NOT ON OUR WATCH: Patriots stand up to Antifa in Portland



The city of Portland, Oregon, is allegedly being taken over again by blue-haired Antifa leftists — but of course, officials are claiming that everything is fine.

“Portland is not war-ravaged. There’s no insurrection. There’s no threat to national security, and there’s no need for military troops. Military service members should be dedicated to real emergencies,” Oregon Governor Tina Kotek (D) said in a promotional video.

“It’s like, this is the meme,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales jokes. “This is literally the ‘everything is fine’ meme. We’re seeing the fire, the fireworks, the Molotov cocktails, the tear gas dispersed, and governor of Oregon says, ‘Everything’s fine.’”

Meanwhile, Antifa has been leading the state through months of unrest — and tax-paying American citizens have had enough of the gaslighting from their local government.


“When you see that Democrat-run cities will not actually handle things, will not actually address things, patriots in this country decided, you know what, we’re going to show up instead,” Gonzales explains, referring to a clip of young men who tried to drown out Antifa by chanting “USA.”

“And you’ve got even more patriots showing up saying, ‘You know what? We’re going to challenge the city of Portland, but we’re going to do it in a respectful, constitutional way. You want to allow Antifa to take over the sidewalks with their medic tents? What happens when we do the same thing?’” she continues.

The host of the “Speak the Truth” podcast, Matt Tardio, is among the patriots standing up to the Oregon government — and he recorded a clip of himself pointing out the “medic tents” that Antifa has set up all over the streets.

“Here’s what we’re going to do, because the Portland police, I don’t think it matters if you want to walk down the street. Antifa is allowed to own this side of the street over here. These are alleged medic tents. So, this is what we’re going to do tomorrow,” Tardio said in the clip.

“This side of the street is going to belong to us because apparently you can just claim sidewalks in Portland as your own and prevent anybody from moving down them. So, my curiosity is simply whether or not we are going to be held to the same standard as Antifa,” he continued.

“Obviously, this should never happen in an American city,” Gonzales comments. “Unfortunately, that is Portland, Oregon, in 2025.”

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.

Charlie Kirk's death revealed the kingdoms colliding in America



The contrast couldn’t be more severe: two martyrs, two causes. One died for the religion of social justice, the other for the gospel of Jesus Christ.

America now stands at a crossroads. Which path will we choose: the broad path that leads to chaos and destruction, or the narrow path that leads to peace and life?

Out of Charlie Kirk’s death, lives are being changed forever. The gospel is advancing. The church is awakening.

On one side, you have the death of George Floyd. Within 24 hours of the video going viral, nationwide protests erupted. Students walked out of classrooms. Crowds poured into the streets. City blocks went up in flames. Businesses were ransacked. Stores looted. Police officers, in many cases, stood down and watched as precincts were burned to the ground.

And Floyd wasn’t the only flashpoint. In Ferguson, Missouri, the death of Michael Brown sparked weeks of violent rioting, leaving entire neighborhoods scorched. In Kenosha, Wisconsin, the police shooting of Jacob Blake ignited nights of arson and looting, culminating in chaos that left the city smoldering.

In each case, Americans were told to understand the destruction as “the voice of the oppressed.” Politicians bent over backward to excuse the lawlessness, even pledging to bail out masked agitators who turned cities into war zones. Lives were lost in the name of “justice.”

And when the flames weren’t enough, activists decided to go further. They declared entire neighborhoods “autonomous zones” — police-free utopias where oppression was supposed to vanish and a new society would flourish.

The same voices behind the riots called for defunding the police. And what did that bring? More chaos. More crime. More death. Neighborhoods left vulnerable. Families abandoned. Chaos parading as justice.

The death of a true martyr

Now, set that against what followed the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

He was murdered for daring to give the biggest microphone not to his friends but to those who opposed him. He welcomed debate. He confronted hostile ideas head on. He refused to be silenced by intimidation. And for that, he paid with his life.

But look at the fruit that followed his death.

No buildings burned. No businesses looted. No cities reduced to ash.

Instead, only candles burned — vigil candles, lifted high in memory of a man who gave his life for truth. People gathered in churches. Prayers rose instead of Molotov cocktails. Instead of mobs demanding blood, thousands made decisions to follow Christ. Politicians who would never publicly declare the name of Jesus suddenly spoke openly about the need for the gospel. Instead of excuses for lawlessness, there were testimonies of salvation.

RELATED: Charlie Kirk showed us the lie at the heart of progressive culture

BENJAMIN HANSON/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images

And yet — after Charlie’s death — all of the cowards found their courage. The very people who shrank from confronting him in debate while he lived now slander him when he cannot answer. They spit on his memory because they could not withstand his arguments. They malign his character because they could not overcome his convictions. Their attacks reveal not strength but weakness. Not courage but cowardice.

It is difficult not to see the parallel with Stephen, the first Christian martyr. In Acts 6–7, Stephen stood before the religious leaders of his day — and make no mistake, progressivism is a worldly religion — and he proclaimed the truth with boldness. Scripture records that “they could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking” (Acts 6:10). And when they could not defeat his arguments, they killed him.

So it is with Charlie. When the world could not overcome his courage, when they could not silence his voice in life, they silenced him in death. But like Stephen, his testimony will outlive his assassins. His words will echo longer than their slander. His life will bear fruit that their hatred cannot erase.

Two different spirits

What explains this radical difference?

On one hand, you have a spirit of rage. A spirit that justifies destruction as expression. A spirit that sees justice as vengeance. That spirit has turned too many American cities into ruins.

On the other hand, you have the Spirit of God. A Spirit that produces repentance instead of riots. Worship instead of war. Candles instead of chaos. When the world lost Charlie Kirk, a true martyr, the response revealed something deeper — something eternal.

The battle lines of our culture are not political but spiritual. The evidence could not be more clear.

The apostle Paul reminds us that “we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness” (Ephesians 6:12). What we are seeing is not merely two different sets of political responses but two different kingdoms on display.

One kingdom demands chaos and calls it justice.

The other kingdom meets tragedy with truth, grace, and hope in Christ.

Which one will define the future of this nation?

History teaches us that rage consumes itself. Cities burned in Ferguson and Kenosha are still rebuilding years later. Families who lost businesses in Minneapolis never recovered. Violence devours its own.

But the fruits of the Spirit endure. Out of Charlie Kirk’s death, lives are being changed forever. The gospel is advancing. The church is awakening.

The call to Christians

The contrast forces every Christian to make a choice.

Will we be swept into the mob’s logic — that vengeance and destruction are the only way forward? Or will we align ourselves with the way of the cross — the way of sacrifice, prayer, and truth proclaimed without fear?

The stakes are high. What America witnessed in the days after George Floyd’s death and the days after Charlie Kirk’s assassination is the clash of worldviews, the collision of kingdoms.

One worldview justifies destruction in the name of oppression. The other proclaims that true freedom is found only in Christ.

One kingdom burns buildings. The other lights candles.

Riots or revival?

The Charlie Kirk Memorial last month was not just a gathering. It was a glimpse into the kind of nation we could be if truth, courage, and the gospel were once again at the center of public life. It was a reminder that even in death, the witness of one faithful man can ignite a movement more powerful than any protest.

The flames of rage consume cities. The flames of faith light the world.

The choice is clear: Riots or revival? Chaos or Christ?

RELATED: Charlie Kirk's legacy exposes a corrosive lie — and now it's time to choose

PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images

And for those who haven’t seen the Charlie Kirk Memorial, hear this from someone who was there in person: No video could capture the palpable power in that room. Politician after politician rose — not to promote themselves but to proclaim Christ’s gospel.

Testimonies poured out of the life Charlie lived, giving himself to students across this country, loving his wife and children faithfully, and modeling what it means to live for something greater than yourself, what it means to truly submit and boldly follow Christ Jesus our Lord.

The video screens could show faces but not the depth of what we felt inside that hall. The sheer numbers of people. The dignitaries. The everyday Americans. All united as we sang, listened, cried, mourned, and celebrated our friend Charlie Kirk.

I cannot remember a time when I was more inspired to tell the truth, to oppose the lies, and to stand for Christ more boldly — and I am now wasting no time in doing so.

We’ve all got work to do. We’ve got a civilization to save. We have a King to proclaim, Jesus Christ.

So Charlie, rest in heaven — we’ll take it from here.

This article is adapted from an essay originally published at Liberty University's Standing for Freedom Center.

Liberty cannot survive a culture that cheers assassins



When 20-year-old loner Thomas Matthew Crooks ascended a sloped roof in Butler County, Pennsylvania, and opened fire, he unleashed a torrent of clichés. Commentators and public figures avoided the term “assassination attempt,” even if the AR-15 was trained on the head of the Republican Party’s nominee for president. Instead, they condemned “political violence.”

“There is absolutely no place for political violence in our democracy,” former President Barack Obama said. One year later, he added the word “despicable” to his condemnation of the assassin who killed Charlie Kirk. That was an upgrade from two weeks prior, when he described the shooting at Annunciation Catholic School by a transgender person as merely “unnecessary.”

Those in power are not only failing to enforce order, but also excusing and even actively promoting the conditions that undermine a peaceful, stable, and orderly regime.

Anyone fluent in post-9/11 rhetoric knows that political violence is the domain of terrorists and lone wolf ideologues, whose manifestos will soon be unearthed by federal investigators, deciphered by the high priests of our therapeutic age, and debated by partisans on cable TV.

The attempt to reduce it to the mere atomized individual, however, is a modern novelty. From the American Revolution to the Civil War, from the 1863 draft riots to the 1968 MLK riots, from the spring of Rodney King to the summer of George Floyd, the United States has a long history of people resorting to violence to achieve political ends by way of the mob.

Since the January 6 riot that followed the 2020 election, the left has persistently attempted to paint the right as particularly prone to mob action. But as the online response to the murder of Charlie Kirk demonstrates — with thousands of leftists openly celebrating the gory, public assassination of a young father — the vitriol that drives mob violence is endemic to American political discourse and a perpetual threat to order.

America’s founders understood this all too well.

In August 1786, a violent insurrection ripped through the peaceful Massachusetts countryside. After the end of the Revolutionary War, many American soldiers found themselves caught in a vise, with debt collectors on one side and a government unable to make good on back pay on the other. A disgruntled former officer in the Continental Army named Daniel Shays led a violent rebellion aimed at breaking the vise at gunpoint.

“Commotions of this sort, like snow-balls, gather strength as they roll, if there is no opposition in the way to divide and crumble them,” George Washington wrote in a letter, striking a serene tone in the face of an insurrection. James Madison was less forgiving: “In all very numerous assemblies, of whatever character composed, passion never fails to wrest the sceptre from reason. Had every Athenian citizen been a Socrates, every Athenian assembly would still have been a mob,” he wrote inFederalist 55. Inspired by Shays’ Rebellion and seeking to rein in the excesses of democracy, lawmakers called for the Constitutional Convention in the summer of 1787.

Our current moment of chaos

If the United States Constitution was borne out of political chaos, why does the current moment strike so many as distinctly perilous? Classical political philosophy offers us a clearer answer to this question than modern psychoanalysis. The most pointed debate among philosophers throughout the centuries has centered on how to prevent mob violence and ensure that most unnatural of things: political order.

In Plato’s “Republic," the work that stands at the headwaters of the Western tradition of political philosophy, Socrates argues that the only truly just society is one in which philosophers are kings and kings are philosophers. As a rule, democracy devolves into tyranny, for mob rule inevitably breeds impulsive citizens who become focused on petty pleasures. The resulting disorder eventually becomes so unbearable that a demagogue arises, promising to restore order and peace.

The classically educated founders picked up on these ideas — mediated through Aristotle, Cicero, John Locke, and Montesquieu, among others — as they developed the structure of the new American government. The Constitution’s mixed government was explicitly designed to establish a political order that would take into consideration the sentiments and interests of the people without yielding to mob rule at the expense of order. The founders took for granted that powerful elites would necessarily be interested in upholding the regime from which they derived their authority.

Terror from the top

History has often seen disaffected elites stoke insurrections to defenestrate a ruling class that shut them out of public life. The famous case of the Catilinarian Conspiracy in late republican Rome, in which a disgruntled aristocrat named Catiline attempted to overthrow the republic during the consulship of Cicero, serves as a striking example.

In the 21st century, we face a different phenomenon: Those in power are not only failing to enforce order, but also excusing and even actively promoting the conditions that undermine a peaceful, stable, and orderly regime.

The points of erosion are numerous. The public cheerleading of assassinations can be dismissed as noise from the rabble, but it is more difficult to ignore the numerous calls from elites for civic conflagration. Newspapers are promoting historically dubious revisionism that undermines the moral legitimacy of the Constitution. Billionaire-backed prosecutors decline to prosecute violent crime.

For years, those in power at best ignored — and at worst encouraged — mob-driven chaos in American social life, resulting in declining trust in institutions, lowered expectations for basic public order, coarsened or altogether discarded social mores, and a general sense on all sides that Western civilization is breaking down.

Without a populace capable of self-control, liberty becomes impossible.

The United States has, of course, faced more robust political violence than what we are witnessing today. But even during the Civil War — brutal by any standard — a certain civility tended to obtain between the combatants. As Abraham Lincoln noted in his second inaugural address, “Both [sides] read the same Bible and pray to the same God.” Even in the midst of a horrific war, a shared sense of ultimate things somewhat tempered the disorder and destruction — and crucially promoted a semblance of reconciliation once the war ended.

Our modern disorder runs deeper. The shattering of fundamental shared assumptions about virtually anything leaves political opponents looking less like fellow citizens to be persuaded and more like enemies to be subdued.

Charlie Kirk, despite his relative political moderation and his persistent willingness to engage in attempts at persuasion, continues to be smeared by many as a “Nazi propagandist.” The willful refusal to distinguish between mostly run-of-the-mill American conservatism and the murderous foreign ideology known as National Socialism is telling. The implication is not subtle: If you disagree with me, you are my enemy — and I am justified in cheering your murder.

Fellow citizens who persistently view their political opponents as enemies and existential threats cannot long exist in a shared political community.

“Democracy is on the ballot,” the popular refrain goes, but rarely is democracy undermined by a single election. It is instead undermined by a gradual decline in public spiritedness and private virtue, as well as the loss of social trust and good faith necessary to avoid violence.

The chief prosecutors against institutional authority are not disaffected Catalines but the ruling class itself. This arrangement may work for a while, but both political theory and common sense suggest that it is volatile and unlikely to last for long.

The conditions of liberty

Political order, in general, requires a degree of virtue, public-spiritedness, and good will among the citizenry. James Madison in Federalist 55 remarks that, of all the possible permutations of government that have yet been conceived, republican government is uniquely dependent upon order and institutional legitimacy:

As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust, so there are other qualities in human nature which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form.

In short, republican government requires citizens who can govern themselves, an antidote to the passions that precede mayhem and assassination. Without a populace capable of self-control, liberty becomes impossible. Under such conditions, the releasing of restraints never liberates — it only promotes mob-like behavior.

RELATED: Radical killers turned campus heroes: How colleges idolize political violence

Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images

The disorder of Shays’ Rebellion prompted the drafting of the Constitution, initiating what has sometimes been called an “experiment in ordered liberty.” That experiment was put to the test beginning in 1791 in Western Pennsylvania. The Whiskey Rebellion reached a crisis in Bower Hill, Pennsylvania, about 50 miles south of modern-day Butler, when a mob of 600 disgruntled residents laid siege to a federal tax collector. With the blessing of the Supreme Court Chief Justice and Federalistco-author John Jay, President George Washington assembled troops to put down the rebellion.

Washington wrote in a proclamation:

I have accordingly determined [to call the militia], feeling the deepest regret for the occasion, but withal the most solemn conviction that the essential interests of the Union demand it, that the very existence of government and the fundamental principles of social order are materially involved in the issue, and that the patriotism and firmness of all good citizens are seriously called upon, as occasions may require, to aid in the effectual suppression of so fatal a spirit.

Washington left Philadelphia to march thousands of state militiamen into the rebel haven of Western Pennsylvania. The insurrectionists surrendered without firing a shot.

Our new era of political violence rolls on, with Charlie Kirk’s murder being only the latest and most prominent example. Our leaders assure us they will ride out into the field just as Washington once did. Whether they will use their presence and influence to suppress or encourage “so fatal a spirit” remains an open question.

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

Videos Show Portland Police Letting Antifa Militants Go While Arresting Journalists

Portland Police are protecting violent leftist organization Antifa while ignoring or punishing the victims of their violence.

Antifa Is The Identity-Obsessed Progeny Of A Long Line Of Brutal Marxist Terrorists

If Antifa is to be defeated, its godless utilitarianism and Marxist identity-obsession that excuses in advance any and every action taken by the 'oppressed' against the 'oppressor' must be entirely rejected.

Why Gen Zers Like Me Will Never Be The Same After Charlie Kirk’s Assassination

Gen Z isn't going to tolerate the horrific death of Charlie Kirk. Their whole lives they've been told forced tolerance will give them safety.

Leftists' favorite F-word — and why they'll never drop it



I notice to my profound disappointment that two of my major scholarly projects landed with a thud. Despite years of research and two books on fascism and antifascism, my findings have been ignored by both the left and the right — including the so-called conservative media establishment.

That’s a pity, especially with so much loose talk about “fascists” running around Washington these days.

Fascism, as it existed in the 20th century, is dead. Antifascism, as it is wielded today, is a political weapon that thrives by manufacturing enemies.

My argument is straightforward: Fascism was a popular European movement in the interwar period, shaped by several conditions unique to that era — returning soldiers who saw themselves as a “front generation” after World War I, economic turmoil in countries like Italy, France, Romania, and Spain, disillusionment with corrupt parliamentary systems, and a “cult of the leader.”

Fascist movements also fed on fears of the Soviet takeover of Russia. Unlike the communists, who worked to spark revolutions across Europe, fascist groups pushed a revolutionary nationalist ideology.

The most representative example was Benito Mussolini’s Italian movement, which came to power after his March on Rome in October 1922. Italy was the only country to establish a full-fledged fascist government, although fascist or fascist-like parties held influence in coalitions elsewhere. The Italian regime blended a cult of the leader with corporatist economics and nostalgia for imperial glory.

Contrary to the later alliance with Hitler, Mussolini’s government initially drew support from patriotic Italian Jews and between 1934 and 1936 led European opposition to Nazi Germany, denouncing its anti-Semitism as barbaric. The 1938 anti-Jewish laws came only under heavy German influence.

Nazism was not “generic” fascism. Hannah Arendt was right to classify it as totalitarian and genocidal. While Hitler borrowed certain trappings from Latin fascists, Nazi Germany drew far more from Stalin’s Soviet model — particularly in its use of terror, secret police, and propaganda to remake reality.

Equating Mussolini’s authoritarian nationalism with Hitler’s genocidal regime is intellectually lazy, even if Mussolini’s disastrous decision to ally with Nazi Germany at the 11th hour paved the way for the comparison.

My critic Jacob Siegel accuses me of drawing this distinction to “sanitize” fascism. Not so. I do not treat it as an archaic movement out of nostalgia but because it is irrelevant to the contemporary West, which is dominated instead by a woke, bureaucratic left.

Antifascism, however, is another matter. It began with Marxists — and later communist regimes — branding capitalist nations that resisted revolution as “fascist.” The Frankfurt School and its American heirs expanded the label to cover ideas and movements far removed from Mussolini or Hitler. By the 1950s, an “F-scale” was used to screen government employees and teachers for supposed fascist sympathies.

RELATED: The cold civil war is real — and only one side is fighting to win

Photo by JOAQUIN SARMIENTO/AFP via Getty Images

Today, “antifascists” slap the term on anything that conflicts with their politics or lifestyle. Esteemed Yale professors Timothy Snyder and Jason Stanley insist our current president is not only a fascist but possibly a Nazi. In their view, opposing any part of the feminist or LGBTQ agenda puts one on the road to Hitlerian tyranny.

This rhetorical game serves a purpose: It shields the accusers from the obvious countercharge that they are the true totalitarians. In my book on antifascism, written as Antifa and Black Lives Matter riots engulfed American cities in 2020, I documented how the American left and its European counterparts mobilize with the same discipline and ruthlessness as the Nazis before they took power.

The difference is that today’s left faces no organized counterforce comparable to the German communists — and enjoys the support of a compliant media. That media not only excuses leftist violence but portrays it as justified. This mirrors the Nazi and communist tactic of claiming to be under siege even while holding power, using the manufactured threat as a pretext to crush dissent.

Fascism, as it existed in the 20th century, is dead. Antifascism, as it is wielded today, is a political weapon that thrives by manufacturing enemies. And the left is using it with remarkable success.

What do you call 12 Antifa radicals in body armor?



Since the 1990s, federal agencies and the media have fed Americans a steady diet of panic about shadowy “right-wing militias” — usually ex-military guys obsessed with guns and ready to wage war against the government at a moment’s notice.

The panic went into overdrive after January 6, 2021. But now, in a staggering act of projection, the threat they’ve spent decades warning about has arrived — only it’s coming from the radical left. And still, the feds insist on looking the wrong way.

Antifa cells are evolving. They’re abandoning mass protest tactics for small-cell terror and direct action.

Despite years of breathless rhetoric, the supposed wave of “right-wing terrorism” never materialized. Jan. 6 was a chaotic security failure, not an insurrection. Most of the defendants were unarmed. Many walked through open rope lines. And yet the regime has used that day to smear millions of Americans and justify years of political prosecutions.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) recently called Jan. 6 “the culmination of a sustained effort to undermine our democracy.” But what sustained effort? Four years later, no mass violence, no uprisings. Nothing at all.

Now, compare that to what we’re seeing from the radical left.

Ambush in Alvarado

After months of threatening Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, Antifa terrorists launched a coordinated attack on an ICE facility in Alvarado, Texas. This wasn’t a protest gone wrong. This was a planned ambush.

At least 11 people, dressed in black tactical gear, carried out the assault. First, they fired fireworks at the building, vandalized security cameras, and sprayed graffiti, including “ICE pig,” “traitor,” and other profanities on vehicles. The goal was to draw agents outside.

When two unarmed officers responded, one assailant opened fire from nearby woods, shooting a police officer in the neck. Another attacker, wearing a green mask, sprayed 20 to 30 rounds at the agents.

Authorities arrested 11 suspects. Ten were charged with attempted murder of a federal officer and firearms charges. One was charged with obstruction of justice. Police recovered AR-style rifles (one jammed), body armor, Kevlar vests, helmets, tactical gloves, radios, and Faraday bags to block phone signals.

Andy Ngo linked the attackers to an Antifa cell in Dallas-Fort Worth. It’s a miracle they failed. But what should alarm us is their level of funding, coordination, and willingness to kill.

Just the beginning

On Thursday, during a raid in Camarillo, California, ICE agents again came under fire. There's a pattern forming, and it isn’t isolated.

The same ideology — radical leftism, anti-Americanism, Marxism, anti-Zionism — is fueling a wave of political violence that dwarfs anything seen on the right. Consider the past eight months:

  • Assassination of United Healthcare CEO (Dec. 4): Luigi Mangione allegedly gunned down Brian Thompson in midtown Manhattan. His manifesto raged against the health care industry. Left-wing voices lionized him. Some disturbing polling shows young Democrats were more likely to condone the killing.
  • Double murder of Israeli embassy staff (May 21): Elias Rodriguez allegedly killed two staffers in D.C., shouting “Free Palestine.” He left a manifesto called “Escalate for Gaza: Bring the War Home.” He had ties to the China-linked Party for Socialism and Liberation.
  • Molotov attack at a pro-Israel rally in Colorado (June 1): Mohamed Soliman, an Egyptian national in the U.S. illegally, allegedly attacked demonstrators with a homemade flamethrower and Molotov cocktails. One victim later died. Soliman had reportedly planned the assault for a year.
  • Firebombing of Gov. Josh Shapiro’s home (D-Pa.) (April 13): Cody Balmer allegedly launched a Molotov cocktail into the Pennsylvania governor’s house during Passover. Shapiro, a rare pro-Israel Democrat, was targeted for his stance on Israel. His family was inside.
  • Attack on Atlanta police facility (March 6): A left-wing mob assaulted the Public Safety Training Center with rocks, bricks, and firebombs. Some were charged with domestic terrorism.
  • ICE facility attack in Portland (June 18): Rioters used fireworks and pushed dumpsters toward the facility. ICE responded with nonlethal force. Over 20 were arrested. Many were tied to the same Chinese-linked PSL network.
  • Shooting at No Kings protest in Salt Lake City (June 14): In a murky incident of left-on-left violence, Antifa-style “safety volunteers” shot and killed a bystander after reportedly misidentifying an armed protester.
  • Bomb-maker arrested in West Chester, Pennsylvania (June 14): Kevin Krebs was allegedly found with 13 pipe bombs, 3D-printed gun parts, 21 handguns, tactical gear, and an AR-15. He was arrested at a No Kings protest. He remains held without bail.
  • Attacks on Tesla and GOP offices (January-April, 2025): As Musk joined the Trump administration, Tesla sites nationwide were firebombed and vandalized. One self-described “queer” activist torched both a dealership and a Republican Party office in Albuquerque.

What we’re really dealing with

Not all these incidents were organized by the same groups. But together, they show a dangerous trend: increasing sophistication, coordination, and lethality among left-wing militants.

This isn’t just protest culture gone too far. It’s a movement gearing up for war. They’re training. They’re arming. They’re radicalizing online and in activist spaces. And while conservatives have long viewed themselves as the only side armed, that’s no longer true.

RELATED: ‘White, well-educated’ Democrats are demanding lawmakers 'get shot' to prove they're anti-Trump as deadly violence rises

Photo by David McNew/Getty Images

Groups like the Socialist Rifle Association and the John Brown Gun Club are producing radicals like Benjamin Song, a former Marine and the suspected ringleader of the July 4 ICE ambush.

Antifa cells are evolving. They’re abandoning mass protest tactics for small-cell terror and direct action.

What needs to happen now

Step one: Designate Antifa and its associated groups as domestic terrorist organizations. Trace their funding. Investigate every affiliated cell, especially those connected to the Party for Socialism and Liberation.

Step two: Ramp up law enforcement. Federal agents need to respond to ICE attacks with overwhelming force. Nonlethal crowd control won’t cut it.

Step three: Empower states. Legislatures should pass laws imposing serious penalties on those who interfere with immigration enforcement. If the feds won’t punish them, the states must.

Step four: Citizens must get serious. Stay armed. Stay trained. Sheriffs should follow the lead of Pinal County’s Mark Lamb and form citizen posses. It’s past time for more robust local defense.

The projection is over

For years, the corporate media and activist left warned you about “armed insurrectionists.” They told you the militia movement was coming. They said America would face domestic political terror.

Well, they were right.

But it wasn’t coming from where they said. It was coming from them.

Stop pretending the Democrats are imploding



Democratic leaders aren’t inciting attacks on Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers out of pure hatred for Donald Trump and his administration. Their motives are strategic. Practical. By undermining immigration enforcement, they protect a pipeline of future Democratic voters — including violent criminals like the “family man from Maryland.”

Once these illegal aliens receive driver’s licenses, they’ll land on voter rolls. They already count in the census, inflating congressional representation in blue states teeming with illegal immigrants. Democrats didn’t bring these “newcomers” here just to deport them.

Republicans imagine that all or at least most Americans are on the same wavelength with them. But that may not be the case.

If activists now ambush and shoot ICE agents, Democratic leaders seem to treat that as a price worth paying to preserve their long-term electoral advantage. And they can count on the corporate left-wing media to help them.

The press operates as an extension of the Democratic Party, not just in the United States but across the Western world. CNN, NBC, and MSNBC broadcast the same spin you’ll hear on CBC, BBC, Deutsche Welle, and France 4. With this media backing, Democrats face little scrutiny — even when they tacitly abet violence against federal agents.

Right now, public support for deportations hovers around 50%, and it might be higher if the media didn’t stage-manage the narrative. Watch a few minutes of network television or skim the New York Times, and you’ll come away thinking border czar Tom Homan’s raids target preschoolers and migrant field hands.

Fox News insists the anti-Trump mobs are just fringe radicals. They’re not. A massive leftist electorate just nominated Zohran Mamdani to be the next mayor of New York City, and if the polls mean anything, he just might win in the fall. Other major cities are led by mayors only slightly less radical — Karen Bass in Los Angeles, Brandon Johnson in Chicago, Michelle Wu in Boston. When it comes to immigration, they’re just as hostile to ICE and just as gushingly sympathetic to illegal aliens as Mamdani.

The “people” voted for these multicultural, America-be-damned leftists. The fantasy that Democratic voters are victims of a hijacked party is infantile nonsense. A growing share of the American electorate has radicalized — including black voters, government employees, and especially college-educated white women, who dominate the culturally leftist bloc in my own Pennsylvania borough.

Despite years of street violence, riots, and inflammatory rhetoric, the Democrats haven’t collapsed. They still hold a slight edge in the generic congressional ballot. RealClearPolitics polling shows the GOP ahead by only seven points. The Democrats may have lost ground — but they’re far from finished.

RELATED: ‘The Suicide Squad’: How Democrats keep blowing themselves up

Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images

Let’s not forget: In the last presidential election, Democrats lost the popular vote by just two million votes, running a hapless candidate against an incumbent with enormous political energy. That’s how effective the Democratic machine remains — even in a lopsided matchup.

No one should mistake this for incompetence or insanity. Yes, the party boasts plenty of scatterbrained motor mouths such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.). But don’t confuse theatrics with disarray. Democratic leaders push grotesque policies — mutilating children with “gender-affirming” surgeries, putting men in women’s sports, promoting race-based discrimination — but voters haven’t punished them for it.

Republican observers tend to judge the other side by their own standards. They also imagine that all or at least most Americans are on the same wavelength with them. But that may not be the case. Democrats don’t even pretend to feel regret when ICE officers take a bullet or when anarchists torch city blocks. They know their base relishes in the havoc.

This is calculated politics. Democrats want to expand their base through mass migration and lawfare, not persuasion. That’s cold strategy, not insanity.

If Republicans want to win, they need to stop imagining their opponents are self-destructing lunatics. They aren’t. Democrats play to win. The GOP must prepare for a real fight — not fantasyland.

DOJ slaps Karen Bass, LA City Council with 'long overdue' lawsuit: 'It ends under President Trump'



Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass stated earlier this month while radicals were savagely attacking U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in her city, "We will not stand for this."

The Democratic mayor was not condemning her fellow leftists' attacks on federal agents but rather the agents' enforcement of federal immigration law.

In the wake of the Los Angeles riots, Bass has kept up her anti-ICE, pro-illegal alien rhetoric, noting on Sunday, for instance, "Every community in L.A. is feeling the shock of these horrific ICE raids — this isn't just targeting one group, it's striking at the heart of our collective safety and trust."

The Trump administration gave Bass more than just ICE raids to complain about on Monday, filing a lawsuit against the mayor, Los Angeles City Council, and the City of Los Angeles over their alleged interference with the federal government's enforcement of immigration law.

"Sanctuary policies were the driving cause of the violence, chaos, and attacks on law enforcement that Americans recently witnessed in Los Angeles," Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement. "Jurisdictions like Los Angeles that flout federal law by prioritizing illegal aliens over American citizens are undermining law enforcement at every level — it ends under President Trump."

The complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California notes that immediately after President Donald Trump's re-election, the Los Angeles City Council, "wishing to thwart the will of the American people regarding deportations, began the process of codifying into law its Sanctuary City policies."

RELATED: Democrats who locked down America during COVID now cry dictator over Trump's deportations

Photo by BENJAMIN HANSON/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images

In late November, the L.A. City Council unanimously voted to establish L.A. as a "Sanctuary City."

The following month, Bass ratified the corresponding ordinance titled "Prohibition of the Use of City Resources for Federal Immigration Enforcement," which enshrined sanctuary policies into municipal law and barred "the use of City resources, including property and personnel, from being utilized for immigration enforcement or to cooperate with federal immigration agents engaged in immigration enforcement."

'Today’s lawsuit holds the City of Los Angeles accountable for deliberately obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration law.'

The ordinance — the "urgency clause," which makes clear that undermining the "incoming federal administration" was the goal — also prohibits city officials, including law enforcement officers, from directly or indirectly sharing data with federal immigration authorities.

The DOJ's lawsuit notes that L.A.'s sanctuary city laws are illegal and "are designed to and in fact do interfere with and discriminate against the Federal Government’s enforcement of federal immigration law in violation of the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution."

Lawyers for the government asked the district court to recognize that the ordinance's violation of the Supremacy Clause and 8 U.S. Code § 1373 makes it unlawful, unenforceable, and void ab initio, as well as to enter a permanent injunction barring Los Angeles, its city council, and the mayor from enforcing the ordinance.

RELATED: JD Vance rejects Democrats' narrative, names the 'real threat to democracy'

Photo by Apu Gomes/Getty Images

"Today’s lawsuit holds the City of Los Angeles accountable for deliberately obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration law," said U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California, who stressed in a tweet that the lawsuit was "long overdue."

'Very simply, we will liberate Los Angeles and make it free, clean, and safe again.'

"The United States Constitution's Supremacy Clause prohibits the City from picking and choosing which federal laws will be enforced and which will not," continued Essayli. "By assisting removable aliens in evading federal law enforcement, the City's unlawful and discriminatory ordinance has contributed to a lawless and unsafe environment that this lawsuit will help end."

The Los Angeles Times, which indicated Bass did not immediately respond to a request for comment, noted that radical L.A. city officials are contemplating striking back at the Trump administration with a lawsuit of its own.

The DOJ's lawsuit appears to be a major step toward another promise kept on Trump's part.

In his Tuesday speech at the 250th anniversary of the Army at Fort Bragg, Trump said, "Within the span of a few decades, Los Angeles has gone from being one of the cleanest, safest, and most beautiful cities on Earth to being a trash heap with entire neighborhoods under the control of transnational gangs and criminal networks."

"They don't like it when I say it, but I'll say it loudly and clearly: They'd better do something before it's too late," continued Trump. "Very simply, we will liberate Los Angeles and make it free, clean, and safe again."

"We will use every asset at our disposal to quell the violence and restore law and order right away," stressed the president.

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