First a word from Pam Bondi, speaking for Trump—because, after all, all declassification authority under the US Constitution derives from the Chief Executive. Trump can declassify what he wants, and it sounds like a decision has been made regarding the Epstein file. By the way, Epstein didn’t commit suicide.
Leading Report @LeadingReport
BREAKING: Pam Bondi says “national security” information will be redacted from Epstein files.
9:04 AM · Mar 4, 2025
In a way that’s progress. Previously we were relying on the statement of the then prosecutor in the Epstein case that he had been warned off certain actions because Epstein was “intelligence.” Now we have it from the AG that the Epstein Operation was, indeed, about “national security.” Not that I believe that “national security” would be jeopardized in any way by the release of such information. The Anglo-Zionists are simply trying to preserve the remaining illusions that some Americans may have about who rules America and how they rule it.
So ask yourself this. If the “national security” information that’s being redacted would simply reveal that CIA and MI6 were using Epstein to run a joint blackmail op against their respective politicians—a sort of Anglo op—would Trump be so reticent about releasing that info? Or is the reticence due to the fact that the Epstein op was a tri-cornered one, which included Israel’s Mossad? There happens to be lots of evidence for that DC-London-Tel Aviv connection.
Instead they’re trying to pretend that the release of the Epstein files was about the prurient interests of the public. No. It was always about the intel angle. And please don’t kid yourself that this has much if anything to do with Pam Bondi. She’s simply fronting for the damage control op.
OK, now for the really depressing news.
Yesterday night I wrote about Trump’s disturbing threats to renew and deepen the genocide against “the people of Gaza”. I say ‘deepen’ because this time around, according to Trump, it will be “Hell”—I guess, as if it wasn’t already. I hope I’m not naive about geopolitical deal making, but I would have hoped that threats of genocide and ethnic cleansing would be off the table for an American president when it came to negotiations. As I’ve been saying, Trump has taken ownership of the Middle East—there’s no longer any pretending that the Anglo-Zionist war there is being run by anyone else.
The same is true for the Anglo-Zionist war on Americans and their freedoms. Only here in America there’s no longer a question as to whether Trump is just blustering. There’s an Executive Order out and DoJ is taking action that threatens the First Amendment.
Yesterday a commenter took issue with some criticism I had made about Trump’s statement this week, reiterating his doubling down on the Zhou regime’s campaign of repression against speech on college campuses across America. The commenter maintained that Trump was only targeting “illegal” or “criminal” protests. The protests in question had begun in response to Israeli war crimes, including genocide and ethnic cleansing. The protests were deemed “illegal” because colleges and universities came under intense pressure to refuse permits for such protests, which would have rendered them “legal”. The pressure was both financial—coming from Jewish donors—but also financial/political because the Israel Lobby controls government policy with regard to Israel through its control of politicians. Thus, the Israel Lobby controls the flow of government money to educational institutions and is also able to order politicians to conduct “investigations” and other harassment. Leading, for example, to the removal of officials at such institutions.
And so I responded:
I think you're mistaken about the word "illegal," which you seem to equate with "violent" or "criminal." All illegal means is "not approved or authorized or permitted". Such "illegal" demonstrations have a long tradition in America going back to the Boston Tea Party. They are not banned by the 1st Amendment--the 1st appears to envision mutual accommodation. In the concrete circumstances, however, everybody knows that Trump is targeting anti-genocide and anti-ethnic cleansing and pro-Palestine demonstrations--that's why he specifically talks of deporting demonstrators. It's coded language that everyone understands in the circumstances. In other words, Zionist Jews will exert financial pressure on educational institutions to not permit such demonstrations, and will then demand that federal authorities deport or prosecute all demonstrators. DoJ will pressure local law enforcement to cooperate--as did, in fact, happen under Zhou.
The point is simply that the First Amendment doesn’t just protect speech that the government permits or agrees with. Yes, there can be reasonable limits, but the whole point of the coordinated crackdown on anti-genocide speech—by not issuing permits for the protests—was to silence otherwise totally permissible speech. Not just trespass and so forth, as at J6, but the content of the speech. It was all intended to shut down criticism of standard Zionist policies by refusing permits for disfavored speech and then strong arming local law enforcement into taking extreme measures against the speech.
It’s being framed as anti-jihadi measures, as if Hamas is a jihadist group—which it isn’t. And as if the US, UK, and Israel haven’t for years supported jihadist terrorists of the most extreme varieties—al Qaeda and ISIS. We’re being told that the crackdown on the First Amendment is all about controlling anti-semitism. Thus, fresh from her triumphant damage control with regard to the Epstein files, Bondi is now pursuing Trump’s anti-free speech initiative—as directed by the Israel Lobby.
The General @GeneralMCNews
BREAKING: Attorney General Pam Bondi has opened an investigation into alleged "Antisemitism" at the University of California.
Trump has made no bones about what’s going on—thought crimes, sympathies, are being targeted:
“I will also quickly cancel the student visas of all Hamas sympathizers on college campuses, which have been infested with radicalism like never before,” Trump also said.
Anti-semitism is being characterized as disease of thought:
U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., one of the administrators tasked [by Trump’s Executive Order] with reviewing Columbia University’s grants, said in a statement that “anti-Semitism ... is a spiritual and moral malady that sickens societies and kills people with lethalities comparable to history’s most deadly plagues,” adding that “making America healthy means building communities of trust and mutual respect, based on speech freedom and open debate.”
Well, we’re all against anti-semitism, right? But who knows what anti-semitism actually is? Mike Johnson is pretty sure he knows what anti-semitism is, because the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance told him. But it’s not that simple:
House passes antisemitism bill as House Speaker Johnson highlights campus protests
Supporters say it will help combat antisemitism on college campuses, but opponents say it overreaches and threatens free speech.
Supporters of the legislation say it will help combat antisemitism on college campuses, but opponents say it overreaches and threatens to chill free speech.
The bill would mandate that when the Department of Education enforces federal anti-discrimination laws it uses a definition of antisemitism put forward by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance [IHRA].
Critics of the bill argue that the definition is overly expansive and could lead to censorship issues.
In fact, the IHRA “working definition” has long been highly controversial, except among wild eyed Zionists and genocide enthusiasts:
In March 2005, Brian Klug argued that this definition proscribed legitimate criticism of the human rights record of the Israeli Government by attempting to bring criticism of Israel, and criticism of Israeli actions and criticism of Zionism as a political ideology into the category of antisemitism and racially based violence towards, discrimination against, or abuse of, Jews.
In December 2016, David Feldman wrote: "I fear this definition is imprecise, and isolates antisemitism from other forms of bigotry." He also said: "The text also carries dangers. It trails a list of 11 examples. Seven deal with criticism of Israel. Some of the points are sensible, some are not." He added: "Crucially, there is a danger that the overall effect will place the onus on Israel's critics to demonstrate they are not antisemitic."
In February 2017, a letter signed by 243 British academics, who asserted that the "violation of the rights of Palestinians for more than 50 years" should not be silenced, contends "this definition seeks to conflate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism" and raised concerns about muddying the definition of anti-Semitism and restricting free debate on Israel.
All of which explains exactly why this “working definition” is being advanced by the Israel Lobby in America and the UK. The result is that organizations like the ADL are using cleverly nuanced versions of this “working definition” to send their inquisitors around America to pressure universities and present Trump and Bondi with targets—no institution is safe. They all have to make anti-anti-semitism—as defined by Zionist zealots—a full time job. So just as we thought we were rooting DEI out of college campuses, we have another growth industry to police WrongThink, and to require that colleges take special measures to root out anything that would trigger, well, the ADL.
ADL gives Harvard and a dozen other universities failing grades on campus antisemitism
C’mon—you didn’t really think the ADL was going to give anyone a free pass, did you?
The key is the definition of anti-semitism that conflates anti-semitism with opposition to Zionism—”the movement for the self-determination and statehood for the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland, the land of Israel.” In their nuanced version of the IHRA “working definition”, which the ADL specifically endorses, the attempt is made to claim that criticism of specific Israeli policies is permissible, but criticism of the actual ideology of Zionism is non-negotiable. In reality, the ADL maintains that Jews have a “right” to statehood in “their ancestral homeland”.
Off course, that’s a descent into outright irrationalism. Applied uniformly, the “right” of peoples to reoccupy their “ancestral homelands” would lead to global chaos. Of course, in the case of Zionism, the Jewish claim is that they have books that document that they obtained their “ancestral homeland” by genociding and ethnic cleansing—the claimed eradication of others for whom that land was also an “ancestral homeland.” Archeologists beg to differ with that account, but the question remains: What to do with people in current occupancy of your “ancestral homeland”. What if they refuse to vacate? The Zionist answer—as embodied in theory as well as in Israeli policy and practice—has been: force up to and including genocide will settle that.
Trump’s policies are attempting to enshrine this as a protected ideology in America, to be policed by its own advocates. Oh, and it is also being policed with AI—what must foreign students think, having come to the US to study in a supposed climate of freedom?
State Dept. to use AI to revoke visas of foreign students who appear "pro-Hamas"
This is a pro-active campaign aimed at thought crime, and welcomes input from Zionist activists. Nor will this activity be limited to foreign students only—don’t kid yourselves about that. We’re talking about fanatics armed with quasi-legal blunderbusses, who will have the full weight of federal and local law enforcement directed against them—”whole of government, whole of authority” (see below). American students who transgress ADL policed red lines will face threats of expulsion and firing from some jobs. And don’t be fooled by the “pro-jihadist” and “pro-terrorist” nonsense. These one sided government definitions are propounded by interest groups with no input from Americans. This is a Zionist inquisition on America with a goal of shutting down disfavored speech. The fact that much of this could likely be thrown out by the courts is small comfort for those concerned for our freedoms. The point is to chill speech. And, then, we all know how long it took for the J6ers to get something only remotely resembling justice.
Why it matters: The effort — which includes AI-assisted reviews of tens of thousands of student visa holders' social media accounts — marks a dramatic escalation in the U.S. government's policing of foreign nationals' conduct and speech.
The reviews of social media accounts are particularly looking for evidence of alleged terrorist sympathies expressed after Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel, officials say.
Officials plan to examine internal databases to see whether any visa holders were arrested but allowed to stay in the country during the Biden administration.
They say they're also checking news reports of anti-Israel demonstrations and Jewish students' lawsuits that highlight foreign nationals allegedly engaged in antisemitic activity without consequence.
The State Department is working with the departments of Justice and Homeland Security in what one senior State official called a "whole of government and whole of authority approach."
Zoom out: The Immigration Nationality Act of 1952 gives the secretary of state the authority to revoke visas from foreigners deemed to be a threat —a point Rubio made as a senator eight days after Oct. 7.
"We see people marching at our universities and in the streets of our country ... calling for Intifada, celebrating what Hamas has done ... Those people need to go," Rubio said.
Trump echoed the same sentiments in a Jan. 30 White House fact sheet tied to an executive order aimed at antisemitism at "pro-Hamas" activity: "To all the resident aliens who joined in the pro-jihadist protests, we put you on notice. We will find you, and we will deport you."
Another executive order, issued Jan. 20, targets visa holders and foreigners who "threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology."
The big picture: The cumulative effect of Trump's executive orders is already having a chilling effect on student visa-holders. They're starting to shy away from protests critical of Israel.
"This should concern all Americans. This is a First Amendment and freedom of speech issue and the administration will overplay its hand," said Abed Ayoub, head of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.
"Americans won't like this. They'll view this as capitulating free speech rights for a foreign nation."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-cuts-400-million-grants-columbia-antisemitism-concerns
Matt Stoller @matthewstoller·
10h
I'm an American Jew and I dislike the connection my community has drawn between our religion and a foreign nation-state with its own geopolitical goals.
There's no better way to generate anti-semitism than to conflate the two.