Kelsey Grammer recalls tragic past, warns about socialists taking over Democratic Party
Kelsey Grammer, the star of "Frasier" who features in the upcoming film "Avengers: Doomsday," highlighted the danger of the socialist contagion spreading through the Democratic Party.
At the outset of his interview with Fox News' Laura Ingraham on Monday, Grammer highlighted his attendance at President Donald Trump's Aug. 14 rally at the Nassau County Police Academy.
'They don't want to value the individual.'
Grammer, who stated last year that Trump is "one of the greatest presidents we've ever had," explained why the event was so important to him.
"I'm a member of a club that most people don't want to belong to. None of its members want to be in it," said Grammer. "My father was gunned down in his carport on the island of St. Thomas when I was 14 years old. My sister was abducted and raped and murdered when she was 18."
"Because of the men and women of the police departments throughout this country and because of the work that Donald Trump has done, for the first time in my life, I could rely on the idea that fewer families would be joining my club this year," said the actor.
During his speech at the police academy, the president touted newly released FBI data showing that 2025 had the largest year-to-year decline in violent crime since the bureau began estimated crime trends.
Data reported to the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting Program showed that violent crime overall decreased 9.3% from 2024 to 2025. Last year, murder and nonnegligent manslaughter decreased by an estimated 18.1%; rape decreased by an estimated 7.6%; aggravated assault decreased by an estimated 7.2%; and robbery decreased by an estimated 18.5%.
Despite the drop in crime, Grammer warned about a related rising threat: the leftist radicals who would abolish the very police forces that helped bring down the crime rate.
RELATED: Democratic socialist leader goes on Fox and admits every extreme thing they want to do
Grammer noted that these socialists "seem to have all the energy right now in the Democratic Party."
"I get it because at least they have an idea," continued Grammer. "It's not that dissimilar from what Donald Trump was saying several years ago, you know, 'Drain the swamp.' I mean, I don't think you should abolish the Senate, but I sure think some senators should look to their laurels and get the job done."
The actor, who admittedly once humored a career in politics, noted that while the ascendant left and newly established right may be motivated to address the same problems, their proposed remedies are irreconcilable.
The socialists, Grammer suggested, "want to be in charge, and they don't want to value the individual. To my mind, the individual is America's greatest, single national treasure, and that's what we always have to preserve. And I keep thinking about this quotation from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn that said, 'Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph, but not through me.'"
After emphasizing that he is determined to help stop "all this nonsense," Grammer told Ingraham that he expects American voters to ultimately deny the socialists their desired takeover.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Migrant welfare recipients called out for funding TERROR GROUPS overseas with taxpayer dollars
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is warning that the federal government is about to crack down on migrant welfare recipients who send money overseas — and BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales is shocked that it was ever allowed in the first place.
“And from now on, anyone who wires money out from one of these money service businesses has to check a box saying whether they are on public assistance. And if you are on public assistance, we are going to start pushing that you cannot wire money out of the country,” Bessent told Laura Ingraham on Fox News.
“Well, what if they lie and they don’t tell us they’re on public assistance?” Ingraham asked. “That’s a crime, lying on a federal form.”
“We’re going to follow it up, and we are going to push that you can no longer do that. The American people, our generosity has been taken advantage of,” he responded.
“Our generosity is funding al-Shabaab and Iranian interests. ... This is really bad,” Ingraham chimed in.
“The money is supposed to go for alleged asylum seekers and their families and children, and if you were wiring the money out of the country, one of two things must be true: You are getting too much money and your benefits should be cut, or you are part of this conspiracy,” Bessent said firmly.
“If the federal taxpayers are paying for you to live here, you’re not allowed to send their money. It’s not even your money. Their money, my money, you’re not allowed to send overseas. That should not be controversial at all,” Gonzales comments on “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered.”
“If you are so broke that you need taxpayer dollars, you are not allowed to send it overseas. You’re not allowed to send it to your family overseas. You’re not allowed to send it to terror groups overseas. You’re not allowed to send it to anybody overseas,” she continues.
And the amount of immigrants receiving benefits from taxpaying American citizens is not a small number.
“You’ve got over half of immigrant-headed households that receive cash, food, medical care, or housing benefits from taxpayers. Over half, according to the Center for Immigration Studies,” Gonzales says.
“We know that over half of these people are taking more than they are bringing to the table,” she continues, pointing out that money sent or brought back by migrants is “almost three times as much as global foreign aid.”
“Look at that chart: 822 billion versus 288 billion in foreign aid. ... This is just these people coming here, taking from us, and then sending it back home or sending it to their favorite terror group,” she adds.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Stephen King forced to apologize for Charlie Kirk remarks, threatened with lawsuit, ripped as 'evil, twisted liar'
Best-selling author Stephen King was forced to walk back and apologize for troubling comments he made about Charlie Kirk just hours after the conservative juggernaut was gunned down in cold blood.
Kirk was assassinated on Wednesday at Utah Valley University while the Turning Point USA founder kicked off his college campus tour.
'Hey Stephen King, you are more monstrous than any of the characters you ever came up with.'
As Blaze News reported, numerous leftists made repugnant remarks regarding the murder of Kirk.
King wrote on the X social media platform, "The motivation of the man who shot Charlie Kirk isn't clear (although he's probably mentally unstable — duh). What is clear is it was another example of American gun violence."
King — an outspoken liberal and donor to the Democratic Party — then stoked division by attacking Kirk after the conservative commentator died from being shot in the neck.
King claimed of Kirk, "He advocated stoning gays to death. Just sayin'."
King's scurrilous remarks about the deceased married father of two ignited a firestorm, including threats of a lawsuit.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) proposed, "Please share if you agree that the estate of Charlie Kirk should sue Stephen King for defamation over this heinously false accusation. He’s crossed a line. It will prove costly."
Fox News host Laura Ingraham replied, "Stephen King is a sad, bitter man."
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) declared, "You are a horrible, evil, twisted liar. No, he did not. Your party — which you shamelessly shilled for — sent $100 billion to the Ayatollah ... who does routinely murder homosexuals. Why are you so dishonest & filled with hate?"
Conservative commentator Dave Rubin added, "Hey Stephen King, you are more monstrous than any of the characters you ever came up with. Charlie was never anything but kind to me and my husband. We broke bread many times, and he never treated us with anything other than respect. He even came to our house not too long ago, and plot twist, didn’t throw rocks at us. Write about that sometime, you hack."
RELATED: New York Times continues SPLC demonization of Charlie Kirk, accuses him of provocation
Kirk believed that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but he did not have hate toward the LGBTQ community.
Kirk said in November 2019, "I believe marriage is one man, one woman. Also, gay people should be welcome in the conservative movement. As Christians, we are called to love everyone. I will always stand against people who wish to establish their own personal values as a reason to kick others out of our movement."
Kirk applauded the Trump administration for launching a "worldwide effort to decriminalize homosexuality in 70+ countries where it's still illegal."
Kirk slammed Saudi Arabia for allegedly executing LGBT people and openly opposed the stoning of homosexuals.
The Turning Point USA founder proclaimed in July 2016, "Remember: when Hillary says she supports LGBT issues, she accepted millions from countries that stone and kill and imprison gay people."
Kirk wrote in April 2019, "Will Ilhan Omar condemn the gays being stoned to death, sanctioned by the government in Brunei under Sharia Law? The left claims it is hate speech to even ask that question. Why is she so silent on this?"
King was likely referencing a video clip from 2024, when Kirk read a Bible passage from Leviticus to illustrate how passages in the Bible can be cherry-picked to present a certain narrative.
King admitted that he made a mistake of "reading something on Twitter without fact-checking" the claim, and he promised that it "won't happen again."
King made several apologies on social media.
"I apologize for saying Charlie Kirk advocated stoning gays," King stated. "What he actually demonstrated was how some people cherry-pick Biblical passages."
"I have apologized. Charlie Kirk never advocated stoning gays to death," King said.
The horror author added, "I was wrong, and I apologize. I have deleted the post."
Gad Saad — an evolutionary behavioral scientist — told King, "Dear Stephen King, while it is laudable that you have apologized for your post, I would urge you to do the following: Examine why you had the impulse to post such a reaction when a young man had been assassinated. That you succumbed to your dark impulses speaks to your having been parasitized by ideological capture. Your hate for Republicans was greater than your empathy for a wife and two young children who had lost their anchor. Charlie was a lovely human being that did not deserve your nastiness. Never let your humanity be overridden by your orgiastic tribalism."
You can keep up to date with the latest developments in the assassination of Charlie Kirk here.
RELATED: MSNBC analyst Matthew Dowd fired over Charlie Kirk comments
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Street riots can’t set US immigration policy
The New York Post last week chided President Trump for not “getting it right” on deportations. But its real target wasn’t Trump. It was Stephen Miller, the president’s longtime immigration adviser and current White House deputy chief of staff. The Post’s editorial board warned that Miller’s plan to apprehend 3,000 illegal aliens per day is “asking for trouble.”
The Post argued the number is unrealistic. Even if Immigration and Customs Enforcement focuses on “the worst of the worst,” the roundup will still trigger media-fueled hysteria and nationwide riots. Mass arrests, it claimed, carry the “highest risk public-opinion-wise.”
If we concede to street violence, we let the enemy set the terms. That’s not leadership. That’s surrender.
The Post envisioned a wave of anti-ICE demonstrations, media pearl-clutching, and chaos. It feared ICE would be stretched too thin trying to hit its daily targets. Worse still, agents might apprehend illegal immigrants who entered before Biden — or even before Obama — and have “put down some roots.” That, we’re told, would create “economic problems,” particularly for agriculture.
The solution? The Post recommended a “scalpel, not a hammer.” Encourage illegal immigrants to self-deport. Offer incentives. Go soft. Supposedly, a million have already left on their own. And if Trump continues gently urging them out, the paper claims, many more will go peacefully.
The problem? We don’t even know if that number is real. The Department of Homeland Security doesn’t systematically track self-deportations. It’s possible some of the exits happened during the Trump years or even before. Regardless, they’ve hardly made a dent in the 11 million people Homeland Security says are here illegally.
But more troubling than the questionable data is the message Trump would send if he adopted the Post’s approach: that he’s willing to pull back on deportations — not because it’s the right policy, but because it might provoke the left. It would mean ICE can’t arrest even violent felons if it risks upsetting the street mobs funded by Democrats. And because the left treats all illegal immigrants as future voters, that would effectively shut down enforcement altogether.
As a historian, I’ll offer a provocative but fitting comparison: Today’s leftist thugs resemble the Nazi brownshirts of the Weimar era. Back then, many thought the nationalists could harness the street violence for political gain. They were wrong. The brownshirts brought chaos, not order. I see nothing morally or politically superior about the rioters in Los Angeles. They may call themselves anti-fascists. But their behavior — and their impact — is the same.
Those who excuse or encourage this violence, or who blame the government for trying to remove violent criminals, don’t care about law and order. They don’t care about stopping murderers, rapists, or cartel operatives. They care about power.
If some illegal immigrants have lived here for years and become productive members of society, the government can evaluate those cases once the criminals are gone. Prioritizing felons doesn’t mean abandoning discretion. But it does mean enforcing the law — despite the noise.
Trump’s crackdown will also encourage more self-deportation. If illegal immigrants know there’s a new sheriff in town, they’ll think twice about staying. As for the rioters and their wealthy enablers? Perhaps, we could find a way to help them self-deport to Antarctica. At a minimum, they deserve the same accommodations the left gave to January 6 protesters.
Even if Miller’s 3,000-a-day goal can’t be fully met, the effort matters. Laura Ingraham is right: We won’t deport all of the Democrats’ future voters. But that’s no reason not to try. The street violence and intimidation are designed to cow Republicans into submission. They’re a threat — not just to policy but to republican government itself.
If we concede to street violence, we let the enemy set the terms. That’s not leadership. That’s surrender.
No more accommodation. Crush the coup.
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com