Laura Loomer's private life: Unknown facts about the Trump ally you didn't know
Image credits: X/@pesach_lattin
Laura Loomer
is a far-right activist and staunch supporter of American President Donald
Trump
. The media personality has gained popularity over the years for creating eye-catching headlines because of her public actions.
Be it handcuffing herself to Twitter's (Now X) New York City headquarters after being banned by the platform or posting anti-Muslim remarks online about popular personalities such as Minnesota Rep.
-elect Ilhan Omar or muslim cab drivers,
Loomer
's actions are loud and contentious.
While she may be popular for her dramatic acts, what she is even more viral about is being an ardent
Trump ally
, so much so that the President at times considers her advice.
In April, she met President Trump in the Oval Office and shared her concerns about staff loyalty with him. Post the meeting, Trump fired numerous administration officials, including at least three senior National Security Council officials. Recently, Loomer is back in the limelight for reacting to former US President Joe Biden's cancer diagnosis with the prediction that "he could die in the next 2 months", which has caused a lot of uproar across media and social media platforms.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
サントリーロコモアが５,９４０→１,０８０円で試せる
ロコモア
こちらをクリック
Undo
While much is known about Loomer's political escapades, here are some unknown facts about her personal life that you should know.
She was raised in Tucson
Image credits: Getty Images
Laura was born on May 21, 1993, and, along with her two brothers, was raised in Tucson, Arizona. While her parents are still known to stay in the city, Loomer has long moved to Florida, which is popular for its political and media personalities.
She left college as she felt discriminated against
Image credits: Getty Images
Loomer attended Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts for a semester but left after she felt discriminated against for being a conservationist. She then moved to
Barry University
in Miami, from where she graduated in 2015 with a degree in broadcast journalism.
She was rumoured to be dating Trump
Image credits: Getty Images
While no confirmed relationships of Loomer's have made it to the limelight, she has been paired with people in her public circles. In 2017, she was alleged to be involved with the alt-right activist Tim Gionet, though Gionet later denied the rumours. Additionally, because of Loomer being a devoted Trump ally, she has been rumoured to have had an affair with Trump that she denied on her podcast "Loomer Unleashed"
She is Jewish
Image credits: Getty Images
Loomer is Jewish, and her heritage is often a part of her activism.
She has used her Jewish identity to criticise people, organisations and movements she perceives as anti-semitic. She was once banned by X (formerly Twitter) after she made remarks about Ilhan Omar, the Minnesota Rep-elect. She tweeted that Omar was 'anti-Jewish' and that her religion pushed homophobia and abuse of women. In 2019, Loomer interrupted a speaker at the Women's March in Washington, D.C.
calling it a "Nazi" organization and shouting, "What about the Jews?"
She has her own media website
Image credits: Getty Images
Loomer owns her own media website called 'LOOMERED', where she publishes news and features, which are all pro-Trump and anti-his-haters. She also runs a podcast titled 'Loomer Unleashed' where she shares her opinions on current events in the news, giving them her own angle of "investigative journalism"
She is popular for public stunts and
conspiracy theories
Image credits: Getty Images
Ever since her college days, Loomer has had a unique penchant for public stunts.
During her time at Barry University, she recorded a conversation with the officials on the idea of starting a club for supporting Iraq and Syria, which they suggested should be changed to supporting the Middle East. Loomer shared the video with Project Veritas, who released it and alleged that the university had no problems supporting the idea of an on-campus organisation to support ISIS.
While Loomer later got suspended and even sued, the video put her on the internet map. She also trespassed into the home of Nancy Pelosi to protest immigration before being removed by the police.
In terms of conspiracy theories, Loomer has many, such as suggesting that the 9/11 attacks were an "inside job."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
14 minutes ago
- The Print
Law doesn't ban Bakrid sacrifice, but politics thrives on pretending it does
Three direct questions are relevant in this regard: which animals are to be sacrificed on Bakrid? Where should they be sacrificed? And what should be done to the blood and carcasses of the sacrificed animals? In fact, an impression is created that qurbani not merely symbolises the violent nature of Islam—which inevitably 'hurts non-violent Hindu sentiments'—but it also crosses the acceptable boundaries of law. These popular perceptions are so powerful that one does not bother to look at the legal framework that deals with animal slaughter in general and Bakrid sacrifice in particular. The aggressive campaign for a 'Green Bakrid' revolves around the idea that this particular Muslim festival is all about killing innocent animals. The Cruelty Against Animal Act, 1960 is often invoked to legitimise the demand that qurbani (sacrifice) on the day of Bakrid—or Bakra Eid—should be made completely illegal. Which animal to be sacrificed? My book, Contested Homelands: Politics of Space and Identity, shows how Bakrid became a highly controversial festival in colonial North India. The colonial authorities evolved a legal-administrative framework to deal with the question of animal slaughter in general and the slaughter of sacrificial cows on Bakrid in particular. These mechanisms, however, placed religious practices of different communities in a binary opposition to each other while simultaneously producing a contested notion of community-space. This administrative mechanism became the guiding principle for various animal preservation laws enacted immediately after Independence. These laws were mainly related to the protection of cows and other bovine animals from slaughter, especially those that were required for the purpose of agriculture and milk production. For instance, the Central Provinces and Berar Animal Preservation Act, 1951 placed a total ban on the slaughter of cows and restricted the slaughter of buffaloes, allowing it as a subject of certification by authorities, based on age and usability in the production. The Bihar Preservation and Improvement of Animals Act, 1955 completely restricted the slaughter of all categories of bovine cattle under any circumstance. The Act does not explicitly prohibit the slaughter of goats or sheep, but it does restrict the slaughter of the animals traditionally associated with the festival in Bihar. The UP Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 also prohibited the slaughter of cows. However, it remained silent on the slaughter of other bovines. Most importantly, these laws criminalised cow slaughter, making it cognisable (arrest without warrant) and non-bailable offence. In short, almost all the state legislations passed afterwards prohibit cow slaughter, allow restricted slaughter of buffaloes, and most importantly, keep goats and sheep outside their purview. These laws, interestingly, did not problematise qurbani on Bakrid. In other words, restricted slaughter of bovine including buffalos and other animals like goats and sheep are not prohibited for qurbani on the occasion of Bakrid. Also read: Bakrid needs a makeover. India's poor need laptops & AC, not gift of meat How should it be slaughtered? The much-talked-about Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (PCA), 1960 does not ban slaughtering of animals. This legislation seeks to prevent the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering upon animals. It defines cruelty in the manner that includes over-loading during transportation, beating, lack of sufficient food, water, or shelter, and abandonment. The Act underlines specific guidelines in connection with slaughter of animals so that 'unnecessary pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is eliminated in the pre-slaughter stages as far as possible, and animals are killed, wherever necessary, in as humane a manner as possible.' PCA (Slaughter House) Rules, 2001 also puts responsibility on the governments and associated enforcement agencies to modernise and maintain slaughterhouses and slaughtering rules to ensure painless slaughter of animals. The PCA does not recognise qurbani as a problematic act. Section 28 of the Act provides immunity for the killing of animals for religious purposes. It says: '…Nothing contained in this Act shall render it an offense to kill an animal in a manner required by the religion of any community.' It is worth noting that the religious norms practiced by Muslim communities for qurbani are very much in line with the provisions of PCA. For instance, Islamic norms do not allow the slaughter of pregnant, sick, under-age, and/or the animals with deformities. Similarly, pre-slaughter care, which includes proper feeding and drinking and allotting resting time to the animal are given adequate attention. Prevention of cruelty during slaughter, which includes quick and painless slaughter with a sharpened knife away from the sight of other animals, also corresponds to the qurbani norms. In this sense, the very act of qurbani does not contradict the basic spirit of PCA. The Supreme Court has rejected several pleas challenging Section 28 of PCA, calling for a ban on qurbani. In July 2023, for instance, the Court ruled against an appeal filed by the Gopeshwar Gaushala Samiti, maintaining the constitutional validity of the provision under the constitutional right to religious freedom. The petition argued that after the insertion of Article 51-A—which outlines the Fundamental Duties of citizens—Section 28 of PCA cannot continue as every citizen is under constitutional obligation to show compassion for living creatures. The petition was filed against an earlier Allahabad High Court order, which had already dismissed the petition in 2017 on the same grounds. Also read: These Pakistani goats are being sold for PKR 2.5 mn. They're selfie magnets at Islamabad Mandi Where to perform qurbani? There have been no specific legal provisions regarding the place of sacrifice slaughters other than colonial bye-laws followed by different municipalities. For instance, the Bye-Laws Part III of the Delhi Municipal Committee, 1957 explains: 'No person can slaughter or cause or permit to be slaughtered at any place other than a public slaughter house an animal…this rule shall not apply to an animal intended for sacrificial slaughter on the occasion of any festival or ceremony … the slaughter of such animals shall not be carried on within the sight of the public except in the case of Zabiha in localities exclusively inhabited by Muslims.' The PCA Rules 2001 also provide that animals are not slaughtered in places other than those recognised or licensed by the concerned authority empowered under the law. However, it does not make any provisions for sacrificial slaughter. In the absence of any clear, legally designated spaces for qurbani even within the Muslim-dominated areas, Bakrid has become a contested festival in legal-administrative terms. Cleanliness and hygiene, we must remember, are also a matter of concern for urban Muslim communities living in areas already lacking basic amenities, regular water supply, proper sanitation, and community centres. However, these concerns have either been completely neglected or have now been reduced to politics over cow, meat, vague notions of vegetarianism, ahimsa (non-violence) and, above all, stereotyping minority culture and identity. The question of administrative intervention required for the efficient observance of Bakrid remains unattended. Nazima Parveen is a Senior Research Fellow at Policy Perspective Foundation. She tweets @ParveenNazima. Views are personal. (Edited by Prashant)
Mint
15 minutes ago
- Mint
This X post by Elon Musk marked the point of no return for his bromance with Donald Trump
Elon Musk and Donald Trump have been caught in the middle of a major spat, and there have been multiple attempts at resolving their difference by their allies, but to no avail yet. According to a CNN report, there were multiple allies and well-wishers of both, Trump and Musk, who were trying to tamp down the escalating feud, but the tipping point was ultimately reached. This happened after Musk dropped a bombastic tweet on X, which read, "Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!" Other than the previously mentioned X post, Elon Musk played it even nastier a few hours ago. He retweeted an MSNBC clip from from 1992 posted by an X user. The video showed Donald Trump partying with Jeffrey Epstein back in the day at Palm Beach, Florida. The caption of the clip by the X user reads,"In 1992, Trump partied with Jeffrey Epstein. Just gonna leave this here." After the retweet of this video, the clip has crossed more than a 100 million views and counting, making the feud between Musk and Trump even more complex. However, it is interesting to note that Musk has not provided any details on how he would have gained access to unreleased files related to Jeffrey Epstein and has also not provided any evidence on where his information was actually coming from. Musk and Trump may have had their differences regarding policy, but things have now turned very personal, very direct, with unknown ramifications lying in wait for the political landscape of the United States. While Musk is getting support from a few Republicans, which could harm Trump's bill, the US President is also not far behind, hinting at going after the government contracts secured by SpaceX. It is not known where this feud will lead, but now all eyes would be on the upcoming agendas placed forward by the Donald Trump administration, and if Musk would be targeting them by rallying more support.
Time of India
16 minutes ago
- Time of India
Pentagon watchdog investigates if staffers were asked to delete Hegseth's Signal messages
The Pentagon watchdog is looking into whether any of Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth's aides was asked to delete Signal messages that may have shared sensitive military information with a reporter, according to two people familiar with the investigation and documents reviewed by The Associated Press. The inspector general's request focuses on how information about the March 15 airstrikes on Houthi targets in Yemen was shared on the messaging app. This comes as Hegseth is scheduled to testify before Congress next week for the first time since his confirmation hearing. He is likely to face questions under oath not only about his handling of sensitive information but also the wider turmoil at the Pentagon following the departures of several senior aides and an internal investigation over information leaks. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Roteirizador Pathfind - O planejador de rotas mais completo do mercado Sistema TMS embarcador Saiba Mais Undo Hegseth already has faced questions over the installation of an unsecured internet line in his office that bypassed the Pentagon's security protocols and revelations that he shared details about the military strikes in multiple Signal chats. One of the chats included his wife and brother, while the other included President Donald Trump 's top national security officials and inadvertently included The Atlantic's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg. Live Events Neither the Pentagon nor the inspector general's office immediately responded to Friday requests for comment on the investigation. Discover the stories of your interest Blockchain 5 Stories Cyber-safety 7 Stories Fintech 9 Stories E-comm 9 Stories ML 8 Stories Edtech 6 Stories Besides finding out whether anyone was asked to delete Signal messages, the inspector general also is asking some past and current staffers who were with Hegseth on the day of the strikes who posted the information and who had access to his phone, according to the two people familiar with the investigation and the documents reviewed by the AP. The people were not authorised to discuss the investigation and spoke on the condition of anonymity. Democratic lawmakers and a small number of Republicans have said that the information Hegseth posted to the Signal chats before the military jets had reached their targets could have put those pilots' lives at risk and that for any lower-ranking members of the military it would have led to their firing. Hegseth has said none of the information was classified. Multiple current and former military officials have said there is no way details with that specificity, especially before a strike took place, would have been OK to be shared on an unsecured device. "I said repeatedly, nobody is texting war plans," Hegseth told Fox News Channel in April after reporting emerged about the chat that included his family members. "I look at war plans every day. What was shared over Signal then and now, however you characterise it, was informal, unclassified coordinations, for media coordinations and other things. That's what I've said from the beginning." Trump has made clear that Hegseth continues to have his support, saying during a Memorial Day speech at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia that the defence secretary "went through a lot" but "he's doing really well." Hegseth has limited his public engagements with the press since the Signal controversy. He has yet to hold a Pentagon press briefing, and his spokesman has briefed reporters there only once. The inspector general is investigating Hegseth at the request of the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen Roger Wicker of Mississippi, and the committee's top Democrat, Sen Jack Reed of Rhode Island. Signal is a publicly available app that provides encrypted communications, but it can be hacked and is not approved for carrying classified information. On March 14, one day before the strikes against the Houthis, the Defence Department cautioned personnel about the vulnerability of the app. Trump has said his administration targeted the Houthis over their "unrelenting campaign of piracy, violence and terrorism." He has noted the disruption Houthi attacks caused through the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, key waterways for energy and cargo shipments between Asia and Europe through Egypt's Suez Canal. The Houthi rebels attacked more than 100 merchant vessels with missiles and drones, sinking two vessels and killing four sailors, between November 2023 until January this year. Their leadership described the attacks as aimed at ending the Israeli war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
