DSA Co-Chair to Fox News: We Want to Abolish Everything and Seize Corporations

Jorge Bonilla
July 26th, 2026 5:48 PM

Text to Speech

00:00 00:00
Font Size

Throughout this cycle, the Elitist Media have abetted DSA-affiliated candidates running as Democrats: gleefully amplified socialists such as Zohran Mamdani and covered for the sins of others such as Graham Platner. Through it all, they have assisted them in concealing what the Democratic Socialists of America actually stand for. A recent Fox News interview rips that veil open.

Shannon Brean interviewed DSA national co-chair Megan Romer on Fox News Sunday. Here are some of that interview’s most remarkable moments.

After an introduction and exchange of pleasantries, Bream asks Romer to respond to former Democratic National Committee chair Jaime Harrison’s complaints about DSA candidates who hate the Democrat Party. Her response confirms what many of have suspected all along:

 

 

SHANNON BREAM: So Jamie Harrison, who was the DNC chair, after you had such a big night in New York City knocking out some of those incumbents and having success with your candidates in the congressional primaries, he said if you hate the Democratic Party, then don't run for our nomination. Don't use our resources and don't rely on our volunteers and don't use our infrastructure and focus on building the party you actually support. Other Democrats out there saying this is a separate party- the DSA- you don't belong within the party. How do you respond to his statements there?

MEGAN ROMER: Yeah, I mean- the two parties have over years and decades created a system where ballot line access is difficult for third parties. I also have been told a lot of times by Democrats “don't vote third party, it’s wasting your vote.” So we run on the Democratic ballot line where it makes sense. We run independents sometimes where that is a viable possibility, but it's a ballot line. And what matters is what the voters think, and the voters are overwhelmingly choosing our candidate.

Romer essentially admits that the DSA is essentially a third party latching on to Democrat structures for ballot access, and that their voters are totally fine with that. Bream then moves on to specific policy positions platformed by the DSA. Although we often focus on the “Abolish ICE” and “Abolish the Supreme Court” portions of their platform, be sure to watch this clip to the very end:

 

 

SHANNON BREAM: OK, so we’re going to put on the screen a few things that are part of your platform and I want to ask you to give me sort of a true or false on these: Abolish the Senate.

MEGAN ROMER: True.

BREAM: Okay. Replace the presidency and Supreme Court as we now know them.

ROMER: Yup.

BREAM: Abolish ICE?

ROMER: Absolutely.

BREAM: Abolish borders and give amnesty to anyone currently in the U.S. illegally.

ROMER: As a long term plan, yup.

BREAM: Defund the Pentagon.

ROMER: Absolutely.

BREAM: Abolish prisons, at least in large part.

ROMER: Yeah, again as part of a long term program- yeah.

BREAM: Okay, so no prisons. Government or public ownership of most large corporations.

ROMER: Yeah. Absolutely.

“Government or public ownership of most large corporations” doesn’t mean a 10% stake, but outright seizure. Of the means of production. The DSA co-chair doesn’t deny or dissimulate, either. This is a clarifying moment that we’ve not seen anywhere on Elitist Media. Instead, we get anchors saying DSA are “not communists.”

Bream then pushes for clarification on some of the earlier policy items such as “Abolish the Senate”:

 

 

SHANNON BREAM: OK, let's go back through some of those then. Abolish the Senate. There are people in the Senate now who are very supportive of DSA. They lose their seats?

ROMER: Well- the Senate is an anachronistic institution. It comes from the British House of Lords. It is made to protect power for -- the Senate was part of the system made to make sure people didn't have too much of a say, so we want to expand Congress significantly but make it a unicameral legislature.

BREAM: Okay, and without the presidency and the Supreme Court. So, abolish ICE. Would there be any enforcement of immigration laws- or with abolishing the border there’s- we’re not enforcing immigration laws, they go away.

ROMER: Yeah- so, again. This is part of this longer term plan, and part of it includes- think-

BREAM: But if you can get there.

ROMER: Yeah, if we can get to the place where the U.S. is not destabilizing countries in order to mine them for resources, there will be significantly less migration. If we are not-

BREAM: What do you say to those, though, that that would potentially destabilize the U.S.? Because there's only so much the economy can bear, and when you have a flood of people coming in it might not work out economically, according to a lot of analyses, if you just open up the borders and there's no enforcement at all.

ROMER: Well, we’re not saying open the borders tomorrow.

BREAM: But eventually.

ROMER: We are saying rebuild an economy in a society that works for everyone. And the open borders is part of a longer term international plan that involves us stopping destabilizing countries. Most people who are coming to this country are coming as economic refugees and we have destabilized their country. We did that.

BREAM: Well, a lot of- you know, if you look at data, the Center for Immigration Studies says right now the people- the households here in the U.S. that are headed up by people who are here illegally, nearly 61% of them are on some type of government or welfare program here in the U.S. Can we afford to do that? I mean, at some point you run out of resources.

ROMER: Well, right now we make it very difficult for people to participate in society in such a way that they can avoid using services. So we want people to be able to work and live and go to school and actually participate which means contributing to society and also getting that we need from society.

BREAM: Okay.

ROMER: It’s a collective choice we all make.

It should be noted that the Senate, presidency, and Supreme Court cannot be abolished except by drastically amending the Constitution itself. Romer goes on to describe what Congress might actually look like. When asked about abolishing ICE, Romer goes into a redistributionist rant wherein she blames America for people being here illegally. Conversely, illegal immigration can only be stopped by making America into the sort of country people would also flee.

Finally, Bream engages Romer on the DSA’s call for abolishing prisons:

 

 

SHANNON BREAM: If we talk about abolishing prisons, does that make society better? Is there anyone who should be incarcerated? Rapists, child predators?

ROMER: When we think about most people in prison. Mostly imprisoned for crimes of poverty.

BREAM: But I am talking about the really --

ROMER: Right. When we get rid of this need for crimes of poverty to exist, when we get rid of that destabilizing force that creates so many people who are living in desperate situations and doing desperate things, that brings those numbers down to a very small numbers and then we can collectively decide what we do with those people. I suspect it won't look like the prison system as we know it today.

BREAM: But you do think some people need to be locked away from society.

ROMER: Some people are not able to be functional members of society. That's true. But what does that look like to keep the rest of us safe? We are talking about safety, we are not talking about punishment. We are talking about making sure that we are safe, everybody is safe, everybody maintains their dignity and everybody maintains their humanity. 

Romer tried to go around the issue as much as she could but could not commit to the idea of locking murderers and rapists away for the rest of their lives. “We are talking about safety, we are not talking about punishment.” 

At a time when socialism is increasingly popular among the left, the Elitist Media seem more interested in hiding from the public what that means. More perverse than the usual bias by omission, this seems to be a perverse accommodation in pursuit of access to future power. In all, the interview performed an extremely valuable public service. May the rest take note.

Donor Privacy Policy