Dumbest Democrat Ever Delivers Cringe Worthy Performance In Front Of State Assembly

It’s been nearly six months since the brutal murder of 23-year-old Iryna Zarutska on the light rail system in Charlotte. The murder was committed by a violent, habitual felon named Decarlos Brown — a black man who, for an allegedly crazy person, chose his victim very carefully. Brown did not attack the first person he ...

---

It’s been nearly six months since the brutal murder of 23-year-old Iryna Zarutska on the light rail system in Charlotte. The murder was committed by a violent, habitual felon named Decarlos Brown — a black man who, for an allegedly crazy person, chose his victim very carefully. Brown did not attack the first person he saw. He rode the light rail for several hours that day. He waited until a defenseless white woman sat in front of him. And then, after just a couple of minutes, he stabbed Zarutska several times, before walking off the train and bragging that he had just murdered a “white girl.”

In a serious country, every politician who allowed Brown to commit this murder would have immediately resigned in disgrace and gone into exile. And there were many, many elected officials who were responsible for what happened. For about a thousand reasons, Brown should not have been a free man at the time of the murder. He had a record that included arrests for felony larceny, assault, shoplifting, and other crimes. He had also pleaded guilty to committing a robbery with a dangerous weapon, which sent him to prison for several years. And then, after all of these arrests, in January of 2025 — just months before murdering Iryna Zarutska — Brown repeatedly called 911 to report that he was under the control of a mysterious “man-made material” that had entered his bloodstream. After enough of these calls, officers arrested him.

But a judge — a black woman named Teresa Stokes, who also happens to run a mental health treatment clinic — decided not to keep Decarlos Brown in jail.

Screenshot: X

Instead, the judge allowed Brown to go free, as long as he provided a “written promise” that he’d appear in court. She permitted a violent criminal, who was committing more crimes and behaving like a raving lunatic, to live among the general public. Lawmakers gave her discretion to unleash this monster on the city of Charlotte. The judge took advantage of that discretion. And a very predictable result occurred.

For the past six months, to their credit, Republicans in North Carolina have refused to allow Iryna’s killer — and his accomplices in the state government — to get away with what they’ve done.

First, Republicans, with a small amount of Democrat support, passed “Iryna’s Law.” This is a law that, if it had been in place last summer, would have saved her life. It prevents magistrate judges from releasing habitual, violent felons — men like Decarlos Brown — without bail. So no more “written promises” or “cashless bail.” By itself, that provision would have kept Decarlos Brown in jail for all of 2025, since he had no money.

Additionally, judges have to provide written explanations for any decision to release violent or habitual offenders. They’re also obligated to make criminals undergo mental health screening if there’s any possibility that they might be insane (which, again, was the case with Decarlos Brown). If judges fail to meet these obligations, among others, then they’ll be removed from the bench.

That’s the first prong of the Republican response to Iryna Zarutska’s murder.

But they’ve also been holding hearings in which they force elected officials with jurisdiction over Charlotte — the people who should’ve kept Decarlos Brown in jail — to answer questions under oath. And these hearings, in no uncertain terms, have been a train wreck for the Democrats who were responsible for Iryna’s murder. They’ve also been eye-opening as to how utterly unintelligent, incompetent and unprepared our leaders are.

These hearings — and other hearings that we’ll discuss in a moment — are the best argument for mass disenfranchisement, and mass impeachments, that you will ever see. The people running major cities in the United States shouldn’t be allowed to vote, much less make life-or-death decisions that affect millions of people.

We’ll start with the questioning of Mecklenburg County Sheriff Garry McFadden, who is responsible for overseeing the jails in Charlotte. So he’s the guy whose agency released Decarlos Brown. Watch this line of questioning from North Carolina Republican representative Allen Chesser, if you’re able to get through it.

By any measure, this is a top-10 all-time moment that’s ever taken place in a legislative hearing in this country.

Watch:

Credit: WCNC Charlotte/YouTube.com

This is the top law enforcement official in a major county in the state, with a population of more than a million people. He’s been in law enforcement for more than 36 years. He was a “legendary homicide detective,” according to his official biography. He won a contested primary election four years ago, by nearly 10,000 votes. He won the general election unopposed, with around 200,000 votes. And despite all of this experience, and despite the position he now holds, he doesn’t have a 4th grader’s grasp of his job description.

It’s not simply that he doesn’t know which branch of government his office falls under. He doesn’t even know what a branch of government is. For all he knows, there are 20 branches of government. I’m surprised that, when asked about the branches of government, he didn’t start listing the parts of a tree. That’s how hopelessly clueless he is.

To be clear, this is not some dumb viral “gotcha” moment. It’s also not a “gaffe,” which is how media outlets in North Carolina are describing this video. It’s directly relevant to his ability to perform his job. And it says a lot about how we select our leaders in this country. It cannot be stated enough that an elected official, or anyone in government, not being able to list the branches of government is a shocking level of ignorance, given their job description. Imagine if you sent a contract to your lawyer, asking him to look it over and break it down for you, and then he sent you back and email saying, “Uh, sorry, what’s a contract?” That’s the level of rank stupidity we’re dealing with here.

Of course, if you work for the judicial branch — which the sheriff apparently believes he does — then your job is to interpret the law. (Judges don’t do that anymore, either, but that’s supposed to be the idea). On the other hand, if you’re an Executive Branch officer, your job is quite different. Your job is to enforce the laws that are passed by the Legislative Branch. This is not a moot point. It’s clearly an issue that causes a lot of confusion for this particular sheriff. In a separate interview a few months ago, the sheriff suggested that, unless his bosses in the Judicial Branch give him permission, then he doesn’t have to follow North Carolina law.

Watch:

Credit: WCNC/YouTube.com

So he implies that he can’t do anything to enforce immigration law unless a “federal judge or magistrate, or state judicial official” has “signed a paper.” And once again, this strongly suggests that he has no idea what his actual responsibilities are.

The way immigration law works, deportation orders are mostly handled by officials and administrators within the Executive Branch — including immigration judges and other officers. These are people who work for the DOJ. They aren’t part of the Judiciary Branch, and in the vast majority of cases, they aren’t “federal judges.” Therefore, since North Carolina law requires that this sheriff cooperates with ICE, he’s actually not allowed to wait for a federal judge or magistrate in the Judiciary Branch to “sign a paper” before he does anything. And the sheriff doesn’t remotely understand any of this, which is obviously a big problem for the top law enforcement official in the county.

But the really amusing part of that clip is from the beginning, when he says something like, “You will never hear a lawmaker say I’m not following the law!”

But in reality, you will hear lawmakers say that. At the hearing the other day, several lawmakers took turns, one after the other, saying that. And it wasn’t exactly a tough argument to make, since the sheriff himself stated that he doesn’t follow the law, and ap