The Views of Brandi Kruse: On DarkHorse Podcast

Summary of The Views of Brandi Kruse: On DarkHorse Podcast

by Bret Weinstein & Heather Heying

2h 24m•February 1, 2026
Listen to Episode

Overview of The Views of Brandi Kruse: On DarkHorse Podcast

Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying interview independent journalist Brandi Kruse (transcript shows variants “Cruz/Brandy”) about her reporting on left-wing street militancy (Antifa/CHOP/CHAZ), her surprise invitation to a White House roundtable on Antifa, her political evolution away from severe Trump-derangement toward voting for Trump in 2024, and broader concerns about political violence, civil liberties, social-media-driven polarization, gun culture, and recent Washington state legislation on 3D‑printed firearms. The conversation mixes on-the-ground anecdotes (Evergreen, Portland, Seattle) with constitutional and policy critique, plus reflections on generational and cultural dynamics that sustain today’s polarization.

Key topics discussed

  • White House roundtable on Antifa

    • Brandi’s invitation, appearance with Andy Ngo, and her main message: prosecute criminal conduct irrespective of media narratives and don’t wait for political buy‑in to act on lawlessness.
    • Her disclosure of prior “Trump Derangement Syndrome” and how covering left‑wing extremism shifted her views.

  • Firsthand reporting on left‑wing militancy

    • Evergreen campus incidents; witnessing harassment/intimidation of journalists.
    • CHOP/CHAZ and Portland riots — pattern of authorities standing down, occupation of public spaces, and de facto armed self‑governance.
    • Distinction between anarchist core, marginal “hang‑ons” and older/performative protesters; tactics aimed to induce law‑enforcement overreach.

  • Terrorism label & civil‑liberties concerns

    • Worry about the legal power that the “terrorist” label gives government actors (NDAA, Patriot Act aftermath).
    • Argument: avoid using “terrorist” as a catch‑all for domestic American actors because the term has been weaponized to strip legal protections.

  • Social media, algorithms, and polarization

    • Algorithms amplify outrage and make otherwise private people into public activists.
    • Personal anecdotes: family rifts, yoga-studio drama, how online outrage differs from offline civility.

  • Gun culture, ownership, and politics

    • Brandi’s personal move to concealed‑carry after threats; concerns about inexperienced or politically alienated people arming themselves without exposure to responsible gun culture.
    • Discussion of Alex P. (Alex Reade/Preddy—name variant in dialogue), the fatal Minneapolis shooting, and how weapon type, training, and context matter.
    • The possibility left‑of‑centerers picking up arms but not adopting conservative gun culture and training.

  • Washington state bills (HB 2320 / HB 2321)

    • Proposed bans on 3D‑printed firearms and criminalizing possession/distribution of digital blueprints.
    • Proposed requirements for 3D‑printer manufacturers to install “blocking features” and give the Attorney General broad rulemaking authority — raised free‑speech and innovation concerns.
    • Rebuttable presumption language criticized as a due‑process/First Amendment risk.

  • Broader governance, taxation, and economy critique

    • Criticism of West Coast progressive policy outcomes: homelessness, crime, business flight, high taxes (example: Seattle “jumpstart” tax), and perceived policy failure despite virtue signaling.
    • Discussion of socialism as an “ingredient” (public goods like fire departments) vs. systemwide socialism, and the need for policies that protect against bad luck while not rewarding bad choices.

  • Norms for policy design

    • Advocacy for “navigation” and “prototyping” rather than blueprints: incremental policy experiments, rapid feedback, and ruthless measurement of outcomes.

Main takeaways

  • Street militancy and intimidation of journalists are real and harmful regardless of the perpetrators’ political label — criminal conduct should be prosecuted, not debated for political optics.
  • Labeling Americans as “terrorists” carries legal consequences that threaten constitutional rights; careful legal and semantic use is essential.
  • Algorithms and social media are major drivers of polarization; in‑person relationships (trusted interlocutors) are crucial for resisting radicalization.
  • Increasing numbers of non‑traditional groups (including left‑leaning people) arming themselves raises questions about access to responsible training and gun‑safety culture.
  • Bills targeting 3D‑printed firearms that criminalize code possession or delegate wide regulatory powers to attorneys general risk free‑speech harms and stifle innovation without solving the underlying violence problem.
  • Policy should aim to protect people from catastrophic bad luck while holding individuals accountable for bad choices; iterative prototyping + honest outcome assessment beats ideological blueprinting.

Notable quotes / insights

  • “If they engage in criminal conduct the way they’re doing it, let’s just arrest them and put them in federal prison.” — highlighting frustration with selective enforcement.
  • On the “terrorist” label: “I don’t want anyone labeled with that term…because what happened to that term in the aftermath of 9/11 is that it was turned into a legal category which alienates you from your constitutional rights without your knowledge.”
  • On polarization: “The algorithm is trying to make me upset at people I know. I take my phone and I throw it to the other side of the couch.”
  • On policy design: “The two modes of thought you have to have are navigation and prototyping…You make a move, did it get closer or farther?”

Policy and practical recommendations (action items)

  • Law enforcement: prosecute demonstrable criminal behavior (assault, arson, weaponization) irrespective of alleged ideology.
  • Language: avoid using “terrorist” casually for American citizens because of legal and constitutional consequences — refer to specific criminal statutes/behavior instead.
  • Legislation: oppose laws that (a) criminalize possession of expressive material (e.g., digital blueprints) without clear, narrow tailoring, or (b) grant overly broad, unreviewable rulemaking to executives or attorneys general.
  • Gun safety: encourage cross‑cultural training and responsible ownership norms — range instruction, certified training, and integration into an established safety culture for any new gun owners, regardless of politics.
  • Digital public health: consider structural measures to reduce algorithmic amplification of outrage (platform design, media literacy, and tools that promote in‑person, trusted dialogue).
  • Policy process: adopt prototyping + metric‑driven approaches: small trials, measure outcomes, iterate or reverse quickly when harm appears.

Sponsors & episode notes

Advertisers read on the episode: Timeline (Mitopure/urolithin A), Helix (mattresses), Branch Basics (non‑toxic cleaners). The interview spans personal anecdotes, policy critique, and philosophical reflections — heavy on constitutional concerns and civil‑liberties framing.

Who should listen / why it matters

  • Journalists and media consumers who want a first‑person account of covering left‑wing street militancy and the threats journalists face.
  • Policymakers and lawyers concerned about domestic‑terrorism terminology, civil‑liberties erosion (NDAA/Patriot Act fallout), and overbroad regulatory proposals.
  • Citizens interested in understanding how social media, culture, and policy interact to produce political polarization and street tactics that seek to provoke law‑enforcement overreach.
  • Anyone wrestling with gun‑ownership questions who wants to weigh cultural, training, and legal dimensions beyond headline debates.