I first met Laura Loomer in the New York office of Project Veritas. She was blonde then, feisty, smart and ambitious. She was also fearless. Because of her outspoken views regarding the dangers of radical Islam – views that I largely share – her career as an investigative journalist and advocate was severely hampered. She became possibly the most censored woman on the planet; forbidden from placing her warnings about Sharia law and radical Islam on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube. Even Uber banned her.
In 2020, Loomer decided to make a valiant race for Congress against Democrat incumbent Lois Frankel in an overwhelmingly blue Florida district, which happened to include Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump’s club and winter residence. She campaigned hard, but the presidential endorsement that she richly deserved never came.
On election day of that year, after President Trump voted, he was asked if he had cast his ballot for Loomer. He responded by saying that he had voted straight Republican – a backhanded way of saying yes.
Two years later, Loomer ran for Congress again, this time in a Republican district challenging an incumbent, Daniel Webster. General Michael Flynn and I both campaigned for her. But local media afforded little coverage to Loomer’s energetic campaign, and although she raised and spent more than $800,000, for some strange reason, little seems to have been spent on actual voter contact, according to her campaign reports filed with the Federal Election Commission; broadcast or cable TV commercials, radio, voter mailings, blast emails or text messages.
Since Loomer has never conducted a benchmark poll of voters on which to base her campaign, I would often ask her how she thought it was going. She would cheerfully tell me that she and her volunteers had knocked on thousands of doors and that voters were overwhelmingly committed to choosing her. I tried to explain to her that voters would tell a candidate anything in order to get them to just go away.
When I was framed by Robert Mueller in the Russian collusion witch hunt, Loomer was among my strongest and most reliable supporters and advocates for a presidential pardon, and for that I will always be grateful.
After Elon Musk acquired Twitter and my account was reinstated, my first act was to advocate for Loomer’s reinstatement, which would later be granted.
In 2018, President Trump catapulted Ron DeSantis, an undistinguished congressman with an ill-fitting suit, a bad haircut and an insufferably ambitious and pushy wife, to the Republican nomination for governor of Florida. Trump had to change his campaign schedule to return to the state three times to drag the personality-challenged DeSantis over the finish line. DeSantis won by 32,000 votes out of a total of 8.22 million cast.
Before DeSantis challenged Trump for the 2024 presidential nomination, both Loomer and I were chastised for accurately predicting his treachery, and were told that we were being divisive and hurting the movement.
Loomer dug in aggressively in her research, accurately blaming the pay-for-play culture of Tallahassee for allowing DeSantis seemingly to extort millions for his challenge to Trump. I attacked DeSantis’s ties to the neocons and a shady book deal with HarperCollins, Rupert Murdoch’s publishing company. Murdoch paid DeSantis a $1.25 million advance on a book that would never make more than $30,000 in sales – essentially a payment to induce DeSantis to challenge Trump.
Based on her outstanding performance in her fight against DeSantis, President Trump warmed to Loomer and, on some occasions, she accurately identified neocons, globalists and NeverTrumpers who were trying to reinvent themselves and burrow their way into a second administration. I lauded much of this work.
When Trump promised Loomer a job on his 2024 campaign staff, he faced an internal revolt from both his family members and the crack campaign team of professionals that he had assembled, and the offer was withdrawn. It was a slight from which Loomer would never recover.
Nonetheless, through dogged hard work and general fearlessness, Loomer created a substantial online presence and audience. She soon developed a lucrative business in which individuals, candidates, corporations and others could pay her to promote their causes or destroy their enemies.
Loomer became a rabid cheerleader for an all-out attack on Iran, which was inconsistent with Trump’s election as a noninterventionist committed to stopping endless foreign wars where our inherent national interests were not clear. Loomer joined the Bush, Cheney, Lindsey Graham wing of the Republican party.
Only after becoming convinced that reliable intelligence showed that the Iranians were closer to building a nuclear weapon than had been previously thought did Trump launch Operation Midnight Hammer last June. It was a precise, limited, strategic but extremely lethal effort to at least set back, if not destroy, the regime’s nuclear ambitions.
Midnight Hammer, although wildly successful, was not enough for Loomer and her newfound friends, such as Mark Levin, Graham and Senator Tom Cotton. She also became obsessed with former Democratic congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, who first became an independent and then endorsed and campaigned for Trump, eventually becoming a Republican and being appointed to Trump’s cabinet as director of national intelligence. When Joe Kent, Gabbard’s director of the National Counterterrorism Center, resigned in protest at Trump’s decision to intervene in Iran, Loomer began insisting that Kent had acted at Gabbard’s direction or with her approval – a complete falsehood.
On March 17, Loomer sent word to Trump that Gabbard’s resignation was imminent, due to his decisions regarding Iran, and that the President must move to preemptively to fire her. It was, of course, not true. Fortunately, because President Trump knew of my strong advocacy of Gabbard for a position in his cabinet, he called me.
On April 10, veteran political reporter Marc Caputo of Axios published a story for which I am not the source, but which is essentially correct, headlined: “How Roger Stone persuaded Trump not to fire Tulsi Gabbard.” The piece explained that the President was displeased with Gabbard when she didn’t wholeheartedly endorse the Iran war and was prepared to fire her – but changed his mind after speaking to me.
I explained that Gabbard was loyal and wasn’t going to resign like Kent; firing her would create a damaging news cycle; and if she were fired she could become a potent GOP presidential candidate. In other words, it is apparent that Loomer attempted to trick the President into terminating Gabbard. (Loomer had reported in a post on X that Gabbard’s political staff had expected her resignation.)
Sadly, Loomer, who began as an independent investigative journalist, is now essentially a propagandist-for-hire. I do not claim that she is a paid agent of Israel, as the Israelis are far too clever for such an arrangement, which would have to be disclosed under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. My guess is that Loomer is funded by wealthy American Zionists, as she has been in the past, who also give money to Israel. She denies she works for Israel.
I had no choice but to call Loomer out on her treachery, which brought the inaccurate counterattack that I represent the Somali government (false, although a lobbyist who did represent them included in his filing his intention to subcontract me, an arrangement that I never engaged in). Indeed, I have never worked in any capacity for the Somali government or any Somali entity, nor taken a penny from them.
Loomer also attacked me for representing the Nigerian government in their US-backed effort to end the slaughter of Christians. I took this work assignment with the encouragement of the administration and the National Security Council and, as required by law, hereby identify myself as representing them, as well as filing all legally required disclosures under FARA. Perhaps Loomer did not see the highly successful joint US-Nigeria bombing of ISIS on Christmas Day.
An American journalist recently told me that Loomer confided in him Mossad’s detailed plans for Venezuela. If true, this once again raises the question of who Loomer really works for, something she has thus far neglected to reveal. Don’t hold your breath.
And there are questions, too, about her mental health. I previously believed Loomer’s complaint that federal authorities had banned her from owning a firearm because she had confronted former FBI director James Comey about his role in Russiagate. I now believe this federal prohibition is based on her past medical history, something Loomer denies. Loomer has said in the past that she has mental health issues, and told this magazine in 2019 that she had once come close to taking her own life. I feel for Loomer, but there remain questions over why she is prohibited from having a gun license.
Who Loomer works for may be a mystery, but what is now abundantly clear is that President Trump will use the military he rebuilt in his first term to ensure that the Strait of Hormuz remains open and that the mullahs will never get a nuclear device. It’s something he has pledged to do since 1988, when he and I first began talking about his making a bid for president.
However, it is doubtful that Loomer will be satisfied unless President Trump commits American troops on the ground and the fight with Iran generates tens of thousands of American casualties, while creating billions in new defense contracts for the likes of Halliburton and General Dynamics.
Frankly, I doubt that is President Trump’s plan. At this point, however, it is abundantly clear that the leader Loomer is most loyal to is Benjamin Netanyahu, rather than Donald Trump.
