'God help us all': Trump's appointment of 22-year-old college grad to terrorism unit amid Iran crisis faces backlash
For the unversed,
Thomas Fugate
, who previously worked as a landscaper and grocery clerk is leading the Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships- a division of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that oversees terrorism prevention. It is known as CP3. The CP3 works to combat terrorism, school shootings and other hate-driven violence, oversees an $18 million grant program intended to help communities battle violent extremism.
ALSO READ:
Meet Thomas Fugate: 22-year-old ex-gardener and grocery store assistant to lead $18 million terror prevention team
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Vietnam: New Container Houses (Prices May Surprise You)
Container House | Search ads
Search Now
Undo
Thomas Fugate's appointment facing backlash?
Thomas Fugate, a 22-year-old who was assigned to a major terrorism-prevention post by Donald Trump, is under scrutiny amid Iran's threats of retribution. Political observers are questioning the president's decision to entrust a 22-year-old with a critical role—especially as the position has taken on even greater importance recently.
In a post on X, formerly known as Twitter, Senator Chris Murphy called out Trump for appointing Thomas Fugate. 'As our nation girds for possible Iranian terrorist attacks, this is the person Trump put in charge of terrorism prevention,' Murphy wrote — referring to Fugate. '22 years old. Recent work experience: landscaping/grocery clerk. Never worked a day in counter-terrorism. But he's a BIG Trump fan. So he got the job," his post read on X.
Live Events
— ChrisMurphyCT (@ChrisMurphyCT)
A former Trump campaign worker, Thomas Fugate's experience has raised some serious concerns. A report from Pro Publica in June revealed that Thomas Fugate got the job after William Braniff — an Army veteran with over two decades of national security experience — resigned in protest of cuts to CP3.
Thomas Fugate's LinkedIn profile shows he spent several months performing 'lawn care work around my neighborhood,' and also worked part time as a clerk at an H-E-B supermarket.
ALSO READ:
Thomas Fugate: A novice who replaced an army veteran to lead US terror prevention centre
In a post, social media account named 'The Republicans against Trump' wrote, 'As major U.S. cities brace for possible terror attacks in response to the strikes on Iran, just a reminder of who Trump put in charge of terror prevention. God help us all.'
— RpsAgainstTrump (@RpsAgainstTrump)
The appointment of the recent University of San Antonio graduate had already put counterterrorism experts and insiders on edge. 'It sounds like putting the intern in charge,' a counterterrorism researcher who has experience working with CP3 told ProPublica. 'We're entering very dangerous territory,' another longtime counterterrorism official said.
'Maybe he's a wunderkind. Maybe he's Doogie Howser and has everything at 21 years old, or whatever he is, to lead the office. But that's not likely the case,' an counterterrorism researcher, who has worked with CP3 officials for years, told ProPublica. 'It sounds like putting the intern in charge.'
The appointment of Fugate with no counter-terrorism experience to a key role in terrorism prevention has raised eyebrows, particularly in the context of escalating tensions with Iran, raising questions about the administration's prioritization of national security amidst geopolitical tensions.
The department told The Independent that Fugate was 'temporarily given additional leadership responsibilities' in CP3 'due to his success.' Staffers he works with, however, have likened meeting with him to 'career counseling' while expressing shock at how little he appears to know about the role, the outlet reported.
ALSO READ:
Tulsi Gabbard snubbed by Trump after US spy chief defied her Iran advice? Pics from Situation room sparks buzz
What is DHS saying?
In a statement to the Daily Beast, a DHS spokesperson called the
Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships
an 'insignificant' and 'ineffective' piece of a larger puzzle. 'Unfortunately, under the Biden administration, CP3 was weaponized against political opponents, and its main purpose was to funnel money to progressive groups. It should be no surprise to anyone that the Trump Administration is making a diligent effort to end waste, fraud, and abuse—this office is just another example,' they wrote. 'The senior official performing the duties of the undersecretary has directly overseen efforts to reform this office and has tasked several staffers to assist with this.'
ALSO READ:
A list of 'safest' countries to seek shelter as World War III fear looms
According to his LinkedIn profile, Fugate briefly worked as a gardener in 2020 before beginning a series of fellowships and internships, including one at the conservative Heritage Foundation. Before taking up the new leadership responsibilities, Fugate was hired as a 'special assistant' in an immigration office at the Department of Homeland Security.
He later joined the Trump campaign and attended the Republican National Convention. He also held the position of secretary general for a Model United Nations club.
In recent months, he shared photos from the White House, including one post where he described taking 'the first major leap' of his career with enthusiasm.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
20 minutes ago
- First Post
Can India and the US strike a trade deal without clashing over agriculture?
As India and the US push to finalise a trade pact before Trump's July 9 deadline, agriculture has emerged as the biggest roadblock. With disagreements over GM crops, dairy and ethanol, and concerns over rural livelihoods, both sides are locked in a tense standoff. Can they reach a deal without upsetting India's farmers? read more A farm worker holds rice sapling as he prepares to plant them in a field on the outskirts of Ahmedabad, India, July 22, 2024. File Image/Reuters India and the United States are racing to conclude an interim trade pact ahead of President Donald Trump's July 9 deadline but a long-standing hurdle threatens to block progress — agriculture. Despite nearing consensus on various industrial sectors, disputes around farm goods, including genetically modified crops, dairy imports and ethanol remain reportedly unresolved. The issue is not merely economic for India; it touches upon food security, rural livelihoods, and political sensitivities, all of which have major implications for the country's domestic stability. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Why India's agriculture sector is non-negotiable Though farming and allied activities contribute a relatively modest portion — around 16 per cent — to India's GDP, the sector supports nearly half of the country's population of 1.4 billion. The farming community represents a dominant political constituency and has historically influenced policy decisions through sustained mobilisations. In 2021, the Indian government was compelled to withdraw major agricultural reforms following year-long nationwide protests. This past resistance still casts a shadow over current trade negotiations, as New Delhi remains wary of sparking fresh unrest by opening up its agricultural sector to foreign competition. India's farming structure is notably small-scale. The average size of a farm is just over a hectare, contrasting sharply with American agricultural operations, where the mean farm size exceeds 180 hectares. In India, most farms are manually operated or use outdated techniques passed down over generations, while US agriculture is highly mechanised and supported by advanced technology, including AI-based monitoring systems and large-scale machinery. US agricultural demands vs India's red lines A central point of contention is Washington's push for increased access to the Indian market for a range of American agricultural products. The US seeks to expand exports of various farm commodities — among them genetically modified (GM) corn and soybeans, wheat, poultry, dairy, rice, ethanol, and a variety of processed foods including canned peaches, frozen French fries, chocolates, cookies and citrus fruits. While India has indicated some openness to easing tariffs on selected imports such as dry fruits and apples, it has remained firm on rejecting access to GM grains, US dairy products, and ethanol. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Genetically modified crops form a significant part of US agricultural output. However, India does not currently allow the commercial cultivation of GM food crops due to concerns over ecological balance, food safety and the impact on smallholder farmers. Even as India imports edible oils made from genetically modified crops — such as soy and canola — it restricts GM crop cultivation. The commercial release of GM mustard, for example, remains on hold due to pending legal proceedings, and a previous attempt to introduce GM brinjal was blocked in 2010. Nonetheless, some flexibility is being explored. According to Bloomberg, Indian regulators may consider permitting select GM-derived by-products used in animal feed, such as soybean meal or distillers dried grains from corn-based ethanol production. These items would not directly affect human food chains but would still mark a departure from India's long-standing GM restrictions. Why dairy and ethanol are particularly sensitive India's dairy sector employs more than 80 million individuals, a figure that includes small-scale farmers, cooperatives, and vendors. The industry is largely unorganised and depends on herds that typically contain two to three animals per household. In contrast, US dairy farms operate on a vastly different scale, often managing hundreds of cattle with heavy reliance on mechanisation and feed practices that include animal by-products. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This latter point is a major concern in India, where dietary norms and religious sensitivities significantly influence food preferences. The potential entry of dairy sourced from cows fed with animal remnants has been met with strong resistance from Indian consumers and cooperatives like Amul, which have played a key role in shaping the country's self-reliant dairy ecosystem. Similarly, ethanol is another highly sensitive area. India has made substantial progress under its Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) initiative, aiming to reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels by blending petrol with domestically produced ethanol. Most of the ethanol used in India is derived from surplus sugarcane, rice and corn. Allowing the import of US ethanol would not only compromise this strategic energy programme but could also undermine the investments made by Indian distillers and agribusinesses. What each side is willing to concede With the deadline for reciprocal tariffs fast approaching, negotiators from both countries are working to close the deal. Sources indicated that the Indian delegation, led by Special Secretary Rajesh Agarwal, has had to extend its stay in Washington due to ongoing disagreements, particularly over agricultural tariffs. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India has shown willingness to discuss reductions on industrial tariffs and provide access to the US in sectors where the political cost is lower — such as in automobiles, a long-standing American request. It has also pushed for broader access to US markets for Indian exports from labour-intensive sectors including textiles, leather, jewellery, plastics, and chemicals. The interim agreement is seen as a stepping-stone towards increasing bilateral trade volumes, with a shared ambition to double total trade to USD 500 billion by 2030 — a goal reiterated by Trump during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's February visit to the United States. Trump, speaking about the potential deal earlier this week, said: 'I think we are going to have a deal with India. And that is going to be a different kind of a deal. It is going to be a deal where we are able to go in and compete. Right now, India does not accept anybody in. I think India is going to do that, and if they do that, we are going to have a deal for much less tariffs.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Why India is not backing down India's resistance to opening its agricultural market is deeply rooted in structural and strategic realities. The rural economy is vulnerable to global market shocks. Even modest tariff relaxations could disrupt domestic pricing and erode the safety net provided by public procurement and the Minimum Support Price (MSP) system — pillars that protect farmers from price crashes. Many experts argue that liberalising agricultural trade too quickly could expose India's fragmented farming community to the volatility of global commodity markets dominated by large multinational agribusinesses. These companies often benefit from generous subsidies and economies of scale unavailable to Indian farmers. Further complicating the negotiations is the demand from US exporters for greater parity. However, India's current agricultural tariff regime — ranging from zero to 150 per cent — is not exceptional. The US, too, maintains steep tariffs on specific imports, such as tobacco at over 350 per cent. Thus, criticisms of asymmetry in trade practices may not be entirely justified. India's position finds some backing under WTO norms, which allow member nations to protect sensitive sectors for reasons such as food security, rural development, and employment. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Nonetheless, the final decision may come down to political calculus more than legal boundaries. Farmers and labour unions mount pressure Opposition to agricultural liberalisation is growing beyond policy circles. On July 3, leaders of the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) held a press conference in Hyderabad, reaffirming their call for an all-India strike on July 9. The SKM, in collaboration with trade unions, is staging protests to oppose what it describes as 'anti-farmer, anti-labour, and anti-people' policies. Former Member of Parliament Vadde Sobhanadreeswara Rao voiced strong opposition to including agriculture in any trade agreement with the U.S. He and other SKM leaders also criticised the government's delay in enacting legislation to guarantee MSP as a legal right. The farmers' coalition has called for a full withdrawal of the National Policy Framework for Agricultural Marketing (NPFAM) and warned of further mobilisations if agriculture is compromised in trade talks. A way out? In light of these challenges, a compromise may be possible through selective market access rather than full liberalisation. One such mechanism could involve tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) — a system that allows a limited volume of imports at reduced tariffs, while maintaining higher duties on imports exceeding the quota. This model was recently adopted in the US-UK mini trade pact announced in May, where agriculture was kept out of contentious discussions. India may be open to marginally lowering tariffs on select low-risk items such as almonds, walnuts, apples, raisins, olive oil, spirits and wine — products that pose minimal threat to domestic producers. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Such a calibrated approach could allow both sides to claim victory without triggering adverse political fallout in India. However, the extent of these concessions remains uncertain. A NITI Aayog policy paper has suggested tariff cuts on certain US agricultural products, but it is unclear whether this reflects the official stance of the Indian government or is merely a preliminary recommendation. Agriculture remains the thorniest issue in the India-US trade negotiations. With inputs from agencies
Time of India
21 minutes ago
- Time of India
Operation Sindoor was 'finest example' of commitment to defend 'Swaraj': Amit Shah
Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Friday said India's armed forces and the leadership are committed to defend 'Swaraj' or sovereignty of the country, and it was demonstrated very well during Operation Sindoor . Speaking after the unveiling of an equestrian statue of Maratha statesman and general Peshwa Bajirao I at the National Defence Academy ( NDA ) here, the BJP leader also said whenever he is plagued by negative thoughts, he thinks of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj and Bajirao. The NDA was the most appropriate place for Bajirao's memorial as it is an institution where military leadership is trained, Shah said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like War Thunder - Register now for free and play against over 75 Million real Players War Thunder Play Now Undo "Whenever negative thoughts come to my mind, I usually think about 'Bal' (young) Shivaji and Peshwa Bajirao, thinking that they were able to establish a 'Swaraj' (self-rule or sovereign state) amid adverse conditions," he said. The responsibility to defend the Swaraj now lies with 140 crore Indians, Shah added. Live Events "When it was time to put up a fight to establish a Swaraj, we did it. When fighting will be required to defend the Swaraj, our forces and leadership will definitely demonstrate it, and Operation Sindoor was its finest example," he said. Paying tributes to Bajirao I (1700 to 1740), Shah said if the battle for independence started by Shivaji Maharaj and taken forward by the Peshwas for 100 years not been fought, "India's basic structure would have ceased to exist." "In his life of 40 years, Peshwa Bajirao scripted immortal history which no other person could write," he added. Bajirao, who became 'Peshwa' or prime minister of the Maratha state at the age of 19, is credited with the expansion of the Maratha rule in central and northern India. After the event, Shah also interacted with NDA cadets.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
35 minutes ago
- First Post
As Trump emboldens Putin again, Russia hits Ukraine with largest air attack
Days after US President Donald Trump emboldened Vladimir Putin by blocking weapons' supplies to Ukraine, Russia launched the largest aerial attack with 550 missiles and drones. Trump said that no progress was made about ending the war in a phone call with Putin yesterday. read more Flames and smoke billow from buildings during mass Russian drones and missile strikes on the Ukraine's capital Kyiv on July 4, 2025, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine. (Photo: OLEKSII FILIPPOV/AFP) Days after US President Donald Trump emboldened Russia again by stopping the supply of weapons to Ukraine, Russia launched the largest aerial attack of the war so far with 550 missiles and drones. Kyiv's skyline erupted in fireballs and clouds of smoke as Russian projectiles hammered the city. The Russian barrage came hours after Trump spoke to Russian leader Vladimir Putin on phone. Trump said that they 'didn't make any progress' about ending the conflict over the call. However, Putin certainly got the message that he was free to attack Ukraine at will. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The overnight barrage followed a monthslong pattern: Trump first cuts supplies to Ukraine that have already been approved and trashes Ukraine. Then Putin launches massive attacks on Ukraine and gains leverage on the battlefield as a result of Trump depriving Ukraine of even defensive weapons. The Kremlin's readout demonstrated how emboldened Russia stood after getting a shot in the arm from Trump. It said that 'Russia will not back down' unless 'root causes' were eliminated. 'Root causes' is a euphemism for Putin's maximalist demands, such as the recognition of all Ukrainian provinces in their entirety that Russia has annexed and other territories that it controls; the ouster of Volodymyr Zelenskyy as the President of Ukraine and the ouster of his administration; amendment of the Ukrainian constitution to put limits on its military in a Versailles-like treaty, include Russian in the nation's cultural affairs, and rule out its membership of Nato; put limits on foreign military partnerships of Ukraine; etc. The implementation of such terms would mean the end of Ukraine as a sovereign nation. Russia makes most of Trump's decision — again For months, Russia has attacked Ukraine with hundreds of missiles and drones on a near-daily basis and Ukraine has sought to buy US-made air defence systems. Earlier this week, instead of clearing such sales, the Trump administration blocked the supply of air defence systems and other weapons that had already been cleared. Trump trashed Ukraine on Thursday and said 'We've given so many weapons' to Ukraine. Russia was quick to grasp the message and respond by ramping up the aerial campaign. Ukraine said Russia launched 539 drones and 11 ballistic missiles overnight in the largest aerial attack of the war. Earlier this year, when Trump suspended military and intelligence assistance to Ukraine after ambushing Zelenskyy at the White House, Russia had responded with a renewed counter-offensive in Kursk region and driving out Ukrainian forces from there. Ukraine's incursion of Kursk was a significant achievement and its occupation of the region was seen as a critical leverage in negotiations where Kursk could be exchanged in lieu of Russia-occupied Ukrainian territory. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Thanks to Trump, however, Ukraine lost that leverage as Russia retook nearly all of Kursk from Ukraine after making the most of the suspension of intelligence-sharing and military supplies. In the overnight attack, Zelenskyy said that at least 23 people were injured. Russia has largely targeted civilians and critical infrastructure in its escalating attacks. A United Nations (UN) report this month said that Ukrainian civilian casualties in Russian airstrikes rose by 50 per cent between January and June. Trump expected to speak to Zelenskyy today After a call with Russia, Trump is expected to speak to Zelenskyy on Friday. If his past behaviour is any guide, Trump would likely push Zelenskyy to accept Putin's terms and wrap the conflict irrespective of the consequences for his nation. On his part, Zelenskyy would likely call for the resumption of military supplies and reiterate the call for the purchase of Patriot air defence systems. He would also likely press Trump to toughen up on Putin. Even as Trump has expressed dissatisfaction with Putin, he has not done anything to put pressure on him. Instead, he has rewarded him at every step by accepting his terms and punishing Ukraine — the defender. He has neither imposed new sanctions on Russia nor ramp up military supplies to Ukraine as he had threatened in the past. Instead, he has slammed Zelenskyy as a warmonger over request to buy air defence systems. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
