A progressive bonfire of the vanities, ‘Mad-Mani’ style



New York City has met many challenges in its history as the capital of capital.

The constant problem that surrounds the city is that with great wealth comes great political profligacy. It is not the first time New York has found itself staring down a time for choosing at the barrel of a gun.

Trump hasn’t yet nicknamed Zohran Mamdani ‘Mad-Mani,’ but whatever he’s called, he’s a real threat to the city.

Tom Wolfe captured the “radical chic” and “mau-mauing” of the compromised big-city life in America, most obviously in San Francisco and New York. But Mayor Rudy Giuliani and his capable chieftains snuffed out the bonfire of the vanities through such commonsense policies like fixing broken windows policing, CompStat, and welfare to work — commonsense policies that fueled an urban renaissance, which Mayor Michael Bloomberg inherited, embraced, and built upon over his three terms.

Memories are short

Somehow, New York voters forgot what unbridled crime in the streets and rampant racialist and redistributionist policies in city hall did to their quality of life. And so they elected Bill de Blasio as mayor. As promised, he swiftly began dismantling the regime of good governance that had made the city great again.

Eric Adams was elected precisely because the people of New York City wanted a return to law-and-order sanity after eight years of de Blasio’s progressive dumpster fire. Sadly, Adams proved to be too ethically compromised to effectively resist the flood of illegal immigrants — many of whom were dispatched on border state buses — who filled the Port Authority. Housed in luxury hotels at taxpayers’ expense, they tested New York City’s sanctuary resolve.

Motivated by his political survival instincts, Adams’ spine stiffened. Conveniently, he was summarily whacked with a federal indictment. “More lawfare!” said his defenders. “Just following the facts where they lead,” countered the Justice Department careerists.

Nevertheless, Adams and Donald Trump found common purpose — and this triggered Democrats in general and progressives in particular. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), naturally, called for Adams to step down “for the good of the city.” You know, the new mantra of the left: guilty until proven innocent.

What are the political odds of Mayor Adams winning against the Democratic Party blob that has just nominated 33-year-old anti-Israel, Marxist Zohran Mamdani as its mayoral nominee? Not good. Right now, far from a coin toss.

RELATED: Mamdani’s socialist New York sounds great — if you don’t have kids

  Photo by TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP via Getty Images

Adams and New York City have four months to mount a credible, winning opposition. It’s a window of political opportunity that would not exist if it were not for Trump gratuitously playing a lawfare card of his own in the form of a timely presidential pardon, giving Adams a new lease on life — and New Yorkers a last chance to inhabit a livable city.

Trump hasn’t yet nicknamed Mamdani “Mad-Mani,” so I’ll go ahead and do it for him. Whatever he’s called, he’s a real threat to the city. Peter Orszag spoke for many successful business executives — the ones responsible for New York’s financial health. Appearing on CNBC, Lazard’s CEO revealed how troubling he found Mad-Mani’s “globalize the intifada” language — not to mention the would-be mayor’s antipathy for free-market capitalism and dislike for the wealthy.

New vanguard rising

Orszag strongly hinted that his firm, and all the public and cultural goods that it underwrites, could relocate to more friendly climes. Florida beckons.

What have this longtime Democrat in good standing and others, like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), been hearing from the socialist-friendly new guard?

It’s “they” — the old guard — who are no longer in charge of New York City politics. The Brooklyn progressives are running things now. Atop the pyramid is the new Adam and Eve, political power couple Mad-Mani and AOC. The vibe they send out is that they would happily have the old guard acquiesce to their agenda or move to Boca Raton.

What does this ascendant power couple hold to be shared and self-evident? For them, Israel and America are both apartheid states, and capitalism is the engine of inequality. And this anti-Semitic, anti-capitalist, anti-American power couple is trending on Instagram and just won the Democratic primary. AOC is coming for you, Chuck.

An appeal to sanity

Why do Democrats hold fast to obvious falsehoods? The answer is that they are repeating what they have been taught in school, from Head Start to college classes. This is what most American kids are being taught, unless they were homeschooled, took the Catholic school route, or went to Hillsdale College.

Schumer and Orszag know this, as do untold numbers of sensible, centrist Democrats. Many of them know the “Chicken for KFC” mindset firsthand in their own families and that their kids, grandkids, and wives are voting for this madness. The intifada chicken has come home to politically roost — and on your watch and with your wallet.

A new coalition of sanity needs to be built and built quickly. New York is worth fighting for and saving.

While conservatives and centrists were shaking their heads in mirth at the spectacle of “Dykes for Palestine,” AOC was still basking in the spotlight for successfully derailing a proposal from Amazon to build a second headquarters in Queens, adjacent to her congressional district. Not because she wanted the jobs in her Bronx district, but because she didn’t want them in New York City at all. Mind you, this was a project so beneficial to the area — it included some 25,000 jobs — that not only was Andrew Cuomo for it, but so was Bill de Blasio. AOC, though, was content to invoke the specter of “corporate greed,” which is what passes for reasoned debate among this generation of young Democrats.

RELATED: New York City’s likely next mayor wants to ‘globalize the intifada’

  Photo by CHARLY TRIBALLEAU/AFP via Getty Images

The reality is that New York City Council, and the protest industrial complex surrounding it, has gotten a lot younger. They are the ones doing the work, organizing, showing up, and winning elections. The Democratic Party is nothing without the protest industrial complex. George Soros and his son pay well and seem to have a taste for chaos.

The progressive ramparts have their favorites. They want true believers running things.

Sorry, Chuck, they are not that into you anymore. Truth be told, they never were.

Although New York has not had a viable two-party system for a long time, when things get bad enough, New Yorkers turn to a law-and-order Republican like Giuliani or an independent like Mike Bloomberg. But do NYC voters really need to wait for all those broken windows — and the chaos it symbolizes — to materialize again before waking up?

It is time for New Yorkers’ wallets to shut tight on Mamdani and open wide for Adams. A new coalition of sanity needs to be built and built quickly. New York is worth fighting for and saving. Its future hangs on the choice those who have not yet left make now.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.

Why indoctrinated kids just handed the Big Apple to a radical Marxist



Zohran Mamdani didn’t win New York City’s Democratic mayoral primary because he is young and charismatic, empathizes with people’s everyday grievances, or ran a brilliant campaign. The real reason is much more terrifying.

The reason the Muslim Marxist from Queens crushed his opponents may be summarized in two words: indoctrinated kids. Simple math shows you what happened.

This isn’t going to remain isolated to New York City. This playbook is about to be replicated faster than E. coli in petri dishes in every city across America.

New York City counts roughly 5.1 million registered voters. Between 750,000 and 850,000 are between the ages of 18 and 29. Another 1.6 to 1.8 million fall between 30 and 49.

Together, those groups total about 2.5 million voters — half the city’s electorate. In other words, half of New York’s voting base consists of what I call “indoctrinated kids.”

Ten years ago, I had a recurring weekly segment on my show called “Campus Madness.” Every week, we told the grisly stories of conservative students facing awful discrimination on campus — simply because they were conservative: grades docked, free speech infringed, humiliation by professors, denied funding from the student body, and so on. The point of the segment was to expose the rampant abuse of conservatives on leftist college campuses.

But honestly, we missed the point. Sure, conservative students faced discrimination — and still do. That was unjust and remains a serious problem.

The greater threat came from students who arrived on campus either apolitical or mildly liberal. They didn’t face discrimination. They didn’t need to. They were the targets.

Their minds were open and their politics malleable. Four years later, they emerged not as moderates but as committed Marxists — true believers in a worldview shaped by relentless indoctrination. Their professors didn’t just challenge ideas. They hammered home an agenda: anti-American, anti-white, anti-God, anti-human.

RELATED: Voters loved the socialist slogans. Now comes the fine print.

  Photo by Adam Gray/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Back then, people joked, “Wait till these silly Millennials get to the real world.” Nope. Those students brought their radicalism with them. Instead of waking up, they woke everything else. And the result is today’s “woke-ified” culture — one shaped more by the classroom than by common sense.

Returning to how this nutty Muslim Marxist just won the Democrat primary for mayor, New York City’s voting demographic explains it all.

Two and a half million of 5.1 million total registered voters are in the “indoctrinated kids” age bracket. One million of those 2.5 million are college graduates. That means 20% of voters in the city are the product of the Marxist indoctrination factories we call “colleges” and “universities.”

Only 11% of New York City voters of all ages are registered Republicans, so read the writing on the wall.

Zohran Mamdani isn't the Democrats’ nominee because voters didn’t understand his Marxism. The indoctrinated kids chose Mamdani because of his Marxism.

The indoctrinated kids are committed radical leftist ideologues — thanks to our colleges and universities that were subverted decades ago by communists who knew exactly what they were doing. They were playing the long game, knowing they were stealing the minds of whole generations of youth who one day — today — would be the deciding factor in our elections.

The scariest part is that this isn’t going to remain isolated to New York City. This playbook is about to be replicated faster than E. coli in a petri dish in every city across America.

It must be stopped. President Donald Trump must defund any college or university that indoctrinates youth in anti-American ideology — including private schools that accept federally subsidized student loans and research grants. Cut it all. They won’t survive a week without the federal government’s largesse. The Marxists are in it to win it. If we don’t use the authority we have while we’re in power, the United States of America will be lost.

If you don’t believe me, just listen to Mamdani speak for two minutes.

Voters loved the socialist slogans. Now comes the fine print.



Zohran Mamdani’s surprise victory over Andrew Cuomo in last week’s New York City Democratic mayoral primary catapulted a full-bodied Democratic Socialist program onto the national marquee. In his midnight speech, he claimed, “A life of dignity should not be reserved for a fortunate few.” His win marks Gotham’s sharpest left turn in a generation — and that’s saying something.

The recipients of his promise are slated to receive an economic makeover that treats prices as political failures. His platform freezes rents on more than 1 million apartments, builds 200,000 publicly financed “social housing” units, rolls out city-owned grocery stores, makes buses fare-free, and lifts the minimum wage to $30 by 2030, all bankrolled by roughly $10 billion in new corporate and millionaire taxes.

If Mamdani’s program collapses under its own weight, the case for limited government will write itself in boarded-up windows and outbound moving vans.

A week later, reality is beginning to set in.

Mamdani means what he says. On his watch, public safety would become a piggy bank. During the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, Mamdani posted, “No, we want to defund the police.” He wasn’t being metaphorical. His current blueprint would shift billions from the NYPD into a new “Department of Community Safety” — even as felony assaults on seniors have doubled since 2019.

Mamdani’s program may feel aspirational to affluent progressives, yet to many New Yorkers it lands like an ultimatum.

Forty-two percent of renter households already spend more than 30% of their income on shelter; now they are told higher business taxes and a slimmer police presence are the price of utopia, which helps explain why tens of thousands of households making between $32,000 and $65,000 — the city’s economic backbone — have left for other states in just the past few years.

Picture a deli cashier in the Bronx. She’s not reading City Hall memos, but she feels the squeeze when rent rises and her boss mutters about new taxes. She doesn’t frame her frustration as a debate about “big government” — but she knows when it’s harder to get by and when it’s less safe walking home. The politics of the city aren’t abstract to her. They’re personal.

Adding insult to injury, the job Mamdani wants comes with a salary of roughly $258,750 a year — more than three times the median city household income — plus the chauffeurs, security details, and gilt-edged benefits package that accompany the office. Telling overtaxed commuters that their groceries will now be “public options” while banking a quarter-million dollars in guaranteed pay is the policy equivalent of riding past them in a limousine and rolling down the window just long enough to raise their rent.

Layer onto that record a set of statements many Jewish New Yorkers regard as outright hostility. Mamdani is one of the loudest champions of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement; last year he pushed a bill to bar certain New York charities from sending money to Israeli causes and defended the chant “globalize the intifada,” drawing sharp rebukes from city rabbis. The day after Hamas massacred 1,200 Israelis on October 7, 2023, he blamed the bloodshed on “apartheid” and “occupation.”

All this lands in a metropolis with the world’s largest Jewish community outside Israel — about 1.4 million residents — whose synagogues, schools, and small businesses have weathered a steady rise in hate crimes. For them, a would-be mayor who treats Israel as a pariah and shrugs at chants of intifada isn’t dabbling in foreign policy; he’s telegraphing contempt for their safety and identity at home.

Republicans see an inadvertent gift. Mamdani’s New York will soon be measured against the lower-tax, police-friendly model many red states — especially my home, Florida — have advertised for years.

Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ Law Enforcement Recruitment Bonus Program has mailed more than 7,800 after-tax checks of $5,000 to officers relocating from 49 states, including hundreds from New York precincts, while Florida touts a 50-year low in index-crime reports and unemployment below the national average. IRS data shows Florida netted 33,019 New York households in the latest year, with average adjusted gross income near $185,000.

Project those trend lines a few years and Mamdani’s New York grows grim: a shrunken police force responding to more 911 calls; fare-free buses draining MTA dollars and stranding riders; municipal groceries undercutting bodegas until subsidies vanish; office-tower vacancies sapping property tax receipts just as social housing bills come due. The skyline still gleams, but plywood fronts and “For Lease” placards scar street level. Meanwhile states that fund cops, respect paychecks, and let entrepreneurs stock the shelves siphon away residents and revenue.

RELATED: Don’t let rural America become the next New York City

  Terraxplorer via iStock/Getty Images

Republicans running in 2026 scarcely need to draft the attack ads, yet they must pair fiscal sobriety with moral urgency — protecting the vulnerable, rewarding work, and defending faith. Mamdani’s primary victory shows romantic egalitarianism still electrifies young voters; statistics alone won’t counter a pledge of universal child care and rent freezes. This indeed won’t be a case of “promises made, promises kept.”

If his program collapses under its own weight, the case for limited government will write itself in boarded-up windows and outbound moving vans.

Should the city somehow thrive — safer streets, balanced books, real wage gains — progressives will demand that Congress replicate Mamdani’s policies nationwide. That is federalism at its most honest: two competing philosophies running side by side under the same national sky, with citizens free to relocate from one laboratory to the other.

For now, the lab results favor the model that backs the blue, protects the paycheck, and keeps the ladder of opportunity in good repair. Voters — and U-Hauls — are already keeping score. By decade’s end, the scoreboard will show which vision truly loved New York’s working families and which merely loved the sound of its own ideals.

Don’t let rural America become the next New York City



Elect strong conservative leaders in your state — or watch it go the way of New York City. That’s the unmistakable warning conservatives should take from New York voters nominating a Hamas sympathizer and self-proclaimed socialist for mayor.

How could this happen just one generation after 9/11? How does the city that suffered most from jihadist terrorism now embrace a foreign-born Islamist who wants to “globalize the intifada”?

When Trump calls for more farm labor from the third world — so long as the workers aren’t 'murderers' — he misses the deeper issue. Violent crime isn’t the only threat.

Several factors explain the city’s decline, but one stands out: immigration. Forty percent of New York City’s population now consists of foreign-born residents — not including the children of immigrants. Mass immigration on that scale, especially from Islamic and third world countries, doesn’t just change the labor market. It imports foreign values and embeds them in the culture.

Trump should think twice about demanding more foreign agricultural workers for red-state America. His arguments about labor shortages miss the larger picture. This isn’t just about harvesting crops — it’s about reshaping schools, neighborhoods, and eventually, the ballot box.

In 2022, the Center for Immigration Studies mapped 2,351 Census Bureau-defined Public Use Microdata Areas to show the percentage of schoolchildren from immigrant households. No surprise: Urban districts in places like New York and Los Angeles show overwhelming majorities of immigrant families.

But that trend now stretches deep into red states. Cities and even rural counties are seeing shockingly high proportions of students from immigrant families.

In southeast Nashville, 65% of public-school students come from immigrant families. Iraq ranks as the second-largest country of origin. In Dallas, all 20 school districts report at least one-third of students from immigrant households. In most of those districts, a majority of families are foreign-born.

This trend extends well beyond major cities. In southwest Oklahoma City, 43% of students come from immigrant families. Greenville, South Carolina, stands at 35%. Birmingham and Chattanooga each hover around 20%.

Red-state cities and midsize towns now reflect immigration levels once limited to coastal urban hubs. That leaves rural America as the last holdout — and even that is changing.

The so-called farm labor trade has transformed heartland communities. These public school districts report the following immigrant family enrollment rates:

  • Texas Panhandle (outside Potter and Randall Counties): 31%
  • Oklahoma Panhandle: 21%
  • Southwest Kansas (Dodge City, Garden City, Liberal City): 55%
  • Central Nebraska: 27%
  • Canyon and Owyhee Counties, Idaho (Caldwell and Nampa): 30%
  • Whitfield County, Georgia: 43%
  • Woodbury and Plymouth Counties, Iowa (Sioux City): 26%
  • Washington County, Arkansas: 26%
  • Fargo, North Dakota: 23%

Until recently, these areas were overwhelmingly native-born. They maintained a strong continuity of American culture and civic tradition.

What happens when the next generation of these children grows up, votes, and brings in more from similar backgrounds? These red counties may not stay red for long.

Mitt Romney won Washington County, Arkansas, by 16 points in 2012. Just 12 years later, Donald Trump carried it by only six — even as he expanded his statewide margin. What changed? More than a quarter of the local student body now comes from immigrant households.

RELATED: New York City’s likely next mayor wants to ‘globalize the intifada’

  Photo by ANGELA WEISS/AFP via Getty Images

Trump won rural Sampson County, North Carolina, by a 2-to-1 margin. Yet, by the 2022–23 school year, Hispanic students made up 44.2% of public school enrollment. The district now runs extensive English as a Second Language programs to meet ongoing demand. Even if Hispanic voters shift modestly right, when has such rapid demographic upheaval ever worked to conservatives’ advantage?

The pace of change is impossible to ignore. Importing foreign labor into rural counties inevitably reshapes culture — and, soon after, voting patterns.

Greene County, Iowa, illustrates the point. In 2023, Hispanic residents accounted for just 3.3% of the total population. But that number underrepresents their influence. Iowa State University researchers found Latino populations in rural Iowa tend to skew young, meaning they disproportionately fill the schools even when their overall numbers look small. That imbalance compounds over time.

When Trump calls for more farm labor from the third world — so long as the workers aren’t “murderers” — he misses the deeper issue. Violent crime isn’t the only threat. The more serious loss lies in surrendering the very communities that naturally align with traditional American culture.

As Vice President JD Vance put it during his Republican National Convention acceptance speech: “America is not just an idea. It is a group of people with a shared history and a common future. It is, in short, a nation.”

That is the nation Trump must promise to defend — not just with words but with sound policy.

The Democrats get their left-wing battering ram



For anyone who read my commentary last week, it should be no surprise that I am overjoyed that state Rep. Zohran Mamdani trounced former Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the New York City mayoral Democratic primary on Tuesday.

Cuomo is a repulsive creep who, as governor, killed thousands of elderly New Yorkers by filling nursing homes with COVID-infected patients. He then lied persistently about his misdeeds. Adding insult to injury, Cuomo groped and mishandled vulnerable women, an offense that led to his resignation in disgrace.

Except for Mamdani’s use of the verboten term 'socialist' and his outspokenly anti-Israeli positions, someone like him fits quite well into the present Democratic Party.

Finally, Cuomo removed bail for violent criminals, something he tried to cover up in his primary race by promising to be “tough on crime.” The fact that Wall Street plutocrats — led by the feckless former mayor, Michael Bloomberg — were backing this shameless reprobate made me even more eager to see him defeated.

Clearly, I am not happy to see Mamdani victorious because I agree with his politics. Looking at the positions he advocates, I can’t find one that doesn’t turn my stomach — but that is also the case when listening to Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, and Amy Klobuchar.

I’ve been told that Mamdani is worse than these other leftists because he calls himself a socialist and bleeds for Hamas. Let me register my doubts that once in office (if he manages to win the general election) he would do anything to nationalize anything. His Upper East Side Manhattan backers, who poured out to vote for him, wouldn’t allow him to act like Castro or Lenin.

What Mamdani would likely do if elected mayor would be to make all the horrible conditions produced by New York’s big-city government even worse. Streets, outside the opulent neighborhoods inhabited by Mamdani’s benefactors, will be overrun by criminal thugs. New York City will become even more of a magnet for LGBTQ+ and Black Lives Matter exhibitionists, and normal people will move out of the urban zoo even faster than they’re doing right now.

Mamdani fits right in

Those claiming that Zohran Mamdani marks some unprecedented plunge into leftist madness haven't been paying attention. High-ranking Democrats such as the Squad, Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, and Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii have long paved the way. Cultural leftists already infest Congress and crowd the statehouses. Aside from Mamdani’s unapologetic use of the word “socialist” and his anti-Israel posturing, he fits quite well in the modern Democratic Party. Nothing about him signals a deeper descent than what voters already hear nightly on MSNBC.

RELATED: New York City’s likely next mayor wants to ‘globalize the intifada’

  Christian Monterrosa/Bloomberg via Getty Images

In the general election, Mamdani may end up splitting the left-wing vote with fellow Democrats, including Mayor Eric Adams, who plans to run as an independent. That kind of vote-splitting could hand the race to Republican Curtis Sliwa, who has positioned himself as the law-and-order candidate. He’s the only one I’d actually like to see win. Still, I won’t pretend I wouldn’t enjoy the irony if Mamdani pulled it off. A Mamdani victory would deliver maximum schadenfreude.

Democrats forsake the working class

For decades, New Yorkers and denizens of other major cities have sabotaged themselves at the ballot box — electing pro-criminal politicians, embracing every deranged social experiment, and lately drooling over criminal illegal aliens. Despite the hand-wringing on Fox News, these urban voters aren’t victims of the Democratic Party. They’ve reshaped it. They turned a once-working-class coalition into a hive of government dependents and ideological psychopaths.

Justice demands that these “progressives” live with the consequences of their own political choices. They asked for this. Let them have it — good and hard. The tragedy, of course, is that normal people will suffer too. Those without the money to flee to private buildings with armed security or relocate entirely will pay the price. That’s why I hesitate to cast Mamdani as some kind of avenging angel.

Still, even with the obvious costs of a Mamdani administration, his rise might accelerate a trend that’s both inevitable and necessary. Sane people with means will keep fleeing cities run by criminals and ideologues. Those who stay behind — those who cheer on the chaos — can live with the rot they helped create.

Nothing new under the sun

Let me close with a brief speculation about politicians like Minnesota’s Ilhan Omar, Mamdani, and their counterparts in Europe — figures who somehow blend radical leftist politics with expressions of Islamic fervor. On paper, devout Muslims ought to align with the Christian right on most social issues. And many Muslim parents across the country have taken a stand, loudly opposing LGBTQ+ indoctrination in schools.

So why don’t Muslim politicians follow suit? Two possible explanations come to mind. Either they’re mimicking the old communist playbook — aligning with fringe social movements as a means to power — or they’re using Islamic identity as a wrecking ball to level what’s left of Western tradition and cohesion.

Let’s not pretend both options are equally likely. I suspect it’s the latter.

A version of this article was originally published in Chronicles.

New York City’s likely next mayor wants to ‘globalize the intifada’



It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

RELATED: Socialist Zohran Mamdani upsets Andrew Cuomo in Democratic primary election for NYC mayor race

  Photo by Madison Swart via Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

L.A. Riots Are A Proxy War For The Ruling Class’s Fight Against Real America

The intifada in Los Angeles, Austin, Philadelphia, New York, Boston, and even Omaha is the sequel to the summer of George Floyd.

Alan Dershowitz Lays Out What It Would Take For Supreme Court To Chisel Away At Famous Free Speech Ruling

'They would cut back a little bit'

A green card is not a ‘get-out-of-deportation-free’ card



“Free Mahmoud Khalil” is quickly becoming the left’s new George Floyd rallying cry, as radicals once again champion criminals, thugs, and terrorist sympathizers. But their argument has a major flaw — Khalil is already free. He is free to return to Syria anytime and continue promoting Hamas. The government is not detaining him indefinitely or seeking to incarcerate him. President Trump is simply enforcing long-standing immigration laws that have been ignored for too long.

Last week, Trump announced that ICE had targeted Khalil, the Syrian national responsible for the pro-Hamas encampment at Columbia University, for deportation. “We will find, apprehend, and deport these terrorist sympathizers from our country — never to return again,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “If you support terrorism, including the slaughtering of innocent men, women, and children, your presence is contrary to our national and foreign policy interests, and you are not welcome here. We expect every one of America’s colleges and universities to comply. Thank you!”

We don’t need to let 'intifada globalists' in our club.

Last month, I outlined how more than 120 years of uninterrupted case law confirms that deportation is not a punishment but a consequence of enforcing national sovereignty. The United States has the right to set conditions for admitting noncitizens. While the government cannot fine or imprison individuals — citizens or noncitizens — for expressing pro-terrorist or pro-communist views, it can require foreign nationals to leave. Freedom of speech protects against incarceration, but it does not grant immunity from deportation.

Recognizing the strength of this legal distinction, Khalil’s supporters are now arguing that there is a difference between those on immigrant visas and those on nonimmigrant student visas. Khalil arrived in the United States from Syria in December 2022 and became a legal permanent resident in 2024. A federal district judge in New York, disregarding the Supreme Court’s long-standing precedent on plenary power, temporarily halted his removal.

In reality, the Constitution does not distinguish between different visa types for noncitizens. Legal permanent residents do not have greater constitutional protection against removal than foreign students. Due process rights for noncitizens depend on what Congress establishes through legislation. While green-card holders typically have more legal avenues to remain in the country, Section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act explicitly grants the president authority to remove any noncitizen who “endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization.”

This is precisely what Khalil did. He led the now-banned Columbia University Apartheid Divest group, which occupied the campus and called for a global intifada in America. Like it or not, his actions fit the legal definition of endorsing terrorist activity and persuading others to do the same. Again, we cannot write such a law to detain indefinitely citizens or even aliens based upon such expressions, but we can ask foreigners to leave.

One is free to debate the political merits of these statutes, but the constitutional moorings are solid. As the Supreme Court ruled in Chae Chan Ping v. United States (1889):

That the government of the United States, through the action of the legislative department, can exclude aliens from its territory is a proposition which we do not think open to controversy. Jurisdiction over its own territory to that extent is an incident of every independent nation. It is a part of its independence. If it could not exclude aliens it would be to that extent subject to the control of another power.

Holding a green card increases the likelihood of remaining in the United States and eventually becoming a citizen, but it does not provide a constitutional guarantee. As Justice James Iredell, one of the Supreme Court’s original members, wrote:

Any alien coming to this country must or ought to know, that this being an independent nation, it has all the rights concerning the removal of aliens which belong by the law of nations to any other; that while he remains in the country in the character of an alien, he can claim no other privilege than such as an alien is entitled to, and consequently, whatever [risk] he may incur in that capacity is incurred voluntarily, with the hope that in due time by his unexceptionable conduct, he may become a citizen of the United States.

The risk of removal is not limited to committing a specific crime that must be proven through due process. It also applies to behavior deemed harmful to national interests, which falls under the discretion of the political branches to enforce.

Emer de Vattel, the Swiss scholar on international law frequently cited by America’s founders and in early American case law, made it clear that removal does not require criminal activity to be justified. He wrote:

Every nation has the right to refuse to admit a foreigner into the country, when he cannot enter without putting the nation in evident danger, or doing it a manifest injury. ... Thus, also, it has a right to send them elsewhere, if it has just cause to fear that they will corrupt the manners of the citizens; that they will create religious disturbances, or occasion any other disorder, contrary to the public safety. In a word, it has a right, and is even obliged, in this respect, to follow the rules which prudence dictates.

A judge has no authority to interfere with immigration officers' decisions. Aliens are not entitled to due process through courts to determine whether they meet the statutory definition of an excluded alien. As the Supreme Court ruled in Knauff v. Shaughnessy (1950):

The decision to admit or to exclude an alien may be lawfully placed with the [p]resident, who may in turn delegate the carrying out of this function to a responsible executive officer. ... The action of the executive officer under such authority is final and conclusive. Whatever the rule may be concerning deportation of persons who have gained entry into the United States, it is not within the province of any court, unless expressly authorized by law, to review the determination of the political branch of the Government to exclude a given alien.

Some may object to the sight of individuals being handcuffed for expressing anti-American views, but such actions are only taken to enforce removal. As the court stated in Turner v. Williams, “Detention or temporary confinement as part of the means necessary to give effect to the exclusion or expulsion was held valid.”

Unlike in criminal cases, federal law allows an alien facing removal who wishes to avoid detention to leave the country voluntarily.

From a political standpoint, a foreigner who holds a green card while calling for jihad provides even more reason for swift removal. If he naturalizes, the country will be left with a self-hating American citizen. As Gouverneur Morris stated at the Constitutional Convention, “Every society from a great nation down to a club had the right of declaring the conditions on which new members should be admitted, there can be room for no complaint.”

We don’t need to let “intifada globalists” in our club.

Mark Levin: Obama and Biden’s immigration policies are ‘suicide,’ led to anti-Semitic protests



Pro-Palestinian protestors targeted the Met Gala to call for an intifada, which is only adding to the rise in anti-Semitic events occurring in the U.S.

Mark Levin can’t help but notice that many of the protestors are Palestinians themselves, which might have a little something to do with the policies of a former president.

“In the latter years, the Obama administration ... focused on increasing the number of people who would be allowed to come into the United States from Muslim and Arab-Muslim parts of the world,” Levin explains, adding, “and he succeeded.”

“The percentage of Muslim immigrants hugely increased out of proportion with the numbers in the United States, and so, Obama did that. He did that intentionally,” he says.

Now, the Biden administration is following in Obama’s footsteps.

“We know that Biden and Blinken have a plan to import people from Gaza into the United States,” Levin says, asking, “Now, why would we do that?”

“Why in the hell would we bring people to the United States, 87% of the population of which supports Hamas,” he says, referencing a recent survey. “And about that percentage supports October 7.”

Both the Biden and Obama administrations' immigration policies have completely ignored what America was built on and what it stands for.

“This is our country. We’re the citizenry. We support immigration but with terms and standards and requirements. We get to decide who comes. We get to vet you. We get to decide if you’ll be a contributor, if you will be a taxpayer, if you will comply with our law,” Levin says.

“You don’t get to come to our country, at least theoretically, and impose your will, plant your flag, take down our flag, take over our institutions and our culture, receive money from enemy governments and enemy societies to use here in our own country,” he continues, adding, “That’s called suicide.”


Want more from Mark Levin?

To enjoy more of "the Great One" — Mark Levin as you've never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.