Shocking crime report on Chicago released as DOJ launches investigation into UC Berkeley
DOJ Launches Civil Rights Investigation into UC Berkeley After Antifa Attack on Conservative Event
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched a federal investigation into the University of California, Berkeley, following an assault by activists, allegedly members of Antifa, on attendees of a Turning Point USA (TPUSA) event.
The investigation, announced by a DOJ representative, stems from the university’s apparent failure to protect conservative speakers and attendees, leading to a breakdown of order and violations of the civil rights of event participants.
This situation echoes a prior legal challenge against UC Berkeley and confirms critics’ fears that the university treats assaults on conservative speech as a “both sides problem” rather than an issue of enforcing law and order.
The Failure to Protect: A History of Selective Enforcement
The core of the DOJ’s concern is the pattern of violence targeting conservative expression on the UC Berkeley campus. This incident, which featured violent chaos that injured attendees and staff, triggered the intervention of the Joint Terrorism Task Force alongside the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division and the FBI.
The DOJ representative noted the history of the issue: “This feels to me like déjà vu all over again. I sued UC Berkeley for exactly this type of violent chaos that happened on the campus [years ago].”
The previous settlement required Berkeley to protect conservative speakers. However, the recent attack, which disrupted an event scheduled to feature figures like comedian Rob Schneider, demonstrated that the university and its local police force were either “completely unprepared, undermanned,” or operating under a bias that prevented equal protection under the law.
The key points of the failure are:
Foreseeability: Berkeley had explicit notice that this type of violence occurs when conservative speakers come to campus, yet they failed to secure the event adequately.
Intimidation: Due to the violence, a sold-out crowd of 2,000 people saw less than half that number attend, as people were “intimidated by this violence.” The resulting chaos constitutes a “heckler’s veto”—where a violent mob effectively shuts down First Amendment-protected speech.
Unequal Protection: The DOJ noted that when liberal speakers like Sonia Sotomayor or the Dalai Lama come to campus, the police somehow manage to protect the speaker and the attendees. When it is a conservative speaker, the protection fails—a serious equal protection concern under the law.
Statutes Triggered: Civil Rights and Hate Crimes
The federal investigation is focusing on several serious statutes potentially violated by the attackers and, critically, by the University and the police department for their inaction:
Civil Rights Conspiracy (18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242): The DOJ is examining a conspiracy to violate the civil rights of conservative attendees. This statute applies when two or more people conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution.
Hate Crime Statutes: The investigation will examine epithets and comments hurled at attendees, which made reference to their “race and to other protected characteristics under the law.”
The DOJ’s message is that the mere defense of “spicy rhetoric” by the speakers does not excuse the actions of a mob that assaults innocent citizens and law enforcement officers. “Two wrongs don’t make a right,” and the failure to enforce law and order against violent activists must be immediately addressed.
Chicago Crime Success: A Counter-Narrative
In a stark counterpoint to the political rhetoric used by Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, a separate segment of the report detailed the success of federal intervention in reducing violent crime in Chicago.
Pritzker, reacting emotionally to federal presence, falsely claimed that the deployment of CBP (Customs and Border Protection) and ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents were “terrorizing neighborhoods” and that the federal agents were leaving the city.
The report presented documented facts contradicting Pritzker’s claims:
Crime Reduction: Following the start of the federal initiative (Midway Blitz), crime rates in Chicago saw a dramatic decline:
Homicides: Down 16%
Shootings: Down 35%
Robberies: Down 41% (The mayor’s own dashboard showed a 44% drop)
Carjackings: Down 48%
Refusal to Acknowledge: Despite these documented results, Pritzker continued to attack the federal agents, calling the head of the operation a “snowflake” and playing “partisan games at the expense of the safety of the people of Chicago.”
Federal Commitment: The DOJ confirmed that CBP and ICE are not leaving Chicago and that the federal government remains committed to its mission of degrading, dismantling, and disrupting corrupt systems and lawlessness, often encountering “extraordinary resistance from Chicago and Illinois radical Democrat leadership.”
H-1B Visa Debate: The Competence Gap
The report also detailed a contentious interview with the President regarding the H-1B visa program, which quickly exposed a gap in the administration’s messaging and policy direction.
When pressed on how the country could raise American wages while simultaneously “flood[ing] the country with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of foreign workers,” the President defended the necessity of H-1B visas.
The key points of the controversy were:
Security Risk: Critics immediately questioned why American policy would support the manufacturing of sensitive missile systems and defense technology by foreign nationals on H-1B visas, labeling it a national security risk.
Cultivating Domestic Talent: The core critique was that the administration should be proposing programs to cultivate the American talent needed to replace foreign workers, not just arguing that “we need them.” Critics argue that the American worker, given the environment and opportunity, is “just as smart and just as capable as anybody else in this world.”
Cost of Living Disconnect: The President attempted to tell voters that they should be talking about the “greatest economy we’ve ever had” due to trillions in investment. However, critics countered that the average American cannot feel $18 trillion in investment and only cares about the money in their bank account, noting that the price of essential items like hamburger has increased by 100%.
The report concluded that whoever is advising the President on the H-1B program should be “fired ASAP” for failing to prioritize the American worker and providing inadequate messaging on the tangible economic benefits of the administration’s policies.