Category: Scratch a Lib-Find a Moron

Portland Police Chief Cries After Admitting Suspects in Border Patrol Truck Attack Are Tren de Aragua Associates
Portland Police Chief Bob Day knew on the first day but withheld this information from the public as leftists urged violent revenge against federal agents

Portland Police Chief Bob Day broke down and cried at a press conference on Jan. 9 after being forced to concede that DHS was right all along: the illegal Venezuelan migrants accused of trying to run down Border Patrol agents the day before in Portland have ties to the violent Tren de Aragua gang. Day admitted he hesitated to tell the public the truth.

What’s worse is that he and the PPB were aware the day prior that DHS was correct in their statement, but refused to confirm it at the initial press conference, which preceded leftist rioting outside the Portland ICE facility. PPB had the names of the couple from their investigation into a July 11 Portland shooting, where the victim said the assailants are members of Tren de Aragua.

On Jan. 8, Border Patrol agents non-fatally shot Luis David Nico Moncada and Yorlenys Betzabeth Zambrano-Contreras in east Portland after the suspects allegedly tried to ram them down with a red pickup truck during a targeted stop. Almost immediately, internal details falsely claiming it was an ICE shooting were leaked to the extremist group PDX ICE Watch by a Multnomah County first responder.

Image
Luis David Nico Moncada
Image
Yorlenys Betzabeth Zambrano-Contreras

Instead of waiting for facts, Portland and Oregon leaders — all Democrats — rushed to stage an emergency press conference condemning federal agents, rejecting DHS’ statements, and publicly siding with the violent suspects, whom they repeatedly described as “victims.” Corporate media followed suit, misleading the public and inflaming tensions. The Portland Police chief refused to share the truth about the suspects’ Tren de Aragua ties.

At night on Jan. 8, an angry far-left mob descended on the Portland ICE facility, attempting to attack it and forcing police to make six arrests — all sparked by misinformation pushed by elected officials, activists and media.

AWFL- Affluent White Female Liberal

 

It’s Already Happening: AWFLs Who Converted to Islam Are Going Full-Blown Karen on It
God works in mysterious ways, my friends.

He sent a raven, an animal considered unclean to the Jewish people, to feed Elijah when he was in hiding from King Ahab.

He gave the Israelis in exile a bronze serpent to look upon to cure their snakebites in the desert, in spite of serpents being considered evil.

And now, God is sending the world’s greatest predator, the first-world leftist white woman, upon the Islamic world.

Last week, I wrote about how the new leftist trend for 2026 surfaced early in the form of leftist white women converting to Islam for the Gram. Gone are the days of declaring your bisexuality or your gender being “non-binary.” Now it’s all about putting on a hijab and giving praise to Allah.

But if you thought these women were converting to Islam to obey the faith and keep to its very misogynistic and homophobic tenets, then I regret to inform you that these are AWFLs, and the only religion they adhere to is the one where they are god.

As I predicted, these leftist white women are now discovering that their “religion of peace” is actually very intolerant of all the things their ideology told them to hold dear, such as gays, transgender people, and even the victimhood of women. As it turns out, Islam doesn’t just reject these things; they actively toss members of the LGBTQ+ community off the top of buildings and consider women to be second-class citizens who have no rights.

But never fear, these converts who still adhere to the religion of “ME” are here to peck-hand and finger wag Muslim men into having the correct beliefs and the acceptable behaviors that will take all the problematic issues out of the faith that has plagued it for the thousands of years it’s been around.

Let’s start with white savior A, who has a message to Muslims who are being homophobic and transphobic. She says they need to be more accepting, not just to stop the genocide of LGBTQ+ people, but because it fuels the genocide of Muslims, because being homophobic and transphobic gives people the excuse to be cool with Muslim genocide.

She ends by stating that being so phobic is pushing away people who are gay and trans from Islam and that they need to humble themselves before Allah because he knows best. Apparently, she knows Allah better than the Imams, and why not? She’s a white leftist woman.

While that was hilarious, I think this next one is even funnier.

Here we have another AWFL complaining about Muslim men who need to “leave hijabi women alone” and stop “haram-policing” women like her. She says she wants a gender separation in women’s online spaces, just like she has at the mosque she attends.

I’m no expert, but I’m pretty sure this woman is doing many things considered “haram” (forbidden) by Islamic standards, and she doesn’t know that because she converted yesterday and already thinks she’s an expert.

In both videos, we see the hubris of the AWFL. So confident in their ignorance that you could shove facts and established rules in their faces and they would brush it off angrily and tell you to stop being problematic while they live out “their truth.”

They clearly haven’t been a part of the religion for long because if they were truly experienced with it, or even looked into it deeper than the likes and views they get for cosplaying as a faithful Muslim, they’d learn that expulsion of gays and transgender people is the point. If given a free hand, these people would be decorating the pavement with “queer” blood like they were painting a Jackson Pollock.

Moreover, they would know that a woman disobeying the rules comes with real punishments that don’t involve a strict talking to. More like a whip to the back or even a stoning.

And if they really adhere to the way, then they’ll get that wakeup call, but in the meantime, I can’t help but laugh as I watch the very thing that plagued Western culture now begin to infect Middle-Eastern culture.

The question is, how long before these women appear in videos, tearfully talking about how they had to walk away from Islam because it was just too problematic?

And another question to ask: How many will be allowed to?

Seriously? Kathy Hochul Orders One World Trade Center Lit in Honor of Muslim American Heritage Month

Just hours after New York City’s first Muslim-American Mayor, Zohran Mamdani, was sworn in, Empire State Gov. Kathy Hochul declared January to be “Muslim American Heritage Month” and ordered One World Trade Center and 15 other state landmarks to be bathed in green light to celebrate “the heritage and culture of Muslim Americans.”

Many on social media were quick to point out that we can’t illuminate the Twin Towers because they are no longer on the skyline after the horrific 9/11 al-Qaeda terrorist attacks, which took down the buildings and killed almost 3,000 innocents. September 11, as all Americans know, was carried out by 19 hijackers affiliated with the Islamist extremist group led by the late Osama bin Laden.

But 9/11 was evidently not on Hochul’s mind Friday evening:

The governor also released a statement vowing to protect Muslims from Islamophobia. She did not mention a report released Monday from the NYPD, which showed that Jews were targeted more than all other minority groups combined in the Big Apple in 2024, and combined for more than 54 percent of all hate crimes in the city.

Hochul:

“Home to the largest Muslim American population in the nation, New York is proud to join in this month-long celebration, recognizing the values, faith and traditions of our Muslim American communities,” Hochul said in a statement.

“New York remains committed to being a beacon of hope, tolerance, and inclusivity that celebrates the diversity of its Muslim American population and protects them from Islamophobia, hate, bias, and harm.”

Meanwhile, Mamdani, in one of his first acts in office, rescinded several executive orders from his predecessor, Eric Adams, that targeted antisemitism. The state of Israel and many Jewish organizations were outraged.

Although local Muslim politicians and groups were pleased with the Appreciation Month and the green lights, there was plenty of negative reaction on social media as well. One conservative author wrote, “The betrayal of the nation’s veterans continues.” Another blistered:

Lighting One World Trade Center green for Muslim American Heritage Month—on the site where al-Qaeda terrorists murdered 3,000 in the name of radical Islam—is a profound insult to 9/11 victims, survivors, and first responders. Tone-deaf doesn’t begin to cover it.

Interesting — I wonder why Hochul waited till 6:49 p.m. to post the move, which is almost certain to provoke reactions from many? If you’re going to be bold, why not be bold in the sunlight of the day?

President Donald Trump has not weighed in as of this hour, but I’m betting he will at some point.

These People Don’t Think the Muslim Hero of Bondi Beach Is a Hero at All

It seems as if the whole world is celebrating Ahmed al-Ahmed, who tackled one of the jihad mass murderers at Australia’s Bondi Beach, last Sunday, but there are more than a few notable holdouts.

“Ahmed al Ahmed,” Bernie Sanders wrote on Monday, “a Muslim father of two, risked his life to disarm a murderer who was shooting down Jews celebrating Hanukkah in Sydney. Religion must not divide our common humanity. We must stand together and end antisemitism, Islamophobia and all hate — no exceptions.”

The superannuated socialist was not alone. Ahmed al-Ahmed has been hailed around the world, and deservedly so, as he prevented many more people from being killed.  Ahmed al-Ahmed is, however, more valuable to some, like Bernie Sanders, for his appearing to prove that the problem of terrorism is not a problem of Islam. It is not accidental that Sanders went out of his way to identify al-Ahmed as “a Muslim father of two,” while referring to the jihadi al-Ahmed tackled simply as “a murderer,” without noting that the murderer in question was acting in accord with the teachings of Ahmed al-Ahmed’s religion, which contains core texts teaching venomous hostility to Jews and including such indelible exhortations as “Kill them wherever you find them” (Qur’an 2:191, 4:89, 4:91, cf. 9:5).

Some Muslims, however, being better informed about their religion than Bernie Sanders is, demonstrated that they were well aware that the Bondi Beach murderers were Muslims. They knew that Ahmed al-Ahmed was a Muslim as well, and weren’t happy about that at all.

The Daily Mail reported Thursday that “Ramallah News, one of the most popular news outlets in Palestine,” by which the politically correct rag likely means Judea and Samaria, also known as the West Bank, as well as Gaza, “shared a story about Mr al-Ahmed’s brave actions on Sunday.” Yet among Palestinian Arabs, al-Ahmed’s actions were not regarded as a cause for celebration: “Ramallah News’ post about Mr al-Ahmed was quickly spread around Arab communities, which overwhelmingly condemned him for saving Jewish lives.”

Continue reading “”

This is the easily discredited (as all Marxist ideas)”Labor Theory of Value”
Robert Heinlein illuminated this in Starship Troopers:

“Of course, the Marxian definition of value is ridiculous. All the work one cares to add will not turn a mud pie into an apple tart; it remains a mud pie,    value zero.

By corollary, unskillful work can easily subtract value; an untalented cook can turn wholesome dough and fresh green apples, valuable already, into an inedible mess,    value zero.

Conversely, a great chef can fashion of those same materials a confection of greater value than a commonplace apple tart, with no more effort than an ordinary cook uses to prepare an ordinary sweet.

These kitchen illustrations demolish the Marxian theory of value — the fallacy from which the entire magnificent fraud of communism derives — and to illustrate the truth of the common-sense definition as measured in terms of use.

 ASU professor calls traditional grading racist, suggests ‘labor-based grading’ instead

Arizona State University professor Asao Inoue recently ranted about “White language supremacy in writing classrooms,” during which he called for abolishing traditional grading in favor of “labor-based grading.”

The latter method scores assignments based on the amount of effort students put towards in the work, devaluing quality and accuracy in the grading.

During Nov. 5 lecture at the University of Tennessee titled “The Possibilities of Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies”, Inoue claimed that “White language supremacy in writing classrooms is due to the uneven and diverse linguistic legacies that everyone inherits, and the racialized white discourses that are used as standards, which give privilege to those students who embody those habits of white language already”.

In order to rid the classroom of the “Habits of White Language”, Inoue advocated for grading to be based on the time spent on assignments, a move he claims “structurally changes everyone’s relationship to dominant standards of English that come from elite, masculine, heteronormative, ableist, white racial groups of speakers,” The College Fix reported.

Inoue paused several times throughout the speech, according to The College Fix, to allow the audience to practice being “anti-racist” by observing themselves “participating in racism, engaging in white fragility, in white rage, or in white language supremacy”.

Inoue has spent a considerable amount of time promoting his grading philosophy. As Campus Reform reported in March, he wrote a 358 page book titled Labor-Based Grading Contracts: Building Equity and Inclusion in the Compassionate Writing Classroom.

Continue reading “”

The Twisted World of Gun Control

Gun control advocates and Democrats inhabit a different space. Perhaps it’s another dimension or some kind of odd singularity. Whatever it is, it’s a fantasy, complete with all the trappings, in which facts are not only irrelevant, they’re squashed by whatever claims are made by the faithful.

We’re accustomed to unsupported (and unsupportable) claims, cynical appeals to emotion, and carefully crafted, mass-market propaganda. However, it appears some gun-grabbers, even influential ones, have succumbed to their addiction and actually believe what they say. They have embraced the elves-and-fairies lifestyle.

After Thurston County Superior Court Judge Christine Schaller upheld Washington’s assault weapons ban* last month, Renée Hopkins, CEO of Alliance for Gun Responsibility, released a statement:

“This is another strong affirmation that our state’s gun violence prevention laws are both constitutional and effective. Assault weapons have no place in our communities, and Washington has been clear about that.”

We’re still waiting on the Supreme Court to weigh in on ‘constitutional’ but ‘effective’? This is obviously some new definition of the word not found in any dictionary — ever.

A report from the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs covered violent crime from 2019 to 2024. The report compared the number of offenses and rate per 100,000 population for Washington state to the national stats.

Washington’s violent crime rate rose 8%; aggravated assaults rose 27%; and the murder rate soared 43%.

Compare those figures to the national rates: The U.S. violent crime rate dropped 6%; the rate of` aggravated assaults rose just 2%; and the murder rate fell 4%.

Red flag laws weren’t ‘effective’, either. In the five years from 2019 to 2023, the CDC reported the percentage of Washington suicides committed with a gun rose 7%.

In fairness, if Ms. Hopkins’ concept of ‘effective’ is an increase in firearm-related fatalities, Washington’s statutes are doing an exemplary job.

There was another notable aberration in September of this year. Following a tragic mass shooting in Manhattan, New York Governor Kathy Hochul sought to place blame on Nevada’s lax gun laws.

Hochul bragged about New York state’s gun laws and demanded Congress pass similar laws on a national basis.

Neither Hochul nor the media figured out that all those strong gun laws failed spectacularly. They not only failed to prevent the incident, but there’s also no indication that they impacted the killer at all. Despite this, she wants all Americans to be subjected to those same laws.

All that’s missing is Rod Serling saying, “Presented for your consideration…”

Ensconced in their little pocket of ersatz reality, gun grabbers believe nothing can stand in the way of their desired goals. Even the impossible is disregarded.

Ihlan Omar, the controversial U.S. Representative from Minnesota’s Fifth Congressional District, was captured on video as she spoke to a group:

“We have more guns in this country than we have humans. So one of the things that is going to be important is to create a registry so we know where the guns are. We know when they go into the wrong hands when they’re stolen. And we can actually start a buyback program. I know that some of the Minnesota legislators have had that legislation and that’s something that we should be thinking about on a federal level.”

Her first sentence is irrelevant: We also have more Crayola crayons than people. Left to themselves, they pose exactly the same threat to public safety as firearms — or steak knives, hand tools, or Ford F-150 trucks.
From the second sentence on, Rep. Omar falls back on a popular gun-grabber fantasy: Federal gun registration. There are two obstacles in our world, but it seems they aren’t considered an issue in whatever dimension is occupied by the gun-control crazies.

First, a national registry of firearms or firearm owners is prohibited by federal law and has been since May 19, 1986. 18 U.S. Code § 926 says: “No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established.”

The second challenge will be much more difficult to overcome: Americans are not going to register their guns. Only a fraction of the estimated 400 million+ firearms owned by more than 80 million citizens are located in states with long-standing gun registration laws. Attempts to impose new, state-level registration requirements on certain types of firearms delivered ‘disappointing’ results.

Actually believing in gun buybacks indicates a ban fan’s addiction has entered a critical phase, urgently requiring an intervention.

When it comes to restrictions on the legal ownership of guns, control addicts and Democrats cling to beliefs less credible than the Easter Bunny. These strongly indicate there’s no point in future discussions.

On the other hand, there is a pressing need for us to rein in some rogues in Congress and state legislatures who have fallen to the lure of the unicorn.

I agree about the loudmouths, not so much about some of their minions.

Dems Would Last Maybe 5 Minutes in the Civil War They Think They Want

It’s been interesting to watch how the intensifying throes of Trump Derangement Syndrome manifest themselves in various Democrats. Even more interesting is the fact that they see these symptoms as features, not bugs.

Sad, sad little creatures.

The Democrats and their flying monkeys in the mainstream media have made it clear that their plan to win back voters who abandoned them last year involves only resistance to President Trump. No policy. No coherent sales pitches. Just tantrums.

I should clarify: The Democrats aren’t offering any policy ideas to attract American citizens who vote. They’re working overtime crafting policy designed to make the lives of illegal alien murderers, rapists, and child traffickers better. In the Dem dreamworld, all of these criminal bottom-feeders will be voting for them regardless of legal status.

This resistance mindset has the Democrats placing a high premium on elected officials and candidates whom they perceive as “fighters.” At present, that applies to anyone who has dropped an F-bomb during a press conference when wailing about Trump. The occasional snarky post (TWEET) on X also counts towards Dem fighter cred.

All of the posturing and potty-mouthing in front of friendly audiences has given the Democrats the mistaken impression that they actually are tough. It’s mostly amusing, especially given the fact that fey soy boy Gavin Newsom is their highest polling “fighter” right now.

One of the biggest fake tough guys is Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who’s been in a never-ending “¿Quién es más macho?” skit ever since he was added to the Democratic ticket as Kamala Harris’s white nanny last year. Earlier this week, Matt wrote about a video clip of Walz and Newsom that had resurfaced. The doughy Walz said that he scares Republicans because, in his words, “I know how to fix a truck.”

It’s another one of those goofy Walz boasts that reeks so much of BS that flies show up as soon as he’s done speaking. Someone who had real mechanical skills wouldn’t be so vague. Great, Timmy, you can fix a truck. Fix a truck how, exactly? “I know how to replace a transmission” or “I know how to install new brakes” would give someone some truck fixin’ credentials. Walz probably once changed a tire on a truck and is basing his flex entirely on that. He strikes me as the kind of guy who would call AAA if his phone fell under the seat, though.

The perpetually open maw of Jasmine Crockett recently tried to pivot away from the violent rhetoric. We’re still not sure why. This is something that my RedState colleague Katie Jerkovich shared in a post the other day:

My, my. They’re a scary bunch, aren’t they?

Yeah… no.

The Dems love to talk about taking it to the streets. The thing is, the only streets they’ve ever gotten rowdy in have been filled with their friends and cops who were protecting them. If the civil unrest they keep advocating for ever broke out beyond the boundaries of one of their safe blue enclaves, they’d wet themselves before shouting their first f-bombs.

Mike Tyson once famously said, “Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.” There have been slight variations on that over the years, but the sentiment remains. I’m a good 35 to 40 years removed from my last drunken bar fight, but I can assure you that I know what Tyson meant.

It’s easy to tell the difference between people who’ve watched a lot of fighting on television or in movies and those who have actually been in fights. The Democrats who fancy themselves as bad a**es are obviously paper tigers when it comes to the knock-down, drag-out stuff. If Eric Swalwell or Hakeem Jeffries got in your face in a bar, the only thing you would be fighting is the urge to laugh.

Dems aren’t going to bring their civil war dream to any place where citizens have been buying ammo in earnest for years. You don’t see Antifa popping up in cities where people enjoy Second Amendment freedom. Lefties keep trying to gut the Second Amendment because they know that they can’t completely live out their violent fantasies until they do.

Yes, this Dem rhetoric does incite violence, but that’s another column altogether. My purpose here is to mock the fact that these people really do think they’re tough. Remember, modern Democrats always end up believing their own lies and talking points. Jasmine Crockett truly believes that she’s some kind of hood-hardened mean girl, despite the fact that she was educated at a country day school and a Catholic college-prep high school that costs a small fortune to attend.

Keep yapping, tough kids. And study up on your Mike Tyson.

A foreigner, here on a student visa, who supports a murderous terrorist group need to be immediately deported, as in stuck on the first available plane back to their home country with nothing more than the clothes on their back and their passport in their pocket.

Faculty group demands protections for non-citizens who ‘express support’ for Hamas.

A national faculty coalition is pushing to grant non-citizens First Amendment protections, demanding that the Trump administration be permanently barred from revoking visas over pro-Palestinian activism or support for terrorist groups.

The initiative is led by the American Association of University Professors and several of its university chapters, including Harvard’s, in partnership with the Middle East Studies Association.

A court victory for the AAUP in September stated that the Trump administration was violating the First Amendment by revoking visas of pro-Palestinian activists, according to The Harvard Crimson.

The national coalition’s new proposal seeks to block the Trump administration from continuing what it calls unconstitutional arrests and deportations. However, it also demands that any relief must apply to all noncitizens, not just members of the petitioning organizations.

It also includes a list of pro-Palestinian statements that cannot warrant a threat to a person’s visa.

The list includes statements considered “to express support or sympathy for terrorism or a designated foreign terrorist organization such as Hamas.”

However, not everyone agrees that citizens and noncitizens should share the same rights.

Foundation for Defense of Democracies Program Director Brandy Shufutinsky told The College Fix via email that Secretary of State Marco Rubio “has the power to revoke visas as they are a privilege, not a right.”

In her experience, no one has faced deportation or visa revocation solely for pro-Palestinian speech. However, she noted that visa-holders who express support for terrorism or violate U.S. civil-rights laws have faced appropriate consequences.

“If we do not allow criminals and terrorists into our country, why would we allow noncitizens who are already here to engage in criminal or terrorist activity?” Shufutinsky said.

Continue reading “”

This is part of the anti-American legacy of President Auto-Pen

She actually said:
“replacing them with loyalists and people who don’t know anything…”
Anything she ever says again should be ignored forever.

Yes, but this statement is even more dangerous:
“these issues should not be in presidential control”
She is placing the bureaucracy above the constitution.

Just my opinion but this was intentional for more than one reason.
1 Political power through election fraud.
2 Graft via kickbacks from purposefully incompetent oversight of funding.

The Somali Fraud Story Busts Liberal Myths
Mass immigration, antiracism, and the welfare state lead inexorably to fraud.

There is a moment when every news story either achieves lift-off or tumbles back to the earth. Having covered a few that drove national headlines, I’ve discovered there is no universal formula for which ones hit the stratosphere, and which do not.

Our recent story detailing Minnesota’s Somali fraud rings has been one of the lucky ones, achieving liftoff in record time. City Journal reporter Ryan Thorpe and I summarized a decade of Somali fraud schemes that stole billions of taxpayer dollars, some of which ended up with Al-Shabaab terrorists back in Somalia. These were sophisticated criminal enterprises that exploited Minnesota’s generous welfare state, deployed accusations of racism to deter scrutiny, and looted the public treasury until local prosecutors did the hard work to bring them down.

The meta-story—how a news item weaves its way through public discourse—is also worth considering. When we published the story, it quickly dominated the conversation on conservative social media. It filtered upward to primetime Fox News, where, on Laura Ingraham’s program, I summarized the piece and called on President Trump to revoke Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for all Somalis in Minnesota.

Within hours, the president, who had been following the story, announced that he would revoke TPS for all Somali recipients. Then, over the Thanksgiving holiday, Trump raised the stakes with a blistering social media tirade that ripped into Somali fraudsters, accused Minnesota governor Tim Walz of mental deficiencies, and promised to stop all asylum cases and immigration from the Third World. This sequence of events turned the Minnesota fraud into the debate of the moment.

The next step in the process is for the liberal media to respond. Right on cue, CBS News published a story misrepresenting our report and “debunking” that misrepresentation—a claim that it eventually retracted under pressure. The New York Times did somewhat better, publishing a long feature on the Somali fraud, confirming key details, and opening the floodgates for discourse on the center-left. The spotlight thus turned to Governor Walz, who was at the helm when Somali thieves robbed Minnesota of billions.

On the surface, the Times story was an acknowledgment that this was a real scandal that the liberal press had missed. But the paper did not address the underlying narrative about why the fraud happened. Yes, the story is about a criminal enterprise, but it runs deeper than that. The story has touched a nerve because it busts liberal myths about immigration, anti-racism, and the welfare state.

Minnesota has long prided itself on its generous welfare programs and reputation for good governance. But after the mass arrival of the new Somali population—many of whom brought with them different attitudes toward government and civil society—these programs became a weak point. George Floyd’s 2020 death in Minneapolis demonstrated that scrutiny could be deflected by making baseless accusations of “racism” against anyone who raised questions about the missing funds.

The uncomfortable truth for Times readers is that all cultures are not equal. Therefore, not all cultures are compatible with all political systems. In this case, the Somali criminal enterprise is incompatible with a generous welfare state, particularly in the context of a racial politics that intimidates whistleblowers and other honest brokers.

Though this story was particular to Minnesota, disruptive mass immigration is a national phenomenon. During the four years of the Biden administration, America imported millions of foreigners, many illegally. Some of these have brought, or are trying to bring, negative aspects of their home culture to the United States.

Indeed, cultural incompatibility was a campaign theme during the 2024 election.  Venezuelan gangs took over apartment buildings in Colorado. Haitian migrants overwhelmed deindustrialized towns in the Rust Belt. The Somali fraud story is another point in this plotline.

The Trump administration claims to be on pace to “shatter” records of forced deportations and so-called self-deportations, but more must be done. The administration should put financial restrictions on illegal immigrants, like requiring proof of legal status for maintaining a bank account; and implement massive remittance taxes to reduce the profitability of illegal immigration and fraud. And it must line up the manpower to turbocharge the prosecution of immigrant fraud, in Minnesota and elsewhere.

The New York Times won’t spell it out in block print, but even devoted liberals are starting to ask questions about the welfare state’s combability with mass migration. The shocking scope and scale of the Somali fraud in Minnesota made this a story that could no longer be ignored.

Everytown Misfires in Attack on Defensive Gun Uses

When Everytown for Gun Safety announced it was holding online gun “training” classes, many anti-gun activists and volunteers with the organization were sharply critical of the move, declaring it was akin to the group normalizing gun ownership instead of advocating for a gun-free future.

Of course, the so-called training has proved to be mostly anti-gun talking points, but if the group’s anti-2A critics have any doubts that Everytown is still as opposed to our right to keep and bear arms as ever they just have to look at the organization’s latest report for reassurance.

Titled “Disarming Fear: Debunking Myths of Defensive Gun Use”, Everytown’s report starts with several incidents that they allege were reported as defensive gun uses even though there were elements of each incident that were immediately known that undercut any self-defense claim. One incident highlighted by Everytown, for example, was the shooting of teenager Ralph Yarl in Kansas City after he knocked on the wrong door of a home when he went to pick up his little brothers from a friend’s house. While Andrew Lester Lester told police that he believed that Yarl was trying to break in to his home and was “scared to death” of Yarl’s size, it only took prosecutors four days to file charges against him.

Everytown asserts that legitimate defensive gun uses are “exceedingly rare,” and that they are “often deployed against unarmed perpetrators, and often accompanied by underappreciated personal and social risks, including loss of life and property.”

How rare? Everytown says it used National Crime Victimization Survey data and came up with a figure of about 69,000 DGUs every year between 2019 and 2023. That’s far below the estimates of 1 million or more DGUs from researchers like Gary Kleck and William English, but even so, that’s about three times the number of homicides in the United States. If DGU’s are “rare”, then murders involving firearms are even more rare, which undercuts Everytown’s entire ideology.

Everytown also takes issue with using a gun to defend yourself against someone who doesn’t have a firearm.

In the majority of these uses, suspected perpetrators are unarmed. In fact, 58 percent of perpetrators are not armed with any weapon. In eight out of 10 DGUs, the suspected perpetrator is not armed with a gun.

So what? An unarmed individual can still pose a threat to life and limb. Just look at the recent DGU in Los Angeles where a 79-year-old Vietnam veteran shot and killed a man who had thrown him to the ground and broke both his legs and continued to assault him while he was writhing in pain. Does Everytown believe George Karkoc should be charged for acting in self-defense since his attacker wasn’t armed with any kind of weapon?

If not, it sure looks like they at least believe Karkoc would have been better off without a gun.

Crime victims who responded with a gun were less likely to get away from the offender than those who responded without one (7 percent with a gun compared to 18 percent without) and less likely to avoid injury (39 percent compared to 44 percent).

So… in either case the vast majority of individuals who were the victim of a violent crime were unable to get away from their attacker, and the difference in the injury rate is honestly negligible. If that’s true, then I would definitely prefer to be armed if someone decides to invade my home, carjack my vehicle, or assault me on the street.

Everytown also notes that violent crime is trending down across the United States, but as FPC’s Rob Romano notes, they still claim that an armed society is a more dangerous place.


Giffords has also recently complained about the number of justifiable homicides, which makes me wonder if this going to be a new talking point for the gun control lobby. “Too many people are defending themselves from violent attackers” doesn’t sound like a great argument to me, but maybe their focus groups are telling them differently.

Everytown’s conclusion, of course, is that you’re better off not owning a gun at all. I’d say the gun control group gave us 69,000 reasons to disregard that advice. In reality the number of defensive gun uses is likely much higher than what the anti-gun org is wililng to admit, but even using their numbers hundreds of people are protecting themselves with firearms each and every day across the United States; proof positive that DGUs aren’t uncommon or unnecessary.

BREAKING: Dems Finally Cave on Schumer Shutdown Clown Show; Newsom: ‘Pathetic.’

What did Senate Democrats get out of the 40-day Schumer Shutdown? Nothing more than what they would have had with the clean continuing resolution.

Chuck Schumer’s caucus threw in the towel last night, with at least ten Democrats plegding to vote to end the filibuster on the CR. The Senate will replace that CR with new language that would extend government operations until the end of January while negotiations continue on the FY2026 budget. Forty days ago, Schumer demanded passage of an extension of expiring ObamaCare subsidies, plus repeals of Medicaid changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill that eliminated coverage for illegal aliens.

So what did Democrats end up getting for this biblical walk in the idiotic budget wilderness? A promise for a vote on the ACA subsidies, with no guarantee of GOP support:

“We may not have gotten everything we wanted”? Democrats didn’t get anything they wanted. They didn’t even get a pass on the filibuster for the debate on ACA subsidies, let alone a commitment for an extension. We’ll get back to that in a moment, but the only real concession in this deal from the GOP is a pledge to rescind the layoffs that Russ Vought began, and those only took place because Schumer shut the government down:

A handful of Senate Democrats on Sunday indicated they are ready to advance a package of bills that could end the government shutdown, multiple sources told Axios.

Why it matters: It is the most significant movement toward a bipartisan breakthrough in the talks to reopen the government in over a month.

  • At least 10 Senate Democrats are poised to support a procedural motion to advance a package of spending bills and a short-term funding measure through the end of January, multiple sources from both parties told Axios.
  • The deal includes a December vote on a Democratic proposal to extend ACA tax credits for one year, multiple sources said. It would take 60 votes to pass.
  • It also includes language aimed at providing assistance to federal employees who were laid off during the shutdown, as well as a provision to fund SNAP benefits through Sept. 30.

Continue reading “”