GOP Lawmaker Demands DOJ Probe Into Soros-Funded Organizations
Rep. Buddy Carter, R-Ga., is calling on the Department of Justice to launch an immediate investigation into organizations funded by billionaire George Soros, citing growing concerns about political violence and domestic extremism.
In a letter sent Thursday to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Carter requested a “comprehensive and immediate” probe into the Open Society Foundations and other Soros-backed groups, alleging that several have supported or incited politically motivated violence.
“The funding of organizations that engage in, support, or incite political violence must not be tolerated,” Carter wrote in his letter.
Carter cited findings from a recent report by the Capital Research Center, which detailed how Soros’ Open Society Foundations distributed more than $80 million to groups accused of endorsing or participating in activities that fit the FBI’s definition of domestic terrorism.
According to the report, one such group — the Center for Third World Organizing (CTWO) — received $400,000 from the foundation and publicly stated it “threw down with people in the streets” during the 2020 George Floyd riots.
The report further identified CTWO affiliates such as the Ruckus Society, which has circulated materials promoting protest tactics that “may be outside of the law.”
Another organization in the same network, the BlackOUT Collective, co-authored a pro-Hamas guide that cited the Ruckus Society and praised the October 7 terror attack on Israel.
The Open Society Foundations also provided $1.85 million to Dream Defenders, $18 million to the Movement for Black Lives, and $200,000 to Dissenters — all named in the report for connections to the same guide.
The Sunrise Movement, which has promoted the “Stop Cop City/Defend the Atlanta Forest” campaign, reportedly received more than $2 million in Open Society grants. Federal authorities have linked that campaign to Antifa-associated anarchist activity.
Carter warned that these revelations point to “an escalation in politically motivated violence from far-left extremist groups.”
He referenced attacks on Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities and the September 10 assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk as examples of the consequences of radicalization.
“The DOJ cannot ignore this,” Carter said. “Americans deserve to know whether these organizations are funding, organizing, or inspiring domestic terrorism.”
The Open Society Foundations denied the allegations, calling them politically motivated.
“Our activities are peaceful and lawful, and our grantees are expected to abide by human rights principles and comply with the law,” the foundation said in a statement. “These claims are attacks on civil society meant to silence speech the administration disagrees with and undermine the First Amendment.”
The Trump administration has already begun coordinating efforts to trace financial support for left-wing extremism.
FBI Director Kash Patel said Wednesday that the bureau is “following the money” behind Antifa and related far-left groups.
Patel described the effort as an “unprecedented financial investigation” into the donor networks and organizational infrastructure enabling domestic violence and unrest.
“The FBI is working with the Treasury Department to map accounts and entities funneling money to extremist organizations across the U.S. and abroad,” Patel said.
“We are following the money. Money never lies,” Patel continued. “That’s what it’s going to take to bring down this network of organized criminal thugs, gang bangers, and yes, domestic terrorists — because that’s what they are.”
Carter said Patel’s comments underscored the importance of a Justice Department inquiry into Soros-backed groups.
“The American people deserve transparency,” Carter said. “If any organization is using foreign money to fuel domestic violence or undermine law enforcement, it must be exposed and prosecuted.”
Former President Obama CAUGHT On-Camera Committing ILLEGAL Act in Canada Against USA: 'It's Treason...'
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Former President Barack Obama drew sharp criticism from supporters of President Donald Trump after a video of him arriving in Canada and greeting Prime Minister John Carney went viral online. The clip, shared by Carney on X with the message “Welcome back to Canada, President @BarackObama,” showed Obama shaking hands with the Canadian leader amid lively background music. Carney added that Obama was joining conversations in Toronto on building “a better and more just future” and empowering more people.
Conservative voices quickly responded to the footage. Laura Loomer wrote on X, “Why is Barack Hussein Obama meeting with world leaders while President Trump is in office? This is a coup.”
Nick Sortor stated, “Obama needs to sit down and figure out his freaking place before his a– ends up in prison for violating the Logan Act.” David J. Freeman, known as Gunther Eagleman on X, commented, “Obama sneaking into Canada for private meetings with globalist Carney? Bro thinks he’s still running the show. Sit down, Barack, Trump’s President. Barack Obama belongs in prison.”
Reports indicated Obama was in Canada for a speaking engagement, though some observers questioned whether that was the sole purpose of the trip. Critics suggested the event may have served as cover for discussions with Carney on issues related to U.S. policy under President Trump, including trade and other bilateral matters.
The Logan Act, enacted in 1799, prohibits private American citizens from conducting unauthorized negotiations with foreign governments involved in disputes with the United States with the intent to influence that government’s conduct. The law has rarely been used, with only two historical indictments and no successful prosecutions.
The controversy escalated further as former FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino issued a pointed warning to Obama following the former president’s recent criticism of the Trump administration’s handling of the Department of Justice.
Obama had told late-night host Stephen Colbert that the White House should not direct the attorney general on prosecutions, describing the attorney general as “the people’s lawyer.” Bongino responded forcefully, suggesting Obama could face scrutiny over actions tied to the 2016 Russia investigation and broader allegations of political weaponization.
The exchange reflects ongoing partisan divisions over the role of former presidents in international affairs and the boundaries of executive authority. Supporters of Obama argue the visit was a standard speaking engagement with no violation of law.
Critics maintain that any private discussions with foreign leaders on matters of U.S. policy without authorization raise serious questions under the Logan Act. No formal legal action has been announced regarding the Canada meeting, and Obama has not issued a direct response to the latest wave of criticism.
The incident underscores broader debates about the appropriate conduct of former officials and the potential for private diplomacy to intersect with current U.S. foreign policy priorities. As the 2026 midterm elections approach, such public controversies continue to fuel discussions about accountability, executive power, and the role of past administrations in shaping international relations. Observers note that the Logan Act remains a rarely enforced statute, but its invocation often highlights deep partisan tensions over perceived interference in ongoing governance.
Seditious Six' Mark Kelly Does It AGAIN - Pete Hegseth Promises A Legal Response
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), a retired U.S. Navy captain, drew criticism after discussing details from a classified Pentagon briefing during a live interview on CBS News. In the segment with anchor Margaret Brennan, Kelly described the impact of U.S. military operations in the Middle East on American weapons stockpiles. He specifically referenced munitions including Tomahawk cruise missiles, ATACMS, SM-3 interceptors, THAAD rounds, and Patriot systems, stating it was “shocking how deep we have gone into these magazines.”
Kelly attributed the depletion to decisions made by the current administration, saying the president acted “without a strategic goal, without a plan, without a timeline,” which he argued left the United States less prepared for potential conflicts elsewhere, including a hypothetical scenario involving China and Taiwan. He noted that replenishing the stockpiles would take years.
The comments followed a classified briefing provided to members of Congress on the effects of recent U.S. involvement in the Iran conflict. National security experts and administration officials have expressed concern that public discussion of specific munitions levels and readiness timelines could compromise operational security and provide adversaries with actionable intelligence.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth responded swiftly, stating that the Department of Defense’s legal counsel would review Kelly’s remarks to determine whether they constituted a violation of his oath or improperly disclosed classified information. Hegseth wrote on social media: “Captain Mark Kelly strikes again. Now he’s blabbing on TV (falsely & dumbly) about a CLASSIFIED Pentagon briefing he received. Did he violate his oath…again? @DeptofWar legal counsel will review.”
Kelly has faced previous scrutiny for a video earlier this year in which he and several Democratic colleagues encouraged military members to evaluate the legality of orders from President Trump, remarks some critics labeled as seditious. As a former naval aviator and astronaut, Kelly has frequently drawn on his military background when discussing national security issues.
The senator’s office has not issued a direct response to Hegseth’s statement. In the interview, Kelly framed his comments as part of legitimate congressional oversight, noting that members of Congress receive classified briefings to fulfill their constitutional responsibilities.
The episode highlights ongoing tensions between the executive and legislative branches over the handling of sensitive national security information. Legal analysts note that members of Congress are generally protected by the Speech or Debate Clause when discussing matters related to their official duties, but the public disclosure of classified details can still trigger internal reviews and potential referrals to the Department of Justice.
The Pentagon has declined to confirm or deny the accuracy of Kelly’s description of stockpile levels. Officials have previously warned that public speculation about munitions readiness can embolden adversaries and complicate deterrence strategy, particularly with respect to China’s military posture in the Indo-Pacific.
The incident occurs against the backdrop of heightened U.S.-Iran tensions and broader concerns about military readiness. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers have expressed worries about the pace of munitions replenishment following sustained operations in multiple theaters. However, the public nature of Kelly’s remarks has intensified partisan debate over congressional responsibility and the boundaries of classified information.
As the Department of Defense legal review proceeds, the matter is likely to fuel further discussion about the balance between transparency, oversight, and national security in an era of heightened geopolitical competition.
