Saturday, April 18, 2026

Tehran reverses decision to open Hormuz as ships come under fire - JNS Staff

 

by JNS Staff

Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei says Iran’s navy is ready to inflict “new bitter defeats” on its enemies.

 

A police speed boat patrols the port as oil tankers and high speed crafts sit anchored at Muscat Anchorage near the Strait of Hormuz.
A police speed boat patrols the port as oil tankers and high speed crafts sit anchored at Muscat Anchorage in Muscat, Oman, near the Strait of Hormuz on March 30, 2026. Photo by Elke Scholiers/Getty Images.

At least three vessels attempting to cross the Strait of Hormuz reported being hit by gunfire after Iran’s military declared on Saturday it was once again closing the chokepoint in response to the United States’ blockade of Iranian ports, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The move came a day after Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that the strait was now open to all commercial vessels in the wake of the ceasefire reached in Lebanon.

An outgoing convoy of eight tankers transited the waterway before the renewed closure was announced, Reuters reported. It was the first major movement of vessels through the strait since the war began on Feb. 28, the report read.

Tehran’s tightening control over the strait comes on the backdrop of bellicose rhetoric.

Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei said Iran’s navy was ready to inflict “new bitter defeats” on its enemies, according to Reuters.

The strait was restored to its “previous status” and is now “under strict management and control by the armed forces,” an Iranian engineering firm controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Khatam al-Anbiya, was quoted by The Guardian as saying.

Iraian Deputy Foreign Minister Saeed Khatibzadeh was cited by The Guardian as saying, “[The U.S.] cannot impose their will to do a siege over Iran, while Iran, with good intention, is trying to facilitate safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz.”

Speaking to reporters at the Oval Office on Saturday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that Tehran “got a little cute …, they wanted to close up the strait again. ... they can’t blackmail us,” Axios correspondent Barak Ravid reported.

The president added that by the end of the day, he would know whether the sides would close in on a lasting agreement.

On Friday, Trump said on Truth Social that the chokepoint was “completely open and ready for business” while the U.S. blockade on Iran remains intact.

In a separate post, he added, “Iran has agreed to never close the Strait of Hormuz again. It will no longer be used as a weapon against the World! President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

Speaking at a Turning Point USA event in Arizona on April 17, the president said that the U.S. “will go in together with Iran” to excavate the enriched uranium reportedly buried deep underground after earlier airstrikes on nuclear facilities.

“That’s so deep we need the biggest excavators you can imagine,” he continued. “We’re going to take it back home to the USA very soon.” 

Asked by reporters on Friday aboard Air Force One what happens if the ceasefire is not extended by Wednesday, Trump replied, “Maybe I won’t extend it, but the blockade [on Iranian ports] is going to remain. So you have a blockade, and unfortunately, we have to start dropping bombs again.”

 

He added, however, that “We had some pretty good news 20 minutes ago, but it seems to be going very well in the Middle East with Iran. You’ll hear about. I just think it’s something that should happen. It’s something that only makes sense to happen. And I think it will. We’ll see what happens, but I think it will,” per The Guardian.

Meanwhile, Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr ⁠Abdelatty said on Saturday that his country, Turkey, Pakistan and ⁠Saudi Arabia were working together on a security arrangement for the Middle East that will prevent the resumption of the war and ensure the stability of energy markets, supply chains and food security, Reuters reported.

  

JNS Staff

Source: https://www.jns.org/news/world/tehran-reverses-decision-to-open-hormuz-as-ships-come-under-fire

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran defies Trump: Our uranium is sacred and not going anywhere - Elad Benari

 

by Elad Benari

Iran firmly rejects Trump’s claim that it agreed to hand over its enriched uranium stockpile, declaring it “as sacred as the soil of Iran" and will not be transferred “anywhere."

 

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei    Foad Ashtari / SOPA Images via Reuters Connect

Iran's Foreign Ministry on Friday stressed the country's stockpile of enriched uranium would not be transferred "anywhere", after US President Donald Trump said that the Islamic Republic had agreed to hand it over.

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told Iranian state media that "the transfer of uranium to the US has not been presented as an option."

He stressed, “Iran’s enriched uranium is as sacred to us as the soil of Iran and will under no circumstances be transferred anywhere."

On the negotiations with the United States, Baghaei said that "the lifting of sanctions is of great importance to us, compensation for the damages incurred is a particular priority for Iran."

Trump told CBS News in an interview earlier on Friday that Iran has "agreed to everything" and will cooperate with the United States to remove its enriched uranium from the country.

Trump made clear that the operation will not involve American ground troops. When asked who would retrieve the material, he responded only with "our people."

"No. No troops," he said. "We'll go down and get it with them, and then we'll take it. We'll be getting it together because by that time, we'll have an agreement and there's no need for fighting when there's an agreement. Nice right? That's better. We would have done it the other way if we had to."

The President added that the enriched uranium would ultimately be brought to the United States.

"Our people, together with the Iranians, are going to work together to go get it. And then we'll take it to the United States," he said.

Trump refuted an earlier Axios report, which stated that the Trump administration was discussing the possible release of $20 billion in frozen Iranian assets in exchange for the nuclear stockpile.

"No, we are not paying 10 cents," he said firmly.

On Thursday, Trump said that the war in Iran should be coming to an end “pretty soon".

“We're doing very well, and I will say the war in Iran is going along swimmingly, we can do whatever we want, and it should be ending pretty soon," the President stated at an event in Las Vegas.

“It was perfect. It’s perfect. It was the power we have," the President added. “We had the most powerful military anywhere in the world."

He stated that while he did not want to strike Iran, “we had to because we can't let them have a nuclear weapon. Can't let them have a nuclear weapon."


Elad Benari

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/425672

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Tensions between US and Iran move up a notch - Israel National News

 

by Israel National News

Iran closes Strait of Hormuz, US President Donald Trump insists talks are going 'very well.'

 

Donald Trump
Donald Trump                                                      White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian

 

Iran is hardening its position and announced Saturday that it has closed the Strait of Hormuz, stating it will continue to control the Strait until the end of the war.

A Fox News report cited a regional intelligence source who confirmed that the Strait of Hormuz is now under full control of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and has been shut.

"Multiple vessels have been forced to turn around since this morning as they attempted to pass through the Strait," the source said.

Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump insisted during an unrelated Oval Office press conference that negotiations are "going actually along very well," and that Iran "can't blackmail us."

The Wall Street Journal quoted US officials as saying that the US military is "preparing in coming days" to board tankers affiliated with Iran and seize commercial ships in international waters.

Speaking to reporters aboard the Air Force One on Friday night, Trump said, "Maybe I won’t extend" the ceasefire with Iran, "but the blockade is going to remain. But maybe I won’t extend it, so you’ll have a blockade and unfortunately we’ll have to start dropping bombs again."

Iran's Press TV quoted the country's Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref as saying, "The management of the Strait of Hormuz is with Iran, and this is a legal right of the Islamic Republic of Iran. We will establish our rights either at the negotiating table or on the battlefield."

Regarding Trump, Aref said, "He usually presents his delusions and fantasies, and his positions change frequently. Therefore, his statements, which stem from rhetoric, lies, and delusions, do not need a response."

Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei declared on X that, "The valiant navy of Iran's Army is ready to inflict new bitter defeats on its enemies."

"In the same way that the drones of Iran's Army strike the US and the Zionist murderers like lightning, its valiant navy is also ready to inflict new bitter defeats on its enemies."


Israel National News

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/425677

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The new 'yellow line' in southern Lebanon - Israel National News

 

by Israel National News

IDF declares 'yellow line' in southern Lebanon, duplicating concept used following ceasefire with Hamas in Gaza.

 

IDF forces in Lebanon
IDF forces in Lebanon                                                                                 IDF Spokesperson

Earlier on Saturday, IDF soldiers identified a terrorist cell that violated the ceasefire understandings and approached IDF soldiers operating south of the ''yellow line" in southern Lebanon, a defense line dedicated to preventing an imminent threat to Israel’s northern communities.

The approaching terrorists posed a threat to the troops.

In a rapid operational response, aimed at removing the threat, the Israeli Air Force struck and eliminated the terrorists.

Additionally, the IDF struck an underground shaft in the area south of the forward defense line, as well as Hezbollah terrorists who were identified entering it. A hit was identified.

"The IDF is operating in accordance with the directives of the political echelon," a statement stressed. "Accordingly, the IDF is authorized to take the necessary measures in self-defense against threats, while ensuring the security of Israeli civilians and the soldiers deployed in the area."

"Actions taken in self-defense and to remove immediate threats are not restricted by the ceasefire. The IDF will not allow harm to Israeli civilians and IDF soldiers and will take all necessary measures to ensure their safety.

"The IDF will continue to act to remove any threat to Israeli civilians and its troops." 


Israel National News

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/425676

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Selective Outrage: When Hezbollah Attacks - Majid Rafizadeh

 

by Majid Rafizadeh

Israel found itself faced with ongoing rocket fire from Lebanon and the presence of a heavily armed group on its border – in contravention of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which had unanimously required of Lebanon: "three principles -- no foreign forces, no weapons for nongovernmental militias, and no independent authority separate from the central government -- as vital to a lasting Lebanese peace." 

 

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a political scientist, Harvard-educated analyst, and board member of Harvard International Review. He has authored several books on the US foreign policy. He can be reached at dr.rafizadeh@post.harvard.edu

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22447/selective-outrage-hezbollah

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Why Does the European Commission Support the Muslim Brotherhood? - Robert Williams

 

by Robert Williams

According to a report published by the ECR Group in December 2025, "Unmasking the Muslim Brotherhood. Brotherism, Islamophobia and the EU," written by Tommaso Virgili and Florence Bergeaud-Blackler, the European Commission is still funding Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations that "exploit EU funding and institutions to advance their agenda."

 

  • "European institutions demonstrate a continued record of engagement with and support for Muslim Brotherhood-related organisations. The most visible examples occur in the form of direct funding." — Paul Stott and Tommaso Virgili, in the report "The Muslim Brotherhood in Europe," October 2021.

  • According to a report published by the ECR Group in December 2025, "Unmasking the Muslim Brotherhood. Brotherism, Islamophobia and the EU," written by Tommaso Virgili and Florence Bergeaud-Blackler, the European Commission is still funding Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations that "exploit EU funding and institutions to advance their agenda."

  • A bit hard for the EU, therefore, to feign ignorance.

  • "They [these Muslim Brotherhood organizations] get funding and legitimacy that other totalitarian groups would never dream of getting.... these organizations play a clever game of dominoes, leveraging legitimacy in one member state to gain credibility in another or at the European level, then using that to charm more grant-making bodies. This creates a vicious cycle of ever-growing legitimacy and funding from multiple sources..." — Charlie Wiemers, Swedish Member of European Parliament, in "Unmasking the Muslim Brotherhood."

  • "If an organization claims to uphold European values, authorities take it at face value. Denying funding for failing to align with those values requires ironclad evidence, but monitoring isn't built to scrutinize content. A few missteps are brushed off as one-offs, and any official who dares push back risks accusations of racism or 'Islamophobia'—a chilling effect that will prevent most officials from acting unless they are extraordinarily principled and courageous." — Charlie Wiemers, in "Unmasking the Muslim Brotherhood."

An unelected and deeply undemocratic institution – the European Commission – is boosting the Muslim Brotherhood, spending taxpayer money on it, and legitimizing it. Pictured: European Commission headquarters, the Berlaymont building in Brussels. (Photo by Nicolas Tucat/AFP via Getty Images)

The European Commission, the unelected executive arm of the European Union, assured Europeans in 2019 that it was not spending their hard-earned taxpayer money on supporting the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). In response to a question by Charlie Weimers, a Swedish Member of European Parliament, about the Commission's funding of the MB, European Commission Vice President Margaritis Schinas said:

"[T]he European Commission does not finance extremists. On the contrary, we have very strong oversight and audit of our financing... and if you have evidence to the contrary, I would be very interested to have it."

Weimers later supplied the Commission with the requested evidence. In October 2021, the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR Group), a center-right political group in the European Parliament, of which Wiemers is a member, published a report they had commissioned from researchers Paul Stott and Tommaso Virgili, "Network of Networks: The Muslim Brotherhood in Europe." Wiemers wrote in the report's introduction:

"The aim of this report is stimulate a debate on what new policies we need to institute to prevent the spread of Islamism in Europe. My ambition is to persuade the European Commission to change its policy and stop all contributions to Islamist organisations."

According to the report:

"... European institutions demonstrate a continued record of engagement with and support for Muslim Brotherhood-related organisations. The most visible examples occur in the form of direct funding."

Weimers did not succeed, however, in getting the European Commission to stop these contributions. According to a report published by the ECR Group in December 2025, "Unmasking the Muslim Brotherhood. Brotherism, Islamophobia and the EU," written by Tommaso Virgili and Florence Bergeaud-Blackler, the European Commission is still funding Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations that "exploit EU funding and institutions to advance their agenda." The authors write:

"The report identifies insufficient financial oversight, allowing EU funds to support extremist groups or to amplify their illiberal ideologies. It also warns against a legitimization effect produced by the engagement of EU institutions with Brotherist narratives and structures."

Among the Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations that the EU funds is the European Network Against Racism (ENAR), an "anti-racism network" that advocates "for better EU anti-racism policies and legislation." ENAR received €23 million ($26.4 million) from the EU in the years spanning 2007-2020 and its director from 2010 to 2021, Michaël Privot, a convert to Islam, admitted in an article in Belgian news outlet Le Soir in 2008 that he was affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, before claiming to denounce the organization in 2012.

A bit hard for the EU, therefore, to feign ignorance.

ENAR is active in fighting "Islamophobia", a strategic tool used by the Muslim Brotherhood to shut down all criticism of Islam, in coalition with a whole slew of other MB-linked organizations in Europe, according to the report.

"... ENAR has been in the forefront of the battle against Islamophobia. It has even coordinated a 'European Coalition Against Islamophobia' that was, in fact a 'network of Brotherist influencers' comprising some of the most influential organizations and individuals of the Brotherhood nebula...."

What is even more concerning is that the opinions of this network appear to carry a lot of weight with highly placed EU decision-makers:

"ENAR enjoys a great deal of material and immaterial benefits from the European Commission... Moreover, ENAR is frequently involved as a partner and consultant in different initiatives sponsored by the Commission or EU agencies. In 2021, for instance, it took part in a roundtable on 'racial and climate justice' along with EC Vice-President Frans Timmermans and in another meeting concerning the European Climate Pact. It also delivered the opening speech at the European Commission's 6th Migration Forum. In 2023, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights shared on its social media, and later deleted, a call for a "march against Islamophobia" promoted by ENAR and other Brotherist organizations... Additionally, ENAR prides itself on engaging with multiple political groups at the European Parliament and on influencing documents and reports from the European Commission, European Parliament and the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA)."

Between 2007 and 2019, the MB-linked Forum of European Muslim Youth and Student Organisations (FEMYSO) received €288,856 ($331,000) of EU funding across various projects, according to the report. Even though EU-funding has apparently stopped since then, EU institutions continue to legitimize the organization, the ECR Group report's authors write:

"In July 2023, the Commission stated that no EU funded project featuring FEMYSO was still running.

"Yet, beyond the matter of financial support, FEMYSO represents another towering example of the different forms of legitimization EU institutions bestow on Brotherist entities. FRA explicitly admits its cooperation with FEMYSO, and, in 2023, it advertised on social media the FEMYSO-led 'march against Islamophobia'... The Commission and the Parliament, too, engage with FEMYSO. In November 2021, Commissioner Helena Dalli tweeted about her meetings with FEMYSO members. This happened the same month as Dalli promoted the controversial FEMYSO campaign to mainstream the hijab..."

Why is the European Commission seeking out the opinions of Muslim Brotherhood groups and bestowing legitimacy on them?

Charlie Wiemers, in the report's foreword, writes that EU support of the Muslim Brotherhood has become a self-perpetuating vicious cycle of growing legitimacy, seemingly created both by ideology, bureaucratic inertia and basic incompetence.

"Political directives often push grant-giving bodies to prioritize or earmark funds for minority-run or minority-serving organizations. This, combined with officials' unfamiliarity with this totalitarian religious-ideology, gives Brotherhood-affiliated groups an edge. They can get funding and legitimacy that other totalitarian groups would never dream of getting....

"[T]hese organizations play a clever game of dominoes, leveraging legitimacy in one member state to gain credibility in another or at the European level, then using that to charm more grant-making bodies. This creates a vicious cycle of ever-growing legitimacy and funding from multiple sources....

"[O]ur monitoring systems are toothless when it comes to catching deviations from a grant's purpose. If an organization claims to uphold European values, authorities take it at face value. Denying funding for failing to align with those values requires ironclad evidence, but monitoring isn't built to scrutinize content. A few missteps are brushed off as one-offs, and any official who dares push back risks accusations of racism or 'Islamophobia'—a chilling effect that will prevent most officials from acting unless they are extraordinarily principled and courageous."

This is not only extraordinary, but potentially fatal. An unelected and deeply undemocratic institution – the European Commission – is boosting the Muslim Brotherhood, spending taxpayer money on it, and legitimizing it. Why?


Robert Williams is based in the United States.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22426/european-commission-supports-muslim-brotherhood

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

President Trump says Iran has 'agreed to everything' - Misty Severi

 

by Misty Severi

Iran has since disputed Trump's claims regarding the transfer of its enriched uranium, stating that it will not be moving its nuclear material anywhere and that no deal on the uranium has been reached.

 

President Donald Trump signaled Friday that the end of the United States' conflict with Iran could be coming soon, stating that the Iranians have "agreed to everything," including getting rid of its enriched uranium. 

The announcement marks a significant step in peace negotiations in the Middle East. The U.S. and Israel have been engaged in a military conflict with Iran since February.

The president said the agreement will not require more U.S. ground troops but that Iran and the U.S. will work together to remove Iran's enriched uranium and bring it back to the United States, according to CBS News.

"No troops," Trump said. "We'll go down and get it with them, and then we'll take it. We'll be getting it together because by that time, we'll have an agreement and there's no need for fighting when there's an agreement. Nice, right? That's better. We would have done it the other way if we had to."

Trump also said Iran has also agreed to stop backing proxy terrorist groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas. 

Iran has since disputed Trump's claims regarding the enriched uranium, stating that it will not be moving its nuclear material anywhere and that no deal on the uranium has been reached. 

The president did not indicate when an official peace deal would be announced but said the U.S. and Iran are meeting over the weekend to finalize the deal. 


Misty Severi is a news reporter for Just The News. You can follow her on X for more coverage.

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/security/president-trump-says-iran-has-agreed-everything-report

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

John Thune’s Senate has delayed weaponization prosecutors in John Brennan probe for two months - John Solomon and Jerry Dunleavy

 

by John Solomon and Jerry Dunleavy

Former U.S. Attorney, Independent Counsel Joe diGenova was dispatched to Florida to play a key role in weaponization probe.

 

Earlier this year, the U.S. Justice Department asked two Senate committees to provide transcripts and records of contacts with former CIA Director John Brennan regarding the now-discredited Russia collusion allegations, signaling there was an active investigation into whether the former spy boss had misled or obstructed Congress. The letters gave a hard deadline of Feb. 23 for compliance.

Two months later, the body run by Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has not complied, slowing a key angle of a grand jury investigation based in Fort Pierce, Fla., into whether Obama and Biden-era government officials engaged in a conspiracy to weaponize law enforcement and intelligence tools to harm President Donald Trump and his followers.

All that is needed, senators told Just the News, is a resolution to be introduced and a floor vote in the GOP-controlled Senate. Neither has happened — even after prosecutors narrowed their requests to evidence related to Brennan — though prosecutors were recently allowed to read one Senate Intelligence Committee report in a secure room, officials said.

Thune's team has told DOJ the Senate leader is trying to get unanimous consent to transmit the evidence, negotiating with Democrats to avoid a floor vote that could slow down other legislation. 

Senate keeping evidence from a Congress in same party

The weeks-long standoff means a Republican administration is being kept from seeing evidence from a Congress in its own party’s control that referred Brennan in the first place for prosecution on allegations he misled lawmakers.

One option, officials told Just the News, is for DOJ to escalate pressure by serving the Senate with a grand jury subpoena.

The delay stands in stark contrast to the House, which had already voted to transmit to DOJ similar evidence from its side of the Capitol. It also risks inflaming Thune’s already strained relationship with Trump.

The president has openly fumed that the Senate leader has been unwilling to rid the chamber of the 60-vote filibuster rule and has been unable to muster enough votes for the administration’s signature election-integrity legislation called the Save America Act, which would impose citizenship checks and photo ID for voters in federal elections.

Two spokespersons for Thune did not immediately return an email from Just the News seeking comment. A spokesperson for the Senate Intelligence Committee also did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

A spokesperson for Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley said he was committed to full transparency.

"Senator Grassley has released a deluge of information related to Crossfire Hurricane over the past decade, including the defective annex to the Intelligence Community’s assessment of Russian election interference, which then-DNI Ratcliffe declassified and provided to Grassley upon his request," the spokesperson said.

"Grassley has made public records he’s received throughout multiple Congresses regarding Crossfire Hurricane, including the declassified Durham and Clinton Annexes, and left no stone unturned," the spokesperson said.

A DOJ spokeswoman did not respond to a request for comment.

The delays in the Senate come as Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche is ramping up resources in Florida and Washington DC to develop the weaponization conspiracy case. The career prosecutor who was running the weaponization probe was sent back to her post this week in Miami, and former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova is set to start Monday as the new lead prosecutor on Russia collusion matters.

DiGenova, a longtime vocal Trump supporter who also did legal work for the president, is a veteran and accomplished federal prosecutor who has worked as a U.S. Attorney in the nation's capital as well as an independent and special counsel in politically sensitive cases.

As the chief federal prosecutor in the nation's capital under President Ronald Reagan, diGenova led a sprawling corruption prosecution of D.C. Mayor Marion Barry that secured a dozen convictions, and he also prosecuted convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard.

Later, he was named an Independent Counsel in a Bush administration probe into workers who had improperly accessed Bill Clinton's passport records ahead of the 1992 election, and also acted as a special counsel who probed Teamsters union corruption. 

Brennan claims he's the victim of a witch-hunt

Brennan has been told he is the target of the investigation and denies any wrongdoing, according to a letter his attorneys sent in December to a federal judge in Miami that argued there was no “legally justifiable basis” for the investigation. The Obama-era CIA boss has claimed in media interviews he’s a victim of a “politically-based” witch hunt.

"I think this is unfortunately a very sad and tragic example of the continued politicization of the intelligence community, of the national security process," Brennan said last summer. Brennan currently serves as a senior national security and intelligence analyst for NBC News and MS NOW, and, according to one talent agency receives between $50,000 and $75,000 for speaking fees.  

Brennan’s lawyer’s acknowledgment came after House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, in October referred the former CIA director to the DOJ for criminal prosecution, alleging he made false statements to Congress in 2023 and possibly obstructed lawmakers' ability to investigate the role the now-discredited Steele dossier played in an Obama-era intelligence assessment. That bogus assessment portrayed Vladimir Putin as assisting Trump in winning the 2016 election.

The letters from Assistant Attorney General Patrick Davis to the Senate Judiciary and Intelligence Committees – obtained by Just the News — provide some insights into what evidence prosecutors are seeking in their investigation into Brennan.

Davis’ letter asked the Senate to provide “fully unredacted copies of classified and unclassified transcripts of the Committee's interviews, depositions, briefings, and hearings with any witnesses, as well as any written responses provided by witnesses” related to three categories:

  • The January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment entitled “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections";
  • Documents related to the Steele dossier and its inclusion in the ICA; and
  • Allegations of collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russian officials.

“The Department requests these materials for our official use in an ongoing law enforcement matter,” the letter said. “We respectfully request the Committee provide the materials by February 23, 2026.”

Jordan's criminal referral involved those specific pieces of evidence now sought by DOJ.

Editor's Note: diGenova's law firm represented John Solomon a decade ago in employment and book contract negotiations. 


John Solomon and Jerry Dunleavy

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/congress/satjohn-thunes-senate-has-delayed-weaponization-prosecutors-john-brennan-probe

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Opposition to data centers turns violent as local concerns merge with hostility toward Big Tech - Kevin Killough

 

by Kevin Killough

Big Tech is facing a wave of community opposition to data centers, and some opponents are using violence to advance their cause. Experts say the opposition to data centers has various sources, but whatever the reasons, tech companies will need to find ways to get communities to buy-in.

 

Big Tech faces a number of challenges with the expansion of data centers, including getting the energy to power them. But if the impacts of renewable energy opposition are any indication, the local opposition to data centers is going to become a formidable opponent to the expansion of artificial intelligence. 

Renewable energy requires large amounts of land, and unlike other energy sources, it requires a lot of new acreage in rural areas. Local opposition has been identified as the biggest impediment by Big Wind and Big Solar to the buildout of renewable energy. 

Become fanatical, even violent

The opposition to data centers is not only rising rapidly, in some cases it’s become fanatical. An opponent of data centers fired shots into an Indiana councilman’s house and left a note reading “No Data Centers.” The councilman supported a development commission’s decision to approve a rezoning petition allowing for a data center to be developed, PBS reported

Multiple comments on a CBS story posted on X about the shooting expressed sympathy for the attacker’s opposition. The organizations opposing the data center condemned the violence and said it doesn’t reflect their advocacy. 

Image
protest
Advocacy groups and community members protest laws surrounding data centers while outside the Texas Capitol in Austin Monday, Feb. 23, 2026.
(Getty Images)

A man accused of throwing a Molotov cocktail at the home of Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, had writings claiming artificial intelligence will result in the extinction of the human race, NPR reported

These extremists are on the fringe of the opposition, and most opponents aren’t using violence to advance their positions. They’re concerned about the impact of data centers on their electricity rates, views, water resources and property values. Some of those concerns aren't supported by the data, but whether or not facts support their case, Big Tech will have to contend with the opposition. Unlike renewable energy, it won’t have quite the backing of governments and subsidies to overwhelm opponents. 

Experts tell Just the News that the opposition to data centers is driven by a deep distrust of Big Tech and climate groups. There are also ways that Big Tech can address some of the concerns opponents have and possibly assuage some of these community concerns. 

‘Unprecedented’ opposition across U.S. 

Energy expert Robert Bryce, who has tracked rejections of renewable energy projects for years, is maintaining a database of data center rejections. Between 2021 and April 7, 2026, according to Bryce’s database, 70 communities rejected or restricted data centers. A week later, Maine enacted a moratorium on new data centers. 

Bryce produced a short documentary on the backlash against data centers, where he interviewed opponents of a data center facility planned by Skybox in Round Rock, Texas, which is north of Austin. The opponents in the video tell Bryce they’re worried about the impact of the 60-foot facility on their views in the neighborhood, noise, water use, property values and electricity rates.

“All those issues are in play when it comes to data centers, but then you add in the distrust or even outright hatred of big tech combined with the general public's concerns about AI, and you have a whole then range of issues that are now being used by opponents to fight these data center projects,” Bryce told Just the News

Bryce said he’s been tracking opposition to alternative energy projects for 16 years, but he’s never seen in that time something similar to the level of opposition he’s seeing to data centers. 

“This is unprecedented,” he said.

Climate activists join opposition: "A coordinated national campaign"

The American Energy Institute published a study this month that ties the opposition to networks of activist groups. The study highlights 12 organizations that are actively opposing U.S. data center development, which have collectively received millions from foreign donors. 

“These are not isolated protests. They are part of a coordinated national campaign to slow the buildout of the electricity systems required for AI, manufacturing and economic growth. That directly undermines President Trump’s agenda to secure American dominance in artificial intelligence and rebuild the energy systems needed to power it,” Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Institute, said in a statement. 

In December, 230 activist organizations, many of which are affiliated with the dozen groups highlighted in the institute’s report, signed a letter demanding that Congress impose a national moratorium on the approval and construction of new data centers. Besides the concerns shared by many communities about data centers, the activist groups are also concerned about climate change. 

Because renewable energy is unreliable, it’s not capable of doing much more than providing intermittent fuel savings for the baseload power — mainly natural gas-powered generation — upon which data centers rely. More than half of the power for data centers, the activists complain in their letter, comes from fossil fuels. 

“These are not popping up like mushrooms, as everyone is making them out to be." - Gabriella Hoffman, director of energy and conservation for the Independent Women’s Center

According to the institute's study, these groups have local chapters that host anti-data center events in multiple states, and the local groups are supported with funding from national organizations. 

The study argues that the opposition to data centers isn’t a spontaneous grassroots movement, but rather a well-funded coordinated campaign by groups and donors pushing a progressive agenda. 

It should be noted that proponents of renewable energy made similar claims about the opposition to renewable energy. Anti-fossil fuel activists like Brown University’s J. Timmons Roberts published articles claiming that the opposition was primarily driven by oil companies afraid of competition from alternative energy sources and “climate denial” think tanks. Publications funded by anti-fossil fuel groups, such as ProPublica, also published articles painting opposition to renewable energy as being a front for oil companies’ interest. 

Pathways to sustainable development

Whatever its source, the opposition to data centers stretches across the U.S. A Gallup poll released in September found that 80% of the public wants to slow down the development of AI, and 66% of adults have some level of distrust when it comes to AI’s ability to make fair and unbiased decisions. 

A YouGov poll published in December found that 77% of Americans believe that AI could pose a threat to humanity. Despite the distrust, the poll also found that 35% of adults, including 51% of GenZers, use AI tools weekly. 

Gabriella Hoffman, director of energy and conservation for the Independent Women’s Center, argues that many of the concerns communities have about data centers can be addressed. Hoffman told Just the News that part of what drives the opposition to data centers is a misunderstanding about what they do. 

Facilities requiring large space and cooling systems go back to the 1940s, Hoffman explains in a policy paper, and the facilities handle the data for a wide range of technologies people use every day — from online purchases to emails. “These are not popping up like mushrooms, as everyone is making them out to be. And it's similar, in my opinion, to the fear mongering placed on fracking and also nuclear energy as well,” Hoffman said. 

Hoffman said that, while some concerns like impacts to electricity rates are not well supported, she doesn’t dismiss all concerns people have about data centers. However, these problems have solutions, Hoffman argues. 

Concerns about water usage, for example, can be addressed with closed-loop recycling. Electricity demand can be addressed with more reliable power from nuclear, natural gas, coal and geothermal.

“I think data centers can be built sustainably. We have thousands of them already. It's not as terrible as everyone makes it out to be, and unless people quit their addiction to technology, they’re going to be feeding the demand for AI data centers,” Hoffman said. 

Community buy-in needed

Renewable energy has been able to, in many cases, steamroll over local concerns since it enjoyed massive subsidies and support for governments pursuing an energy transition, which has not materialized

Bryce said that the opposition to data centers provides a path by which people can fight Big Tech, which they’ve wanted to do for some time. Activism over privacy concerns has gained little traction against these big companies, but they are winning at local zoning board hearings. 

“People understand they can't fight big tech in the digital world, so they're fighting them in the physical world,” Bryce said. 

Hoffman said that Big Tech will have to work on the community buy-in if they’re going to get local boards to permit their projects. Tech companies will likely be on board with a lot of what is needed to address many of the concerns. They’ve always been supportive of industry developing alongside nature preservation, and marrying the two won’t present insurmountable obstacles, Hoffman said. 

“We can be judicious and practical with how AI data centers are developed without supporting moratoriums or the kind of NIMBYism [Not In My Back Yard] we're seeing,” Hoffman said.  


Kevin Killough

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/opposition-data-centers-turns-violent-local-concerns-merge-hostility-toward

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Socioeconomic Status Does Not Explain the Black–White Achievement Gap - Lipton Matthews

 

by Lipton Matthews

Income and parental resources fail to account for persistent disparities in academic performance, which emerge early and persist across schooling and subject areas.

 

Prevailing assumptions in educational research hold that black–white differences in academic performance are substantially a product of socioeconomic inequality. Black children are likely to grow up in households with lower incomes, less accumulated wealth, and parents with fewer years of formal education, and these disadvantages are routinely offered as the primary explanation for persistent gaps in measured academic achievement. A straightforward logic has achieved near-consensus status in mainstream academic and policy discourse: address the resource deficit, and the performance deficit will follow. A careful examination of the empirical evidence, however, suggests this consensus is premature. Socioeconomic factors account for portions of the gap under certain conditions and at certain points in development, but they consistently fail at precisely the moments and in the domains where their explanatory power is most needed. The gap persists within socioeconomic categories, widens in ways socioeconomic status (SES) cannot account for, and behaves in patterns that point toward something the conventional framework was not designed to accommodate.

Surface plausibility is not the same as explanatory power. Parents with higher socioeconomic status read more to their children, expose them to richer vocabularies, enroll them in enrichment activities, and generally prime them for academic success in ways that lower-income parents cannot afford. These mechanisms are real and measurable. But a closer examination of the research reveals that SES is at best an incomplete explanation and, in some of its most important dimensions, actively misleading. Gaps persist and widen within SES categories, the components of SES do not behave uniformly, and the specific pattern of which gaps SES can and cannot explain points toward something the conventional framework struggles to accommodate. Moreover, research in the psychometric tradition has long established that when cognitive ability is directly controlled, black and white Americans show broadly similar income levels, suggesting that income differences between racial groups are substantially mediated by differences in measured cognitive ability rather than discrimination or opportunity gaps. If that is so, then income may function less as an independent cause of the achievement gap and more as a proxy for the cognitive characteristics the gap reflects.

Inadequacy in the SES explanation becomes visible almost as soon as children enter formal schooling. Data from a nationally representative sample of children entering kindergarten in fall 2010 reveal that black–white test score gaps are already firmly established before meaningful instruction has taken place. At kindergarten entry, black students scored approximately 0.32 standard deviations below white students in reading, 0.54 standard deviations below in mathematics, and 0.52 standard deviations below in working memory among children with valid scores. These are not trivial differences. A gap of 0.54 standard deviations in math translates roughly to the difference between the 50th and 29th percentiles of a normal distribution.

Controlling for a composite measure of socioeconomic status combining family income, parental occupational prestige, and parental education does meaningful work here. It eliminates the reading gap at kindergarten entry and reduces the math gap by approximately 75 percent. Working memory, however, proves considerably more resistant, with SES controls accounting for only around 54 percent of that difference. Even at its most generous, then, the SES framework leaves a substantial portion of the gap unexplained before a single lesson has been taught.

What happens over the course of kindergarten is where the SES explanation begins to genuinely unravel. Both math and reading gaps widened by approximately 0.06 standard deviations across the kindergarten year. Far from explaining this widening, controlling for socioeconomic background made the picture worse: black students learned less math and reading over kindergarten than white students from comparable socioeconomic backgrounds, meaning the adjusted gaps widened more than the raw ones. SES does not merely fail to explain the trajectory of the gap. It fails while pointing in the wrong direction entirely.

Not all subjects behave the same way, and the divergence between reading and math in these findings carries significant theoretical weight. Gap decomposition analyses revealed that differential school quality by race played a substantial role in the widening of the reading gap, with approximately 71 percent of black students’ loss of ground in reading occurring between schools rather than within them. Math told an entirely different story. Approximately 63 percent of the adjusted math gap widening occurred within schools, meaning that even children attending the same schools and sharing comparable socioeconomic backgrounds showed diverging math trajectories. Multiple alternative explanations, including differences in school readiness, parental attitudes toward mathematics, working memory gaps, student-teacher racial mismatch, and differential teacher effectiveness within schools, were systematically tested, and none provided convincing explanatory traction.

Psychometric research offers a framework for understanding why this should be so. Mathematical reasoning is among the most g-loaded of cognitive domains, meaning performance on math assessments correlates more strongly with general cognitive ability than performance on most other academic tasks. Of note is that the black–white IQ gap is greatest on g-loaded tasks. However, reading in early grades, by contrast, involves substantial quantities of learned, school-transmitted content: phonics, vocabulary, and comprehension strategies. These skills are more directly teachable and more sensitive to variation in instructional quality, which is precisely why school quality differences account for much of the reading gap widening. Math, particularly the abstract numerical reasoning assessed in kindergarten evaluations, draws far more heavily on fluid reasoning capacities that resist direct instruction. If cognitive differences contribute to the math gap independently of socioeconomic circumstances, equalizing school quality and family resources will not eliminate it, and that is exactly what the evidence shows.

Adding a further layer to this picture is the working memory finding. Working memory is a domain-general cognitive capacity that is not explicitly taught in schools, and its gap remained essentially constant over kindergarten, while the math and reading gaps widened. Reading gaps widened in ways consistent with school quality explanations, but math gaps widened within schools in ways that school quality cannot reach. This distinction between what schooling can and cannot fix maps onto the distinction between what is and is not deeply g-loaded, a coincidence that the SES framework has no straightforward way to explain.

Turning from school-based evidence to the home environment, research using data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics examines whether family wealth, as distinct from income, can account for black–white differences in children’s cognitive scores. Raw gaps in that dataset are substantial and consistent with other sources: white children scored approximately 0.4 standard deviations higher than black children on verbal assessments and roughly two-thirds of a standard deviation higher on mathematics for school-aged children. Underlying these gaps is a racial wealth disparity that is indeed remarkable. Median white families held approximately six to nine times the net worth of median black families, and 42 percent of white families owned stocks or mutual funds compared to just 8 percent of black families.

Yet when a comprehensive set of parental and family characteristics was controlled for, including parental education, occupational prestige, income since the child’s birth, grandparents’ education, and, crucially, the mother’s own cognitive test score, the raw black–white difference in children’s test scores became statistically non-significant. Family wealth as a broad measure showed little independent mediating effect, and the gap did not survive the introduction of these controls. Once the cognitive and human capital environment of the home is adequately characterized, race adds little additional explanatory power. Essentially, this is an indirect way of saying that the heritability of intelligence explains scholastic performance.

Within that overall picture, however, one specific finding stands out. Among school-aged children, holdings in stocks and mutual funds showed a consistent positive association with both reading and math scores, persisting even after controlling for other wealth components, income, and demographic characteristics. Acknowledging uncertainty about the meaning of this association, the researchers suggest it may partly reflect unmeasured parental personality traits, specifically a stronger future orientation or financial sophistication.

Pushing this interpretation further reveals something significant. Stock market participation is not merely a financial behavior. It requires the capacity to reason about probabilistic future outcomes, to defer gratification across extended time horizons, to navigate complex instruments under uncertainty, and to maintain confidence in planning when immediate returns are invisible. These are precisely the cognitive and dispositional characteristics that correlate most robustly with higher general cognitive ability in the psychometric literature. Stark racial disparities in stock ownership, combined with the fact that this particular form of wealth predicts children’s outcomes when broader wealth measures do not, suggest that stock holdings may proxy for cognitive and personality traits transmitted from parents to children. Income, under this interpretation, is not simply a resource that buys cognitive development. It is partly an index of the cognitive and dispositional characteristics of the parents themselves.

Most theoretically disruptive for the SES-as-explanation framework is what emerges from longitudinal analysis tracking children from kindergarten entry through the spring of eighth grade. Examining black–white achievement gaps across different levels of family socioeconomic status reveals a pattern that runs directly counter to the conventional narrative: as parental educational attainment increases, black–white achievement gaps grow larger, not smaller.

At kindergarten entry, among families where parents did not complete high school, black children scored just 0.08 standard deviations below comparable white children in math, a small and statistically marginal difference. Among families where parents held a bachelor’s degree or higher, that gap at kindergarten entry reached 0.69 standard deviations in math, 0.52 standard deviations in reading, and 0.84 standard deviations in science. Rather than diminishing as children moved through school, these gaps persisted and in several domains grew further. Income moved in the opposite direction entirely: as household income rose, black–white gaps narrowed and, at the highest income levels, even reversed in some domains. When black and white families have equivalent earnings at kindergarten entry, race gaps widen as parents’ educational attainment rises. At a $50,000 income level, disparities among children whose parents completed high school or some college exceeded those found among children with the least-educated parents by a factor of 3.2 percent in math, 8.2 percent in reading, and 31 percent in science.

Precisely this divergence between income and education as moderators of the gap is what psychometric research on educational attainment and cognitive ability would predict. Researchers, including Linda Gottfredson, have documented that black Americans, on average, obtain more years of formal education than their measured cognitive ability would predict, a pattern attributed to institutional pressures and the reduced signaling costs of credentials when labor market returns to cognitive ability differ by race. If educational attainment among black Americans is a noisier signal of underlying cognitive capacity than it is among white Americans, parental education would predict children’s cognitive outcomes less reliably for black families. And if income more faithfully tracks cognitive and human capital across racial groups because it is more directly tied to demonstrated capacity in the labor market, income would narrow the gap while education widens it. That is precisely the pattern the data reveal.

Appearing at kindergarten entry before meaningful schooling has occurred, persisting and widening within socioeconomic categories, resisting explanation most stubbornly in the most g-loaded domains, and growing larger rather than smaller as parental educational attainment increases: the black–white achievement gap does not behave as the SES explanation would predict. Its most telling component of family wealth is the one most plausibly associated with cognitive and dispositional traits rather than material resources alone. The divergence between how income and education moderate outcomes maps onto what psychometric research tells us about the differential relationship between credentials, earnings, and cognitive ability across racial groups. Socioeconomic status, as conventionally measured and invoked, is not a serious explanation for the black–white achievement gap. It explains some of what we observe at some moments in development and fails, often conspicuously, at the moments and in the domains where explanation is most important.

* * *

Lipton Matthewsis a researcher and podcaster. His work has been featured in Mises, The Federalist, Chronicles, American Thinker, Epoch Times, and other publications. He is also author of Busting African Delusions: Institutions, Human Capital, and the Path to Progress.

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2026/04/18/socioeconomic-status-does-not-explain-the-black-white-achievement-gap/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter