Saturday, July 26, 2025

Opinion | Why Tulsi Gabbard's 'treasonous conspiracy' case against Obama is absurd

Zeeshan Aleem
Fri, July 25, 2025 

As President Donald Trump tries to quiet a rebellion from his own base over his administration’s decision to withhold the release of the complete Jeffrey Epstein files, his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, is going on offense.

Through memos and documents released both last week and this week, Gabbard is attempting to advance the evidence-free claim that officials in former President Barack Obama’s administration engaged in a “treasonous conspiracy” and “coup” attempt in 2016. Gabbard alleges the Obama administration manipulated intelligence assessments that found that Russia sought to tip the election in favor of Trump, with the purported goal of destroying Trump politically. Gabbard has recommended criminal charges, including against Obama himself, while pushing this nonsensical narrative.

While the reports bring a bit of new information to light about U.S. intelligence operations, they don’t dislodge the many well-substantiated assessments indicating Russia intervened in 2016 to hurt Hillary Clinton and boost Trump. The timing of the release does suggest, however, that Gabbard is scrambling to find some way to satisfy people in the MAGA base hungry for a new conspiracy theory as the administration tries to leave the Epstein story behind.

Gabbard’s maneuvering appears to be an attempt to put meat on the bones of Trump’s longtime narrative that all the investigations showing Russia tried to help Donald Trump win the 2016 election were a “hoax.” On Friday, she released a memo, emails and intelligence documents that she effectively claimed were proof that Russia didn’t try to interfere in the 2016 election. But as CNN points out, her main argument rested on a sleight of hand:

She cited an intelligence document that purportedly said Russia ‘did not attempt to affect the outcome of the election.’ In fact, that document — a President’s Daily Brief, or his daily intelligence report — merely said Russia hadn’t impacted the election results ‘by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure.’ “It was referring narrowly to a very specific (and severe) type of potential election interference. The Obama administration never alleged such interference took place or that Russia manipulated actual votes that were cast.”

In other words, Gabbard used a cherry-picked quote to conflate the idea that Russia didn’t actually target election infrastructure and attempt to alter vote counts with the idea that Russia didn’t interfere at all.

On Wednesday, Gabbard announced a new document release, which included a declassified report put together by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee in 2020 about the 2017 intelligence community assessment of Russian interference. As NBC News reports, “The Republican report was emphatically rejected at the time by Democratic lawmakers on the panel who played no role in its creation.”

NBC News explains that the report found that even the deeply partisan Republican report found most of the 2017 intelligence community assessment on Russian interference in the election “sound,” but it took issue with the reliability of the sources it depended on to come to the conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin “aspired” to help Trump. That’s fine to document for the historical record, but it’s hardly some kind of smoking gun of a conspiracy.

And Gabbard conveniently skips over the fact that an incredibly rigorous bipartisan Senate investigation released the same year landed somewhere different. As NBC News summarizes it:

The 2020 Senate investigation, which spanned three years, involved more than 200 witnesses and reviewed more than a million documents, endorsed the intelligence agencies’ assessment that Russia had spread disinformation online and leaked stolen emails from the Democratic National Committee to undermine Clinton’s candidacy and bolster Trump’s prospects. Trump’s current secretary of state, Marco Rubio, was the acting chair of the Intelligence Committee at the time. He and every other member of the committee, both Republicans and Democrats, endorsed the report’s findings.”

The Obama administration and intelligence community’s approach to the matter was also covered extensively through a Justice Department report in 2019, special counsel Robert Mueller’s report in 2019 and a report by special counsel John Durham in 2023. If there was some grand conspiracy by Obama officials to mess with the intelligence assessment and destroy Trump, both Republicans and Democrats had plenty of opportunity to find it.

The sloppiness of what Gabbard is presenting only confirms what has been widely suspected about her actions: that it’s a weapon of distraction. And it doesn’t seem like a coincidence that she claims to have uncovered evidence of a shadowy “conspiracy” at the exact moment that Trump is being accused by both Democrats and Republicans of covering one up. It all looks like an attempt to find some red meat for the base. Fox News appears to be taking the bait, pushing the unsubstantiated Obama conspiracy theory on its shows at a far greater rate than the Epstein story. The appetite of Trump’s base, however, is less predictable on this story.

At the same time, Gabbard’s new anti-Obama offensive also functions as an opportunity for her to move to the center of things in the White House, particularly after she clashed with Trump over Iran. As my colleague Steve Benen noted, “If the DNI were looking for a way to return to the president’s good graces, she apparently found one.”

What better way to excite her boss than with a brand-new conspiracy theory?

This article was originally published on MSNBC.com


Massive spike in threats against Obama after Trump team claims he committed ‘treason’

Ariana Baio
Thu, July 24, 2025 



Threats made online against former president Barack Obama spiked over the weekend after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard accused him of a years-long coup attempt against President Donald Trump.

Gabbard has claimed Obama and his top officials ran a “treasonous conspiracy” by insinuating they manufactured an investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election to undermine Trump’s first election.

Hours after she made the claim, on July 18, violent rhetoric about Obama surged on platforms such as Truth Social, Telegram, and Gab, with some calling for his arrest, imprisonment, and execution.

That rhetoric was intensified after the president posted an artificial intelligence-generated video of Obama being arrested and continued to re-post Gabbard’s claims throughout the weekend.

By July 19, threatening comments targeting Obama rose from three to 56 – a more than 1,700 percent increase, according to the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism.


Truth Social, Gab, and Telegram users sent violent political threats against former president Barack Obama after the Trump administration pushed its theory about the 2016 Russia investigation (Getty Images)More

Truth Social users posted rhetoric calling for a “firing squad,” a “public hanging,” and “streaming” his execution live – all while decrying Obama for the alleged treason.

One user called for Obama’s execution by using memes of a guillotine, electric shock chair, and public hanging platform.

For years, Trump has blamed Obama and other Democrats for abusing power to facilitate investigations or indictments into himself. Since taking back the White House, Trump has promised to conduct a campaign of retribution against those he believes have targeted him.

The documents Gabbard referred to as evidence of Obama’s meddling show that the Obama administration wanted a review of the allegations against Russia before leaving office and pressured intelligence agencies to work quickly.

A spokesperson for Obama denied Gabbard’s allegations, calling them “bizarre,” “ridiculous,” and “a weak attempt at distraction.


Tulsi Gabbard alleged Barack Obama's involvement in a 'coup' on Wednesday (Getty Images)

The Global Project Against Hate and Extremism said similar violent rhetoric increased on Gab, a platform known for platforming right-wing extremists.

Between July 17 and July 20, comments targeted Obama as treasonous and deserving punishment rose from nine to 48, a more than 400 percent increase.



Gabbard and White House 'lying' about intel on Russian interference in 2016, ex-CIA official says
NBC News

A review of targeted comments made on Telegram in the same timeline revealed that threats against Obama rose from zero to 12.

Harrison Fields, a White House spokesperson, said in a statement, “As a survivor of multiple assassination attempts, the President takes these matters extremely seriously. The White House condemns all acts of violence, and anyone engaging in such behavior will be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.”


Gabbard releases more Russia documents, prompting concerns over intel sources

Olivia Victoria Gazis
Thu, July 24, 2025 


Washington — Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on Wednesday declassified additional materials on the intelligence community's assessment of Russia's actions in the 2016 election, claiming in a social media post and at a White House press briefing that they showed Obama administration officials "manufactured" information in order to undermine then-candidate Donald Trump.

Her statement on X said the documents show Obama officials "manufactured the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment that they knew was false, promoting the LIE that Vladimir Putin and the Russian government helped President Trump win the 2016 election."

Democrats disputed her claims and accused Gabbard of misrepresenting the intelligence findings. Wednesday's report follows a separate set of declassified documents on the matter released by Gabbard last Friday. In a memo accompanying those documents, she similarly accused Obama administration officials of plotting a "years-long coup" against Mr. Trump.

Obama's spokesperson Patrick Rodenbush said in a statement regarding the first set of materials, "These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction," he said, a likely reference to turmoil in Congress over the release of files related to child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Rodenbush also said nothing in last week's documents "undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes." Rodenbush has not responded to the most recent release of material.

Gabbard also said in her X statement that it was Mr. Trump who made the decision to declassify the House Republicans' report.

The Wednesday release was a declassified report that was compiled in 2017 and finalized in 2020 by the House Intelligence Committee's Republican majority — where FBI Director Kash Patel was a lead staffer at the time, according to two sources familiar with the matter. It focuses at length on the intelligence community's judgment that Russian president Vladimir Putin aspired to help Mr. Trump to win the 2016 election.

It includes discussions of raw intelligence provided by a human source to the CIA, as well as Signal intercepts gathered by the National Security Agency, prompting concerns from current and former intelligence officials and condemnation from Democrats about the risks it could pose to sensitive intelligence sources and methods.

But the report does not fundamentally change previous assessments by the U.S. intelligence community — or the multiple reviews that followed.

"The desperate and irresponsible release of the partisan House intelligence report puts at risk some of the most sensitive sources and methods our Intelligence Community uses to spy on Russia and keep Americans safe," Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner said in a statement. "And in doing so, Director Gabbard is sending a chilling message to our allies and assets around the world: the United States can no longer be trusted to protect the intelligence you share with us."

An Office of the Directorate of National Intelligence official said the president's ultimate declassification authority meant he was not obligated to consult with intelligence agencies about redacting sensitive content in the report.

At the White House briefing Monday, Gabbard accused President Obama of "leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment." She told reporters that the documents would be sent to the Justice Department and FBI for investigation of "criminal implications."

Asked by CBS News correspondent Ed O'Keefe whether she thinks Obama is guilty of treason, Gabbard responded that she would leave criminal charges to the Justice Department, but said what occurred "can only be described as a years-long coup and a treasonous conspiracy against the American people."

She declined to directly answer another question from O'Keefe about how the latest declassified documents change previous assessments, given that the Senate Intelligence Committee — which included then-Sen. Marco Rubio — dedicated an entire volume of its five-volume investigation to the intelligence community's analysis..

"[W]e are ensuring that the intelligence community is not being politicized, Gabbard said. "Look at the evidence and you will know the truth."

The House committee's Republican-authored report criticizes the review of the analysis underlying the assessment that went into the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, or ICA, for several reasons, including that its production was rushed to be released before Mr. Trump took office. It also claimed analysts failed to consider plausible alternative explanations for Putin's intentions and questioned whether they sufficiently took into account the human source's motivations, proximity to Putin or bias towards Mr. Trump.

The GOP House committee report zeroes in on a piece of intelligence contained in a report from a human source that it contends was subjected to "questionable interpretation" by analysts.

"The unclear fragment (shown in bold) is part of a sentence in a [redacted] that reads, 'Putin had made this decision [to leak DNC emails] after he had come to believe that the Democratic nominee had better odds of winning the U.S. presidential election, and that [candidate Trump] whose victory Putin was counting on, most likely would not be able to pull off a convincing victory,'" a bullet says on page 4 of the report.

It adds that a senior CIA operations officer said at the time, "We don't know what was meant by that" and "five people read it five ways."

The findings align in many areas with a separate tradecraft review released earlier this month by CIA Director John Ratcliffe, which determined that the confidence level in the assessment that Putin aspired to help Mr. Trump win should have been "moderate" instead of "high," chiefly because it was derived from one source instead of multiple. The CIA's report, however, did not include any detailed discussion of the sensitive sources or methods involved.

The CIA's own review of the intelligence that informed the finding on Putin's preference "confirmed that the clause was accurately represented…and that the ICA authors' interpretation of its meaning was most consistent with the raw intelligence." It more broadly found that much of the tradecraft underlying the 2017 assessment was "robust and consistent" with analytic standards.

The CIA declined to comment on the report released by Gabbard.

Democrats seized on the timing of the disclosures — which they pointed out could have been made at any time during the first Trump administration or since he took office for a second time.

"It's appropriate that this shoddy and partisan report was released by Director Gabbard on the day that House Republicans are quite literally fleeing Washington, D.C., for six weeks rather than releasing the Epstein files that Trump is so desperate to cover up," said House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Jim Himes.

"Given the rushed and unusual 'declassification' process the DNI has implemented, I fear that the public release of this report could compromise sensitive sources and methods and endanger our national security," Himes said.

Trump DOJ sets up ‘strike force’ to probe unfounded Obama ’16 vote claims

Dave Goldiner, New York Daily News
Thu, July 24, 2025 



President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice has set up a “strike force” to probe unfounded claims that former President Barack Obama illegally pushed allegations that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to boost Trump.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said she’s eager to “investigate potential next legal steps” following the release of a report on the issue from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard that accused Obama of hatching a “treasonous conspiracy.”

“We will investigate these troubling disclosures fully and leave no stone unturned to deliver justice,” Bondi said in a statement.

Impartial analysts say there is nothing new in Gabbard’s dossier and no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama. It doesn’t refute the widely accepted fact that Russia sought to influence the 2016 campaign on Trump’s behalf and against Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.

Critics say administration officials are seeking to gin up new controversies to distract attention from the politically damaging calls for Trump to release more information on the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking case.

Trump has no secret of his intent to use federal law enforcement to suit his own personal and political interests, effectively rejecting decades of independence for the Department of Justice.

Gabbard has claimed that newly declassified files prove a “treasonous conspiracy” by the Obama administration in 2016 to politicize U.S. intelligence in service of casting doubt on the legitimacy of Trump’s White House win.

The intelligence chief cited emails from Obama officials and a 5-year-old classified House report in hopes of undermining the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to boost Trump and denigrate Clinton.

Russia’s activities during the 2016 election remain some of the most examined events in recent history.

Multiple bipartisan investigations, including one led by now-Secretary of State Marco Rubio, found that Russia sought to interfere in the election through the use of social media and hacked material.

The evidence doesn’t back the notion that Russia successfully hacked voting machines or rigged voting totals to help Trump and hurt Clinton. But Obama never claimed that it did, and publicly said there was no evidence of vote tampering in December 2020 as Trump prepared to take office for his first term.

_____


Trump booed, cheered at Kennedy Center. Now opera house may be renamed for Melania

Kinsey Crowley and Jennifer Sangalang,
 USA TODAY NETWORK - Florida
Palm Beach Daily News
Thu, July 24, 2025 



When President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump visited the Kennedy Center last month to see “Les Misérables,” part of the crowd booed when the couple stood up.

Roughly six weeks later, a House panel voted to rename the Kennedy Center venue where Les Mis appeared "First Lady Melania Trump Opera House.”

As president of the United States, it’s not uncommon to have places, monuments and streets bearing your name. Earlier this month, the road in front of Donald Trump’s private club, Mar-a-Lago, known as Southern Boulevard, was approved by Palm Beach County, Florida, commissioners to be renamed President Donald J. Trump Boulevard. Next month’s release of Trump Mobile – complete with gold cell phone and monthly plan – is another example.

More: Lawmakers vote to name Kennedy Center opera house after Melania Trump

On June 11, the president and first lady attended the opening night of “Les Misérables” at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. Melania Trump stood alongside her husband when Donald Trump appeared on the balcony. A cacophony of jeers, cheers and claps broke out ahead of a "USA" chant, video posted on X (and in this story) shows.

On July 22, a House panel advanced a measure to rename a venue at the Kennedy Center in honor of Melania Trump. The measure was voted on as part of a larger amendment approved by the Appropriations Committee. The larger House and Senate still have to vote on the spending bill.

The theater is presently designated as the "Opera House," located between the "Concert Hall" and the "Eisenhower Theater."



Donald Trump had never attended a Kennedy Center show during his first term, but he has waged a conservative takeover on the institution since returning to the White House earlier this year. He designated himself chairman shortly after he took office.

Contributing: Samantha Neely, USA TODAY Network-Florida

This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Kennedy Center may rename opera house after Melania Trump




Fact Check: JFK's grandson Jack Schlossberg slammed GOP attempt to rename Kennedy Center after Melania Trump

Anna Rascouët-Paz
Thu, July 24, 2025 


Getty Images


Claim:

Jack Schlossberg, grandson of John F. Kennedy, criticized efforts by U.S. House Republicans in July 2025 to rename the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts after first lady Melania Trump.

Rating:
Rating: True

After U.S. House Republicans moved to rename the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts after first lady Melania Trump on July 22, 2025, a rumor spread that Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of former President Kennedy, slammed the effort in an Instagram post.

For example, the Facebook page for Occupy Democrats relayed the claim in a July 23, 2025, post, adding that Schlossberg "refuses to stand by as MAGA tarnishes his family's legacy":


(Facebook page Occupy Democrats)

The post had gained 266,000 reactions and 29,000 comments. Further, it was reshared 105,000 times on the social media platform, spreading the claim. Occupy Democrats also posted it on Instagram (archived) and X (archived). In addition, Snopes readers searched the website seeking to confirm the veracity of the claim.

The rumor is true. On July 22, 2025, Republicans on the Appropriations Committee of the House of Representatives passed an amendment that would rename Kennedy Center to First Lady Melania Trump Opera House. The amendment, introduced by Rep. Mike Simpson, a Republican from Idaho, passed as part of the 2026 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations bill. The bill and amendment had yet to become law.

In response, Schlossberg, whose mother is JFK's and Jacqueline Kennedy's (later Onassis) daughter Caroline Kennedy, posted several images, including a screen capture of a report by The Hill on the amendment. He added a caption criticizing the move (archived):




(Instagram user @jackuno)

Schlossberg's post had amassed 30,638 likes as of this writing. The caption, which opened with a quote by his grandfather, read (emphasis ours):


"A nation reveals itself not only by the men it produces — but also by the men it honors, the men it remembers. "

JFK believed the arts made our country great and could be our most effective weapon in the fight for civil rights and against authoritarian governments around the world.

He took political heat for it at the time — for inviting black artists to the White House, like the Staples Singers. For supporting black Americans like Harry Belafonte and James Baldwin on global tours to showcase the best of our society.

Pablo Cassals, a symbol of resistance to fascism, played for President Kennedy. Yo-yo Ma did too… when he was just 6 years old. Robert Frost performed at JFK's inaugural. The Mona Lisa came and visited the WH.

The Trump Administration stands for freedom of oppression, not expression. He uses his awesome powers to suppress free expression and instill fear. But this isn't about the arts.

[President Donald] Trump is obsessed with being bigger than JFK , with minimizing the many heroes of our past, as if that elevates him. It doesn't.

But there's hope — art lasts forever, and no one can change what JFK and our shared history stands for.

Snopes contacted the White House to ask whether President Donald Trump or his wife Melania Trump had requested House Republicans to rename the opera house.
Sources:

Kurtz, Judy. "House GOP Moves to Rename Kennedy Center Opera House after Melania Trump." The Hill, 22 July 2025, thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/5413914-kennedy-centers-opera-house-melania-trump-gop/. Accessed 24 July 2025.

"Rep. Simpson Moves to Name Kennedy Center Opera House after Melania Trump." U.S. Congressman Mike Simpson - 2nd District of Idaho, 22 July 2025, simpson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=401722. Accessed 24 July 2025.

JFK's Grandson Claims Republicans Aren't Allowed to Rename Kennedy Center Theater After Melania Trump

The performing arts center was established as a "living memorial" to President John F. Kennedy, though House Republicans have now proposed using the institution to honor Melania as well

Rachel Raposas
Thu, July 24, 2025
PEOPLE


JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty; ANDREW THOMAS/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty; Chip Somodevilla/GettyJack Schlossberg, the Kennedy Center, and Melania Trump.


Jack Schlossberg is advocating for the Kennedy Center to remain a memorial dedicated solely to his grandfather.

President John F. Kennedy's only grandson reacted on Wednesday, July 23, to a new Republican effort to rename the Kennedy Center's Opera House after first lady Melania Trump.

The performing arts center in Washington, D.C., which was recently overtaken by President Donald Trump, was designated in 1964 as a "living memorial" for JFK.

In a Wednesday Instagram post, Schlossberg slammed Republicans' proposal to put a Trump flair on his grandfather's memorial, highlighting a potentially conflicting federal law that dictates how the Kennedy Center should operate.

The federal statute that Schlossberg screenshotted states that as of Dec. 2, 1983, "no additional memorials or plaques in the nature of memorials shall be designated or installed in the public areas of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts."

"Plain reading of the statute makes clear — YOU CAN'T DO THAT," Schlossberg, 32, wrote in the caption of his post. On top of the screenshot, the Harvard Law School alum also wrote, "Law prohibits renaming Kennedy Center."


Kayla Bartkowski/GettyThe John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C.

The Kennedy Center was opened as an interactive memorial for the late president, per Public Law 88-260, which explains why no other memorials are permitted within the center.

Kennedy, a devoted supporter of the arts, frequently advocated for what he called "our contribution to the human spirit," per the center's site. Though plans to open a national cultural center in D.C. were already in the works before Kennedy's death, the establishment was redesignated as a JFK memorial in the months after his assassination. Construction began in 1964, and the center opened in 1971.

Schlossberg's passion for upholding the Kennedy Center's legacy comes after a group of Republicans in the House Appropriations Committee advanced a proposal on Tuesday to rename the Kennedy Center's Opera House so that it is called the "First Lady Melania Trump Opera House."

The committee included the Melania proposal in a larger spending bill that has not yet reached the full House floor for a vote.

PEOPLE reached out to House Speaker Mike Johnson and the Kennedy Center for comment about the statute Schlossberg cited.


Kevin Wolf/APInside the Kennedy Center Opera House

Earlier this year, Trump fired most of the board at the Kennedy Center, appointed his supporters in their place and subsequently asked them to elect him as chair. Since then, many in the arts community have bashed the president's involvement.

Never miss a story — sign up for PEOPLE's free daily newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer.

Melania, who is considered an honorary chair of the center as the sitting first lady, has only made one prominent public appearance at the institution since her husband took office in January, to attend the opening night of Les Misérables with Donald in the Opera House that could soon bear her name.

Several lead cast members in the musical boycotted the performance that night because of the Trumps' presence, and when the first couple entered the venue for the show, they were met with a mix of boos and cheers.



Fact Check: Melania Trump's parents came to U.S. through process Donald Trump tried to curb

Nur Ibrahim
Thu, July 24, 2025 


Eric Baradat/AFP/Getty Images


Claim:

First lady Melania Trump’s parents came to the United States through a family-based sponsorship, also referred to derogatorily as “chain migration.”

Rating:
Rating: True

Since U.S. President Donald Trump's first administration, many have speculated about first lady Melania Trump's parents' immigration statuses and how they came to the United States. A number of online posts claimed they arrived through a process that Trump himself has derided and tried to curb.






A July 2025 YouTube video claimed the following:


Donald Trump built a movement on immigration cruelty — cages, deportations, and raids. But behind the scenes, he used the same "chain migration" he demonized to import his entire in-law family while brown kids were ripped from their parents and locked in cages.

During his first administration, Trump did indeed try to curb the practice of so-called "chain migration," calling it a threat to national security. And based on Melania Trump's parents' immigration papers and confirmation from their lawyer, it is true that her parents entered the U.S. through the same process Trump tried to end.

As we have reported before, despite the strict guidelines under which relatives are eligible for the process, as well as annual caps on the number of immigrants allowed to enter the country in this manner, Trump has frequently criticized such family reunification visas, calling them "chain migration." These visas allow U.S. citizens to sponsor their parents financially, bring them to the United States, and eventually apply for their family members' permanent residency.

We previously reported in February 2018 that the first lady's parents' immigration status was not a matter of public record, and thus the manner in which they came into the country was unknown. However, federal immigration records revealed in 2024 that her mother, Amalija Knavs, did come to the country through her daughter's sponsorship.


According to Newsweek, in 2024 the conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation obtained Knavs' immigration records through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request while suing former U.S. President Joe Biden's administration to access visa records of Britain's Prince Harry. The Washington Post also requested the records from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) after Knavs died in January 2024. We reached out to The Heritage Foundation to access the records and will update the story if we get more information.

The Washington Post confirmed that Knavs was sponsored by an adult child for a green card, and her financial sponsor was listed as "Melania Trump."

Michael Wildes, the immigration lawyer for both of the first lady's parents, Viktor and Amalija Knavs, had also confirmed their method of immigration to The New York Times in 2018. He said Melania Trump had sponsored her parents for their green cards. When asked if the Knavses obtained citizenship through "chain migration," Wildes said, "I suppose."

Even as Trump derogatorily called such a process "chain migration," Wildes said the term was a "dirtier" way of characterizing such sponsorship that was "a bedrock of our immigration process when it comes to family reunification."

Wildes also confirmed that the couple met the five-year requirement for residency before applying for citizenship.

During his first administration (2017-2021), Trump endorsed the RAISE Act that would have limited priority sponsorship to spouses and minor children and required U.S. citizens to obtain renewable and temporary visas for their parents instead of fast-tracking residencies.

Snopes has previously investigated claims that Melania Trump came to the U.S. "improperly" on an EB-1 "Einstein" visa and self-sponsored herself for a green card as a result. She became a permanent resident in 2001. Melania did indeed receive such a visa and was required to demonstrate "extraordinary abilities" as a model. Successful models have often qualified for such a visa.

Snopes archives contributed to this report.
Sources:

Correal, Annie, and Emily Cochrane. "Melania Trump's Parents Become U.S. Citizens, Using 'Chain Migration' Trump Hates." The New York Times, 9 Aug. 2018. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/09/nyregion/melania-trumps-parents-become-us-citizens.html. Accessed 22 July 2025.

Garcia, Arturo. "FACT CHECK: Did Melania Trump's Parents Arrive in the U.S. Through 'Chain Migration'?" Snopes, 8 Feb. 2018, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/melania-trump-parents-chain-migration-meme/. Accessed 22 July 2025.

"Melania Trump's Mom's Papers Released in Prince Harry Case." Newsweek, 23 Oct. 2024, https://www.newsweek.com/melania-trump-mom-amalija-knavs-papers-released-prince-harry-visa-1973400. Accessed 22 July 2025.

Rascouët-Paz, Anna. "Inspecting Claim Melania Trump Improperly Came to US on EB-1 'Einstein' Visa." Snopes, 2 Jul. 2025, https://www.snopes.com//news/2025/07/02/melania-trump-einstein-visa/. Accessed 22 July 2025.

Sacchetti, Maria. "Records Confirm Trump's Mother-in-Law Came to U.S. through Process He Derided." The Washington Post, 25 Mar. 2024, https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2024/03/25/trump-melania-parents-chain-migration/. Accessed 22 July 2025.

Report: U.S. Latinos, America’s Labor Force, and the ICE Agenda




 July 25, 2025


U.S. Latinos, 20 percent of the American population, are driving national economic growth. The Latino Donor Collaborative’s new report details the whys and wherefores as immigrant arrests, detentions and deportations increase. 

First, here are some highlights of the LDC report. (The LDC is a nonpartisan research organization and does not lobby or endorse specific legislation, as policymakers use its data at the local, state, and federal levels to inform economic development, workforce and immigration strategies.)

“Now valued at $4 trillion with an annual average real growth rate of 4.4 percent, U.S. Latino GDP is the second-fastest growing among the world’s ten largest economies, trailing only China and on par with India, and outpacing countries like France, Canada, and the rest of the United States.” Current U.S. GDP is $27.6 trillion, according to estimates from World Economics.

The growth of gross domestic product, or GDP, is the sine qua non of a capitalist economy.

On that note, U.S. GDP fell at an annual rate of 0.5 percent in the first quarter of 2025, after a 2.4 percent rise in the fourth quarter of 2024, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.

According to the LDC report, “U.S. Latino GDP is projected to rank as the world’s fourth largest by 2029, surpassing Japan and Germany by the end of the decade.” That is less than five years away. These economic numbers suggest a rise in the political power of the U.S. Latino population. Economics and politics are a unity, though not always easy to see.

Speaking of working people, the LDC report spotlights the outsize contributions to growth from Latinos residing stateside. “Despite comprising 19.5 percent of the U.S. population, the U.S. Latino cohort was responsible for 28.3 percent of total additions to national GDP between 2017 and 2022. The 10 largest state Latino economies, including California, Texas, Florida, and New York, are all growing faster than their non-Latino counterparts.”

What else does the data above mean in the current moment under President Trump and the GOP-controlled House and Senate? We turn to the recently signed One Big Beautiful Bill legislation.

One of its features is tax cuts for the wealthy and increased federal spending for immigration arrests, detention and deportation. On one hand, an influx of more taxpayer dollars for Immigration and Customs Enforcement will create new employment opportunities. For example, these new workers will spend their wages to buy goods and services and spur growth in the consumer economy.

On the other hand, ICE workers do not care for, feed and shelter the working population. It requires care, food and shelter to live. Thus, industries such as agriculture, domestic care and construction are vital to the lives of other workers.

Recall that the term essential workers arose during the pandemic. Essential workers are central, not peripheral, to the nation’s economic output and the well-being of the entire working class, including those born in the U.S. Further, their well-being extends past care, food and shelter.

For more details, we turn to Ben Zipperer, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute, based in Washington, DC. According to his research, ICE arrests, detentions and deportations of noncitizen workers would also harm U.S.-born workers, an impact that has yet to appear on the public radar screen.

“Immigrant workers make up a substantial part of the workforce in the United States: 1 in 5 workers is an immigrant, and about half of immigrants are noncitizens,” according to Zipperer. “Because of their sizable presence in the workforce, large-scale attempts to remove them will lead to extensive employment losses for foreign-born workers. What is less apparent, however, is the impact that arrests, detentions, and deportations of immigrants will have on millions of U.S.-born workers who will lose their jobs. The widespread job losses for both immigrants and U.S.-born workers will undercut the narrative that abruptly removing immigrants will somehow magically increase employment opportunities for U.S.-born workers.”

Employment opportunities increase when the economy grows. When growth decreases, employment opportunities shrink. All things being equal, workers of all birthplaces want job gains. Magic is not part of this equation.

Seth Sandronsky is a Sacramento journalist and member of the freelancers unit of the Pacific Media Workers Guild. Email sethsandronsky@gmail.com

Fewer than half of ICE arrests under Trump are convicted criminals


Tim Henderson, Stateline
Thu, July 24, 2025 



NEW YORK, NEW YORK - JUNE 04: A woman cries after her husband is detained by federal agents escort after exiting an Intensive Supervision Appearance Program office on June 04, 2025 in New York City. Federal agents are arresting immigrants during mandatory check-ins, as ICE ramps up enforcement following immigration court hearings. The Trump administration has ordered officials to increase detentions to 3,000 migrants per day.
 (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

Despite Trump administration rhetoric accusing Democrats of protecting violent criminals and drug-dealing immigrants, the administration’s arrests have been catching a smaller share of criminals overall, and a smaller share of people convicted of violent and drug crimes, than the Biden administration did in the same time frame.

While the Trump administration has caught more immigrants with convictions for drugs and violence, their share of the rising arrest numbers is smaller, as more people get swept up for minor traffic violations or strictly immigration crimes, according to a Stateline analysis.

Forty percent of the nearly 112,000 arrests by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from Jan. 20 through late June were of convicted criminals. That’s compared with 53% of the nearly 51,000 arrests for same time period in 2024 under the Biden administration.

The share of people convicted of violent crime fell from 10% to 7% and drug crimes from 9% to 5%, according to a Stateline analysis of data from the Deportation Data Project.

The project, led by attorneys and professors in California, Maryland and New York, collects and posts public, anonymized U.S. government immigration enforcement datasets obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests.

Some Democratic states are among those with the highest share of violent criminals in this year’s ICE arrests: Hawaii (15%), Vermont (13%), and California and Nebraska (12%) — while some of the lowest shares were in more Republican states: Maine (2%), and Alabama, Montana and Wyoming (3%).

Immigration attorneys see an increased push to arrest and detain immigrants for any type of violation or pending charge as President Donald Trump pushes for higher arrest and detention numbers to meet his campaign promise for mass deportation. Trump officials have called for 3,000 arrests a day, far more than the current average of 711 as of June and 321 a day during the same time period under Biden.

The majority of recent ICE detentions involve people with no convictions. That’s a pattern I find troubling.

– – Oregon Republican state Rep. Cyrus Javadi

Arrests have accelerated since about mid-May, when government attorneys began asking to revoke bail and arrest people who show up for court hearings after being released at the border, said Vanessa Dojaquez-Torres, practice and policy counsel for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, which represents more than 16,000 immigration attorneys.

“We’re not completely sure what the reasoning or the goal is behind some of these policies, other than they want detention numbers up,” Dojaquez-Torres said.

“They seem to have really been struggling to get their deportation numbers up, and so I think that’s one of the reasons why we see a lot of these policies going into effect that are meant to kind of circumvent the immigration court process and due process.”

Arrests of people convicted of violent crimes increased by 45% from about 5,300 to 7,700 compared with last year. For drug crimes, the increase was 21% — and they fell as a share of total arrests, from 9% under the Biden administration to 5% this year.

Resentment against Albuquerque ‘deliveristas’ may have sparked viral Walmart ICE arrest

Arrests for those not convicted of any crime nearly tripled to about 67,000, and increased from 47% to 60% of arrests.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security defended ICE arrests Wednesday. Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement that the agency was “targeting dangerous criminal illegal aliens and taking them off American streets. Violent thugs ICE arrested include child pedophiles, drug traffickers, and burglars.”

In Oregon, arrests during the first part of last year increased from 51 under the Biden administration to 227 under the Trump administration, with those not convicted of any crime increasing from 34 to 137. Those with convictions for violent crime increased from 3 to 16. Even some Republicans are concerned with the new emphasis on non-criminals.

“The majority of recent ICE detentions involve people with no convictions. That’s a pattern I find troubling, especially when it risks sweeping up people for things like expired tags or missed court dates,” said Oregon state Rep. Cyrus Javadi, a moderate Republican representing Tillamook and Clatsop counties.

Nationally, nonviolent crimes have risen as a share of immigration arrests. The most common crime conviction for those arrested this year is driving while intoxicated, which was also the top offense last year under Biden

But this year it’s closely followed by general traffic offenses, which rose to second place from sixth place, surpassing such crimes as assault and drug trafficking.

Traffic offenses, outside of driving while intoxicated and hit and run, rose almost fourfold as the most serious conviction on record for those arrested, the largest increase in the top 10. Those offenses were followed by increases in the immigration crime of illegal entry, meaning crossing the border in secret, which tripled.

The increase in traffic violations as a source of immigration arrests is a reason for cities to consider limiting traffic stops, said Daniela Gilbert, director of the Redefining Public Safety Initiative at the Vera Institute of Justice, a nonprofit devoted to ending mass incarceration.

“It’s an important point to consider intervening in so that there can be less interaction, and so ICE has less opportunity to continue its indiscriminate dragnet of enforcement,” Gilbert said.

The institute argues in general that traffic stops should be limited to safety issues rather than low-level infractions such as expired registrations or single burned-out taillights, both because they do not improve public safety and because they disproportionately affect drivers of color.

Such policies limiting stops under some conditions are in place in 10 states and in cities in six other states, according to the institute.

The most recent state polices took effect last year in California and Illinois, while a policy is set to take effect in October in Connecticut. The most recent city policies were in Denver and in East Lansing and Ypsilanti, Michigan. Six other states have considered legislation recently.

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org



 

US begins deportation flights from Alligator Alcatraz despite controversy
US begins deportation flights from Alligator Alcatraz despite controversy

 US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has begun deporting immigrants from Alligator Alcatraz, a hastily built detention camp in the Florida Everglades, Governor Ron DeSantis announced on Friday.

Erected in the space of eight days on the grounds of an old airstrip, Alligator Alcatraz is part of a detention system that represents a core element of President Donald Trump’s controversial immigration enforcement strategy. The facility is designed to hold some 5,000 detainees, under grim conditions in a remote swath of wetlands. Its name is a nod to both the dangerous reptiles whose Everglades population numbers upwards of 200,000 and the former island prison off the coast of San Francisco that housed some of the most notorious criminals in US history. The latter was legendary for its inescapability.

The first group of immigrant detainees arrived at the facility about three weeks ago. In comments from the Alligator Alcatraz site on Friday, DeSantis said several hundred detainees had been deported from the facility by DHS.

He added that Florida is working on establishing makeshift courtrooms in a bid to increase the efficiency of Trump’s mass deportation efforts. “I want [there to be] aggressive processing and an aggressive deportation schedule… We look forward to hopefully being able to get the approval for immigration judges to be on-site [at Alligator Alcatraz],” he said.

Environmental groups filed suit against the state and various federal actors late last month to challenge the legality of the unconventional detention site. The lawsuit alleges that federal and state authorities violated the National Environmental Policy Act by failing to conduct required environmental reviews before constructing the facility in an ecologically sensitive area that serves as habitat for endangered species.

Since taking office in January 2025, President Trump has pursued an unprecedented and aggressive immigration enforcement strategy, marked by mass arrests, questionable due process protections, and deportations to countries that the arrested individuals lack any connection to. A recent DHS release announced the deportations of eight men to South Sudan. Of the eight, two were from Cuba, one was from Laos, one was from Mexico, two were from Myanmar, and one was from Vietnam. Only one of the eight was a South Sudan national.

Despite campaign promises that focused on shoring up immigration enforcement against hardened criminals, his administration’s approach has proven far more expansive. Recent polling reveals that US voters across the political spectrum have softened on immigration in the first six months of the second Trump presidency. Overall, the proportion of US adults who see immigration as a good thing reached a record high of 79%, while those who see it as a bad thing hit a record low of 17%, according to Gallup. The number of Republicans wishing to see decreased immigration is down 40 percentage points from last year’s high of 88%.

 



Judge dismisses Trump administration lawsuit against Chicago 'sanctuary' laws

Associated Press
Fri, July 25, 2025


FILE - Anti-Trump protesters march to Trump Tower as they rally for a number of issues, including immigrant rights, the Israel-Hamas war, women's reproductive rights, racial equality and others, on the day of President Trump's Inauguration, Monday, Jan. 20, 2025, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Erin Hooley,File)More

CHICAGO (AP) — A judge in Illinois dismissed a Trump administration lawsuit Friday that sought to disrupt limits Chicago imposes on cooperation between federal immigration agents and local police.

The lawsuit, filed in February, alleged that so-called sanctuary laws in the nation’s third-largest city “thwart” federal efforts to enforce immigration laws.

It argued that local laws run counter to federal laws by restricting “local governments from sharing immigration information with federal law enforcement officials” and preventing immigration agents from identifying “individuals who may be subject to removal.”

Judge Lindsay Jenkins of the Northern District of Illinois granted the defendants' motion for dismissal.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said he was pleased with the decision and the city is safer when police focus on the needs of Chicagoans.

“This ruling affirms what we have long known: that Chicago’s Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety. The City cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump Administration’s reckless and inhumane immigration agenda,” he said in a statement.

Gov. JB Pritzker welcomed the ruling, saying in a social media post, “Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court.”

The Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security and did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

The administration has filed a series of lawsuits targeting state or city policies seen as interfering with immigration enforcement, including those in Los Angeles, New York City, Denver and Rochester, New York. It sued four New Jersey cities in May.

Heavily Democratic Chicago has been a sanctuary city for decades and has beefed up its laws several times, including during Trump’s first term in 2017.

That same year, then-Gov. Bruce Rauner, a Republican, signed more statewide sanctuary protections into law, putting him at odds with his party.

There is no official definition for sanctuary policies or sanctuary cities. The terms generally describe limits on local cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE enforces U.S. immigration laws nationwide but sometimes seeks state and local help.


Federal judge dismisses Trump administration's lawsuit against Chicago over its sanctuary city policies

Nnamdi Egwuonwu
Fri, July 25, 2025 
NBC


Attorney General Pam Bondi addresses reporters as President Donald Trump listens in the White House briefing room on June 27. (Jacquelyn Martin / AP file)


A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by the Trump administration that sought to block the enforcement of several "sanctuary policies" in Illinois that restrict the ability of local officials to aid federal immigration authorities in detainment operations.

In a 64-page decision, U.S. District Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins, a Joe Biden appointee, granted a motion by the state of Illinois to dismiss the case after determining the United States lacks standing to sue over the sanctuary policies.

The judge said in the ruling that Illinois' decision to enact the sanctuary laws is protected by the 10th Amendment, which declares that any powers not specifically given to the federal government or denied to the states by the Constitution are retained by the states.

“The Sanctuary Policies reflect Defendants’ decision to not participate in enforcing civil immigration law — a decision protected by the Tenth Amendment and not preempted by the [Immigration and Nationality Act],” the judge wrote. “Because the Tenth Amendment protects Defendants’ Sanctuary Policies, those Policies cannot be found to discriminate against or regulate the federal government.”

The federal judge wrote that granting the administration's request would create an "end-run around the Tenth Amendment."

“It would allow the federal government to commandeer States under the guise of intergovernmental immunity — the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment.”

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker praised the dismissal, which he said will ensure state law enforcement is "not carrying out the Trump administration's unlawful policies or troubling tactics."

"As state law allows, Illinois will assist the federal government when they follow the law and present warrants to hold violent criminals accountable. But what Illinois will not do is participate in the Trump administration’s violations of the law and abuses of power," Pritzker said in a statement.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Trump Justice Department sued the state of Illinois and Cook County, the home of Chicago, in February over policies it argued infringed on the ability of federal authorities to enforce immigration laws, the first lawsuit by the administration aimed specifically at "sanctuary jurisdictions," a label applied to states, cities, counties or municipalities that establish laws to prevent or limit local officials from cooperating with federal immigration authorities.

In the 22-page lawsuit, filed days after Attorney General Pam Bondi was confirmed by the Senate, the Justice Department sought to block state, city and county ordinances that prohibit local law enforcement from assisting the federal government with civil immigration enforcement absent a criminal warrant. Bondi said the policies "obstruct" the federal government.

“The challenged provisions of Illinois, Chicago, and Cook County law reflect their intentional effort to obstruct the Federal Government’s enforcement of federal immigration law and to impede consultation and communication between federal, state, and local law enforcement officials that is necessary for federal officials to carry out federal immigration law and keep Americans safe,” the lawsuit says.

The administration has taken similar action to target sanctuary jurisdictions across the country, including a lawsuit this week against New York City, which was described by the Justice Department as “the vanguard of interfering with enforcing this country’s immigration laws” in a complaint filed Thursday. The administration filed a separate lawsuit targeting New York state in February over it’s “Green Light Law,” which enables undocumented immigrants to apply for noncommercial driver’s licenses and bars state officials from turning over that data to federal immigration authorities.

The Justice Department in June filed a complaint against Los Angeles for immigration policies it argued interfere and discriminate against federal immigration agents by treating them differently from other law enforcement agents in the state. The suit came as Trump administration officials increasingly sparred with California’s Democratic leaders after immigration detainment efforts in the state led to clashes between protesters and federal authorities, and led the administration to deploy thousands of National Guard troops.

In January, Trump signed an executive order directing Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to ensure sanctuary jurisdictions “do not receive access to federal funds” and to consider pursuing criminal or civil penalties if localities “interfere with the enforcement of Federal law.”

A federal judge in April blocked the effort to withhold federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions, finding that Trump’s order violated the Constitution’s separation of powers principles. That judge blocked an earlier effort by Trump in 2017.