MixCollage-07-Oct-2025-02-38-PM-9301

The Case Of The Child Killer Released From Prison Just Got Even More Insane

Criminal Justice

Kentucky

Leftists

Liberals

Matt Walsh

Murder

Opinion

Prisons

Serial Killers

Violent Crime

In February 2020, two professors participated in a <a href="https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/02/experts-debate-the-regulation-of-hateful-speech-on-campus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/02/experts-debate-the-regulation-of-hateful-speech-on-campus/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1759330618947000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0_Nus6xBc7ezkBvs9uTOra">debate</a> hosted by Harvard on the subject of hate speech and whether it constitutes “violence.”
Lisa Feldman Barrett, a psychology professor at Northeastern University, argued that, yes, hate speech can be violence based on the stress responses in the brain when confronted with speech one finds offensive. Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist at New York University, called Barrett’s argument a “huge disservice to what we are trying to do at universities” and warned that opening up this concept to a room full of students will lead to them equating speech and ideas they don’t like to violence. And when violence is the perception, the only recourse is more violence.
Little did these professors know that they were sitting on a powder keg with a short fuse. Who can forget the chaos that ensued in 2020 and beyond? And since then, with just a few exceptions, numerous violent outbreaks in the public square have been initiated by those rallying around left-wing causes.
Given that the vast majority of college professors <a href="https://dukechronicle.com/article/duke-university-faculty-survey-political-leanings-liberal-conservative-moderate-centrist-harvard-yale-variation-across-school-tenure-status-demographics-20241022" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://dukechronicle.com/article/duke-university-faculty-survey-political-leanings-liberal-conservative-moderate-centrist-harvard-yale-variation-across-school-tenure-status-demographics-20241022&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1759330618947000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0suXDDFCeetl9-FSmRkqFb">identify</a> as “liberal” or “very liberal,” we now have a sizable petri dish in which young people learn that violence is an available tool at their disposal — a tool used to dispose of speech they want eliminated from the public square.
We saw the culmination of this earlier this month with the cruel assassination of conservative icon Charlie Kirk. According to <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5506576-charlie-kirk-suspect-hatred-texts/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5506576-charlie-kirk-suspect-hatred-texts/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1759330618947000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0cG3uMfqu-15s9JBLWWPSQ">text messages</a> sent by the young man in custody for shooting Kirk, he “had enough of his hatred,” saying that “some hate can’t be negotiated out.” And what “hate” deserved silencing in this twisted mind of the killer? Allegedly, he was romantically involved with his roommate, a male who identified as a female, and Kirk was an outspoken critic of gender identity ideology, as are many others around the world.
Equating the widely held, scientific truth of biological sex to “hate” is absurd. But, regardless, “hate” speech should never be the subject of violence or censorship — especially not on college campuses. Once the bastion of the marketplace of ideas, universities are quickly becoming breeding grounds for uncritical thinking where uniformity of thought is encouraged and dissenters are silenced. Alliance Defending Freedom’s Center for Academic Freedom, where I serve as director, has intervened in numerous situations where conservative students and student groups — <a href="https://adflegal.org/case/turning-point-usa-suny-cortland-v-cortland-college-student-association/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://adflegal.org/case/turning-point-usa-suny-cortland-v-cortland-college-student-association/?utm_source%3Ddailywire%26utm_medium%3Doped&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1759330618947000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3OgGQQHlGz-ZmvEMI4Y6gk">including TPUSA chapters</a> — have been attacked simply for espousing ideas that go against the grain.
Young people didn’t learn the idea of violence as a solution to discomfort in a vacuum. As previously mentioned, the left-wing bias that permeates academic faculty is eye-opening. <a href="https://heterodoxacademy.org/blog/are-colleges-and-universities-too-liberal-what-the-research-says-about-the-political-composition-of-campuses-and-campus-climate/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://heterodoxacademy.org/blog/are-colleges-and-universities-too-liberal-what-the-research-says-about-the-political-composition-of-campuses-and-campus-climate/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1759330618947000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3eLAotLPKJODCTDdKgtwqX">Studies</a> show that, in 1989, the liberal-to-conservative faculty ratio was 2:1; by 2017, it was 5:1. A 2022 <a href="https://freespeechcenter.universityofcalifornia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/NFH-VOICE-GRANT-REPORT-Politics-of-the-Professoriate-2.7.22-1-1.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://freespeechcenter.universityofcalifornia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/NFH-VOICE-GRANT-REPORT-Politics-of-the-Professoriate-2.7.22-1-1.pdf&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1759330618947000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0F0adF8_CdxMyEku0U7Vcx">report</a> from the National Center for Free Speech and Civic Engagement found 69.5% of professors identified as “solidly liberal,” while only 13.2% were “conservative.” A 2023 Harvard <a href="https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/5/22/faculty-survey-2023-politics/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/5/22/faculty-survey-2023-politics/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1759330618947000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3J3uwPJgWsq3OveEVAmblP">study</a> showed that its own faculty displayed a 26:1 liberal-to-conservative ratio. This lack of viewpoint diversity has played a significant role in fostering hostility toward free speech.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial">Get 40% off new DailyWire+ annual memberships with code FALL40 at checkout!</a></h3>
The simple solution is for the adults in the room to acknowledge the consequences of faulty ideas and take steps to foster diversity of thought. This means hiring faculty who share different opinions. This means hosting respectful debates where students can witness civil discourse. This means that, if students disrupt respectful debate, campus leadership will take measures to hold unruly protestors accountable. And this means, most importantly, that we should move past the idea that speech protected by the Constitution is equivalent to “violence.”
There are only two ways to enact change in society: speech or violence. In our current political and cultural environment, we’ve seen where both ends of the spectrum draw their lines. But a democratic society cannot long exist when one party believes that it is acceptable to kill those with whom it disagrees. Virtually every civilization throughout history has chosen violence; our founders, on the other hand, chose a better path.
Now is the time to preserve that path.
* * *
Tyson Langhofer is senior counsel and director of the Center for Academic Freedom with <a href="http://www.adflegal.org/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.adflegal.org/?utm_source%3Ddailywire%26utm_medium%3Doped&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1759330618947000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1sroCl7-wqa7zVSXPqasqY">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> (<a href="https://twitter.com/ADFLegal" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://twitter.com/ADFLegal&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1759330618947000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0rr8NLbEmHuac-ozsbbWhA">@ADFLegal</a>).
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Kirk Debate

Free Speech Is Essential. Universities Must Do Everything They Can To Preserve It.

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

American Universities

Conservatives

Free Speech

TPUSA

US-POLITICS-TRUMP-KIRK-SHOOTING

Christian Faith Was On Full Display At Charlie Kirk’s Memorial And Leftists Are Confused

Bible

Charlie Kirk

Christianity

Democrats

Don Lemon

Legacy Media

memorial

The Atlantic

Turning Point USA

The following is an edited transcript of a speech delivered by Michael Knowles at “This Is The Turning Point with Special Guest Michael Knowles” held at the University of Minnesota on Monday, September 22, 2025.
* * *
This event was originally supposed to be a conversation between Charlie and me. Now it will be a conversation about Charlie — and what his assassination means for our country. The enemies of civilization — the assassin as well as the people who excused and cheered him on — thought that they could stop Charlie Kirk’s movement. In reality, they could not even stop his speaking tour.
I would like to begin with a prayer. Charlie had a great affinity for St. Michael the Archangel. And I think the St. Michael prayer speaks especially to our moment.
<blockquote>St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray. And do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, thrust into Hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls.</blockquote>
Twelve days ago, a ruined soul assassinated one of the brightest figures of our generation. And when I say “bright,” I don’t just mean Charlie’s rhetorical skills, which surpassed those of just about everyone in public life. I don’t just mean his political genius, which led him, at just 18 years-old, to found the most significant cultural institution on the American Right; which took him to the stage of the Republican National Convention by age 22; and which brought most of the United States government, including the president, vice president, and secretary of state, to his memorial service. I’m not talking about any of his accomplishments — be they in broadcasting, publishing, coalition building, or any of the other things that Charlie mastered.
Charlie’s brightness came, not primarily from his professional accomplishments, but from his character. You didn’t have to be a personal friend of his to know it. You could see it in everything he did. There was simply a light and a levity to the man. And it was constant, even when he was stressed. Even when he was arguing. Even when he suffered setbacks. And that light and that levity stemmed from one fact: Charlie’s Savior lives.
We’re mourning Charlie right now, and it’s right to mourn Charlie. It’s right to grieve. I have no use for the happy-clappy kind of modern religion that tells us we can’t be sad when our friends die simply because we have faith in their salvation.
Death is bad. Murder is evil. People who commit murder need to be punished. People who celebrate murder need to be punished too. Death reminds us that something has gone wrong. Death was not part of the original plan. Jesus wept at the death of his friend just moments before He raised him from the dead.
We can know “that in everything God works for good with those who love him, who are called according to his purpose,” while still recognizing the difference between good and evil. We can entrust Charlie’s soul to Our Lord Jesus Christ, as Charlie always entrusted himself, while still knowing that his assassin took something from us that he didn’t have to take.
What the assassin took was not even Charlie. Charlie belongs to God, as do we all. What the assassin took from us more precisely was what we imagined Charlie’s future to be. That’s part of what makes death so shocking: the realization that our plans are not in fact guaranteed. “Man plans, and God laughs.”
“But he was going to do this.” “She was going to do that.” “We were going to speak at the University of Minnesota together.” We weren’t, actually. We do not have ultimate control over those things. Everyone who knew Charlie knew he would be president one day. But “would” is a conditional verb; “would” depends upon “ifs” that are out of our control. Charlie would have been president. But he won’t be.
In the wake of Charlie’s death, many people are presuming to declare what he would have believed about this or that issue. Not what he did believe, mind you. But what he would have believed, what he would have said if he had lived just a little bit longer.
This kind of talk is as unseemly as it is absurd. “It is appointed for men to die once, and after that the judgment.” With the exception of his beloved wife and the people very closest to him, those who would chime in for Charlie today are appropriating an authority that does not belong to them. It’s a usurpation. At best, it’s a waste of time. And one thing that Charlie never did was waste time.
He accomplished more in his 31 years than most people could accomplish in many lifetimes. His most public accomplishments were political. His most important were religious. He wanted to be remembered for his faith. He wanted to help as many souls to Heaven as he could. If you want to honor Charlie, go to church. Read the Bible. Pray. And do it now. Don’t wait. Now might be your only chance.
<div id="attachment_975885" style="width: 912px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-975885" class="size-large wp-image-975885" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/GettyImages-2236356067-902x576.jpg" alt="MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA - SEPTEMBER 22: Attendees hold up posters of Charlie Kirk during the &quot;American Comeback Tour&quot; event at Northrop Auditorium on the University of Minnesota campus on September 22, 2025 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The event was hosted by political commentator Michael Knowles after the assassination of Charlie Kirk earlier this month. (Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)" width="902" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/GettyImages-2236356067-902x576.jpg 902w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/GettyImages-2236356067-300x192.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/GettyImages-2236356067-768x491.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/GettyImages-2236356067.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 902px) 100vw, 902px" />Stephen Maturen/Getty Images</div>
Many people are doing just that. I saw it myself last Sunday. You will not be surprised to learn that I attend a rather traditional church. Smells and bells and suits and ties. One thing that means is that it’s easy to tell when someone new shows up. Someone who just looked for the nearest church because he felt a sudden desire to be close to God. Someone whose “Sunday best” is usually a t-shirt and jeans.
I saw a lot of t-shirts at church last Sunday. And I was thrilled to see those t-shirts. (Next week, however, they should put on a jacket.) But I was thrilled to see those t-shirts then. Because it meant that people who had left the church were returning. People who perhaps had never been to church were showing up for the first time. And they were showing up because of Charlie.
I was one of the hundreds of thousands of people who attended Charlie’s memorial. When you count those who streamed it, I was one of over one hundred million people who watched it live. It was a remarkable event in many ways. But two things stood out in particular.
First, Charlie’s widow, Erika, gave one of the most powerful speeches I’ve ever heard. I was sitting with some of the toughest politicians in the world. I don’t think there was a dry eye in the house. In just one of several arresting moments in her speech, Erika forgave the man who murdered her husband. Because Christ on the cross asked his Father to forgive his killers — because we all ask God to forgive us as we forgive those who trespass against us. At a time when half the country, it seems, minimizes, excuses, and even celebrates political violence, Erika Kirk gave us a glimpse of Calvary.
But the second most striking part of the memorial was that the leadership of our federal government spent four hours proclaiming the Gospel to the entire world. This should not have been surprising. We’re a country founded by people who called themselves Pilgrims. Our country was settled to be “a model of Christian charity.” Our government was established on the premise that our Creator endows us with rights. Our national anthem declares, “Conquer we must, when our cause it is just, and this be our motto: in God is our trust.” Seeing our national leaders proclaim the Gospel should not have been surprising. But it was. Because we hadn’t seen it in a long time. Many of us had never seen it in our lifetimes.
The memorial was perfectly Charlie: on the one hand, it was about eternity — about the truths that transcend all ages and places; on the other hand, it was eminently political — temporal, local, particular. There is no contradiction between the two. Because we’re both of those things. We’re souls, which are eternal; and we’re bodies, which are temporal.
People tend to fall into one of two errors on this subject today. They either think that politics is everything — more important than family, more important than morality, so important that we murder people over disagreements. Or they think that politics is nothing — that we should ignore policy fights and debates and keep our pure and precious hands from being sullied by the muck of practical politics. Charlie understood that both errors miss the mark. That we need to keep our eyes on eternal things — that we’re never quite at home in this world because we’re pilgrims on our way to the heavenly Jerusalem — but also that we’re political creatures in time and space. Which means that we have to do things. Which means that our faith will give a certain shape to the political community, which exists for the common good.
So what should we do now? We should forgive our enemies’ trespasses, and we should prevent our enemies from trespassing against us in the future.
Some people seem to misunderstand Christian forgiveness. They think it’s somehow contrary to criminal justice — that it means letting criminals off the hook, that it means anarchy. On the contrary, Christian forgiveness is about recognizing that vengeance belongs to the Lord, who will repay, while justice belongs to the civil authority, which does not bear the sword in vain. Erika Kirk forgave her husband’s killer, and the state of Utah will inject poison into that killer’s veins until he’s dead. There is no contradiction between these two things. 
Christian forgiveness does not demand that we allow the cruel to rape the earth. It demands that we love our enemies. And sometimes love is tough. In our personal lives, love means praying for those who persecute us. In politics, love usually means punishing the guilty, for both the protection of the innocent as well as for the betterment of the guilty. No one benefits from crime, decay, and disorder.
<div id="attachment_975889" style="width: 879px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-975889" class="size-large wp-image-975889" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/GettyImages-2236356069-869x576.jpg" alt="MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA - SEPTEMBER 22: Political commentator Michael Knowles points to an empty chair on stage during the &quot;American Comeback Tour&quot; event at Northrop Auditorium on the University of Minnesota campus on September 22, 2025 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The event was hosted by Knowles after the assassination of Charlie Kirk earlier this month. (Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)" width="869" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/GettyImages-2236356069-869x576.jpg 869w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/GettyImages-2236356069-300x199.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/GettyImages-2236356069-768x509.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/GettyImages-2236356069.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 869px) 100vw, 869px" />Stephen Maturen/Getty Images</div>
We cherish the marketplace of ideas in America. In the wake of Charlie’s assassination, many are inclined merely to redouble our devotion to the “marketplace of ideas.” But this instinct misses a crucial step. We had a marketplace of ideas. The Left shot it up. If we wish to restore the healthy exchange of ideas, we need to refortify the marketplace.
Marketplaces of all kinds require rules, confidence, and common media of exchange. They require order. Liberty requires order. You can’t be undisciplined and free. You can’t be ignorant and free. That’s why we don&#8217;t let toddlers vote. 
What we must do now is reassert order. We must insist upon the acceptance of basic truths and moral goods, not as the asymptotic goal of endless debate but as the axiomatic foundation without which debate cannot occur. C.S. Lewis called these principles “the Tao.” Others call them the natural law or the first principles of practical reason. If you’ve ever studied algebra, you know that you must begin with certain axioms — premises such as a = a and if a=b then b=a. These axioms are themselves unprovable. But without assuming them, you can’t prove anything else. The same is true of politics and morality. We can’t quite prove that we should live in an ordered society, but without assuming so, we can’t prove anything else.
If our society is to function, we must foreclose certain antisocial behaviors and suicidal ideologies. We must stop, to borrow a phrase from Chesterton, &#8220;the thought that stops thought.&#8221; Practically, this means we must stigmatize certain evil ideas and behaviors, and we must ostracize people who insist upon them. More practically, this means that people who persist in such disorder should lose their social standing. In certain cases, they should lose their jobs. You can’t maintain a hospital if the nurses seek to murder half the patients. You can’t operate a school if the teachers wish death upon their students’ parents. You can’t run a restaurant if the customers expect the kitchen staff to poison them. 
There must be consequences to heal this national trauma and to re-establish a healthy politics. Those consequences require clarity of vision, courage in our convictions, and an extraordinary amount of God’s grace. I believe it can be done. You all who have come out here tonight, despite the threats from the people who would destroy our political community, have shown that you believe it can be done. The man we honor tonight gave his life in the confident hope that it can be done. 
We must never despair. We must never surrender to the forces that seek our destruction. And we must work tirelessly to ensure that this moment truly becomes a turning point for America.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="This Is The Turning Point | Special Guest Host Michael Knowles" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zFTeMeExCDs?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Turning Point USA’s “American Comeback Tour” Continues In Minnesota After Kirk Assassination

Charlie’s Brightness Came From His Character. Because His Savior Lives.

Faith

Freedom of Speech

Minnesota

HOUSTON—President Donald Trump’s chief of Immigration and Customs Enforcement slammed liberal judges stymying the agency’s mass deportation effort by creating “roadblocks” based on their personal “opinions” in a recent interview with The Daily Wire.
Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons called efforts to block key immigration policies “super frustrating” and acknowledged that they negatively affect arrest and deportation operations targeting criminal illegal immigrants roaming the country.
“Every day it seems like we have some type of adverse decision that&#8217;s going to affect how we&#8217;re doing our job,” Lyons said.
“What we’re seeing is a lot of [the] time when judges opine with their own opinions on it, they&#8217;re going against how Congress wrote the law. And sometimes we have congressional leaders who are barking at what we&#8217;re doing or complaining about it,” Lyons added. “Well, they have the power to change it.”
“All ICE is doing is enforcing the law the way it’s written and the way Congress laid it out,” he said. “So, I think that’s the biggest frustration for us, not only is it these roadblocks impeding how we’re doing our law enforcement mission, it’s the fact that it&#8217;s just roadblocks based on someone&#8217;s opinion that they don’t like what ICE is doing.”
<div id="attachment_961241" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-961241" class="wp-image-961241 size-full" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/08/GettyImages-2229249665.jpg" alt="WASHINGTON, DC - AUGUST 13: FBI agents walk on patrol in the U street neighborhood on August 13, 2025 in Washington, DC. U.S. President Donald Trump announced plans to deploy federal officers and the National Guard to the District in order to place the DC Metropolitan Police Department under federal control and assist in crime prevention in the nation's capital." width="1024" height="683" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/08/GettyImages-2229249665.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/08/GettyImages-2229249665-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/08/GettyImages-2229249665-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/08/GettyImages-2229249665-768x512.jpg 768w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />Credit: Photo by Andrew Leyden/Getty Images.</div>
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, the younger brother of former liberal Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, recently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/judge-rules-trump-illegally-deployed-us-military-to-los-angeles">blocked</a> Trump from using the approximately 300 National Guard soldiers left in Los Angeles from “engaging in arrests, apprehensions, searches, seizures, security patrols, traffic control, crowd control, riot control, evidence collection, interrogation, or acting as informants, unless and until Defendants satisfy the requirements of a valid constitutional or statutory exception.”
The Supreme Court also recently overturned a separate attempt by a U.S. District Court judge’s order barring immigration agents from conducting “roving patrols” in the City of Angels.
U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, an Obama appointee, ruled in August that the Trump administration can’t deport accused MS-13 gangbanger Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Uganda for the time being after charging him with human smuggling.
Xinis previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/judge-gives-trump-admin-deadline-to-return-man-mistakenly-deported-to-el-salvador" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ordered</a> the Trump administration to “take all available steps to facilitate the return” of Abrego Garcia after he was deported to El Salvador in March despite an “administrative error.”
&nbsp;
<div id="attachment_928805" style="width: 1210px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-928805" class="wp-image-928805 size-full" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Untitled-design-6.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="628" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Untitled-design-6.jpg 1200w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Untitled-design-6-300x157.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Untitled-design-6-1024x536.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/06/Untitled-design-6-768x402.jpg 768w" sizes=" (max-width: 1200px) 100vw, 1200px" />Credit: Photo by Christopher Dilts/Bloomberg via Getty Images</div>
Trump administration officials have set a goal to deport 1 million illegal immigrants each year. By the end of August, ICE had deported more than 332,000 illegal immigrants, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
While the latest number outpaces the previous fiscal year, when 271,000 illegal immigrants were deported, the current pace of deportations falls short of the president’s ambitious goal.
Lyons, however, said he’s confident that ICE will reach that number with the agency’s street operations, combined with its push for illegal immigrants to self-deport.
The Trump administration has offered to pay for commercial <a href="https://www.dhs.gov/cbphome" target="_blank" rel="noopener">flights</a> for those seeking to leave the country on their own, in addition to handing them a $1,000 “exit bonus.”
“I think we’re going to see our number, definitely with the CBP Home app and those that decided to leave on their own,” Lyons said.
Lyons, who said he plans to retire in “a year or two,” also shared his vision for success at the conclusion of the Trump administration’s historic deportation campaign.
“At the end of it, if we’ve done our best to eradicate MS-13, if we’ve had a significant impact on the fentanyl problem that’s affected almost every state, if we were able to locate and find all the unaccompanied children, if we were able to really show all the public safety threats were removed, to me that’s success, to me that shows that ICE did its law enforcement mission it was meant to do.”

Untitled design (1)

EXCLUSIVE: Trump’s ICE Chief Slams Liberal Judges For Creating Deportation ‘Roadblocks’ Based On Personal ‘Opinions’

Deportations

Donald Trump

Immigration and Customs Enforcement

MixCollage-15-Sep-2025-04-51-PM-6957

Don’t Let Them Lie To You. Charlie Kirk’s Killer Is A Left-Wing Terrorist.

assassination

Leftism

Progressivism

In our household, we lean more Carrie Underwood than Taylor Swift. It’s nothing personal — though, I’ll admit, it sometimes feels personal when celebrities use their platforms not only to sing but also to lecture half the country. Taylor Swift has been explicit in her support of President Biden and left-leaning causes. Travis Kelce, for his part, was the face of a national campaign telling Americans to roll up their sleeves and get the COVID shot. So, let’s be clear from the outset: their politics aren’t mine, and their cultural influence often points in the opposite direction of what I want for my family and this country.
And yet, here we are — celebrating their engagement. And celebrating is exactly the right word.
Because while my ideological Venn diagram doesn’t perfectly overlap with “Swiftie Nation” or its new hubby, there is one place where the circles meet in the middle: the enduring institution of marriage. Two people at the absolute height of their careers, perhaps the most famous singer and the greatest tight end to ever wear an NFL uniform, have chosen to stop, look each other in the eye, and say: “This is the person I want to commit my life to.” That is worth applauding.
Swift commands more than 280 million followers on Instagram alone. Kelce has over seven million. Combine their reach, and you have a cultural juggernaut — bigger than most cable networks.
Young people study their lives like Scripture. So, when two such figures choose marriage — not another “situationship,” not cohabitation without vows, not endless serial dating, but marriage — they are broadcasting a message stronger than any new single or touchdown dance: love is worth binding. Commitment is worth celebrating.
That matters in a culture where marriage is often delayed, derided, or dismissed altogether. Divorce rates may be down, but so too are marriage rates, with many young people opting out of family life altogether. Celebrities, more often than not, model instability rather than stability. Swift and Kelce choosing marriage provides an image of permanence at a time when our culture too often glorifies impermanence.
Make no mistake: this isn’t an argument that either of them has suddenly found their inner Ronald Reagan. I’m not suggesting Taylor Swift is about to record a country ballad praising the Second Amendment or that Travis Kelce will do the Trump dance after his next touchdown. Their politics are what they are. But we conservatives don’t need to agree with someone on everything to recognize when they’ve taken a step toward timeless truth.
Marriage is older than the United States. It predates kings, constitutions, and pop charts. It is the bedrock of civilization. Even when cultural elites mock or minimize it, they cannot erase the reality: when a man and woman bind themselves together in marriage, they are creating the most time-tested foundation for family and community that the world has ever known.
That’s why this engagement — between two people we wouldn’t consider political allies — is so instructive. It reminds us that truth has a stubborn way of showing up in places we least expect it. It reminds us that marriage is attractive even to those who don’t share our worldview. And it reminds us that conservatives should not be shy in celebrating when culture, however briefly, affirms what we’ve known all along.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=summer&amp;utm_content=editorialsummersale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial">End of Summer Sale &#8211; Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
Taylor Swift has sung about breakups for nearly two decades. Now she’s signaling something far more meaningful than another heartbreak anthem. Travis Kelce has been praised for toughness on the field; now he’s showing a different kind of courage off of it — the courage to commit. For young people watching — and let’s be honest, tens of millions of them are — this story has the potential to shift the narrative. Instead of “just keep swiping,” the message becomes: “choose one, and choose forever.”
There’s a deeper point here for conservatives. Too often, we — myself included — reduce culture to a scoreboard of “us versus them.” Who endorsed Biden? Who took a knee? Who did the Bud Light ad? That matters, yes. Ideas have consequences, and politics shapes the future. But not everything has to be reduced to the partisan trenches. Sometimes, culture reminds us that God’s design still resonates even when people don’t recognize it as His design.
Marriage is one of those reminders.
So no, I don’t expect Taylor Swift to headline CPAC anytime soon. And no, I don’t expect Travis Kelce to start quoting C.S. Lewis in the locker room. But I do expect that their engagement will make some young people pause and reconsider the script they’ve been fed — that career comes first, that love is temporary, that vows are outdated. Seeing the most famous woman on the planet say yes to marriage — and seeing one of the NFL’s biggest stars embrace that same choice — undercuts the lie that commitment is uncool.
We don’t have to be Swifties to be happy for them. We don’t have to endorse their politics to endorse their vows. In fact, it is precisely because we disagree with them on so much that celebrating this moment becomes even more powerful. It shows that conservatives can recognize and affirm the good, even in those who don’t see the world as we do.
And maybe — just maybe — Swift and Kelce will discover that the overlap between their world and ours is bigger than they think.
For now, let’s give them this: congratulations. Marriage is still worth singing about.
* * *
Gates Garcia is the host of the YouTube show and podcast “We The People.” Follow him on Instagram and X @GatesGarciaFL.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

2025 Stanley Cup Final – Game Four

Love Wins: Even When We Don’t Vote The Same

Dating

Gen Z

Marriage

Taylor Swift

Travis Kelce

Bravo star Jennifer Welch is getting dragged on social media for suggesting that Trump supporters should be barred from dining at Chinese, Indian, and Mexican restaurants, but should instead be forced to bring their “fat asses over to Cracker Barrel.&#8221; 
The “Sweet Home Oklahoma” star made the comments during an appearance on the “I’ve Had It” podcast. 
“I’ve had it with white people that triple Trumped, that have the nerve and the audacity to walk into a Mexican restaurant, a Chinese restaurant, an Indian restaurant, go to perhaps their gay hairdresser,” the mom of two said in anger.
“Triple Trump” refers to agreeing with the president’s policies on immigration, DEI, and LGBTQ issues, <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/08/11/us-news/bravo-star-jennifer-welch-says-trump-voters-should-be-banned-from-mexican-chinese-indian-restaurants/">according</a> to the New York Post. According to internet slang databases &#8216;Triple Trumper&#8217; can also refer to a person who voted for President Trump in all of the last 3 presidential elections: 2016, 2020 and 2024.
“I don’t think you should be able to enjoy anything but Cracker Barrel,” she continued.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Take Your A** to Cracker Barrel" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qc40eQNL8tk?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
“If you want to triple Trump, if you want to brow beat DEI, if you want to brow beat gay people, you want to brow beat black people as you have been doing for hundreds of years… White people that triple Trumped should be boycotted, banned from enjoying the best thing that America has to offer, which is multiculturalism,” Welch said during her rant.
“Get your fat asses out of the Mexican restaurant. Get your fat asses over to Cracker Barrel because nobody wants to see your f***ing smug ass, teeny weeny pink arm, big gut around,” she went on. “Nobody wants to see that sh**, no one.”
Commenters on social media shot back at the TV personality.
“It’s always the most intolerant and hateful pretending to love everyone,” one person said in reply, as the New York Post <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/08/11/us-news/bravo-star-jennifer-welch-says-trump-voters-should-be-banned-from-mexican-chinese-indian-restaurants/">reported</a>.
“Uber Karen. I voted for Trump and I’m having a burrito with chorizo and spinach dip for lunch today.”
“Ah, so minorities are just flavors to her, this explains so much,” a person on X said in reply. 
“What an idiotic comment… completely detached from reality,” another person wrote. “Legal immigrants are not illegal immigrants! Stop conflating the two.”

Jennifer Welch

Bravo Star Blasted For Saying Trump Voters Should Be Banned From Ethnic Restaurants

Celebrities

Entertainment

Politics

While the nation mourns the devastating floods that wreaked havoc in Texas, some are taking to TikTok to use the disaster as a jumping off point for shocking racial commentary.
Sade Perkins, a former member of the Houston Food Insecurity Board, posted a video on TikTok pointing out the “double standard” between attitudes towards the girls at Camp Mystic and children of families being deported.
&#8220;Camp Mystic is a Whites-only girls Christian camp. They don&#8217;t even have a token Asian, they don&#8217;t have a Token Black person, it is an all White, White-only conservative Christian camp,&#8221; Perkins claimed.
&#8220;They want you to have sympathy for these people. Meanwhile, they are deporting your family members. And I need you all to keep that in mind before you all get out there and put on your rain boots and go find these little girls.&#8221;
Houston Mayor John Whitmire&#8217;s office <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/us/former-houston-appointee-claims-flood-ravaged-camp-mystic-whites-only-viral-video" target="_blank" rel="noopener">condemned</a> Perkins’ comments: &#8220;The comments shared on social media are deeply inappropriate and have no place in a decent society, especially as families grieve the confirmed deaths and the ongoing search for the missing,&#8221; the statement from the mayor&#8217;s office read.
The mayor’s office told FOX News they would not reappoint Perkins and would be “taking immediate steps to remove her permanently from the board.”
She’s not the only one trying to politicize the flood, which has claimed the lives of at least 82 people.
Another TikToker, who goes by the username <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@bossysptenstarsimon" target="_blank" rel="noopener">bossysptenstarsimon</a>, implied that some higher power sent the floods to target white people in particular in a video under the caption “I hope this is a lesson 2 ppl in the floods.”
“I find it ironic that it was the deep southern [sic] of Texas that it happened to,” the user, who is black, says. “Are we not paying attention to the certain” — at this point, she stops speaking and brushes her face, to suggest skin tone —&#8221;that’s on the videos?”
“Hopefully this is opening up some eyes and showing people that he watches,” she adds.
A number of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/libs-dragged-for-blaming-texas-flood-disaster-on-trump?author=Amanda+Harding&amp;category=undefined&amp;elementPosition=1&amp;row=3&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+News&amp;rowType=Vertical+Carousel&amp;title=Libs+Dragged+For+Blaming+Texas+Flood+Disaster+On+Trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">leftwing celebrities</a> and political figures have also politicized the flooding, with many implying that Texas — a largely Republican state — brought the disaster upon itself by voting for President Donald Trump, who they say cut disaster response funding. But meteorologists agree that the devastation in Texas was in no way caused or made worse by the administration&#8217;s cuts, as The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/theres-no-evidence-to-suggest-doge-cuts-caused-texas-flood-devastation-meteorologists-say?topStoryPosition=undefined&amp;author=Sam+Korkus+and+Isabel+Garcia&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=3&amp;row=1&amp;rowHeadline=Top+Stories&amp;rowType=Top+Stories&amp;title=There%E2%80%99s+No+Evidence+To+Suggest+DOGE+Cuts+Caused+Texas+Flood+Devastation%2C+Meteorologists+Say" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>.

Storm Helene Causes Massive Flooding Across Swath Of Western North Carolina

TikTok Users Try To Make Texas Floods All About Race

Floods

Texas

TikTok

As we celebrate July 4, it’s important to go back a few weeks and recall what happened on June 14. On that day, we saw one portion of our country take time to celebrate the 250th Anniversary of our nation’s army, and a different portion protest what they seem to believe is a rising monarchy in our nation’s capital.
Now, there have always been differences of opinion among Americans. It’s one of the characteristics of a functional democracy. Over the past five years, however, we have experienced a fundamental division in our nation that must be confronted.
About 30 years ago, Jerry Porras and Jim Collins wrote a book called “Built to Last,” chronicling their research on organizations that thrive and survive over long periods of time. One of the most important durability-inducing elements they cite is the adherence to a small set of core values, inviolable traits that define the principles and behaviors around which the company’s founders built the organization. To reject or violate those values is to advocate for the organization’s demise.
While a country is not synonymous with a company, I am convinced that the same concept can be applied to a nation that wants to thrive and survive. I’m also convinced that a difficult conversation about America’s core values is long overdue.
It’s worth noting that core values are not the drivel that some companies produce using marketing jargon and wordsmithing to come up with a list of sugary, generic adjectives that will be palatable to just about everyone. Core values are the authentic principles that underlie the character of an organization — or a nation — over time.
For the better part of the past 50 years, the U.S. has been struggling with an increasing sense of confusion around its core values. Recently, however, that confusion has morphed into a serious and dangerous division, calling to mind Abraham Lincoln’s reference to the words of Christ, reminding Americans that “a house divided against itself cannot stand.”
More and more people, like me, are concerned that our country will not be able to stand if we remain so divided. We cannot continue to go forward simply agreeing to disagree, or worse, not even acknowledge our disagreements and allow ourselves to be torn apart. It’s time that we, as a nation, face and answer a few basic questions before it’s too late.
What are those questions, the ones that underlie our values? Here are the most obvious ones.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/freedom/">JULY 4 SALE: Get Six Months Of DW+ Free</a></h3>
Are we founded upon Judeo-Christian values and dependent on God’s providence, or are we a nation that is essentially agnostic, removing faith in God from public life, education, and the military? It can’t be both.
Do we believe in freedom of speech, press, and religion, or are we willing to allow elected and unelected influencers to determine what are and are not acceptable words and beliefs? Again, these are incompatible.
Do we believe in a limited central government, or do we prefer a powerful, singular federal provider of rules and services? Pick one.
In light of these questions, I see two ways to move forward.
First, we can go back and honestly embrace the core principles that the founders believed would hold us together and keep us united, and then recommit to those principles, without apology. It’s as simple, and sometimes difficult, as that.
Or, second, we can dismiss the ideals of our founders and decide, after 249 years, to create a new country. We can roll the dice and bet that we can conceive of a better model than Adams, Hamilton, Jefferson and the others did.
What we can’t do, and what we’ve been doing for too long, is avoid these questions and let our core principles, and an entire nation, die a slow death as we drift further and further apart while the media, academia, and creative judges determine what America really is. We are a democracy, still, and we must choose our own path, or it will be chosen for us.
Now, there are many differences between companies and countries, not the least of which is the inability of countries to “fire” their own citizens, or even simply facilitate their departure. An organization’s CEO, on the other hand, can say to employees who don’t want to adhere to its core values that it’s time for them to work somewhere else. A nation cannot do that, and rightly so. However, if that nation wants to survive, it also cannot overly accommodate or apologize to those who oppose its values.
It’s worth noting that this challenge we face today existed at the very beginning of our nation, though to a lesser extent. Even then, there were those who had sided with the British or who would have preferred a monarchy, perhaps one led by George Washington. They were not all forced to leave the country, but they were required to come to terms with the principles of this experimental nation if they wanted to stay.
So, if we decide to recommit to our founders’ ideals — and I’m certainly in favor of that path — then we must politely and unequivocally say to citizens who dislike the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, or any foundational aspect of American life: “You don’t have to believe what we believe, practice any particular faith, or even celebrate the freedoms upon which we are founded. You don’t. But you do have to make peace with the reality of our core values and ideals, which are based on those things. Or you can make plans to live somewhere better suited to your preferences.” 
That is neither intolerant nor snarky; it is clear. And clarity is kind.
We must stop allowing people to pretend that the nation’s values are something other than they are, because there is nothing kind about that.
It&#8217;s ironic that the nations in the world today that have the most intolerant and unkind values are the ones that won’t even let people opt out and leave. Just look at North Korea and Cuba, though there are others. This is, of course, absurd.
But for a free nation like ours to bend over backward to accommodate those who hate what we stand for is equally absurd. So let’s make a decision so that we can reverse the trend toward divisiveness and disunity, and get back to rebuilding a nation around the values that have served us for 250 years.
* * *
Patrick Lencioni is one of the founders of The Table Group and is the pioneer of the organizational health movement. He is the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/stores/Patrick-M.-Lencioni/author/B001ILFMB2?ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_2&amp;qid=1751571498&amp;sr=8-2&amp;isDramIntegrated=true&amp;shoppingPortalEnabled=true&amp;ccs_id=3de65105-8f38-4be0-90f1-d7c66bb8daa2">author of 13 books</a>, which have sold over 10 million copies and been translated into more than 30 languages.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Fireworks on the Fourth of July, Washington, D.C.

Can We Still Agree On America’s Core Values? A Nation Divided On Independence Day

Books

Founding Fathers

Republicans

United States

New York City is on the verge of electing an actual communist mayor of the city, and this requires us to ask a question.
Why?
What is happening with the Left that they&#8217;ve decided to opt for Bernie Sanders over anything like a mainstream Democratic Party candidate?
Of course, this has been coming for a long time. Bernie Sanders ran an incredibly strong race against Hillary Clinton in 2016. Bernie Sanders then ran an incredibly strong race against Joe Biden in 2020.
Thus, there is something happening inside the Democratic Party — and it&#8217;s growing —and it&#8217;s growing — and it&#8217;s growing. That doesn&#8217;t mean the Democratic Party is growing and growing. In fact, the Democratic Party is shrinking even as this movement is growing.
It&#8217;s essentially a tumor destroying the health of the Democratic Party from the inside. But something is happening.
Zohran Mamdani, the former no-name, 33-year-old trust fund kid who’s a socialist and anti-Semite, who has worked for all of three combined years, I believe, in his entire adult life (and that includes him rapping), is now on the verge of becoming the mayor of the most important city in the West.
I think reasonable people look at this and think he is winning in spite of those things. I think that&#8217;s missing the point. He&#8217;s winning because of those things.
That’s because there&#8217;s an Omnicause on the Left; the Scavenger cause, which is to tear down all the systems. Inchoate rage at the system channeled into socialist economics, Howard Zinn-inspired foreign policy, and destructive hatred of traditional institutions.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/bss-ep-2226-member-exclusive?elementPosition=6&amp;row=2&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
That Scavenger philosophy has gained tremendous credence with the dissatisfied Left, a Left that achieved many of its victories and now has plunged itself directly into nihilism.
The problem with the Left over the course of the last several decades has been that they caught the car. In the 1960s, the Left in the United States began to catch the car with everything from the sexual revolution to the overturning of the constitutional order. In doing so, they then had to construct a system.
The problem is that when you construct a system and then the system fails and fails and fails again, and then the backlash happens in the form of a Donald Trump, you start to lose your mind, you start to become insane.
Thus, instead of them wanting to capture the commanding heights of the system and change the system from within incrementally, “make it better,” which used to be the Democratic way, now they just want to burn everything down.
That is not a particularly attractive message to a broader American public that does not want to burn everything down. The secret about President Trump is that when President Trump ran in 2016, pledging that he was going to burn everything down, the reality is that people realistically believed that he was going to burn some things down, but he was certainly not going to burn everything down.
They actually thought he would be a lot more moderate than he said he would be. It turned out in many ways that he was significantly more institutionalist in his approach from 2016 to 2020 than people expected him to be. Even today, all the crazy people who are yelling about him challenging democracy, won’t recognize that democracy is not under threat, that the courts are not under threat. This idea that Donald Trump is simply running roughshod over our most cherished institutions is a lie.
But Democrats have always used revolutionary language in order to push forward evolutionary ends. Interestingly, Donald Trump did the same thing inside the Republican Party. He used revolutionary language to achieve evolutionary ends. All of that is normal politics in the United States.
That’s what&#8217;s currently happening to the Left. Bernie Sanders and his entire wing of the party are using revolutionary language because they want an actual revolution. This is why you have seen the Left nodding at riots over the course of the last decade, at actual attempts at revolution in the streets.
It&#8217;s why so much of the Left was fine with Luigi Mangione shooting the United Healthcare CEO, because revolution requires a few broken eggs, and it is why Bernie Sanders now has the whip hand in the Democratic Party.
Zohran Mamdani is simply channeling Bernie Sanders at this point, with a few added features. He&#8217;s ethnically diverse, he&#8217;s not originally born in America, his father is a postcolonial studies professor at Columbia University of Shia Muslim descent, and his mother is an Indian-American filmmaker of Punjabi Hindu descent.
All these things add a smattering of exoticism to Zohran Mamdani. The fact that he is a rabid anti-Semite obviously sprinkles a lot of pizazz atop the Omnicause stew. He&#8217;s Greta Thunberg with a beard, with a more ethnically exotic background, and with a lot more charisma.
He is the face of the international Left in a nutshell. In his victory speech, he said:
<blockquote>Let me close with this. In these dark times, I know that it is harder than ever to keep faith in our democracy. It has been attacked by billionaires and their big spending by elected officials who care more about self-enrichment than the public trust, and by authoritarian leaders who rule through fear. But above all, our democracy has been attacked from within. For too long, New Yorkers have strained to find a leader who represents us, who puts us first, and we have been betrayed time and again after so many disappointments. 
The heart hardens, belief becomes elusive, and when we no longer believe in our democracy, it only becomes easier for people like Donald Trump to convince us of his worth, for billionaires to convince us that they must always lead. And I pledge to you that we will remake this great city not in my image, but in the image of every New Yorker who has only known struggle.</blockquote>
“Known struggle?” Are you kidding me? Mamdani has experienced a shocking lack of struggle in his young and non-achievement-oriented life. 
According to <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/kylemullins/2025/06/24/heres-how-much-new-york-city-mayoral-candidate-zohran-mamdani-is-worth/">Forbes</a>:
<blockquote>At a panel in Harlem in February, New York state assembly member Zohran Mamdani discussed a piece of proposed legislation that would strip Columbia University of various tax breaks and redirect the revenue to fund the City’s university system. Mamdani’s no stranger to Columbia—his father is a Harvard-educated, renowned professor there, and he grew up in university-owned housing. “Columbia was our first landlord,” he told the crowd, according to an account in the student newspaper. &#8230; Forbes estimates Mamdani to be worth around $200,000. &#8230; Mamdani attended Bank Street, a prestigious Manhattan private school that now costs as much as $66,000 a year for elementary school students, before graduating from the Bronx High School of Science, one of the city’s best public schools. &#8230; he studied Africana Studies at Bowdoin College, a private liberal arts school in Maine.
After graduating, he worked on his mom&#8217;s sets. He tried his hand at a rap career using the monikers Young Cardamom and Mr. Cardamom, and “took jobs working on several political campaigns and community organizing efforts.”</blockquote>
That is legitimately his entire work history. This is a person who is campaigning for those who “have only known struggle.”
What is he actually saying?
What he is saying is that if you are unsuccessful in life, what is required is a revolution: a revolution led by someone like Zohran Mamdani, a trust-fund kid.
That&#8217;s what he is. And yet he is treated as though he is a revolutionary.
By the way, a dirty little secret about revolutions: They are very rarely led by true members of the low-income classes. They are usually led by upper-middle-income people who feel upset that they didn&#8217;t get their “fair worth.”
That’s Mamdani. And so he is taking Bernie Sanders’ economics and slapping on top of that all of the spicy peppers that makes so many liberals go absolutely gaga, particularly white, highly-educated, rich, elite liberals.
All the things that normal people see in Mamdani as problems are nectar to the Left.
When I say that Bernie Sanders is taking over the Democratic party, this is what I mean. AOC is Bernie Sanders wearing AOC’s face. Mamdani is Bernie Sanders wearing Mamdani’s face.
There’s a reason that leftists are marching with a queer flag and a Palestinian flag and an Iran flag and also voting for Zohran Mamdani: because they are about destroying the things that work — in the name of nothing.
It is not as though they want to build a better system. They do not have the capacity to build a better system.
This is about a shout and a cry at the “establishment,” screaming at the moon in the name of revolution.
That is Bernie Sanders.
Bernie has never been on a major piece of legislation. Bernie is a lifelong loser. He&#8217;s a loser.
But that doesn&#8217;t mean he’s not dangerous.
Losers can absolutely be dangerous.

New York City Mayoral Candidates Campaign Ahead Of Primary Election

Greta Thunberg With A Beard

Ben Shapiro

Bernie Sanders

Communism

New York City

Zohran Mamdani

You know, sometimes, in the hurly burly argle bargle mumbo jumbo of divisive political discourse, it becomes too easy for us to stop listening to the arguments of our opponents. Remember: we all want to see America thrive, and THEY all want to see America particlized in a self-aggrandizing orgy of violent destruction, then set on fire to destroy even the remaining traces of the personal liberty and prosperity we once spread not only from sea to shining sea but all around the world, so they can sweep away our flawed but magnificent nation and replace it with a socialist paradise that will quickly devolve into the hell of oppression and terror that has been the fate of every other socialist paradise while their misbegotten, ignorant and self-deceiving idealism slowly reveals itself to be nothing more than a ravenous hunger for power with its attendant sadistic cruelties.
But for a moment, let’s put those minor differences between us aside and see if we can try to understand our friends on the Left so we can begin to appreciate the goals and ideas that have turned them into such flaming dirt-bags.
For instance, take the riots in Los Angeles. They began when some Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers tried to arrest a number of illegal migrants for the purposes of deportation. Now sure, you could say the migrants had broken federal laws and the ICE agents are duly appointed federal law enforcement officers, working to roll back the slow-motion invasion of our country by unvetted illegals that took place during an administration run by sinister and faceless leftist operatives hiding behind the mindless shell of a once-sentient machine politician who had been propped up for half a century by an unimaginably corrupt corporate news media.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show">WATCH: The Andrew Klavan Show</a></h3>
But let’s look at the other side of the argument. We can’t just go around randomly sending child molesters and drug dealers back to their native countries. These are jobs Americans won’t do because they’re largely civilized people. And who will mow our lawns in order to weasel their way into our confidence and get closer to our children? You don’t want an untidy lawn, do you? And when you think of it in that larger context, you can see why masked thugs are pelting federal officers with rocks and torching cars and looting businesses while waving foreign flags to signal the fact they want to destroy the last best hope of civilization and replace it with whatever gangster-ocracy they just escaped from.
Now some of you might ask: who in the world would believe a crazy-ass argument like that?  But let me ask you something: Did you know that 56% of young liberal white women have been treated for mental illness. Think about that the next time one of these ladies posts her support for the rioters. See, when you first hear that most liberal white girls are mentally ill, you probably think the mental illness is just something a little neurotic like when they won’t let you pay for dinner but then sleep with you anyway. But no, it turns out that talking to some of these dames is more like being trapped in Arkham Asylum desperately trying to escape from a shrieking Admiral Levine who’s coming after you with one of those emasculators they use to castrate bulls, and then just as you lock yourself in an abandoned broom closet and think you’ve escaped him or her or whatever the hell he is, you turn around and there’s some 21-year-old from UCLA screaming “globalize the intifada” and voting for Gavin Newsom, and just as you think you’re done for, you wake up in your own bed and whisper, “Oh thank God, it was only a dream,” and then roll over and, holy crap, she’s lying right next to you. And you didn’t even pay for dinner. And also Los Angeles is on fire.
So now that we understand that these riots have the full and enthusiastic support of young leftist white women shrieking at us unintelligibly from whatever enclave of privilege has made it possible for them to believe the nutty crap they believe, I think we can begin to have more civilized and serious conversations about providing air support to the National Guard.
* * *
This excerpt is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Andrew Klavan Show</a>.”
The views expressed in this satirical article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Andrew Klavan is the host of “The Andrew Klavan Show” at The Daily Wire. Follow him on X: <a href="https://x.com/andrewklavan" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@andrewklavan</a>
Klavan is the bestselling author of numerous books, including the Cameron Winter Mystery series. The fourth installment, “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1613165536?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_thcv_3&amp;storeType=ebooks" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A Woman Underground.</a>” His most recent nonfiction release is “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Kingdom-Cain-Finding-Literature-Darkness/dp/0310368340/?_encoding=UTF8&amp;pd_rd_w=nMYjR&amp;content-id=amzn1.sym.bc3ba8d1-5076-4ab7-9ba8-a5c6211e002d&amp;pf_rd_p=bc3ba8d1-5076-4ab7-9ba8-a5c6211e002d&amp;pf_rd_r=133-8344803-2786917&amp;pd_rd_wg=7a8J3&amp;pd_rd_r=5791ea0f-6d96-4732-9d6a-3a4e6b348bb5&amp;ref_=aufs_ap_sc_dsk" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Kingdom of Cain: Finding God in the Literature of Darkness.</a>” (May 2025, Zondervan/HarperCollins).

Menu