Against the backdrop of the Democratic Party’s drift leftward, Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) appears mainstream. He has represented a shifting set of California districts for nearly 30 years. Not only is he a senior member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, but he was also previously chairman of the Asia subcommittee.

While Sherman votes reliably Democratic, he avoids the extremes of the growing progressive “squad.” Sherman, who is Jewish, does not openly dabble in either the antisemitism that some of his Democratic cohorts embrace nor does he rationalize Palestinian or Iranian-backed terrorism.

Alas, Sherman ruins his moderate brand in another, equally destructive way. He apparently has a blind spot for creepy cults so long as their supporters pony up the donations. Consider the Mujahedin-e-Khalq, perhaps the only group Iranians despise more than the Islamic Republic itself. Sherman is among the cult’s top supporters in Congress. The MEK’s leader, Maryam Rajavi, often thanks him in her speeches. Even though the MEK’s finances are notoriously murky and the MEK previously targeted and killed Americans, the two meet frequently.

The problem is not simply that Sherman endorses Rajavi but rather that, by doing so, he betrays the Iranian people who risk everything to win freedom. Rajavi is an unelected autocrat who brokers no dissent. Her rallies are foreign to those of any democracy, but instead are reminiscent of North Korea, right down to the paid courtiers.

Sherman is not alone in his embrace of Rajavi, but would any American representative go further and stray into useful idiocy for Kim Jong Un’s regime? Alas, the answer here is yes, Brad Sherman would. Fringe progressive groups push an unconditional peace treaty to formally end the Korean War. On its surface, that sounds reasonable. Who wouldn’t want peace? The devil is in the details, though. Any peace treaty would cancel the United Nations Security Council Resolutions that authorize the United States and U.N. troop presence in South Korea. The result? Empowering North Korea beyond Kim’s wildest dreams.

Enter Sherman, who introduced the “Peace on the Korean Peninsula Act” (H.R. 1369). To promote the bill, he cited the endorsement of “Women Cross DMZ,” a group that advocates for North Korea’s positions. He then had an official representative of Women Cross DMZ participate in a March 1 press event coinciding with his reintroduction of the bill. Sherman’s partnership with Women Cross DMZ comes despite Pyongyang directing Women Cross DMZ founder and leader Christine Ahn to focus her 2015 march on North Korea’s demands for an unconditional peace treaty.

While Sherman might be sincere in his advocacy, someone wiser would consider why the most hard-line pro-Pyongyang groups back the bill, while those concerned with South Korean freedom and democracy do not. Sherman fails to counter arguments at Korean American Public Action Committee events that the U.S. is to blame for the failure of 1990s-era agreements such as the Agreed Framework, which should also raise questions about his judgment.

Not since the height of the Cold War and the height of World War II have the forces of totalitarianism so threatened the liberal rules-based order. Certain principles should be bipartisan. At a minimum, those advocating for extreme fringe groups, anti-American terrorists, or apologists for the world’s most repressive states should not find fertile ground in the halls of Congress. Sherman should stand with the Iranian and Korean people. Flattery and donations should not sway any member away from a laser focus on freedom.