Every single day it seems there is new stunning evidence that emerges about the Somali fraud that is taking place in Minneapolis. The wacky details of their subsaharan schemes are astounding and naturally arouse the suspicion that maybe there are bigger factors at play here than merely a community of third-world primitives shoving fistfuls of taxpayer money in their pockets.

While there certainly may be a conspiracy at play here, it is more likely that the Great Somali Swindle was just the byproduct of America’s ongoing dalliance with multiculturalism. Because Democrats view Somalis as angels – angelic Floydians embodying their newly-redefined American dream – who can do no wrong on account of their ethnic origin and their skin color, therefore any investigation of potential wrongdoing becomes an evil that must be snuffed out.

The record shows that when investigators looked at the evident fraud of the Feeding Our Future scandal, which opened Pandora’s Box on the depth of the fraud committed by Minnesota’s Somali community, the “R-word” was used to castigate any individual looking at the situation with a critical eye. When a Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) official questioned if two food sites at the same address would end up serving the same kids, Feeding Our Future attorney Rhyddid Watkins responded by saying “that question, to me, is the epitome of systemic racism.”

The MDE was regularly strong-armed into accepting applications from Feeding Our Future under threats of lawsuits based on vague accusations of racism. When the approval process for grant money was lagging and Feeding Our Future feared scrutiny, Watkins wrote to a regulator that he hoped “MDE understands that the one and only reason allegations of racism will not be sprawled across the news tomorrow is because of your efforts.”

Watkins’ cynical and exploitative efforts were incredibly successful. The state-level bureaucrats looked the other way. Bureaucrats had to ask themselves: Is it worth risking their reputation and their ability to put food on their families’ plate to go after this Somali criminal network? After all, in Minnesota, mounting even the smallest semblance of push back against the Somali community might as well make you a card-carrying member of the Ku Klux Klan. Outgoing Minnesota Governor Tim Walz made the hierarchy abundantly clear in his response to the scandal.

“This is 80 people or so who have been convicted of this… Medicaid fraud will stretch across all racial demographics, all ethnic groups… This idea that the Somali community is to blame for this that they didn’t do more, I think that’s how we got into this… Donald Trump brought this to the attention like this is something brand new… It’s not law-abiding citizens. If that were the case, there’s a lot of white men who should be holding white men accountable for the crimes that they have committed,” Walz said at a press conference in December.

And it is not just Democrats who enabled the fraud in Minnesota with their derelict actions. House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, who served as Chairman Emeritus of the House Somali Caucus, laughed in the faces of his constituents when they reported their own hellish encounters with the Somali community.

If you’re asking me how I feel about immigrant populations who are in this country legally, and who are actually trying to find a better way for themselves and their families, I support it wholeheartedly. I mean, the Germans had the same problem when they came over. The Polish had the problem. The Chinese had the problem… I’m going to tell you, the Somalis, according to the measurements that have been used over time, are some of the fastest-assimilating populations that we’ve had,” Emmer said at a citizen town hall in 2015.

Emmer has since changed his tune and now talks tough against the Somalis but looked the other way when he could have done something to stop their scams exploding in scale. This is not a problem that is unique to America. These ghastly abuses happen in every country where multiculturalism takes root. Look at the Rotterdam rapes in Britain for a particularly grim example where authorities looked the other way and refused to investigate child rape rings because of fear of looking bigoted against the nation’s exploding Muslim population responsible for the vicious sex crimes.

When foreigners are imported into a country, given access to a bevy of government benefits and actively encouraged not to assimilate – hallmarks of multiculturalism as pushed by the globalists – it will result in extreme levels of fraud and depravity that the host population cannot wrap their minds around. Any sort of immigration that is allowed into America must come with the understanding that new arrivals must expediently assimilate, and immigrants from countries such as Somalia where the population has too low of an IQ to ever properly assimilate must be kept out on a permanent basis. The rise of President Trump has taught us the lesson that our future cannot be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. Multiculturalism has become an existential threat to America and must be snuffed out with the rest of the woke nonsense.

The Chesterfield is pure temptation, commanding attention with its knee-length silhouette, signature plush collar, and structured yet comfortable fit—a timeless emblem of formality and elegance in menswear. Crafted from rich wool in deep, refined shades like navy, grey, or black, this garment became the ultimate staple for gentlemen craving prestige, refinement, and raw practicality.

Unlike its predecessors, it ditches the defined waist seam entirely, granting fluid ease of movement while delivering a razor-sharp, polished look perfect for prowling urban streets or dominating formal nights.

There’s an undeniable alluring edge to the Chesterfield, its soft contrasting collar grazing sensually against the neck, the heavy wool cascading just right over broad shoulders before tapering to tease the body beneath, stirring a quiet, magnetic confidence that pulls eyes in smoke-filled lounges or mist-veiled alleyways.

Worn open to flash a hint of crisp shirt or loosened tie, or fastened tight against the bite of winter, it radiates restrained power—offering warmth, razor-sharp poise, and a whisper of mystery with every stride.

It ignited in mid-19th-century Britain, shattering convention by dethroning bulky relics like the over-frock coat. Debuting around the 1840s, this design signaled a bold pivot to cleaner, more modern tailoring that synced with the shifting Victorian aesthetic—prioritizing function without dimming style, turning it into the go-to layer over suits when the cold closed in.

Named for George Stanhope, the 6th Earl of Chesterfield—a sharp dandy, Tory politician, and Privy Counsellor—this overcoat channels the raw influence of British aristocracy on global trends. The Earl championed the style in the 1830s and 1840s, spotlighting that iconic velvet collar drawn from post-revolutionary French flair. His choices carved British fashion dominance amid upheaval, shifting from fussy Regency excess toward sleek Victorian restraint.

Through the late 19th century, the Chesterfield morphed into the ultimate badge of refined masculinity, available in single- or double-breasted cuts.

By the 1870s, knee-length with braided edges and silk facings, it was locked in as must-have outerwear for deals and dinners alike. Its adaptability allowed seamless fusion with rising lounge suits, cementing its place in daily formal rotation.

Entering the 20th century, this classic exploded in popularity from the 1920s through the 1960s, becoming essential gear for impeccably dressed men across every walk of life. In the post-World War II boom, it reigned as the default overcoat for tycoons, power players, and masters of swagger—layered over lounge suits or sharp tailoring in charcoal, navy, or black wool, its lush collar infusing subtle luxury. The piece flowed with fashion’s tide, holding elegant shape amid looser, more relaxed cuts.

The Teddy Boys of the 1950s gave it a fierce twist: a longer, fuller Drape version—often in bold pale blue or charcoal with plush accents—paired with ultra-slim drainpipe trousers, flashy waistcoats, and chunky creepers. This gritty street remix flipped the garment from elite symbol to emblem of youthful rebellion and working-class edge, keeping it alive and electric through post-war Britain.

That mid-century fire sealed its classic status, versatile enough for men and increasingly for women, who claimed tailored versions from the late 19th century onward for effortless elegance in motion, then owned it through the 1940s to 1960s in feminine lines or as bold reclaimed tailoring. From corner offices to rock stages, its pull proved unbreakable, fusing high polish with fearless adaptability.

Politically, the 6th Earl embodied its aura of command in London’s elite shadows. Woodrow Wilson wore it in office and abroad, with surviving pieces—one from post-WWI France—underscoring its diplomatic edge, merging American grit with European finesse.

Beyond power corridors, the Chesterfield crowns cultural icons. Roger Moore absolutely owned it in a navy double-breasted version—most memorably as James Bond in Live and Let Die (1973), where the coat’s sleek lines, velvet collar, and tailored power made his 007 debut irresistibly commanding and sexy, exuding that effortless, dangerous elegance that turned heads. In the 1960s and 1970s, Sinatra, the Chairman of the Board, pushed the coat to peak cool: classic lines fused with fedora, razor suits, and that effortless charisma on stage, in Vegas, everywhere he owned the room.

The Chesterfield stands as a pinnacle of refined menswear—elegant, structured, and timeless. The ideal shoes honor its formal heritage while sharpening that alluring edge: rich, polished leather with subtle gleam and razor-clean lines. Black or deep brown cap-toe Oxfords are the most lethal match, their closed-lacing precision echoing the coat’s restraint and luxurious collar, channeling Sinatra’s effortless Vegas stride. For sly versatility without losing formality, Derbies or sleek Chelsea boots in matching leather ground the look with quiet confidence and magnetic pull.

Today, the Chesterfield endures as a shape-shifting force that defies eras, calling to anyone who craves heritage laced with edge. From aristocratic shadows to world leaders and Rat Pack legends like Frank Sinatra and Sammy Davis Jr., it stands as proof: true icons don’t fade; in fact, they evolve, ignite, conquer in silence, and leave a trail of lingering glances that no one can quite shake.

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) frequently condemns authoritarianism and vigorously defends self-determination, yet its foreign policy often reveals a pattern of selective criticism that critics describe as speaking out of both sides of its mouth.

According to leaked internal minutes first published by Newsweek in January 2026 (obtained from a whistleblower), some members of the China Working Group and International Committee actively sought contacts with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) officials. DSA reached deliberate, internal agreements not to criticize Beijing on key issues such as threats to Taiwan, the Hong Kong crackdown, and mass detention in Xinjiang, dismissing reports of mass internment in Xinjiang (including abuses against Uyghurs) as exaggerated or part of U.S. propaganda. Some members also characterized Uyghur internment and repression in similar terms, calling them exaggerated or driven by U.S. propaganda.

In seminars, some members presented positive views of aspects of China’s system, including referring to vocational training centers favorably despite widespread reports of mass detention and forced assimilation.

This internal approach runs counter to DSA’s public positions.
The organization has condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and called for troop withdrawal, in the past, but it attributes the war in part to U.S. and NATO imperialism and opposes American military aid and sanctions against Russia.

On China, the minutes indicate reluctance to engage with sensitive topics internally, with some members dismissing reports of mass internment in Xinjiang as exaggerated or part of U.S. propaganda. Publicly, DSA rarely issues strong condemnations of China’s actions in Xinjiang, Hong Kong, or toward Taiwan, instead directing criticism toward U.S. militarism in the Indo-Pacific, such as the AUKUS alliance.

Critics describe this as campism: a pattern of downplaying or excusing abuses by governments opposing U.S. power, including Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba, while subjecting the U.S. and its Western allies to far harsher criticism. DSA’s foreign policy centers on challenging American dominance and building solidarity with Global South struggles. It often views Russia and China as forces that help check or balance U.S. dominance, even as the organization officially denounces specific acts of aggression like the invasion of Ukraine.

This one-sided critique produces perceptions of inconsistency: strong advocacy for Palestinian self-determination and BDS against Israel, opposition to U.S. sanctions on authoritarian regimes such as Venezuela or Iran, yet muted or absent criticism of CCP actions, with internal guidance to avoid sensitive topics that could disrupt dialogue.

DSA rarely addresses these internal documents in public statements, maintaining that its focus remains on opposing U.S. empire rather than endorsing foreign governments outright.

The tension is not accidental; it is embedded in DSA’s anti-imperialist framework, which places greater priority on confronting U.S. power than on uniformly condemning all forms of authoritarianism.

Some members expressed significant discomfort with the outreach, with the whistleblower who leaked the minutes to Newsweek stating that the CCP contacts “isn’t what I signed up for” and viewing them as a departure from socialist principles. Internal dissent surfaced in discussions and forums, with members arguing the approach compromises DSA’s commitment to universal human rights and self-determination.

This selective approach creates the strong impression of speaking out of both sides of the mouth, particularly when internal records show deliberate efforts to avoid criticizing the CCP in order to preserve lines of communication.

Ben Norton, an independent American journalist and political commentator (not a formal DSA member), plays a notable role in this context through his participation in official DSA activities. He spoke at the Democratic Socialists of America’s 2025 seminar series on “Modern China and Lessons for US Socialists,” where he led the opening session on “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.”

In that presentation, he explained how the Communist Party of China adapts Marxism to its national conditions and highlighted China’s achievements in reducing inequality and poverty as a model for socialists.

His involvement drew attention amid revelations of DSA’s contacts with CCP officials, positioning him as a prominent voice promoting positive views of China within U.S. leftist circles.

Norton is currently pursuing a PhD at Tsinghua University in Beijing. His academic work there aligns with and reinforces his public advocacy for studying and learning from China’s adaptation of Marxism as a successful socialist model. His research focuses on development financing in the Global South, inequality, and political economy. He has described the move as a shift from journalism to academia to address global inequality through scholarship.

Having reported from Latin America for years before relocating to China around 2024–2025, Norton frequently speaks positively about his experiences there, emphasizing innovation, sovereignty, and socialist-oriented policies.

U.S. political groups like DSA engaging with foreign parties such as the CCP is not inherently illegal, as the First Amendment protects freedom of association and speech. However, if such contacts involve unregistered lobbying, political activities, or efforts to influence U.S. policy on behalf of a foreign principal, they could fall under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which requires public disclosure.

This concern extends beyond DSA to broader worries about Chinese influence in American institutions. Senators Rick Scott, Jim Banks, and Markwayne Mullin warned in January 2026 that programs allowing Chinese nationals fast-track citizenship paths create long-term security vulnerabilities, potentially enabling future infiltration of U.S. government and academic positions.

Sen. Tom Cotton and colleagues similarly urged restrictions on Chinese nationals at Energy Department facilities to prevent theft of AI and national security research. These warnings underscore why even non-official contacts with CPC-linked entities draw scrutiny in today’s climate of U.S.-China rivalry.

This pattern is not new in the American left. It echoes the foreign obsessions of the Weather Underground in the late 1960s and 1970s. Emerging from Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), that militant group sought inspiration and support from revolutionary movements abroad, including trips to Cuba where members met North Vietnamese representatives and received training, funding, and tactical advice.

The Weather Underground aligned with anti-U.S. forces in the Third World and socialist states, viewing them as allies against American imperialism, even as it engaged in domestic bombings and revolutionary rhetoric. DSA’s current outreach to CCP officials and reluctance to criticize Beijing’s actions reflect a similar prioritization of anti-imperialist solidarity over consistent opposition to authoritarian practices.

Ultimately, the question is not just whether such ties are legal, but what they reveal about ideological consistency. When a major U.S. socialist organization quietly accommodates one authoritarian power while loudly condemning others, it risks undermining its own credibility and the very principles it claims to defend.

The contradiction may serve short-term strategic goals, but in the long run, it invites scrutiny that no amount of anti-imperialist framing can fully deflect. In an era when U.S. senators and lawmakers openly warn of Chinese infiltration in academia, government, and research, the DSA’s documented outreach serves as a stark reminder that foreign influence operations can take many forms, and few go unnoticed forever.