No, Hamas-Linked CAIR Did Not Help Thwart an Assassination Plot Against President Trump

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

Order Jamie Glazov’s new book, ‘United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny, Terror, and Hamas’: HERE.

Several years ago, Pamela Geller coined the phrase “terror-clowns” to describe the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR should only be taken seriously to the extent that it can harm the public through media pressure and political manipulation. Everything else is hype.

A Convenient New Claim

In mid-December 2025, CAIR held an online press conference responding to Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s designation of the organization as a terrorist threat. During that press conference, CAIR’s national deputy executive director, Edward Ahmed Mitchell, made an extraordinary claim:

CAIR’s also played a role in keeping Americans safe, including helping federal law enforcement thwart attacks on the American people, including an attack on President Trump during his first term that we helped the FBI to thwart.

For reasons never explained, reporters attending CAIR’s press conference did not follow up with questions about this astonishing assertion.

Now, however, an exclusive report from the Houston Chronicle provides CAIR’s version of events, portraying the organization as a heroic defender of the President of the United States. “Exclusive: Muslim group Greg Abbott deemed a terrorist threat says it helped stop attack on Trump,” by Benjamin Wermund, Houston Chronicle, January 12, 2026.

Media as Myth-Maker

The Reality Behind the Trump Plot

According to CAIR, the group played a “deep” role in stopping a plot involving Hasher Taheb, a man arrested in 2019 and accused of planning attacks on the White House, the Statue of Liberty, the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, and a synagogue. Taheb later pleaded guilty and is now serving a 15-year prison sentence.

CAIR claims it helped facilitate meetings between FBI agents and community members who knew Taheb, and that it attempted, with FBI approval, to talk him out of committing violence. This is the extent of CAIR’s alleged heroism.

Why Is CAIR Playing FBI?

That description raises an obvious question: why would a self-described civil rights group attempt to manage an active terrorism case at all? Shouldn’t law enforcement be doing the talking? The suggestion that the FBI would “step back” and allow CAIR to handle a critical stage of a terrorism investigation is either implausible, deeply alarming, or simply ridiculous.

A Familiar Deflection

Mitchell insists CAIR only revealed this story now because of what he called the “ludicrous claims” that CAIR is a terrorist organization. That explanation invites a different question: if CAIR truly played a heroic role in protecting a sitting president, why did it wait years to mention it? Why did this tale of patriotic valor surface only after CAIR found itself under scrutiny? One is left to wonder whether the silence reflected modesty, forgetfulness, or the simpler possibility that nothing of significance actually happened. The Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial, by contrast, was not “ludicrous.” It was the result of years of investigation, and the presiding judge concluded the government had produced “ample evidence” of CAIR’s associations with Hamas.

The Documentary Record CAIR Cannot Erase

CAIR’s leadership continues to deny these associations, but no amount of public relations will erase the documentary record. Governors Greg Abbott and Ron DeSantis relied in part on a report from George Washington University’s Program on Extremism, co-authored by Lara Burns, who analyzed the transcript of the notorious 1993 Philadelphia meeting.

That meeting, which the FBI secretly recorded, was a summit of senior Hamas leaders in the United States convened in response to the Oslo Accords. Future CAIR co-founder Nihad Awad attended and spoke at the meeting, urging participants to focus on explaining the “legality” of Hamas. Participants were instructed not to say the word “Hamas,” instead using the coded term “Samah,” which is simply Hamas spelled backwards.

What Abbott Cited — and Why It Matters

Abbott’s designation could allow Texas authorities to pursue legal action against CAIR and restrict state partnerships with institutions that host the organization. The governor’s order also notes that a founding board member of CAIR’s Texas chapter, Ghassan Elashi, was sentenced to 65 years in prison in a terrorism financing case, and highlights statements by CAIR’s current national director, Nihad Awad, praising Hamas-controlled Gaza after the October 7, 2023 attacks.

CAIR insists it is being targeted for criticizing Israel. In fact, CAIR anticipated scrutiny of its Hamas connections months earlier. In a November 2025 internal Zoom meeting, participants were instructed to preemptively discredit critics by labeling them Israeli proxies or “Israel First politicians,” a rhetorical maneuver designed to deflect from substantive questions about the organization’s record.

Why the Anecdote Changes Nothing

Nor does CAIR’s claim of occasional cooperation with law enforcement resolve anything. Muslims have been denouncing, sidelining, or reporting other Muslims since the earliest period of Islam; doing so in an isolated case proves nothing. What remains unanswered are the enduring concerns: CAIR’s documented associations with Hamas, Nihad Awad’s statement that the October 7 attacks made him “happy,” months of local television appearances rationalizing or excusing Hamas violence, and repeated calls for renewed fighting even after hostages were exchanged. A single anecdote addresses none of this, and none of it disappears because CAIR now points to one contested episode. That claim ignores the core issue: CAIR presents itself as a civil rights organization while systematically obscuring its origins and associations with a designated terrorist network.

What the Record Actually Shows

As for the Trump plot, the public record is clear.

If this were truly a story about federal cooperation, it would be reported through federal confirmation. The fact that CAIR itself reports it tells readers everything they need to know. According to FBI statements, the investigation began after a tip from members of the public, not CAIR. The FBI has declined to confirm CAIR’s role beyond what appears in charging documents and press releases.

Talking as Counterterrorism?

CAIR’s contribution, as Mitchell described it, consisted largely of informal outreach efforts that failed. We have seen this kind of “talking” before. In North Carolina, members of the local Muslim community tried to talk Samir Khan out of pursuing jihad. It did not work. Khan went on to become a senior Al Qaeda propagandist and the founder of the English-language magazine Inspire. Conversation, it turns out, is not a deradicalization strategy.

Where Is the Evidence?

Which raises obvious questions that CAIR never answers. What exactly does this much-vaunted “talk” consist of? Where is the public campaign by CAIR urging Muslims not to engage in jihad? Where are the published materials, or sustained initiatives spelling this out? Everything we are told happens privately, off-camera, and without documentation. And perhaps that is precisely why it does not work. By CAIR’s own telling, its attempt to “turn Taheb around” ended when he stormed out of a prayer service and responded to CAIR’s intervention with a stream of violent messages. This is offered as evidence of influence. It is, in fact, evidence of the opposite. Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the dynamics of jihad recruitment could have predicted this outcome.

Cue the Laugh Track

CAIR did not provide evidence of the alleged correspondence before the January football game. Mitchell said he believed the exchanges occurred via phone calls and text messages that he could not locate. At this point, a reasonable observer might pause, shake his head, and cue the laugh track. The evidence exists, we are assured, it has simply vanished. Perhaps it a sheep ate it. In any event, this evidentiary standard would not survive a middle-school disciplinary hearing, let alone justify claims of heroically thwarting an assassination plot against the president of the United States. Taheb was not “talked down.” He was arrested after a year-long federal investigation.

Abbott’s Response

A spokesman for Governor Abbott dismissed CAIR’s anecdote as an attempt to “put lipstick on a pig.” That assessment appears charitable.

CAIR was not indicted in the Holy Land Foundation case, but federal authorities severed non-investigative ties with the organization because of its documented associations. That history has not changed, no matter how often CAIR attempts to recast itself as a counterterrorism partner.

The Punch Line

Hamas remains a U.S.-designated terrorist organization. CAIR’s efforts to blur that reality with selective anecdotes and self-congratulatory press conferences should fool no one.

Yet time and again, CAIR manages to dodge questions about its Hamas connections not by answering them, but by changing the subject, and the media obligingly goes along. One minute, the issue is documented associations with a terrorist organization. The next minute it is a missing text message, a vanished phone call, or a heroic tale that somehow cannot be corroborated.

That is the real trick. Not thwarting terrorism, but evading scrutiny. And as long as reporters keep playing along, the terror-clowns will continue juggling distractions, while the audience is encouraged not to notice what is actually on stage.