HOW QATAR BOUGHT AMERICA

Summary

Podcast Summary: "Keeping It Real with Jillian Michaels"

Episode: HOW QATAR BOUGHT AMERICA

Date: January 4, 2026
Host: Jillian Michaels
Guest: Freddie Block (Investigative Journalist, The Free Press)

---

Overview:

In this eye-opening episode, Jillian Michaels sits down with investigative journalist Freddie Block to unravel how Qatar, a tiny nation with outsized wealth and ambition, has spent decades entrenching itself into American institutions. Block and Michaels delve deep into Qatar’s multi-billion dollar influence campaigns in politics, education, media, and beyond, questioning the efficacy and transparency of U.S. laws meant to track and curb foreign influence. The conversation is direct and provocative, addressing the complexity, scale, and ramifications of these efforts—and the surprising lack of public discussion about them.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Qatar’s Playbook: The Tools of Influence

• Soft Power & "Black Box" Spending

  • Qatar employs think tank funding, university endowments, and media partnerships to shape perceptions and influence policy, much of which is not tracked by the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).
  • “It’s a form of soft power, but influencing think tanks... is that actually a type of lobbying? Is that an influence campaign?” — Freddie Block [08:56]
  • $9 million tracked to U.S. think tanks in 5 years; real amount likely higher due to untraceable donations.

• Laws & Loopholes: The Limits of FARA

  • FARA, intended to expose foreign influence, only tracks above-board activity. Contributions to think tanks, universities, and NGOs often fall outside its scope.
  • “It hasn’t been updated in a really long time… enforcement is pretty weak.” — Freddie Block [05:22]

2. Money Trail: Who Spends What?

• Staggering Sums by the Gulf States

  • Qatar: $23.4 billion on U.S. lobbying, compared to $1.8 billion by Israel (all-time totals).
  • UAE: $31 billion; Saudi Arabia: $110 billion (all-time lobbying) [07:47]
  • “It’s pretty astounding.” — Freddie Block [07:48]

• Education’s Price: University Endowments

  • Qatar is the largest foreign contributor to U.S. universities since 1986 ($6.3 billion, surpassing China’s $5.6 billion) [25:28].
  • Many funds support U.S. satellite campuses in Doha (e.g., Northwestern, Georgetown) [25:28].

3. Influence in Government & Politics

• Targeting Administrations

  • Qatar seeks to build connections “on both sides of the aisle,” tailoring its approach to both Republican and Democratic power-brokers [12:15].
  • Trump inner circle: Extensive Qatari relationships—Donald Trump Jr. (Doha trips, golf courses), Susie Wiles (former Mercury Public Affairs, Qatar’s lobby), and special envoy Steve Wyckoff (whose son negotiates personal deals while in Doha) [12:15–14:30].
  • “Critics could say it’s like America First policy, but on a Qatari jet.” — Block [14:30]

• Controversial Lobbying Successes

  • Qatar lobbyists played a key role in killing HR 2712, a bill to sanction Hamas supporters, to protect Qatari interests and American aerospace jobs [69:56].

• State-level Focus: The South Carolina Case Study

  • Heavy Qatari investment aligns with attention to lawmakers like Lindsey Graham, Joe Wilson; connections to local industry (Barzan Aeronautical, sister-city programs) [62:39].
  • “You start to see in FARA records...millions of dollars.” — Block [63:11]

4. Shaping K–12 and University Curriculum

• Qatar Foundation International in U.S. Schools

  • Funding brings Qatari-developed materials and cultural programming to U.S. public schools.
  • Block’s investigation began when a NYC classroom displayed a Middle East map omitting Israel—funded by Qatar Foundation International [21:47].
  • “That was inaccurate… Israel’s a country, it exists.” — Block [21:47]

• Academic Compromise: Speech & Values

  • U.S. university campuses in Doha accept restrictions on speech, debate, and gender issues, conflicting with their purported missions. Example: Georgetown’s Doha campus canceled a debate (“Is God a Woman?”) due to blasphemy laws [34:08].
  • Agreements at Northwestern’s Doha campus restricted criticism of Qatar even for the U.S. home campus [34:08].

5. Media, Journalism & Narrative Control

• Al Jazeera’s Pervasive Reach

  • Qatar’s state media, Al Jazeera, remains influential in shaping youth opinions on the Middle East through its English-language reporting and via platforms like Instagram and TikTok [28:54].
  • “Most of the people I went to college with…when they post about Gaza, it’s an Al Jazeera article.” — Block [28:54]

• Targeted Media Investments

  • $50 million funneled to Newsmax reportedly softened negative coverage ahead of the 2022 World Cup and labor controversies [39:33].
  • Washington Post columns by slain journalist Jamal Khashoggi were reportedly shaped with help from a Qatar Foundation-linked staffer [39:33–41:07].

• Journalist Cultivation & Influencer “Hospitality”

  • Qatar invites journalists, influencers, and political insiders (of both parties) on all-expenses-paid trips to Doha for events and conferences; organizers include key lobbyists [46:02].
  • “Sometimes it was direct payments for speaking at events… luxury trips.” — Block [46:02]

6. Think Tanks & The Policy Feedback Loop

• Qatari Money, American Policy
  • Think tanks in the U.S.—including the highly influential Brookings Institution—regularly receive millions in funding from Qatar and other Gulf states, directly impacting the knowledge consumed by policymakers and the public [09:23].
  • “They do craft policy…they are influencing our policy.” — Block [58:27]

7. National Security & the “Revolving Door”

• Officials (& Generals) on the Qatar Payroll

  • Former ambassadors and high-ranking military officials (e.g. Richard Olson, Timmy Davis, General John Allen) moved to jobs or contracts funded by Qatar soon after public service [52:38, 54:33].
  • “The State Department rules are vague enough that this seems kind of icky… but it’s not necessarily not allowed.” — Block [54:33]

• Critical Quote:

  • “No foreign country should have access to any information that a four-star general may have.” — Jillian Michaels [57:11]

8. Why So Little Public Outcry?

• Selective Scrutiny
  • Michaels repeatedly critiques the U.S. public’s and media’s near-singular focus on Israel’s influence while ignoring the immense and often more opaque Qatari and Gulf intervention [10:30, 26:22, 67:31].
  • “If you’re going to cry foul, let’s unilaterally cry foul.” — Jillian Michaels [10:30]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Qatar’s outsized spending:
  “For Qatar, it’s $23.4 billion…compared to Israel’s $1.8 billion…It’s pretty astounding.” — Freddie Block [07:48]

• On FARA’s limitations:
  “FARA only goes so far…you could skirt the law via think tanks or education without registering.” — Freddie Block [05:22]

• On social media’s warped discourse:
  “You are far more likely to see pro-Palestinian content on TikTok than you are pro-Israeli…these platforms have the power to alter algorithms.” — Freddie Block [28:54]

• On disclosure double standards:
  “If I take money to do an ad or a post…#paidad…You’re in serious trouble if you don’t disclose. But nobody has to disclose this.” — Jillian Michaels [67:31]

• On U.S. campus free speech in Qatar:
  “The debate was canceled because blasphemy is illegal in Qatar…so that is extremely troubling.” — Freddie Block [34:08]

• On why the U.S. doesn’t require Al Jazeera to register as foreign agent:
  “It’s easy to kill efforts if you have the right people and access…you can lobby against policies you don’t like for your country.” — Freddie Block [49:58]

• On public ignorance:
  “I don’t think the average bear knows any of this and the ways in which their perception of the world is being manipulated.” — Jillian Michaels [59:41]

---

Important Timestamps

• Opening Context & Introduction: [00:02]
• What is FARA? [03:59]
• Soft Power Loopholes & Think Tanks: [08:13]
• The Money Breakdown (Qatar, Israel, Gulf States): [07:47–08:13]
• Media Influence—Al Jazeera, Newsmax, Social Media: [28:54–31:09, 39:30–43:09]
• K–12 and University Funding: [21:47, 25:28]
• High-profile Political Influence & Trump Ties: [12:15–15:24]
• Case Study: South Carolina Lawmakers: [62:23–67:31]
• Revolving Door: Ambassadors & Generals: [52:23–57:11]
• Think Tanks as Policy Drivers: [58:27]
• Legislative Response & Policy Solutions: [71:41]

---

Policy Solutions & Individual Safeguards

• Policy Changes Needed

  • Modernize FARA and Section 117 of the Higher Education Act to enhance disclosure, close exemptions, and make reporting more frequent and more detailed [71:41].
  • “Disclosure acts are helpful, but haven’t been updated in a really long time.” — Block [73:53]
  • Lower reporting thresholds for university gifts (as started by Trump-era reforms).

• What Can Individuals Do?

  • Demand transparency from media and educational institutions about funding sources.
  • Be skeptical; seek out diverse information sources; question consensus narratives.
  • Track and read reporting on foreign influence—recommendation to follow coverage at The Free Press (thefp.com).

---

Conclusion

Jillian Michaels and Freddie Block illuminate the breadth and complexity of Qatari influence in the U.S.—from quiet inroads in education to aggressive lobbying and media partnerships that have shaped public discourse and policy. The episode calls for increased awareness, transparency, and equal scrutiny of all foreign actors, not just those already in the American spotlight. It ends with an urgent appeal: update the laws, demand disclosure, and stay vigilant, because unchecked influence does not come without consequences.

Resources:

• Read Freddie Block’s reporting: thefp.com
• For more on Omid Malik: Search Free Press articles by Gabe Kaminsky

---

Transcript

[Jillian Michaels]

A country smaller than Connecticut, with a population smaller than Chicago, has spent decades buying influence in the United States, and not with tanks or missiles, but with endowments, media partnerships, lobbying firms, educational initiatives. They fund American universities. They sponsor curriculum. They host journalists and politicians at luxury conferences. They operate the most powerful media outlet in the Arab world. And at the same time, they've harbored extremist leaders, funded radical movements, and played both sides of America's wars in the Middle East. Now, if China were doing this, we would call it infiltration. If Russia were doing it, it would be called propaganda. But when Qatar does it, it's called cultural exchange. Joining me today is investigative journalist Freddie Block from the Free Press, who's been on the forefront of exposing who Qatar is influencing in America, how, why, and at what cost. Here we go. Keeping It Real with Jillian Michaels. This one is a bit of a mind bender. I wasn't paying attention to this at all until Trump got a half a billion dollar plane. And I thought, oh, God, you know, the optics of this are bad. And he's like, I'm not keeping it. It's going in the library. But everybody started talking about Qatar, and I subscribed to the Free Press. I got this article in my inbox, how Qatar bought America. And I'd never heard any. Anything like what I read in that article before. And it was deeply alarming. And I think it was so alarming that it just tucked it in the back of my head, because I thought, like, I don't even know how to talk about this. I'm going to be called Islamophobic if I do talk about this. But as we've now seen an increase in terror attacks and nobody wants to talk about it, I can't help but wonder, like, is part of this Qatari influence? Am I being paranoid? And then you've got Tucker who's like, I'm buying land in Qatar. I'm just thinking, okay, what the heck is going on? So before we go down this rabbit hole, I want to establish the reality that, okay, correct me if I'm wrong. So all foreign countries, allies, and foes seek influence in America. I mean, all of them do it. So what is the prize that they're after here? Like, what's the point of that?

[Freddie Block]

So any country that is trying to gain influence in the United States, obviously, at the end of the day, they. They want something in return. They want to be able to call in favors whenever it suits them, or they want to be able to lobby for specific policies that would benefit them or lobby against policies that would hurt them. And as you said, every country in the world tries to do this in the United States because American policy could potentially affect them. But what's unique about Qatar and many of the Gulf nations is how much money they put into it compared to other countries. And that's really where our intrigue in digging into Qatari lobbying started. But obviously with Qatar as well, what makes it an interesting story to look into is the fact that this is a nation that, if you look just at the plain view, they are a non NATO ally of the United States. It's officially declared that way, but they're also one of the harbors of some of the worst terrorists in the world.

[Jillian Michaels]

Right.

[Freddie Block]

So how can those two things coexist? And that is why Qatar was such an important story, in my opinion, to dig into to understand where are they spending their money, how much is it, and what are they trying to get in return?

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay, I also want to explain real quick for anybody who doesn't know, can you tell people what Farah is?

[Freddie Block]

Yes. So Farah is the Foreign Agents Registration Act. And this was an act that came into place, I think, around the 40s, actually, to counteract Nazi propaganda. That's initially why it became law in the United States. And what it does is it requires any foreign government who's trying to seek influence in the United States, whether that's through a media campaign, whether that's through lobbying in Congress, it requires them to register that activity with the, with the Department of Justice. And what this produces is these logs essentially that you or I or anybody can go through to see who's hired who, how much are they paying them, and also who are these lobbyists talking to, whether it's DC, Whether it's journalists, things like that. Now, it's far from a perfect tracking system, but it at least gives investigative reporters like me a starting off point to try to understand what the influence campaign looks like, at least the above board influence campaign. Because sometimes there's also things that we might refer to as like a black box. But that, that's kind of the starting point for many journalists trying to understand what foreign influence looks like.

[Jillian Michaels]

I'm sorry, what do you mean a black box?

[Freddie Block]

Well, obviously Farah is something that, you know, anybody has to comply to. Any foreign country trying to seek influence in America has to register that activity. Any lobbyists who work for them have to register their activity. But that doesn't mean everybody always follows the law. And so there are multiple different examples from many different countries of people trying to skirt Farah, either by outwardly ignoring it or in some cases, getting a little bit more creative. So, for example, there are many foreign countries that fund think tanks. In the United States, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates are two of the largest funders of think tanks in the United States. They're giving billions of dollars to think tanks. And that doesn't necessarily need to be registered with Farah, but that is something, obviously, that could very easily influence US Policy. So there. Fair it only goes so far is really the short answer. And it hasn't been updated in a really, really long time. And many people are actually trying to work on getting more legislation to. To make FARA enforcement stricter, to also make the requirements for reporting stricter and more detailed. But none of that's really made its way through Congress.

[Jillian Michaels]

Got it. Okay. And I want to be. I want to be fair and I want to be transparent. Is it not the number one criticism of APEC that they have not registered in Farah? Am I right about that?

[Freddie Block]

It's a critique that people give to aipac, but ultimately, AIPAC is an American organization run by Americans who are seeking to influence outcomes in elections. But, you know, it is an American organization, and at the end of the day, Americans don't need to register as foreign agents, because they're not. I actually want to give you a really important piece of information I looked up just before we were speaking today. So after I did my investigation how Cutter Bought America and spent eight months going through literally thousands of pages of documents, this amazing Free Press reader reached out to me and said, hey, I coded this dashboard for you, and you can look up real time how much money countries are spending, which seems so obvious, but the Department of Justice doesn't make it that easy on the outright. But anyway, I looked this up today. So this is all time spending on lobbying. All time spending on lobbying for Israel is around $1.8 billion, which sounds like a lot of money. And it is a lot of money.

[Jillian Michaels]

Sure.

[Freddie Block]

So for Qatar, it's 23.4 billion. So that's compared to Israel's 1.8 billion. And it gets really interesting when you look at the other Gulf countries, too. So Qatar is the third biggest. The second biggest is the United Arab Emirates at 31 billion. And then you've got Saudi Arabia at 110 billion. And that's how much money these Gulf countries are investing in foreign lobbying in the United States. It's pretty astounding.

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay, I want to go back to this little loophole you mentioned with regard to think tanks. So, all right, Farah, correct me if I'm wrong, tracks how much money they give to politicians, how much money they give to lobbying firms, how much money they give to public relations firms, legal. Legal firms in the United States. But money that's not captured. These. These workarounds would be the think tanks you mentioned, universities, foundations, and. And this is called soft power. Correct. And this influences education, media, NGOs. Am I getting that right?

[Freddie Block]

Absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah.

[Jillian Michaels]

So.

[Freddie Block]

So this is a form of soft power. But you also could question it and say, influencing think tanks that are actually proposing policy to American policymakers, is that beyond soft power? Is that actually a type of lobbying? Is that an influence campaign? And so there are a lot of people that will argue that that type of influence shouldn't just be disregarded, that it's very serious, and there should be mechanisms in place to better track it. But let me give you some numbers here, too, which are just really interesting. So Qatar has spent in the last five years. These numbers come from the Quincy Institute, who I think does amazing work digging into what I called, again, this black box. So in the last five years, Qatar has spent $9 million investing in think tanks that we can track. Remember, we can't track all of this. So the number I gave you before has to do with what's registered with the Department of Justice. This is just what people have been able to search, just trying to understand who's investing in the biggest think tanks in the United States. And again, some of the think tanks that accept the most foreign money are like the Brookings Institute, which is hugely influential. So Qatar spent 9 million on think tanks in the last five years. United Arab Emirates has spent 16.7 million on think tanks in the last 5 years. So, again, this just really reveals to the American public. Like, I'm reading this thing in the Brookings Institute about what's going on in the Middle East. Like, what am I supposed to believe? And I think that that sows a lot of doubt in the American public about the information that they're getting and how it could possibly be influenced.

[Jillian Michaels]

Do you have any idea how much Israel gives to think tanks? I'm just curious. And I'm not trying to say I don't like when any foreign country does this, but what's alarming to me is the fact that we only focus on Israel. That's the only focus. And it's like, well, but hold on, $1.7 billion in that's being tracked, as you mentioned, versus $23 million from Qatar that's being tracked. Billion. I'm sorry. Billion dollars. $100 billion from Saudi. That's being tracked. And nobody's crying foul. Like, if you're going to cry foul, let's unilaterally cross cry foul. And I'm shocked that this is not a part of our discourse every time this issue comes up. So, any idea how much Israel spends on soft power?

[Freddie Block]

So I don't know the exact number on think tanks, and the reason for that is that the numbers I just pulled to read to you now were the top numbers. Those were the biggest funders to think tanks are Qatar and the uae. So I don't know what the Israel number is. I'm sure that they do it, too, but it's less.

[Jillian Michaels]

Yeah, I got you. I got you. Okay, that makes sense. All right, so now, before we dive into where this money's going, I want to understand what is the objective? So what are they looking for? Are they looking for protection? Are they looking for ideological normalization, leverage over U.S. foreign policy? I mean, I know this is conjecture, but you've done a heck of a lot of homework on this. What do you think they're trying to buy with this money?

[Freddie Block]

So you're right. I mean, everything else that here is somewhat speculative, and I can only base it in what I know, which is where are they investing? And when you look at the way that Qatar's lobbying campaign has worked in the past five years, you see that they're going after politicians and media organizations, for example, that hit. Hit both sides of the aisle in the American public. And they're trying to cater a narrative to both that can appeal to the left and that can appeal to the right, that can appeal to Republicans, that can appeal to Democrats. And so I think ultimately, what Qatar is trying to do and what many countries try to do is bolster its image to the American public. That's one. I think another, though, is that they're trying to gain influence in the Trump administration, and they tried to do so in the Biden administration, too. But Trump's in power right now. Let's look at his inner circle for a second to see how they may have been influenced by Qatar, starting with his son. Donald Trump Jr. Has been in Doha tons of times this year, speaking at the Doha Forum, trying to build Trump golf courses in Doha. Let's look at Susie Wiles, his chief of staff. Susie Wiles used to lead Mercury Public affairs, which is a lobbying firm that used to lobby on behalf of Qatar. Still does, I think. Actually, Pam Bondi who was the lobbyist at Mercury Public affairs lobbying on behalf of Qatar? It was Pam Bondi, the Attorney General. Let's also look at Steve Wyckoff, arguably one of the most influential people in the Middle east today. He's Trump's special envoy to the Middle east, the person negotiating for the release of the Israeli hostages, for the release of the Israeli American hostages when he was in Doha. The. The Wall Street Journal had an amazing story on this. A few months ago when Wyckoff was in Doha negotiating for the release of the last remaining hostages. His son was also in Doha negotiating real estate deals for the family business. So you see just a plethora of conflicts of interest when it comes to Trump's inner circle. And we haven't even mentioned the jet, you know, the $400 billion jet that Trump was going to accept from Doha and convert into Air Force One. It's, you know, I think critics could say it's like America first policy, but on a Qatari jet.

[Jillian Michaels]

Right. Could you make the argument that business with these countries is America First? So Trump's gonna say, and I think rightfully so, but correct me if you disagree. I brought, you know, I got billions of dollars of investment from Saudi and Qatar or Qatar and uae, and it's good for America. And arguably, I mean, I would imagine he's right. And I interviewed Mike Baker, who famously worked with the CIA for many years, and he was like, you're being naive if you think we shouldn't be talking to these people. Because if we don't, Russia will be, China will be. We have to do this. This is America. First thoughts on that?

[Freddie Block]

It's a great question. And I think ultimately it's a double edged sword. And I've actually spoken to people in the conservative movement, you know, advisors to Trump, who have different responses and answers to this. Some people will say, you know what, this is the way the world works. You got to work with these countries. They've got lots of money. You might as well bring that investment into the United States. But then there's other people who will say, yeah, but you know, Qatar's not investing in the United States for free for them. You know, they make investments for returns. And so what are those returns going to be? And I'll give you one example that I think is on top of mind for many Americans, which is our military. So, so Qatar actually hosts the largest US Air base in the Middle east, the Al Date air base. And Steve Wyckoff, again, Trump's envoy to the Middle east, he went on Tucker Carlson show just a few months ago and said that since around 2013, Qatar has paid for every dime of that Airbase. That's about $8 billion. And so you could look at that and say, you know what, that's great for America because we have this top of the line air base in a very strategic, key location. And then you could look at it the other side and go, yeah, but that's an American air base that is not being funded by America. And if that funding goes away, our military could be in trouble. So now we're kind of hamstrung. And I think that ultimately that's where we find ourselves. Is, is that worth the risk, losing a little bit of America's independence in that way to get that investment to be able to enhance our military? And people debate that all the time.

[Jillian Michaels]

You know, little sidebar. I actually was at that air base visiting the troops in 2010, and they, they essentially call it like the Four Seasons because it's Air Force, obviously. And I guess the Air Force has it a little easier than the army, but very bizarre to have been there and kind of seen it all and not known any of this. Looking back, you know, you start to connect the dots. It's very strange. When do you think Qatar's influence campaign began in earnest? So, like, was it post Arab Spring? Was it pre 9 11? Was it post Trump? Like, were there any inflection points that have accelerated their spending and their outreach?

[Freddie Block]

Absolutely. That year is 2017 for this story. And that's because in 2017, Qatar's neighbors, Saudi and the United Arab Emirates, they declared the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization and Qatar didn't. And so after Qatar refused to do that, Saudi and the UAE instituted a military and economic blockade against Qatar. And that is when Qatar's influence campaign in America really started to ramp up because they looked to the United States and eventually to Donald Trump for help to negotiate out of this. And you can actually see I have more numbers on this as well, which are so interesting. So in 2016, Qatar spent $4.2 million on lobbying in the United States. In 2017, after the blockade, they spent $16.3 million. So this is a huge jump and I think showcases that that blockade was kind of an existential threat for Qatar. And that was really when the country decided, okay, we really need to go hard in the United States. And I think their lobbying campaign, influence campaign in the United States has only become more sophisticated since then.

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay. And that at the time was millions. And now the total number has Grown to multiple billions.

[Freddie Block]

Correct, Got it. Okay. But that's accumulating over time.

[Jillian Michaels]

Alarms me. Right, understood. So. So the reason this has started to get my attention and again, like, okay, I guess call me Islamophobic if you need to call me Islamophobic. But Texas just labeled the Muslim Brotherhood a terror organization. So that got my attention. Because you're thinking, well, the federal government hasn't done it. Are we, are we Islamophobic? Are we being racist against Muslims? But when you start to learn about that particular organization and you find out that like Saudi Arabia labeled them a terror organization and you start to do some homework into this and how far this goes back, it becomes alarming. And I remember watching an episode of Dave Rubin's show from nine years ago and he had a guest on talking about how the Muslim Brotherhood was working to manipulate curriculum and textbooks for kids.

[Carl Higbee]

In Tennessee, in California, there was a meeting of the Muslim Brotherhood and they agreed that one of the best ways to bring Sharia to America was to control the textbook process. One of the things I admire about the Muslim Brotherhood is their shrewdness, their toughness, and their ability to do long range thinking. Well, we've seen this impact here in Tennessee because last year we saw the first of the new textbooks in what was called Human Geography, which purports that Islam is the religion of tolerance, that the golden age in Baghdad was the high point of human history, that Islam was the first to give women their rights. And it goes on and on and on. Now, some of these things are half true but not fully understood. For instance, let's take Islam as the first to give women their rights. Well, it also gave the Muslims in jihad the right to rape kafir women. It also gives them to the right to take part in polygamy, to have wife beating, which is a right within Islam. So it's their right in the sense of Islam gives women their rights, but it does not. Go ahead and tell you what all those rights include.

[Jillian Michaels]

And I just thought, what the hell does the Muslim Brotherhood want with kids in elementary school and junior high and high school? So we want to start with that. The K through 12 pipeline. Why are Qatari funded materials being used in public schools?

[Freddie Block]

So this is a great question and it's actually going to bring me back to how I started covering this story in the first place. So I was an education reporter and I had gotten a tip that there was a map hanging in a classroom in a New York City public school in Brooklyn, and it was a map of the Middle east, but there was no Israel on the map. And regardless of what you think about the conflict in the Middle east, regardless of what you think about Israel, that map was inaccurate. Israel's a country, it exists. And this map was hanging in an elementary school classroom, and it was teaching kids that this is what the Middle east looked like and that that wasn't the real picture. So that was initially why I started looking into that story. What I found, just digging in a little bit deeper, was that the map was hanging in a classroom that was funded by a group called Qatar Foundation International, and that is a US Subsidiary of Qatar foundation, which is founded by the mother of the Emir of Qatar. So this is an organization with a very direct link to the government of Qatar that is spending money in American public schools. So I dug in a little bit deeper, and what I found was that Qatar Foundation International had given over a million dollars to the New York City public school system in the past five years. And that's really what for me, started me on this track of trying to understand Qatari influence in America because it was so baffling to me. Even though Qatar is a non NATO ally of the United States, I also know that, you know, they have been accused of funding terrorists, of harboring the worst terrorists in the world. The leaders of Hamas, the leaders of the Taliban, they're all in Doha. And so I thought, why are they funding American schools? And it's happening all over the country. I mean, they have dozens of grant programs across the country in school districts big and small.

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay, you know, so are any of the. This is so mind blowing. Are any of the parents? Because I'd imagine there's a lot of Jews in Brooklyn and there's no Israel on the map at school. Is the school making the parents aware of this funding? Is this public knowledge?

[Freddie Block]

So it's public insofar as you can look up all these public records and find where funding is coming from and what schools it's going to. And that's how I was able to track it myself. And I do think that at a certain point in time, Qatar foundation was promoting this. So, for example, there used to be articles on Qatar Foundation's website about these. They're called Arab Cultural Arts programs. That's what it was in Brazil, Brooklyn, this classroom. There used to be an article about that program on the website. But when I started looking into it, I actually found that that article had been taken down and I had to find it using the Internet archive. And I saw a couple examples of that. Tweets also about these classrooms had been taken down when I started looking into it. And so I do think that at one point it was promoted, but with greater scrutiny. I think that promotion has at least lessened.

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay, let's progress to the obvious next question. Universities. How much money is Qatar pouring into our universities? I mean, I've seen figures out there that involve Harvard, like our most elite institutions. How much money and for what and to where?

[Freddie Block]

So Qatar is the largest foreign funder of American universities since we started tracking this data in 1986. So since that time, Qatar's given $6.3 billion to American universities. The second most is China at 5.6 billion. So that's a ton of money. Obviously you asked where's it going for Qatar? A lot of that money is actually going to fund campuses of American universities in Doha, Qatar's capital. So there are at least five, because I believe one is being shut down right now, US Campuses that have satellite campuses in Doha. And I'll give you a couple examples. One is Northwestern's journalism school, and another is Georgetown University's Public policy.

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay, so here's what I see. I see kids Since Gaza, since October 7, on the college campuses, divest from Israel. We demand you divest. And listen, I'm not going to give Israel pass. I'll be fair. Okay, how are you spending your money? Be transparent about it. Even Ben Shapiro is like, America shouldn't give Israel money. Like, I have no problem engaging in these conversations. Oh, it's Netanyahu and smart rich. And this is, you know, people, atrocities have occurred on both sides. What I am not seeing is, how about divest from Qatar, how about that? I've got an idea. Like, you're upset about Gaza. What about Bandai? Like, what about all. What about the two National Guardsmen? Like, like, can we have an equal. And I think this is fair to me. There's not a moral equivalence, but let's just say that there is a moral equivalence to Radical Islam. October 7th. And you can be outraged about what's happening in Gaza. Nobody wants to see images like that coming out of Gaza. But I see only, only criticism of Israel. And I've listened to, I've been here to listen. I've validated points on the matter. But when there is no speaking of this, no criticism of this, and should you go to criticize it, you're famously have been called a white nationalist this week for trying to point out, like, hey, there's 2 billion Muslims in the world and the vast majority are incredible. Awesome people. And we watched a Muslim guy disarm one of the terrorists at Bondi. But if Even if even 1% of 2 billion people is radical, does that not deserve your attention? I mean, we've witnessed it over the past month alone. There have been five different incidents, I think, from Christmas markets in Europe to foiled terror plots in California. So this is where I kind of wonder, is this the work of a Qatar soft money campaign that has brainwashed these kids into thinking Israel is the sole devil and not just these kids. So, like, do you think I'm being crazy? Is this tin hat?

[Freddie Block]

So I think what your question makes me think about is Al Jazeera. So Al Jazeera is a Qatari state run media organization that is, is arguably the most influential media organization in the Arab world, hands down. And it's also highly influential, I think, in the United States. I mean, I am, I'm 26 years old and most of the people I went to college with when they post on Instagram about what's going on in Gaza, it's an Al Jazeera article. And I do think that that's very notable. And I think that, you know, Israel has tried to ban Al Jazeera and some people have said that's a great idea, some people have said that's horrible and an attack on freedom of the press. But ultimately the point of that ban would be to say that this is, you know, Qatari influence in Israel influencing perceptions of what the government's doing in Israel in a, and, you know, they would argue, very unfair way. And so I do think that that is a very, very critical point when we're trying to understand why so many different people in the world view this conflict in the Middle east the way we do. We have to look at what they're reading and what they're watching and where they're getting it from. I'll add another point to that as well, which is TikTok. I mean, we saw, for example, this was presented in Congress, that the TikTok algorithm, the way it works compared to other social media sites is that you are far more likely to see pro Palestinian content on TikTok than you are pro Israeli content. And the same extends that, you know, this is real because the same trend extends for issues related to China. I think you're 153 times more likely to see information about Tiananmen Square on Instagram than you are on TikTok. So you can see how these social media companies have the power to alter these algorithms. And you, you can see the results of that. I mean, we are in a way what we read and consume and that forms and shapes our worldview. And unfortunately, in this age of social media, I think that worldview is very easily manipulated when it comes to holiday gifting.

[Jillian Michaels]

I want to give people things that they'll love. Beautiful, timeless pieces that they'll wear for years. And that's one of the reasons I go with Quint. Everything's premium quality at a price that actually makes sense. Quince has something for everybody, whether it's silk tops and skirts for dressing up, perfectly cut denim for everyday wear, outerwear that actually keeps you warm and looks good. Their Italian wool coats, they're standout pieces. They're beautifully tailored, incredibly soft, and they're crafted to last for seasons. Every piece is made with premium materials from, from ethical, trusted factories. And they're priced far below what other luxury brands charge. The craftsmanship. It shows in every detail, from the stitching to the fit and the drape. It's elevated, timeless, and made to wear on repeat. I personally am obsessed with their super soft Mongolian cashmere sweaters. For only 50 bucks. They look and feel amazing. Guys, I find gifts so good, you're going to want to keep them with quints. Go to quint.com Jillian for free. Free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. Now available in Canada too. That's Q-U-I-N-C-E.com Jillian to get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com Jillian I want to get to journalism next, actually, because, you know, everyone's been, God forbid you don't hate Israel. You're a shill and you've been paid, I guess, $7,000. I kind of find that funny because, I mean, I've turned down, I don't know, tens of millions of dollars from big food and big pharma over the years. But that $7,000 was just like, oh, I couldn't resist it. I, you know, I don't have enough influence, by the way, to have taken money from anyone in this space. No one's even offered me money. I kind of am like, wait a minute. It's like in me too, when everybody had the story about the person that inappropriately hit on them. I didn'. And part of me was kind of just. I'm like, am I that unattractive that I don't have a me too story? I guess I'm just so un influential in this space that nobody's offered me money on either side.

[Freddie Block]

So having said that, real quick, you're just too independent.

[Jillian Michaels]

That's me, mama. Yeah, and also, you know, haven't hit a million followers on YouTube yet. Guys, if you could help, please, Shameless plug, please, like, click subscribe. All right, moving on here. I have this note that there are compromises that need to be made for these US University campuses that operate in Doha. So is it true that there are restrictions on speech, restrictions on academic freedom? I don't even know what this means on gender norms. What does that mean? That they're like, they're anti the whole trans thing, which I'm about to find absolutely hilarious if that's the case.

[Freddie Block]

So I think what that's referring to is the fact that Qatar, unlike the United States, does not have freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of religion. These are all rights that we enjoy and I think take for granted in the United States. But Qatar simply doesn't have those. In fact, I'll give you an example. So the Georgetown Public Policy School, a couple years ago, I think around 20, 19 students there wanted to host a debate called Is God a Woman? And it was based off of that Ariana Grande song by, you know, God is a Woman. And I think it was like a fun play, but it was supposed to be an interesting, you know, debate about this topic. And the debate was canceled because blasphemy is illegal in Qatar. You can't question God. You can't question whether God is a woman because that's. That's not allowed. That's not legal in Qatar. And so the debate was canceled. And the foundation for Individual Rights and Expression actually ranked the Georgetown Doha campus among the lowest in free expression that year because obviously you couldn't even have a debate on campus. And for those that think of American universities or think about what they should be at least, which is, in my opinion, you know, bastions of free expression, of civil discourse and debate that simply can't exist in Qatar if what the debate is runs counter to what the government allows. So that's one key example. The other that many people will point to is the fact that, again, Northwestern had a journalism school, they have a journalism school in Doha, and the president of Northwestern actually testified in front of Congress earlier this year and admitted that the university did have to. There was a stipulation in the contract regarding criticism of Qatar that extended not just to the Doha campus, but to the American campus as well. And so that for anybody, again, who thinks of universities as, you know, the ultimate place of free expression, of where it should be, that is extremely troubling.

[Jillian Michaels]

You know, there's another hypocrisy that I'd like to point out. I. I'm agnostic. I don't subscribe to any organized religion. And I've always been a little bit, as a. And I say this as a gay person, because you feel like so many different religions being gay is a sin. And so I've always been a little bit hesitant in a little bit reluctant, little bit intimidated. And I've tried to understand everything from Christianity, Catholicism, Judaism, Islam. If you're going to criticize Christians, which. Go ahead, criticize Christians. I don't want them telling me what to do with my body. I don't want them telling me, you know, gays can't get married. Right. And all of these things. Where's your criticism of Israel, Islam? That's all I want to know. Because here in America, they may not like your marriage, but in the vast majority of Muslim countries, you will go to jail for being gay or you'll be killed for being gay. And yet you've got gays running around in a Palestinian flag. And the gays got a little bit of a kick in the ass recently in Michigan. I think it's like Hammam Track, Michigan, where you can no longer fly the gay flag in public. It has to be, like, in your house, like, private areas. And they were pissed. And I thought, oh, what's the matter? Didn't apply your scrutiny unilaterally? It's staggering to me. I want to go to the journalism piece here. So what are they after? They're after narrative control, obviously.

[Freddie Block]

Yeah. I think every country who invests in lobbying and influences is after narrative control.

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay, so what are they going after? They're going after Legacy Media, podcasting, TikTok, print, legacy, all of it. Is there one more so than another? Like TikTok? Obviously more so than Instagram kind of a thing.

[Freddie Block]

So I would say generally all of it. And I'll give you a few key examples of what that's looked like. So one is, again, I mentioned earlier in our conversation that Qatar goes after media, politicians on both sides to try to create favor, gain influence, whatever you want to call it. So a couple years ago, Qatar was getting a lot of heat internationally because they were building these stadiums for the World cup, and people were accusing the country of using slave labor. Also, just to backtrack, Qatar is a country of 300,000 people, and everyone else who lives there is essentially in a slave class in Qatar. But back to the World Cup. So there Were many people dying building these stadiums. And Qatar was getting a lot of heat for this. And around that time, a group linked to the Qatari government gave $50 million to Newsmax, the conservative media broadcast television.

[Jillian Michaels]

Site, all the time. Oh dear. Oh, boy. Okay.

[Freddie Block]

They gave $50 million to go. And then the reporting on that was that basically the, the editor in chief said, hey, guys, like, hold off a bit on, on the criticism of Qatar on this stuff. And so that's a really direct example of like how it could work, money change in potentially how you're written about in the press. I want to give you another example that I think is so interesting though, and this has to do with the Washington Post. So many years ago, people may remember, there was a journalist named Jamal Khashoggi, and he was very tragically murdered by who many believe is the Saudi government. But Jamal Khashoggi, he was a columnist at the Washington Post and he wrote many columns critical of, you know, Saudi, of the uae, of different policies in the Gulf. And after his death, it was actually the Washington Post, I think their investigative team revealed this. It was found that Khashoggi, many of the articles and columns that he had been writing in the Post had in some way been potentially shaped or there was help with translation with somebody from Qatar foundation, which again is that group linked to the mother of the mayor of Qatar. And so that's not to say that he didn't necessarily believe what he was writing. I'm not saying that at all. But it's just to show like he had this relationship with somebody who was in some way helping him shape these columns, who worked essentially directly for the Qatari government. And he was writing columns for a broad American audience and influencing their perception of the Middle East.

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay, I have to give credit just to Carl Higbee alone, only because I know he has talked about this on Newsmax. I'm not denying what you just said, and that's extremely upsetting and distressing. But I wonder, are they cherry picking incidents then? Because I'm also very good friends with Leland Vitterd on News Nation. So you did not mention News Nation. And he just basically excoriated radical Islam. And he's like, I'm done. I'm done not calling this out because you're gonna attack me and call me an Islamophobe. Political Islam needs to be discussed. And he basically just goes for it.

[Carl Higbee]

For a long time, people, the media, even people like me, have been bullied into ignoring and speaking about the dangers of Islamic terrorism for fear of being called Islamophobic. That stops now. The past 48 hours have shown us it is better to be honest than politically correct. The Muslim community must hold each other accountable and push out the radicals. If they will not, they are part of the problem. We have now seen large Muslim populations in the United Kingdom, Western Europe, the United States and Australia who do not share our values and do not want to share our values. But anyone who calls that out is apparently just suffering from Islamophobia. It is their fault. A phobia is generally described as an irrational or excessive unsubstantiated fear. That is a phobia of flying because planes generally do not crash. But in 2025, as the year comes to a close, we are seeing these fears play out in dangerous ways.

[Jillian Michaels]

And I know he Higby's been going for it, but this incident with Newsmax is alarming. Are they silencing like certain things or is there like a blanket request for compliance?

[Freddie Block]

Do you think so? Particularly with that Newsmax example, My understanding is it pertains to the World cup and the criticism that Qatar was getting during that time because of the construction of the stadiums and all of that. So my understanding is it's not blanket, but I think it's a very real example of when you have money, you can buy influence. It can work. It can work in America. It can work even in news organizations that we really trust. Whether for you it's Newsmax or the Washington Post, There are doors that are open for people who want to seek influence to go through.

[Jillian Michaels]

Can you talk to me a little bit about journalist cultivation?

[Carl Higbee]

So.

[Jillian Michaels]

Let me make sure I ruin my life here. We've all seen Tucker very recently go to Qatar and interview the PM over there.

[Freddie Block]

And.

[Jillian Michaels]

There'S talk of you mentioned double Donald Trump Jr. Who's very nice to me, joined my podcast, gave me a very honest interview and I really appreciate it. But at the same time I just wonder, these guys are going over there with these like all expense paid conferences and how do you think with individual journalists they're cultivating influence? Is it like gifts and luxury trips or direct payments? And last thing I'll say on this is that this guy, Omid Malik, who is an American and does business with Donald Trump Jr. Like this guy is an American investor, but he gets a lot of his funding from Qatar.

[Carl Higbee]

And.

[Jillian Michaels]

He'S put $15 million into Tucker's podcast network. So you gotta kinda wonder about it just a little bit. So I'm not saying it's obviously I'm Also told it's the right as well as the left. It's both sides, as you've mentioned. But what are they doing? Cuz there's no direct payment from, you know, the Qatari government to podcasters, right, or journalists. Or is there? Or is it just these luxury trips, like what are they doing to get total compliance? Because that's surely what it seems like. It seems like it's all or nothing, black or white. Israel bad, you know, Arab world good or Arab world bad? Israel good. And I very rarely see any ability to kind of integrate flaws and criticisms on both sides. How are they doing this?

[Freddie Block]

So first on Omid Malik, I recommend all of your listeners go read my colleague Gabe Kaminsky's profile of him in the Free Press, because I think that's the best insight into who he is, what his background is and what his influence is in terms of Tucker. So Tucker, you mentioned went and interviewed the Prime Minister of Qatar. It was actually found out after the fact that some of Qatar's lobbyists were instrumental in setting that up. So that is actually a very clear example of how the lobbying campaign can be successful. They connect you with the right people, they get you in front of the right people and they can get you the platform that you're seeking. And so that seems to be what happened with the Tucker interview, based off of Fair Records. In terms of other journalists in the influence campaign, I'll bring up two examples. The first is a couple years ago the Wall Street Journal had a great story about this and it was about how Qatar was targeting 250 influencers in Trump's inner circle. And they didn't mean influencers like social media influencers, they meant people who can influence Donald Trump. And it was exactly what you described, luxury trips. Sometimes it was direct payments for like speaking at events and things like that. You know, one of the people in the Wall Street Journal article is Alan Dershowitz. He was given, you know, these trips in speaking fees and he came out and said, I had no idea that this was essentially part of a, you know, influence campaign. There's an even more recent example of this though. I mean, truly, just a few weeks ago, there were a group of conservative influencers, people who have very big platforms on like, X especially who were given, you know, trips to Doha. They went and saw the Formula One race. They met with Qatari officials there. And it's unclear who exactly paid for the trip. But afterwards, you know, they're posting online, on Instagram, whatever, oh, this is the most amazing country. We had These great talks. Oh, my gosh, the Formula one race was so great and so many people speculate that the Qatari government was behind paying for those trips.

[Jillian Michaels]

See, I could see myself, it's like, hey, do you want to come to Qatar all expenses paid and go to Formula one and, like, see the country and get. Get eyes on a. J? I'd be like, yeah, of course I do. But I could. I could also see Alan Dershowitz is obviously very pro Israel. So that one kind of struck me because he's been vocal about it. I could see how you would. You would definitely take the bait. By the way, if Israel was like, come to Jerusalem. I'd be like, I love Jerusalem. I've been to all these countries already, actually, and have loved visiting every single one. And I famously now at this point am 70% Arab and like a third. I discovered this later in life. My mom's mom was a Russian Jew who ran from the Nazis and they hid the whole thing. So in other words, like, I don't have an agenda. I could see myself going to either place, loving it, and being like, this is awesome. You know, And I think in my career, it's like, come to this resort in Cancun and post about it. Like, I don't want to demonize influencers necessarily. Like, if I was Tucker and they invited me to go to Qatar, I'd be like, hell, yeah. But the one thing that throws me off a little bit is the. Is the bias in the reporting is. That's the part where I'm like, but, but, but, but, but, but, but. Where's the bar where you apply the scrutiny unilaterally?

[Freddie Block]

Right.

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay. Can I ask you, why has the Department of Justice been hesitant then to force Al Jazeera to register as a foreign agent? They're treated as an independent news outlet, but they're not. They're state funded. So wouldn't this be obvious? So, like, why haven't they been forced to register?

[Freddie Block]

So there actually was a law passed that required AJ which was an English subsidiary of Al Jazeera, to. To register as a foreign agent, but they still haven't done that. After that law passed, I think they hired some big lawyers, and now it's kind of pending, slash, fallen out of. Fallen out of the conversation. We haven't heard really anything about it since. So there was that. There was that effort. And ultimately, I think, again, just speculating here, it's easy to kill efforts that you think are going to hurt you. If you have the right mechanisms, the right people in place, the right access to be able to say, hey, please don't do that, or, you know, whatever. You. Again, you can lobby against policies that you don't like for your country, especially if you've hired all the right people and are paying them hundreds of thousands of dollars every month to help you.

[Jillian Michaels]

Right. I want to talk a little bit about this revolving door. So, of course, in my line of work, that means you work for Pfizer, you work for the fda, you go back, you work for Pfizer, and it's pretty nefarious. You create a drug, you go approve the drug, you got a bunch of shares in the company, and then you go back and you work for the company again. And we all know this. We've seen it with Big Food and Big Pharma. I've heard about it with Boeing in the State Department. You work for the military industrial complex. You work for the State Department, you work for the military industrial complex. But there's also a revolving door when it comes to Qatar or foreign countries in our government. So can you explain, I don't understand this. How does this work?

[Freddie Block]

I think what you might be referring to is essentially just the way lobbying works in the United States. Depends on which person's in power, which lobbyists are going to be the most effective people to help you. So I think this is what you're referring to, and it's quite interesting, actually, when you look at the lobbying activity happening right now. You know, it's been a little bit over a year since Donald Trump got elected. And who are the biggest lobbyists picking up the most lucrative contracts? Well, it's people who used to fundraise for Trump, used to be campaign advisers for Trump. Those are the people who are now being able to pick up the biggest contracts, both for domestic and foreign lobbying, because they have the closest line to the president, and people want the best access. So I think that's what you're referring to.

[Jillian Michaels]

Well, I think so. So I. I have a note here to ask you about former U.S. ambassador Richard Olson, but this guy pled guilty to illegal lobbying for Qatar. What is illegal lobbying? When you don't register that you're a lobbyist.

[Freddie Block]

So illegal lobbying, as you said, it's when you don't register, it's when you do activities that the law requires you to register for, but you don't actually disclose that you're doing it. And there have been many different cases of this. There's actually a recent case regarding a group called Yemen Watch, and this was essentially a nonprofit type group that was founded and it was highly critical of Yemen and it was trying to raise awareness of the famine in Yemen. And it actually later turned out that this nonprofit was being run by essentially Qatar in some way, shape or form, because the people running this nonprofit were investigated by the DoJ, were forced to register with Farah after the fact. And often cases, you know, the punishment can range. It could be, you have to pay a big fine to. You could serve jail time. The interesting point about this, though, is that when Pam Bondi came into office again, Trump's attorney general, she issued a letter very soon after coming into. Into office, saying. Saying that her Department of Justice was not going to be investigating or prosecuting these Farah cases as much. So she kind of signaled that they were going to be a bit more lenient on these cases. And depending, you know, on who you are, people have seen this in different ways. Some people say that Farah has been used to weaponize people with whom you politically disagree with. This has happened with Republicans. People point to Russiagate, whatever. But on the other side, people can say, okay, but you're easing enforcement. So what is going to incentivize any group to register now? They're just going to try to do as much as they can without having to register it so that there can't be scrutiny. And the DOJ is basically telling them, yeah, we're probably not going to prosecute you for anything.

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay, what was this guy trying to change while he was secretly on their payroll, do you know?

[Freddie Block]

I don't know much about Richard Olson's story, but I do know that there are examples of other. Other US Ambassadors to Qatar who have gone on to in some way shape or form be connected to Qatar or be promoting Qatar after their tenure as ambassador is over. I'll give you the most recent example, which is Timmy Davis. So he was the US Ambassador to Qatar under Joe Biden. And after his tenure as US Ambassador ended a few months later, he actually ended up taking what seems like a pretty nice, cushy job at an investment firm that is linked to money from the Qatari royal family. And I talked to. I wrote about this in the Free Press, and I talked to a lot of ethics experts in D.C. about this. Like, hey, is this allowed? I talked to former State Department officials about this, and basically their. Their criticism was that the way that the State Department rules are written is that they're vague enough that this seems kind of icky. This seems pretty wrong. But it's not necessarily explicitly not allowed. And so there Are people actually trying to work on legislation to make some of this? Make some of what? Basically ambassadors or high ranking deputies and officials in foreign governments limit what they can do shortly after their post. Because for a foreign country, obviously they'd become a very valuable asset if they can access those people in some way.

[Jillian Michaels]

Right, Okay. I have also a question about something called the four star influence. So foreign countries are going after retired generals. And then with Qatar in particular, apparently there was a Marine general named John Allen who was recruited after that 27 block, 2017 blockade that you mentioned. How is this allowed? They're going after our military. And that's. And I'm not just blaming Qatar. The fact that any foreign government can do this is insane. What in the world would you get from one of our fricking generals that you should have as a foreign government?

[Freddie Block]

I think that there are multiple different reasons why foreign governments seek out influencers, seek out former military people, seek out former diplomats. It's because they're trying to likely do one of those three things, which is shape their narrative. They're trying to gain access to U.S. officials, or they're trying to get potentially information. If that person is recently out of the military, maybe they have information. I don't know.

[Jillian Michaels]

That's the part that's alarming though. You want influence, you want connections, but information. No foreign country should have access to any information that a four star general may have. I have a little bit of information about it. That the FBI apparently seized General John Allen's electronic data with regard to how he allegedly used his position at the Brookings Institution to shift the Trump administration's tone toward Qatar. Now listen, again, like, I don't think Israel should do it. I don't think China should do it. I don't think Russia should do it. I don't think Iran should do it. I don't think Qatar should do it. I just, I'm gonna say it one more time. I don't like when we apply the scrutiny to only one country. And that kind of makes me wonder if that's what's coming out of all of this Qatari and Arab money. So think tank independence, can you explain to people, and forgive me, I'm presuming that there are probably a few people that don't really understand what a think tank is or does. So just to clear up any confusion, these guys basically craft policy, don't they? Isn't that what they do, or am I getting that wrong?

[Freddie Block]

Yeah, in a lot of respects they do. So think tanks can take on Multiple different forms in one sense, you know, they cater to the public. They host forums and they have journals, and a lot of them do. And they post articles. They have scholars who oftentimes are also big names at universities who write for them and things like that. So they're an information center in a lot of respect. They do policy research. So, you know, maybe if it's an immigration focused think tank, they're focusing on, you know, how many immigrants are in the country and what's the economic impact of this and that and illegal immigration versus legal immigration. Like, they'll focus on these issues and try to find these numbers and do these reports and things like that. But, you know, think tanks also do craft policy, as you said. A lot of times, think tank researchers are asked to brief members of Congress about certain events going on in the world or in the United States on key issues because, you know, congressional members can't be experts on everything. And so they, they call in these think tank experts to help them and assist them to understand what's going on in the United States and the world. And so think tanks are highly influential. You know, why are they all in Washington, D.C. well, at the end of the day, they're, they're influencing our policy.

[Jillian Michaels]

Right, of course. And it's clearly not independent when you're taking millions of dollars from foreign governments. That's, that's just, that kind of corruption is the same kind of corruption that I have again, that I have seen in health care for decades. It's just that I'm only really learning about it now when it comes to foreign governments and their influence. But I don't think the average bear knows any of this. And the ways in which their perception of the world is being manipulated, it's, it's just we're surrounded. I was talking to Dr. Drew about this the other day and he's like, gillian, my entire world view has arguably been been propagandized. Whether it was his coming up as a doctor when he turned his back on hormone replacement therapy because he was told to, or things like this that we talk about on a show I do with him and Dave Rubin and Sage Steele every week. But I just think nobody has any idea the ways in which they're being manipulated. It's wild. Do you think this would be a security risk when you're recruiting four star generals, or do you think I'm just, I'm now down a rabbit hole here?

[Freddie Block]

I'd have to read more about that story to be able to give you an answer on that. And whether it's a security risk. But I think in general, let's just zoom out and think about the U.S. cutter relationship in general. Think about how much influence they have over our economy, think about how much influence they have over our military, over our politics. I think there are a lot of people that would say that is a security issue that essentially, you know, we have again, an air base in the Middle east funded by Qatar that we may not be able to fund ourselves and we're now, you know, at the whim of a foreign country, otherwise we risk losing funding. Like, I think there are a lot of people that say that that is a very serious security issue. And I think there's people also that have criticized the outsized role that Qatar has played in the US Negotiations in the Middle east and essentially, you know, arguing that the United States has exported its foreign policy in some way to this foreign country as well. So when I hear about national security issues, that's a lot of the critique that I'm hearing is, you know, that our foreign policy is very much embedded with these other countries. And again, even though they're major non NATO allies, are they countries that we can trust? Are these countries that have the same values as the United States, that are aligned with the United States on the world order and all of those important questions.

[Jillian Michaels]

Can we talk for a second about targeted influence? So Qatar apparently has focused really heavily on South Carolina lawmakers like Lindsey Graham and Joe Wilson. Why? What's in South Carolina?

[Freddie Block]

South Carolina is a fascinating case study. So there are tons of Qatari investments in South Carolina. So let's just look at the economics and then we'll go back to the politics of it. Doha and I think Charleston are sister cities. And I guess Doha gave Covid relief money to South Carolina during COVID So there's this kind of interesting pre existing relationship that there's a technical college in South Carolina that has a relationship with a Qatari university and they get tons of funding from them. And then there's also this group called Barzon Aeronautical, which is a essentially like a drone company that its headquarters is in South Carolina. But, but they are a Qatari drone company and they invest. I mean, if you look at the fair records for bars on aeronautical, I mean, it is millions of dollars. It's crazy how much money they're investing coming directly from Qatar to this drone company in South Carolina. So on the economic side, it's already really interesting and you start to see in FAIR records that, you know, Qatari officials are arranging a lot of meetings with South Carolina officials in the state. But now let's zoom out to the national level. You mentioned Lindsey Graham, the senator to South Carolina. He is, you know, what many people would presume to be a foreign policy hawk, I guess, in the most stereotypical sense. And there was this interesting moment Shortly after the October 7th attack in Israel where Lindsey Graham was speaking at a conference in Doha, and he said something along the lines of, oh, you know, we're here in Qatar, and, like, Qatar's our friend and Hamas is here. But, you know, we know why Hamas is here and, like, Qatar is our main ally and why is there.

[Jillian Michaels]

Hold on. Why. Why is Hamas there? I actually, I've been trying to get to the bottom of that for quite some time. I've heard someone, one of the Qatari members of the Qatari government say, well, the U.S. biden administration wanted us to keep Hamas here, which, by the way, I never understood, but. Sorry, I interrupted you.

[Freddie Block]

No, not. Not at all. It's an important question. So everything is, you know, depends who you ask. Right. So you could ask some people, like what you just mentioned. They'd say, well, you know what? We need to negotiate. We need some sort of negotiating table, some sort of neutral place where we can talk to the leaders of Hamas to try to, you know, come to an end to the war in Israel between Israel and Gaza. Like.

[Jillian Michaels]

Like.

[Freddie Block]

Or Israel and. And Hamas, not Israel and Gaza.

[Carl Higbee]

Right.

[Freddie Block]

So that's what some people would say. And then other people would say, well, Hamas is there because the Qatari government is ideologically aligned with, you know, certain elements of the Muslim Brotherhood ideology, which is also the foundation of Hamas's ideology. And that's why they're there. So depends who. Yes, right. But Lindsey Graham was saying. But, yeah, right. And Lindsay Graham was saying, you know, they're. They're there because. For negotiating. And that's what I think he was referencing. But the speech was so notable that it was covered in all sorts of news outlets of people being, like Lindsey Graham says, like, Qatar's major US Friend in speech at Doha Forum or whatever conference. It was in Doha at the time. And I looked into the lobbying records about this speech, and there's a guy, his name is Andrew King. And I don't mean to pick on Andrew King. You know, he's a lobbyist. He's doing his job. But here's what he did. He is the former chief of staff to Lindsey Graham. He was hired as a Qatari lobbyist a few years back. And based off of the records with The Department of Justice. You can see that on October 7th, Andrew King called Lindsey Graham. He had dozens of meetings with Lindsey Graham or Lindsey Graham's team leading up to this speech that Lindsey Graham gave in Doha, including a meeting on the day of the speech, which begs the question, you know, was. Was he in Doha with Lindsey Graham? And none of them responded to my request for comment at the time for more information about what was going on there. But that is, you know, a little bit of insight potentially into, you know, who are the people that Lindsey Graham may be turning to to talk about what's going on in the Middle east to get some insight about Qatar and its, you know, relationship to the United States. Well, it's is potentially this guy who used to work for him that's also now paid tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars a month to lobby on behalf of Qatar. So that's one key example of Lindsey Graham, S.C. but I agree it's worth way more investigation what's going on between Qatar and South Carolina, because there's a lot there.

[Jillian Michaels]

You know, I probably have even said in defense of Trump at times, look at all the money he's getting them to invest in America. It's like, well, Gillian, like, he's investing in Qatar, is investing in South Carolina. Like, this is what you want. They're providing jobs. But it just. There comes a point where you start to wonder, kind of like, as you mentioned, what's the motive for that? What's the quid pro quo? Disclose. If I take money to do an ad or a post, which I generally never post for food products, but let's just say, right, all of a sudden, you see an ad for some sort of energy drink, and I don't disclose it, like, hey, this company paid me to do an ad for this energy drink. Hashtag paid ad. You're in serious trouble, Serious trouble. You know, even our, like, the people that advertise on the podcast, they're like, you gotta. You gotta buy a sweater. Because if you talk about our product and you didn't actually purchase the product and you didn't actually wear the product, we can all get in very big trouble. But nobody has to disclose this. Whereas I think if somebody said to me, hey, listen, Qatar is. There's a duality there. Here's what we're getting out of it. These are the things we need to worry about. These are the things we're being careful of. This is where the line is in the sand. I feel like people would feel far more comfortable and Again, you levy these critiques onto Israel. I want to know what they're asking for. I want to know the influence they have. I want to know who they're paying. I want to know what we're doing on their behalf. Okay, this one is a heck of a lot more money. Heck of a lot more. So what about this one? Qatari lobbyists successfully killed a bill called HR 2712, which was meant to sanction Hamas supporters. And this would have jeopardized billions in U.S. aerospace contracts and thousands of American jobs. So let me just tie that back in for one second. So all of this money that I would have been so happy was going into South Carolina is the cost of that. You're no longer sanctioning Hamas supporters.

[Freddie Block]

So it's hard to necessarily connect what's going on in South Carolina to everything that's going on on the Hill. But all of these efforts are related in some way, which is that, you know, as I said before, countries are always hiring lobbyists to try to garner influence, to promote bills that benefit them, and to kill bills that hurt them. And in this case, as you mentioned, I'm not familiar with that either. But as you mentioned it, you know, that makes sense why Qatar would want to kill that bill. And so, because they already have an army of lobbyists on both sides of the aisle, you know, they have somebody like Jim Moran, a former Democratic congressman, who can go speak to the Democrats and say, hey, here's why you should kill this bill. Got somebody like Andrew King who could say that, too. I'm not saying that they did work on them. I'd have to check the records and confirm that. Those are just examples of the types.

[Jillian Michaels]

Of might have on payroll. And this is in the podcast. Count on it being fact checked. That's all I'm going to say. If you're watching this now, it's been fact checked, and that is accurate. Sorry, go on.

[Freddie Block]

Well, so those are the types of people that are on Cutter's payroll at the end of the day. And so it makes sense that Qatar would have the ability to have lobbyists lobby on their behalf, because that's what they're paying, you know, at the end of the day, $20 billion for is they want that influence.

[Jillian Michaels]

Okay, so then, final thoughts. What can the US do to combat foreign influence? What's being done, what needs to be done, and what do we do as individuals to either fight against this or safeguard our own personal belief system?

[Freddie Block]

Well, I think on the policy level, we talked a bit about different disclosure requirements. Today, the Foreign Agents Registration Act. When I talked about foreign funding, I was actually referring to section 117 of the higher Education act, which requires disclosure of foreign funds. And a lot of people would say, these disclosure acts, they're great. It's important to have them, but they haven't been updated in a really long time. So when I talked about the Farah black box, you know, there are a lot of exemptions for activity that you don't have to register with Farah. If you're doing something for commercial purposes, for example, that is a potential exemption under Farah. And people argue, well, that's just. It makes it so easy to evade any disclosure. And the disclosure requirements, while helpful, aren't that extensive. You know, you have to say who you called and talked to and reached out to and things like that, but you don't have to really disclose necessarily what was being discussed. You don't, oh, maybe you put in a little line, but you really don't have to give that many details. Right? And so there are a lot of people lobbying right now to say, you know what, we need to enhance these disclosure requirements. We need to make the reporting more frequent or we need to make it more detailed, or we need to get rid of some of these exemptions. And again, you know, the federal laws really haven't been updated in decades. And so some people say they work, and some people will argue that they barely work at all. On higher education funding. The Trump administration actually did do something. They made an effort to lower the disclosure requirement. It used to be $250,000. That was the level that a gift had to reach from a foreign country for a university to have to disclose it. And the Trump administration lowered that number, saying that you have to disclose lower gifts. I can't remember what it is off the top of my head, but I think those types of efforts are a step towards transparency. And it's saying, you know, this is still legal. You know, a university like Harvard can accept money from China, they can accept money from Qatar, but they have to disclose it. And people are arguing not only do they have to disclose it, but we think that they should be doing more in. In disclosures.

[Jillian Michaels]

You've really been fantastic. I so appreciate your taking the time and educating myself and the audience on this matter. Where can people learn more about this? Find that Omid Malik piece that you mentioned and just generally educate themselves as thoroughly as possible in order to safeguard their sanity. Tell them where to find you, please.

[Freddie Block]

So you can go to the fp.com that's the free Press. It's where you can read all of our stories. You can read my story, how Qatar Bought America. I've got a bunch of other stories about different Qatari lobbyists, about the map and the New York City public school. You can read all that at the Free Press. You can read my colleague Gabe Kaminsky's profile of Omid Malik, also at the Free Press.

[Jillian Michaels]

Thank you so much, Franny. I really appreciate it. And I look forward to hopefully talking to you again. Maybe a brighter topic next time, Something like that.

[Freddie Block]

Same here, definitely. Thank you so much for having me on. Thanks so much.

[Jillian Michaels]

Thank you so much for watching. If you enjoyed the podcast, please, like, comment, subscribe and share. And make sure to let me know what guests you want to see on in the future.