the conflict….

Larijani’s comments came after an online platform calling itself “blood pact” began raising funds for what it calls “retribution against those who mock and threaten the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.” The site says to have collected over $40 million to date.

It was not immediately possible to verify the authenticity of the figure.

“We pledge to award the bounty to anyone who can bring the enemies of God and those who threaten the life of Ali Khamenei to justice,” a statement on the site said.

The campaign’s stated aim is to raise $100 million for the killing of Donald Trump. It remains unclear who operates the site….

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iranian MP: We need to be able to produce as many nuclear bombs as we want in less than 24 hours

Hamas Wants the World to Believe It Has ‘Lost Control’ of Gaza

Spain: Anti-migrant street riots break out after Muslim migrants beat 68-year-old man

Will Islam Subjugate Europe?

Australia: Muslim screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ stabs random Australians

UK: London police arrest dozens of supporters of newly banned Palestinian protest group

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Europe veers Right—Towards Israel and Trump?

There are accumulating—albeit belated—signs of a new political assertiveness in Europe, together with a growing appreciation of Israeli resolve and Trumpian toughness

“…this concept [of multi-culturalism] has failed, and failed utterly.” —Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, 2010

Winds of change are finally beginning to blow in Europe.

With them, they carry potential implications not only for the European continent itself but for Israel and the wider Middle East—as well as for relations with Washington, particularly with the current Trump administration.

A stiffening of political will?

A clear indication of the stiffening of political will was reflected in a recent conference held in Vienna.

Under the auspices of former Austrian Vice-Chancellor Heinz-Christian, and with the participation of Members of European Parliament from Germany, Holland, and Belgium, as well as prominent guests of honor from across the continent—including France, Hungary and the UK, the conference focused on “Peace, Freedom, and Security.”

Billed as “The Vienna Conference of European Patriots”, it evinced the ominous banner, “Europe on the Brink – Between Self-Denial, Islamism, and Geopolitical Irrelevance”, reflecting the sense of concern that prevailed at the event. Speakers warned that what once was celebrated as “multicultural open-mindedness” is increasingly proving to be myopic political naivety. Several speakers expressed alarm at what they perceived as an “urgent threat”—i.e., the looming spectre of a steadily creeping transformation of European social order into “Islamist authoritarianism”. The overall sentiment was that the real threat menacing Europe today is not an external one, but more an internal one—eroding the very core of European society.

A threat to national cohesion

This perception dovetails well with the perturbing findings of a government-commissioned probe into the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood in France. The report warns that “The Muslim Brotherhood movement is a “threat to national cohesion” in France and action must be taken to stop the spread of “political Islamism.”

Indeed, there was particular disapproval of France, which, it will be recalled, granted the Ayatollah Khomeini political asylum. It was here that he spent his last months in exile under the benign neglect of the French authorities, before returning triumphantly to Iran, where hordes of his devotees, inflamed by his corrosive credo, swept the radical Islamists to power, later to be “exported” globally.

Moreover, along with a considerable body of expert opinion, blame was also attributed, in large measure, to France for the turmoil in Libya and the overthrow of a then much chastened Gaddafi. Paris’s rash haste in siding with the rebels precipitated the current chaos and subsequent flow of migrants into the EU. According to one 2020 study of events in Libya, “Paris soon became the most intransigent power in international efforts to foster negotiations between the Gadhafi regime and the leadership of the revolutionaries…The result of this policy is clearly visible: What has ensued is almost ten years of conflict and social distress.

Significantly, the failure of the current French administration, under Emmanuel Macron, to control the still ongoing tide of Muslim migrants and their overflow across the Channel into the UK has earned the ire of his British neighbors, even eliciting calls for his recent—and unduly ostentatious—state visit to be cancelled.

Flaccid France

Indeed, at the Vienna conference, Macron was taken severely to task for blunders at home and abroad.

Indeed, the French daily, Le Monde, recently outlined the pervasive domestic strife afflicting the country: “There is a rise in bankruptcies and restructuring plans, alongside calls for strikes at Air France, the national rail company …and within the civil service. Additionally, a new wave of unrest is spreading among farmers. [with] this unrest, stemming from economic difficulties and budgetary austerity measures”.

Yet, with the home-front in turmoil, Macron chose to commit his foreign policy to what is increasingly becoming a forlorn anachronism–a Palestinian state—and one likely to place him in direct confrontation with an increasingly assertive and proactive Trump administration. Moreover, in view of the appalling atrocities of October 7, together with the overwhelming support they received from the Palestinian public, both in Gaza and the West Bank, this policy would be an unconscionable reward for blood-curdling terror. As such, it is not only practically unfeasible, but morally bankrupt as well.

In contrast to the censure of the flaccid EU policy, there was praise for both Israel and the Trump administration. Israel was lauded for conveying a clear message with its resolute military action and pinpoint intelligence that left the Iranian nuclear program largely in ruins. Likewise, President Trump was commended for launching his B-2 bunker-busting bombs and Tomahawk missile strikes on the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan facilities in support of Israel’s action, and for laying the foundation for a restructured Mid-East via the “Abraham Accords.

A new European assertiveness

There are accumulating signs of a new political assertiveness and a growing appreciation of Israeli resolve to resist, and stare down what, until recently, seemed to be intimidating radical Islamist threats. With it, a grudging appreciation of Donald Trump may also be emerging, together with a budding acknowledgement of the efficacy of his tough stance on issues his predecessors eschewed. Hopefully, the recent Vienna conference is a sign that the edifice of Europe’s socio-cultural heritage can still be salvaged.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: A new era for Europe?

Are Illegal Immigrants Using Taxpayer-Funded Benefits? Not Anymore.

In another move to tackle illegal immigration, President Donald Trump and his administration are ensuring that illegal immigrants cannot access taxpayer-funded programs. The White House announced Thursday that the Trump administration “is taking the biggest step in more than 30 years to protect taxpayer-funded benefits for American citizens — NOT illegal aliens.” The Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Education (DOE), Agriculture (USDA), and Labor (DOL) have all moved to ensure that illegal immigrants cannot take advantage of taxpayer-funded programs, which the White House estimates will save “roughly $40 billion in benefits for American citizens…”

HHS officially rescinded a Clinton-era policy which the agency says “improperly extended certain federal public benefits to illegal aliens.” The withdrawn 1998 policy was an agency interpretation of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996 that “improperly narrowed the scope of PRWORA, undercutting the law by allowing illegal aliens to access programs Congress intended only for the American people.” PRWORA barred noncitizens from receiving “federal public benefits,” which the 1998 HHS policy interpreted not to apply to a broad swath of its taxpayer-funded programs.

In a statement shared with The Washington Stand, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. said, “For too long, the government has diverted hardworking Americans’ tax dollars to incentivize illegal immigration.” Rescinding the 1998 policy, Kennedy said, “changes that — it restores integrity to federal social programs, enforces the rule of law, and protects vital resources for the American people.”

The DOE also reversed a Clinton-era policy in order to terminate “taxpayer subsidization of illegal aliens in career, technical, and adult education programs.” Like HHS, the DOE had previously issued its own agency interpretation of PRWORA, not classifying numerous taxpayer-funded programs as “federal public benefits” and subsequently allowing illegal immigrants to access government-funded career, technical, and adult postsecondary education programs. Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement, “Postsecondary education programs funded by the federal government should benefit American citizens, not illegal aliens.” Due to the policy shift, she said that “hardworking American taxpayers will no longer foot the bill for illegal aliens to participate in our career, technical, or adult education programs or activities.”

The USDA has also moved to reinforce protections against illegal immigrants accessing taxpayer-funded programs, especially the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as Food Stamps. “The generosity of the American taxpayer has long been abused by faulty interpretations of the 1996 welfare reform law,” said Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, referring to PRWORA. She insisted that “illegal aliens should not receive government dollars. This effort is one of many by the Department of Agriculture to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse of USDA’s programs and policies.”

Federal workforce development programs and related grants have also been shielded by the DOL. In order to benefit from programs funded by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, grantees and applicants must first verify that they have valid work authorization. Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer said in a statement, “By ensuring these programs serve their intended purpose, we’re protecting good-paying jobs for American workers and reaffirming this Administration’s commitment to securing our borders and ending illegal immigration.”

Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) research director Steven Camarota told TWS that legal loopholes — like those that the Trump administration is now closing — in public benefits have allowed illegal immigrants to burden American taxpayers for decades. “There are a number of reasons how and why illegal immigrants can access the welfare system, including the fact that they have U.S.-born children and they are actually eligible for some program” because of that, Camarota explained. He continued, “The bottom line is most illegal immigrant households have at least one worker, but they make extensive use of the social benefits, particularly food programs and Medicaid, because their low-average educational attainment means they generally earn low wages and qualify for programs.” Denoting legal loopholes in public benefits programs, he added, “I have no evidence that they are cheating or gaming the system, though they do seem to have extensive knowledge of the welfare system, given their use rates.”

“If we wish to avoid these costs, then enforcing the law and ensuring that as many illegal immigrants as possible go home is the only option,” Camarota insisted. He expounded, “It is virtually impossible to prevent this situation, partly because of the presence of U.S.-born children, partly because it’s impossible deny people emergency care, and partly because the United States is just not a country that’s going to stop people from receiving WIC or free school lunch or emergency medical care.” He clarified, “If the illegals remain, so will the cost.”

CIS director of Policy Studies Jessica Vaughan said in comments to TWS, “These steps are long overdue. Nearly 30 years ago, Congress decided that American taxpayers should not have to pay for welfare benefits and other services to illegal aliens.” Vaughan observed that numerous presidential administrations, starting with Clinton’s, “have chipped away at that law by creating loopholes to allow federal and state agencies to offer some of these benefits to illegal aliens.” She observed, “Now we are at the point where more than 60% of illegal alien households are accessing some form of welfare, which is an enormous cost for taxpayers, and which limits what is available to Americans who need them.”

“Taxpayers should not have to subsidize vocational or other post-secondary education for illegal aliens, who aren’t allowed to work in this country. Illegal workers displace American workers and cause their wages to go down,” Vaughan said. She emphasized, “We should not be encouraging illegal aliens to stay here to participate in taxpayer-funded training and education programs, when millions of Americans who would like to compete for better jobs should have these opportunities.”

Vaughan continued, “Similarly, illegal aliens should not receive taxpayer-funded child care or other non-emergency health and welfare programs. Access to these programs should be preserved for Americans and legal immigrants.” She explained, “Many American community leaders have learned the hard way in the last four years that generous social service programs like guaranteed access to shelter and health services are unsustainable with mass migration. Numerous studies have shown that this is because, on balance, illegal alien households contribute less in taxes than they receive in public benefits.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Criminal Illegal Alien Lina Maria Orovio-Hernandez received MORE THAN $400,000 in stolen federal benefits

CNN’s Dana Bash Tries to Corner Tom Homan on “Alligator Alcatraz” — Instantly Regrets It

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 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.

Tolerating Riots Hurts Cops, Leads to Lawlessness

An inability to squelch riots is a feature of a failing, or at least a flailing, nation. The U.S. has been struggling with this problem for a decade now, and police and urban-dwelling Americans are paying the highest price.

I covered the Baltimore riots in April of 2015, which erupted after Freddie Gray died in police custody, and left a smoldering CVS pharmacy, a few other battered buildings, and a general sense that masked men can get away with a lot more than we once thought. We later learned the city leaders purposefully allowed the rioting. They told police to stand down. As many of these cases are, this one was marked by ambiguity and missing details around the death, lots of anger, and the aforementioned riots that burned down parts of the city and left several injured — including me.

But this story is not about me or my black eye 10 years ago. It is about the trend, from Baltimore and Ferguson to the 2020 BLM riots that swept the nation with little to no consequences, to the anti-ICE riots that sprang up in Los Angeles and elsewhere and persist in Portland, where several were arrested earlier this week. ICE agents now face gunfire, rocks, and public condemnation from Democrats.

After the riots in Ferguson, Missouri, there were reports of nationwide police discouragement and a spike in violent crime in many places. This phenomenon occurred again in the aftermath of the 2020 riots. Police turnover increased as cops were maligned as racist. Meanwhile, violent crime spiked. Over the last decade, anecdotal evidence suggests police officers pulled back from high-crime neighborhoods, many fearful of becoming the next scapegoat for perceived institutional racism.

I discussed this topic and more on the “Outstanding” podcast with Jason Johnson, a former cop who now serves as president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund. Sam McCarthy, a writer for the Washington Stand who covers these topics, also joined us on the podcast.

“It devastated police morale,” Johnson said of the 2020 riots, “pretty much everywhere, to the point where there’s the immediate impact of surging crime. Crime surged in 2020 … [and] homicide numbers went up in 2020 pretty much everywhere — some places significantly, 70% in a one-year increase.” He continued, “We actually published a study on this very recently where we retrospectively looked at this data. We looked at the crime numbers, and then we looked at measures of police productivity. So when you think about hardworking police officer,” he prompted, “what do you think about them doing? You think about them making arrests, right? If you’re out there looking for criminals, you’re probably going to find them and you’re probably going to make an arrest or at least stop a stop, a traffic stop or a stop of a suspicious person. Traditionally, that’s how we kind of measured how productive our law enforcement officers are and how much work they’re doing,” Johnson explained. “And what we found was those numbers move in opposite directions. So the measures of police productivity in 2020 went down very sharply … [because] police are on the defensive.”

So, how should we think about this as Christians?

A few years ago, in a moment of uncharacteristic diligence, I memorized Romans 13. Take a look at this section:

“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing” (Romans 13:1-6).

A few key takeaways: First, God considers government officials ministers of his wrath. Ministers. Extensions of his will. Second, God accepts punishing wrongdoers as a key and godly function of otherwise pagan governments.

Presumably, ungodly governments are at the very least expected to maintain the rule of law so that society can function and the gospel can be preached until Jesus returns and permanently manifests his more perfect governance. Inherent in this text is the idea that God supports police and doesn’t want to defund them, though reform is always an option. On top of that, God is angry at criminals and sees them as worthy of wrath — not simply victims of society and merely in need of rehabilitation. Lastly, government officials who deal with criminals, including police, are worthy of a certain amount of respect as ministers of God’s will, even if they don’t acknowledge God or walk in His ways. The Romans at the time of Paul’s writing certainly didn’t.

Of course, police must act justly. There are plenty of admonitions in Scripture about treating people, and particularly the downtrodden, with justice. But in the nation’s zeal for justice, many have forgotten the God-designed and vital role of police and the respect they deserve as a result.

“As long as you as long as you earn the respect, you will be respected,” Johnson said of these officers. “All that was taken away, and they said, ‘No, don’t respect these authority figures. They’re not good. And that that is the message that has been pumped out through popular media and throughout social media that so many young people are influenced by.”

Johnson said that because of the media narrative against police, becoming an officer “just didn’t have the same luster it had.”

“That That’s the reason that I was attracted to law enforcement. It seems like a way to do good in so many different ways. And they took that away.

Johnson made the point that young people are not as attracted to becoming officers because of the cultural narrative.

“It’s very simple. … [T]he people who have influence in our culture have to speak out about the positives of law enforcement and as a career as a profession, that it really is a good thing. It’s a good thing to do if you want to create a positive force in your community. And so, I think it’s as simple as that.”

AUTHOR

Casey Harper

Casey Harper is managing editor for broadcast for The Washington Stand and host of the Outstanding podcast.

RELATED ARTICLE: Anti-ICE Violence Escalates to Doxing, Threatening Officers at Home

RELATED VIDEO: Iranian-Linked Website CROWDFUNDING a Hit on President Trump — Over $40 MILLION Raised

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 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.