π¨ THREAD: What do Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, John Bolton, and Elaine Chao have in common? They were all paid by a Marxist-Islamist Iran group that was designated as terrorist until 2012.
No, this is not a joke.
Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) was founded by leftist Islamists to oppose the western-backed Pahlavi, and participated in his 1979 overthrow. Khomeini barred MEK afterwards. MEK was implicated in multiple bombings, including that of Americans, and remained an openly armed group until 2003.
Since they got de-listed as a terrorist organization in 2012 on procedural grounds, MEK and their fronts have been actively recruiting US politicians selling themselves as a moderate alternative to Khomeini. But RAND Corporation says MEK meets the qualifications for a cult, citing criteria such as forcing their members to work 16+ hour days and forced divorces.
Polls of the Iranian-American community shows that they do NOT accept Rajavi, MeK's leader, as legitimate, with a 46-point net disapproval - numbers nearly as bad as the existing regime.
As Pence's former Chief of Staff, Marc Short, has already weighed against Trump deal, it's helpful to recall this.
Receipts below. As always, patience as I pull the thread together.π
In an interview with @ItsYourGov , National Council of Resistance of Iran director and MeK representative Alireza Jafarzadeh was asked directly: "Is your group involved in any sort of lobbying or payments for speeches to prominent individuals such as Mike Pompeo?"
NCRI-US said "absolutely not."
@ItsYourGov Jafarzadeh is the registrant contact on FARA Registration #6171 for NCRI-US for Iran, on behalf of MeK.
@ItsYourGov Pence's OGE financial disclosure, filed for his 2024 presidential candidacy, lists $190,000 from "National Council of Resistance of Iran" for a June 2022 speech at the MEK compound in Albania. Can't get more direct receipts than that.
@ItsYourGov Elaine Chao - $50,000.
John Bolton - $40,000.
Many, many politicians involved.
@ItsYourGov Mike Pompeo has been one of the most prolific speakers on the NCRI circuit. He labels MeK as freedom fighters. Speaking fees have not been disclosed, but AI estimates his payments well into the hundreds of thousands range, taking in comparable speakers.
@ItsYourGov So, are MeK actually freedom fighters? The Iranian community doesn't seem to think so. Repeated polling shows unfavorables comparable to the existing regime.
@ItsYourGov And for good reason - a RAND Corporation study documented them as Islamist extremists qualifying as cult. MeK was invited by Saddam Hussein to fight on his behalf against US enemies. The list goes on and on.
What changed about MeK? Not their leadership or ideology. Money.
How the denial works: a three-entity structure.
NCRI-US (the DC office Jafarzadeh runs) -- FARA registered. The filing reports $0 in speaker fees and $0 in payments to individuals.
NCRI Paris/Albania (the foreign principal) -- this is what's listed on Pence's financial disclosure as the source of the $190,000. This entity pays the speakers directly.
OIAC (domestic 501(c)(4)) -- organizes U.S. events. No FARA registration was identified for OIAC in the DOJ FARA database. As a 501(c)(4), OIAC is not required to publicly disclose donors. Paid Pence separately.
Each entity can deny what the others do. That's how "absolutely not" works.
@ItsYourGov Now, you will find reporting from left-wing groups critical of MeK paying Republicans. This is because Communists are aligned with the IRGC, and MeK does oppose IRGC.
But "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" mentality is exactly what has gotten us into GWOT and quagmires.
MEK's entire value proposition is regime change. They're selling themselves as "the democratic alternative"; Rajavi is "president-elect" of a government-in-waiting.
Trump's current Iran posture is negotiation, not regime change. (Side note - IMO, true regime change is probably impossible without a land war, which is a nonstarter.)
That'd explain why Pence, Pompeo, Short, and that entire crew are counter-signaling a peace deal.
@ItsYourGov Will the Iranian deal work? I don't know yet if it will, and nobody does. I pray it will.
But when Pompeo, Pence, and other Never-Trumpers start prematurely poo-poohing the deal - now you know to check and see if money is involved here.
One thing I learned while researching this report is that proponents of regime change over negotiation need an honest reckoning with the fact that the MEK has spent years cultivating support in Congress.
If a regime-change scenario were to unfold, it would be difficult to prevent the MEK from positioning itself as the interim government.
@ItsYourGov Yep, MEK are Marxist-Islamists. I don't know how else you'd describe their ideology.
β’ β’ β’
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
π¨ποΈ THREAD: The Biden ghostwriter tapes are out.
Tonight the Oversight Project ( @ItsYourGov ) released roughly 70 hours of audio from Joe Biden's 2016β2017 interviews with his "Promise Me, Dad" ghostwriter, Mark Zwonitzer, the same recordings Special Counsel Robert Hur cited in 2024. They came out only after a two-year court fight with DOJ that Biden's own lawyers tried, and failed, to block.
I've started going through them. Across five of these interviews, with no cleared person in the room, Biden pauses to flag his own notes as classified or too sensitive to hand over. On one tape he says it out loud:
"Some of this may be classified, so be careful." (April 24, 2017. Audio below.)
Oversight's Jeff Clark: "The tapes make clear that Biden disclosed massive amounts of classified information to his ghost writer."
No thesis yet, analysis is ongoing. But here are the biggest quotes so far, in Biden's own words, each with a timestamp you can check against the audio.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. π
@ItsYourGov Feb 16, 2017 [0:04:19].
"early on, um, in '09, I just found all the classified stuff downstairs."
Biden reads his diary aloud to Zwonitzer, narrating a classified National Security Council meeting (Austin, Dunford, Blinken, Obama, Carter, Brennan), then:
@ItsYourGov April 24, 2017 [0:45:31]. On the handwritten records he kept from office:
"I had all those at the house in a safe. I don't know what⦠they made me do with them."
π§΅π₯ THE MOVE: The Framework Candace Owens Uses to Train Her Audience to Ignore Evidence π§΅
Tyler Robinson left a handwritten confession note under his keyboard for his roommate. He sent a text first: "Drop what you are doing, look under my keyboard."
The response from Candace's audience: "Where's the metadata on those texts?β
The metadata exists. Search Warrant No. 3217131, Page 7: a warrant was obtained for Lance Twiggs' cellphone. The Statewide Information Analysis Center (SIAC) provided Apple ID information for both accounts on the device. FBI investigators reviewed the data. The warrant covers iMessages, FaceTime and call history, photographs, videos, location history, websites visited, email, and browsing history.
But that answer won't matter to anyone who asked. And the reason it won't matter is the whole point of this thread.
Here's how THE MOVE works:
- Candace finds something about the case that hasn't been publicly reported.
- She treats the absence of public reporting as the absence of investigation.
- She fills the gap with a theory.
- When the evidence eventually surfaces, she doesn't engage with it... she finds a new procedural question about the evidence itself.
- And that question does the same job the old one did: allows her audience to keep scrolling.
Below are six videos. One pattern. Once you see THE MOVE, you'll catch it every time she opens her mouth on this case.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. π
Candace: "Does he even exist? I think it's a fair question. Is he just an AI app?"
THE MOVE: Surveillance photos aren't perfectly clear, ergo they're not Tyler Robinson.
REALITY: He walked up to the TPUSA table and talked to staff. Four visits on camera. DNA at 30 quintillion to 1. DNA on the rifle towel. Turned himself in by name with his parents. One blurry stairwell frame let her skip past all of it.
π§΅π₯ THREAD: Candace Owens on Erika Kirk, in Her Own Words
Candace, yesterday, pre-spun a @ncri_io report she hadn't read, calling it "Zionist." The report is Candace's own show. It doesn't accuse her of anything. Her own footage does that.
Before the investigation, Candace spent 40 episodes defending Erika Kirk. She called her "genuinely such a nice person." She swore that nobody "outside of my husband and Erica Kirk" had the power to shut her up. She told her audience she would stop if Erika asked.
Erika asked her to stop. Candace didn't stop. She couldn't; the investigation had become her primary subscription product. So she revoked Erika's authority the only way she could: by making Erika untrustworthy.
No new evidence appeared between the praise and the accusations; just a new business need.
And this business need may very well end up in tragedy.
Here is Candace and her audience - in their own words.
(Special credit to @SKDoubleDub33 for the music.)
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. π
Candace built four mutually exclusive theories about who killed Charlie Kirk. Each version contradicts the last. None had a single named source.
The closest thing Owens comes to offering actual receipts is declaring a .30-06 could not have possibly killed Kirk and left no exit wound. One that is easily debunked by searching for counter-examples.
Last night, Darializa Avila Chevalier β endorsed by NYC-DSA (Democratic Socialists of America) β beat a five-term incumbent to win New York's 13th congressional district.
@AsraNomani has been reporting on their ties to Cuba and the China/Singham network. But whatβs not known is DSAβs deep ties to the German government.
The Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung (RLS) is the political foundation of Die Linke β the German parliamentary party formed from the merger of the Party of Democratic Socialism, itself the legal successor to East Germany's ruling Marxist party, the SED.
Under German law, every party in the Bundestag gets a taxpayer-funded foundation. Die Linke's share is approximately EUR70MM annually.
Most German party foundations sponsor conferences, publish research, and fund exchange programs. What RLS-NYC did was put its own staff inside DSA's organizational leadership β concurrently β for over a decade.
In 2012, RLS opened a New York office. EIN 45-3658022. Their own annual report states: "With the help of funds from the BMZ and the Foreign Office, the Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung maintains a network of international relationships. This includes financing its foreign offices."
Over the last 13 years, Berlin has sent millions to this office.
Despite these ties, no FARA registration for the Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung was identified in the Department of Justice database.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread.π
Neal Meyer is listed on the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation's payroll as "Project Manager."
Meyer previously served as NYC-DSA's chapter treasurer from 2016 to 2018.
On January 15, Meyer published "Big Stakes in the Big Apple" on , a strategic analysis of DSA's electoral prospects after Mamdani's mayoral victory.
One week later, NYC-DSA voted endorse Darializa Avila Chevalier for NY-13. rosalux.nyc
π¨π§΅ BREAKING - The "conservative" protest against AI data centers has an anti-ICE NGO organizer, a DSA member, Facebook money.
Other than that, totally grassroots.
Axios ran an "exclusive" Wednesday about a "conservative group" called Humans First planning a nationwide day of protest against AI data centers on July 18. Amy Kremer is chairing it and invoking the Tea Party.
Axios didn't mention that Humans First was incubated by the Center for AI Safety, an organization funded with millions from Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz. Or that its original staff included a Sunrise Movement organizer who sat in at Pelosi's office with AOC and a DSA member who organized for Kamala Harris.
NBC News described CAIS as having founded Humans First "to be a sort of Trojan horse to make AI safety issues more palatable to a conservative political audience."
@ParkerThayer exposed the Action Network backend.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. π
Credit to @ParkerThayer for finding this Action Network backend and inspiring me to dig a bit deeper.
π§΅ THREAD: Shashank Joshi, a foreign think tank careerist, has a 16-year record of attacking US foreign policy... and now he's lecturing our military leadership on how to take the oath. Why does he still have a work visa?
He's an Indian national who arrived in April and is already the loudest critic of the Pentagon on social media.
The Economist's new Washington Bureau Chief β an Indian national on a visa who just arrived in April β went on a Canadian national security podcast literally titled "The Problem of America" and said this about US military operations:
"They have attacked scores of small boats in the Pacific and the Caribbean. They've killed dozens of people in a campaign that is, by most accounts, quite illegal and contrary to international law."
That's Shashank Joshi, @shashj . Defence editor turned bureau chief. Two months in the country and he's already built a 16-year paper trail calling American power "malevolent," "predatory," and "quite illegal" β while sitting on the advisory board of a UK think tank funded by the European Commission, BAE Systems, and the US State Department.
And he's now lecturing our military leadership on what it means to take the oath.
I have the receipts.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. π
Shashank Joshi has been in DC for two months, and is already lecturing our military officials on what their oaths mean⦠even though his entire record is criticizing the US military.
He's an Indian national. Cambridge. Enrolled in a Harvard PhD program... but his public profiles list no doctorate, suggesting he dropped out. Senior Research Fellow at RUSI, the world's oldest defence think tank. Then a stint at the Tony Blair Institute. The Economist hired him as Defence Editor in 2018. Promoted to Washington Bureau Chief, April 2026.