On September 1, 2025, former President Donald Trump once again thrust George Soros and his son into the center of America’s political storm, demanding their prosecution under federal law. Trump’s call, issued on his social media platform Truth, accused the billionaire philanthropist and his “Radical Left” son of fueling unrest and destabilizing the nation—a charge that has reignited fierce debate across the political spectrum, with ripple effects felt as far away as Albania.
According to MENAFN, Trump’s statement was sweeping: he asserted that Soros’s influence had led to widespread violence, including the June riots in Los Angeles, where protests against federal immigration raids escalated into chaos. The demonstrations resulted in property damage, numerous arrests, and the deployment of the National Guard. Trump declared that Soros “should no longer be allowed to rip apart America,” a sentiment that resonated with his supporters and provoked outrage among his critics.
Trump’s accusations, while lacking specific references to particular protests, come after a summer marked by large-scale demonstrations. The Los Angeles riots stand out as a particularly stark example, with federal immigration policies at the heart of the unrest. While the protests began peacefully, they quickly spiraled out of control, leading to scenes that dominated national headlines and prompted officials to take extraordinary measures to restore order.
George Soros, a Hungarian-American financier, has long been a lightning rod in American politics. Through his Open Society Foundations (OSF), Soros has funded a wide array of progressive and civil rights organizations, including groups active in the Black Lives Matter movement. According to MENAFN, some of these groups have been linked to violent episodes during protests, further fueling controversy over the scope and impact of Soros’s philanthropy.
The debate over Soros’s role in American society is nothing new, but Trump’s latest salvo has given it renewed urgency. The former president’s allegations have been bolstered by a recent Senate Judiciary Committee report, which claims that the OSF had ties to the Clinton campaign’s efforts to promote what Trump and his allies describe as “false allegations” of Trump-Russia collusion during the 2016 election. This so-called “Russiagate” scandal has continued to cast a long shadow over American politics, with Soros’s name resurfacing whenever questions of foreign influence and political manipulation arise.
Internationally, Trump’s call for prosecution has stirred reactions as well. In Albania, Democratic Party MP Belind Këlliçi weighed in during an appearance on the show “Kafe Shqeto,” as reported by CNA. Këlliçi discussed Trump’s demand for federal charges under the “RICO” law—a statute historically used to combat organized crime—against both Soros and his son. He insisted that this move was not “a bolt from the blue,” but rather the culmination of evidence presented to the U.S. Congress concerning OSF’s financing of what he described as “extreme leftist agendas,” often in partnership with USAID.
Këlliçi elaborated on the alleged partnership between OSF and USAID, claiming that the latter, which was shut down by Trump, had “channeled hundreds of millions of dollars to capture the media and civil society.” He argued that this funding was instrumental in advancing what he called “far left” causes, particularly those related to LGBT and transgender issues. “Now American citizens are being saved money because the US has slipped left,” Këlliçi stated, suggesting that Trump’s actions were a necessary corrective to what he sees as ideological overreach.
Perhaps most strikingly, Këlliçi pointed to the case of Albanian opposition politician Berisha, describing the accusations against him as a “social experiment by Soros.” This claim reflects a broader narrative among some international critics who allege that Soros uses his wealth and influence to shape political outcomes not only in the United States but around the world.
Back in the U.S., the Open Society Foundations have repeatedly defended their work, emphasizing their commitment to promoting democracy, civil rights, and social justice. Soros himself has long denied involvement in any illegal activity, arguing that his support for progressive causes is both transparent and rooted in a belief in open societies. Yet, as the MENAFN article notes, the OSF’s funding of activist groups—some of which have been associated with violent incidents—remains a flashpoint for controversy.
The Trump administration’s move to file federal charges against Soros under the RICO law, as described by Këlliçi, is unprecedented. The RICO statute, originally designed to dismantle organized crime syndicates, has rarely been applied in cases involving political activism or philanthropy. Legal experts are divided on whether such charges would hold up in court, with some arguing that the case would face significant constitutional challenges related to free speech and association.
Supporters of Trump’s position argue that Soros’s financial support for activist groups has contributed to a climate of unrest and polarization. They point to incidents like the Los Angeles riots as evidence that outside funding can exacerbate tensions and lead to violence. Critics, on the other hand, contend that Trump’s accusations are little more than political theater, designed to distract from his own legal troubles and to rally his base ahead of the next election cycle.
The issue has also reignited long-standing debates over the role of philanthropy in politics. Soros’s critics accuse him of using his wealth to undermine traditional values and national sovereignty, while his defenders argue that he is a champion of human rights and democratic reform. The fact that the OSF has partnered with government agencies like USAID further complicates the picture, raising questions about the appropriate boundaries between public and private influence in shaping civil society.
As the story unfolds, both sides seem determined to dig in their heels. Trump’s supporters see the prosecution of Soros as a necessary step to restore order and accountability, while his opponents warn that such actions threaten the foundations of free expression and political dissent. With the 2026 election season already beginning to heat up, it’s clear that the battle over Soros’s legacy—and over the broader question of money in politics—is far from over.
For now, the only certainty is that George Soros will remain a polarizing figure, his name invoked by those seeking to explain the turbulence of contemporary politics. Whether the legal actions promised by Trump’s administration will materialize, and what consequences they might bring, is anyone’s guess. But as the headlines continue to swirl, one thing is clear: the debate over Soros, his influence, and the future of American democracy is only growing more intense.
