Login
Noted left-wing organizations such as Arabella Advisors and the Soros network are bankrolling the pro-Hamas, anti-Israel protests across the United States, according to a new website documenting the organizations and their funders.
The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project has launched a new website, ColorRevolutions.us, that details the nonprofit organizations, academic and financial institutions, and foreign governments that have put financial resources behind the anti-Israel protests after the Hamas terrorist attack in Israel last Oct. 7.
“The stakes not only for the American way of life, but for Western civilization itself, could not be higher,” Mike Howell, executive director of the Heritage Oversight Project, told The Daily Signal.
“Our country is being overthrown from the inside. They’re not afraid. They’re blatantly and publicly celebrating terrorist causes,” Howell added. “This United States needs to get its pride and resolve back, or else we’re going to lose it all.”
The website contends this funding resembles a “color revolution in the United States.”
The website’s “about” section describes color revolutions as “uprisings supported by actors whose interests in protests are not primarily the protest topic.”
It continues:
The actors are distinct in terms of demographics, economic class, nationality, etc. from the bulk of the protestors. They use their significant resources to leverage a divisive event into self-serving political change that is substantially broader than the original protest topic. …
This site makes the case to Americans that behind the current outbreak of protests are well-resourced groups with a history of driving for radical social change that most Americans rightly identified as harmful and have come to reject.
The New Venture Fund, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization operating under the umbrella of Arabella Advisors, has funded anti-Israel protests at Georgetown University and The George Washington University, both schools based in Washington, D.C.
Numerous other organizations funded by major institutional left-wing donors are engaged in organizing anti-Israel or pro-Hamas protests and activities.
For example, the website reports that billionaire funder of left-wing causes George Soros’ family’s Open Society Foundations have funded protest organizers Jewish Voice for Peace and U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights.
The progressive political fundraising group ActBlue has funded organizing efforts by the groups MPower Change, an organization that purports to fight Islamophobia and white supremacy, and Until Freedom Inc., a group that says it seeks “intersectional social justice.”
The traditional left-leaning philanthropy group Tides Foundation financially supports the Adalah Justice Project, Jewish Voice for Peace, Justice and Education Fund, and Students for Justice in Palestine.
Beyond typical left-leaning organizations, the Chinese Communist Party is working with American millionaire entrepreneur Neville Roy Singham. Singham has a network that has funded protest organizers Justice and Education Fund and The People’s Forum.
It was The People’s Forum that organized the protests at Columbia University, according to The Washington Free Beacon.
The New York Times reported in May 2023 that Singham’s network pushed Chinese Communist Party talking points in its progressive advocacy. And The Jerusalem Post reported that Singham, a consultant for Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei, was bankrolling the efforts. Singham has denied that he promotes Chinese propaganda.
Other American Muslim organizations are backing the anti-Israel efforts. These include American Muslims for Palestine, founded in 2005. The Anti-Defamation League called American Muslims for Palestine “the leading organization providing anti-Zionist training.”
The Americans for Justice in Palestine Educational Foundation, for Americans for Justice in Palestine, is a fiscal sponsor of American Muslims for Palestine.
The Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund also donated to the Justice and Education Fund and The People’s Forum.
“This was not Goldman Sachs money. We administer a Donor Advised Fund in our asset and wealth management business, and as with all donor advised funds, donations are made to 501c3 charities, at the client’s direction, using a client’s contributions to the fund,” a Goldman Sachs spokesperson told The Daily Signal in a statement after the initial publication of the story.
The Daily Signal reached out to all the funders listed on the Color Revolutions website. None responded by publication time.
Some responded afterwards.
“As a donor-advised fund, Schwab Charitable facilitates grants recommended by donors to 501(c)(3) charitable organizations deemed eligible by the IRS and state regulators,” Schwab Charitable Trusts said in a written statement after publication. “Grants recommended by donors do not reflect the values or beliefs of Schwab Charitable or its management. Schwab Charitable is an independent 501(c)(3) public charity regulated by the IRS and a separate legal entity from Charles Schwab. We encourage anyone with concerns about a charitable organization to contact the IRS (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f13909.pdf) or state regulators (http://www.nasconet.org/resources/state-government/).”
This story was updated to included responses from some of the identified donors.
The post Who’s the Big Money Bankrolling Pro-Hamas Protests in US? You Might Be Surprised appeared first on The Daily Signal.
For months, Democrats have predicted that a guilty verdict in the controversial New York hush money trial would doom former President Donald Trump’s reelection hopes. Instead, new polling data from Scott Rasmussen suggests there is “no measurable impact.”
Rasmussen’s polling firm, RMG Research, had both Trump and President Joe Biden tied at 42% in its poll immediately preceding the May 30 verdict. Following the conviction, Trump gained a percentage point, leading 43% to Biden’s 42%.
“[T]he conviction of Donald Trump in a New York courtroom had no measurable impact on Election 2024,” Rasmussen wrote in a memo shared with The Daily Signal. “Survey results following the conviction are virtually identical to results preceding the conviction.”
Rasmussen first unveiled his findings Sunday on Merit Street Media’s “The Scott Rasmussen Show.”
Meanwhile, the percentage of voters who viewed Trump as less ethical than other politicians remained the same before and after the jury’s decision to convict him on 34 counts.
“This suggests any baggage carried by the president has long since been baked into the public’s assessment of him,” Rasmussen wrote in his memo. “In other words, the jury decision wasn’t news that surprised anyone.”
Also working in Trump’s favor: A majority of Americans, 52%, think his conviction will be overturned on appeal. Less than a third, 32%, disagree.
>>> Social Media Message Could Doom Trump NYC Verdict—If It’s True (And That’s a BIG IF)
Biden’s ethical lapses—and potential criminal behavior—are a factor contributing to the latest poll numbers, Rasmussen wrote. More than half, 51%, believe Biden committed crimes that could put him in court once he leaves office. Another 41% say Biden is less ethical than most politicians.
More than 6 in 10 voters, 62%, want the audio tapes from Robert Hur’s interview of Biden to be released to Congress, including 45% of Democrats. The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project, Judicial Watch, and CNN are suing the Justice Department for access to the recordings.
In a recent development, the Justice Department admitted to altering the Biden transcript by removing “filler words” such as “um” or “uh.” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said that “the transcript is not accurate and was changed in a way to help Biden.”
>>> Amid New Cognitive Questions, Edits to Biden Transcript Color Lawsuit Over Recording
An overwhelming number of Americans agree: Upon being told of the edited transcript, 69% said Congress should have the opportunity to review Biden’s interview to confirm its accuracy.
Nearly two-thirds, 65%, think the Biden tapes contain embarrassing statements, while 59% believe the audio’s public release would harm Biden’s reelection bid.
The RMG Research polling data on Trump’s trial is from a June 3-4 survey of 1,000 registered voters; it has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. The data on Biden’s audio tapes is from a June 5-6 survey of 1,000 registered voters; it has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
The post How Will Trump Verdict Affect His Election Prospects? New Poll Offers First Clue appeared first on The Daily Signal.
As Americans struggle to keep up with the rising tide of prices and feel the squeeze of high interest rates on housing, President Joe Biden continues to claim that the economy is good. “Bidenomics” is working, there’s no recession to see here, so shut up and enjoy the drag queen performances at the White House.
That narrative took a hit back in 2022, however, when America experienced two consecutive quarters of decline in gross domestic product—the traditional definition of a recession. In the first quarter of 2022, inflation-adjusted GDP declined in the U.S. by 1.6%, and it declined by an additional 0.6% in the second quarter of that year.
The Biden administration responded by simply redefining the word “recession.” The move made a bizarre kind of sense coming from a bureaucracy that has redefined what it means to be a woman.
The White House stated in July 2022 that “it is unlikely that the decline of the GDP in the first quarter of this year—even if followed by another GDP decline in the second quarter—indicates a recession.”
The Heritage Foundation, a stick-in-the-mud organization that doesn’t support willy-nilly redefining words to suit the woke movement, decided to get to the bottom of this whole redefining-a-recession nonsense. Heritage’s Oversight Project filed a Freedom of Information Act request in July 2023, asking the Treasury Department for internal communications regarding recessions. (Heritage created The Daily Signal in 2014.)
Treasury asked Heritage to narrow the parameters of the request. It did so. Treasury refused to hand over the documents by the time required by law. Heritage sued. Late last month, Treasury handed over some documents.
The catch? Most of the conversations in those documents have been redacted.
To be sure, we do get little gems like “I’d be glad to discuss tomorrow or Monday,” and “Thank you for forwarding.” These largely meaningless pleasantries are among the few words Treasury apparently deems nonthreatening enough to reveal to the public.
Many pages simply feature a large black box redacting the entire page.
One email shows Treasury staff discussing a quote from the International Monetary Fund stating that a “technical recession” consists of two quarters of economic decline.
“For the United States, some indicators, such as the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s GDPNow forecasting model, suggest that a technical recession (defined as two consecutive quarters of negative growth) may already have started,” Gene Sperling, a senior adviser to Biden, quoted the IMF in an email on July 26, 2022.
Treasury redacted Sperling’s own words in his email, along with the substance of every email responding to him.
So, Heritage plans to sue again.
“The Oversight Project sued the Treasury Department to seek answers on why the Biden administration gaslit the American people into changing the definition of recession,” Kyle Brosnan, chief counsel at the Oversight Project, told The Daily Signal. “We have received multiple document productions from our lawsuit showing that there were a lot of communications about this change, but excessive redactions have hampered our ability to determine the truth. We intend to challenge these redactions as we progress in the case.”
The Biden administration’s apparent attempt, yet again, to hide the substance of internal discussions about the definition of a recession raises more questions than answers.
Did Treasury officials intentionally twist the definition in order to politically protect Biden in a midterm election year? Did they develop strategies for hiding negative economic news that might interfere with the 2024 election? If they weren’t trying to monkey with the definition of recession, why are they so insistent on hiding that fact?
Perhaps the Biden administration merely wishes to redefine “transparency,” as well.
The post WHAT ARE THEY HIDING? Biden Admin Redacts Its Justification for Altering the Definition of ‘Recession’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.
Vaunce News