Abdul El-Sayed, who is currently front-running the Democratic Party primaries has been backed up by Bernie Sanders surrogate and controversial Muslim activist Linda Sarsour for nearly a decade.
That Slow Joe's administration created the basis for aggression by Hamas and Hezb'allah should come as a surprise to no one.
Did you imagine for a moment that the notion that the most openly diverse, democratic country in the Middle East, which goes to unheard-of lengths to protect citizens in enemy territory, was an "apartheid, genocider” sprung up spontaneously? That this defamation arose all on its own through large grassroots movements? Of course, this is not how so many libels against Israel took root.
In an extensively documented report, the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives found that the Biden Administration sent funds to NGOs (Non-Government Organizations) that used them to destabilize the Israeli government and fund anti-American and anti-Israeli activities here. These efforts, unsurprisingly, have generated a wave of anti-semitism in the U.S. and have certainly encouraged Hamas’ belief that the Netanyahu government was weakened enough that it could conduct the barbaric actions of October 7 without being stopped or being subject to an appropriate military response. The Committee Report details that these movements were never organic. They were well-funded, mostly by U.S. taxpayers. They did not spring up spontaneously. You and I paid for this through the underhanded, vile Biden administration. Everything was financed by the U.S. government funneling cash through tax-exempt, underregulated organizations.
The report is lengthy. To fully understand the context of the Biden actions, here’s a brief history. A substantial thorn in the side of many Israelis is the power of their largely self-selected Supreme Court. Without an executive and legislative role in seating the Court, nor a written constitution to circumscribe its jurisdiction, that Court (reliably left-wing) has gone so far as to strike down laws and appointments on vague grounds of “reasonableness.” Those who think the role of the Israeli Parliament (Knesset) has been superseded by the Court (the Israel Right) wanted the Knesset to have the power to override the Court and change the method by which the Court’s judges were selected. In July 2023, the government of Israel passed one part of the reform package -- it limited the reasonableness doctrine. Mass protests prevented further reform, mass protests that the committee found were funded by the Biden Administration. The October 7 attack by Hamas followed, and efforts at further judicial reform remain stalled.
The money for the anti-Netanyahu protests and terrorist groups was funneled through USAID, the State Department, the Department of Defense, and other federal agencies. The committee notes, ”There is evidence that U.S. nonprofits may be violating 501(c)(3) provisions of U.S. law by funding radical anti-Israel groups and protests against the Israeli government.”
Here are some of the organizations singled out in the Committee report:
Abraham Initiatives
This outfit received $2.05 million from the U.S. It “created propaganda to support the protests and used social media groups to update people ‘on all things related to the protest movement against the regime coup.’” The money it received was from USAID and the Department of State. The USAID Inspector General’s Office issued an “advisory notice regarding the ‘challenges and vulnerabilities that exist’ within the agency’s monitoring capabilities and warned that “these challenges persisted after the Biden-Harris Administration’s ‘Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act,” which granted another billion dollars “for additional humanitarian aid in Gaza.”
The Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, and the Tides Foundation
These U.S. tax-exempt organizations “provided over $5 million to groups that funded anti-Israel protests in the U.S. and Israel, and supported multiple terrorist-linked NGOs.”
“[T]he Jewish Communal Fund [JCF], and its grantees, Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors (RPA) and PEF [Peace and Education Foundation] Israel Endowment Funds may have violated their tax-exempt status by funding groups engaged in radical anti-government campaigns in Israel.”
RPA received millions of dollars from USAID, the State Department, and the Department of Defense. PEF received $41.2 million from JCF, which it used to fund radical protest groups.
Together, the two Rockefeller outfits donated millions to leftist anti-Israel groups, including the Tides Network, and Tides donated some funds to a “U.S. nonprofit with ‘zero [funding] transparency’ that ‘promotes a narrative of sole Israeli aggression.”
The Rockefeller Brothers Fund “provided nearly $4 million to radical, anti-Israel groups, including some with ties to terrorist organizations.” While it was funding anti-Israel protests and the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement and terrorist-linked NGOs, it also received more than $50 million from USAID and the State Department.
The Rockefeller Brothers Fund provided almost a half-million dollars to the anti-Zionist Jewish Voice for Peace, a group so foul that it blames the October 7 terrorist attack by Hamas on “Israeli apartheid occupation -- and United States complicity in that oppression as the source of all this violence.”
As well, this fund gave a grant to six entities that the Israel Ministry of Defense designates as “terror organizations.”
From 2016 to 2022, USAID granted $30 million to the Tides Network, which certified that “it had not provided and would not provide ‘material support or resources’ to any individual or entity associated with committing terrorist acts in any context within the past ten years.” To the contrary, however, the committee found that the Tides Foundation (part of the Tides Network) “provided significant funding to anti-Israel groups with ties to terrorist organizations.”
Yet another Tides entity, the Tides Center, provided over $1 million since 2019 to radical anti-Israel protest groups.
The interference with Israeli politics has been patent enough to allow substantial documentation. It’s my own view that we will soon see more evidence of election interference here and in places like Brazil, where more subtle, hard-to-uncover machinations took place under Biden and his cohorts.
On “the edge of an historic victory” in Iran
In a most thoughtful post, Newt Gingrich said he was convinced we are on “the edge of historic victory” as a result of the “historic coalition” President Trump formed.
After spending this week reviewing the Iranian war I am now convinced President Trump is on the edge of an historic victory. The real breakthrough for me came as I reviewed President Trump’s decisions and maneuvers not from the standpoint of American unilateralism but from the standpoint of the leader of a remarkable historic coalition, the largest coalition ever put together in the modern Middle East. Everyone understands that Israel is an important ally. What is little discussed is the depth of support from the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region. It has to be sobering for the Iranian dictatorship to realize that it does not have a single ally willing to challenge the American naval blockade. Slowly, gradually, timidly, our European allies are lining up to help with the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. A great deal of President Trump’s maneuvers against Iran make sense once he is seen as a coalition leader and not just as a unilateral American President. I spent a lot of the last couple weeks reviewing kinetic options including winning the battle of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz and if necessary using the shocking and shattering level of force President Nixon and Secretary Kissinger used against Hanoi and Haiphong in Christmas 1972 (which both leaders believed convinced the North Vietnamese to agree to a truce and the freeing of American POWs). If this were a unilateral American campaign I could enthusiastically support a more aggressive kinetic campaign. However it is also clear it would shatter the coalition because our Arab allies are convinced Iran could still do enormous damage to their oil fields and infrastructure. Coalitions are inherently slower than unilateral campaigns. However coalitions ultimately bring vastly more power to the fight. I am as frustrated as everyone else by the pace of talking with the dictatorship but having reviewed the correlation of forces and the options available to the coalition on one side and the Iranian religiously motivated dictatorship on the other I am prepared to assert that President Trump’s coalition leadership (something almost none of his critics want to acknowledge) is within reach of an enormous historic victory. And if the Iranian dictatorship ultimately proves it is hopelessly committed to a suicidal position there will be plenty of time for a kinetic campaign of enormous power and effectiveness. Either way we are on the edge of an astonishing victory for our values and for a safer Middle East.
I think he’s right, and, if so, the President managed this victory despite the many millions Obama and Biden pumped into Iran and into those NGOs which wanted a weakened Israel, a hogtied U.S., and a diminution of U.S. support for Israel, with the measurable increase in anti-semitism being just a perfectly foreseeable bonus to them.
California’s state Assembly passed the “Stop Nick Shirley Act” on Tuesday, and yet, Nick Shirley is still out here filming.
The Dallas Express covered the legislation in April, when the Assembly Judiciary Committee advanced the bill 11-2. At the time, Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio gave it the nickname that has since stuck, warning the legislation was designed not to protect vulnerable workers, but to silence independent journalists.
“AB 2624 can only be described as the ‘Stop Nick Shirley Act’ – a bill designed to silence citizen journalists exposing fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars,” DeMaio said at the time.
“If this bill becomes law, the message is clear to every journalist in California: expose corruption and you will be punished,” DeMaio continued.
Now that the full Assembly has passed the Act 57-19, DeMaio’s warning is no longer hypothetical.
Introduced by Assembly member Mia Bonta (D-Alameda), AB 2624 extends California’s existing Safe at Home privacy program – previously covering domestic violence and trafficking victims – to employees and volunteers of immigration service organizations.
Under the bill’s text, it would ban anyone from posting on the internet the personal information or image of an immigration support services provider, their employees, volunteers, or individuals living at the same address.
However, critics – like Shirley – worry that the bill’s wording is narrower than it seems.
In reality, it could cover a wide range of nonprofits, NGOs, and health care facilities that receive taxpayer money.
If passed, these groups could be protected from on-the-ground video investigations. Those who violate the rules – and try to independently investigate fraud against those groups – could face civil lawsuits starting at $4,000 per violation, plus possible criminal penalties of up to $10,000 in fines or one year in county jail.
“This bill would have made it criminal to expose fake hospices in LA or the Somali ‘learing center’ in Minnesota if they then claim ‘reasonable fear’ and the business owner gives a written demand not to post the video,” Shirley posted to X on May 26. “Plain and simple, California is trying to make it harder to expose fraud and scare individuals from investigating fraud in their communities, as they could be sued for an injunction to remove the video + forced to pay their attorney fees + minimum $4,000 in damages.”
“The Attorney General’s wife, Mia Bonta, created this bill and is now trying to make it law. How is this not a conflict of interest?” Shirley asked.
Shirley’s viral videos have documented what he and federal prosecutors say is rampant fraud in government-funded programs. After exposing suspected daycare fraud in Minnesota, Shirley turned his camera toward California. His team documented over $170 million in suspected fraud involving hospice operations, capturing footage of owners and operators allegedly profiting lavishly from schemes billing Medicare for patients who were not terminally ill.
That journalism led to real consequences. Federal prosecutors launched “Operation Never Say Die,” charging over a dozen people in a $50+ million Medicare hospice scheme, while arresting eight others for high-level healthcare fraud in California.In other words, the footage worked, helping to expose mass fraud. Now, California Democrats have passed a law that could make that footage illegal.
The bill’s passage is raising questions about a conflict of interest. The author of the bill, Assembly member Bonta, is married to California Attorney General Rob Bonta. His office worked with federal prosecutors on “Operation Never Say Die” – the same crackdown that targeted the kind of organizations her bill would now protect from independent journalism or investigations.
Even if there’s no direct coordination between the husband and wife behind the scenes, the optics are tough to ignore.
Not everyone sees the bill as an attack on free speech or independent journalism. Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins (D) defended the measure on the Assembly floor in late April, saying “this is not a game” and arguing the legislation protects against what she characterized as harassment of immigrant communities.
Bonta herself dismissed criticism of the bill as “MAGA misinformation,” saying in a press release published on April 14 that “under my bill, there are no provisions related to journalism or fraud” and insisting the legislation does not infringe on the First Amendment.
However, groups like the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) have raised concerns about the bill’s potential overreach and its chilling effect on citizen journalists.
“The bill includes a carve-out for journalists, but it could still be used to censor newsworthy information about immigration organizations,” FIRE reported.
I have been writing about the decline of free speech in the United Kingdom for years, including in my book The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.
One of the most critical components of the British censorship system is Ofcom, the Office of Communications, which regulates the broadcasting, internet, telecommunications, and postal industries.
The most recent controversy is detailed in the Telegraph, with Ofcom investigating GB News over the simple replaying of a Trump interview in which he called climate change a “hoax.”
Ofcom is investigating GB News for failing to challenge Trump’s characterization, even though many people share his views on climate change.
It is a breathtaking demonstration of the censorship culture in the United Kingdom. World leaders make controversial statements in every interview.
A free press allows the public to hear such viewpoints and reach their own conclusions on the merits of such arguments or policies.
The debate over the climate change data continues to rage.
The dates for dire predictions for massive environmental disasters, including those of Al Gore, have passed. Professor Guy McPherson received widespread press attention for his 2016 prediction that the entire human race would be wiped out by 2026. It appears that he is wrong.
Al Gore received the 2007 Peace Prize for his film The Inconvenient Truth as media, academic, and government censors attacked anyone questioning his data. His apocalyptic predictions have not borne out, and recent scientific papers have rejected the predictions found in the underlying studies.
Gore predicted more frequent and stronger hurricanes, but some insist that global data reveal a slight decline in both frequency and intensity. Others argue that the number may be decreasing but the intensity is increasing. We have not seen the type of global hurricane disaster that Gore described in the movie.
Critics point to NASA data to argue that the areas burned by wildfires have fallen by more than 25 percent over the past quarter of a century.
While the global population quadrupled in the last century, deaths from climate-related disasters have plummeted from the 1920s, when an average of nearly half a million people died annually from such events.
Even the film’s famous use of polar bears has not panned out. Polar bear populations have more than doubled from around 12,000 in the 1960s to over 26,000 today. While some have contested those figures, it has certainly not resulted in the wipeout predicted by Gore.
I believe that climate change is real, and there are other signs of more severe climate events, including flooding, that present real dangers for various countries. The point is not to say that it is all a hoax, but that reasonable people can disagree on this question.
That brings us back to the British censors.
In the last two decades, free speech protections in the U.K. have been eviscerated and the government is doubling down on the criminalization of speech. The criminalization of speech has expanded exponentially as individuals and groups call the police to silence those who criticize them or advocate opposing views.
Even silent prayer or “toxic ideologies” can lead to arrest. Expressing concerns over Western cultural values is now treated as an admission of “right-wing ideology,” warranting investigation. A few years ago, a neo-Nazi living with his mother was found to have a room filled with hateful symbols and material.
Judge Peter Lodder dismissed free speech concerns over the defendant’s possessions with a truly Orwellian flourish:
“I do not sentence you for your political views, but the extremity of those views informs the assessment of dangerousness.”
Calling the defendant “a right-wing extremist,” Mr. Lodder said the contents of his room were evidence of “enthusiasm for this repulsive and toxic ideology.”
The British people have become conditioned to censorship as different groups seek to silence those who express opposing viewpoints. The result is one of the most speech-phobic nations on Earth as offices like Ofcom fuel the fear of free speech.
Alice Weidel, co-leader of the anti-migration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, has successfully sued the Left Party leader and won a retraction after she spread falsehoods about Weidel on live television.
In mid-May, Ines Schwerdtner, the federal chairwoman of the Left Party, claimed during an interview on Welt TV that Wediel neither resides in Germany nor pays taxes.
“Alice Weidel doesn’t even live in Germany, she doesn’t pay taxes here,” she told viewers.
This statement is false.
While Weidel spends much of her time with her family in Switzerland, she has her primary residence in Germany and pays taxes in the Federal Republic of Germany. Weidel has been very guarded about the issue over the years, as she faces a high threat level and avoids appearing in public due to the security threat she lives under.
AfD leader has family taken to safe house and cancels rally due to attack threat
Weidel’s lawyers explained in a warning letter, cited by Junge Freiheit, that this claim was false, as their client both lived in Germany and paid taxes.
The law firm Höcker filed a lawsuit on the AfD’s behalf seeking an injunction. Weidel’s lawyers also demanded that Schwerdtner ensure the relevant passage was deleted from Welt TV’s programming.
Furthermore, the lawsuit calls on the Left Party leader to acknowledge the “claim for damages.”
Following this, Schwerdtner’s lawyer sent a letter to the Höcker law firm stating that their client had “indeed made a mistake.” The Left Party leader additionally undertook to “refrain” from making the false statement that Weidel does not pay taxes in Germany.
The letter also pointed out that the interview in question on Welt TV had since been deleted by the broadcaster. Furthermore, Schwerdtner stated that she would transfer the legal fees “within one week.”
Germany: Left Party wants voting rights for all foreigners who have lived in the country for 5 years
Weidel’s press spokesman, Daniel Tapp, told JF that in politics one “shouldn’t be too sensitive in principle.”
However, when “blatant falsehoods are being spread, one cannot let them stand unchallenged.”
The AfD has been surging in the polls, with one survey last week showing it hitting a record 42 percent in Saxony, double the support of the second-place Christian Democrats (CDU).
Germany: Anti-immigration AfD soars to record high 42% in state of Saxony, nears absolute majority
A poll in May showed the AfD at 29 percent at the national level, while the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) fell to 22 percent.
Russia and the Taliban-led government in Afghanistan have reached a military and technical cooperation agreement, Russian news outlet Interfax reported this week.
The deal was concluded during the International Security Forum held in Moscow. According to the report by Interfax’s correspondent, Taliban Defense Minister Mullah Mohammad Yaqoob held talks with Secretary of Russia's Security Council Sergei Shoigu on the sidelines of the event.
A Saturday message and warning from Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters via Al Jazeera: "The management of the Strait of Hormuz is exercised with full authority by the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran." It added that "all ships, commercial vessels and tankers are only required to travel through the designated routes and obtain permission from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy."
So despite President Trump's latest warning which declared strict conditions on reopening the Strait of Hormuz, Tehran appears to be completely brushing his words aside, and is moving closer to formalizing its authority over vital energy shipping waterway.
State-run Nour News is reporting that a bill outlining Tehran's role in managing passage through the strategic waterway has been finalized and is expected to be brought to a vote soon.
According to Bloomberg, Iranian lawmaker Alireza Salimi did not provide a specific timeline for the vote but said the legislation is on track to become law. Salimi said that "only Iran and Oman can decide on Strait of Hormuz management" - adding that "the Omani side has given preliminary approval" to Tehran's plan. He further emphasized the strategic importance of Hormuz, declaring that "the Strait of Hormuz is more important and more valuable to the Islamic Republic of Iran than dozens of nuclear bombs."
Previous comments by Salimi indicate the bill would cover shipping security, the collection of navigation and environmental pollution fees, as well as the creation of a regional development and progress fund - all of which critics have dismissed as but Tehran's ruse to collect what is in effect a "toll". The legislation is expected to undergo review by Iran's Guardian Council, which is responsible for vetting and approving all laws before they take effect.
Reports of more MQ-9 Reaper damage or destruction have emerged; however, the Pentagon has not verified this, and is not expected to. This along with the past week of 'live-fire' tit-for-tat incidents suggests an escalating situation, even as the warring sides try to get back to the peace negotiations table. It looks like it could be related to the Saturday missile attack on a US base in Kuwait, but details are murky. Per DropSite:
Some latest commentary on where things stand via Al Jazeera... the key issues:
- Unfreezing of Assets & Sanctions
- Nuclear File
"So far, there is no timeframe. However, we know that the negotiations are still continuing. The agreement, according to Iranian officials here, is not finalised yet. Proposals and messages are being exchanged through Pakistani mediators and some other regional players as well," the report says. Per AJ:
The Iranians, while saying that it is not finalised, have largely agreed on many items. However, there are still some sticking points.
Finally, the Iranians are quite clear at this stage. They are saying that they are not discussing the nuclear file or nuclear programme unless confidence-building measures are put in place. Only if the first phase is successful will they be open to discussing their nuclear programme.
These confidence-building measures have been precisely identified as the unfreezing of billions in assets held aborad.
An Iranian Fateh-110 short-range ballistic missile targeted Kuwait's Ali Al Salem Air Base, a key operational hub for the U.S. Air Force's expeditionary forces in the Gulf region. An initial report from Bloomberg News indicates that Kuwaiti air defenses intercepted the tactical ballistic missile in the last 24 hours, but falling debris struck part of the base, injuring five Americans and damaging one MQ-9 Reaper drone while severely damaging another.
About five people, including both contractors and active duty personnel, suffered minor injuries, the person said. One Reaper was destroyed and at least one other was seriously damaged. -BBG
A sprawling conspiracy to strip a grieving Harlem family of their brownstone has netted charges against 18 individuals and three companies, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg announced Thursday — a case prosecutors say unraveled only after years of persistent investigative work into one of the borough’s most brazen property fraud schemes.
The defendants allegedly forged documents, impersonated heirs, and engineered a fraudulent sale of a West 131st Street brownstone to pocket $1.636 million in mortgage and construction loan proceeds. The property had belonged to a woman who died in 2018, leaving her husband, two children and a grandchild as legal heirs.
According to prosecutors, the scheme required a veritable assembly line of fraud.
Co-conspirators allegedly fabricated fake IDs and birth certificates, which other defendants then used to impersonate the family at a real closing, where attorneys, brokers and title agents reportedly stood by — fully aware that the sellers had no legitimate authority to transfer the deed.
“This was a scam through and through,” Bragg said at a press conference Thursday.
It’s been a nightmare on East 119th Street.
The owners of a recently completed East Harlem rental building have been unable to evict a tenant they claim is violent — even though they commenced eviction proceedings in August 2024 and his lease ended on Feb. 28, 2025.
“He happily destroys our lives for two years and I can’t get a judge to remove him from this apartment,” landlord Amy Simek told The Post.
Tenant Falade Aderidigbe destroyed his 450-square-foot studio at 309 E. 119th St. by “breaking down the walls, ripping out sheet rock and destroying the bathroom,” Manhattan Supreme Court documents indicate.
The damage has cost Simek and her son Kevin about $30,000, plus $40,000 in legal fees, she said.
Posts
All Comments
