Here Come the New Jacobins

By Becket Adams

Sunday, June 28, 2026

 

If you think it’s bad that the Democratic Party refuses to acknowledge its violence problem, just wait until you realize there is a growing contingent within the party that not only condones it but views it as a necessary means to an end.

 

It has long been thus in left-wing politics, as my colleague Noah Rothman argues, with certain periods involving more revolutionary violence than others.

 

The thing to recognize now, at this moment in U.S. politics, is that we’re fast exiting one of the more peaceful periods.

 

Consider the angry reactions last week to the sentencing of nine Antifa members convicted of partaking in the 2025 premeditated armed assault on federal workers at an ICE detention center in Texas.

 

Taken at face value, the outraged responses from left-wing activists and even members of the press to the convictions leave the impression that the guilty had done nothing worse than set off fireworks and hand out pamphlets.

 

Yet what happened in Texas was far more serious, and claims to the contrary can’t be dismissed as simple ignorance or a difference of opinion. We have to accept that those who regularly downplay or misrepresent such incidents do so because they support the underlying actions. We also must recognize that these people are fast gaining real power and influence.

 

In 2025, members of the North Texas Antifa cell organized and planned an attack on federal personnel stationed at an ICE facility in Alvarado. On July 4, after conducting reconnaissance and “gear checks,” they arrived at the detention center dressed in black uniforms, equipped with body armor and first aid kits, and armed with eleven firearms. They disabled the facility’s CCTV cameras and set off fireworks to lure the federal personnel out into the open.

 

Rather than rushing out, however, the center’s receptionist called 911.

 

Lieutenant Thomas Gross of the Alvarado Police Department responded to the call. As he arrived and began issuing commands, one of the attackers shouted, “Get to the rifles!” Gross was then shot in the neck, according to his bodycam footage. At the same time, a second gunman fired approximately 20 to 30 rounds at two unarmed correctional officers who had stepped outside the ICE facility.

 

The correctional officers were unharmed, Gross survived, and the attack was thwarted.

 

The assailants and coconspirators were later arrested.

 

On March 13 of this year, a federal jury in Fort Worth, Texas, convicted nine members of the cell on charges ranging from providing material support to terrorists to rioting with intent to commit violence. The trial lasted twelve days. Benjamin Hanil Song, the group’s leader, was convicted of attempted murder for shooting Gross. Five witnesses who had pleaded guilty testified that the cell was organized around Antifa ideology.

 

On June 23, Song received a 100-year sentence; seven codefendants were sentenced to a combined 350 years.

 

The case was straightforward, and the sentences were fair.

 

But try telling that to the worst elements of the far left.

 

“These sentences are a travesty and totally unjustified, but that’s the point,” complained Democratic Representative Rashida Tlaib of Michigan on X. “Americans hate the fascist Trump regime, so the only way they can try to cling to power is brute force. [The ‘Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence’ presidential memo] is a grave threat to all of us and more bulls**t ‘terrorism’ charges like these are coming.”

 

Alec Karakatsanis, founder of the Civil Rights Corps, added elsewhere: “The sentences handed down today are a huge threat to the possibility of a democratic society. . . . The evidence of an illegal conspiracy is non-existent, but this is how the authoritarian dragnet targets those fighting against repression. Everyone should be learning about this case.”

 

Earlier this year, the New Republic published a sympathetic profile of the accused Antifa members, describing the case as “the first big test of Trump’s crackdown on free speech.” Its author continued to insist even after the sentencing that the case “is far muddier than the DOJ has claimed.”

 

In reaction to The Guardian’s reporting last week on defendant Daniel Sanchez-Estrada, who was convicted of obstructing a federal investigation and tampering with evidence, MS NOW regular Krystal Ball remarked: “I read this 5 times to make sure I was properly comprehending that he is actually facing 30 years for having leftist reading materials. Beyond insane.”

 

Perhaps a sixth reading would clarify matters.

 

More fromBecket Adams

 

Sports Journalists Jettison Their Affection for Silent Protest

 

Media ‘Pounce’ on Susan Collins for Having the Temerity to Notice Platner’s Past

 

The Scott Pelley Meltdown Is Revealing

 

Worse than activists behaving as activists is how major news outlets covered the sentences, with many downplaying, ignoring, or mischaracterizing entirely the details of the July 4 assault in Texas (emphases added):

 

“Anti-ICE protesters sentenced to decades in prison in latest crackdown on dissent,” PBS News announced.

 

“Federal judges in Texas gave eight members of an alleged ‘antifa cell’ prison sentences as long as 100 years for their roles last summer in a protest that turned violent outside an ICE facility,” said the Washington Post.

 

The Guardian headlined its story, “Texas anti-ICE protesters convicted of terrorism charges sentenced to at least 50 years in prison,” with a subhead that read, “Activists accused of being part of antifa get long prison terms in case seen as test of Trump’s crackdown on dissent.”

 

The BBC, for its part, stated, “Eight people with alleged ties to Antifa collectively sentenced to 450 years in prison over ICE centre protest.”

 

Describing the Antifa connection as “alleged,” even when a court has already established those links, and characterizing the sentences as overreactions to routine “ICE center protests,” when the convictions include attempted murder and evidence tampering, are deliberate and extremely revealing editorial choices.

 

The facts are a matter of public record, available from the Justice Department and Texas courts, and have been widely discussed on social media. There’s even bodycam footage, so the perpetrators’ actions should not be in dispute.

 

Yet, certain Democratic officials, left-wing magazine writers, and even mainstream outlets maintain that the sentences are excessive and that the cell’s underlying conduct was not especially serious, if they mention the conduct at all.

 

We can’t chalk this up to “agree to disagree.”

 

If these people cannot even acknowledge so clear-cut an example of political violence, especially one as indefensible and one where the facts are so readily available, they will condemn nothing done by left-wing agitators. Raise the possibility that the Democratic base has grown unusually comfortable with violence, and the response is an immediate and reflexive dodge: “Melissa Hortman!” or “January 6!” shouted on a loop.

 

This leaves us in the unhappy position of having to acknowledge the obvious: There is a growing and increasingly influential wing of the Democratic Party that views political violence as defensible and acceptable, if not favorable.

 

Don’t take my word for it.

 

Recent polling data says as much.