178

Trump stirs far-right rage despite FBI deprioritizing extremist threat (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Experts say white supremacists have benefited from president’s policies but anger remains among neo-Nazis

Donald Trump has faced an onslaught of criticism from opponents and Maga diehards alike, on issues such as Jeffrey Epstein, the war with Iran, and his steadfast alliance with Israel in the face of genocide. But among the ever dangerous far right, which has generally applauded Trump’s efforts to deport thousands of people a day, his actions of late have stirred rage among a group experts say has benefited greatly from his administration’s law-enforcement pivots.

The FBI, headed by Trump acolyte Kash Patel, has reassigned the jobs of thousands of agents and eviscerated parts of the bureau tasked with investigating rightwing extremists that are considered the most dangerous domestic security threat facing the US today. Those same types, which includes a locus of fascist street-fighting gangs known as active clubs and accelerationist neo-Nazis, increasingly view Trump as an enemy, but are freer than ever to organize – almost entirely due to changes instituted in his latest presidency.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

The article is about the far-right. We're not talking about his average voters. Therefore, we don't disagree, but we are talking about different things.

[-] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I wouldn't even think the fat right as a whole is mostly terrorists. The terrorists are the most extreme of the extreme.

this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2025

178 points (98.4% liked)

politics

31338 readers

3479 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News