“You know, you don’t want people to die in law enforcement situations or otherwise.
But it strikes me that we are undergoing an epidemic of political vigilantism right now. Why are people showing up in vehicles, in convoys, not just in Minneapolis, but all over the country, in an effort to obstruct lawful federal law enforcement activities? This is not an isolated incident. We have had hundreds of car rammings against ICE agents all over the country. According to DHS, this lady in this car today, along with other vehicles, had been tracking ICE agents around.
“Why are people believing that they can drive their car into a federal law enforcement situation, and that [this] is an appropriate thing to do?
“I understand they don’t like the fact that these agents are enforcing existing immigration law. But that’s not how we change laws in this country. If you don’t like a law, you talk to the politicians. You don’t drive your car into the middle of a building or a law enforcement situation that’s being occupied by the people who are simply there to enforce the law. If I don’t like how much the IRS is charging me in taxes, I don’t drive my car into the Treasury Department, try to run somebody over. I call my congressman.
“Political vigilantism is being encouraged by Democratic officials, like the lieutenant governor of Minnesota, Peggy Flanagan, who earlier this year told people to ‘put your bodies on the line,’ and Tim Walz calling these guys Gestapo all year. What do you think happens when you radicalize a base of people about this?”
—Scott Jennings, CNN
I am not here to talk in any great depth about the Minneapolis case, except to say that it is not a Rorschach (but it is a test). This is not an instance of motivated reasoning on two sides—“if you’re on the left, then you see it one way; if you’re on the right, then you see it another way.” There’s only one way to see the thing, and if you don’t see it that way, then you’re on the left. If you see the thing itself, then you’re everybody else. It will suffice to here quote from George Orwell’s Ninety Eighty-Four: “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
But it’s not just about the forensics of the thing. The woman who tried to run over the ICE agent in Minneapolis was an “ICE Watch Warrior.” These are professional agitators trained to target and disrupt ICE agents and operations. They use their cars and bodies to block ICE vehicles. Body cam from the struck officer dropped today tells us what the two women were there to do: interfere with law enforcement in their official duties. This was not merely a “poet dropping off her kid at school.” (If you have time, check out that school. It tells you a lot about the subcultural space the woman occupied.)
And the two people shot in Portland by ICE the next day? One of them, the driver, Luis David Nico Moncada, was an illegal alien from Venezuela affiliated with the Tren de Aragua transnational gang and tied to a recent shooting in Portland. An agent fired on the vehicle after the driver attempted to run over officers (search videos of what happens to officers who let people run them over). Both aliens were wounded, fled the scene, and then called the Portland police for help (criminal aliens know who their friends are). Progressives will tell this story without these details. The woke scolds leave out background and context to manufacture sympathy for criminals to weaponize emotionally dysregulated individuals against the Republic.
Rather, I’m here on a Friday afternoon to explore what underpins the madness. And it is madness. I begin by asking readers to imagine conservatives—MAGA types—out in the streets attacking law enforcement. Not an occasional incident here or there, but in the thousands, in cities across the United States, burning cars and structures and openly assaulting civilians and police. Imagine the MAGA types, joined by the mass media, calling a Democratic president a “Nazi” or a “fascist” at massive rallies and urging Americans to “rise up” against the government, invoking slogans like “no kings” (a clear reference to the French Revolution that brings to mind the swoosh of the guillotine).
Democrats obsess over the events of January 6, 2021, at the Capitol—what is, to avoid getting into the darkness behind it (not MAGA), charitably described as a police riot—as if it were the worst thing that ever happened to America. As if it were on par with Pearl Harbor. As if it were worse than 9/11—if they even remember that day and what was behind it. Yet, those same Democrats were fully supportive of Black Lives Matter. Remember that? Members of Congress wore African kente cloth and took a knee in solidarity with a movement built on lies about law enforcement. Joe Biden’s running mate, Kamala Harris, openly said the chaos should continue until the mob got its way. Leaders in Portland, Minneapolis, and other blue cities stood down their police, allowed rioters to cordon off neighborhoods, establishing so-called “autonomous zones” to claim independence from the US government. Imagine if conservatives had done anything like that. We all know what Democrats would call them. Even when conservatives don’t do that, they’re smeared as “insurrectionists.”
When Charlie Kirk was assassinated, there were no riots. People weren’t flooding the streets, burning police cars or police stations, looting stores, or storming restaurants, harassing patrons, and forcing them to repeat political slogans like “Charlie Kirk is a saint.” They met peacefully to remember his life and works, while progressives took to social media in droves to celebrate his death. Yet the coercion and violence that didn’t happen in the wake of Kirk’s assassination happened in spades during the Black Lives Matter riots. People were compelled to affirm the slogan “Black Lives Matter.” There was arson, assault, burning, looting, and desecration of monuments. Billions of dollars worth of chaos, dozens of deaths, and untold numbers of injuries. Progressives supported it all the way. Hell, they lead it.
There was an election in November 2024. Remember that? Trump ran on immigration enforcement. We call that democracy. It means that our side won. It’s our turn to govern. Yet, one of the two major political parties is either directly or effectively telling its followers to do whatever they can to disrupt the democracy that they tell us we are losing. Law enforcement is doing its job as prescribed, and progressives are calling on the rank-and-file to interfere with lawful operations.
If the Democratic Party were standing up for American values and national unity, if it cared about public safety, it would be telling its supporters something very different. It would be saying: There are law enforcement actions underway that the people voted for. You may not like it, but this is, after all, a democracy, which we have told you time and again is a precious thing. So stay away from those areas. The Party would urge people to stay away because police operations are dangerous, and people could get hurt. And because rule of law. It would tell its publics that interfering with police activity is not a legitimate protest—it’s criminal behavior. And, for heaven’s sake, don’t attack police officers! Instead, the Democratic Party is telling its followers the opposite, egging on violent street-level action.
Does this make any sense on its face? What if progressives didn’t think police should roll up gangbangers and threw their bodies between cops and gangs to stop them? Imagine mobs of leftists interfering with drug busts. Would Democrats encourage this? Are Democrats close to encouraging this? I can imagine it now. Can’t you? Democrats are encouraging the rank-and-file to interfere with immigration enforcement. Why not public safety generally? Why not overthrow the government? Isn’t that what they want?
Scott Jennings put the matter quite well in that CNN segment. Why are Democrats organizing their public to fight with law enforcement in the first place? Has the Party become a communist insurgency? One weirdly tied to corporate power? Sounds more like fascism to me. Maybe you didn’t see it before (maybe you didn’t believe me at first), but can you now see the role Antifa was destined to play? Just an idea, they said. This weekend, we will watch together while an idea burns down Minneapolis. Maybe Portland, too.
When I look at the protesters and rioters in the streets, I see a lot of emotionally dysregulated people. I also see what Eric Hoffer described as “true believers.” They are always there waiting for the signal to be on the move. Five years after the 2020 riots, they’ve been signalled once more—just in time for the election season. In both cases (and the several in between), the riots were ginned up by the Democratic Party, advanced in the name of progressivism, the corporate state heart of Party ideology. One would have to deny what is plainly before his face to not see that these actions are aimed at not merely delegitimizing the current President but the American Republic itself—just as he would have to in order to see what happened on January 7 in Minneapolis as anything other than a legitimate act of self-defense.
Imagine if conservatives drove cars into the middle of active law enforcement operations under conditions of escalating violence. These are extremely dangerous situations for citizens to insert themselves into. It seemed inconceivable only a decade ago that a responsible political party would encourage people to interfere with police actions—whether those actions involved immigration enforcement or pursuing corporate and white-collar crime to protect criminals. And yet, Democrats are either explicitly encouraging or tacitly supporting exactly that kind of interference when it comes to immigration enforcement. There is no difference in principle between law enforcement dealing with drug gangs and illegal aliens. What happened to the rule of law? For Democrats, it now depends.
You may disagree with current immigration policy (although it’s the same policy as Barack Obama’s—so what gives?), but that’s why we have elections. If you don’t like a policy, work harder, win elections, and put different people in office to change it. Are elections all we need? No, but for the love of Pete, save direct action for worthy causes. This is not the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, where black and white Americans came together to stand against clearly racist Jim Crow laws, largely through peaceful protest and limited civil disobedience. Even then, violence was widely condemned, with liberal Democrats—LBJ and Hubert Humphrey—leading the way. They opposed arson, attacks on police officers, and riots. They condemned lawlessness. What happened to those Democrats? Looking at the long history of the Party (Secession and the Civil War come to mind), those Democrats may very well have just been a fashion.
What is the great social injustice today that would justify this level of violence, violence far worse than what occurred during most of the civil rights era? Seriously, what comparable injustice exists now? The protection of illegal aliens and criminal aliens in the United States? Protecting them for whom? What about the citizens and legal residents of this country? Don’t they need protecting? What did Democrats do to people to make them prioritize illegal aliens over their fellow citizens? This is a pattern. Look at who the Democratic Party and progressives are siding with in these endless and branded protest actions. They side with Hamas against Israel. They side with a Venezuelan dictator who was rolled up on narcoterrorism charges. They demand the return of a man involved in human trafficking who was expelled from the country. These are just a few examples from a universe of madness. Is there any bad actor they don’t support?
When you step back and look at it honestly, you have to ask: of the two major political parties that once disagreed within constitutional limits about the country’s direction, which one is now willing to burn everything down for power? Which one routinely characterizes the president of the United States as a second Hitler and his supporters as brownshirts, yet supports movements whose extralegal actions are destructive to civil peace? Do Democrats not understand that we can see their hands up the backsides of the puppets who do their bidding? Do they also not understand that we can see who has their hand up the backsides of Democrats?
The question for you is simple: On which side do you stand? Do you stand with the globalists? Or with America?
freedom and reason 