Connect with us

INTERNACIONAL

FBI cuts ties with leftist group that put Turning Point USA on its ‘hate map’ before Kirk assassination

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

FBI Director Kash Patel announced on Friday the agency has «terminated» all ties with the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) — a left-leaning nonprofit organization known for its «Hate Map» and designating groups it views as extremist, including Turning Point USA.

Advertisement

The nonprofit, founded in 1971, originally focused on civil rights legal advocacy. However, in recent years, critics claim it has become highly partisan, targeting conservatives and faith-based organizations alongside actual hate groups.

«The Southern Poverty Law Center long ago abandoned civil rights work and turned into a partisan smear machine,» Patel wrote in an announcement on X. «Their so-called ‘hate map’ has been used to defame mainstream Americans and even inspired violence. That disgraceful record makes them unfit for any FBI partnership.»

The FBI announced on Friday it is cutting all ties with the Southern Poverty Law Center, a left-leaning nonprofit organization targeting what it believes are «hate» groups. (Barry Lewis/InPictures)

Advertisement

PATEL CUTS TIES COMEY’S FBI MADE WITH ADL AS ORGANIZATION FACES BACKLASH FOR TPUSA CRITICISM

Patel said during the FBI’s Anti-Christian Bias Panel in April, he made it clear that the agency will «never rely on politicized or agenda-driven intelligence from outside groups—and certainly not from the SPLC.»

The director’s announcement comes less than a month after Turning Point USA (TPUSA) founder Charlie Kirk was assassinated while speaking at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10, killing the 31-year-old father of two.

Advertisement

In May, the SPLC listed TPUSA in its «hate and extremism» report, calling it a «hard-right organization with links to Southern Poverty Law Center-identified hard-right extremists.»

People holding "This is our Turning Point" signs during a memorial for Charlie Kirk

People raise placards reading «This is our Turning Point» during a memorial service for slain conservative commentator Charlie Kirk at State Farm Stadium, in Glendale, Ariz., Sept. 21.  (Brian Snyder/Reuters)

SCHIFF: PATEL’S FBI LEADERSHIP REPLACED EXPERTISE WITH ‘RABID PARTISANSHIP’

«Turning Point USA’s primary strategy is sowing and exploiting fear that white Christian supremacy is under attack by nefarious actors, including immigrants, the LGBTQ+ community and civil rights activists,» the SPLC wrote in a May 22 case study. «… Turning Point USA’s effort to sow fear and division to enforce social hierarchies rooted in supremacism is emblematic of the hard right’s broader political project to destroy our foundational democratic principles and institutions.»

Advertisement

On Thursday, TPUSA spokesman Andrew Kolvet shared one of Kirk’s X posts from Feb. 10, 2023, where he described the SPLC as a hate group, saying, «There’s a Charlie tweet for everything.» 

«What’s happening right now to the ADL and SPLC is critically important and deadly serious,» Kolvet wrote in another post Thursday, sharing a photo of the May SPLC case study. «They are both part of an ecosystem leveraged by radical left vigilantes to dehumanize conservatives and stoke political violence. They provide the sheen of legitimacy for the left’s violent foot soldiers.»

Kirk also posted about the topic on May 25, denouncing the SPLC for comparing TPUSA to extremist groups like the KKK, and arguing the SPLC is a corrupt, money-driven organization that raises funds by stoking fear.

Advertisement

«Their game plan? Scare financial institutions into debanking us, pressure schools to cancel us, and demonize us so some unhinged lunatic feels justified targeting us,» Kirk wrote. «Remember the Family Research Council? An SPLC-inspired gunman went after them. They’d love nothing more than to see TPUSA in the crosshairs. … Being on their list is a badge of honor. It means they’re terrified that we’re so effective. Keep crying, SPLC—America’s done with your scam.»

Turning Point USA (TPUSA) spokesman Andrew Kolvet

Turning Point USA (TPUSA) spokesman Andrew Kolvet, a longtime friend of Charlie Kirk, sounded off on the SPLC smear on X. (Patrick Fallon via Getty Images)

‘MOST TRANSPARENT’ FBI EVER: PATEL UPDATES SENATE ON KIRK ASSASSINATION PROBE

Kolvet highlighted that on Sept. 9, the day before Kirk’s murder, the SPLC published a newsletter «directly attacking Charlie.»

Advertisement

«Did these contribute to the assassin’s motive?» Kolvet wrote Thursday. «We may never know, but the swirl of extremist propaganda certainly played a role. The SPLC has been credibly accused of corruption, mishandling of donations, union-busting, and covering up of sexual assault by senior leadership, all while sitting on nearly $1 billion in reserves and being based in red Alabama. These are legitimate predicates for investigation. Those should happen immediately.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

«The influence of the ADL and SPLC must be completely purged from any serious company, org, and agency. Companies like PayPal which still rely on these disgraced orgs should be the focus of future boycotts if they insist on continuing their association.»

Advertisement

Elon Musk reacted to Kolvet’s post with a simple, «Exactly.»

Patel’s announcement about the FBI cutting ties with the SPLC came just hours after Kolvet’s post.

Advertisement

fbi,religion,politics,hate crime,charlie kirk

Advertisement

INTERNACIONAL

El fundador de Telegram afirmó que 65 millones de rusos acceden a la app con VPN pese a la censura impuesta por Putin

Published

on


Las restricciones digitales impuestas por el gobierno de Putin provocaron un fuerte malestar social, sobre todo en los más jóvenes (REUTERS/Ramil Sitdikov)

La campaña de bloqueo y censura impulsada por el gobierno de Vladimir Putin contra Telegram -y otras plataformas- provocó una interrupción bancaria nacional y no logró frenar el uso de la aplicación, según su fundador Pavel Durov, quien afirmó que 65 millones de rusos siguen conectados a diario mediante VPN.

Las restricciones impuestas por las autoridades rusas a Telegram y a las redes privadas virtuales, conocidas como VPN, tuvieron efectos de alcance inesperado. De acuerdo con The Moscow Times y otros medios internacionales, el intento de bloqueo derivó en fallas masivas en el sistema bancario nacional, afectando pagos con tarjeta, cajeros automáticos y transferencias. Las entidades Sberbank, VTB y T-Bank notificaron fallos el 3 de abril, coincidiendo con la fase más intensa de la ofensiva digital.

Advertisement

En este contexto, Pavel Durov, fundador de Telegram, utilizó su propio canal en la plataforma para asegurar que más de 65 millones de personas en Rusia acceden cada día a la aplicación, pese al bloqueo, y que más de 50 millones envían mensajes diariamente. Durov calificó el fenómeno como una “Resistencia Digital”, en la que decenas de millones de usuarios emplean VPN y servidores proxy para sortear la censura.

Durov recordó que una estrategia similar en Irán solo generó un uso masivo de herramientas de evasión. “El gobierno esperaba migraciones hacia apps de vigilancia, pero solo consiguió que millones adoptaran VPN”, afirmó el empresario, quien prometió adaptar el tráfico de Telegram para dificultar su detección y bloqueo por parte de los sistemas de inspección rusos.

Pavel Durov, fundador y CEO de Telegram (REUTERS/Albert Gea)
Pavel Durov, fundador y CEO de Telegram (REUTERS/Albert Gea)

La ofensiva regulatoria fue liderada por Roskomnadzor, el regulador de internet de Rusia, que en febrero pasado comenzó a ralentizar el acceso y, a partir del 1 de abril, activó un bloqueo nacional. El objetivo oficial era redirigir a los usuarios hacia plataformas de mensajería alineadas con el Estado, como Max, una aplicación obligatoria en nuevos dispositivos desde 2025.

Especialistas en ciberseguridad, como Fyodor Muzalevsky de RTM Group, explicaron a The Moscow Times que el bloqueo de direcciones IP vinculadas a servicios financieros contribuyó a la caída bancaria. El incidente dejó fuera de servicio terminales de pago, cajeros y aplicaciones de banca móvil en todo el país. El metro de Moscú incluso permitió el acceso gratuito y comercios de la capital solo aceptaron efectivo durante horas.

Advertisement

La presión estatal crece sobre los servicios de mensajería y las VPN. El Ministerio de Desarrollo Digital ruso ordenó a las plataformas restringir el acceso a usuarios de VPN antes del 15 de abril, y analiza multas de hasta 30.000 rublos para quienes utilicen herramientas no autorizadas. Reuters destacó que Roskomnadzor ya bloqueó más de 400 servicios de VPN desde mayo de 2025, un aumento del 70% en comparación con el año anterior.

La respuesta social, según datos de Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, se refleja en cifras de uso: Telegram sumó cerca de 96 millones de usuarios en enero de 2026 antes de las restricciones. Aunque la cifra descendió tras el bloqueo, el mantenimiento de 65 millones de usuarios diarios ilustra la persistencia de la plataforma incluso bajo prohibición.

Putin intensifica la censura digital en Rusia (EFE/EPA/SERGEI ILNITSKY)
Putin intensifica la censura digital en Rusia (EFE/EPA/SERGEI ILNITSKY)

El conflicto digital abarca también otros servicios. Las autoridades intensificaron restricciones sobre aplicaciones extranjeras, como WhatsApp, luego de que su matriz, Meta, supuestamente incumpliera la legislación nacional. El portavoz del Kremlin, Dmitry Peskov, instó a la población a migrar a servicios estatales.

Los apagones de internet móvil se suman a la estrategia de control. Desde mayo de 2025, en 83 regiones rusas se han reportado cortes selectivos de conectividad, que solo permiten acceso a sitios aprobados por el gobierno. Este modelo incrementa la dependencia de herramientas de evasión para acceder a información y servicios básicos.

Advertisement

Telegram, además de mensajería, se consolidó como fuente principal de noticias y coordinación social, llegando incluso a ser utilizada por militares rusos en el conflicto de Ucrania, según The Moscow Times. El bloqueo de la plataforma tiene así consecuencias que trascienden lo tecnológico y afectan la operatividad social y política en el país.

De esta manera, el gobierno de Putin enfrenta la disyuntiva de endurecer el control sobre VPN y plataformas digitales, o ajustar su estrategia para evitar nuevos daños colaterales. Mientras tanto, la “Resistencia Digital” de millones de usuarios persiste, desafiando las restricciones y adaptando sus métodos para permanecer conectados.



Business,Corporate Events,Europe

Advertisement
Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

A de facto pro forma: Why Washington fixated these sessions as the DHS shutdown dragged on through recess

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Carpe diem. If you’ve wondered why all of Washington buzzed so much this week about «pro forma» sessions in the House and Senate, here’s your chance to find out why.

Advertisement

Come on now. Tempus fugit. There’s no time like the present. Hopefully, when you finish reading this, you can declare veni, vidi, vici when it comes to your understanding of pro forma sessions in the House and Senate.

Let’s start with what pro forma means and why it holds application in Congress.

SEN. MIKE LEE URGES TRUMP TO INVOKE RARE CONSTITUTIONAL POWER TO FORCE CONGRESS BACK FROM SPRING RECESS

Advertisement

In Latin, «pro forma» refers to «a matter of form.» In other words, something appears real, but it’s just perfunctory. For decades, the House and Senate have used the parliamentary artifice of a «pro forma» session to adhere to the Constitutional requirement of meeting every three days.

Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution states that «Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.» That means the House and Senate must convene at three-day intervals — unless both bodies approved the same «adjournment resolution» to allow one another to depart Washington for an extended period of time. In other words, the House and Senate must vote and agree to be out at the same time. And if there’s no consensus on an adjournment resolution, the House and Senate technically must «meet» every three days.

The House and Senate often fail to sync up on an adjournment resolution because the party opposite the President wants to block him from using his power to install cabinet officials or other figures via a «recess appointment» — thus circumnavigating the Senate confirmation process. That makes it challenging to approve an adjournment resolution. But that’s another matter.

Advertisement

Sunrise light hits the U.S. Capitol dome on Thursday, January 2, 2025. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Back to pro forma sessions.

Sans an adjournment resolution, the House and Senate simply gavel in and gavel out every three days. There is (usually) no legislative business. These are pro forma sessions. The House and Senate meet «in form.» But don’t accomplish anything. There’s often only one lawmaker on hand — the person who presides. House pro forma sessions usually run two or three minutes. Senate sessions are even more abbreviated — usually lasting 25 to 35 seconds.

Advertisement

What constitutes a Congressional meeting? Just those few seconds of session time suffices.

Some years ago, senators actually held an informal competition, racing through pro formas in an attempt to see who could conduct the meeting the fastest. The quickest pro forma session clocked in at a blistering 21 seconds.

Here’s the parliamentary posture of the House and Senate last week:

Advertisement

The Senate adjourned for the day in the wee hours on Friday, March 28. The House followed suit just before midnight the same night. Without an adjournment resolution, both would meet the next Tuesday. Therefore, if the House or Senate wouldn’t have to meet again until Tuesday.

GOP RAILS AGAINST ‘S— SANDWICH’ DEAL AS ALL EYES TURN TO HOUSE TO END DHS SHUTDOWN

There’s nothing written prohibiting the House or Senate from conducting legislative business during a pro forma session. In other words, either body just has to conduct some legislative business to convert a pro forma session into a de facto session. So that’s why it was though that the Senate’s pro forma session on Tuesday was ripe for activity as the DHS shutdown continued.

Advertisement

Some House Republicans demanded that the Senate align with what the House passed Friday night: a bill which funded all of the Department of Homeland Security for two months.

The Senate gaveled to order on Tuesday morning around 10:33 am et (a couple of moments late). Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., presided. But after 31 seconds, Hoeven adjourned the Senate without any business. Hoeven himself — or any senator — could have tried to pass the House bill with the skeleton crew on hand. Sen. Chris Coons, D-D.E., was the only other senator in the chamber. Coons or anyone else could have sought recognition to speak. But none of that happened.

Split image of John Thune, Chuck Schumer and Mike Johnson

Amid the ongoing Department of Homeland Security shutdown, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has not had his immigration reform demands met while Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., passed rival DHS funding proposals. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images; Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

And then the Senate adjourned, only to meet again Thursday morning (note the three-day interlude) at 7 a.m. for another pro forma session.

Advertisement

Pro forma sessions are customarily one of the most dull exercises in Congress. A skeleton crew of floor staff are there. Those asked to preside over the sessions are lawmakers who need to be in Washington for some reason over a recess or those who don’t go home often. Depending on which party has the majority, lawmakers from Maryland, Virginia or West Virginia frequently preside — simply because they are nearby. A limited number of reporters surface. They’re all thirsty for a quote or soundbite — simply because so few other lawmakers are available thanks to the recess. The whole enterprise starts and wraps up within minutes and everyone goes back home.

But that was not the case with last Tuesday’s Senate session. Everyone wanted to see if Republicans might try to approve the House-passed DHS bill. Or for that matter, if the House may attempt to align with the Senate and pass its bill. Neither happened. Even though a flood of reporters descended on the Capitol.

BEHIND THE SCENES OF CONGRESS’ ELEVENTH-HOUR RUSH TO FUND THE DHS

Advertisement

But the drama was higher this past Thursday morning. On Wednesday, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., dramatically reversed himself and consented to the Senate-passed bill to fund all the Department of Homeland Security through Oct. 1 — except the Border Patrol and ICE. Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., published a joint statement endorsing the Senate’s strategy. And so around dawn on Thursday, Thune himself showed up to pass the Senate package again.

The presence of the Majority or Minority Leader on the floor during a pro forma session is nearly unprecedented. It’s a magna momemti when it comes to a pro forma meeting.

TSA agent monitors passengers at LaGuardia Airport.

A Transportation Security Administration agent watches as passengers queue for security screening at LaGuardia Airport in New York City on March 22. (Charly Triballeau/AFP via Getty Images)

This was not an ordinary pro forma. And even though nothing happened on Tuesday, neither of those sessions were far from the customary pro formas Congress usually sees during a recess.

Advertisement

It was presumed that the House would align in its pro forma session later Thursday morning. But consternation gripped the House Republican Conference. How was Johnson suddenly endorsing the Senate deal which he just characterized as a «joke» a few days earlier? That’s to say nothing of Johnson twisting himself in multiple knots and aggravating all wings of the GOP Conference.

So the House took no action. Which is why DHS remains shut down since the House and Senate have magnified the scope and potential for all four pro forma sessions held in recent days.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

It turns out that all of these high-profile pro forma sessions were just bona fide pro forma sessions.

Nil actum est. Congress didn’t accomplish anything. Again.

Advertisement

house of representatives politics, senate, government shutdown, politics, john thune, chuck schumer

Advertisement
Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

El piloto desaparecido en Irán reaviva el fantasma de la crisis de los rehenes de 1979 y deja a Estados Unidos en alerta máxima

Published

on



El derribo de un avión de combate estadounidense sobre territorio iraní y la intensa búsqueda de uno de sus tripulantes han generado preocupación de que pueda ser capturado y proporcionar a Irán un valioso recurso que podría utilizar para presionar a Estados Unidos.

La operación de rescate se encontraba en su segundo día este sábado, con tropas estadounidenses realizando una búsqueda exhaustiva y el ejército iraní también intentando encontrar al tripulante.

Advertisement

Como muestra del afán del régimen por atrapar al aviador, un presentador de una filial local de la cadena estatal iraní leyó el viernes en televisión un comunicado en el que instaba a los residentes a capturar al «piloto o pilotos enemigos» y entregarlos vivos a las fuerzas de seguridad a cambio de una recompensa.

La posibilidad de que Irán capture al aviador evoca el temor a una repetición de la crisis de rehenes de Irán de 1979, un suceso traumático en la historia estadounidense que sentó las bases de casi cinco décadas de relaciones hostiles entre Estados Unidos e Irán.

La crisis, en la que estudiantes militantes tomaron la embajada estadounidense en Teherán y mantuvieron cautivos a 52 estadounidenses durante 444 días, sentó un precedente para Irán que perfeccionaría en las décadas siguientes como forma de acaparar titulares internacionales, infligir daño a sus adversarios y obtener concesiones.

Advertisement

Desde 1979, el gobierno iraní ha utilizado repetidamente la toma de rehenes como táctica contra sus adversarios. Ha detenido a estadounidenses, europeos y otros ciudadanos extranjeros, a veces manteniéndolos encarcelados durante años antes de liberarlos, a menudo a cambio de dinero o la liberación de sus propios ciudadanos encarcelados en el extranjero. Ha utilizado a los rehenes como herramientas de propaganda y para obtener influencia.

La crisis de 1979 marcó el último año de la presidencia de Jimmy Carter y, para muchos, se convirtió en un símbolo de sus fracasos.

Donald Trump ha criticado repetidamente la gestión de la crisis de rehenes por parte del Carter, calificándola de «patética». En 1980, declaró a un periodista: «Que este país se quede de brazos cruzados y permita que un país como Irán retenga a nuestros rehenes, a mi parecer, es un horror, y no creo que lo harían con otros países».

Advertisement

Hamidreza Azizi, experto en seguridad iraní del Instituto Alemán de Asuntos Internacionales y de Seguridad, una organización de investigación, afirmó que Irán podría adoptar dos estrategias si logra capturar al aviador.

Si la captura se mantiene en secreto, los iraníes podrían contactar a Estados Unidos en privado y llegar a un acuerdo secreto, exigiendo concesiones a cambio de la liberación del tripulante. O bien, Irán podría exhibir al aviador ante las cámaras como propaganda.

Según él, esa era la estrategia más probable. «Realmente quieren proyectar esta imagen de victoria y, además, humillar a Trump», afirmó Azizi.

Advertisement

Ali Alfoneh, investigador principal del Instituto de los Estados Árabes del Golfo, con sede en Washington, mencionó un incidente de 2007 en el que Irán capturó a marineros británicos, alegando que sus embarcaciones habían entrado ilegalmente en aguas iraníes. Los marineros fueron vendados, amenazados y sometidos a presión psicológica antes de prestar declaración en vídeo, en la que parecían disculparse. Sin embargo, no se reportó que sufrieran daños físicos, señaló Alfoneh.

“El entonces presidente Mahmoud Ahmadinejad aprovechó al máximo la cobertura mediática internacional al anunciar su liberación y les estrechó la mano personalmente”, declaró el Alfoneh en un correo electrónico. Añadió que el trato al aviador estadounidense probablemente sería diferente, dado que Estados Unidos e Irán están en guerra.

Incluso si el tripulante desaparecido es rescatado, el incidente subraya los riesgos de realizar misiones sobre territorio hostil contra un adversario con capacidad de represalia. Las operaciones de rescate son intrínsecamente peligrosas porque ponen en riesgo a otros miembros del servicio estadounidense.

Advertisement

Fuente: The New York Times

Continue Reading

Tendencias