SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:#222;padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.sticky-sidebar{margin:auto;}@media (min-width: 980px){.main:has(.sticky-sidebar){overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.row:has(.sticky-sidebar){display:flex;overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.sticky-sidebar{position:-webkit-sticky;position:sticky;top:100px;transition:top .3s ease-in-out, position .3s ease-in-out;}}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
With violent rhetoric targeting Obama beginning to spread on fringe platforms, fanned by Trump’s and Gabbard’s posts, we risk further normalizing political violence which is already on the rise.
On July 18, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard made a post on Twitter alleging “the most powerful people in the Obama administration,” including former President Barack Obama, were involved in a “years-long coup” and a “treasonous conspiracy” against Donald Trump. Her post quickly went viral, amassing over 13 million views over the weekend, and galvanized the online fringe to fantasize about violence against their political enemies. Trump fanned Gabbard’s flames, sharing a racist AI-generated video of Obama being arrested on Truth Social, which Trump owns.
Major news stories generally act as flashpoints for extremists online to ramp up their spread of hatred and advocating for violence. This time was no different, as extremists, clearly inspired by Trump and Gabbard’s posts, were given new reasons to target their long-time nemesis, former President Obama. The Global Project Against Hate and Extremism’s (GPAHE) research on unmoderated platforms like Truth Social, Gab, and Telegram, which are frequently used to spew hatred and share violent political fantasies, found that users directed racist comments at Barack Obama, and his wife Michelle, and dreamt of political violence, suggesting Obama should face a firing squad or public execution by hanging, a crude reference to America’s dark history of racist mobs lynching Black people.
On Truth Social, comments made between July 17 and July 20 targeting Obama as treasonous and deserving of either imprisonment or execution rose from 3 to 36, an 1,100% increase, including a high of 56 comments on July 19, reflecting a frightening 1,767% increase. Gabbard’s post enraged Trump supporters who were quick to call for a military tribunal against Obama, demanding that Attorney General Pam Bondi “get them all now and don’t waste another day… The punishment for Treason is Hanging,” and that Obama and his former cabinet “should all [be] put up against a wall for a firing squad.” One user expressed glee at the possibility of Obama being “prosecuted for the death penalty,” saying “I’m so happy finally accountability for that corrupt piece of dog sh*t.” Another called for “public trials and public executions” against former members of the Obama administration, saying “our enemies are from within not foreign,” sharing a similar remark from Vice President JD Vance, who in a February address to European leaders warned them of “the threat from within.”
User “zennia” on Truth Social calls for Obama and his former administration to face “public trials and public executions” (Source: Truth Social)
On Gab, a platform similar to Twitter, comments made between July 17 and July 20 targeting Obama as treasonous and deserving of either imprisonment or execution rose from 9 to 48, representing a 433% increase. Users on Gab responded to Gabbard’s allegations by further accusing “commie Jews and black democrats” of “kill[ing] the American elections system.” Others exclaimed they weren’t satisfied with an arrest, saying “Obama should be prosecuted for treason, all asset ceases, and both him and Mooochelle deported to Tanzania,” but would “settle for a firing squad of all on [pay-per-view].” In the same comment, the user accuses Obama of being a “Radical Islamic Terrorist Sympathizer” whose goal was to transform America “into a socialist black terrorist sh*t-hole.” Users called for Obama to be lynched, writing, “All you need is some rope and a little wood.” Others wanted to take justice into their own hands, including one user who claimed, “I WILL DESTROY AND JAIL ALL OF THE FAKE NEWS MSM ALL CRIMINAL POLITICAL HACKS AND ALL DEEP STATE PLAYERS WILL BE TRIED AND EXCUTED!!!!!!”
A racist user on Gab accuses “commie Jews and black democrats” of trying “to kill the American elections (sic) system” (Source: Gab)
On Telegram, comments made between July 17 and July 20 targeting Obama as treasonous and deserving of either imprisonment or death rose from 0 to 12. A manual review by GPAHE of private Telegram groups not immediately accessible by scraping revealed numerous other similar posts. Telegram channels, including ones associating themselves with the conspiratorial QAnon movement, were excited about the prospect of Obama being convicted of treason, which would lead to him facing “the rest of his life in federal prison or the death penalty.” Other chat groups on Telegram, which associate themselves with far-right influencers such as Catturd and extremist groups like the white supremacist Proud Boys, had several users calling to hang Obama (“he should swing,” “let’s see him swing on national TV”), including calls to “hang them all” and “have a huge fireworks exhibition,” while others fantasized about “DOZENS of executions,” saying “MAKE PUBLIC HANGINGS GREAT AGAIN,” a reference to Trump’s motto, “Make America Great Again.”
One user on a Telegram chat group calls for multiple executions, invoking a new slogan based on Trump’s branding, “MAKE PUBLIC HANGINGS GREAT AGAIN!” (Source: Telegram)
Trump has long threatened his political opponents with persecution, dating back to his first election campaign against Hillary Clinton when calls to “lock her up” ran rampant at his rallies (Clinton was never charged with any crime). He’s since continued his assault on democracy by targeting judges who’ve ruled against him, and now democrats such as Obama and Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who Trump said should go to prison. Trump’s targeting of the judiciary has already led to judges experiencing growing, targeted threats against themselves and their families. And there has been other horrific political violence. In June, a Christian nationalist assassinated Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman (DFL-34B) and her husband, seemingly with political motivations. With violent rhetoric targeting Obama beginning to spread on fringe platforms, fueled by Trump’s and Gabbard’s posts, we risk further normalizing political violence which is already on the rise.
GPAHE’s research regularly reveals spikes in online bigoted and violent rhetoric whenever the president targets people with his online posts. The combination of Director Gabbard and President Trump’s conspiracy-laden and racist posts not only inflamed extremists, but further normalized language, racism, and other ideas that are completely unacceptable in a thriving democracy. We, as a nation, cannot contribute to this normalization by staying silent.
One critic called the move "a desperate attempt to distract from the Trump administration's decision to block the release of the Epstein files."
As U.S. President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans stonewall efforts to keep the full files on deceased financier and convicted child sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein under wraps, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on Monday released a long-anticipated massive trove of documents related to the 1968 assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., despite opposition from his family.
"Today, after nearly 60 years of questions surrounding the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., we are releasing 230,000 MLK assassination files, available now at https://archives.gov/mlk," Gabbard said on the social media site X. "The documents include details about the FBI's investigation into the assassination of MLK, discussion of potential leads, internal FBI memos detailing the progress of the case, information about James Earl Ray's former cellmate who stated he discussed with Ray an alleged assassination plot, and more."
"Thanks to President Donald Trump's leadership, Executive Order 14176 resulted in three, unprecedented interagency efforts to identify, digitize, declassify, and release files related to the federal government's investigations into the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, and Dr. King," Gabbard added.
However, many of the MLK documents remain heavily redacted.
Responding to the MLK files' publication, the King family said in a statement: "As the children of Dr. King and Mrs. Coretta Scott King, his tragic death has been an intensely personal grief—a devastating loss for his wife, children, and the granddaughter he never met—an absence our family has endured for over 57 years. We ask those who engage with the release of these files to do so with empathy, restraint, and respect for our family's continuing grief."
Statement from the King Family on the Release of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Assassination Files:
[image or embed]
— Martin Luther King III (@officialmlk3.bsky.social) July 21, 2025 at 1:00 PM
The King family reiterated their belief that "someone other than James Earl Ray was the shooter, and that Mr. Ray was set up to take the blame."
"As we review these newly released files, we will assess whether they offer additional insights beyond the findings our family has already accepted," their statement said.
As his relatives noted, the FBI infamously surveilled King—America's most hated man, according to a 1968 Harris poll that showed the civil rights icon with a 75% negative approval rating—under the notorious COINTELPRO program, especially after his civil rights activism evolved into staunch critiques of U.S. militarism during the escalating Vietnam War and capitalism-driven economic inequality.
Then-Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy authorized the wiretapping of King's phone, with the head agent in charge of COINTELPRO, William Sullivan, warning that "we must mark [King]... as the most dangerous Negro of the future in this nation." This, just before King was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964 for helping to lead the struggle against Jim Crow segregation and disenfranchisement.
The FBI systematically bugged King's home and hotel rooms, mailed an anonymous letter urging him to kill himself, and even sent a tape of what it claimed was King having one of his numerous alleged affairs to his wife. When King criticized the FBI for ignoring the heinous and often murderous crimes of the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacists who were still lynching Black people with alarming regularity and impunity, an infuriated Hoover publicly called him the "most notorious liar" in America.
People from across the political spectrum took to social media to slam the MLK document dump as "a desperate attempt to distract from the Trump administration's decision to block the release of the Epstein files (despite earlier promises)," as the X account Republicans Against Trump portrayed the move.
Prominent attorney and Democratic strategist Aaron Parnas wrote on the social media site Bluesky, "Whether through releasing the MLK files or trying to prosecute President [Barack] Obama, Donald Trump is flooding the zone with information to distract you from the Epstein files."
Bernice King—MLK's granddaughter and CEO of the Martin Luther King Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change—wrote on X: "Now, do the Epstein files."
Trump’s cavalier attitude about the findings of U.S. intelligence agencies is just the most recent example of presidents ignoring what they did not want to hear.
I’ll never forget the day I was recruited by the Central Intelligence Agency. What does that have to do with President Donald Trump bombing Iran? I’ll get there, so indulge me.
It was the spring of 1983, and I was sitting in an auditorium at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia with my fellow classmates. We were a select group of Columbia University graduate students in the school’s International Fellows Program, and we were in Washington, D.C. for dog and pony shows sponsored by the CIA, State Department, and other federal agencies looking for fresh young talent. I was in the journalism program. Everyone else was studying law, business, or international relations.
After two CIA officers droned on interminably about China, which was not making much news at the time, an over-caffeinated HR officer took the stage. “We need people like you,” she said. “We can’t have good policy without good intelligence, so we’d like you to consider applying here.” She then mentioned that five of the fellows had interned at the agency the previous summer and asked them to hold up their hands, which they did reluctantly. Given the CIA’s terrible reputation at the time, it was understandable why they didn’t want to acknowledge that they had worked there.
Presidents don’t give a fig about what the CIA or any other intelligence agency tells them. They will do what they want, regardless, and Congress does little to nothing to rein them in.
The HR lady then asked if there were any questions. My hand shot up, and she called on me first.
Earlier that morning I picked up a copy of The Washington Post, which ran a story on its front page reporting that the CIA, under President Ronald Reagan’s direction, had dedicated millions of dollars to undermine the fledgling Nicaraguan government, which had overthrown a corrupt dictator four years before. I thanked her for her presentation and then said: “I’m really interested in applying to work at the CIA, but I’m not interested in doing intelligence work. I’m interested in covert action. I’m interested in destabilizing sovereign nations like Nicaragua. How do I apply?”
There was dead silence, and then students began to snicker. The HR lady, meanwhile, was speechless, but she quickly regained her composure and said, “I don’t know anything about that, but the application procedure is the same.”
After a few other, more serious, questions, the session was over. But before I could get up from my seat, I felt the steely grip of the man who ran the program, the extremely conservative dean of Columbia’s graduate school of international affairs. He was not happy. He squeezed my shoulder as hard as he could and said, “Mr. Negin.” (He never addressed us by our first names.) “I want you to know that everything that was said here today is off the record.”
I’m proud to say that, until today, I have honored his off-the-record request. There was nothing newsworthy to report, anyway. But given the incident happened more than 40 years ago, I’m not too worried about recounting it now, especially since it will help make a point.
Of course, that CIA recruiter was absolutely right. To have good policy, government officials need good intelligence. What she didn’t say, however, is what we learned yet again this past week: Presidents don’t give a fig about what the CIA or any other intelligence agency tells them. They will do what they want, regardless, and Congress does little to nothing to rein them in.
On June 17, when a reporter on Air Force One reminded President Trump that his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, had testified before Congress in March that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, his reply was: “I don’t care what she said. I think they were very close to having one.”
In response, Gabbard backtracked, posting on X on June 20 that “dishonest media” took her testimony out of context and Iran could produce nuclear weapons “within weeks to months.”
But that does not mean that Iran is building a bomb.
A handful of officials told The Wall Street Journal last week that the intelligence Israel provided the United States to make its case for attacking Iran did not convince them that Tehran is intent on building a nuclear bomb. “The [Israeli] intelligence only showed Iran was still researching nuclear weapons,” two officials told the paper, “including revisiting work it had done before its nuclear weapons program shut down in 2003.” Although the United States estimates that it would likely take Iran one to two weeks to produce enough enriched uranium for a weapon, “the consensus view among U.S. intelligence agencies,” the Journal reported, “is Iran hasn’t made a decision to move forward on building a bomb.”
Nevertheless, on June 21, the U.S. Air Force flattened three Iranian nuclear sites, and it remains to be seen if the attack will lead to any unfortunate, unforeseen consequences. Two days later, Iran lobbed missiles at a U.S. military base in Qatar, which said its air defenses intercepted. Then, later that day, Trump announced that Israel and Iran had agreed to a cease-fire, but as of the next morning, they both violated it.
Trump’s cavalier attitude about the findings of U.S. intelligence agencies is just the most recent example of presidents ignoring what they did not want to hear. One obvious example is when President Lyndon Johnson paid no heed to warnings about a potential quagmire in Vietnam. Another is when President George W. Bush invaded Iraq in 2003 under false pretenses.
In early 1963, the CIA cautioned Johnson about intensifying U.S. intervention in Vietnam nearly a year before the now-disputed Gulf of Tonkin incident in August 1964. The agency suggested that bombing Vietnam would “provoke heavier troop intervention” rather than ensuring a victory. Three days after the incident, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, essentially giving Johnson a blank check to escalate U.S involvement.
We all know how that turned out. From 1961 through 1973, the United States spent more than $141 billion on the war, more than $1 trillion in today’s dollars, and as many as 3.4 million people died, including more than 58,300 U.S. servicemembers, between 200,000 and 250,000 South Vietnamese soldiers, some 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters, and as many as 2,000,000 civilians on both sides.
Pretty frustrating, no? To spend all that time trying to dig up “good intelligence” and then have it ignored. Especially when scores of lives are lost and survivors have to suffer with their injuries, both physical and psychological.
In October 2002, a month after al Qaeda stunned the United States by attacking New York and Washington, the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan to eliminate al Qaeda and topple the Taliban government. Two years later, the United States invaded Iraq, ostensibly because Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was connected to al Qaeda and possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD), neither of which was true.
There is a mountain of evidence that the Bush administration cooked the books to justify invading Iraq, much too much to post here. Suffice it to say that senior U.S. intelligence officials and analysts have testified that Bush and his administration disregarded intelligence that didn’t support their goal of removing Hussein.
In an essay in the March-April 2006 issue of Foreign Affairs magazine, for example, former national intelligence officer Paul Pillar accused the White House of manipulating intelligence on Iraq’s alleged WMD. He said the administration ignored any intelligence that did not align with its intention to invade. “It went to war without requesting—and evidently without being influenced by—any strategic-level intelligence assessments on any aspect of Iraq,” he wrote. The “broadly held” intelligence assessment, he added, was that the best way to address the Iraqi weapons issue was through an aggressive inspections program to supplement the sanctions already in place.
In late April 2006, CBS’s “60 Minutes” interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who revealed that the agency had received credible intelligence from Iraq’s foreign minister, Naji Sabri, that there were no active WMD programs. “We continued to validate [Sabri] the whole way through,” said Drumheller. “The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy.”
Finally, a September 2007 article in Salon by Sidney Blumenthal confirmed Drumheller’s account. Two former senior CIA officers told Blumenthal that in September 2002, then CIA Director George Tenet briefed Bush on top-secret intelligence from Sabri that Hussein did not have WMD. Bush rejected the information, which turned out to be completely accurate, as worthless. The former CIA officers added that Tenet did not share that intelligence with then-Secretary of State Colin Powell nor with senior military officers planning the invasion. “Instead,” Blumenthal wrote, “…the information was distorted in a report written to fit the preconception that Saddam did have WMD programs.”
The Iraqi war’s toll was considerable. From 2003 through 2011, when the U.S. military officially withdrew, the United States spent $728 billion (in 2022 dollars) directly on the war, according to a Pentagon estimate. Nearly 4,500 U.S. servicemembers died, while nearly 32,300 were wounded, and some 200,000 Iraqi civilians were killed.
A few years after the Bush-Cheney Iraq debacle, I bumped into one of my classmates who had interned at the CIA before we met at the International Fellows Program. He showed up at my weekly yoga class, of all places. I hadn’t seen him since we were at Columbia. After exchanging pleasantries, I asked him if he wound up working for the CIA. Indeed, he had. “So, do you like working there?” I asked. “It’s less than inspiring,” he replied. Why? Because, he said, policymakers reject the agency’s findings if they don’t support their preconceived notion of what to do.
Pretty frustrating, no? To spend all that time trying to dig up “good intelligence” and then have it ignored. Especially when scores of lives are lost and survivors have to suffer with their injuries, both physical and psychological.
In retrospect, I’m glad I turned down that offer to apply to work at the CIA. I obviously made the right choice. No way I would ever be happy there, even with a job destabilizing sovereign nations.
]This column was originally posted on Money Trail, a new Substack site co-founded by Elliott Negin.