Even mobsters answer questions: Why Fauci's hearing showed blatant 'disrespect' for the American people



Anthony Fauci spent years commanding Americans to “trust the science.” But when faced with real questions about his approach to the pandemic, the longtime public health bureaucrat had almost nothing to say.

The health “expert” accused Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) of having an “obsession” with calling for his prosecution, before going on to invoke the Fifth Amendment a whopping 111 times.

“Any reasonable person who has followed his unhinged obsession with me would readily come to the same conclusion,” Fauci said.

But BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere believes Paul’s obsession is actually the right kind of obsession to have.


“That’s not an obsession that’s unhealthy,” Stu says. “Being obsessed with fitness is not unhealthy. Being obsessed with eating right is not unhealthy. Being obsessed with making sure we hold people accountable for horrible things that occurred to the people of this country is not an unhealthy obsession.”

Stu also calls Fauci’s refusal to answer questions “unbelievable” and disrespectful.

“You have no respect for the legislative branch of government. The whole point — your entire career — is a long series of decisions made as essentially a technocrat without responsibility to the legislative branch,” he says.

Even when Fauci was asked simply whether or not there was a folder in front of him, he pleaded the Fifth.

“Even in mob hearings, they’ll answer some stuff,” co-host Dave Landau adds. “Yeah, he’s so guilty he’s not going to answer anything,”

Senator Josh Hawley also had a chance to go after Fauci — and he did not waste it.

“Let’s just get one thing straight. You don’t have any rights under the Fifth Amendment because you’ve been pardoned, as you very well know, as the Supreme Court has been clear for a century and more,” Hawley said, as Fauci looked on in silence.

Hawley pointed out that Fauci’s lawyers were sitting behind him “shifting nervously in their chairs” after he brought up his pardon.

“This isn’t about the Constitution. This isn’t about the law. This is about contempt. Contempt for this body and contempt for the American people. But I think I know why you’re doing it,” he said.

“It’s because you don’t want to answer questions. It’s because you did all kinds of terrible things. It’s because during the pandemic, you got rich, didn’t you? You got rich while people were dying — hundreds of thousands of Americans, over a million in the end. And you were getting rich,” he continued.

“And not only were you doing that,” he added, “you were using federal employees with taxpayer money to apply for and solicit cash prizes for you personally. Cash prizes totaling over a million dollars. You did all of that during the pandemic, didn’t you?”

Fauci then, unsurprisingly, invoked the Fifth Amendment again.

“I mean, look,” Stu says, “if he answers them, he’s going to lie anyway. But he knows that he’s going to lie. He’s not going to tell the truth. And if he does that, then he opens himself up for even more.”

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave's lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Leaked Fauci diary reignites COVID outrage: ‘Everything he’s done to a beagle should be done to him’



For years, critics of Anthony Fauci argued that the nation’s top public health official knew more about COVID-19’s origins than he was willing to admit — and now the release of his diary proves they were right.

And Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has been all over it.

“Senator Rand Paul has also been very into this. In fact, he took a beating multiple times in hearings where, you know, look, he was just quite clearly right when he was describing things like gain-of-function research,” BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere comments.

And both Stu and co-host Dave Landau support Paul in his fight to bring down the man who led Americans astray, as they believe what he did to the country was unforgivable.

“Fauci made it so kids couldn’t socialize for two years, which means he figured out a whole new way to cause autism without even using a vaccine, and then he was forcing vaccines,” Dave says.


“If you were in the Northeast, I mean, your kids didn’t go to school for up to a year and a half,” Stu agrees.

Dave admits that he has “hate for this guy for what he did to this country” that can’t be faked.

“Like, I f**king hate this guy. I’m sorry, I really do. I really think everything he’s done to a beagle should be done to him and on public TV,” he says, referencing the fatal experiments Fauci carried out on Beagles.

“I hate him,” he adds.

And Paul clearly does too.

In a thread on X, he wrote: “My investigation uncovered that Anthony Fauci kept a diary. What he wrote privately and what he told the country are two different stories.”

On January 26, 2020, Fauci wrote: “Now we know that the market was not the source. It was the amplifier.”

“He believes the wet market is not the source of this and then goes on for as long as I can remember saying up until now that there was natural origin and that’s where it came from,” Stu explains.

“I believe it was called the Wuhan COVID-19 lab,” Dave adds.

“They’re like, ‘No, somebody ate a bat sandwich four doors down.’ And you’re like, ‘Right, but where was it near?’ And they’re like, ‘Well, it’s certainly not near the Fauci-made-this-disease lab,’” he continues.

In another diary entry from February 1, 2020, Fauci admitted that only 2 out of 12 scientists on a call believed the virus was natural.

“The rest felt that deliberate insertion was possible,” he wrote.

“The lab leak theory. That’s what it is,” Stu says.

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave's lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Have pop music lyrics made America meaner?



Ask almost anyone why America seems angrier than it did a generation ago, and you'll hear the usual suspects: social media, partisan politics, cable news. But what if another culprit has been hiding in plain sight all along — inside the songs we play every day?

A study recently published in Scientific Reports suggests our playlists may tell us more about the country's moral trajectory than we realize. Researchers analyzed nearly 400,000 songs spanning six decades, tracking how often lyrics invoked virtues such as care, loyalty, and compassion versus themes of cheating, revenge, vice, and harm.

Nobody racks up a billion Spotify streams with a breakup anthem called 'I Respect Your Boundaries and Wish You Well.'

The results were difficult to ignore.

Monetize the misery

Lyrical themes centered on betrayal, cruelty, and moral transgression have surged, while old-fashioned virtues like loyalty, empathy, and basic decency have steadily faded. Grandma's favorite crooner asked for your hand in marriage. Today's streaming superstar wants to key your car, burn down your house, and monetize the misery.

The statistics read like a rap sheet for the Billboard charts. References to cheating and betrayal rose by more than 70%. Themes of degradation climbed by over 60%. Meanwhile, expressions of genuine care steadily declined. The charts increasingly reward revenge, resentment, and contempt while rewarding compassion far less than they once did. We have moved a long way from "We Can Work It Out" to "I hope you choke on your lies."

Naturally, the researchers include the obligatory academic disclaimer: Correlation does not equal causation. Fair enough.

The real question isn't whether every listener imitates every lyric. It's whether hundreds of millions of people, absorbing the same emotional scripts year after year, gradually reshape the emotional climate of a culture.

RELATED: Pop star Olivia Rodrigo hosts all-female music fest to fund Planned Parenthood; 'I am so ecstatic'

Michael Le Brecht II/Disney/Getty Images

Despair in D

Music has never been mere background noise. It reinforces emotional habits. Songs teach us which reactions deserve applause, which resentments should be nurtured, and which kinds of people become heroes or villains. They don't dictate behavior, but they help define what feels normal.

For anyone who still insists lyrics are just harmless poetry, consider the grunge explosion of the early 1990s. That era produced extraordinary music, but it also made alienation, despair, and emotional detachment strangely glamorous. Grunge didn't invent teenage angst, but it undeniably gave it a soundtrack and, for many young listeners, an identity.

If a generation could absorb that emotional atmosphere through music, it isn't unreasonable to wonder what six uninterrupted decades of increasingly cynical and vengeful lyrics might accomplish.

Betrayal with a beat

Of course, the counter-argument deserves serious consideration. Perhaps musicians are simply cultural weather vanes rather than cultural architects. When public trust collapses, institutions weaken, and family life frays, songwriters naturally gravitate toward darker material. Popular music may simply be documenting a society already in decline. The songs are less the explosion than the soundtrack playing while the building burns.

Even if that's true, it still leaves us with an uncomfortable feedback loop. Society grows harsher. Music reflects that harshness. The music then normalizes it for the next generation, making cruelty ordinary and contempt emotionally familiar.

We also can't ignore the incentives of the modern attention economy. One doesn't have to become a card-carrying Marxist to recognize that outrage is profitable. Streaming platforms, much like social media, reward intensity over restraint. Nobody racks up a billion Spotify streams with a breakup anthem called "I Respect Your Boundaries and Wish You Well." Audiences crave betrayal, public humiliation, vengeance, and emotional spectacle because those emotions command attention.

Did pop music single-handedly make America meaner? Probably not.

But for more than half a century, our most popular songs have steadily sung less about forgiveness, loyalty, sacrifice, and reconciliation and more about revenge, narcissism, betrayal, and score-settling.

Culture is an ongoing conversation. If, decade after decade, the soundtrack of everyday life increasingly celebrates contempt over compassion, we shouldn't be surprised when public life begins to sound the same way.

ROAD RULES REFRESH: Forgot how to drive? Let Uncle Josh bring you up to speed.



Over the past 15 years, America has abandoned just about every social rule, every kind of etiquette, and every normative behavior that used to make public interaction bearable. I’ve decided it’s time to open Uncle Josh’s Finishing School. Unlike the establishments of yore that taught society girls the finer and fussier points of manners, my school will concentrate on remedial education.

Today, we will be reviewing the rules of the road. Matriculants, open your desks and take out your copy of the Uniform Vehicle Code and your state Department of Motor Vehicles’ manual for new drivers. We will be referring to these texts.

I call this a 'box-in,' and drivers do it every time I’m on I-89. It’s not just annoying and inconsiderate to camp in the passing lane, it’s illegal in half the country.

Learn to 'Code'

The Uniform Vehicle Code is a model law. It’s not an actual state or federal law. It’s a universal template on which every state bases its rules of the road.

Your state has a driver’s handbook through its Department of Motor Vehicles. These are nearly identical from state to state. The only exceptions will be local idiosyncrasies, such as New York City’s ban on turning right on red.

For this article, we’ll use the Vermont manual. Your state’s manual will have nearly identical laws and rules.

This lesson is for all of you. Whether you’re my Boomer grandmother, my Gen X peer, a Millennial, or Gen Z, many of you have forgotten the basic rules of the road.

Road rules are not just about being nice. They’re the difference between life and death. While it’s true that millions of foreigners and illegal aliens have flooded our roads with dangerous, unskilled driving, we Americans are barely better.

Automotive anarchy

Here’s how it looks from a big picture perspective. Over the past 10 years, but much more rapidly since “COVID,” I’ve noticed that American drivers are acting as though all the road rules they knew their whole life just disappeared.

All of a sudden, no one knows who has the right-of-way at a four-way stop with a sign. All of a sudden, no one understands that a red light means “stop” — they sail through a solid red light not looking in either direction. All of a sudden, no one remembers that the left lane on an interstate is not a travel lane but a lane for passing.

I don’t think Americans have actually forgotten these things. Instead, I suspect our culture’s lurch toward selfish narcissism, accelerated by the psychosis of our response to “COVID,” has led to people just not caring about anyone but themselves.

Trouble is, that selfish attitude won’t protect the selfish driver. It’s not just the other guy in the other car who could get hurt — the selfish driver could die too.

Let’s review the most neglected rules of the road.

RELATED: Crash course: How cars work

Matt Himes

Right-of-way at 4-way stops

Imagine an intersection with cars at all four corners. They’re all stopped at a stop sign. Who goes first? Let me tell you what this is like in Vermont. This is a blue/progressive state, and that mindset infects everything, including how people walk in stores or drive on streets. It’s a baffling mixture of people trying to be “nice” to other drivers in a way that seems more about showing off “being nice” than it is about making driving safer and more predictable.

At that four-way stop in Vermont, you will see all four cars inching/stopping/inching for up to 10 seconds. Then, someone at one of the four forks will start waving another driver through. That’s the “being nice” part. But it’s a trap. No one else at the intersection remembers that right-of-way passes to the right, so you can’t predict if you’ll get T-boned.

This isn’t “nice.” It’s dangerous. The reason for having road laws is to give universal predictability. Ignoring road laws means that no driver can predict what another driver will do. This is begging for a wreck.

Here’s how you know who goes first. This is taken from the Vermont DMV manual. It is the same right-of-way in every state in America:

  1. The first driver to arrive at the four-way stop has the right-of-way. If there is confusion, then:
  2. The driver on the right has the right-of-way when there are two drivers at the intersection.
  3. If there are more than two drivers, you will have to make eye contact with someone and “negotiate” who is the first to go.
  4. After the first person goes, the right-of-way goes clockwise, to the right.

Right-of-way at T-intersections

  1. The driver on the “through road,” the road that does not terminate at a stop, has the right-of-way.
  2. That means if you’re on a road that ends at a T, the traffic on the other road, the “through” road, has the right-of-way. You must stop, even if there is no stop sign.

Right-of-way at unmarked intersections

When two roads merge, either with a T, or by curving together and becoming one road, the “through” traffic on the main road has the right-of-way. If you are on the access road approaching the main road, you do not have the right-of-way. You must yield to traffic on the through road.

Left-lane 'camping' on the interstate

This is a particular annoyance to me as a Vermont driver. We have only one major interstate, Eisenhower Interstate, I-89. This means I-89 gets, for us, “a lot” of traffic. It’s the only efficient way to get through much of the state. I have to drive 40 miles to get to a home improvement store, for example, and I must take I-89 if I don’t want to have to go 30 miles an hour through villages if I take Route 2.

But I-89 only has two lanes in each direction. That means that if driver Gloria is “camping” in the left/passing lane, driver Gloria has arrogated the entire interstate to herself. She forces every driver behind her to be unable to pass her as she does five miles below the speed limit, matching her speed to the truck in the right-hand travel lane.

I call this a “box-in,” and drivers do it every time I’m on I-89. It’s not just annoying and inconsiderate to camp in the passing lane, it’s illegal in half the country.

That's right. It is illegal to use the left lane as a travel lane in at least half of U.S. states. Do you know the law in your state?

Even if it’s legal in your state to use the left lane as a travel lane, it’s a poor choice. It’s rude and inconsiderate to other drivers. Put yourself in their shoes. Remember how it’s frustrating to you to be prevented from passing because driver Gloria feels like camping in front of you and a line of cars. Don’t do that to other drivers.

Inconsiderate behavior like this is a major cause of the breakdown in civility, and it also provokes dangerous road-rage incidents.

A plea to the police

The good will of people willing to be responsible for themselves only goes so far. We need active law enforcement too.

To my eye as a driver, local and state police are doing a poor job. Despite the fact that cellphone use (not just calls, but texting and reading on the phone) has skyrocketed, most police I notice spend most or all of their traffic enforcement time doing the old-school “pull over and hide on the highway and nab speeders.”

I don’t see any evidence that police are taking the other, growing dangers more seriously. Have you seen cops enforcing traffic infractions like left-lane camping, stealing right-of-way at intersections, or pulling over Jayden who’s piloting a Nissan Armada while looking down at his iPhone?

Sure, it’s harder to detect and enforce against distracted driving than it is to nab someone on the radar. But there has to be a way to do it better.

When Judges Cave To ‘Preferred Pronouns’ They Surrender Ultimate Truth

Courts exist to say what the law is. That duty begins with saying what is true.

The truth about Flock cameras: ‘We are the sheep, and they are controlling us’



What started as a plan to track license plates has evolved into something far more expansive, according to automotive expert Lauren Fix. And on “Stu and Dave Do America,” she warns that the rapid expansion of surveillance technology is only getting worse.

“So, you’ve heard about the Flock cameras. Why do they call them ‘Flock’? That’s my first question. Are we the flock?” Fix asks, before answering, “Oh, yes we are. We are the sheep, and they are controlling us.”

“The truth is, they’re supposed to track your license plates, but they don’t. They track the car, the picture of your car, the bumper sticker on your car, ... wherever you’ve been. Do you have a cargo container on your roof? Do you have a bike rack? Do you have a dent? Do you have a scratch? All of that is being tracked,” she continues.


“And it’s not just at one intersection. It’s at every intersection,” she adds.

And Americans aren’t happy with the heightened surveillance.

“One guy got arrested for sitting in a lounge chair. Like, he brought a folding chair out and on a pole like you would use in a pool, he put a piece of cardboard in front of the camera, and he got arrested for obstructing justice,” Fix explains.

“So, again, it was a misdemeanor, but it’s still all B.S.,” she says. “So, the bottom line is, why do you need to have these cameras on the roads?”

But they’re not just on the roads.

“They’re in parks. They’re in schools. They’re at Home Depot. They’re on every single FedEx truck. And don’t worry, they just put it on 400,000 school buses that are supposed to stop when people bypass the bus, where kids are loading and offloading,” Fix explains.

“They’re supposed to take a picture of that person, and you get a ticket,” she continues, noting that the families bringing their children out to the bus are then being photographed too.

“But it gets worse. So many people have complained about these Flock cameras that many cities, including Los Angeles, said, ‘You know what?’ The city of Los Angeles said, ‘We’re going to cancel our contract. Instead, we’re going to go with another company called Axon,’” she says.

This company, Fix warns, makes Flock cameras “look like child’s play.”

“They’ve moved it to the whole next level. They have gone even farther, and they’re making contracts with people that have ended their Flock camera systems,” she explains.

“They will be putting their cameras on every single light post. No permits, no requirements, just putting them on every single light post. That’s about 450 million around the world. And that means every light post on every street will have a camera,” she continues.

Fix claims there’s also a link between the new “kill switch” in cars and this new surveillance system.

“These dots are connected, and I will tell you, you’re not going to be happy,” she adds.

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave's lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

We Can’t Have Politicians Who Lie About Their Oath To Defend The Constitution

You can’t establish a new constitutional order without first dismantling the one already in place.

Panic over data centers points to a larger problem



I live in Loudoun County, Virginia, about a mile from the largest concentration of data centers on earth, which has given the online discourse around them a vaguely odd character.

At worst, they are large concrete squares that are indistinguishable from any other industrial park, except that they produce less noise or pollution. My utility bill is ordinary, if slightly below the national average, and my roads are as nice as any in the country. But to hear online activists talk, my community should be on the verge of running out of water.

We have been taught to be more afraid of the side effects than excited about the potential.

Loudoun County hosts roughly 200 operating data centers; Northern Virginia’s cluster draws some 4,140 megawatts, more than double Beijing’s, the world’s second-largest market.

Since the data centers began being built in the late 1990s, Loudoun County has been able to spend lavishly on infrastructure and public schools, all while cutting its real property tax rate. In fact, the county calculates that every dollar of services it provides the industry returns some $26 in taxes.

When I noticed the glaring difference between this reality and the online discourse, I realized that this is a recurring pattern I have seen my entire life.

When I was growing up in the early 2000s, there was a set of beliefs in American society that were viewed as nonpolitical and weren’t debated by either side. They acted as an ideological background radiation of sorts. I like to call this the “Boomer Truth Regime,” after both the Baby Boomer generation and the boom time after World War II.

You can take the American 20th century as one huge emotional and moral arc. Starting in 1900 and continuing for the next 45 years, our country had its optimism for the future hammered out of it. It was in this era that Jim Crow intensified, the Depression battered the country, and we fought two world wars.

But beginning in the late 1940s, American society, and to a lesser extent the whole world, began a process of upward movement — and as a result acquired a feeling of almost inevitable, rapid, transformative salvation. Start with almost any evil, real or perceived, of that century — sexism, colonialism, segregation — and trace it forward, and you will find a satisfying narrative conclusion by 1999.

RELATED: The question of the AI age: How much humanism is too much?

Moor Studio/Getty Images

In “Zero to One,” Peter Thiel and Blake Masters called the resulting mood “indefinite optimism”: the belief that things simply get better without anyone having to decide how. And so we bundled all the changes of that era together and sanctified the whole package.

For decades, it has been taken for granted that basically all societal and cultural shifts in the second half of the 20th century were good — and that they existed as a single, inseparable package.

Among the sanctified conclusions was not only indefinite optimism for the future but also a deep fear of the dangers of new technology. In short, the Boomer Truth Regime permanently fused the word “machine” with the word “gun,” as they were in the world wars. This was largely a traumatic response to the misuses and abuses of the cornucopia of technology by tyrants during that era.

In the early 20th century, the world had at its fingertips an inventory of wonders such as nitrogen fixation, airplanes, automobiles, submarines, rockets — and every one of them was first used at scale for murder. So when our society looks at a new power, what we see is the face of the murderer.

We see Hiroshima, or the tank, or the B-2 bomber. It is this same reflex that has killed the construction of new nuclear or hydroelectric power, because we have been taught to be more afraid of the side effects than excited about the potential.

The Boomer Truth Regime decided that anything capable of doing huge things is, on its face, terrifying and must be vigorously opposed.

You can see the degree to which this belief is highly influential in America and other Western countries in the polling data around AI.

In Ipsos’ 2026 global survey, 83% of Chinese respondents and 79% of Indian respondents say AI products make them excited; in the United States, the figure is only 33%, compared with 29% in Britain. Or take, for example, that when asked whether AI’s benefits outweigh its drawbacks, 85% of Chinese respondents and 80% of Indians say yes, compared to only 38% of Americans.

RELATED: The terrifying scale of the data center land-grab

Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg/Getty Images

The Pew Research Center also finds that about half of Americans are more concerned than excited about AI, and only one in 10 is the reverse.

It is possible that the data centers in Loudoun County will begin to drive up costs. Virginia’s own legislative auditors project that data-center growth could add $14 to $37 a month to a typical residential bill by 2040 — but the size of the effect is nowhere near the emotional reaction you see in American society right now.

The same report found that data centers currently pay their full cost of service and have no history of cost-shifting to households.

For decades, doubting any piece of the Boomer Truth Regime package was the equivalent of a kid complaining about his bedtime. Dissidents could say whatever they wanted, in whatever register they wanted, precisely because there was no chance the thing they were calling for would ever be implemented.

Every critique of the Boomer Truth Regime was essentially powerless. But that era will soon end, as the generation raised in the 21st century inevitably takes over. It isn’t that younger generations stopped believing in pieces of the package, but that the idea of viewing it as a sanctified whole is dissolving.

And when the sanctity eventually falls away, everything will be re-examined at once — not just the parts you dislike. The whole package, from nuclear power to civil rights law, will be on the table in our lifetime. It is up to us to defend the parts we value and reject the parts we don’t.

One part I reject is the idea that we can no longer, and should no longer, do incredible things. AI is one such thing. It of course has dangers, but it also has almost incalculable potential — and I know which side I’m betting on.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally at the American Mind.

Marvel’s desperation era? ‘Avengers: Doomsday’ is ‘nonsensical’ and ‘looks really bad’



The first trailer for "Avengers: Doomsday" has arrived, and it’s raising some serious questions about the future of superhero movies — especially whether or not anyone still cares about them.

And BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere admits that he has never cared less.

“It seems like they took all previous superhero movies and put them in a blender. And then just released whatever came out of that blender. A green sort of brownish mess,” he tells co-host Dave Landau on “Stu and Dave Do America.”

“The actual plot of it is nonsensical,” Dave agrees, adding that it “looks really bad.”


“I am not a fan of superhero movies generally. I don’t like the Marvel universe. I don’t get into this, so I’m not the right person to ask necessarily. To me, a lot of them seem kind of nonsensical,” Stu says.

The film stars Robert Downey Jr. as Dr. Doom, which, Stu points out, seems a little desperate.

“It seems like a desperation move, like when they go on vacation in a dying sitcom, you know, and then they add a brother that you didn’t know existed and you’re just like they’re just reaching for whatever at this point,” Stu says.

“I feel like it hurts the Robert Downey Jr. trajectory, because you go from heroin addict who had all kinds of problems, you know, fell asleep in his neighbor’s race-car bed,” Dave says. “And then he came back and became Iron Man and a superhero ... and he’s lived this kind of extraordinary comeback. Why be the villain?”

“I am a fan of his work, but I think it hurts the actual RDJ,” he adds.

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave's lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

‘Run him for Congress’: Anti-ICE arsonist checks every Democrat activist box



Another leftist attack outside a federal building in Lower Manhattan has struck New York City, with 43-year-old Andrew Arrabaca landing himself in handcuffs as the alleged perpetrator.

The former U.S Army soldier allegedly doused the stairwell with gasoline, ignited it with a firework, and sent flames and smoke up the front of the building before shooting an airsoft gun.

“In fairness, he’s lighting gas on fire on cement,” BlazeTV host Dave Landau says on “Stu and Dave Do America." “That’s just going to go out, right?”

“But there was also fireworks and some other explosives. People were hurt, right?” co-host Stu Burguiere chimes in. “This is not like a nothing scenario.”

Stu also points out that this is becoming increasingly common on the left.


“This is not Osama bin Laden, right? This is not ... like this person necessarily tried to kill a bunch of people, but it is pretty indicative of what goes on over and over again with these leftists. They’re doing this stuff all the time,” he says.

“This is inherent on the left. This is part of the movement. ... It’s an extreme part of the movement, but it is central to what they’re doing and also something that often mainstream normal leftists, Democrats just overlook because it doesn’t count,” he continues. “They just delete all the left-wing violence and only look at right-wing violence.”

And in a press conference following the attack, FBI assistant director in charge James Barnacle let the public know that officials are taking the situation "very seriously."

“On his cart — he had a cart — he had anti-ICE literature on it. When he was being arrested, he yelled derogatory terms to ICE, used bad words. Obviously, he is an anti-American, anti-government extremist,” FBI Assistant Director in Charge James Barnacle said in a press conference after the attack.

“We know that from what he said. We know that from what he has said post-arrest, and we know that from his actions that he tried to take today,” Barnacle added.

“I mean,” Stu comments, “run him for Congress if that’s his profile.”

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave's lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.