FBI Lied About Boulder Attack
The federal complaint called the event a "pro-Israel gathering," but that's not what the organizers say
I’m an independent journalist whose reporting is made possible by paid supporters. Thank you for sharing and supporting this journalism.

At a time when the Trump administration is actively conflating antisemitism with criticism of Zionism and Israel’s government, the Justice Department (DOJ) is lying about important details of Sunday’s attack on Jews Sunday in Boulder, CO.
Specifically, the FBI describes the organization that organizes public gatherings for the release of Hamas hostages as “pro-Israel,” even though that’s not how the group describes itself. Attorney General Pam Bondi called the attack “anti-Semitic,” but the FBI complaint doesn’t go that far.
Mohammed Sabry Soliman is being charged with violating federal hate-crime law in addition to state charges of attempted murder for the attack.
The FBI’s complaint called the crowd “pro-Israel” and the event itself “a pro-Israel gathering.” It also includes this line:
According to a post on Facebook, an organization called “Run For Their Lives” organizes a weekly walk across locations in the United States as a way to call attention to Israeli hostages still being held in Gaza.
That’s not true. The post doesn’t say that, and the organization doesn’t say that.
The walks organized by Run For Their Lives are explicitly to call attention to all hostages still held by Hamas, not just Israeli ones. (Some of those taken hostage had dual citizenships, while others were nationals of other countries.)
The Facebook post advertising the June 1 walk in Boulder didn’t mention Israel.
Although the national Run For Their Lives organization was started by Israelis in California, it’s not limited to Israelis. “[L]ocal events are independently led by dedicated and committed leaders within their communities,” the organization’s website says.
And Run For Their Lives explicitly distances itself from the war. “This is about innocent children, women, the elderly, and other civilians being held by terrorists—not about the war.”
It also says, “We encourage carrying flags of all countries from which there are hostages.” In fact, Run For Their Lives appeals to non-Jews and non-Israelis to get involved:
Making this a global movement shows world leaders that we all care, regardless of nationality or religion. You don’t need to be Jewish or Israeli to be disturbed by this crisis—all people around the world should be.
Ironically, both the accused attacker and the Justice Department seem to have seen Run For Their Lives as something it’s not, or at least something it doesn’t claim to be.
According to the FBI’s complaint, Soliman “stated that he hated the Zionist group and did this because he hated this group and needed to stop them from taking over ‘our land,’” meaning Palestine.
And in the DOJ’s press release, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon said, "No American should experience violence motivated by hatred based on their faith or national origin.”
Bondi referred to “This vile anti-Semitic violence.”
But the FBI complaint refers only to anti-Zionist and pro-Palestinian rhetoric. Nothing about Judaism or national origin. Officials haven’t alleged any antisemitic slurs or rhetoric targeting Jews for their faith.
It’s obviously reasonable to guess that Run For Their Lives is predominantly Jewish, with a good number of people who support the Israeli government, or are Zionists. But it’s not reasonable to erase any who don’t by assuming they don’t exist.
And it’s obviously reasonable to guess that Soliman harbors and was motivated at least in part by genuine antisemitism, but the government’s premature declaration of it — in contrast to its own assertions of the facts — threatens to increase the risks to Jews by conflating their religion with the actions of the Israeli government.
It’s also possible the Trump DOJ and FBI were simply sloppy in their work. Bondi alternates between calling Soliman the attacker and the alleged attacker. The FBI complaint has grammatical errors (“I know that ‘Zionist’ to mean individuals who believe in the establishment of a Jewish state and are supportive of the government of Israel”).
But with Bondi openly professing the DOJ’s commitment to Pres. Donald Trump’s political agendas, the handling of this case could also reflect another attempt by the administration to justify oppression of political speech by conflating anti-Israeli-government or anti-Zionist sentiment with antisemitism.
Some Jewish groups have warned that undermining democratic rule of law is a threat to Jewish safety. And Trump’s measures in the name of fighting antisemitism are already taking a toll on Jews. Harvard’s Israeli students, for instance, are included in Trump’s attempt to expel the school’s international students.
And Trump’s own base openly harbors strains of genuine antisemitism. Many evangelicals consider Israel’s survival a means to the end times — when Israel must exist to fulfill prophecy of Jews converting to Christianity or going to Hell. Senate Republicans tweaked a putative antisemitism bill to make sure it allows for blaming Jews for killing Jesus, the central driving tenet of antisemitism.
Ironically, while Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio were defending sending teams to round up international students who criticized the Israeli government — in forums as unthreatening as student newspaper op-eds — Soliman, an Egyptian national, was apparently never even sought by immigration officials.
His authorization to remain here had expired in March. There’s no evidence the Trump administration took any action to remove him.
I’m a veteran journalist and TV news producer who’s worked at MSNBC — as co-creator of Up w/ Chris Hayes and senior producer for Countdown with Keith Olbermann — CNN, ABCNews, The Daily Show, Air America Radio, and TYT. My original reporting on Substack is made possible by a handful of paid subscribers. Thank you.
Who knows what Kash and Bongo have done to those left in the FBI who were the professionals. As for INS, I would like to know why "Soliman, an Egyptian national, was apparently never even sought by immigration officials", that "his authorization to remain here had expired in March", and that "there’s no evidence the Trump administration took any action to remove him". This for me is the lingering big (yes, ironic) deal. Is anyone else mentioning this? I've kinda been looking.
Is ‘keep everyone else mad at each other and confused while we pull the rug out from under all of them’ in the authoritarian playbook anywhere? Thank you Jonathan for following up on this stuff. You and Rachel Maddow have a talent for it.