The Los Angeles mayoral race is in the news, and with it, the ghosts of the Palisades still smoldering beneath the surface of every debate exchange. On the stage last week, mayoral candidates Spencer Pratt, incumbent Mayor Karen Bass, and City Councilmember Nithya Raman duked it out over who was to blame for the Palisades Fires. Rightly so. Pratt correctly pointed out that Democratic leadership was responsible for the empty water reservoirs and hydrants running dry, as well as the misappropriation of funds from the city’s operational budget. However, they all failed to address the actual cause of the fire, which is symptomatic of a much larger rot wreaking havoc across our political landscape. It’s been discovered that a Left-wing arsonist named Jonathan Rinderknecht intentionally started the fire that killed 12 people and displaced hundreds of thousands more. Prosecutors say he was “fixated” on Luigi Mangione and “held a resentment of the rich.” Rinderknecht searched the terms “free Luigi Mangione” — the man who brutally murdered husband, father, and UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson on the dark streets of New York City in December 2024. He also searched “lets take down all the billionaires” and “reddit lets kill all the billionaires.” He ranted to his Uber passengers about the evils of capitalism and the virtues of vigilante justice. He told investigators, explicitly, that someone might commit arson in the Pacific Palisades out of resentment; the same ideological desperation, he said, that motivated the murder of Brian Thompson. Remove the accelerant and the matches, and he is quoting a standard-issue Liberal pundit. This is among the single most destructive acts of domestic terrorism in modern American history. Over 23,000 acres burned — an estimated $25 billion in damage. Fifty-six percent of Palisades is gone, the result of one man motivated by a coherent, widely distributed ideology, and it has received a fraction of the media coverage it deserves. Why? Because the perpetrator was a leftist. Not a fringe extremist in the traditional sense, but a regular, slightly unhinged leftist. This is nothing out of the ordinary from what we see on a regular basis.  Just recently, a one-eyed TikTok user announced plans to assassinate the president and his children. Obama’s friend and colleague Mark Hamill posted to X that “if only” the president were in a grave. After the president was almost assassinated yet again, a UnitedHealthcare worker was fired for publicly lamenting that the shooter missed. When she took to TikTok to complain, the comment section rushed to her defense. The shooter himself, Cole Allen Thomas, was a seemingly regular, only ever-so-slightly unhinged leftist. He was, by all accounts, normal, until he did the abnormal. Increasingly, Democrats of all stripes are publicly expressing their hatred for billionaires, the wealthy in general, anyone who achieves success – honestly, anyone who’s happy – and this one goes without saying: anyone within 10 feet of a MAGA voter. This hatred, coupled with a rapid and upward trend of political violence where the ends justify any means, is dangerous. Forty-two percent of the Left says political violence is sometimes justifiable. Left-wing violence is at an all-time high. A record number of liberals identify as religiously unaffiliated, medicated, alone, and depressed — conditions their own leaders have done nothing to address and everything to exploit. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez mouths off lies about American history to manufacture resentment. Barack Obama lectures about Republican radicalization while posing for photos with terror sympathizers. The New York Times platforms terror-sympathizing podcasters who have explicitly called for killing capitalists and watching them bleed out in the streets. Maine is on the verge of primarying a candidate with a Nazi tattoo, while the national press yawns. The leaders of the Left are not bystanders to this violence; they are its architects. They build the ideological framework, fan the resentment, and then act bewildered when ordinary people take the next logical step. Jonathan Rinderknecht lit a match that burned through 56% of the Palisades, but the kindling had been laid for years by politicians, media figures, and cultural institutions that have spent a decade telling the most unstable among us that the rich are their oppressors, that the system deserves to burn, and that those who act on that conviction are, at worst, romantics ahead of their time. One Leftist. One raging case of class resentment — 23,000 burned acres. And nobody wants to talk about it.

President Donald Trump polled a crowd at the White House on Monday, asking if they would like to see Vice President JD Vance or Secretary of State Marco Rubio run for president in 2028.  “I don’t know. Who’s it going to be? Is it going to be JD? Is there going to be somebody else? I don’t know,” Trump told a group of law enforcement officials at the White House on Monday.  He then asked the crowd who they thought should succeed him.  “Who likes JD Vance? Who likes Marco Rubio? All right. Sounds like a good ticket,” Trump asked. Applause from those in attendance appeared to be louder for Vance, but Trump said he wasn’t making any endorsements yet.  “By the way, I do believe that’s a dream team. But these are minor details. That does not mean you have my endorsement under any circumstance. But you know … I think it sounds like presidential candidate and vice presidential candidate,” Trump said.  Rubio said last year that he would support Vance if the vice president decided to run for president.  “If JD Vance runs for president, he’s going to be our nominee, and I’ll be one of the first people to support him,” he told Vanity Fair in an interview.  That comment has not held off speculation that he may still make a presidential run, especially with his long list of responsibilities within the administration.  Last year, Trump said he believed that Vance would be the “most likely” 2028 GOP nominee.  “Well, I think most likely, in all fairness,” Trump said when asked last August if MAGA would line up behind Vance in 2028. “He’s the vice president. I think Marco is also somebody that maybe would get together with JD in some form.” Trump, however, did not fully endorse Vance at the time.  “I also think we have incredible people, some of the people on the stage right here, so it’s too early obviously to talk about it,” he said. “But certainly, [Vance] is doing a great job, and he would be probably favored at this point.”

Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum delivered a blistering rebuke of California Governor Gavin Newsom on Monday, accusing Newsom of creating a self-inflicted energy crisis as he blames President Donald Trump for his state’s near-record high gas prices. Burgum’s comments follow months of escalations from Newsom, who has characterized the recent spike in fuel costs as “Donald Trump’s crisis.” Newsom argues that the president’s aggressive foreign policy and military actions in Iran have destabilized global oil markets, sending California’s prices to a staggering $6.15 per gallon this month. “California hasn’t changed anything as it relates to that cost,” Newsom insisted, claiming that state-level baseline costs have remained static. “The cost at the pump has been for one reason: Donald Trump’s recklessness as it relates to the war in Iran, period, full stop.” In March, Newsom dismissed Trump’s “Drill Baby Drill” mantra as a “lie to enrich Big Oil donors,” claiming that American families are paying $1.5 billion more at the pump weekly while corporations “cash in on Trump’s chaos.” Burgum took the governor to the woodshed, dismantling Newsom’s narrative by pointing to California’s specific policy choices. Burgum highlighted that California has intentionally isolated itself from the American energy grid, effectively becoming an “energy island.” “California is leading in highest energy prices, highest taxes, and out-migration,” Burgum stated. “They’ve blocked every pipeline, they block transmission lines … and then they’re complaining to this administration about their high energy prices.” Burgum noted a startling vulnerability in California’s infrastructure: the state is uniquely dependent on oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz. While the rest of the country has increased domestic energy security, California imports roughly 60% of its oil by ship. Burgum also pointed to the systematic dismantling of California’s refining capacity, noting the state has plummeted from 40 refineries to just six, while Texas continues to expand its capacity.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), the reigning queen of the confidently incorrect, recently took her traveling circus of ignorance to the University of Chicago, where she somberly warned that GOP redistricting would “wipe out every black representative on the map” in Tennessee — a state that, in reality, has zero black representatives in Congress. It takes a special kind of “Economics Guru” to mourn the extinction of something that doesn’t exist, but for AOC, the facts have always been a secondary concern to the “vibes” of radical grievance. “When you’re watching states like Tennessee, watching wipe out every black representative on the map in these states, we have an obligation as Americans to stand with black Americans and communities whose representation is being disenfranchised,” Ocasio-Cortez pontificated. AOC on the new Tennessee Congressional map which would eliminate the last Democrat seat: “States like Tennessee want to wipe out every Black Representative” The current Democrat Rep is a White guy and his Republican opponent is a Black woman. Can’t make this up pic.twitter.com/ZDWojmaHCC — Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) May 11, 2026 The deep-blue district wiped out by Tennessee’s redistricting has been represented by Democrat Steve Cohen for nearly 20 years. Speaking at the Institute of Politics — founded by Obama advisor David Axelrod — Ocasio-Cortez didn’t stop at hallucinating Tennessee’s congressional delegation. She pivoted to a historical rewrite that would make a Soviet propagandist blush, asserting that the American Revolution was actually a war against the “billionaires of their time.” The reality, of course, is that the Revolution was bankrolled by the wealthiest men in the colonies — men like John Hancock and Robert Morris. Morris worked in tandem with Chaim Solomon, a Polish-born Jewish-American who went bankrupt financing the Continental Army. They didn’t fight to overthrow wealth but used their wealth to secure liberty. Unlike the failed, blood-soaked revolutions of France or Russia — fueled by the exact brand of class envy AOC propagates — the American founding wasn’t predicated on pillaging the successful. But this brand of “oatmeal for brains” logic is AOC’s stock-in-trade. Her greatest hits of stupidity include: The Amazon Blunder: She famously bragged about “saving” New York $3 billion by chasing Amazon out of Queens, fundamentally failing to understand that a tax break isn’t a bag of cash sitting in a vault. You can’t “spend” money that a company never brings to the city. The Billionaire Myth: On a recent podcast with Ilana Glazer, she claimed it is impossible to “earn” a billion dollars, suggesting wealth only comes from “breaking rules.” Apparently, inventing a product that millions of people value is just “market power” and “abuse.” Gun Law Illiteracy: She once told Chris Cuomo that “guns are not allowed in the District of Columbia,” a statement that came as a shock to the thousands of D.C. residents with legal permits and the members of Congress who, by law, are allowed to keep firearms in their offices. Whether she is shrieking about “wage theft” (which she defines as a company not paying what she thinks they should) or claiming the unemployment rate is low because everyone has two jobs, Ocasio-Cortez remains the ultimate proof that in the modern Democratic Party, historical literacy and basic math are entirely optional.

This article is part of Upstream, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you. *** Meghan Markle loves three things: flower sprinkles, fame, and Meghan Markle. But if you missed the part about how she’s basically in a long-term relationship with her own handwriting, we tapped an expert to weigh in on what Meghan’s calligraphy reveals about her soul.  If you’re expecting a heart of gold, brace yourself. This is the real Meghan Markle. Not even her fake-empathetic eyebrows can save her now. It’s not like I was anticipating a glowing review, but I grabbed a bucket of popcorn when I got the results. “It is pretty damning stuff, but I’m afraid this is what I am seeing in the handwriting,” a leading analyst from the British Institute of Graphologists, Tracey Trussell, told The Daily Wire. “I’ve found that the handwriting never lies!”  After Markle’s latest newsletter from her As ever lifestyle brand dropped into my inbox, teasing a $58 box of chocolates, each truffle impressed with “A-s e-v-e-r” in tight gold letters, I could no longer ignore the situation. The rigid unevenness of her handwriting pierced my heart. Why was the Duchess of Montecito doing this to us?   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by @aseverofficial Every As ever candle, jam, and tea canister is tortured by her signature script. But I wouldn’t care about Megligraphy, except for this: Along with her rinse-and-repeat story about demanding that an allegedly misogynist dish soap company change its TV ad when she was 12 (Vanity Fair couldn’t even verify the whole story), she’s been talking about her handwriting for decades — and loving every minute of it. Meghan appeared on “Larry King Now” in 2013, two years into unremarkably starring on “Suits” and three years before landing Prince Harry. When King inquired as to whether Meghan was a calligrapher, she replied with characteristic pseudo-humility, “I, I, I … I used to be, yes. That was, um … I went to all-girls Catholic school. Handwriting class was one of those lost arts.” King held up the writing sample for the camera (it said “I Love Larry King”) while Meghan appeared pleased with the extra flourishes she added to drugstore cursive. In 2016, she told AOL Build that she paid the bills with commissioned calligraphy while struggling as an actress. “I just had always had nice penmanship,” she bragged. “I’d done, I don’t know, celebrity correspondence for Dolce & Gabbana or The Four Seasons. I did Paula Patton and Robin Thicke’s wedding.” Oh, here, Meghan, it looks like you might have accidentally dropped these names. Are you a survivor of the Netflix series “With Love, Meghan”? Then you saw her fawn over her own handwriting there, too. Lamenting an A-minus in penmanship class from like 100 years ago, she said of the “little swirls” she’s still obsessed with including, “You know what, I’ll take the ‘minus’ for a little bit of character.” So relatable, your majesty.  Unlike butter churning or lute playing, calligraphy isn’t some sort of ancient skillset we don’t see very much. Proving the writing style’s revived popularity, Etsy hosts thousands of shops peddling custom designs by crafters powering a $1.28 billion global calligraphy pen market. But these are gestural, flowing expressions of art. Meghan’s is the opposite of that.  “We know that Meghan is obsessed with appearances,” Trussell observed. “Everything in her world is hyper-controlled and super focused on perfectionism, which means she is forever teetering on the brink.”  Maybe you’ve heard of handwriting analysis helping to solve crimes. In the civilian lane, graphology can uncover roughly 5,000 personality traits by studying the spacing between words, the sizing of letters, and slanting and looping patterns, among other things. “Our handwriting is the unique pattern of our psychology expressed in symbols on the page, and graphology is the science of deciphering these symbols,” Trussell said. Of course I happily unleashed this resource on forensically dissecting the celebrated founder of fruit spread. Trussell kindly accepted my request to analyze Meghan’s calligraphy from As ever brand packaging, along with Meghan’s handwritten notes that often accompany celebrity gift basket swag. Here’s what Trussell read between the lines. “Meghan may be producing a polished performance, but from a graphologist’s perspective, it’s style over substance — a type of ephemeral pseudo sophistication that lacks soul,” Trussel shared, describing a style that functions like a tourniquet to natural flow. You could say that someone who just teased a photo of their son Archie to possibly distract from less flattering headlines about how she’s living a separate life from her prince husband might be lacking in the soul department. At least when it comes to publicity.   Noting the stiffness and rigidity I saw on the chocolates, Trussell said of the “clockwork” nature of Meghan’s lettering, “This reflects her intolerant and inflexible approach to life, her affected, contrived and disingenuous nature, and further conceals underlying feelings of inadequacy.” That inflexibility is not at all shocking, considering how Meghan forced the Kardashians to delete photos of Harry staring at Kris Jenner’s chest from Instagram, when it was obvious guests would be photographed at the party.  Trussell also didn’t let Meghan off the hook when it came to the smoke-and-mirror messaging of her excessively flattering and flowery gift notes. “Whatever the truth, the fact that she feels the need to construct and project something so flawless is telling.”   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (@meghan) Getting into the nitty-gritty, Trussell sees specific details in Meghan’s penmanship that tell the real story. “The way the writing tumbles forwards obliquely reveals Meghan’s passion and obsession, and her acute sensitivity. Plus, the letters are nearly all joined, so interrupt her at your peril!” Mirroring the line-crossing intimacy of the time Meghan awkwardly cradled her friend’s baby bump on a red carpet, her oversized lettering indicates manufactured confidence, Trussell says: “This is merely attention-seeking and an overcompensation for feelings of inferiority and anxiety, which are all lurking under wraps.” While upturned strokes signal good intentions, Trussell says the fact that those lines always hook backward in the opposite direction reveals Meghan’s inflated ego and greed. “It’s all for applause and effect, without any real feeling or emotion behind the intention,” she shared. Those little frills Meghan compulsively adds reveal anxiousness, a desire for protection, and apprehension about the unknown.   This was all extraordinarily delicious. But my guiltiest pleasure in this analysis of Meghan’s handwriting might be best portrayed via the sweeping letter “A” in As ever. “Meghan’s consciously drawn large (disproportionately oversized) capitals tell of her immense personal pride and vanity, her arrogance and presumptuousness, whilst disclosing her craving for respect and approval,” Trussell says. “She’s got her head in the clouds.” Case closed. Vain, insecure, and calculating, Meghan Markle’s calligraphy proves she’s thirsty as ever to be loved with a cursive capital L.