Voters won’t buy ‘freedom in Iran’ while Minneapolis goes lawless



My buddy Ryan Rhodes, who’s running for Congress in Iowa’s 4th District, drove north to Minnesota to see the chaos in Minneapolis up close. What he found looked worse than the headlines.

“You have a really Islamo-communist set of people who we have imported” to this country, Rhodes told me. “I think you’ve got a lot of Muslim Brotherhood agents in there, people whose message is, ‘We have taken over this city.’ Forget just elections. We lose our country if we keep allowing these people to come in.”

Americans can handle hard truths. They can handle sacrifice. They can handle a fight. What they won’t handle is watching the bad guys win again.

Rhodes wasn’t talking like a guy chasing clicks. He sounded like a guy staring at the map and realizing tyranny doesn’t need a passport. It can sit three hours from your front door.

So forgive me if I don’t have much patience for the foreign-policy sermonizing right now. How am I supposed to sell voters on “freedom in Iran” while Minneapolis slides toward lawlessness and Washington keeps acting powerless to stop it?

That pitch collapses fast with working-class Americans, especially while the economy limps along and trust remains thin on the ground. Republican voters want competence, results, and consequences for people who harm the country. They want accountability at home first.

We’ve lived what happens without it.

COVID cracked Trump’s first term because bureaucrats and “experts” ran wild, issued edicts, trashed livelihoods, and faced zero consequences. Then the George Floyd riots poured gasoline on the fire. Cities burned while federal authorities watched the destruction unfold.

Trump’s comeback last year required more than winning an election. It required overcoming a full-scale assault on the country’s spirit — and on the right to live as free citizens. The machine didn’t just beat Republicans at the ballot box. It hunted them. Roughly 1,400 Americans were rounded up by the Biden regime over the January 6 “insurrection.” They went after Trump too. They went after anyone in their way.

Those four years didn’t just wreck careers in Washington. They reached down to the local level — school boards acting like petty dictators, public health officials issuing mask and jab mandates, and doctors’ offices turning into political compliance centers. Families paid the price.

Now the country watches the same disease spread again.

People see domestic radicals attack federal officers in the streets. They watch Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) posture like a man protecting the mob, not the public. They hear Minneapolis leaders talk like ICE has no right to exist inside city limits. The footage looks like a warning, not an isolated event.

Remember CHAZ/CHOP in Seattle in 2020? That’s the template: Declare a zone off-limits to law, romanticize the lawlessness, and dare the state to reassert control. Every time the government blinks, the radicals learn the lesson: Push harder.

Demoralization has started to set in. I see it on Facebook and on the ground. In Iowa, I’m seeing campaign photos that would’ve been unthinkable in past cycles: small crowds, low energy, people staying home. Iowa has its first open Republican gubernatorial primary in 15 years, and the mood should feel electric. Instead, it feels like exhaustion.

As things stand, fewer Republicans will vote in the June primary than voted in the 2016 Iowa caucuses. That’s unheard of. Iowa has more than 700,000 registered Republicans. I wouldn’t bet on even 200,000 showing up.

That should terrify the White House.

RELATED: America now looks like a marriage headed for divorce — with no exit

Photo by Madison Thorn/Anadolu via Getty Images

Trump isn’t on the ballot in Iowa anymore. He doesn’t need to win another primary. But the movement still needs to win elections. It needs to win them in places like Iowa — and it needs to win them while the country watches cities like Minneapolis drift toward foreign-flag politics and open contempt for American sovereignty.

Rhodes put it bluntly: If we don’t stop this, we’re watching an Islamic conquest play out in real time, one “sanctuary” city at a time. Great Britain didn’t fall in a day. It surrendered by degrees.

So what do voters need to see now?

Not another speech. Not another promise. Not another commission. Not another “investigation” that ends in a shrug.

They need to see what they were promised when Trump ran for a second term: accountability.

If the country watches Minnesota slide into open defiance of federal law and nobody pays a price for it, voters will conclude the system can’t defend them. And if the system can’t defend them at home, it has no credibility abroad.

Start with Minnesota. Make it plain that “no-go zones” don’t exist in the United States. Enforce the law. Protect federal agents. Prosecute the people who assault them. Strip federal money from jurisdictions that obstruct enforcement. Treat organized lawlessness like organized lawlessness, not a political disagreement.

Americans can handle hard truths. They can handle sacrifice. They can handle a fight.

What they won’t handle is watching the bad guys win again — without consequences.

America now looks like a marriage headed for divorce — with no exit



Marriages rarely end over one argument. They fall apart through a long breakdown in communication, a growing inability to resolve disagreements, and the slow realization that two people no longer walk toward the same future.

Healthy marriages don’t require full agreement on every subject. They require compromise on the decisions that shape daily life: money, children, priorities, responsibilities. They also require shared goals.

No tidy divorce court exists for a nation-state. We share one flag, one legal framework, and one public square.

When those goals diverge — and neither side will realign — the relationship becomes unsustainable. The law calls the condition “irreconcilable differences.”

America now lives in that condition.

We remain bound under one nation, one Constitution, and one civic home. But we no longer share a common purpose. We no longer share a common story about what the country is, why it exists, or whether it deserves to endure.

This conflict no longer turns on tax rates or regulatory policy. It turns on the legitimacy and direction of the American experiment itself.

The modern left no longer argues about how to preserve the American system. It treats the system as the problem. Democratic leaders and activists call for “fundamental transformation,” flirt with socialism, and talk about the founding less as a flawed but noble legacy than as a moral failure that demands replacement. In that worldview, America doesn’t need reform. America needs erasure.

The right still believes the country can be repaired and preserved. The left increasingly treats the country as something to dismantle.

This rupture shows up in concrete ways. In 2021, the National Archives placed a “harmful language” warning on the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence — the documents that define the nation. That doesn’t signal ordinary partisan dispute. It signals contempt for the country’s moral foundation.

Socialism sits at the center of this divide. It contradicts the American system at its roots. America rests on the premise that rights come from God, not government. Socialism elevates the state over the individual and makes rights conditional on political approval. It centralizes power in the name of enforced equality — “equity.”

RELATED: Americans aren’t arguing any more — we’re speaking different languages

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

America protects private property as an extension of liberty. It channels ambition into innovation and prosperity. Socialism treats success as a social offense and demands equality of outcome. When people refuse to surrender the fruits of their labor, socialism turns to coercion. Coercion requires centralized authority. Centralized authority punishes dissent.

The pattern repeats: less freedom, greater dependency, and a governing model incompatible with constitutional self-rule.

The irony remains hard to miss. The left calls Donald Trump “Hitler” while cheering figures like New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, an avowed socialist. Yet the Nazi Party sold itself as the National Socialist German Workers’ Party — a collectivist project built on centralized power and state control.

The same left often excuses Antifa, a movement built on intimidation, street violence, and political enforcement designed to silence opposition. Those tactics don’t belong to liberal democracy. They belong to regimes that fear debate.

Even basic reality has become contested. The left and right can’t agree on something as elemental as what a man or a woman is. The Supreme Court recently showcased the collapse when ACLU attorneys arguing sex-based discrimination refused to define “woman.” When a society refuses to name biological facts that every civilization once treated as obvious, compromise collapses with it.

This crisis goes deeper than polarization. It reaches the level of knowledge itself. The left increasingly treats biology, history, and moral limits as malleable social constructs. The right still believes objective reality binds us all.

These aren’t normal disagreements. They describe incompatible worldviews. And incompatibility carries consequences.

During the COVID era, polls found majorities of Democrats willing to endorse coercive measures against the unvaccinated, including house arrest. Nearly half supported imprisoning people who questioned vaccine efficacy. Those numbers didn’t represent a fringe. They revealed a growing comfort with state force in service of ideological conformity.

After Trump’s 2016 election, many friendships survived political conflict. By 2020, after years of dehumanization — after constant accusations of “Nazism” aimed at ordinary voters — many of those relationships broke. The political battle stopped sounding like disagreement and started sounding like moral extermination.

RELATED: Washington, DC, has become a hostile city-state

Photo by Astrid Riecken For The Washington Post via Getty Images

In September 2025, someone assassinated Charlie Kirk. Large segments of the left didn’t just rationalize the killing. Many celebrated it.

After Scott Adams died following a long fight with cancer, prominent voices responded with mockery instead of decency. People magazine ran a headline labeling him “disgraced.” Even death became a political verdict.

This is what irreconcilable differences look like at a national scale.

A country cannot endure when one side believes the nation stands as fundamentally good — worthy of preservation and reform — while the other believes it stands as irredeemably evil and must be dismantled. Marriages end when partners stop seeing each other as allies and start treating each other as enemies.

Nations fracture for the same reason.

America cannot solve this the way a couple dissolves a marriage. The Constitution binds us to one civic order. No clean separation awaits. No tidy divorce court exists for a nation-state. We share one flag, one legal framework, and one public square.

When irreconcilable differences exist but separation remains impossible, the danger grows.

Only three paths remain: recommitment to constitutional principles, enforced coexistence through expanding coercion, or escalation into open conflict as dehumanization becomes normal.

Pretending this amounts to another election cycle, another policy dispute, or another cable-news food fight invites catastrophe. A nation cannot survive when its people no longer agree on what it is, why it exists, or whether it deserves to continue.

Unlike a failed marriage, America can’t walk away.

A protest doesn’t become lawful because Don Lemon livestreams it



What should have been a peaceful Sunday service at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, turned into a political ambush. Roughly 30 anti-ICE protesters pushed into the sanctuary mid-worship, chanting slogans and confronting church leaders as families tried to pray.

Disgraced former CNN anchor Don Lemon was there, too, livestreaming the chaos.

If activists can storm a church mid-service, scream at families, and then hide behind the First Amendment, the standard becomes simple: The loudest mob sets the rules.

The Department of Justice has opened a formal investigation and signaled that federal protections for houses of worship may apply. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon noted on the “Glenn Beck Program” that the activists’ conduct could implicate the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which bars intimidation, obstruction, and interference with the free exercise of religion in places of worship. The protesters may have also violated the Ku Klux Klan Act, a post-Civil War law that makes it illegal to terrorize and violate the civil rights of citizens.

According to multiple reports, the demonstrators were tied to the Racial Justice Network and aimed their protest at a church leader they accused of working with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The protest followed rising tensions in Minnesota after the fatal shooting of anti-ICE activist Renee Nicole Good during a confrontation with federal agents.

Lemon framed the entire spectacle as civic virtue. He insisted he was “not an activist, but a journalist” and argued that protest inside a church remains constitutionally protected speech.

The footage tells a messier story.

Video released after the incident shows Lemon interacting with the group beforehand, appearing familiar with organizers and the plan. One outlet described the operation as “Operation Pull-Up.” That undercuts the narrative Lemon later pushed — that he simply arrived to document an event that unexpectedly “spilled” into a worship service.

Intent matters. So does outcome. The outcome looked like this: a sanctuary overrun, a service derailed, congregants shaken, and children crying while activists shouted and gestured at the pews.

That is far from “peaceful assembly.” It is targeted disruption.

The First Amendment protects speech. It does not grant a roaming license to invade private spaces and commandeer them for political theater. Rights have edges because other people have rights too. Worshippers do not lose their liberty because activists feel righteous.

That basic distinction keeps a free society from collapsing into a contest of intimidation.

RELATED: Americans aren’t arguing any more — we’re speaking different languages

Photo by Heather Diehl/Getty Images

This case matters because it tests whether the country still draws that line. If activists can storm a church mid-service, scream at families, and then hide behind the First Amendment, the standard becomes simple: The loudest mob sets the rules. Next week it will be another church. Then a synagogue. Then any gathering that activists decide deserves punishment.

The Justice Department is right to examine the FACE Act here. Congress passed it to stop coercion dressed up as protest — the use of obstruction and intimidation to prevent Americans from exercising basic freedoms. That principle doesn’t change because the target shifts from an abortion clinic to a church sanctuary.

The press corps’ selective outrage makes the problem worse. Cultural elites demand “safety” and “inclusion” in every other arena, but many of them treat Christian worship as an acceptable target. They police speech in classrooms and boardrooms, then shrug when activists shout down prayer.

That double standard signals something deeper than hypocrisy. It signals permission.

Lemon’s defense captured the rot in one sentence: Making people uncomfortable, he said, is “what protests are about.” Fine. Protest often makes people uncomfortable. But discomfort does not justify trespass. It does not excuse intimidation. It does not cancel someone else’s right to worship in peace.

A society that cannot protect sacred spaces will not protect much else for long. If the law refuses to punish conduct like this, the lesson will spread fast: Invade, disrupt, harass — then claim virtue and dare anyone to stop you.

America does not need a new normal where mobs treat churches like political stages. It needs consequences.

ROOKE: Anti-ICE Protesters Made Fatal Mistake In PR Battle Over Minnesota

They invaded a sacred space where families were worshiping

The left’s ‘fascism’ routine is a permission slip for violence



The alternate reality Democrats have constructed is falling apart in real time. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said the following when asked to comment on an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shooting a woman in Minneapolis who was attempting to run over the agent with her car: “What we saw today was a criminal, a criminal, murder a woman and shoot her in the head while she was trying to escape and flee for her life.”

She then called “disgusting” the “editorializing” of those who argue that the ICE agent was in front of the car as it was accelerating, just before he fired. “Watch it for yourself, watch it for yourself,” she concluded, with supreme confidence that any viewer would see with the same skew of her own lens.

A significant portion of the American media and popular culture has normalized the idea that totalitarians have taken over the government.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) went even harder over the rhetorical cliff in responding to the shooting. He classified interpretations of the ICE officer’s action as self-defense as “bull***t” and demanded that ICE “get the f**k out of Minneapolis.” Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D) in New York followed suit, calling the event a “murder” and a “horror.”

It is a stark bit of evidence of how American society has been warped by the twisted rhetoric of the radical left regarding political conflict in our country.

The video from the officer who fired at the vehicle indicates clearly, however, that it was accelerating in his direction, with him close enough to touch the hood. How is it possible to watch video footage and see it as the “murder” of someone “flee[ing] for her life”? The vehicle was illegally blocking a law enforcement vehicle. Instead of complying with the demand to exit the vehicle as any sane person would do, the driver hit the gas, making contact with the law enforcement officer before being shot.

Are we to believe that ICE agents came there precisely to kill her?

The New York Times published a video analysis that supposedly debunks the claim that the agent fired in self-defense. How? Well, the wheels of the SUV turned to the right just in time to avoid hitting the agent. Never mind that the agent was standing just in front of the vehicle when it started to move forward quickly, and he moved to avoid it. By the Times’ logic, the agent would apparently have been justified to use force only after the SUV had hit him.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) said he doubts an FBI investigation of the shooting could reach a “fair outcome.” He’s given no reason why he believes this. But of course, if your view is that all sides not directly aligned with you ideologically are Nazis, this is a logical conclusion.

One might first hypothesize that Ocasio-Cortez, Frey, Walz, Mamdani, and others who share their bizarre interpretation of the evidence are cognitively challenged in some way. We do not wholly discount this possibility.

But the more likely answer is that such things become possible when a significant portion of the American media and popular culture has normalized the idea that totalitarians have taken over the government and are actively looking to kill their opponents. In such a scenario, attempting to run over the totalitarians with your car might not only be an acceptable choice — it might be the most moral one.

The Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin connected the event to the language the far left has been using to describe ICE: “This is the direct consequence of constant attacks and demonization of our officers by sanctuary politicians who fuel and encourage rampant assaults on our law enforcement who are facing [a] 1,300% increase in assaults against them and an 8,000% increase in death threats.”

There is no doubt that political radicals have been foaming at the mouth about ICE and other aspects of the Trump administration’s policies in the most extremist language. They’ve justified using violence against them even since before the first Trump administration took office.

RELATED: Fraud thrived under Democrats’ no-questions-asked rule

Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

The alleged assassin who murdered Charlie Kirk in September, who was involved in a relationship with a transsexual, had come to believe that Kirk and other conservatives who criticized the overreach of trans radical activism were such a deadly threat that only lethal force was appropriate. He wrote anti-fascist messages on the casings of the bullets he used.

None of this is a surprise in a culture in which American nationalism is seen as the equivalent of Nazism and violent attacks against the Trump administration and its supporters are cheered on and encouraged. And it is not just the explicitly political media that embraces this insanity.

Witness the response to “One Battle After Another,” the recent film by Paul Thomas Anderson, loosely based on Thomas Pynchon’s novel “Vineland.” Starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Sean Penn, the film cheerleads for a radical anti-fascist terrorist organization as they wage war on American police and immigration forces. Penn is cast in a stupendously comical role as a caricature of which the left never tires: He is a military figure and a white supremacist who nonetheless is sexually attracted to nonwhites. All of the admirable figures in the film are revolutionary terrorists. The response by critics in the mainstream media has been a virtually unanimous cheer.

We are in a dangerous place. Leftist radicals are giving no indication of cooling their rhetoric — or their actions.

Buckle up. It is going to get rougher before it gets better.

Editor’s note: This article appeared originally at the American Mind.