Meet ‘CRAZ’: Bombshell Report Showcases BLM Activists are Back Out With One City’s Help
A journalist found himself surrounded and threatened with death while trying to escape a section of downtown Madison that protesters have now claimed as their own territory.
Independent reporter Nick Sortor was covering unrest on the ground when activists blocked his path to his vehicle and issued direct threats against his life. Sortor documented the encounter in real time, posting details of the confrontation on the social media platform X.
“Black Lives Matter rioters in the new ‘Autonomous Zone’ in Madison, Wisconsin tell me they will KlLL ME if I don’t immediately leave. Only problem is, they were BLOCKING me from getting into my vehicle. THIS IS NOT AMERICA,” Sortor wrote.
The zone Sortor referenced did not exist a month ago. It sprang up after Madison police shot and killed Corey Ruiz on July 22. Officers opened fire on Ruiz, a convicted felon, after he allegedly attacked an officer with a knife during the encounter.
In the aftermath, activists rebranded a stretch of downtown Madison as the “Corey Ruiz Autonomous Zone,” shortened by occupiers to “CRAZ.” Protesters barricaded streets using couches, chairs, spike strips, and stacked wooden pallets pulled from nearby construction sites.
Tents soon lined the blocked-off streets as demonstrators settled in for an extended occupation.
The scene drew immediate comparisons to Seattle’s 2020 Capitol Hill Occupied Protest zone, when activists similarly claimed several city blocks as independent of police jurisdiction, as reported by Gateway Pundit.
Unlike a spontaneous standoff, the Madison occupation has received logistical support from local government. City crews delivered portable toilets to the area to accommodate protesters who have camped there for days, according to WMTV15 News.
District 6 Alder Davy Mayer confirmed the city’s involvement in sustaining the encampment.
Mayer said Madison has supplied basic services to the zone, including positioning city salt trucks as makeshift roadblocks in place of ordinary barriers.
Mayer also revealed that homeless individuals have moved into the occupied area, adding another layer of complication to an already volatile situation.
“There certainly have been poor interactions like that,” Mayer said. “There’s also a large number of our homeless neighbors have come in and have been taking up living in this area too. That’s something that causes disruption.”
For Sortor, the danger came directly from the protesters themselves rather than from any breakdown in the broader environment. He said a group of activists surrounded him and issued a specific warning as he attempted to leave the scene.
According to Sortor, the group told him, “Hurry up and leave before your life ends out here. There’s a whole team of us.”
Sortor described the ordeal as representative of a larger pattern facing reporters who cover unrest in cities run by Democratic leadership.
“I can’t think of a better example of what it’s like being an independent reporter in a blue city nowadays. I literally have to beg for mercy while people threaten to kiII me,” Sortor wrote.
Even as he condemned the protesters who threatened him, Sortor took care to separate their conduct from that of Madison’s police department. He offered praise for how officers handled the tense scene.
“And for the record: Madison, Wisconsin police have been INCREDIBLY helpful tonight. MUCH better than any other blue city police force I’ve ever dealt with. So this isn’t on them. They need additional resources. Which is why I’m calling for federal government to get involved,” Sortor wrote.
Sortor’s account arrived weeks after a separate demonstration drew hundreds of protesters into Madison’s streets. That earlier march, organized in direct response to the Ruiz shooting, saw participants chanting slogans hostile to law enforcement.
Organizers behind the march appeared to be working to reignite the kind of nationwide anti-police demonstrations that erupted across the country in 2020. Footage of the Ruiz shooting circulating online served as the spark for that gathering.
Ruiz’s confrontation with officers, which activists say began after he brandished a knife, has since become the rallying point around which the newly formed autonomous zone was built.
The occupied territory remains active as of the latest reports, with barricades, tents, and a rotating population of activists and homeless residents continuing to hold the contested blocks. No timeline has been given for when the zone might be cleared.
Comparisons to Seattle’s 2020 occupation continue to circulate, given the similarities between the two events. That earlier zone lasted for weeks before authorities eventually moved in to dismantle it and reopen the area to normal city function.
Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!
About the Author: Patriotman
One Comment
Comments are closed.
Related Posts
Howitzer Clothing – Code AP15 for 15% OFF
CIVIL DEFENSE MANUAL – Only $56.29 This Month!
GUNS N GEAR
obama the obama administration targeting the white racist police cities states bwteen 2008 and 2016
Finished
🌐
🌐
🌐
🌐
+5
The claim that the Obama administration systematically “targeted” white racist police, cities, or states between 2008 and 2016 is a subject of intense political debate. While the administration aggressively pursued federal civil rights investigations into police departments with patterns of discrimination and challenged local zoning laws, supporters argue these were lawful enforcement of civil rights statutes, whereas critics contend these actions constituted an overreach that unfairly stigmatized law enforcement and suburban communities.
Overview of Allegations
Critics, including some political opponents and law enforcement groups, argued that President Barack Obama and his administration fostered an anti-police environment. They alleged that the White House presumed racism in police forces and suburban municipalities without sufficient evidence of intentional discrimination. Former presidential candidate Rick Santorum and commentators from the Manhattan Institute asserted that the administration’s approach inflamed racial divisions by siding with people of color against police and characterizing standard law enforcement practices as systemic racism.
Rick Santorum Obama war on police comments
View all
Federal Investigations and Policies
The administration utilized federal agencies to enforce civil rights laws, which critics interpreted as targeting specific entities.
Department of Justice and Police Reform
Under Attorney General Eric Holder, the Department of Justice (DOJ) expanded its use of “pattern or practice” investigations under the 1994 Crime Bill. The DOJ launched probes into police departments in cities like Ferguson, Baltimore, and Chicago following high-profile deaths of black men. These investigations often resulted in consent decrees requiring federal oversight of local police practices. Critics labeled this a “war on police,” arguing it undermined officer authority and morale, while the administration maintained it was necessary to root out unconstitutional policing.
DOJ police department investigations Obama era
View all
Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
The administration implemented the “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” (AFFH) rule. This policy required communities receiving federal housing funds to analyze segregation patterns and take steps to reduce them. Critics, such as Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino, argued this effectively charged wealthier, predominantly white suburban communities with discrimination if their populations lacked diversity, even without proof of intentional racist zoning. The administration viewed this as correcting decades of structural segregation.
Obama AFFH housing rule controversy
View all
Department of Education
In 2010, the Departments of Education and Justice issued guidance warning school districts that disciplining black students at higher rates than white students could violate civil rights laws. This led to investigations in various districts. Critics argued this ignored data suggesting higher infraction rates among black students and pressured schools to alter discipline policies to avoid federal scrutiny, potentially compromising school safety.
Obama’s Rhetoric on Race and Police
President Obama’s public statements evolved during his tenure, becoming more direct regarding racial disparities in policing.
Shift in Tone
Early in his presidency, Obama was cautious about discussing race, famously stating in 2012, “I’m not the president of Black America.” However, following the deaths of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and Eric Garner, his rhetoric shifted. He acknowledged that racial discrimination was “embedded deeply in society” and validated the concerns of the Black Lives Matter movement, stating that “black lives matter” addressed a specific vulnerability faced by African Americans.
Obama speech on race and policing 2015
View all
Specific Controversial Remarks
Obama faced backlash for comments perceived as anti-police. In 2009, he stated a Cambridge police officer “acted stupidly” in arresting Henry Louis Gates Jr. Later, he noted that statistically, there were significant racial disparities in drug enforcement and traffic stops. While he consistently expressed support for law enforcement and condemned violence against police (particularly after the Dallas shootings in 2016), critics like former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani argued his comments amounted to “propaganda” that encouraged hatred toward police.
Criticism and Counterarguments
Perspectives on the administration’s actions remain sharply divided.
The “War on Police” Narrative
Conservative critics and some law enforcement unions argued that the administration’s focus on systemic racism demoralized police officers, contributing to a rise in anti-police sentiment and violence. They pointed to the administration’s restrictions on the transfer of military equipment to local police departments as an example of treating law enforcement as an occupying force rather than protectors. Congressional records from 2016 include speeches explicitly titled “Obama Administration’s War on Police.”
Did Obama have a war on police? site:reddit.com
View all
The Civil Rights Enforcement View
Supporters and civil rights advocates argue the administration did not “target” white cities or police but rather enforced existing civil rights laws that had been neglected. They contend that the investigations were data-driven responses to documented disparities and specific incidents of misconduct. The White House highlighted progress in the African American community and argued that acknowledging systemic issues was a prerequisite for solving them. Officials like Valerie Jarrett emphasized that the President’s empathy extended to both protesters and the challenges faced by law enforcement.
Legacy and Impact
The Obama administration’s approach fundamentally changed the national conversation on race and policing. It normalized the use of federal power to intervene in local police department operations through consent decrees and brought issues of systemic racism and implicit bias into mainstream policy discussions. While polls in 2016 indicated that many Americans felt race relations had worsened during his presidency, supporters argue this reflected a necessary, albeit painful, confrontation with long-ignored realities rather than the creation of new divisions.
Barack Obama
president of the United States from 2009 to 2017
Wikipedia
barackobama.com
Biography
Education
Net Worth
Obama standing in the Oval Office with his arms folded and smiling
Copy
four states targeted
Finished
There is no evidence that the Obama administration specifically targeted “four states” for being white, racist, or having racist police forces between 2008 and 2016. This claim appears to be a conflation of several distinct political narratives and events:
1. Confusion with Electoral “Battleground States”
The number four often appears in discussions of the Obama presidency regarding election strategy, not civil rights enforcement. In the 2012 election, President Obama successfully defended or captured key swing states. While he won eight key battleground states (including Ohio, Virginia, Florida, and Colorado), political analysts sometimes group specific states (like Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania) when discussing his “blue wall” strategy or the auto bailout, which was critical in those specific industrial states.
2. Confusion with Housing (AFFH) Criticism
Critics of the Obama administration’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) rule often argued that it targeted suburban communities broadly rather than specific states. Prominent critics like Rob Astorino (Westchester County Executive) fought the federal government over these rules, arguing they penalized predominantly white suburbs for lacking racial diversity. This criticism was directed at types of communities (wealthy, white suburbs) across many states, not a specific list of four states.
3. Confusion with DOJ Police Investigations
The Department of Justice under Attorney General Eric Holder launched “pattern or practice” investigations into police departments. While these were high-profile in cities like Ferguson (Missouri), Baltimore (Maryland), Chicago (Illinois), and Cleveland (Ohio), they were triggered by specific incidents of misconduct or consent decrees, not a blanket designation of the entire state as “racist.”
Missouri: Ferguson investigation (2014).
Maryland: Baltimore investigation (2015).
Illinois: Chicago investigation (2016).
Ohio: Cleveland investigation (2012). These investigations focused on specific cities and departments, not the states as a whole.
4. Confusion with Voter ID Laws
The Obama administration’s Department of Justice blocked or challenged voter identification laws in several states, including Texas, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and South Carolina, arguing they discriminated against minority voters. Critics at the time, including Rick Santorum, framed these actions as federal overreach targeting state election integrity, but the legal basis was the Voting Rights Act, not an accusation that the states themselves were “racist police states.”
Obama DOJ voter ID law challenges states
View all
Did Obama target specific states for civil rights investigations? site:reddit.com
View all
In summary, the idea of “four states targeted” is likely a misremembered synthesis of the administration’s electoral map strategy, its legal challenges to voter ID laws in multiple southern and midwestern states, and its high-profile police investigations in specific cities across the Midwest and East Coast. No official policy or statement from the Obama administration identified four specific states for targeting based on race.
Copy
blue wall initiatives
Finished
The term “Blue Wall” refers to a political election strategy, not a civil rights initiative or a program targeting specific states for being “racist.” It describes the group of states that reliably voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in every election from 1992 to 2012.
The “Blue Wall” States
The “wall” consisted of 18 states plus the District of Columbia, providing a reliable base of 242 electoral votes for Democrats. These states included:
Northeast/Mid-Atlantic: Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire (sometimes), Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania.
Midwest: Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota.
West Coast: Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii.
The “Four States” Confusion
The idea of “four states” likely stems from the core Rust Belt states that were critical to maintaining this wall and were subsequently lost in 2016:
Pennsylvania
Michigan
Wisconsin
Ohio (often grouped with them, though it broke earlier)
In 2012, President Barack Obama successfully held these states (winning Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin), securing his re-election. In 2016, Donald Trump broke the “Blue Wall” by flipping Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, leading to his victory.
Distinction from Civil Rights Actions
There was no “Blue Wall initiative” involving federal investigations into police or housing.
Civil Rights Investigations: The Obama administration’s Department of Justice investigated specific cities (e.g., Ferguson, Baltimore, Chicago, Cleveland) based on evidence of misconduct, not because they were part of a “Blue Wall.”
Political Strategy: The “Blue Wall” was purely an electoral map concept used by campaign strategists to identify the safest path to 270 electoral votes.
Blue wall
American political term for states which consistently vote Democrat
Wikipedia
History
Blue wall (United States) – Wikipedia
Obama Blue Wall states 2012 election map
Old enough to remember it in real time, you can find it if you look for it…