A newly surfaced detail from a federal terrorism investigation is drawing renewed attention to alleged Iran-linked threats against President Donald Trump’s family, including first daughter Ivanka Trump.

The revelation emerged after Daily Wire reporter Kassy Akiva said she uncovered a disturbing reference buried deep within a Department of Justice terrorism complaint that had received little mainstream media attention.

“I found something buried in a DOJ terrorism document that no major outlet noticed. …An Iran-backed terror group threatened Ivanka Trump and referenced a date that lines up with a Disneyland Paris trip she took while members of the terror network were operating in Paris,” Akiva wrote Wednesday on X.

According to the federal complaint, the threat allegedly came from Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamiya, a group prosecutors describe as a front organization connected to Kata’ib Hizballah and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The organization is accused of operating within a broader Iran-backed terror network allegedly involved in plotting attacks against American and Israeli interests throughout Europe.

Federal prosecutors claim the group posted a threatening message on Snapchat that appeared to reference Ivanka Trump directly.

“Your daughter was on the brink of death thirteen days ago,” the message allegedly stated, according to the DOJ filing.

The timing of the threat quickly raised concerns because Ivanka Trump had publicly documented a family vacation to Disneyland Paris during the same timeframe prosecutors allege terror operatives tied to the network were active in France.

Photos from the trip had been shared publicly online, prompting questions about whether members of the alleged terror network may have been monitoring high-profile American figures abroad.

The DOJ complaint reportedly outlines how operatives connected to the organization coordinated activities across several European countries while simultaneously spreading extremist propaganda and threats through online platforms. Prosecutors allege the network functioned as part of Iran’s broader proxy infrastructure, which U.S. intelligence officials have increasingly accused of targeting American officials, dissidents, and allies in retaliation for escalating tensions between Washington and Tehran.

The newly resurfaced threat adds another layer to longstanding national security concerns surrounding Iranian retaliation efforts tied to the 2020 U.S. drone strike that killed IRGC Gen. Qassem Soleimani under President Trump’s administration.

Since Soleimani’s death, federal agencies and intelligence officials have repeatedly warned about Iran-linked assassination plots, surveillance operations, and terror threats targeting current and former Trump administration officials.

Several criminal cases and intelligence bulletins issued over the past few years have detailed alleged Iranian efforts to monitor or target prominent Americans connected to Trump’s national security and foreign policy decisions.

The DOJ has not publicly indicated whether the threat involving Ivanka Trump moved beyond online communications or whether investigators believe she was ever in immediate physical danger while overseas. However, the language included in the complaint has intensified scrutiny over the scope and reach of Iran-backed networks operating internationally.

Ivanka Trump has not publicly addressed the resurfaced threat.

The original details surrounding the DOJ filing were first highlighted by Trending Politics News, which noted the apparent connection between the alleged threat and Ivanka Trump’s documented presence in Paris while suspected terror operatives were reportedly active nearby.

The revelations arrive as President Trump’s administration continues increasing pressure on Iran amid ongoing nuclear negotiations and rising military tensions in the Middle East. U.S. officials have repeatedly accused Tehran of expanding its proxy operations throughout the region and beyond, while Iran has denied involvement in targeting American civilians or political figures.

As investigators continue examining the alleged terror network, the case is expected to further elevate concerns over the security risks facing high-profile American officials and their families amid escalating geopolitical tensions.

The Justice Department has reportedly opened a criminal investigation into writer E. Jean Carroll, the woman who successfully sued President Donald Trump in two high-profile civil cases connected to allegations that he sexually assaulted her in the 1990s.

According to multiple reports published Wednesday evening, federal prosecutors are now examining whether Carroll may have committed perjury during sworn testimony related to her lawsuits against Trump. The investigation is reportedly being overseen by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago, though officials have not publicly confirmed specific details about the probe.

The reported investigation centers on statements Carroll made during a 2022 deposition tied to her legal battle against Trump. During that testimony, Carroll allegedly stated that no outside individuals or organizations were financing her lawsuits. However, later court disclosures reportedly revealed that some of her legal expenses were supported through a nonprofit organization connected to LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, a billionaire Democratic donor known for backing anti-Trump political causes and legal initiatives.

Federal investigators are reportedly reviewing whether Carroll’s statements under oath conflicted with the financial arrangements later disclosed by her attorneys. Legal experts note that the opening of a criminal investigation does not automatically mean charges will be filed, nor does it indicate wrongdoing has been proven.

CNN first reported the existence of the investigation Wednesday, citing multiple anonymous sources familiar with the matter. Other national media outlets later confirmed elements of the report.

Carroll first accused Trump of sexually assaulting her inside a dressing room at a Manhattan department store during the mid-1990s. Trump has consistently and repeatedly denied the allegations, arguing that the encounter never happened and claiming he did not know Carroll personally.

The legal fight between the two became one of the most closely watched courtroom battles involving Trump in recent years.

In 2023, a New York jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation in Carroll’s first civil lawsuit, awarding her $5 million in damages. Jurors concluded that Carroll had proven her claims under New York’s civil standards, though Trump was not found liable for rape as defined under state law.

A second jury verdict followed in 2024 after Carroll sued Trump again over statements he made publicly denying her allegations and criticizing her credibility. In that case, the jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $83.3 million in damages for defamation, one of the largest defamation judgments in modern American political history.

Trump has appealed both verdicts, arguing that the trials were politically motivated and legally flawed.

The latest development adds another dramatic chapter to the long-running legal conflict between Trump and Carroll, especially as Trump continues serving as president while simultaneously battling multiple legal challenges on several fronts.

Reports also indicate that Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has recused himself from any involvement in the investigation due to his prior work representing Trump in matters connected to Carroll’s lawsuits. Blanche’s recusal was reportedly intended to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest as federal prosecutors review the allegations surrounding Carroll’s deposition testimony.

As of Wednesday night, Carroll’s attorneys had not publicly commented on the reported investigation, and the Justice Department had not issued an official statement addressing the matter.

Whether the investigation ultimately results in criminal charges remains unclear, but the development is likely to intensify political and legal scrutiny surrounding one of the most controversial and closely followed cases involving President Trump.

Christine Drazan, the former Oregon House Minority Leader, secured victory Tuesday in Oregon’s Republican gubernatorial primary, emerging from a crowded field as Republicans look to reclaim the governor’s office in a state Democrats have controlled for nearly 40 years.

The Republican primary featured several notable candidates, including former Portland Trail Blazers player and businessman Chris Dudley, state Rep. Ed Diehl, and Marion County Commissioner Danielle Bethell.

Drazan entered the race with strong statewide recognition following her narrow defeat to Democratic Governor Tina Kotek in the 2022 gubernatorial election.

Throughout the campaign, candidates focused heavily on issues such as homelessness, public safety, drug policy, and the rising cost of living. Republicans argued that Democratic leadership in Salem and Portland has failed to effectively address these growing concerns.

Diehl centered his campaign on lowering taxes and cutting government spending, while Bethell emphasized homelessness, public safety, and government accountability.

Dudley, a former NBA player and political newcomer, campaigned as an outsider with backing from prominent Oregon business leaders, including Nike co-founder Phil Knight.

Republicans believe mounting voter frustration over crime, homelessness, and affordability could make Oregon’s upcoming gubernatorial race more competitive than in previous years. Drazan is now set to face incumbent Governor Tina Kotek in November, according to Fox News.

Kotek has faced criticism over the state’s homelessness crisis, including increases in the unsheltered population, struggles to expand housing capacity, and concerns surrounding education and transportation funding. Despite the criticism, she faced little opposition in her bid for a second term.

Meanwhile, Republican candidates endorsed by President Donald Trump continue to notch primary victories across the country, often defeating incumbents who either opposed Trump or declined to fully support his agenda.

Among the most notable defeats was Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, who lost his Tuesday primary to former Navy SEAL Ed Gallrein.

The developments come as Republican National Committee Chairman Joe Gruters said Republicans could potentially outspend Democrats during this election cycle, reversing a long-standing Democratic fundraising advantage.

Speaking with Breitbart, Gruters argued that Republicans are entering the midterm cycle with stronger financial footing and greater coordination across the conservative movement.

Host Mike Slater asked Gruters to put the reported $70 million Democrats spent during Virginia’s recent redistricting battle into perspective.

“How much money is that for the parties?” Slater asked.

Gruters responded, “The DNC has minus 4 million [dollars], and it wasn’t the DNC that plowed $70 million: It was the collective.”

“So, if you look at the collective on the right, we may have $800 million,” he continued.

“The collective on the left may have $350 million, and when you have the court, there’s gonna be a court case that is ruled on in the next week or two, coordinated campaign limits, which will magnify that, which will allow full coordination and allow the parties to spend at the candidate rate, which is massive for us,” he said.

Gruters argued the current financial environment could represent a major shift from previous election cycles.

“When you have that financial advantage, people, you know, people don’t know that the Democrats routinely spend more than us on election cycles, because they have more massive donors and that will write massive checks,” he said.

“But this time, this cycle [we] will either spend a parity or will outspend them, and that’s never happened before,” he added.

According to Gruters, the Republican National Committee is currently in a much stronger financial position than the Democratic National Committee.

He stated that the RNC currently has “about $125 million” available, while describing the DNC as operating with negative cash reserves.