On June 11, 2026, federal agents raided the Cleveland headquarters of the Soros-backed Ohio Organizing Collaborative (OOC), a progressive nonprofit focused on voter registration and mobilization, as reported by Fox News. The agents executed search warrants as part of an ongoing federal fraud investigation.

On June 11, 2026, federal agents raided the Cleveland headquarters of the Soros-backed Ohio Organizing Collaborative (OOC), as reported by Fox News. OOC is a progressive nonprofit focused on voter registration and mobilization. The agents executed search warrants as part of an ongoing federal fraud investigation.

Agents also visited the homes of current and former staff members across Ohio, including in Columbus, Dayton, and Cincinnati; seizing electronic devices.

The OOC is a Soros-funded nonprofit that has received millions from George Soros-linked entities, including the Foundation to Promote Open Society and the Open Society Action Fund. According to its website, the OOC is a grassroots organization focused on voter registration, community canvassing, and advocacy for criminal and economic justice reform. 

Tax records show it received approximately $1.9 million between 2019 and 2020, while its closely affiliated Ohio Organizing Campaign received an additional $1 million in 2021 and another $1 million in 2023. These grants have supported large-scale voter registration and mobilization efforts across Ohio.

Overall, the OOC and its affiliated entities have received more than $10 million in revenue from progressive donors, including the Tides Foundation, New Venture Fund, major labor unions such as the American Federation of Teachers and SEIU, and other George Soros-linked organizations. The group played a major role in registering over 100,000 voters ahead of the 2024 elections and has supported ballot initiatives aligned with Democratic and progressive priorities.

The investigation appears tied to potential violations in the group’s voter registration activities.  A federal judge authorized the warrants. 

OOC board member Prentiss Haney described the FBI’s actions as extensive, involving more than 100 agents in some accounts, and centered on questions about alleged voter fraud. 

He characterized it as intimidation:

“They had agents all across the state going to civil rights leaders’ and community leaders’ doors intimidating them… asking them if they’re committing voter fraud, just on their doors, in front of their houses with their children.”

Haney called the actions “straight-up intimidation tactics” and an “assault” on civic engagement, arguing they aim to suppress voter turnout ahead of the 2026 midterms. 

The OOC has condemned the raids as political intimidation by the Trump administration. 

Funding ties have drawn particular attention. Tax records show that the Soros-backed OOC and its affiliated entities have received more than $10 million in revenue from progressive donors. These include the Tides Foundation, the New Venture Fund, major labor unions such as the American Federation of Teachers and SEIU, and George Soros-linked organizations like the Open Society Foundations and the Foundation to Promote Open Society.

This is not the group’s first brush with voter fraud allegations. In 2017, a paid canvasser for the OOC was originally charged with 35 counts in a fraudulent voter registration scheme that included forged signatures. She ultimately pleaded guilty to 14 of those counts.

Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose has previously flagged concerns about patterns of irregularities in large-scale registration efforts. Supporters of the current investigation cite this history as justification for closer scrutiny of high-volume voter registration drives. 

The timing, Ohio’s gubernatorial and U.S. Senate contests have intensified the controversy.  

Some Ohio lawmakers, including U.S. Reps. Shontel Brown and Emilia Sykes, have denounced the operation as voter suppression and intimidation, while others, including Secretary of State Frank LaRose, view it as a necessary probe to safeguard electoral integrity. LaRose’s office stated that it “appreciates the work of our federal law enforcement partners and stands ready to continue assisting them at any time.”

Senators Rand Paul (R-KY) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) are urging the Trump Justice Department to prosecute Dr. Anthony Fauci and challenge the validity of his preemptive pardon from President Biden, according to a June 18, 2026 report by Just the News.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee and a longtime critic of Fauci, described Biden’s pardon as unusually broad and vague. It covers a sweeping, unspecified period of years without naming particular crimes, similar to the pardon granted to Hunter Biden.

Paul has questioned the pardon’s legitimacy, noting it was issued via autopen on or around January 19, 2025, as Biden left office. He has raised concerns about whether the former president personally reviewed or authorized it, asking: “Was President Biden of sound mind? Did he understand who he was pardoning? Did he participate in it? Did he approve of each of the ones that were signed by autopen?”

Paul has  repeatedly  referred Fauci to the DOJ for allegedly lying to Congress about gain-of-function research funded at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. He argues that charging Fauci would allow a judicial review of the pardon’s constitutionality. Recent indictments of Fauci associates, including senior adviser David Morens for allegedly destroying records and concealing information, could provide leverage, as those deputies might cooperate in exchange for leniency.

Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) told Just the News that Fauci “is a bad person, and he ought to be prosecuted, because I believe he did commit crimes.” Johnson expressed confidence that research supported by Fauci’s agency contributed to the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. Both senators see prosecution as a means of accountability for alleged misconduct and a way to challenge executive overreach in issuing broad preemptive pardons.

The Trump administration has declared various Biden-era pardons, including Fauci’s, null and void due to autopen use, citing concerns over Biden’s mental fitness and lack of personal authorization. 

In 2025, President Trump issued a memorandum directing a review of Biden-era clemency actions, tasking the DOJ and White House Counsel with investigating potential unauthorized use of the autopen. House Oversight Republicans, in reports such as “The Biden Autopen Presidency,” have called for DOJ scrutiny, and the Trump DOJ’s Pardon Attorney has raised doubts about autopen pardons absent further court review.

Legal experts, including constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, have noted that autopen use is historically permissible absent clear proof of a total lack of presidential awareness or authorization. No definitive Supreme Court ruling has resolved the broader issue.

Fauci has long denied any wrongdoing, maintaining that NIH-funded research did not qualify as gain-of-function under U.S. definitions and that he acted in good faith. Critics, including Paul, point to emails and actions from early 2020 showing Fauci downplaying a potential lab origin while shaping public scientific narratives.

The pardon was part of Biden’s broader preemptive clemency actions protecting figures such as Gen. Mark Milley and January 6 committee members. It has faced scrutiny over autopen procedures and questions about Biden’s capacity at the time.

A successful legal challenge could set precedent on the specificity required for pardons, the validity of autopen signatures on clemency documents, and the scope of preemptive pardons for uncharged conduct. The Trump DOJ now faces pressure to decide whether to indict Fauci and litigate these issues.

Supporters of the senators’ push argue it addresses grievances over COVID-era policies, the handling of the lab-leak hypothesis, and public trust in health institutions. Opponents view it as political retribution. The debate reflects deep divisions over pandemic accountability that continue years later.

Whether the DOJ will act remains to be seen, but Paul and Johnson’s public statements maintain pressure on the issue. With indictments of Fauci’s former colleagues already underway, the case could test the limits of executive pardons and prompt further judicial examination of the COVID response.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has spent decades at podiums across the country, screaming into microphones as the self-proclaimed champion of the 99% and unapologetic leader of democratic socialism.

Sanders has made his entire career in government, serving as Mayor of Burlington (1981–1989), 16 years in the U.S. House (1991–2007), and more than 18 years in the U.S. Senate since 2007.

He is the longest-serving independent member of Congress in U.S. history.

In his nearly 19 years as Senator Sanders has sponsored only a handful of bills that became law; most of them minor or token gestures, such as post office re-namings. His ambitious flagship proposals like Medicare for All and sweeping wealth taxes have failed to pass as standalone legislation. He has been far more effective at offering amendments and co-sponsoring bills than enacting his own major ideas.

Sanders became a household name during his 2015–2016 presidential campaign through his obnoxious, well-documented rhetorical assaults on millionaires and billionaires. From the podium, he repeatedly railed against the “rigged system controlled by the ultra-wealthy,” portraying elites as greedy puppet masters and the root of America’s inequality.

This tirade continues even as he has become a millionaire himself, with a net worth of $2 to $3 million. All of this while stirring up young voters and promising student debt forgiveness, free college, and massive wealth redistribution.

He touts small-dollar donations from grassroots donors, but those funds are bankrolling private jets, limos, luxury hotels, and high-end travel.

The hypocrisy is glaring in the numbers.

In 2025 alone, Sanders’ campaign spent more $550,000 than on private jets, including $221,723 in Q1 and nearly $230,000 in Q2, often with vendors like Ventura Jets, as reported by The Center Square (with the 2025 totals also detailed by the New York Post and Q2 figures by ABC News affiliates).

By mid-2026, Sanders’ official campaign committee had already funneled between $608,000 and $619,000 into lavish travel, including $562,117 for 11 private jet charters and $16,633 on limo and chauffeured services, plus stays at upscale four-star hotels. These expenditures, drawn from Federal Election Commission filings, occurred while the year was only half over.

Sanders is not the only Democratic socialist engaging in such practices. In April 2025, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez joined him on the “Fighting Oligarchy” tour. Fox News Digital obtained exclusive photos and video of both boarding a luxury Bombardier Challenger private jet (costing up to $15,000 per hour) between stops in Bakersfield and Sacramento, California.

That same year, AOC’s campaign spent over $53,000 on luxury hotels, including the five-star Vdara Hotel & Spa in Las Vegas and Asher Adams in Salt Lake City, plus high-end meals in NYC, Vegas, and Puerto Rico, and nearly $50,000 more on hotels, catering, and venue rental at Puerto Rico’s Coliseo de Puerto Rico.

When questioned on May 7, 2025, on Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier, Sanders defended the private jet use, “You run a campaign, and you do three or four or five rallies in a week. It is the only way you can get around to talk to 30,000 people. You think I’m gonna be sitting on a waiting line at United… while 30,000 people are waiting? That’s the only way to get around. No apologies for that.”

Private jet travel is a bipartisan norm in politics, with Republicans also racking up substantial charter costs. The key difference is that Sanders and AOC aggressively champion climate change initiatives and humble working-class lifestyles, while exempting themselves from the very standards they impose on others, whereas Republicans rarely preach the same level of personal sacrifice or environmental alarmism.

Sanders owns three homes and has built a multimillion-dollar net worth from the capitalist system he denounces.

Sanders has been at this long enough that he preaches a doctrine he refuses to live by. For all his hatred of capitalism, he has shown little ability to deliver meaningful legislation in nearly 19 years in the Senate. The receipts from the 2025 and 2026 “Fighting Oligarchy” tour reveal the condescending pattern of a self-described democratic socialist who preaches experimental ideologies he refuses to live by. Their anti-wealth crusading loses credibility when they live like the very targets they claim to despise.

This pattern extends to his longstanding commentary on authoritarian regimes. Sanders has repeatedly highlighted “positive things” about Fidel Castro’s Cuba, particularly its literacy programs and healthcare system. In a 2016 Democracy Now! interview following Castro’s death, he stated: “A lot of positive things that can be said. Their healthcare system, for a Third World country, is quite good… Their educational system is strong… Some very positive changes came about.” He defended similar views in 2020, asking whether a massive literacy campaign was “a bad thing, even though Fidel Castro did it,” while acknowledging the regime’s authoritarianism.

The real worry is not isolated praise but a worldview that excuses the coercive methods behind utopian promises, the same ideology that fuels Sanders’ campaigns while the luxury travel bills pile up. 

In the end, the math doesn’t add up. Sanders’ rhetoric may fire up crowds, but the lifestyle, legislative record, and selective admiration for authoritarian “achievements” expose a fundamental disconnect; he preaches one set of rules with righteous fury while living by another.