Antifa or Santa Claus? Demand Facts from Our Leaders

Facts matter—especially when government officials define threats and shape national security policy. During testimony before the House Homeland Security Committee, FBI National Security Operations Director Michael Glasheen failed to clearly state whether “Antifa” exists as an organization. This is not a disputed question in federal threat assessments. Antifa is not an organization; it is an ideology or loosely affiliated movement, not a structured entity with leadership, membership rolls, or centralized command. Former FBI Director Christopher Wray testified under oath that Antifa is “more of an ideology or a movement than an organization.” Federal analyses from the Department of Homeland Security have similarly described Antifa as a label used by individuals acting on shared beliefs, not as a coordinated organization. There is no credible evidence supporting the existence of Antifa as an organization. Treating an ideology as an organization mischaracterizes the threat landscape, misleads the public, and undermines sound policymaking. By the same standard, there is no proof that Santa Claus exists as an organization—no officers, no headquarters, no chain of command. Belief or repetition does not create organizational reality. When a senior national security official cannot clearly articulate this basic, well-documented distinction, it raises serious concerns about competence, preparedness, and candor. Intelligence and law-enforcement work depend on precision. Ambiguity where facts are settled erodes public trust and weakens congressional oversight. For these reasons, a formal review of Michael Glasheen’s competence and fitness for his role is warranted. Additionally, in the interest of transparency and evidence-based governance, I call on legislators to publicly state whether they believe Antifa is an actual organization, or whether they accept the documented conclusions of the FBI and DHS. Clear public statements grounded in facts are essential to restoring trust and ensuring that national security decisions are informed by reality rather than rhetoric. National security policy must be guided by evidence, not belief. Anything less undermines democratic accountability. Respectfully,