The most disturbing part about suspected White House Correspondents’ Association dinner gunman Cole Allen’s manifesto is that it is indistinguishable from what has become commonplace rhetoric of the Democratic Party and the wider Left. Allen calls President Donald Trump a “pedophile, rapist, and traitor,” almost identical to the language Allen’s congressman, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), has used to attack the president.
Just days before the shooting, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) held a press conference with the words, “Maximum Warfare. Everywhere, All The Time,” emblazoned around the president’s face. Cole seems to have taken Jeffries literally. The line between leftist hatred and elected Democratic officials has been blurred almost to the point of being erased entirely. Allen is not the first leftist to turn Democratic Party rhetoric into violent criminal action.
Recommended Stories
This was third assassination attempt on Trump and came after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, the murder of two Israeli Embassy staffers outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, the firebombing of an Israeli solidarity march in Colorado, the attempted murder of Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel in Texas, the arson of the governor’s mansion in Pennsylvania by an anti-Israel activist, the arson of Elon Musk’s Teslas across the country, and the killing of two Catholic children in Minneapolis by a transgender activist.
In the face of this wave of left-wing violence, institutions of the Left such as the New York Times should acknowledge the problem and address it. But it did the opposite, giving a platform to Marxist streamer Hasan Piker, who offered this defense of Luigi Mangione’s murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, who was “engaging in a tremendous amount of social murder,” Piker asserted. “The systematized forms of violence, the structural violence of poverty, the for-profit, paywalled system of healthcare in this country — and the consequences of that are tremendous amounts of pain, tremendous amounts of violence, tremendous amounts of deaths.”
When the financing of healthcare is equated with physical violence, and this is used to justify the murder of healthcare executives, it is plain that Democrats have a rhetoric problem. But instead of condemning Piker and his celebration of political violence, Democrats lovingly embrace him. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA), Summer Lee (D-PA), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), and Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El Sayed have all eagerly sought Piker’s support.
Polling shows that Piker is where the majority of Democratic Party voters are. According to a Rutgers University poll, almost 60% of those who consider themselves “left of center” said the destruction of Tesla dealerships to protest Musk’s political opinions was at least somewhat justified. The poll found that 56% of those “left of center” respondents felt the murder of Trump would be at least somewhat justified. Similarly, a YouGov poll found that while 26% of young liberals agreed with the statement that political violence is sometimes justified, only 7% of young conservatives agreed.
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS TURNED ON ISRAEL
Instead of embracing Piker and his endorsement of political violence, some ignore it. Former President Barack Obama, exuding in his patented sanctimony, had the audacity to issue a statement this weekend claiming “we don’t yet have the details about the motives behind last night’s shooting,” hours after the suspected gunman’s manifesto and his connections to the Democratic Party were well known.
Obama can pretend not to know what motivated Cole, and Trump’s other two would-be assassins, and Kirk’s suspected killer, and the Tesla arsonists, and the would-be ICE assassins, and the Minneapolis school shooting, and the Capital Jewish Museum murders. But Obama is being disingenuous and is in danger of losing all credibility. He and his party need to face the truth that they are nurturing violence to be used as a supplement to political control.
