Is Trump Being Bamboozled?: Islamic State Terrorists Threaten Comeback Thanks to His Support for Syria's Islamist Leader - Con Coughlin

 

by Con Coughlin

For Qatar and Turkey, supporting al-Sharaa fits in with their long-established policy of backing radical Islamist groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, while the Saudis' backing for the new Syrian regime is based on their desire to prevent Iran's ayatollahs from re-establishing a foothold in a country, Syria, that was once Tehran's closest regional ally.

 

• Trump's attempts to improve ties with both Turkey and Saudi Arabia brought about the US lending its endorsement to al-Sharaa's Islamist regime in Damascus. The result is that al-Sharaa has now set about, at the very least, failing to prevent (here, here and here) wholesale attempts, apparently by his own government's security forces, to slaughter Syria's religious and ethnic minorities: Druze, Alawites and Kurds, including America's presumed allies, the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces Army (SDF), who courageously defeated Syria's Islamic State terrorists.

• Syria's Christians may well be the al-Sharaa government's next target.

• Trump's willingness to give his backing to al-Sharaa is said to be the result of his attempts to deepen ties with Middle East states such as Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia which, for different reasons, appear keen to see an Islamist government in power in Damascus -- as elsewhere. For Qatar and Turkey, supporting al-Sharaa fits in with their long-established policy of backing radical Islamist groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, while the Saudis' backing for the new Syrian regime is based on their desire to prevent Iran's ayatollahs from re-establishing a foothold in a country, Syria, that was once Tehran's closest regional ally.

• If the US ever does pull its troops from Syria, the vacuum will most assuredly be filled instantly by Turkey and other Jihadists, as well as by Russia again and possibly China.

• The US president could find himself facing an extremely difficult predicament, especially during midterm elections, if, as a result of his support for Syria's Islamist leader, more Americans and others are killed or suffer serious injury at the hands of al-Sharaa's government, IS terrorists who have escaped from Syrian prisons, as well as al-Sharaa's apparent commitment to ethnically cleanse, then Islamise, Syria.

US President Donald Trump's campaign to prevent Islamic State (IS) terrorists from staging a comeback is in serious danger of being undermined because of his support for Syria's Islamist "interim" president, Ahmed al-Sharaa. Pictured: Trump hosts al-Sharaa at the White House on November 10, 2025. (Image source: Donald Trump/Truth Social/Wikimedia Commons)

US President Donald Trump's campaign to prevent Islamic State (IS) terrorists from staging a comeback is in serious danger of being undermined because of his support for Syria's Islamist "interim" president, Ahmed al-Sharaa.

It was not that long ago that al-Sharaa had a $10 million bounty on his head after Washington designated him a terrorist for his close links to al-Qaeda in both Iraq and Syria.

The bounty was subsequently lifted after al-Sharaa, with significant military backing from Turkey, succeeded in overthrowing the Baathist dictatorship of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in late 2024.

Trump's attempts to improve ties with both Turkey and Saudi Arabia brought about the US lending its endorsement to al-Sharaa's Islamist regime in Damascus. The result is that al-Sharaa has now set about, at the very least, failing to prevent (here, here and here) wholesale attempts, apparently by his own government's security forces, to slaughter Syria's religious and ethnic minorities: Druze, Alawites and Kurds, including America's presumed allies, the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces Army (SDF), who courageously defeated Syria's Islamic State terrorists.

Syria's Christians may well be the al-Sharaa government's next target.

Al-Sharaa's meeting with Trump at the White House in November 2025 ended with US officials announcing that the new Syrian regime had been invited to join Trump's international coalition to combat the threat posed by IS terrorists -- a remarkable turnaround in al-Sharaa's fortunes, given his previous close association with Islamist terrorist organizations.

The Trump administration has become increasingly concerned at the prospect of IS staging a comeback after suffering a catastrophic defeat at the hands of US coalition forces in 2017, which succeeded in destroying the so-called caliphate that IS had established in the Syrian city of Raqqa.

The prominent role played by the Kurdish-led SDF proved crucial to the eventual outcome of that US-led offensive.

Trump's decision, therefore, to invite a known Islamist such as al-Sharaa to join the latest US effort to crush IS understandably raised many eyebrows in Washington, with critics questioning whether the new Syrian leader could be trusted to take a firm stand against IS terrorists.

Following his White House meeting with al-Sharaa, Trump appeared impervious to such concerns. He claimed that his main priority was "to see Syria become a country that's very successful. And I think this leader can do it. I really do."

Al-Sharaa, for his part, assured Fox News that his visit to the White House represented a "new era" in which the country would cooperate with the US.

Trump's willingness to give his backing to al-Sharaa is said to be the result of his attempts to deepen ties with Middle East states such as Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia which, for different reasons, appear keen to see an Islamist government in power in Damascus -- as elsewhere. For Qatar and Turkey, supporting al-Sharaa fits in with their long-established policy of backing radical Islamist groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, while the Saudis' backing for the new Syrian regime is based on their desire to prevent Iran's ayatollahs from re-establishing a foothold in a country, Syria, that was once Tehran's closest regional ally.

Trump's backing for al-Sharaa, at a time when he has repeatedly declared his determination to prevent IS terrorists from staging a comeback, now faces the very real prospect of backfiring spectacularly after recent events in Syria, where al-Sharaa's attacks against Kurdish strongholds in the north of the country have resulted in hundreds of IS terrorists escaping from Kurdish-run prison camps.

Al-Sharaa's forces earlier this month launched a series of assaults, ostensibly with Trump's backing, against Kurdish-controlled regions of northern Syria as part of his efforts to assert his control over the entire country.

The Kurds established their own autonomous zone while fighting alongside US forces during Syria's long-running civil war, and around 1,500 US troops still remain in the area, partly to protect the Kurds, as well as to help maintain security for the estimated 50,000 IS terrorists and their dependents that were taken prisoner following the fall of Raqqa.

Trump has made no secret of his desire to end America's military involvement in Syria. At the end of his first term in office, he tried to withdraw the remaining US forces, but had to abandon the plan after being accused of betraying the Kurds, who had proved themselves to be such valued allies during the war against IS.

Since returning to office last year, Trump has renewed his efforts to end US military involvement in Syria – a move said to be one of the reasons behind his decision to back al-Sharaa's Islamist regime.

If the US ever does pull its troops from Syria, the vacuum will most assuredly be filled instantly by Turkey and other Jihadists, as well as by Russia again and possibly China.

Trump's support for Al-Sharaa has, in addition, raised concerns about the fate of the IS prisoners still being held in Kurdish-controlled territory, after reports that significant numbers managed to escape during recent fighting between government forces and the Kurdish-led SDF.

There have even been reports of IS raising its flag again in Raqqa after al-Sharaa's forces seized control of the city from the Kurds.

Certainly, any development that results in IS terrorists re-establishing a foothold in Syria could prove more than embarrassing for the Trump administration after the president personally pledged his commitment to maintain the US military effort to prevent the terrorist group from regrouping.

The White House recently authorised strikes against IS bases in both Syria and Nigeria after three US military personnel were killed in an IS ambush in December, prompting Trump to promise that his administration would undertake "very serious retaliation" against those responsible for the killings.

The US president could find himself facing an extremely difficult predicament, especially during midterm elections, if, as a result of his support for Syria's Islamist leader, more Americans and others are killed or suffer serious injury at the hands of al-Sharaa's government, IS terrorists who have escaped from Syrian prisons, as well as al-Sharaa's apparent commitment to ethnically cleanse, then Islamise, Syria.

Con Coughlin is the Telegraph's Defence and Foreign Affairs Editor and a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.

Source:https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22240/trump-sharaa-syria-islamic-state

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump’s Maliki message underscores Iraq’s growing strategic risk, won't back him as PM - Seth J. Frantzman

 

by Seth J. Frantzman

Maliki was last in charge in 2014, when ISIS took over part of Iraq. He spent years in the wilderness before returning to the spotlight.

 

 

US President Donald Trump called last week for Iraq’s former prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, not to be appointed for a new term.

Maliki was last in charge in 2014, when ISIS took over part of Iraq. He spent years in the wilderness before returning to the spotlight.

Why Trump chose to weigh in on his possible elevation to prime minister is not clear.

Perhaps the US president was wary of having a pro-Iran leader in Iraq at a time when the US needed Iraq due to changes in the US posture in Syria. This happens while the US is moving ISIS detainees to Iraq from Syria.

In Iraq, many parties are angling ahead of the appointment of a new president and prime minister. The powerful Kurdish KDP is in talks with the Shi’ite Coordination Framework, Shafaq News says.

Former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki reacts at a polling station inside Al-Rasheed Hotel during the parliamentary election in Baghdad, Iraq, November 11, 2025. (credit: REUTERS/THAIER AL-SUDANI/FILE PHOTO)

Meanwhile, Rudaw media reported that in the Kurdistan region of Erbil, in northern Iraq, “Iraq’s ruling Coordination Framework said Saturday it remains committed to nominating former prime minister Nouri al-Maliki as its candidate for the premiership, despite a warning from US President Donald Trump that Washington would end its support for Iraq if Maliki returns to office.”

Trump warned Iraq that US-Baghdad support will end with Maliki as PM

Trump has warned Iraq that US support for Baghdad will end if Maliki becomes prime minister. Meanwhile, the US is also in a state of tension with Iran, meaning that Iraq could be the center of a new conflict.

Videos over the weekend showed that Iranian-backed militias may be stockpiling missiles in an underground site in Iraq. The militias, such as Badr, Kataib Hezbollah, and Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba, are also threatening to back Iran in case of a war.

Meanwhile, in Erbil in the Kurdistan region, the Kurdish leadership is trying to balance their work in Syria to help Kurds there with efforts to determine which Kurdish leader might be able to secure Iraq’s presidency. Since the US invasion in 2003, Iraq’s president, a largely ceremonial role, has been Kurdish.

At the same time, there are many questions about what has happened with Mark Savaya, the American tapped by the Trump administration as an envoy to Iraq. His X/Twitter account appeared to have been abruptly disabled last week, days after Trump slammed Maliki. Savaya had been outspoken against the militias in Iraq and Iran’s influence.

Shafaq News reported on February 1 that “informed sources reported on Sunday that US President Donald Trump is considering assigning the Iraq file to Tom Barrack, instead of the current special envoy Mark Savaya.”

The report said “private sources told Shafaq News Agency that the US President has begun considering assigning the Iraq file to Tom Barrack, noting that the latter has extensive experience in Middle Eastern affairs and deep knowledge of the region, but no final decision has been made on this matter yet. According to the sources, the American objectives in Iraq will remain unchanged, whether the mission continues under Savaya's leadership or is assigned to Barak, and include confronting Iranian-backed militias.”

Reuters had also reported that “US special envoy for Iraq Mark Savaya no longer in the post, sources say.” However, Diyar Kurda of Rudaw posted that “I talked to Mark Savaya and he dismissed the reports, saying he has not yet begun the role and is still awaiting his credentials. He questioned how he could have been fired before officially starting the position.”

Amberin Zaman of Al-Monitor also wrote on January 29 X that “I just communicated directly with the US special envoy for Iraq, Mark Savaya,  who flatly denied rumors that he has been dismissed from his post.”

Trump’s post about Maliki was designed to have an effect. If Iraq moves forward with Malik, this will pressure the US.

Iran also did the same by killing thousands of protesters after Trump warned them not to.

Iraq is now in the center of many intriguing situations, from the ISIS members in Syria being moved to Iraq, to US-Iran tension, Iraqi militias, and other issues. 

Seth J. Frantzman

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-885212

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Gaza's Rafah crossing reopens for first time in a year to pedestrians only - Amir Bohbot, Amichai Stein

 

by Amir Bohbot, Amichai Stein

Only a handful of crossings are expected on Sunday, according to Walla, allowing operators to ensure that all identification screening systems are functioning properly.

 

The Rafah border crossing on the Egyptian side, in Rafah, Egypt, January 29, 2026.

(photo credit: REUTERS/STRINGER)

 

Gaza's Rafah Border Crossing reopened to pedestrian traffic on Sunday morning, for the first time since 2025, under the supervision of representatives from Egypt, the European Union, and the IDF’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT).

Although the lists of civilians crossing have already been approved by Israel, only a handful of crossings are expected on Sunday, according to Walla.

COGAT later corroborated this, noting that it is a "pilot test" during which COGAT will "assess the operation of the crossing." The pilot will allow operators to rehearse procedures and ensure that all identification screening systems are functioning properly, Walla noted.

The free movement of people between Gaza and Egypt is expected to fully begin on Monday, COGAT confirmed.

Approximately 10 ambulances are also preparing to enter the Gaza Strip in order to evacuate sick and injured Palestinians, according to Arab media.

Egyptians protest against the U.S. President Donald Trump's proposal for Egypt and Jordan to host over a million Palestinians from Gaza, at a gate at the Rafah border crossing, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Rafah, Egypt, January 31, 2025. (credit: STRINGER/ REUTERS)

Israel agreed to a limited reopening of the crossing under a full Israeli monitoring mechanism last week, according to the Prime Minister’s Office.

Also last week, The Jerusalem Post, citing two sources familiar with the matter, reported that discussions on disarming Hamas are expected to begin after the crossing reopens.

According to the sources, a Palestinian technocratic administration in Gaza is slated to lead negotiations with Hamas regarding disarmament. “The idea is that Palestinians will negotiate with Palestinians,” one of the sources said.

Rafah crossing reopens, sparks criticism from Israeli politicians

The crossing will be run by Palestinian personnel who are not affiliated with the Palestinian Authority and do not wear PA uniforms, alongside European Union observers from the EUBAM mission.

"Smotrich and Ben Gvir folded as usual: the Rafah crossing was opened this morning in both directions, including the presence of representatives of the Palestinian Authority. The IDF is not there," Opposition head Yair Lapid posted to X/Twitter on Sunday, criticizing the opening of the crossing.

MK Yulia Malinovsky (Yisrael Beytenu) also slammed the crossing's reopening in a Sunday post to X/Twitter.

"Today is Netanyahu's day of absolute victory, today the Rafah crossing will open for the benefit of his friends, the Hamas terrorists," she wrote, noting that since April, the government has also greatly expanded operations at the Kerem Shalom Crossing to "monstrous dimensions."

היום יום הניצחון המוחלט של נתניהו, היום יפתח מעבר רפיח לרווחתם של חבריו, מחבלי החמאס.
יחד עם זאת, ממשלת ישראל הרחיבה באופן משמעותי את מעבר כרם שלום למידות מפלצתיות ולא, ההחלטה על מעבר כרם שלום זה לא בגלל לחץ של טראמפ או לחץ בינלאומי אלא רק על סמך החלטה של ממשלת ישראל עוד באפריל… pic.twitter.com/csEV2i6r63

— Yulia Malinovsky יוליה מלינובסקי (@YuliaMalinovsky) February 1, 2026

The move, aligned with US President Donald Trump’s 20-point peace plan, was contingent on Hamas returning all hostages, living and deceased, and on what the PMO described as a “100% effort” by Hamas to locate and return the remains of all deceased hostages.

The decision to reopen the crossing also came before Israel confirmed the identification of St.-Sgt.-Maj. Ran Gvili's remains last week.

Anna Barsky contributed to this report.

Amir Bohbot, Amichai Stein

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-885155

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

New security accord between Syria, SDF points to structural realignment, implementation uncertain - Rizik Alabi

 

by Rizik Alabi

The new agreement, described as a “qualitative shift,” differs in both form and substance from previous understandings reached in recent years.

 

SDF leader Mazloum Abdi (L) and Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa (R) signing a deal to end the war between their two groups, March 2025.

(photo credit: SCREENSHOT/X/VIA SECTION 27A OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT)

 

A new security agreement between the Syrian government and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) comes at what officials describe as one of the most sensitive periods since the conflict began and could signal a broader shift in northeastern Syria, which has long remained outside full state control.  

For more stories from The Media Line go to themedialine.org

The new agreement, described as a “qualitative shift,” differs in both form and substance from previous understandings reached in recent years.

While earlier arrangements focused on ceasefires or the temporary management of contact points, the current accord moves toward a deeper restructuring of security and military relations.

It aims to accomplish this through a comprehensive ceasefire, troop redeployment, and the organized integration of entire units into the Syrian army, rather than the selective, individual integration previously practiced.   

Since 2012, the relationship between Damascus and the SDF has been complex, marked by cautious tension and situational understandings.

Soldiers from the Syrian Democratic Forces stand in front of the detainees before the first exchange operation between the Syrian Democratic Forces and the Syrian government in Aleppo, Syria, April 3, 2025. (credit: REUTERS/MAHMOUD HASSANO)

SDF estabilisshed own administrative structures

While the SDF established its own administrative structures and military control with international backing, the Syrian government maintained a limited and largely symbolic security presence in certain cities, notably Al-Hasakah and Qamishli.

This relationship, which never matured into a genuine partnership, has remained contingent on regional and international power dynamics, shaped by both the US presence and Damascus’ internal calculations.

A key aspect of this agreement is the understanding that regular Syrian army forces will be absent from major city centers in al-Hasakah and Qamishli, with internal security forces assuming responsibility for security matters in coordination with the SDF.

This arrangement reflects an effort to avoid direct clashes and provides the local population with temporary stability.

At the same time, it raises questions about the nature of actual control, the boundaries of influence between the two parties, and the sustainability of this security model.

The military dimension of the agreement appears to be the most sensitive, as it stipulates the formation of a new unit comprising full SDF brigades, including one in Kobani (Ain al-Arab), to be integrated into the Syrian army as cohesive formations.

If implemented, this would set a precedent in the Syrian conflict, reflecting a shift from temporary containment toward institutional reconstruction. However, it also raises concerns about the loyalty of these formations, command-and-control mechanisms, and how military doctrine will be managed within an institution long characterized by strict centralization.

NEW -- Here's the comprehensive integration deal now in place in #Syria -- in Arabic & English.#SDF fighters are to be integrated as individuals, not entire Divisions; a major change since the deal agreed in-person in October 2025. pic.twitter.com/mZXQH6BwBq

— Charles Lister (@Charles_Lister) January 18, 2026

At the administrative and political levels, the agreement paves the way for integrating self-administration institutions into Syrian state structures, securing the positions of civilian employees and regularizing their legal status.

It also points to the need to address sensitive cultural and rights issues, such as recognition of the Kurdish language and adoption of the Nowruz holiday, matters long steeped in political and symbolic contention, and a real test of Damascus’s willingness to move from a purely security-focused approach to a broader political one.

A careful reading of the agreement reveals gaps that cannot be ignored, most notably the absence of a clear implementation timeline and of monitoring mechanisms and guarantees to ensure mutual compliance.

This ambiguity creates room for divergent interpretations and may lead to future clashes if differing visions collide in practical application, particularly on contentious issues such as border crossings, oil resources, and detainee files that are not explicitly addressed in the agreement.

On a broader scale, this agreement cannot be separated from rapidly evolving regional and international developments.

The relative decline in US attention to the Syrian issue, alongside attempts by some Arab countries to reintegrate Damascus into their regional orbit, has prompted local actors to reassess their positions.   

For Damascus, the agreement offers an opportunity to gradually strengthen sovereignty without a costly military confrontation, while the SDF views it as an effort to preserve its gains within a new framework that ensures a role within the state rather than isolation or confrontation.

Nonetheless, the fundamental question remains: Does this agreement represent a first step toward a sustainable internal settlement, or is it merely a temporary political truce imposed by the circumstances of the moment? The answer depends on both parties' ability to translate the texts into tangible outcomes and their willingness to make genuine concessions beyond narrow security calculations.

In conclusion, the security agreement between Damascus and the SDF marks a pivotal moment in the trajectory of the Syrian crisis, one where the desire for stability intersects with a long legacy of mistrust.

Between cautious optimism and legitimate skepticism, the future of this understanding hinges on what unfolds on the ground in the coming weeks and months, rather than on what is written in official statements.

Rizik Alabi

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-885204

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Federal judge blocks effort to end Trump administration’s ICE surge in Minnesota - Nicholas Ballasy

 

by Nicholas Ballasy

“Plaintiffs ask the Court to extend existing precedent to a new context where its application is less direct — namely, to an unprecedented deployment of armed federal immigration officers to aggressively enforce immigration statutes,” U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez wrote in the decision.

 

On Saturday, a federal judge refused Minnesota’s bid to halt the Trump administration’s expanded immigration enforcement operation in the Minneapolis–St. Paul area, leaving in place the deployment of thousands of ICE and Border Patrol agents.

Minnesota state officials had asked the court for an emergency injunction to stop “Operation Metro Surge,” a surge of roughly 3,000 federal immigration officers that they argued went beyond lawful federal authority and violated state sovereignty. 

They had accused the administration of using enforcement as political leverage against the predominantly Democratic state, alleging civil-rights violations and disproportionate targeting.

“Plaintiffs ask the Court to extend existing precedent to a new context where its application is less direct — namely, to an unprecedented deployment of armed federal immigration officers to aggressively enforce immigration statutes,” U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez wrote in the decision.

“None of the cases on which they rely have even come close,” the judge added. 

Nicholas Ballasy

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/federal-judge-blocks-effort-end-trump-administrations-ice-surge-minnesota

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Democrats opposing gender ideology face prison for registering as 'Democrats' in Illinois: lawsuit - Greg Piper

 

by Greg Piper

Democrats for an Informed Approach to Gender says it's received more interest from Illinois than any other state, but "party name provision" in nonprofit registration law bans soliciting donations without Democratic Party approval.

 

Democrats for an Informed Approach to Gender opposes the Democratic Party's general elevation of gender identity over sex in public policy, especially subjecting gender-confused people to the lifelong consequences of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgical interventions so they more closely resemble the opposite sex.

The nonprofit's leaders could allegedly be fined or go to prison in Illinois if they register as "Democrats" without the state party's permission.

The Land of Lincoln's bespoke "party name provision" in its 40-year-old General Not for Profit Corporation Act, which Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias repeatedly invoked to deny DIAG's applications to solicit charitable contributions in the state, is the target of a First Amendment lawsuit on DIAG's behalf by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.

"Not only would they likely face an uphill battle in getting approval from the Illinois Democratic Party, they refuse on principle to seek permission from the very party they plan to criticize," a flagrantly unconstitutional condition on protected speech, said FIRE, which also filed a motion for preliminary injunction.

While the state party officially supports so-called gender affirming care as "health care," without age or other restrictions, DIAG opposes throwing "gay, lesbian, and gender non-conforming/gender-distressed children and vulnerable adults under the wheels of a regressive ideological bus" through "predatory medical harm."

It portrays the standard Democratic position on medicalized gender transitions as pseudoscientific and harmful to both physical and mental health.

The Illinois Democratic Party told Capitol News Illinois it hadn't received a request from DIAG, but "the fact that they’re proudly anti-transgender does not align with the Democratic Party of Illinois’s values" of "progress and inclusivity."

FIRE noted the Colorado Democratic Party threatened "additional action" against DIAG in the Centennial State nearly two years ago if it didn't change its name, without specifying what law DIAG was supposedly violating. "DIAG confirms that nothing ever came of it all," a FIRE spokesperson told Just the News.

The state party also demanded in 2018 the Colorado chapter of Democrats for Education Reform change its name.

"Illinois can’t get around the First Amendment by outsourcing censorship to party bosses," FIRE attorney Daniel Zahn said. Civil libertarians including FIRE made similar allegations against the Biden administration's jawboning of social media to censor disfavored narratives on COVID-19, elections and Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop.

"DIAG was founded on our belief in open inquiry, challenging ideological conformity, and above all, the freedom to speak out," DIAG Board Secretary Jenny Poyer Ackerman said. "Backing down would go against everything we believe in." 

LAWSUIT: Want to criticize a political party in Illinois? Better get approval first.

FIRE is suing to strike down a law that blocked a group of dissenting Democrats from operating in Illinois simply for using “Democrats” in its name. pic.twitter.com/yJxC5tCvIn

— FIRE (@TheFIREorg) January 27, 2026

FIRE told Just the News that Illinois is the first state to give DIAG a problem and that it's aware of no similar law anywhere else in America. The law gives any "established political party" veto power over other nonprofits' generic use of their nouns and adjectives, including "regular democrat," "regular democratic," "regular republican," "democrat," "democratic" or "republican."

It also gives Republicans power to censor groups such as the Log Cabin Republicans, which calls itself the "oldest and largest organization for LGBT conservatives," and "absurdly" gives the Democratic Party a veto over the Democratic Socialists of America and even the Federation for a Democratic China, FIRE said.

The Log Cabin Republicans were long outliers in the GOP on social issues but now closely resemble GOP orthodoxy on some. Like DIAG, the GOP group celebrated the Supreme Court's ruling upholding state bans on medicalized gender transitions for minors, which are pushed by a "zealous cabal that views children as pawns in their gender ideology crusade."

Massive interest in Illinois based on who's visiting donation page

DIAG can solicit in 14 states without a registration requirement, has registered its name in 14 others and with the federal government, is exempt in six states, only recently crossed "revenue-based registration thresholds" in three states and has pending registration in six, the lawsuit says.

Donations fund the group's "advocacy campaigns, meetings, testimony, educational materials" and communications with supporters about "relevant legislation," it says. 

The group has a waiting donor base in Illinois if it were allowed to solicit contributions there, "with more Illinois residents signing up to receive updates than those in 42 other states," according to the suit. Instead, it's blocking IP addresses from Illinois, which represent 6% of all users attempting to visit its donation page.

Had enough of gender ideology? Horrified by the medical scandal? #shiftthenarrative Join us! https://t.co/M50ydjjMZz pic.twitter.com/HkRrrljpkx

— DIAGdemocrats (@DIAGdemocrats) January 30, 2026

The party name provision is the only impediment left to registration after Giannoulias, the secretary of state, twice cited "procedural deficiencies" that DIAG has since resolved, the suit says. Though Giannoulias didn't mention the party name provision in his first rejection last summer, he has twice mentioned it since.

The secretary of state doesn't seem to know the law he's enforcing, however, by falsely claiming DIAG needs permission from "the National Democratic Party," the suit says.

The constitutional issue is not a close call, with SCOTUS deeming charitable solicitations "a category of speech close to the heart of the First Amendment" because they involve "communication of information, the dissemination and propagation of views and ideas, and the advocacy of causes," the suit says, quoting an 8-1 precedent from 1979.

DIAG is asking for a declaration that the party name provision violates the First Amendment facially and as applied to the group and preliminary and permanent injunctions against Giannoulias denying registration to DIAG and enforcing the provision at all.

Giannoulias has yet to respond to the suit filed Tuesday, though U.S. District Judge Steve Seeger, nominated by President Trump, issued him a summons on Thursday. His office did not respond to a query from Just the News or reportedly from other media outlets.

Greg Piper

Source: https://justthenews.com/nation/free-speech/democrats-against-gender-ideology-face-prison-registering-democrats-illinois

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The ground loyal wingman and the future of manned-unmanned combat - Maj. Gen. Saar Tzur

 

by Maj. Gen. Saar Tzur

If the skies have become dangerous, the ground battlefield has become a truly lethal trap. So instead of adding more and more soldiers or additional manned combat platforms, we add robots.

 

Elbit System's Rook unmanned ground vehicle

(photo credit: ELBIT)

Over the past two decades, the concept of the Loyal Wingman has been perceived almost exclusively as part of the aerial domain. Manned combat aircraft, accompanied by unmanned aerial vehicles, have become a symbol of modern warfare. The UAV flies alongside the pilot, executes high-risk missions, absorbs fire, collects intelligence, and at times even conducts strikes – all without endangering human life. 

This concept did not emerge from technological enthusiasm, but out of genuine operational necessity. Over time, the skies have become increasingly dense and threatening, saturated with air-defense systems, precision missiles, and advanced sensors. The cost of losing an aircraft and its pilot is immense, both in human and strategic terms. The solution was the creation of a loyal, unmanned companion, one willing to assume risks and perform missions that humans would prefer to avoid.

Today, this idea is making its way down to the ground – and not by coincidence. If the skies have become dangerous, the ground battlefield has become a truly lethal trap. Improvised explosive devices, mines, attacking drones, precision anti-tank fire, snipers, dense urban combat, and a dispersed enemy exploiting every corner and contour of the terrain.

Tanks and armored personnel carriers, once symbols of power and survivability, now find themselves increasingly vulnerable. It is precisely here that the concept of the Ground Loyal Wingman emerges – an unmanned ground robotic platform operating alongside a manned vehicle, supporting it, protecting it, and significantly enhancing its combat power.

The sentence that encapsulates this entire concept is simple yet revolutionary: increasing force mass, lethality, and operational effectiveness at low cost. Instead of adding more and more soldiers or additional manned combat platforms, we add robots.

An unmanned ground vehicle is seen next to a counter UAS system A1-Falke by Argus Interception during the defence exercise ''Red Storm Bravo'' in which civilian and military coordination is trained and led by German army Bundeswehr in Hamburg, Germany, September 26, 2025 (credit: REUTERS)

The strategic background: Why now?

To understand why this concept is transitioning from a futuristic idea into an urgent operational necessity, one must examine the strategic shifts taking place in ground warfare.

First and foremost is the human factor – the growing difficulty in recruiting combat soldiers and the continuous erosion of manpower. Modern armies struggle to recruit and retain professional fighters. The loss of soldiers is not only a personal tragedy but also a direct blow to long-term operational capability.

Second, asymmetric threats are intensifying. Adversaries increasingly employ relatively low-cost yet sophisticated means, such as explosives and drones, to target expensive and advanced forces.

Third, the tempo of warfare is accelerating. The battlefield demands a faster decision-making cycle (professionally referred to as the OODA Loop). Human cognitive capacity is inherently limited, while autonomous systems can collect, process, and present information at far higher speeds. Finally, innovation has become a cornerstone of deterrence. A state that demonstrates technological superiority both prevails on the battlefield and sends a powerful psychological message to its adversaries.

Within this context, the Ground Loyal Wingman is not merely another new platform, but a profound conceptual shift – a transition from a purely human combat force to a hybrid human-machine force operating as a single organic system.

The core concept: Human brain, robotic arms

At the heart of the concept lies a clear division of roles. The manned ground vehicle – whether tank, armored personnel carrier, or combat vehicle – serves as the brain and the leader. It defines intent, makes decisions, and leads the force. Alongside it operate one or more Ground Loyal Wingmen – robotic platforms tasked with assuming the dangerous, attritional, or technically complex missions. They extend detection and engagement ranges, enable operational continuity, and function as true force multipliers.

As in the aerial domain, the concept rests on the following three central pillars.

• Shared mission: The manned platform defines the mission and intent, while the robot executes selected components, particularly those that pose the greatest risk to human life.
• Autonomous flexibility: The Wingman must operate across varying levels of autonomy, from full manual control (teleoperation) to autonomous execution of well-defined missions.
• Modularity: The same platform can carry sensors, weapons, logistical payloads, or electronic warfare systems, depending on the operational requirement.

The uniqueness of the ground domain lies in its complexity. Unlike the air domain, the ground environment is filled with obstacles – buildings, stairways, trenches, vegetation, and physical barriers. Therefore, a Ground Wingman must be robust, agile, and equipped with advanced sensors that enable effective maneuvering in dense and complex terrain.

Advantages: Far more than just another robot

The benefits of integrating ground Wingmen are deep and multi-layered, offering a wide range of strategic and tactical advantages.

The supreme objective of ground Wingmen is to reduce the risk to human lives. Autonomous platforms are designed to perform the “dull, dirty, and dangerous” missions. Fewer exposed soldiers, that translates into fewer casualties and ensures sustained operational continuity over time.

These platforms also offer operational force multiplication – a combat team brings greater mass of fire and influence to the battlefield with the same human order of battle, significantly reducing reliance on scarce professional manpower – and creating a substantially stronger unit.

Ground Wingmen can also provide enhanced situational awareness through accompanying platforms carrying multiple sensors positioned optimally across the terrain, generating a richer and more relevant battlefield picture for the entire force.

Tactical flexibility and audacity also increases with such platforms. The ability to conduct multiple missions simultaneously, combined with a greater willingness to accept risk using unmanned platforms, enables commanders to act more boldly in executing their plans. The decision-cycle acceleration (OODA Loop) also increases. This is achieved as commanders receive real-time information from robotic sources, enabling faster and more informed decisions.

The presence of robotic platforms alongside heavy vehicles also conveys technological superiority and strength, while boosting the confidence of soldiers on the ground. In addition to achieving a psychological advantage,the cost-effectiveness is significant. These platforms are cheaper and simpler to produce and maintain than manned vehicles, making their loss in combat a systemically tolerable attrition.

Challenges: The road ahead

Despite its vast potential, realism is essential. The technology is not yet fully mature for complex ground missions. Autonomous systems still struggle with the inherent unpredictability of the battlefield. Communications and control remain a central challenge.

Fast, resilient, real-time connectivity is required to enable seamless transitions between human control and autonomy. Survivability is another challenge. Unmanned platforms are inherently more vulnerable, reinforcing the need for simplicity and low cost to allow acceptable losses.

Cognitive load is also a concern. A single operator controlling multiple platforms may become overwhelmed. However, manned vehicles often include crew members who can dedicate attention to operating robotic assets, significantly mitigating this issue.

Capabilities: A complete operational web

A ground Wingman can perform a wide range of operational roles and capabilities.

First and foremost, it can carry out Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) roles, such as route clearance, detection of mines and explosives, and early warning of enemy presence. It can also be responsible for force protection by securing flanks and creating a physical and intelligence buffer between the enemy and the manned platform, including static and prolonged protection of the manned vehicle itself. Or it can take part in electronic and spectral warfare by signal collection, detection of hostile transmitters, and counter-drone operations.

Such platforms can also provide direct support by carrying light or medium weaponry, marking targets, or operating sensing and deception systems. The deception would draw enemy fire to improve the survivability of the manned platform. Ground Wingmen can also provide logistical support (resupply and CASEVAC) by delivering ammunition or evacuating casualties while minimizing risk to troops.

The concept also includes size differentiation. Small and compact platforms capable of entering alleys and climbing stairs, medium platforms offering greater protection and capability, and heavy platforms that may serve as partial alternatives to tanks and armored personnel carriers.

How the battlefield changes

The introduction of the Ground Loyal Wingman is expected to reshape force structure. Instead of units organized around a single vehicle, we will see paired formations – a manned vehicle accompanied by one or two robotic platforms.

These robots will create a new layer of tactical depth, serving as forward reconnaissance and sensing elements that allow the manned force to operate with relative security. In urban combat, small robots will enter alleys and buildings ahead of soldiers.

Deterrence will evolve as adversaries confront integrated human-machine forces. All of this will integrate with aerial drones and unified command-and-control systems to create a truly multi-domain force.

Conclusion: The future of warfare is already here

The Loyal Wingman concept, born in the skies of aerial combat, is now landing on the ground. It carries the same underlying logic – increasing force and capability while protecting the human element – yet it must address the unique challenges of the ground domain. Particularly in urban environments, the potential is immense. The army of the future will not advance with steel and fire alone, but with a robotic spearhead integrated into the human fist. This represents a genuine paradigm shift, one that promises fewer exposed soldiers, more simultaneous missions, and faster, smarter, and safer warfare.

This is the next step in the evolution of the ground battlefield – a step that those who adopt it 

Maj. Gen. Saar Tzur, a major-general (res.) served for 34 years as an IDF commander. His last position was Commander of the Northern Corps where he led the Multi-Domain Maneuver Array, shaping the IDF Ground Forces for the next decade through advanced strategy and technology. Today, he is CEO at an international defense consultancy and a partner at a venture capital fund specializing in defense-tech 

Source: https://www.jpost.com/defense-and-tech/article-885162

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

NYT Gaza op-ed doctor tied to Hamas, watchdog says - JNS Staff

 

by JNS Staff

The Gaza pediatrician featured in New York Times op-eds and global NGO campaigns is in fact a Hamas colonel, according to NGO Monitor.

 

Hussam Abu Safiya, center, wears a Hamas military uniform at a 2016 ceremony marking the completion of Kamal Adwan Hospital in northern Gaza, in an image posted by Gaza Medical Services. Source: @NGOMonitor/X.

A Gaza physician who wrote New York Times op-eds accusing Israel of atrocities is actually a colonel in the Hamas terrorist organization, according to an Israeli watchdog group.

Senior researcher Vincent Chebat had located a 2016 photo of Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya in a Hamas military uniform at a ceremony marking the completion of Kamal Adwan Hospital in the Gaza Strip, NGO Monitor said on Saturday. Abu Safiya’s photo appeared on the Gaza Medical Services’ Facebook page, a group operating under the Hamas-run Health Ministry. 

❗Breaking: NGO Monitor researcher finds photo of Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya in his Hamas uniform. 🧵
That the director of Kamal Adwan Hospital had a Hamas rank was an open secret in Arabic media, yet he was invited to write opeds for the @nytimes and was praised as a hero in an… pic.twitter.com/xPB05nNr2W

— NGO Monitor (@NGOmonitor) January 31, 2026

Abu Safiya wrote two opinion pieces for the New York Times after the war began, in late 2023 and in December 2024, in which he was described as “a pediatrician and the director of Kamal Adwan Hospital in northern Gaza,” with no mention of any role in Hamas, which is designated by the United States as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

In the 2024 op-ed, he wrote, “We are suffering and paying the price of the genocide that is happening to our people here in the northern Gaza Strip,” and described Israeli actions in Gaza as horrific, without addressing Hamas’s role.

The war began on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas led a cross-border assault into southern Israel, killing about 1,200 people, kidnapping roughly 250 others and wounding thousands more. NGO Monitor said Abu Safiya’s social media posts appeared to praise the Oct. 7 attacks and included anti-Israel and antisemitic rhetoric.

The group said organizations including Amnesty International, the BBC and Al Jazeera portrayed Abu Safiya’s 2024 arrest as part of Israel’s “systematic targeting of Palestinian health workers,” while omitting Arabic-language references identifying him as a colonel in Hamas-run Military Medical Services.

“Those who platformed Abu Safiya must do some serious soul-searching, and figure out how they ended up promoting the propaganda of a literal Hamas terrorist,” Chebat told the New York Post.

JNS Staff

Source: https://www.jns.org/nyt-gaza-op-ed-doctor-tied-to-hamas-watchdog-says/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Minnesota, the Land of 10,000 Lunatics, Turning Red This Year? - Arthur Schaper

 

by Arthur Schaper

Minnesota’s political battleground sparks unrest, shapes elections, and shows how closely the nation’s future can hinge on one state.

 

From the George Floyd riots to anti-ICE insurrections, what is happening in Minnesota? Why are leftist hordes concentrating their efforts to attack and destroy ICE in this state, as opposed to California or New York?

Minnesota has always been an odd, progressive political animal, even a little bit loony (the common loon is the state bird, by the way). Leftist politics has been at home there longer than most realize.

At the outset, Minnesota welcomed a large swath of Scandinavian and German immigrants, and they brought socialist ideas with them. In fact, most of those settlers were radicals seeking to live out their views, having faced persecution in their home countries. They came to America to establish and roll out their collectivist programs and policies, incorporating them into the state long before socialism gained traction with younger voters today.

This collectivist core shaped Minnesota’s political party structure. The Democratic Party holds a lot of sway in the state, but it’s really the Democratic Farm and Labor Party. A more progressive moniker, this liberal movement reflects the more socialist-leaning political program that has been pervasive.

Of course, it’s not as though Republicans have been shut out of Minnesota politics. Republican governors have been elected in Minnesota, but one of them (Arne Carlson) endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016. The last Republican governor, Tim Pawlenty, who served from 2003 to 2011, could have carried the GOP ticket in 2012, but he was too bland for the national conservative grassroots’ interest. What’s worse, according to conservative Minnesotans I have spoken with, he was partly responsible for the increased Somali refugee settlement in the state. Just a few months ago, he faulted President Trump for “stigmatizing Somalis” because of their exposed culture of corruption and violence, plus the lack of assimilation to American views and values.

With Minnesota Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?

The last time the Land of Ten Thousand Lakes elected a Republican for president, in 1972, Richard Nixon rode to a 49-state wave of victory, a massive backlash of the silent majority against the moral collapse of the hippie movement. Yet even then, Nixon won the North Star State by a bare five percentage points. He was also the last Republican nominee to win Hennepin County (Minneapolis and St. Paul). Keep in mind that current deep-blue states like California still voted consistently Republican until 1988, and even Oregon and Washington were voting Republican in 1984! Worse, Ronald Reagan never won Minnesota. Talk about resistance to conservatism!

At the state level, Minnesota politics has often taken a weird turn. Post-Watergate, the Minnesota Republicans faced such damaging prospects that they rebranded themselves as the “Independent-Republican Party.” In 1998, Minnesotans elected a Reform Party governor, pro wrestler Jesse “The Body” Ventura, who also went by the moniker Jesse “The Mind” Ventura. He talked a good game on some issues on the right (cutting taxes, supporting gun rights), but also took some bad turns to the left, favoring the legalization of drugs and prostitution. That same year, the voters handed him a split legislature, forcing him to grapple with a Republican House and a Democratic Senate.

After one term, Ventura left office, fed up with the infighting and the relentless media scrutiny (what did he expect would happen?). Instead of maintaining a dignified political profile, he started hawking conspiracy theories about 9/11. He then began comparing political parties to criminal enterprises (with no real suggestions on how to improve politics). He has since moved even further to the left, praising Minnesota students for disrupting lawful immigration enforcement while falsely condemning ICE for rounding up (violent) illegal aliens.

And who can forget former Democratic US Senator Al Franken, aka Stuart Smalley? Minnesota voters threw out their last GOP US Senator (Norm Coleman) by a slim 300-vote margin. Of course, the Minnesota canvassing board’s decision to count 900 absentee ballots for some reason helped Franken’s cause. Coleman was good enough and smart enough, and doggone it, Franken stole the election!

From there, Minnesota was a blue bastion. Democrats took the executive office, but Republicans would eke out some power by taking back the legislature from time to time. Things looked better for the conservative cause in 2016, when Trump became the first GOP nominee in decades to come within two percentage points of winning. Democrats had every reason to panic at that point. Trump’s working-class rebranding of the GOP pushed Republican opportunities throughout the Rust Belt, and Minnesota is a prime prize for the political taking.

Of course, the fight for the North Star State was not over. In 2022, Democrats succeeded in taking back both branches of the government. With Weird Tim Walz as governor, the Minnesota Democratic Farm and Labor Party rolled out every destructive, progressive agenda program they could, hoping to turn their progressive state into a colder version of California.

Republicans rightly feared the worst, and at the 2024 MNGO conference, they resigned themselves to the fact that there was no hope. But then came Election 2024, and Republicans won a 50-50 split in the Minnesota House. On top of that, the Democrats refused to show up for work! Why? Because one of the Democrats was disqualified from serving since he had moved from his district! That gave the Republicans a brief one-seat majority, and now Republicans run the Minnesota House for the first time in nearly 10 years.

The Minnesota GOP-led House cut off Minnesota Medicare benefits to illegal aliens. They have also launched investigations and filed impeachment charges against disgraced Gov. Walz!

And these slow but steady victories reveal the real departure point for the latest leftist political upheavals in the state. Radical pro-illegal immigration, pro-Islamic militancy activists have descended on Minnesota because they know the state is on a political knife’s edge. As immigration enforcement removes all the illegals, especially the large Somali population of “refugees” who have lived off the United States taxpayer, Minnesota will lose a Congressional seat. On top of that, the Minnesota Democratic Party has long depended on the widespread welfarism, broad voter corruption, and the Democratic open border program of refugees to beef up their numbers. With those numbers gone, Republicans could take back the legislature and even the governorship this year!

Minnesota Republicans still control the House, and they are just two seats away from getting back the state senate. Now that Governor Tim Walz, who was a couple of thousand votes away from being a heartbeat away from the presidency, has given up his bid for reelection, Republicans can capitalize on a lot of outrage across the state and restore a GOP trifecta.

Republicans are close to taking back power in the Land of 10,000 Lakes, a victory that would deliver a huge blow to Democratic power across the country. It’s bad enough that the Democratic Party lost the Rust Belt states in two presidential elections already. If Minnesota were to slip back into the Republican column at the state level, it would open up opportunities for Republicans to take the state for the first time in over 50 years at the presidential level.

Minnesota is a do-or-die for the Democratic Party. They can’t afford to lose the Land of Ten Thousand Lunatics.

Arthur Schaper

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2026/02/01/minnesota-the-land-of-10000-lunatics-turning-red-this-year/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

GOP lawmaker in Washington state ask Trump administration to investigate fraud allegations - Carleen Johnson

 

by Carleen Johnson

“We truly don’t have very good mechanisms set up to track when money is not being spent properly,” said Rep. Jenny Graham, R-Spokane Valley, in a Friday interview with The Center Square. “There’s nothing that happens when money disappears. Who actually is held accountable for it?”

 

(The Center Square) -

A Washington state lawmaker is asking President Donald Trump and the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate potential self-dealing and fraud within taxpayer subsidized programs that fund race-based housing grants, daycare subsidies and more.

As reported in recent weeks and months by The Center Square, state officials and majority Democrats have so far resisted efforts to call for investigations or outside audits.

“We truly don’t have very good mechanisms set up to track when money is not being spent properly,” said Rep. Jenny Graham, R-Spokane Valley, in a Friday interview with The Center Square. “There’s nothing that happens when money disappears. Who actually is held accountable for it?”

Graham has introduced House Joint Memorial 4014, asking the Trump administration to get involved and start investigating grant programs and the state agencies responsible for doling out the funds.

Part of HJM 4014 credits TCS investigations and reporting for inspiring the measure, which is similar to a bill.

-WHEREAS, The Center Square has reported on potential fraud in Washington state's taxpayer-subsidized childcare centers, including instances where licensed facilities received substantial subsidies despite appearing inactive or nonoperational; and

-WHEREAS, The Center Square investigations have drawn parallels to federal raids in Minnesota over similar childcare fraud schemes, spotlighting vulnerabilities in Washington's Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) subsidy system that may have cost taxpayers millions; and

-WHEREAS, The Center Square has documented democratic lawmakers criticizing journalistic probes into these allegations, while republican lawmakers call for independent audits to address unaccounted funds nearing $500,000,000; and

-WHEREAS, The Center Square has reported frustration from legitimate day care owners over alleged fraud within the Somali community, with DCYF claiming to investigate reports but downplaying the extent of issues.

Graham told TCS with both Governor Bob Ferguson and Attorney General Brown deflecting questions about the appearance of widespread self-dealing and potential fraud, and majority Democrats telling reporters they should not look into the questionable dealings, her HJM hopes to get the attention of the Trump administration.

“There are some credible allegations about possible fraud going on and this is one of the reasons why your tax bills keep going up and up and up,” Graham said. “They have to be willing to start looking at where the money is going to stop the bleeding instead of continually going back to passing bills that take more money out of the pockets of the working people.”

The HJM also notes a lawsuit filed by Representative Jim Walsh, who is the Washington State Republican Party Chairman. The suit challenges the “attorney general's disparagement of efforts to preserve public records related to widespread taxpayer fraud, alleging state employees altered records in violation of the Public Records Act."

TCS has screenshots from state websites showing large taxpayer subsidies to home daycare providers, where subsidies received since media reporting began have changed.

“We have a situation where you literally have elected officials, including the auditor of the state saying we’re not going to investigate this fraud. And the mayor of Seattle said she’s not going to investigate the fraud because it’s racist,” Graham said. “So, I really honestly feel like I didn’t have much other option but to try to look outside of Washington state….to find out where all the Washington state taxpayer money is going.”

The House Joint Memorial, which is co-sponsored by 13 other Republicans in Olympia was referred to the State Government & Tribal Relations committee.

The committee is chaired by Rep. Sharlett Mena, D-Tacoma. TCS reached out to her office to inquire if the HJM will receive a public hearing but did not receive a response in time for publication. 

Carleen Johnson

Source: https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/watch-wa-gop-lawmaker-asking-trump-administration-investigate-fraud

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter