Top Democrats were sent letter with 'suspicious substance' — at least a dozen others targeted, feds say



Numerous politicians reported receiving letters with a suspicious substance on Friday, including Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service are investigating numerous letters that were sent to state election officials and congressional offices, according to a spokesperson for the USPIS.

'Political violence has no place in our democracy, and we hope those who perpetrated this crime are brought to justice.'

"Like has happened across the country, my Minnesota office was sent a letter containing a suspicious substance, and we were promptly notified by the Capitol Police and postal inspectors," Klobuchar wrote in a statement on social media. "Thanks to the postal workers and investigators who identified and intercepted it, no one in our office was in immediate danger."

A similar letter was sent to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer but was intercepted by law enforcement officials.

Republican Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota said his Sioux Falls office also received the suspicious letter.

"Our Sioux Falls office will be closed for the remainder of the day as SFPD continues to investigate and will reopen for normal hours on Monday morning," he wrote. "This situation is deeply concerning and follows a trend of intimidating tactics that impact our team members. This has no place in our nation. America is better than this."

He posted an image showing that the return address read "DSA," which could stand for the Democratic Socialists of America.

Democratic Rep. Hillary Scholten of Michigan said her letter also read "DSA" and contained an "unidentified white power."

"Today I learned that my office was the intended recipient of a suspicious letter containing an unidentified substance in what appears to be a deliberate attempt to cause harm to me and my staff," wrote Rep. Analilia Mejia, a Democrat from New Jersey.

Others who reported receiving the threatening letters include Democratic Rep. Sarah Elfreth of Maryland, Democratic Rep. Kelly Morrison of Minnesota, Democratic Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester of Delaware, Democratic Rep. Ritchie Torres of New York, and Florida Democratic Reps. Maxwell Frost and Darren Soto.

"Political violence has no place in our democracy, and we hope those who perpetrated this crime are brought to justice," Soto said on social media.

RELATED: Hundreds of threatening letters containing white powder sent to GOP lawmakers in states that passed laws unfavorable to LGBT activists

"We are committed to protecting our nation's election officials from threatening and dangerous mail. Any threat or attack on an election official is unacceptable," said USPIS deputy chief inspector Brendan Donahue.

"Our partners, including the FBI and we at the Postal Inspection Service, will bring all of our resources to bear on these investigations," he added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

NY Democratic Socialists Boss Railed Against Landlords. His Rich Parents Rented Out Their Florida Mansion for $18,000 a Month, Bought Him a $1 Million NYC Home.

Gustavo L. Gordillo, the embattled co-chair of New York City's chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, has made a name for himself railing against property ownership, landlords, and real estate investors who enjoy robust rates of return.

The post NY Democratic Socialists Boss Railed Against Landlords. His Rich Parents Rented Out Their Florida Mansion for $18,000 a Month, Bought Him a $1 Million NYC Home. appeared first on .

The DSA's plan for immigration is the worst one yet



President Donald Trump recently renewed his criticism of the left’s immigration agenda, taking aim at mass amnesty. The Democratic Socialists of America are making the point for him, calling to “grant amnesty for all immigrants regardless of status.”

The White House Council of Economic Advisers released a new report last week estimating that the DSA’s immigration policies could cost Americans a whopping $440 billion to $613 billion over 10 years. And that’s not the worst of it.

'The rule of law cannot co-exist with mass amnesty.'

According to the CEA, allowing mass amnesty could create $36 billion to $47 billion in estimated annual costs for just SNAP, Medicaid, and HUD housing vouchers.

The report argues that these costs would come from “turning the existing population of illegal aliens into legal residents eligible for federal social safety net programs.”

While DSA candidates like Melat Kiros believe “millions of undocumented immigrants in the United States right now should have an immediate pathway to citizenship,” American taxpayers should be asking the more important question: If mass amnesty could leave taxpayers with billions in new costs every year, what exactly does it solve?

It certainly does not solve the underlying problem. It changes the legal status of the people already here while leaving the incentives that attract more illegal immigration intact. We have been down this road before. Not to ruin the ending, but we somehow keep finding ourselves right back to where we started.

In 1986, President Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act. The law created legalization programs for millions of illegal aliens while also establishing employer sanctions intended to discourage the hiring of unauthorized workers. About 2.7 million people ultimately received legal status under the law.

However, the bargain did not work. Due to IRCA’s eligibility cutoff, roughly 2 million were excluded from legalization, while an estimated 500,000 were eligible but never received legal status. According to the Migration Policy Institute, those who remained in unlawful status “became the nucleus of today’s large unauthorized population.”

The enforcement side also fell short. Weaknesses in employment verification and document fraud undermined employer sanctions. The problems IRCA was meant to address ultimately grew. The unauthorized population increased from an estimated 3.5 million in 1990 to 12.2 million by 2007.

Legalization changed the status of millions of people, but it did not prevent the country from having to deal with an even larger unauthorized population later. A growing population of illegal aliens brings larger costs for schools, health care, housing, and other public services.

RELATED: Republicans cannot serve two masters on immigration

Kent NISHIMURA/AFP/Getty Images

The DSA platform does not just call for mass amnesty; members also want an end to ICE detention and deportations.

CEA estimates the “net cost to taxpayers of ending deportations and ICE detentions to be between $79 and $139 billion over 10 years.” The report argues that doing so would eliminate fiscal savings associated with current immigration enforcement.

Former Border Patrol agent and Texas Public Policy Foundation senior fellow Ammon Blair puts it plainly: “The rule of law cannot co-exist with mass amnesty.”

If amnesty paired with enforcement did not keep our country from ending up back here, why should taxpayers expect amnesty with less enforcement to work any better?

Mass amnesty is not an immigration solution. And it cannot prevent the next wave of illegal immigration.

American immigration policy sends a message around the world. If the United States repeatedly demonstrates that entering or remaining in the country illegally may eventually end in legal status, policymakers have to consider the incentive that amnesty creates for the next person deciding whether our immigration laws are worth obeying.

That is the problem with DSA’s socialist immigration promises. The slogans are simple, yet the consequences are anything but. Americans would be left paying billions in new costs while the DSA simultaneously calls for less immigration enforcement.

We cannot mistake an old idea for a new solution. History has shown us that mass amnesty is not the answer. Socialism has never been short on promises, but it is taxpayers who are always expected to foot the bill.

Democrats’ Open Border Policies Will Import A Revolution

The alien population is the means via which Democratic socialism, an entirely alien form of government, will be ushered into this country.

The socialists want a new Constitution. Believe them.



As the midterm elections approach, democratic socialism is attracting renewed attention as an alternative to America’s constitutional order. Recently elected officials in Seattle, Colorado, and New York City, along with dozens of others, identify as democratic socialists. Membership in the Democratic Socialists of America has surged, and a recent CNN poll found that a third of Democrats now identify with the movement’s political program.

The goals of the DSA and the promises made in campaign rallies should be understood by all Americans for exactly its aim: a complete overhaul of the U.S. Constitution and the governing laws that have ensured our freedoms for the last 250 years.

A ‘new society’ that eradicates the right to religious liberty is a familiar step down an extremely dark path.

This is not an esoteric challenge to our economic system. It’s a threat to our entire republic.

At the core of all socialist movements, historically and contemporarily, is the supremacy of the collective over the individual, where the state assumes the role of controlling guardian to determine what is “best for society,” squelching individual liberties, all in submission to this ideological monopoly.

As such, the one thing totalitarian governments will never allow is an appeal to a higher authority than the government. There can be no authority higher than the state. That is why socialist-controlled governments have always viewed religious liberty as a threat and target it as one of the first freedoms to dismantle.

That’s why Virginia Democrat Senator Tim Kaine’s remarks during a 2025 hearing deserve attention. The former Democratic Party vice presidential nominee said he found "extremely troubling" "the notion that rights don't come from laws and don't come from the government, but come from the Creator."

The American founding says otherwise.

The Declaration of Independence states that “all men are created equal” and “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,” among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

That formulation is not ornamental. It establishes a limit on government.

If government grants your rights, government can redefine them or take them away. If rights exist before government, then government is bound to respect them.

That’s why religious liberty is the first right protected in the Bill of Rights. Without the right of conscience, all other liberty disappears.

Members of the DSA counter this assessment by pointing to its Religion and Socialism Working Group outreach to the faith communities. In their own words, “DSA’s Religion and Socialism group is open to DSA members of all faiths whose socialism is in some way inspired by their spiritual identity.” In other words, religion is welcomed and approved only if it agrees with the DSA’s socialist ideology, which in essence, then, is a state-endorsed church. All opposing religious viewpoints need not apply.

RELATED: ‘Reign of terror’: One-third of Democrats give thumbs-up to Trump assassination

Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

In the old Soviet Union, state regulations defined how religious organizations could function, what they could say, and when they could meet. Eventually, church doors were closed, sectarian schools were closed, and religious leaders were incarcerated, all because socialist regimes cannot allow organizations or the populace to appeal to a higher authority than the government.

The commonly repeated pattern with all socialist movements begins with ideological propaganda denouncing all viewpoints that don’t fall in lockstep with its platform. In the case of the DSA, that means throwing out the old and fundamentally changing the very foundations of our government, including religious liberty.

But that’s just the start. In the DSA’s program for the current year, the objective is quite clear: “Our goal is to put workers in charge of the government through a new democratic constitution …” and “Replace the President and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress.”

This “new society” would eliminate the three co-equal branches of government that provide essential checks and balances. Gone are the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights that protect the rights of all Americans.

Religious liberty is foundational to a country that values individual freedoms. It defines the relationship between citizens and government by limiting the government’s power and protects freedom of conscience. It is inseparably linked to broad civil liberties including free speech, parental rights, academic freedom, and freedom of assembly.

None of these rights can exist without the foundation of the right of conscience: religious liberty. A “new society” that eradicates this most important right is a familiar step down an extremely dark path. What we need instead is a recommitment to a society that understands and cherishes the liberties protected in our founding documents that have defined us as the “land of the free.”

How Socialist Democrats Use The Soros Strategy To Fill Local Courts With Woke Judges

We are witnessing in real time a judicial revolution that needs to be countered.

Democrats Aim To Win Rural Voters By Lying About ‘Moderation’

Democrats in general, and the Democratic Socialists of America in particular, are paying a lot more attention to rural America.

New York socialist Democrat gets TORCHED online for post about Mexican Independence Day



A self-described socialist Democrat has gone viral online after saying she would bring the Mexican fight for independence to the U.S. Congress if elected.

Union organizer and New York Assemblywoman Claire Valdez is running for New York's 7th District but posted a message of defiance against "empire" and corporations.

'Viva guacamole, or whatever it is you traitors scream.'

"215 years ago, Mexicans fought an empire that demanded our land and our labor. And we won," she wrote on social media Wednesday.

"I'll carry that fight with me to Congress as New York's first Mexican American representative," Valdez added. "And I'm strengthened not just by Mexico's history but its present. Last month I met comrades in Morena who are standing up to the empires and corporations that have always [been] taken from us — and building a government for the working class."

The sneering nature of her sloganeering was not appreciated by many online.

"American leftists elect people who are open about foreign allegiances and their agenda to serve foreign state interests," replied journalist Andy Ngo.

"Are you campaigning for Mexico or America?" responded another detractor. "I mean ... if you’re that proud of Mexico and its fight, I sincerely think you should head back over there and roll up your sleeves. Viva guacamole, or whatever it is you traitors scream."

"I’m very proud of my Mexican heritage, and I’ll be the first to say this is unacceptable," said another user. "If your political identity centers around advocating on behalf of Mexico (or any other foreign nation) & its people then you have no business serving as an elected or appointed official in American politics."

"Mexico is a colonialist state that crushed and destroyed indigenous people — why are you celebrating this?" added another.

"This is the United States of America. F**k off," replied the Libs of TikTok account simply.

RELATED: Democratic Socialists of America will seek to RADICALLY upend the federal government in reported platform update

No one apparently noted that the nickname for New York is the "Empire State," and Valdez claims to be running against "empire." The official nickname derives from a compliment to the state made by George Washington.

The Democratic Socialists of America party has celebrated a string of primary victories against more establishment candidates, leading many to warn that the fringe extreme is gaining influence in the Democratic Party.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

There Is No Such Thing As A Moderate Democrat Anymore

Democrats can keep pretending they are 'moderate' to win general elections, but moderation requires more than just saying the word over and over again.