If you can bring yourself to think back to the Obama years, you’ll remember that the so-called “Religious Right” was relentlessly mocked for making various predictions that, in the eyes of enlightened liberals, couldn’t possibly come to pass. The Religious Right said that Roe v. Wade was not an infallible decision, and that it could be overturned. They said gay marriage was an abomination that would pave the way for various forms of child abuse, including the evil of transgenderism. They said religious freedoms would be suspended, and that LGBT activists would use the power of government to force Christians to violate their deeply-held beliefs. They said that abortion would give rise to a broader culture of death where euthanasia became commonplace, particularly in godless places like Canada and California. All of these predictions, of course, have turned out to be right on the money. Pretty much everyone, regardless of their political affiliation, can see that now. The “religious Right” is owed an apology by many, many people. But there is one prediction of the Religious Right — one that was endlessly derided for pretty much the entirety of Barack Obama’s presidency — that still gets a very bad rap, even though it was also an accurate prediction. I’m talking about the alleged “moral panic” about the possibility that Democrats would soon implement a variant of sharia law in the United States. Surely, we were told thousands of times, this was a classic example of bigotry and Islamophobia. Barack Obama is supposedly a Christian, after all. How could he, or anyone else, possibly transform America’s legal system into something resembling the Islamic legal code? That was a conspiracy theory, the fact-checkers told us. It was a lie concocted by Fox News to brainwash older voters who don’t know any better. Even today, many conservatives hold this view. For many self-described members of the Right, it’s still unthinkable that America’s legal system — easily the most durable and functional system in the West — could one day look a lot like the sharia courts in, say, Mogadishu. The problem is that, for reasons that were never fully explained to the American public, we have imported hundreds of thousands of Somalis into the United States. And when you’re talking about numbers that large, then inevitably, transformation will occur. This transformation won’t simply involve the construction of mosques, the establishment of Somali sporting leagues, and the commencement of regular Islamic celebrations in the streets. It will also involve the implementation of a new legal system — one that has absolutely nothing in common with any Western tradition, much less our own. And indeed, that’s exactly what has taken place in Minnesota, one of America’s largest states. In Minnesota, America’s system of laws is now effectively defunct. It has been replaced, as the Religious Right had warned, with a primitive and oppressive legal code that has far more in common with sharia law than anything the Founders put in writing. If that sounds like hyperbole, ask yourself this: When you saw the story of Shiloh Hendrix a few months ago, what did you think would happen to her? In case you’ve forgotten, in April, shortly after 6:00pm, Shiloh Hendrix was at a park in Rochester, Minnesota with her 18-month-old son. That’s when another boy, around the age of 8, went rummaging through her diaper bag and removed an applesauce pouch. Eventually, Shiloh Hendrix chased the boy down and retrieved her property, though not before she uttered a few racial slurs. That’s when a Somali man started filming. Here it is as a refresher, although the slurs will be censored. Watch: Credit: Sharmake Omar. @endwokeness/X.com Again, when you saw this story back in April, what did you think would happen to Shiloh Hendrix? There were really only two options that anyone considered. The first possibility was that Shiloh Hendrix would be canceled by the outrage mob. Her life would be destroyed for saying a few naughty words in frustration. The other possibility was that conservatives would do the right thing and fight back. They’d raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for Shiloh Hendrix, and send a very clear message that “cancellation” campaigns don’t work anymore. That’s not because conservatives support the use of bad language in public parks. It’s because the right to freedom of speech is paramount, and people are tired of dumb cancellation mobs. What no one seriously expected — because it would be too preposterous — is that government officials in Minnesota would attempt to throw Shiloh Hendrix in prison. After all, in the United States, we have something that Somalia doesn’t have. We have a First Amendment. And the First Amendment prevents the government from arresting American citizens for saying bad words. That includes racial slurs. It includes speech that most people find highly offensive. We aren’t Canada, or North Korea. So unless you’re threatening to murder someone — which Shiloh Hendrix wasn’t doing — then you won’t be prosecuted. That’s how things work in the United States. That’s how things have always worked here. So how could anyone put Shiloh Hendrix in handcuffs over this? That would’ve been a reasonable question, say, 20 years ago. But a lot’s changed since then. Most notably, large portions of the state of Minnesota, practically speaking, are no longer part of the United States. More than 100,000 residents of Minnesota speak Somali. There are so many Somalis in Minnesota that they hold their own Independence Day celebrations. They’re electing public officials who explicitly promise to work on behalf of Somalia, rather than Americans. And now, they’re carrying over the great Somali legal tradition as well — which means, among other things, no freedom of speech. If you upset Somalis, then you go straight to jail. That is why, yesterday, the city of Rochester Minnesota announced that it plans to bring criminal charges against Shiloh Hendrix. This is directly from the city’s website: The Rochester City Attorney’s Office is filing a complaint summons, stemming from the April 28, 2025, incident that occurred at Roy Sutherland Playground, at Soldier’s Field Park. … The draft complaint charges Shiloh Hendrix with three counts of Disorderly Conduct under Minnesota Statute 609.72, subd. 1(3), a misdemeanor level charge with a maximum of 90 days in jail and/or a $1,000 fine. Yes, the City of Rochester is going to attempt to imprison Shiloh Hendrix. For saying nasty things to some Somalis in a park — including a child who stole her property, and a Somali man who began harassing her afterwards — Shiloh Hendrix is supposedly guilty of “disorderly conduct.” In an attempt to explain these charges, the Mayor of Rochester, Kim Norton, put out the following statement: This was a situation that deeply affected many people, especially our communities of color, and caused real turmoil in our community. We acknowledge the lasting impact this incident has had, not only on those directly involved and across our community, but also in the broader conversations happening at the state and national level. These moments remind us of the complexity and far-reaching impacts of situations like this. The City remains committed to staying engaged and proceeding with transparency and care, continuing efforts that support accountability and progress in Rochester. Meanwhile, the city added: This matter involved a large amount of evidence and required careful consideration of potential charging options across multiple offices. … As the legal process moves forward, the City recognizes not only the significant attention and emotion surrounding this case, but also the complex and lasting impacts situations like this have on communities of color and our broader community. These statements, taken together, are an admission by the city that Shiloh Hendrix is being prosecuted for political reasons. By their own admission, the City was concerned about the attitudes of various demographic groups, before deciding whether to bring a criminal case. Specifically, they were worried about what Somalis thought. And because Somalis were deeply offended, they’ve decided to suspend the First Amendment in Rochester. Before we get into the specifics of the criminal complaint — which is even more of a farce than you’re probably imagining — Shiloh Hendrix should file a federal civil rights lawsuit against the city of Rochester as quickly as possible. The mayor, Kim Norton, should be arrested, in the same way Douglas Mackey was jailed by the Biden administration. Remember that case? They charged Douglas Mackey with committing a “conspiracy against rights,” meaning that he supposedly conspired to infringe on the right to vote (by making a meme). Well, Kim Norton is engaging in a much more obvious “conspiracy against rights.” She’s openly admitting that she’s attempting to eliminate the First Amendment rights of women like Shiloh Hendrix. That becomes extremely obvious when you look at this criminal complaint. Credit: State of Minnesota, County of Olmsted These are the three counts. They’re all the same, but they all apply to separate “victims.” Here’s what they say: On or about April 28, 2025, within the City of Rochester, Shiloh Hendrix, while in a public or private place and knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know, that it would, or would tend to, alarm, anger, disturb others, or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, did wrongfully and unlawfully engage in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct, or in offensive, obscene or abusive language that would reasonably tend to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others. Now, already, you’ve probably noticed the problem here. What this law is intended to outlaw, very clearly, is behavior that’s so disruptive that it causes an unreasonable disruption to other people’s lives. For example, if you’re playing loud music at a party at 2:00am, and people can’t sleep, then that would qualify as “noisy” behavior that “disturbs others” and causes a “breach of the peace.” Along the same lines, if you block the doorway of a building, and tell everyone that they’ll have to fight you if they want to enter, then you could be accused of “alarming others” and “provoking an assault.” Those would be reasonable examples of disorderly conduct, under this law. What’s happened in this case is that, after the Somalis and liberal women of Rochester saw this viral video, they went looking through the laws to find some way to charge Shiloh Hendrix. And then they deliberately interpreted this particular law in a highly literal and frankly demented manner. They saw the words “offensive language” and thought they had a case. But the problem is that this law, like every other law, is subordinate to the U.S. Constitution. You cannot read any law in such a way as to conflict with the Constitution. As applied to Shiloh Hendrix, that’s clearly what they’re doing here. Shiloh Hendrix did not disrupt anyone’s life. She didn’t cause a “breach of the peace.” There’s no evidence that anyone was unreasonably “alarmed” by her actions in that park. And she didn’t go to that park with the intention of causing any kind of disruption. She responded to the fact that a Somali child had stolen her property, and then ran away with it. That’s actually confirmed in the text of the complaint: Credit: State of Minnesota, County of Olmsted As you can see, it states that a man identified as “SHJ” was in the park with his three children. One of them, “YJ,” is 8 years old and autistic. The man, SHJ, told police that his son “approached a diaper bag that belonged to someone else and he took an applesauce pouch from the bag.” Then “YJ climbed the playground equipment in an attempt to get away from his father and from the defendant.” It was only at that point, according to the complaint, that “Defendant became very angry” and “shouted and repeatedly used a racial epithet.” The rest of the complaint simply  describes the video we’ve all seen. Then there’s this paragraph at the end: “SHJ explained that YJ, as well as his other children, were very scared and troubled by Defendant’s hateful words and conduct.” Well, that’s just too bad, isn’t it? The guy was “scared and troubled” by the Defendant’s “hateful words.” And we’re supposed to care about his personal reaction for some reason. The complaint does mention that other adults and children were in the park, but they don’t include any information about their reactions, probably because they either agreed with Shiloh Hendrix or didn’t care. So that’s what we’re left with. The Somali whose child stole something felt “scared and troubled.” Of course, Shiloh also felt “scared and troubled.” That’s what happens when someone steals your property and runs away with it. It’s also what happens when you flood Minnesota with Somalis who are incapable of assimilating with American culture, and who degrade the quality of life in this country every single day. But we’re not supposed to care about Shiloh’s perception of events. We’re just supposed to be mortified that she said words that “troubled” and “scared” other people. Never mind the fact that it’s not a crime to say words that “scare” other people, unless those words are explicit threats of violence. In Rochester, they’re not using our legal system anymore. They’re using Somalia’s. This is a case that merits the immediate involvement of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division. There is no way that the Trump administration can permit a local government to override the constitutional rights of an American citizen. If this continues, we’ll end up like so many other Western countries that are now effectively governed by barbarians. That’s the case in Dundee Scotland. You may have seen this video from the other day. A 14-year-old girl and her 12-year-old sister were being harassed by an adult man, apparently one of those “asylum seekers” we’re told about. Eventually she produces a weapon to ward the man off — and she’s the one who gets arrested. Watch:  Credit: @Basil_TGMD/X.com. UK Child Defends Self. We all know that they’re going to make a Netflix show about this, and politicians in Europe are going to force people to watch it. They’re going to portray this teenage girl as a monster for defending herself, when her own government abandoned her. That’s how these things work overseas. From the Scottish Daily Express: An axe-wielding schoolgirl from Dundee who is said to have been defending a young female from a migrant man has become a social media hero. The girl, aged 14, has been charged with possession of a bladed weapon after police were called to the scene in the Lochee district of the city at the weekend. … The footage was taken on Saturday afternoon and shows two girls on a grass verge by the busy Coupar Angus Road. A man’s voice is heard saying: ‘Show the knife, show the knife.’ The second girl then screams “Get the f*** away from her” before the other youngster holds up the two weapons. The second girl shouts: “Don’t f***ing punch my little sister, she’s 12.’ This is what happens when Western governments sit by passively, as foreigners invade in unprecedented numbers. Eventually, the legal system starts working for the foreigners, against the native citizens. That’s why the Shiloh Hendrix criminal case simply cannot be allowed to stand. It’s also why — to bring things back to the topic we discussed yesterday — I have no patience whatsoever for the “free speech” argument for burning the American flag. We don’t have free speech in this country. If they’re going to throw people in jail for saying a bad word, then, yes, I want you thrown in jail for desecrating my flag. No more playing by two different sets of rules. In the 1980s, when the Supreme Court decided that flag burning was a Constitutional right, you could make the argument that the First Amendment still meant something in the United States. But it doesn’t anymore. We’ve simply imported too many foreigners — including people from the shariah countries that the Religious Right warned about — for our Constitution to have any effect in places like Minnesota. The Somalis demanded a political prosecution in defiance of our Constitution, and Democrats in Minnesota gave it to them. Those are the rules that have now been established. And until all of those Somalis are deported, and the Democrats who launched this prosecution of Shiloh Hendrix are removed from office, we have two choices: We can either ignore what’s happening, and watch as they throw us in prison, one by one. We can end up like Scotland, in other words. Or we can use every tool that’s available — including the power of the federal government — to prevent any more U.S. cities from transforming into precisely the kind of lawless third-world dystopias that we were warned about, not so long ago. Those warnings were ignored at the time. They were mocked, over and over again. But as the prosecution of Shiloh Hendrix makes clear, those warnings were actually correct. And we simply cannot ignore them anymore.

A doctor offered up by the American Medical Association as an expert on transgender health care claimed that kids as young as 3 years old have a “stable” view of gender identity and that puberty blockers are reversible, according to footage published Wednesday by The Ben Shapiro Show.  Dr. Jesse Krikorian, a transgender-identifying woman, argued during a conversation with Michigan State Rep. Brad Paquette that kids can identify as transgender from a “very young age” and that puberty blockers don’t have permanent impacts on their development. The conversation was arranged by the American Medical Association President Bobby Mukkamala, who referred Krikorian to Paquette after the lawmaker asked the medical association to point him to an expert on transgender procedures.  Video footage of Mukkamala’s conversation with Paquette was published on Tuesday by Shapiro. In that conversation, Mukkamala said his organization endorsed transgender procedures on kids because that was what the experts told them. When asked for a more detailed explanation on the alleged expert science in support of transgender procedures, Mukkamala connected Paquette with Krikorian.  Throughout the conversation, Krikorian downplayed the impacts of puberty blockers, claimed young teens are able to make informed decisions about their future fertility, and dismissed studies from England and the Department of Health and Human Services critical of transgender procedures.  READ PART ONE: Leaked Footage Exposes Top Med Org’s Support For Trans Procedures On Kids: ‘I’m Not An Expert At All’ “Developmentally, kids generally have a pretty sense, a pretty stable sense of gender identity starting around age three,” Krikorian told Paquette, according to footage obtained by Shapiro. “They may not tell us unless we asked, but it’s generally there around that age just developmentally. That’s when that comes in.” Krikorian is a family medicine doctor who told Paquette that she was currently thinking about moving to Canada because of laws being passed in the United States to ban transgender procedures on kids. She told the Republican lawmaker that she has worked with many transgender identifying kids before, including one 7-year-old boy who identified as a girl, whose biggest concern was the “appearance of a bulge in her ballet leotard.” While discussing the American Medical Association’s designation of Krikorian as an expert, Shapiro said that with no other medical issue, you could be cited as an expert because of your personal experience. “But suddenly with ‘gender-affirming care’ the most prominent expert the [American Medical Association] could offer is a trans person who is a family physician. That is not expertise, that is projection,” Shapiro said on his Wednesday show.  When Paquette questioned the wisdom of placing kids on puberty blockers, Krikorian argued that puberty blockers were just needed to “buy time” for a child to figure out their gender identity. 6/ Krikorian claims: – Parents know if their 5yo is trans. – Doctors are transing kids to appease their concerns about how other people perceive them. – A 13/14yo is ready for permanent decisions after their pubertal (and brain) development has been blocked for a couple of… pic.twitter.com/13gtfQC2zg — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) August 27, 2025 “There’s nothing about starting puberty blockers that means that you have to continue them. There’s nothing about starting hormones. That means you have to continue them,” she said. “It’s only if you like the results that you’re getting, if you’re happy, if you’re feeling good, if you’re feeling better about yourself and more able to function in society, that you keep going with them.” When asked about potential side effects of puberty blockers, Krikorian acknowledged that bone density would be impacted, but argued that kids can “catch up” once they are taken off the blockers. “Every drug has side effects for sure. Puberty blockers are very reversible,” she said.  Despite Krikorian’s claims, studies have shown that puberty blockers can have irreversible impacts on bone growth and cause sexual dysfunction, voice damage, and infertility. At a different point, when discussing putting males on estrogen and females on testosterone, Krikorian said that “most of the side effects are things that people are looking for.”  “You know, they’re looking for beard growth if they’re taking testosterone. They’re looking for a deepening voice if they’re taking testosterone. Or they’re looking for that softer skin, they’re looking for the more feminine distribution of fat if you’re taking estrogen,” she said.  She later claimed that, because “being transgender is really hard,” she doesn’t “worry too much about these patients” since they are not doing it to have fun, but to address their identity issues.  When discussing the impacts that transgender treatments can have on fertility, she said that “a lot of people are willing to make this trade off.” She said that 13 and 14-year-olds had some “insight” into the possibility of not being able to have kids if they underwent transgender procedures.  “In other words, according to Dr. Krikorian, cross-sex hormones don’t sterilize kids, but even if they do, it’s okay because these kids can plan to adopt or buy someone else’s sperm one day,” Shapiro said on his show. “That is of course insanse and dystopian. My kids don’t even know what they want for lunch let alone make a decision about adopting a child of their own in 20 years.”  She also suggested that males wanting to identify as female should save up their sperm before starting estrogen if they wanted to have kids.  “If your life plan involves genetic children, go ahead and bank sperm,” she said. “Sperm is not that hard to come by. You can buy it. You can access it. If you’ve got a partner who can carry a pregnancy, you guys can make it happen.” 4/ That doesn’t seem to bother Dr. Krikorian much though, because if a boy suffers one of the extremely likely outcomes — such as permanent sterilization — from pumping estrogen into his body, “sperm is not that hard to come by. You can buy it.” pic.twitter.com/cQw9o6FDWA — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) August 27, 2025 Paquette asked Krikorian if she had reviewed the Cass report or the recent Department of Health and Human Services study that documented the flaws with many of the problems with transgender medicine.  She said that the Cass Report, a British report that criticized transgender medical procedures for kids, was not good evidence and that the HHS report was “politically motivated” and not “sound science.” Krikorian admitted that she had not read through the entire HHS report, only portions of it.  12/ In fact, Dr. Krikorian hadn’t even read @RobertKennedyJr @HHSGov‘s Report on Gender Dysphoria — the most extensive US report on the topic she is an alleged specialist in, authored by our nation’s top health agency. Krikorian, the AMA’s choice-expert calls it “politically… pic.twitter.com/IzlR5v71cq — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) August 27, 2025 Paquette ended the conversation with Krikorian by suggesting that they could possibly have a future call to discuss the HHS report in more depth.  “At this point the AMA is now indistinguishable from other leftist activist organizations like the Human Rights Campaign or the ACLU. They don’t engage in science,” Shapiro said. “They’re not interested in protecting patients. They are a lobbying arm for quacks and a mouthpiece for leftists who prey on children.” Paquette supports shielding kids from transgender procedures and introduced a bill in May that would have banned them in Michigan. He joined Shapiro on Wednesday to discuss his conversation with the American Medical Association and Krikorian. The more he pushed back on transgender ideology, the more Paquette said he was told to “trust the experts.” “A lot of folks said, ‘well, you’re not a doctor Brad,’ even though I talked to a lot of them. And ‘well the AMA supports this,’ and so I went to the AMA. I started to talk to their experts and came to find that they have no idea what they’re talking about,” Paquette said. He said he wants to expose the “no understanding, no grounding in evidence-based medicine” WATCH THE FULL CONVERSATION: 

This comes amid backlash over mass illegal immigration into the UK

A lot of us can relate to Ralphie

'Does any flag of a foreign nation belong on a public school facility'

The Senate confirmed Monarez on July 29.

Did not appear in court

'Rational gun laws desperately needed'

The man who opened fire at a Minneapolis Catholic school Wednesday identified himself by two names, and those names match a court record for a name change in 2019. Two children, ages 8 and 10, died in the shooting, and the shooter injured 17 others. Authorities found the gunman dead at the scene. The FBI is investigating the shooting as an act of domestic terrorism and a hate crime targeting Catholics, FBI Director Kash Patel posted on X. “The shooter has been identified as Robin Westman, a male born as Robert Westman,” Patel wrote. “The FBI will continue to provide updates on our ongoing investigation with the public as we are able.” Law enforcement sources confirmed the suspect’s identity as Robert Westman or Robin Westman in speaking with Fox News. The New York Post also reported that police identified Westman in a news conference and said Westman “has been identified as a transgender woman.” The Daily Signal obtained two documents from Minnesota court records showing a Robert Westman requesting a legal name change to “Robin Westman” in 2019. Mary Grace Westman filed a name change request for a minor, Robin M. Westman (born in June 2002), on Nov. 18, 2019. Westman put an address in Eagan, Minnesota, on the application. A judge granted the request on Jan. 15, 2020. The document granting the name change notes that Robert Westman “identifies as a female and wants her name to reflect that identification.” ?TRANS SHOOTER?According to Fox News, law enforcement sources have identified the Annunciation Catholic School shooter as "Robin Westman" or "Robert Westman." Why??Minnesota court docs explain it. Here's the approval of a name change because the "minor child"… pic.twitter.com/gk5cPVwi6L— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) August 27, 2025 Minneapolis Police did not immediately respond to The Daily Signal’s requests to confirm or deny that the suspect is the individual in the court records. Speaking to the media Wednesday about the shooting, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said, “I have heard about a whole lot of hate that’s being directed at our trans community.” “Anybody who is using this … as an opportunity to villainize our trans community, or any other community out there, has lost their sense of common humanity. We should not be operating out of a place of hate for anyone,” Frey, a Democrat, added. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey: "Anybody who is using this as an opportunity to villainize our trans community has lost their sense of common humanity."Are you freakin kidding me? pic.twitter.com/XsSoVaivZI— Greg Price (@greg_price11) August 27, 2025 Previous mass shooters who targeted Christian schools or churches have identified as transgender, most notably the shooter who targeted The Covenant School in Nashville in March 2023. The post TRANS SHOOTER? Annunciation School Shooting Suspect Changed Name Due to Gender Identity, Court Records Suggest appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos. Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. Recently, there’s been almost an epidemic of left-wing hysteria about violence, murder, and people who commit violent crimes. It’s more than just hysteria. There’s been an effort to defend people that commit heinous crimes or almost glorify them or just neglect the severity of their crimes on innocent people. It takes various manifestations. But it does reveal and illustrate this element of leftism, that it’s heartless, it’s cruel, it’s cold. It’s almost as if, to make an omelet, you have to break, as Josef Stalin said, a few eggs. I’ll give you a few examples. We have over 600 sanctuary jurisdictions. And that means that in these areas of states, cities, and counties, when an illegal alien commits a crime and he’s apprehended and he is not legally in the United States, these jurisdictions will not turn him over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a Department of Homeland Security agency. They will not do it. In other words, they’re saying to all of us: “We would rather let these people out—and they do get out—and maybe commit crimes, and that’s a price we’ll pay, in opposition to border security.” We see another manifestation with President Donald Trump’s 30-day takeover. It’s not a takeover. It’s an augmentation of the Washington, D.C., police forces by bringing in federal forces. And for the first time in decades, there has been an eight-day period where there hasn’t been a single murder in Washington, D.C. The residents seem very happy, although careful not to express that joy because it’s contrary to the mainstream leftist governance of the city. But what’s weird is Trump is getting lambasted by mostly wealthy, white, protected liberals, that he’s an autocrat, a dictator for coming into Washington and trying to help people live normal lives in the inner city. Again, the theme is they don’t care about the number of people, this week, that have been saved from either being killed or maimed or wounded. But there are two or three other examples that are even more egregious. We all remember the Department of Government Efficiency 19-year-old, Edward Coristine. I hope I can mention his nickname without seeming foul, but he was called “Big Balls.” And he worked for Elon Musk. He was attached to the Social Security department, the Department of Treasury, and the Department of Health and Human Services, etc., looking at the budgets of these various Cabinet divisions. He was walking late in Washington, D.C., after a gathering. A young woman left ahead of him. He was worried that she shouldn’t have been walking a short distance alone to her car. When he followed her, he heard her scream. There were 10 young thugs. They were trying to carjack her car and hurt her. She was confronting them. He ran over, pushed her in the car, tried to get her secure. She locked the car. Then he faced off with these 10 people, and he was beaten to a pulp, as you would expect. Two of them, the prime suspects, were arrested, detained. And of course, a local judge in Washington, D.C., a liberal-appointed judge, let them out. They’re out now stalking people again, no doubt. But the point is, a lot of people on social media and the Left said, “Why should we worry about a wealthy, basically, white kid, who gets roughed up a bit? Is that why Donald Trump went into Washington? And if so, we don’t really care.” It was very heartless. It reminded me, very recently, do you remember the UnitedHealthcare CEO, Brian Thompson? He was a person from the middle class, was born without status or advantages or money, and he worked himself up to the leadership position of one of the largest health care concerns in the United States. And Luigi Mangione—a 25- or 26-year-old wealthy, well-educated kid, high status, privileged—decided that he was an enemy of the people because health care was not universal and UnitedHealthcare may have refused coverage to certain people in need. So, he decided he was going to kill him. And he did kill him. He murdered him. It’s on tape. And what was the reaction of the Left? Some on the left canonized him. They even made a play about him here on the West Coast. He is a folk hero. A former Washington Post reporter did an interview and talked about how magnetic he was, how good looking he was. There was one other example. There was a Blackstone—that’s a real estate investment firm in New York—executive, a very successful young woman in her 40s, Wesley LePatner. And a deranged or angry—I don’t know what we would call him—young man walked in broad daylight with a semi-automatic weapon. He was angry because he felt he should have been given a chance to go to the National Football League. And he had a vague idea where the National Football League headquarters was in Manhattan. He burst in through security. He didn’t even get up to the NFL. Instead, he saw various other offices that had nothing to do with his grievance. And he shot and killed three people. One of them was Wesley LePatner. She was a 42- or 43-year-old mom, very successful, all well-liked. It was a horrendous accident. And yet, when you looked at the social media response, it was very similar to Ed Coristine’s action that earned him sarcasm or criticism, very similar to Luigi Mangione, who was, as I said, made a hero for murdering someone. In this case, the shooter was contextualized. People said, “You know what? She makes thousands of dollars per minute. I’m not going to worry that she was offed by somebody who was from the underclass.” What is the common denominator of all of this new leftism? It’s sort of Stalinistic. It basically says: For the greater good of the revolution, there are enemies of the people. We don’t wanna know what their independent circumstances are. We don’t really care if they’re moms or nice people, if they’re bad people. All we know, in our Marxist binary, they’re on the wrong side of the ledger. They’re the victimizers and the poor people who were murderers or are thugs and assaulted them, they were the victimized. They had a perfect right. We’re gonna weigh in. In other words, it’s one of the most heartless and disturbing aspects of contemporary, popular culture, and it’s pretty much the domain of the Left: “We can use violence, any means necessary, to hunt down and kill enemies of the people, or hit, assault, rough up people that we feel are not sufficiently sympathetic to the underclass.” It should stop because it leads to a French revolutionary, Jacobin chaos, if we’re not already there. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post How Left-Wing Ideology Fuels Crime and Chaos appeared first on The Daily Signal.