Masked Patriot Front white nationalists march Saturday in Kansas City
Police said the event, carried out by the Patriot Front, did not result in any arrests. Talk about the march spread rapidly on social media throughout the afternoon and evening.
The Patriot Front is a white nationalist 'and avowedly fascist nationwide organization' that was formed in the aftermath of the deadly 'Unite the Right' march in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017, according to the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights.
On Saturday, the group's members — faces covered and dressed in their signature navy shirts, khaki pants and tan caps — marched down the sidewalks chanting, 'Life, liberty, victory' and 'Reclaim America.' Some carried shields and many carried flags, including upside-down American flags, Betsy Ross flags and Confederate flags.
A video posted on X showed more than 150 marchers lined up in formation outside the National WWI Museum and Memorial as leader Thomas Rousseau gave a speech.
When the event was over, the members piled into U-Haul trucks. In a video posted later on X, Rousseau said that 'today was the largest action we've ever put on as an organization.'
'It was remarkably successful, and we accomplished every single objective we set out to for the day.'
Officer Alayna Gonzalez, a Kansas City Police spokesperson, said a patrol sergeant saw a group of about 100 marching on the sidewalk near the National WWI Museum and Memorial for about an hour.
'The KCPD was unaware this group was planning to come into our city as they do not advertise their protest/march locations,' she said in an email. 'We learned this group calls themselves the Patriot Front and it is believed everyone involved is from out of town and not local to Kansas City.'
Gonzalez said it appeared the group did not need a parade permit for the event.
'A parade permit is not needed unless roadways need to be shutdown, and from information received at this point the group remained on the sidewalk and out of roadways,' she said. 'There is zero indication that KCPD was involved in any kind of escort capacity while the group was here. There were no arrests made or citations issued. The group has left Kansas City.'
Mayor Quinton Lucas commented about the march in a post on X Saturday evening.
'While the First Amendment provides the right to bring any message to Kansas City,' he said, 'we know that our diversity, our welcoming community, and our respect for the rights of all reject whatever hate and cowardice come our way.'
A spokesperson for the National WWI Museum and Memorial issued a statement Sunday afternoon denouncing the Patriot Front's views.
'The National WWI Museum and Memorial is aware of yesterday's gathering on the public grounds surrounding our institution,' said Karis Erwin, vice president of marketing and guest services. 'We respect First Amendment protections for peaceful assembly and free speech, and want to be unequivocally clear that the views expressed by this group do not represent or align with our values. We stand firmly against hatred, bigotry and divisiveness in all forms.'
While the grounds include public park space where groups may gather, Erwin said, 'such use should never be interpreted as our endorsement of any particular viewpoint.'
'The Museum and Memorial remains committed to serving as a place of learning, reflection and unity for all visitors. This Memorial Day, as we do every day, we honor the lives of those who died in defense of liberty and freedom. This Memorial, a beacon for democracy, reminds us all of core values that seek to unite us and create a just and lasting peace for all nations.'
Devin Burghart, president and executive director of the Seattle-based Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights, said Kansas City was the only city targeted by the Patriot Front on Saturday.
'The presence of a group of masked white nationalists tromping through the streets of Kansas City is a stark reminder that, in this moment, we must counter racism and bigotry on the margins and in the mainstream,' Burghart said in an email to The Star on Sunday.
'The attention-seeking neo-fascist group Patriot Front is well-known for utilizing stunts like this to generate publicity and attract broken young men to their ranks. Widespread community condemnation and long-term organizing are essential in making sure this new generation of white nationalists can't take root in our communities.'
Rousseau founded the Patriot Front in an effort to rebrand the neo-Nazi organization Vanguard America after the violence in Charlottesville, according to groups that monitor far-right extremists. The white supremacist convicted of killing Heather Heyer when he intentionally plowed his car into a group of counter-protesters that day was seen in photographs holding a shield emblazoned with the Vanguard America logo.
In June 2022, police arrested 31 Patriot Front members in Couer d'Alene, Idaho, after receiving a tip that men in face masks with riot gear were seen getting into a U-Haul outside a hotel. Police pulled the truck over near a park where an annual Pride event was to take place. Inside the truck, officers found a smoke grenade, shields and other gear as well as documents describing a plan to incite a disturbance at the park.
A May 2023 IREHR report said that Missouri was the third most active state for Patriot Front activity. It said the group's members sometimes perform charitable acts to improve their image.
'On November 11, 2022, Patriot Front members handed out food and blankets to people experiencing homelessness in Kansas City,' the report said. 'Flyers about Patriot Front were attached to the brown bags they were handing out.
'This type of action is about more than helping the community. This recruitment tool gets young men and teenagers involved in the group.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
16 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
The convictions that count are the ones that sometimes sting
I bring up Goldberg's essay not only to recommend it but also because I was struck by the question with which he introduced it: 'What principle do you hold,' he challenged his readers, 'that is against your self-interest or political desires?' Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up It's a cogent and revealing test. It obliges anyone who answers the question to think about whether they embrace their convictions as a matter of principle or merely because they're convenient. Anyone can defend the freedoms or prohibitions that serve their own purposes. The truer test of ideological and moral seriousness is whether you adhere to your principles even when doing so cuts against your interests, tastes, or partisan loyalties. Advertisement This isn't an ivory-tower abstraction. American history is rich with examples of people who upheld principle at real personal cost. John Adams, though a patriot who hated British rule, risked his career to defend the redcoats accused in the Boston Massacre, convinced that even despised defendants deserved counsel and a fair trial. Justice John Marshall Harlan, raised in a Kentucky family of enslavers, broke with his social milieu to insist in his lone dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) that 'our Constitution is color-blind.' And in 1960, Richard Nixon, urged by allies to contest an election marred by serious irregularities, refused to plunge the nation into turmoil, saying the country's stability mattered more than his own ambition. I have tried to meet that test in my own writing — with what success, I leave others to judge. For instance, I defend the right even of Holocaust-deniers to spread Advertisement I have sometimes put a version of Goldberg's question to candidates in a primary election: Can you name a position you take that is clearly opposed by most of your party's base? Rarely have I gotten a substantive answer. Most politicians duck the question, unwilling to announce that they uphold an unpopular position on principle — even though doing so would be pretty strong evidence that their convictions were genuine. What makes this problem worse is the increasingly common belief that only those who agree with us are legitimate participants in American life. Too many on the right write off their opponents as anti-American, while too many on the left see theirs as irredeemably bigoted or authoritarian. If you begin from the premise that dissenters are not merely wrong but illegitimate, then there is no reason to extend to them the rights or freedoms you claim for yourself. But that mind-set drains principle of all meaning. Defending free speech only for your allies is like championing religious liberty only for your own faith: That's not upholding a principle — it's wielding a partisan cudgel, something that has become endemic in contemporary American life. So much of what bedevils our civic discourse these days, Goldberg writes, begins with 'the premise that America is defined by our politics and, therefore, the people with the wrong politics are not Americans.' Which is why Goldberg's challenge ought to be posed more often. A principle that only applies when it's easy isn't much of a principle at all. So, readers, I'll put the same question to you: What principle do you hold that runs against your own interest or desire? Please give it some thought and share your reflections. In a future column, I'll share some of the more intriguing and noteworthy responses. Advertisement Jeff Jacoby can be reached at
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
Budweiser Stock (BUD) Looks Merrier as it Makes Trump-Friendly U.S. Investment Pledge
President Trump is likely to have raised a glass today to Budweiser-owner Anheuser-Busch InBev (BUD) after it revealed plans to invest $15 million in its facility in St. Louis. Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. Shares in BUD were 1% higher in pre-market trading. Domestic Brew Although that figure by itself is unlikely to pop any corks in the White House, it does show that AB InBev is making good on its previously announced $300 million commitment to boosting U.S. manufacturing. It also follows its announcement earlier this month of a new $9 million investment in its Baldwinsville, NY brewery and a $17 million investment in its Houston brewery. This, of course, has been one of the key pillars of Trump's tariff strategy – to increase domestic making of stuff and having American workers do the hard graft. The funds, announced today, will support supply chain infrastructure to transport domestically grown ingredients to the company's St. Louis, Missouri brewery and help deliver beer brands including Budweiser and Bud Light to consumers. Tariff Defense AB said it has invested nearly $2 billion over the last five years in 100 facilities across the U.S., but the onus on manufacturing in the States has no doubt been spurred on by the strategy of the Trump administration. In order to avoid crippling tariffs, a number of high-profile firms have committed to ramping up U.S. spending, from tech giants such as Apple (AAPL) and Nvidia (NVDA) to motor manufacturer Honda (HMC) and pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca (AZN). Budweiser has previously said it was boosting investments in key brands and ramping up efforts to grow at-home consumption, as spending elsewhere – including in bars – remains pressured. In the first quarter AB InBev said overall volumes declined by 1.9%, impacted by weak demand in China and Brazil. However, it added that North America and Europe showed 'resilience', with top and bottom-line growth. Is BUD a Good Stock to Buy Now? On TipRanks, BUD has a Strong Buy consensus based on 7 Buy ratings. Its highest price target is $90. BUD stock's consensus price target is $78.83, implying a 28.07% upside.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump escalates attacks against Smithsonian museums, says there's too much focus on ‘how bad slavery was'
President Donald Trump escalated his campaign to purge cultural institutions of materials that conflict with his political directives on Tuesday, alleging museums were too focused on highlighting negative aspects of American history, including 'how bad slavery was.' In a Truth Social post, Trump directed his attorneys to conduct a review of museums, comparing the effort to his crackdown on universities across the country. 'The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been — Nothing about Success, nothing about Brightness, nothing about the Future,' Trump wrote. Trump's comments come days after the White House announced an unprecedented, sweeping review of the Smithsonian Institution, which runs the nation's major public museums. The initiative, a trio of top Trump aides wrote in a letter to Smithsonian Institution secretary Lonnie Bunch III last week, 'aims to ensure alignment with the President's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions.' The letter said the review would focus on public-facing content, the curatorial process to understand how work is selected for exhibits, current and future exhibition planning, the use of existing materials and collections and guidelines for narrative standards. Bunch — who has served as Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution since 2019 and is the first African American to hold the position — has made multiple comments about the importance of educating people about slavery through the National Museum of African American History and Culture specifically. He told Smithsonian Magazine that part of the purpose of that museum 'was to help a nation understand itself — an impossible task without the full recognition of the horrors of slavery.' Exhibits at the Smithsonian take years of planning and are heavily evaluated by teams of scholars and curatorial experts before they make their debut. Janet Marstine, a museum ethics expert, said that the demands laid out by the Trump administration 'set the Smithsonian up for failure.' 'Nobody could provide those kinds of materials in such a comprehensive way, in that short amount of time, and so it's just an impossible task,' she said. The White House has asked the Smithsonian to provide a wide array of materials, from internal emails and memos to digital copies of all placards and gallery labels currently on display. The Smithsonian declined to comment on Trump's latest remarks. A White House official, asked about the attorney review process Trump described, said the president 'will explore all options and avenues to get the Woke out of the Smithsonian and hold them accountable.' Still, Trump's efforts to target colleges and universities — which he is now comparing to his focus on Smithsonian museums — has been even more aggressive. His administration has moved to strip federal funding from higher education institutions for a variety of reasons, including allegations of antisemitism and failure to comply with certain policy changes. Columbia University recently settled with the Trump administration for more than $220 million dollars and Trump has also been in a protracted battle with Harvard University after his administration froze $2 billion in federal funding. The Trump administration's push to align federal support with his cultural agenda has extended beyond the nation's capital. The Institute of Museum and Library Services and the National Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities canceled tens of millions of dollars in federal grants earlier this year, affecting small museums, library initiatives, arts programs and academic research projects across the country. Trump has previously praised the Smithsonian museums, including the National Museum of African American History and Culture, which he toured during his first term as president. 'I'm deeply proud that we now have a museum that honors the millions of African American men and women who built our national heritage, especially when it comes to faith, culture and the unbreakable American spirit,' Trump said during remarks at the museum in February 2017. Later that month, Trump said the museum 'tells of the great struggle for freedom and equality that prevailed against the sins of slavery and the injustice of discrimination.' Earlier this year, Trump signed an executive order that put Vice President JD Vance, who serves on the Smithsonian's Board of Regents, in charge of stopping government spending on exhibits that don't align with the administration's agenda. He also tasked a former member of his legal team, attorney Lindsey Halligan, with helping to root out 'improper ideology' at the Smithsonian. 'Museums in our Nation's capital should be places where individuals go to learn — not to be subjected to divisive narratives,' the executive order said. The Smithsonian began a review of its own in June, and has repeatedly stressed its commitment to being nonpartisan. The institution told CNN in July that it was committed to an 'unbiased presentation of facts and history' and that it would 'make any necessary changes to ensure our content meets our standards.' The Smithsonian was established in the 1840s by the US with funds from the estate of James Smithson, a British scientist. As a unique trust instrumentality that is supported by federal funds, it is not an executive branch agency, which makes it a complex question whether the Trump administration has the ability to control its exhibits. It is governed by a 17-member Board of Regents led by Chief Justice John Roberts. Trump's moves to review and alter the Smithsonian Institutions have sparked intense debate, including on CNN's NewsNight with Abby Phillip, where Jillian Michaels, podcast host of 'Keeping it Real,' recently defended Trump, saying 'he's not' whitewashing slavery. 'You cannot tie imperialism and racism and slavery to just one race, which is pretty much what every single exhibit does,' Michaels said, adding: 'Every single thing is like, 'Oh, no, no, no, this is all because White people bad,' and that's just not the truth.' CNN's Betsy Klein and Ethan Schenker contributed to this report. This story has been updated with additional context.
