Jim Marter: I will not be silent in the face of Colorado Terror Attack and Homeland Security Failures
Jim Marter: I will not be silent in the face of Colorado Terror Attack and Homeland Security Failures
'This attack on the innocent, including a Holocaust survivor, is a stark reminder that we need to demand secure borders and immigration enforcement or we'll face more terrorism and anti-Semitism.'— Jim Marter
OSWEGO, IL, UNITED STATES, June 4, 2025 / EINPresswire.com / -- Today, Republican congressional candidate Jim Marter urged an end to the silence regarding the heinous terror attack in Boulder, Colorado over the weekend where eight individuals were injured during a peaceful pro-Israel rally. So far, Marter's opponent has made released no similar, official statement.
The facts are, the suspect, Mohamed Soliman, reportedly used incendiary devices and a makeshift flamethrower in an act authorities are investigating as domestic terrorism, allegedly motivated by radical Islamic extremism and anti-Semitism.
Among the victims were four men and four women. Two suffered severe burns and had to be airlifted to a burn unit. One of the victims is an 88-year-old Holocaust survivor, and another is a professor at the University of Colorado.
'This brutal attack on innocent Americans, including a Holocaust survivor, is a stark reminder of the threats posed by radical ideologies,' said Marter. 'It's deeply concerning that anyone could remain silent in the face of this act of terror and anti-Semitism.'
Soliman, overstayed his visa and was therefore residing illegally here in the United States. Thankfully, he was apprehended at the scene and is currently facing multiple charges.
'Our elected officials have a duty to speak out against such heinous acts and to ensure the safety and security of all Americans,' Marter continued. 'Silence can put Americans at risk and embolden would-be terrorists. If we fail to stand strong in the face of terrorism and lawlessness, we'll see more of this,' said Marter.
Jim Marter is a principled Republican for Congress in Illinois' 14th District. He is a small business owner, husband, and father, with a long record of serving the community, standing against violence and discrimination, and fighting for individual freedoms, secure borders, and accountable government.
To learn more about Marter for Congress, visit www.marter4congress.us.
Campaign HQ
Marter for Congress
+1 815-585-8006
email us here
Legal Disclaimer:
EIN Presswire provides this news content 'as is' without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
American Military News
20 minutes ago
- American Military News
New bill introduced on D-Day anniversary would ‘strengthen' US, UK partnership
A new bill introduced by a Republican congressman on the 81st anniversary of D-Day would allow the United States to share military technology with the United Kingdom. On Friday, Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) announced in a press release that he had reintroduced the Special Relationship Military Improvement Act of 2025 to strengthen the country's relationship with the United Kingdom on the 81st anniversary of D-Day. 'Our nation can never forget the sacrifice of thousands of Allied soldiers who lost their lives on D-Day and the invasion of Normandy. The price they paid ensured that millions could live free from tyranny,' Green said. 'And the best way to commemorate this momentous day is to strengthen our partnership with the United Kingdom—and that's exactly what this bill does.' In Friday's press release, the Republican congressman explained that advancements in military technology currently become the 'exclusive property' of the United States when sold to the federal government under the rules established by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. Green said that while Canada is provided exemptions under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, the United Kingdom is not provided exemptions. READ MORE: D-Day hero receiving medals for saving 200 lives If the Special Relationship Military Improvement Act of 2025 was passed, it would implement a change to the Arms Export Control Act to allow military technology to be shared between the United States and the United Kingdom. In Friday's press release, Green said advancements in U.S. military technology 'should be available to our allies' and that sharing military technology with allies was 'common sense.' Green explained, 'The U.S. and the U.K. work together in almost every aspect to share intelligence, fight terrorism around the globe, and ensure that, through our combined military strength, the world can enjoy unprecedented peace.' In a statement to Fox News on Friday, Green said, 'On the beaches of Normandy, it was British soldiers who ran in the sand alongside Americans.' He added, 'When we were attacked on 9/11, it was the United Kingdom that sent soldiers into Afghanistan to help us destroy al-Qaeda and the Taliban that gave them safe haven.' Green emphasized that the United States will 'never forget' the friendship it shares with the United Kingdom. The Republican congressman added that sharing military technology is 'crucial' in the face of increasing threats across the globe.
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Hegseth could be ‘on the hook' for hundreds of millions on Qatari jet, says Raskin
The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee has warned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that he could be 'on the hook' for hundreds of millions of dollars for having accepted a luxury jet from the Qatari government. In a letter sent Wednesday, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that Hegseth's formal acceptance of the Boeing 747 jetliner last month – a move made so that the Air Force can upgrade its security measures so it may eventually be used as Air Force One – violates the Constitution emoluments clause. The rule bars federal officials from accepting financial benefits from foreign governments without congressional approval. 'I write now to urge and advise you to promptly mitigate these violations—and your own personal legal exposure—by either returning the plane to the Qatari government or promptly seeking Congress's consent to accept it,' Raskin wrote. The Pentagon announced on May 21 that it had officially accepted the 13-year-old luxury jet previously used by the Qatari royal family, a supposed 'free,' gift that could be used to supplement the aging Air Force One fleet, according to President Trump. The transfer has been criticized by U.S. lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, who say it raises ethical and corruption questions in addition to costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars to retrofit the plane into a secure and working Air Force One. Others have focused on the national security risks of such a gift, saying the aircraft would have to be swept for listening devices. Some have worried that in Trump's push to use the plane before he leaves office, the Air Force will rush security upgrades and cut corners on protection systems. A former professor of constitutional law and former ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, Raskin has focused his criticisms on the ethical issues around accepting the Qatari plane, repeatedly arguing that it requires congressional approval. 'The Constitution is perfectly clear: no present 'of any kind whatever' from a foreign state without Congressional permission,' Raskin wrote on X last month after news of the gift broke. Congress has the authority to block federal officials from receiving gifts from foreign governments, as granted in the Constitution, but the government arm has not held any formal vote to accept the plane or not. Democrats largely have been unsuccessful in stopping Trump from accepting the Qatari jet. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) last month attempted to pass a bill that would bar the use of a foreign jet as Air Force One, but that effort failed. Raskin, along with other Democrat lawmakers, have introduced resolutions to condemn the gift but Republicans have blocked them from being considered on the floor. Making matters more complicated, Democrats, given their status as the minority party, can't convene any oversight hearings that would force government officials to testify on the issue, and their colleagues across the aisle have not called any such hearings themselves. In his letter, Raskin says Hegseth is in violation of the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, which could prompt the Attorney General to bring civil action and penalties against him. Under that law, government officials can accept certain gifts up to $480 in value, and they cannot 'request or otherwise encourage the tender of a gift or decoration' from another country. In violating the act, Hegseth can face a penalty 'not to exceed the retail value of the gift improperly solicited or received plus $5,000.' 'In other words, you may be on the hook for $400 million (plus $5,000) even for a jumbo jet that you accepted on behalf of the President but do not get to personally enjoy,' Raskin writes, referring to the cost of a new Boeing 747-8 jet. 'If you truly believe that there is nothing untoward about the President asking for and receiving a $400 million 'flying palace' from a foreign power, then you should let Congress and the President's Republican colleagues vote to approve the transaction,' he adds. 'If you're unwilling to do that, you must return the plane to Qatar.'
Boston Globe
38 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump may win the fight over the tax bill. But Musk is built for the long war.
But while Trump still dominates the short-term politics of the Republican Party, Musk holds a very different kind of power, one that may ultimately outlast Trumpism. He's younger. He's vastly wealthier. And unlike most political rivals, Musk doesn't need a seat in Congress or a friendly Fox News hit to wield influence. He owns the platforms. He runs the systems. And his companies are increasingly intertwined with the United States' future — from space exploration to battlefield communications. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up This feud didn't erupt out of nowhere. Musk had reasons to be angry. First, the 'Big Beautiful Bill' Advertisement This isn't just a policy spat, it's a power struggle. Trump is playing to win the moment. Musk is building for the long haul. Advertisement Let's start with the obvious: Trump tuns 79 next week. Musk turns 54 at the end of June. Trump is focused on one last political chapter. Musk is laying groundwork for the next several decades. That generational difference shapes everything else. Trump's power is political. Musk's is infrastructural. The president can rally public opinion, bend Congress to his will, and weaponize regulatory agencies. But Musk operates on another level — embedding his companies into the very systems the government depends on. SpaceX is now central to NASA and Pentagon operations. Starlink powers military communications in Ukraine and is quietly becoming indispensable for disaster zones and geopolitical hotspots. Even Tesla, for all its recent volatility, helped create the EV market and still shapes infrastructure policy. If Trump wants to punish Musk, he has tools — the SEC, federal contracts, and regulatory pressure. Heck, one Trump ally believes Trump has reason to deport Musk back to his native South Africa. But the irony is that Trump's own administration might need Musk more than Musk needs Trump, particularly in the next moment of crisis. Then there's media. Beyond the powers of the presidency, Trump's strength is performative — rallies, TV hits, the occasional viral clip. Sure, he also has Truth Social, but that is a niche network. Musk, by contrast, owns the algorithm. As the proprietor of the much more mainstream X (formerly Twitter), he doesn't just post. He shapes the feed. He bans journalists, elevates allies, and controls what trends. But their falling-out signals a deeper shift on the American right — a movement once held together by Trump's gravitational pull is now already fragmenting. One can see that just in the fights over the Big Beautiful Bill. Musk represents a rising faction: tech-aligned, anti-woke, post-party, and less interested in governing than in redesigning systems altogether. Advertisement Of course, Musk is no model of discipline. His erratic tweets and ideological zig-zags make him an unreliable political force. But that's precisely what makes him dangerous. He's not a senator. He claims he is not a donor anymore. He's not trying to be president and, well, he is constitutionally ineligible anyway. Instead, he's trying to shape what the presidency needs. Trump still knows how to land a punch. But Musk might is laying claim to the terrain on which the next generation of political power will be fought. So yes, Trump can still win this fight over a tax bill. But Musk is playing a different game. He's not trying to win a news cycle. He's trying to build the operating system for what comes next. James Pindell is a Globe political reporter who reports and analyzes American politics, especially in New England.
