A Wisconsin transgender activist released a series of videos urging followers to "kill your local Republican" and declaring a "trans jihad" against MAGA supporters, then promised to make that message "the moderate position for the state of Wisconsin."
Teha Delaruelle, who has ties to Democratic politics in the state, sat in front of a dry-erase board bearing the words "Kill Your Local Republican" and pointed to it on camera. The footage, first reported by the Daily Caller, was posted to X on July 1, 2026, by conservative commentator Dustin Grage.
In the clips, Delaruelle directed the threats at what the activist called "the oppressor, the bigots, the animals that make up MAGA", and gave followers a one-month window to act. The stated goal: a "permanent state of dread" for conservatives.
The first video features Delaruelle speaking against the handwritten "Kill Your Local Republican" backdrop. In it, Delaruelle laid out the ambition plainly:
"We're going to make this the moderate position for the state of Wisconsin."
A second clip escalated the rhetoric further. Delaruelle declared on camera:
"We are doing trans jihad."
That video, as the New York Post reported, featured a trans flag with an outstretched arm holding a rifle. Delaruelle vowed to make Republicans "walk down the streets in fear, anxiety and worry," adding: "This is their new reality. And it's never gonna change."
A third video posted by Grage featured the slogans "Smash MAGA" and "Left Wing Death Squads."
None of this is ambiguous. None of it requires interpretation. It is an open, on-camera call for political violence against members of a specific party.
The videos did not emerge in a vacuum. Delaruelle maintains a Substack blog, teatimewithteha.substack.com, where the activist has published calls for what amounts to an "anti-civilization revolution." In one post, Delaruelle wrote that "society desires nothing less than our total extermination, therefore we must destroy their society."
That framing, casting political opponents as existential threats to justify open calls for destruction, has become a recurring pattern in certain corners of activist politics. It is the language of radicalization, not persuasion.
Delaruelle also wrote that the public wants revenge against MAGA figures who, in the activist's telling, strip away rights. The Substack content described the situation as an "existential struggle."
In an era when political violence against conservative figures is not hypothetical but documented, language like this deserves to be treated with the seriousness it demands.
The Heartland Post reported that Delaruelle served as a volunteer staffer for Katrina DeVille, a Democratic congressional candidate running in the August 11 primary for Wisconsin's 8th Congressional District. The same outlet reported Delaruelle had spent years with the Outagamie County Democrats. The Daily Caller noted that staffing claim remains unverified.
DeVille, described by the Titletown Times as a transgender musician, is one of four Democrats seeking to unseat Republican Rep. Tony Wied. Her platform includes a $22 minimum wage, tax changes for churches, and expanded access to gender-related medical care.
The New York Post reported that DeVille has since distanced herself from Delaruelle, stating the volunteer was removed and blocked after displaying "deeply troubled behavior." At the time of the Daily Caller's initial report, however, the DeVille campaign had not addressed the situation.
The delay matters. When a person connected to your campaign, however loosely, is on camera calling for the killing of political opponents, silence is not a neutral position. It took outside pressure and media attention before any distancing occurred.
As of the reporting, no law enforcement agency has been identified as responding to or investigating Delaruelle's videos. No arrests. No charges. No public statement from any authority.
That silence raises its own questions. Imagine, for a moment, that a conservative activist sat in front of a whiteboard reading "Kill Your Local Democrat," declared a "jihad" against progressives, and gave followers a one-month deadline to act. The FBI would have a press conference scheduled before the video finished buffering.
The double standard is not a talking point. It is a lived reality that Americans can see with their own eyes. Calls for political violence should be investigated and, where warranted, prosecuted, regardless of which direction they point.
Recent cases show that federal authorities are perfectly capable of acting swiftly when the threat targets the right people. A Chicago man was recently indicted in connection with a conspiracy targeting a political figure. The machinery of accountability exists. The question is whether it gets switched on equally.
What makes Delaruelle's videos particularly alarming is not just the content but the stated intent to normalize it. "We're going to make this the moderate position" is not a throwaway line. It is a strategy, an explicit effort to move the window of acceptable political discourse until calls for killing Republicans sit comfortably inside it.
This is the logical endpoint of years of rhetoric that frames political disagreement as literal violence against marginalized groups. Once you convince yourself, and your audience, that your opponents are engaged in "total extermination," any response becomes justifiable. The leap from "they are committing genocide" to "therefore we must destroy their society" is shorter than anyone should be comfortable with.
The broader political environment makes this more dangerous, not less. The United States has faced escalating security threats at home and abroad. Domestic political violence is not a relic of another era. It is a present danger.
And yet the institutional response to this particular brand of incitement has been conspicuously muted. Major Democratic figures have not rushed to condemn the videos. The media coverage, while it exists, has not generated anything close to the firestorm that would follow identical rhetoric from the right.
Conservative Americans have watched for years as the rules of acceptable speech are applied with exacting precision in one direction and casual indifference in the other. A Republican officeholder who used even a fraction of Delaruelle's language would face immediate calls for resignation, law enforcement scrutiny, and wall-to-wall cable news coverage framing the remarks as evidence of a broader movement toward fascism.
When the threat comes from the left, wrapped in the language of liberation and social justice, the response is quieter. A volunteer gets "removed and blocked." The campaign distances itself after the story breaks. And the activist continues to maintain a public Substack calling for the destruction of society.
The pattern is familiar to anyone paying attention to how threats are handled in the current political climate. Consequences depend less on the severity of the conduct than on the identity and ideology of the person engaged in it.
Several questions remain open. Has any law enforcement agency opened an investigation into Delaruelle's videos? What was the exact nature and duration of Delaruelle's role with the DeVille campaign? When were the original videos first posted, and did anyone in Democratic political circles see them before Grage surfaced them publicly?
Has Delaruelle offered any public response to the coverage? And will any elected Democrat in Wisconsin, or nationally, condemn the videos by name?
These are not rhetorical questions. They are the basic accountability measures that would be demanded instantly if the partisan roles were reversed.
When someone sits in front of a camera and tells followers to kill members of a political party, the only acceptable response is swift, unequivocal condemnation, followed by a serious investigation. Anything less tells you exactly whose safety the system considers worth protecting.
