Hard Wire

SCOTUS Issues Decision On Alabama Case

1.7k Views

Even if it wasn’t obvious before, it has become impossible to ignore during President Trump’s second term: Democrats and their allies in the media continue to escalate political tensions through selective narratives, distortions, and outright falsehoods that fuel outrage and, in some cases, violent extremism carried out in the name of “democracy” and “social justice.”

The pattern has repeated itself over and over.

Earlier in 2025, Tesla dealerships and Tesla owners became targets for left-wing activists enraged over Elon Musk’s alliance with President Trump. Dealerships were vandalized. Vehicles were torched. Some Tesla owners reported being harassed or aggressively confronted on the road simply for driving the wrong brand of car. The message from the activist left was unmistakable: political dissent would not be tolerated.


Yet when Democrats in Washington were given opportunities to clearly condemn the violence, many refused to do so directly. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer was asked specifically about the attacks tied to anti-Musk activism. Instead of forcefully denouncing the incidents, Schumer pivoted immediately into another attack on Musk himself.

“I can’t talk about Tesla, but Elon Musk is a disaster for America, and America knows it,” Schumer said at the time.

That kind of rhetoric matters. Political leaders know exactly what they are doing when they repeatedly portray opponents not merely as wrong, but as existential threats deserving public rage.


And elected officials are not alone in driving the hysteria. Their partners in the mainstream media and political commentary class continue amplifying narratives designed to inflame audiences rather than inform them.

That was on full display Monday during The View’s reaction to the Virginia Supreme Court ruling that struck down Democrats’ proposed congressional redistricting referendum ahead of the 2026 midterms.


The co-hosts immediately framed the decision as some kind of anti-democratic power grab, despite the actual ruling saying nothing of the sort.

Whoopi Goldberg suggested Republicans had somehow “cheated” voters. In reality, the court ruled that the process Democrats used to place the referendum on the ballot violated the Virginia Constitution. The issue before the court was procedural and constitutional from the beginning.

Goldberg also implied the timing of the ruling itself was suspicious because it came after voters had already cast ballots. But the court directly addressed that issue in its opinion, explaining that prior legal arguments made by the Commonwealth affected when the challenge could be resolved.


None of that stopped the panel from portraying the ruling as illegitimate.

The Constitution itself was dismissed almost like an inconvenience. The justices were casually accused of political bias and portrayed as obedient to Trump despite the fact that Virginia Supreme Court justices are appointed by the General Assembly, not by any president.


Then came Ana Navarro’s claim that “Trump started this” by encouraging Texas Republicans to redraw congressional maps in 2025.

That argument ignores recent history entirely.

As House Speaker Mike Johnson pointed out, House Democrats aggressively pursued mid-decade redistricting efforts in states like New York well before Republicans responded in kind. Blue-state gerrymandering has existed for decades in places like Illinois and Maryland, where congressional maps have been drawn so aggressively that Republican representation was nearly erased altogether.

Ironically, the same co-hosts complaining about Republican mapmaking openly endorsed similar tactics in Democratic-controlled states moments later.

Previous South Carolina Consider District Changes
Next Former Mayor Takes Plea Deal