The Pakistani Muslim Judge Who Protected 2 Trump Assassins

A disturbing pattern by an extremist judge

(First some housekeeping: regular subscribers to my articles may have noticed a change in the last few days. After using Google’s Blogger for nearly 20 years, I’ve had to move over to Substack because email deliveries just weren’t working properly for the last year. If you subscribe or go to Danielgreenfield.org you should automatically be taken to the new site.)

(I apologize for any inconvenience and if you have trouble reading the site or getting emails, please let me know, I’ll try to fix what I can. Some people are also under the impression that they now have to pay to read the articles. That’s not true. Support through paid subscriptions are appreciated, but you do not need to pay. I am not closing the door on any of the readers who have been with me for as long as two decades. Please keep on reading and sharing my articles.)

Last year, Edward Alexander Dana was charged over a rant in which he allegedly claimed that, “this is Donald Trump’s way of saying, hey, I can look like Putin” and vowed “to protect the Constitution by any means necessary. And that means killing you, officer, killing the President, killing anyone who stands in the way of our Constitution.”

Judge Zia Faruqui, a Pakistani Muslim federal magistrate judge, insisted that Dana, who had 23 prior arrests and 9 prior convictions, was a victim who deserved a government apology.

Faruqui apologized to Dana, claimed that America is “past the point of constitutional crisis”, and warned that “people like Mr Dana are suffering the consequences” of law enforcement in D.C.

The Pakistani Muslim judge blamed racism for Dana’s arrest, ranting that “the government’s message to people who look like Mr. Dana is ‘be very afraid” and then claimed, “I’m afraid right now.”

“I really appreciate the judge, though, for being reasonable,” Dana said after his release.

After the latest assassination attempt against President Trump at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Judge Zia Faruqui has apologized to yet another Trump assassin.

This time it was Cole Thomas Allen who had come armed with a shotgun, handgun and knives, and had written a manifesto explaining why he was trying to kill President Trump. Allen’s lawyer had complained that the assassin hadn’t received a free tablet in prison and that he had been put on suicide watch after admitting that he had expected to die during his attack.

Once again, the Pakistani Muslim judge apologized to a presidential assassin for having been inconvenienced. “I am very troubled by what they indicate the conditions that you have been subjected to … I’m sorry. It sounds like things have not been the way they’re supposed to … Whatever you’ve been through, I apologize.”

Judge Faruqui, a magistrate judge who had been appointed by Judge Beryl Howell, a longtime Trump opponent, during the Obama administration, then said that he was “fascinated and concerned” that Allen, a presidential assassin, had been treated worse than J6 detainees.

“A lot of people seem to have forgotten January 6,” the Pakistani judge complained. “Pardons may erase convictions, but they do not erase history.”

Judge Zia Faruqui had long worked to sabotage the Trump administration’s effort to fight crime in D.C., falsely describing it as a “constitutional crisis”, contending that “the rule of law is being flushed down the toilet” and threatening to stop authorizing criminal charges after arrests.

It is debatable whether Faruqui, a member of the highly controversial Muslim Bar Association of New York ever met the basic standard for being appointed.

The MuBANY has claimed that Muslims were persecuted after 9/11, demanded the resignation of the NYPD commissioner over the screening of a movie about Islamic terrorism together with Muslim Brotherhood organizations linked to terrorism including CAIR. Some critics have accused MuBANY’s leadership of having Brotherhood links. The Muslim Brotherhood is the parent organization of numerous Islamic terrorist groups including Al Qaeda and Hamas.

MuBANY takes part in the National Association of Muslim Lawyers which as it boasts, “convened experts from CAIR, Muslim Advocates, and the ACLU to host a webinar on the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist designation.” CAIR is an unindicted terrorist funding co-sponsor whose leader praised the Islamic terrorist campaign of Oct 7.

Faruqui had previously pursued Islamist agendas by aiding the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s case against Myanmar. Gambia, an unstable Muslim regime where Christians are persecuted, had sued Facebook on behalf of the OIC, demanding information on Buddhists in Myanmar to justify its false claim that the ‘Rohingya’, an invasive Muslim group of illegal colonists responsible for violence against Buddhists, were actually victims of ‘genocide’.

Some Rohingya Jihadists had developed ties to ISIS and Al Qaeda had issued a statement warning that “the government of Myanmar shall be made to taste what our Muslim brothers have tasted in Arakan, with the permission of Allah.”

Rather than considering the actual merits of the case, Judge Zia Faruqui went on another rant, mocking Facebook for trying to protect the privacy of Buddhist users worried about Muslim persecution, repeated Islamic and leftist propaganda in his ruling, and complained that Facebook posts had depicted “the Rohingya and other Muslims as an existential threat to Myanmar and to Buddhism. In the case of the Rohingya, it [went] a step further. It [was] accompanied by dehumanising language and the branding of the entire community as ‘illegal . . . immigrants.’”

Which is of course entirely accurate, but understandably objectionable to the Pakistani judge.

Much of the Rohingya operate out of Pakistan. And much like Al Qaeda, Rohingya Jihadist groups like the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army operate out of Judge Faruqui’s homeland.

In his ruling, Judge Zia Faruqui mischaracterized a call by a spokesman for the president of Myanmar (formerly Burma) to kill “Rohingya terrorists” as a call for “the destruction of the Rohingya.”

Is it any wonder that he’s apologizing to presidential assassins?

How many presidential assassins can a judge set out to protect and apologize to, how many Islamist causes should he advocate for and how many extremist organizations does he have to be associated with, and how many criminals does he have to enable before he’s removed?

The David Horowitz Freedom Center announced our new ‘Judicial Accountability Project’ whose goal is holding federal judges accountable. Faruqui is a federal magistrate judge. Magistrate judges do not serve for life and can be removed by district judges. But if they choose not to do so, Congress can act to remove Judge Faruqui from his position.

In the previous profile of Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, formerly Epstein’s lawyer, who had signed off on the Biden administration’s illegal raid on Mar-a-Lago, Congress was urged to call him in and ask him some pointed questions. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui has behaved unprofessionally, violated judicial ethical standards with his partisan rants from the bench, and appears to have a disturbing affection for presidential assassins. He can be removed.

The only question is whether Congress is willing to do it.

(First some housekeeping: regular subscribers to my articles may have noticed a change in the last few days. After using Google’s Blogger for nearly 20 years, I’ve had to move over to Substack because email deliveries just weren’t working properly for the last year. I apologize for any inconvenience and if you have trouble reading the site or getting emails, please let me know, I’ll try to fix what I can. Some people are also under the impression that they now have to pay to read the articles. That’s not true. Support through paid subscriptions are appreciated, but you do not need to pay. I am not closing the door on any of the readers who have been with me for as long as two decades. Please keep on reading and sharing my articles.)

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.