On Friday afternoon, a jury delivered a string of verdicts on a group of nine individuals, a rudderless group of underdeveloped simpletons with over-inflated egos, charged with a litany of crimes. This stems from an orchestrated assault on July 4, 2025, on an ICE facility located in Alvarado, Texas. The charges ranged from attempted murder, rioting, conspiracy to use and carry explosives, and lending material support to terrorists. Mixed verdicts were handed down, as some of the charges came back with not-guilty verdicts, but some of the more serious charges stuck.
Making this a landmark case was the designation of the individuals as part of an Antifa group and charged with domestic terrorism. This begins the uncomfortable scenario it spells out for our media complex, as there has been a concerted effort by many in the press to allege that Antifa is not an organized outfit, but regarded as an amorphous entity with no central planning. It has been the desperate narrative for years now.
Of course, this claim of a gauzy nature defies common sense, as recognizable facets such as uniformly attired participants across the country, rapid-fire organized appearances, and promotional materials and insignia are common knowledge. There is a tinge of insistent desperation seen in the press to declare this outfit as little more than a spectre in our midst. "We cannot seem to find their base of planning," say the dolts in the press who do not even look.
As one case study, here is Chuck Todd and Chris Cillizza, when they were discussing the matter of the president last Fall declaring Antifa to be a terror group.
🚨NEW: Chuck Todd *PANICS* over Trump designating Antifa terrorist organization🚨
— Jason Cohen 🇺🇸 (@JasonJournoDC) September 22, 2025
"I don't even know what Antifa is. I know what the definition of Antifa is. There is no group!"
"But what's dangerous is that by designating it, who's going to define who the group is?"
"And if… pic.twitter.com/vhZsRMSArF
Recommended
Of course, there is the expected journalist pathology, where opposing a stance by Donald Trump is performed by rote, but there is a deep level of obliviousness at play as well. Todd’s complaint here is that he deems it an arbitrary label being applied, and sees danger when guilt is not proven, just alleged. That this comes from the very people who use this labeling tactic wildly – be it “Nazi”, “White Supremacist”, “False News Outlet”, etc. – is but one problem.
The best is Chuck Todd, in his claim that Antifa has not been a defined organization, becoming disproven by a valid source – Chuck Todd himself. It turns out he has, in the past, recognized the existence of this group as a valid concern. Back in his “Meet The Press” days, Chuck covered the subject of this outfit and spoke with an author who wrote a book on the very definable aspects of Antifa.
Chuck Todd in 2025: "I don't even know what antifa is."
— Bill D'Agostino (@Banned_Bill) September 22, 2025
Chuck Todd in 2017: *hosts antifa professor who wrote 'The Anti-Fascist Handbook'* pic.twitter.com/hAtCzV3Mcc
Also bothered by this case was the Washington Post, specifically when covering this trial a week ago. Molly Hennessee-Fiske, taking a noticeable position of support for the defendants, was writing about this court case and resorting to recalibration in order to suggest the government was out of line with its approach to charging domestic terrorism. That she needed to ignore a grand jury already finding cause enough to send this to a trial is the start of her arrested thinking.
To grasp Molly's sympathies, you do not even need to delve into her defensive and deflective prolix account of things; we get the fractured prism of her assessment in the headline: “Government argues ICE facility protest was actually left-wing terrorist plot”. We are served up the contemporary practice in the press to regard those they support favorably and reframe acts of violence as a “protest”, and thus charge that arresting any criminal perpetrators is “a violation of free expression.”
The nine defendants in this case stormed the ICE facility at night, slashed tires on government vehicles, spray-painted walls, and tore down security cameras. They brought weaponry (around a dozen firearms), body armor, and explosives. They fired guns at or into the building, and a police officer arriving on the scene was ambushed and shot in the neck. Yet here is WaPo, attempting to sell this as a “protest”.
The revealing aspect in all of this is the willingness of the media to hurl every manner of accusations at those groups it finds disfavor with in their reporting. The Proud Boys, Patriot Front, Groypers, and similar factions are frequently called out and criticized by journalists. Yet the group that is FAR more consistent in its delivery of violence, actionable offenses, and disruptive gatherings is simply described as an opaque essence.
This frees the journalists to avoid being critical, leading to one conclusion: Antifa must be a group with which they favor. Now seeing them designated as a terrorist group will provide more problems when covering their antics.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical Left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member