Iranian General’s Niece Living Decadent Lifestyle in US That Would Be Illegal in Tehran is to Be Deported
The niece of the late Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani and her daughter live a lavish lifestyle in the US that would be illegal in Tehran, but are now set to be deported after backing Iran in the war. The Mail has the story.
From chugging bottles of champagne and lounging in designer clothing to partying at luxury Las Vegas resorts, the niece of the late Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani lived a lavish lifestyle in the United States.
But Hamideh Soleimani Afshar, 47, and her daughter Sarinasadat Hosseiny, 25, are now facing deportation after Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers detained them on Friday in Los Angeles.
The women have also had their green cards revoked after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio accused Afshar of celebrating the deaths of American soldiers during President Donald Trump’s ongoing war with Iran.
The mother and daughter documented their glitzy lives on their now-deleted social media, posting enviable snaps of opulent holidays, expensive cars and stylish parties.
Afshar, who originally entered the US in June 2015 on a tourist visa, would often publish pictures of herself decked out in gold jewellery, dispatching from helicopters in the desert and relaxing in Louis Vuitton clothes.
Her daughter – who came to the US with her mother on a student visa – appeared in snaps relaxing on a sun lounger by a pool in a black bikini, showing off her tattoos, and posing on a bed in a halter neck party dress, next to a bottle of rosé.
Both enjoy donning outfits deemed illegal in Tehran, where women face arrest, beating and even rape in custody for disobeying the strict dress code enforced by the Islamic regime which includes the compulsory hijab.
Afshar is the niece of the slain Qasem Soleimani – one of Iran’s most powerful military figures who was the commander of the lethal Quds force and the architect of the regime’s terror activities throughout the Middle East.
Soleimani was killed by a US Reaper drone strike ordered by President Trump at Baghdad Airport in January 2020.
Before his death, he was seen as the country’s most influential commander, second only to the late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.
After joining the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps in his early 20s, the hardliner eventually became responsible for hundreds of American deaths in Iraq and waves of militia attacks against Israel.
Various photos from his grandniece’s social media show her posing with a fluffy Pomeranian as well as her clubbing in Miami, holidaying in Alaska, and partying down in Las Vegas.
But a press release issued by the State Department following the women’s arrest on Friday accused Afshar, her mother, of “promoting Iranian regime propaganda”.
It said she had “praised the new Iranian Supreme Leader, denounced America as the ‘Great Satan’ and voiced her unflinching support for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a designated terrorist organisation”.
The mother and daughter were granted asylum by a judge in 2019; in 2021, Afshar was granted her green card, followed by her daughter in 2023, both under the Biden administration.
Afshar “pushed regime propaganda while enjoying a lavish lifestyle in Los Angeles, as attested to by her frequent posting on her recently deleted Instagram account”, the statement said.
DHS further claimed that in a July 2025 naturalisation application, Afshar disclosed that she had travelled to Iran at least four times since being issued her green card, which made her asylum claims “fraudulent”.
Rubio said the State Department had been alerted to Afshar’s antics by her posts about Tehran and the US on her since-deleted Instagram account.
He said the permanent resident status that allowed the women to live indefinitely in the US was revoked and that they will be deported at the first available opportunity.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Living the life in the US (where did the money come from?) whilst bad mouthing the US and also supporting IRGC.
Now have their just desserts. Pity we don’t do the same here
Going on holiday to a place you claim to be afraid of going back to and posting that information in public… She should be deported for being too f–g stupid.
Yeah, this is a classic.
1.) The mother and daughter were granted asylum in 2019.
2.) Subsequently they visited the country they claimed they had fled from.
3.) Then denounced their host country as “The Great Satan”.
How many more cases must there be, in Britain as well as the US?
Well done Donald Trump. This is just the sort of high profile publicity that is required.
Get your widows vests and don your burkhas ladies.
One big worry – Kneel invites them here. He’s corrupt enough.
As Oscar Wilde wrote of the death of Little Nell, one would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh.
Oh dear, how sad, never mind.
Something about this doesn’t pass the MAk smell test.
I agree. Too “on the nose”.
So, that’s Trump’s freedom of speech: Everybody ought to be free to say what his political opponents consider really repellent. Other things, not so much. And if you’re a foreigner, the punishment for wrongspeech is deportation¹.
¹ Something doesn’t quite hang together here. The USA is at war with Iran, so, how is it going to deport Iranians to this place?
I am far from being an expert on US law but it appears that these women, having firstly been given green cards on false pretences (if they voluntarily returned to Iran on ‘holiday’ they were not refugees) they have since taken to insulting their generous host country. US citizens quite properly enjoy freedom of speech. There is no reason that the USA’s guests should be granted the same privilege. I only wish the UK were as robust about freedom of speech and the conduct of foreigners while they’re here.
And I’m sure the Red Cross / Red Crescent could get them safely back to Iran.
It’s possible to argue against this weasel-wording, but that’s really not necessary. The US constitution deals with rights man is naturally supposed to have, not just citizens rights and as “congress shall make no law …”, congress won’t have made a law restricting freedom of speech of people who are legally resident in the USA: They’re entitled to “insult their host country” to their hearts content, much as some people might not like that. If they’re not, there’s no freedom of speech in the USA and members of the Trump administration can stop lecturing others about it, because their policy is the same as that of all others: Our speech good, other speech bad!
My guests can say anything they like but if they insulted me or my hospitality I would show them the door pronto. I think this is about good manners or an obvious lack of them.
These people aren’t anyone’s guests. They were granted permission to live in the USA for some reason by the previous government and they’re certainly paying their own bills as their lifestyle suggests that they’re rather rich.
But this still doesn’t matter: Freedom of speech means people are free to say what they want in a private capacity without fear of some kind of official or semi-official repercussions. And this means all people within some jurisdiction where freedom of speech is supposed to exist. If that’s not the case, there’s no freedom of speech because Except when really repellent people say really repellent stuff! is exactly the usual reservation. To some people, The USA is the great Satan! is really repellent stuff. And to some other people, Sex is binary and genetically determined is really repellent stuff. If people aren’t free to say both, there’s no freedom of speech.
I used to think the same but now I am not sure that the pro Palestinian hate marches or Bob Vylan’s ‘death to the IDF’ chant should be allowed. I agree as an abstract principle you are right. In a civilised society I am not sure that anyone has a right to say such awful things. In defending Vylan one is defending a call to murder.
I am also not sure that there is a moral equivalence between Vylan and Lucy Connolly.
Bob Vylan is an attention-whoring idiot. That’s already evident in his stage name. And the best way to deal with such people is to treat them as meaningless noise nuisance. Anything else grants them a significance they really don’t deserve.
Not sure if you are advocating anarchy or acting like a toddler having a tantrum. Not insulting your host is generally considered good form and being ungracious is not free speech- it’s just rude.
Note to a reader: Instead of writing about the topic, he has now switched to writing about me, presenting a nonsense-dichotomy of something that has no relation to my text whatsoever (“advocating anarchy”) plus an insult based on my conjectured motivation for writing the previous text he’s ignoring completely. That’s typical strategy for people who want to “win” an argument but are unable to do so by … well … argueing. They always end up bashing the man.
He also repeats the nonsense analogy I both refuted (nobody’s anybody’s guest here) and dismissed as besides the point because someone’s idea of “decency” simply doesn’t matter here. If someone believes that he gets to dictate what other people may or may not say because he’s the superior judge of decency and indecent things must not be said, this person is obviously opposed to freedom of anybody’s speech but his own.
Nice people. At first sight I could have sworn this was going to be about some trans thing.