“Every time he wears a tuxedo…” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
We’ve gone way past the notion of creeping authoritarianism. We’ve got an executive branch that’s forcing us into a Soviet-style Command and Control Economy. We’ve also entered a deeper phase of attacks on the U.S. Constitution, which resemble the commands of Dear Leader in Korea to provide adequate adoration and no criticism. Our First Amendment Rights have never experienced such obvious frontal attacks. Meanwhile, the wannabe King was living it up in his usual white trash ways by embarrassing us in a State visit to the UK. He’s the perfect example of “The Ugly American” as outlined in the book of the same name. It’s going to take years to retrieve our international standing and influence.
This analysis in the PBS article compares our current attacks on Freedom of the press to those of Orbán’s Hungary and Putin’s Russia. I don’t have a working TV, and I have watched less of it over the years. I think the absurdity of “reality” TV finally did me in. However, it’s still an important source of information in this country as well as entertainment, and to see it be controlled by the current administration and its stupidity is beyond anything I’d ever expect. I grew up on the Smothers Brothers, Laugh-In, and other comedies that continually trolled Richard Nixon. I never thought we’d experience McCarthyism again, which was before my time, but taught repeatedly in American History as one of our darkest nights.
Since taking office in January, President Donald Trump has waged an aggressive campaign against the media unlike any in modern U.S. history, making moves similar to those of authoritarian leaders that he has often praised.
On Wednesday, Trump cheered ABC’s suspension of Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show after the comedian made remarks about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk that criticized the president’s MAGA movement: “Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.
It was the latest in a string of attacks against news outlets and media figures he believes are overly critical of him. Trump has filed lawsuits against outlets whose coverage he dislikes, threatened to revoke TV broadcast licenses and sought to bend news organizations and social media companies to his will.
The tactics are similar to those used by leaders in other countries who have chipped away at speech freedoms and independent media while consolidating political power, including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a close Trump ally whose leadership style is revered by many conservatives in the U.S.
“What we’re seeing is an unprecedented attempt to silence disfavored speech by the government,” said Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at Dartmouth College. “Donald Trump is trying to dictate what Americans can say.”
The first thing that does peeve me about this and related articles is the consistent use of the word “conservatives” in all of the analysis I’ve read. Traditional Conservatives do not support the suppression of the Free Press. It’s generally some kind of Populist Uprising within their ranks that leads to this sort of nonsense. I’m not defending the spineless bunch of Republicans that are enabling this, but we need to recognize what this represents. The Bulwark represents the example of our strange bedfellows these days. I repeatedly provide perspectives by Bill Kristol because I may not agree with him on many things, but he does respect the Constitution and continually warns us about the threat presented by our fascist-loving Executive Branch. Yesterday, he wrote this at The Bulwark. His analysis was presented along with that of Andrew Egger and Jim Swift under their daily heading. Yesterday it was “Yeah. It’s Fascism.” Kristol’s analysis was entitled “We’re Gonna Call It What It Is.”
JD Vance is outraged. How dare some people use the term “fascist” to describe the man to whom he has pledged fealty? How dare they apply the term to the movement to which he has hitched his star?
Very few individuals have seen President Donald Trump as close-up as John F. Kelly, the retired Marine Corps general who served for nearly a year and a half as White House chief of staff during Trump’s first term.
Kelly was and is a staunch conservative. In an interview with the New York Times shortly before the 2024 election, he explained that, “In many cases, I would agree with some of his policies.”
In that same interview, Kelly was asked whether he thought Trump was a fascist. Kelly answered by reading aloud a definition of fascism that he’d found online.
Well, looking at the definition of fascism: It’s a far-right authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy.
Kelly then commented:
Certainly the former president is in the far-right area, he’s certainly an authoritarian, admires people who are dictators — he has said that. So he certainly falls into the general definition of fascist, for sure. . . . He certainly prefers the dictator approach to government.
Unlike Vance, who saw in Trump a wagon to which to hitch his star, Kelly was at the end of a distinguished career when he joined the Trump administration. He meant to serve his country, not himself. He found that he was working for a fascist.
As for the movement which Vance aspires to lead once Trump leaves the scene, it too has many features of fascism.
In 1995, the Italian novelist and critic Umberto Eco perceived a “ghost stalking Europe (not to speak of other parts of the world).” That ghost was fascism.
Eco explained that “fascism was a fuzzy totalitarianism, a collage of different philosophical and political ideas.” Nonetheless he argued that “in spite of this fuzziness, I think it is possible to outline a list of features that are typical of what I would like to call Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism.”
Among the elements of Ur-Fascism:
“The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition,” he writes, which implies “the rejection of the modern world.”
“Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”
“For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.”
“Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks for consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders.”
“Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration.”
“At the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”
“The Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters. This is the origin of machismo. . . . Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons—doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.”
“Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”
Sound familiar?
I still have the old family habit of watchingNBC News. I stream it now on my small laptop, and it’s about the only old-school TV thing I do watch besides The Weather Channel during Hurricane Season. It’s the source of this article. “Trump suggests FCC could revoke licenses of TV broadcasters that give him too much ‘bad publicity’. Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr told Fox News on Thursday afternoon that ABC’s decision to suspend Jimmy Kimmel’s show indefinitely may not be “the last shoe to drop.”
President Donald Trump on Thursday floated the possibility that TV broadcasters could lose their federal licenses over what he perceives as negative coverage of him, a day after Disney’s ABC yanked “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” off the air.
Speaking to reporters, Trump suggested that the Federal Communications Commission should revoke broadcasters’ licenses, arguing that many late-night hosts appearing on those networks are “against me” and that “they give me only bad publicity, press.”
“I mean, they’re getting a license. I would think maybe their license should be taken away. It will be up to Brendan Carr,” Trump said on Air Force One, referring to the FCC chairman. “I think Brendan Carr is outstanding. He’s a patriot. He loves our country, and he’s a tough guy, so we’ll have to see.”
Trump also said of evening shows on network TV: “All they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that. They’re an arm of the Democrat Party.”
A day earlier, Trump praised ABC for indefinitely pulling “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” after on-air comments its host made about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. “Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
For shits and giggles, here’s Nixon on Laugh-In with his Sock It to Me moment. I need some levity.
There’s more fascism afoot than just suppression of the press. The New York Times has this headline today. “Draft Bill Would Authorize Trump to Kill People He Deems Narco-Terrorists. Potential legislation circulating in the executive branch and Congress would grant President Trump sweeping military powers.” Only Congress has the power to declare war.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 11:
[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; . . .
I can only imagine what’s in Yam Tit’s dotard mind about Venezuela and their tossed-out piece of trash dictator. We can learn a lot from his petty attacks on Venezuela.
Draft legislation is circulating at the White House and on Capitol Hill that would hand President Trump sweeping power to wage war against drug cartels he deems to be “terrorists,” as well as against any nation he says has harbored or aided them, according to people familiar with the matter.
A wide range of legal specialists have said that U.S. military attacks this month on two boats suspected of smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea were illegal. But Mr. Trump has claimed that the Constitution gave him the power he needed to authorize them.
It was not clear who wrote the draft congressional authorization or whether it could pass the Republican-led Congress, but the White House has been passing it around the executive branch.
The broadly worded proposal, which would legally authorize the president to kill people he deems narco-terrorists and attack countries he says helped them, has set off alarm bells in some quarters of the executive branch and on Capitol Hill, according to people who spoke on the condition of anonymity about sensitive internal deliberations.
Three people familiar with the matter said that Representative Cory Mills, a Florida Republican and combat veteran who sits on the Armed Services Committee, was involved in developing the draft. Mr. Mills, a staunch Trump ally, declined to comment on the potential legislation or his role. Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, declined to comment, citing a policy against discussing “drafts that may or may not be circulating.”
An administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters, said the draft originated with a member of Congress who had asked for technical assistance in improving it. The official portrayed its circulation for input by executive branch agencies as a routine courtesy that should not be interpreted as support for the idea.
The measure has emerged amid an escalating debate in Washington over the president’s war-making power and Congress’s role in authorizing the use of American military force, after the Trump administration opened a deadly campaign against the boaters.
The two boat attacks — killing what Mr. Trump has said were 14 people he accused of smuggling drugs toward the United States — were the latest in a series of military operations the president has taken without congressional authorization, raising constitutional concerns among some lawmakers in both parties, who say their branch should play a greater role in such decisions.
Critics have also said that Mr. Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have given illegal orders, causing Special Operations troops to target civilians — even if they are suspected of crimes — in apparent violation of laws against murder.
Meanwhile, RFK Jr. is trying to kill us all. I have a 3-week-old grandson and 2 four-year-old granddaughters. The granddaughters are fortunate to have two doctors for parents. My conversations with my youngest these days are unusual. I just keep asking, can Aiden get all the vaccines he needs? Are you keeping up with them? That’s the milestone these days. Are we vaccinating our children, and will they have to go to school with unvaccinated kids? This article actually comes under the title of “Good Grief”. It’s from Arstechnica.com. It’s written by Beth Mole. RFK Jr.’s anti-vaccine panel realizes it has no idea what it’s doing, skips vote. With a lack of data and confusing language, the panel tabled the vote indefinitely.”
The second day of a two-day meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices—a panel currently made up of federal vaccine advisors hand-selected by anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.—is off to a dramatic start, with the advisors seemingly realizing they have no idea what they’re doing.
The inexperienced, questionably qualified group that has espoused anti-vaccine rhetoric started its second day of deliberations by reversing a vote taken the previous day on federal coverage for the measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (MMRV) vaccine. Yesterday, the group voted to restrict access to MMRV, stripping recommendations for its use in children under age 4. While that decision was based on no new data, it passed with majority support of 8–3 (with one abstention). (For an explanation of that, see our coverage of yesterday’s part of the meeting here.)
But puzzlingly, they then voted to uphold access and coverage of MMRV vaccines for children under age 4 if they receive free vaccines through the federal Vaccines for Children program, which covers about half of American children, mostly low-income. The discrepancy projected the idea that the alleged safety concerns that led the panel to rescind the recommendation for MMRV generally, somehow did not apply to low-income, vulnerable children. The vote also created significant confusion for VFC coverage, which typically aligns with recommendations made by the panel.
Today, Kennedy’s ACIP retook the vote, deciding 9-0 (with three abstentions) to align VFC coverage with their vote yesterday to strip the recommendation for MMRV in young children.
That’s the deal in the executive branch today. Nobody knows what they’re doing, but they sure have a lot of conspiracy theories and paranoia to act on. I had those diseases up there listed under MMRV. I wouldn’t wish the cases I got on anyone, and I survived them. The Wall Street Journal‘s headline was even more disturbing. “RFK Jr.-Backed Panel Advises Against MMRV Combo Vaccine for Young Children. New members of key committee tweak routine childhood vaccine guidance as some states and insurers go their own way.” Thank goodness my kids live in Denver and Seattle!’
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s handpicked slate of vaccine advisers voted to no longer recommend a combined shot for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella for children under age 4.
The move came as some states, insurers, public health leaders and a U.S. senator called into question whether Americans should rely on the committee’s decisions.
Here’s what to know:
The details
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a key panel under the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, voted 8-3, with one abstention, to no longer recommend MMRV, a combined shot immunizing against measles, mumps, rubella and varicella, also known as chickenpox, for children under 4. Parents would instead be recommended to get their young children one vaccine for varicella and a second known as the MMR vaccine that inoculates against the other three diseases, under the committee’s new guidance.
Here’s some craziness from Mint. The mainstream media hasn’t decided what to do with it yet, even though it’s almost a day old. I can probably list at least one million historical figures more in need of a holiday than the prince of hate speech. “Charlie Kirk Day: US Senate passes resolution to create National Day of Remembrance for slain far-right activist. The US Senate has unanimously backed a resolution to establish a National Day of Remembrance for Charlie Kirk on October 14. The measure now heads to the House for a crucial vote.” I have him slated for the dance and piss on his grave kind of tribute. No one should be shot and killed, but we do not have to make saints of political extremists.
One last one from ABC News. I guess one of his appointments refused to take bogus, trumped-up charges to court. “Trump poised to fire US attorney for resisting effort to charge NY AG Letitia James: Sources. Trump officials had pushed Erik Siebert to bring criminal charges against James.”
President Donald Trump is expected to fire the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia after investigators were unable to find incriminating evidence of mortgage fraud against New York Attorney General Letitia James, according to sources.
Federal prosecutors in Virginia had uncovered no clear evidence to prove that James had knowingly committed mortgage fraud when she purchased a home in the state in 2023, ABC News first reported earlier this week, but Trump officials pushed U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert to nevertheless bring criminal charges against her, according to sources.
While sources caution that plans could still change, Siebert was notified on Thursday of Trump’s intention to fire him, sources told ABC News, and was told that Friday would be his final day on the job.
Since this is my day off, I’m going to pick up one of my guitars and play some David Gilmour licks. Take care of yourselves!
What’s on your Action, Reading, and Blogging list today?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
“The MAGA Gang (is) desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.”
We have almost no media left. It’s time for some form of strike or America can kiss journalism, the constitution and the country goodbye.ABC yanks Jimmy Kimmel ‘indefinitely’
BREAKING: ABC has pulled Jimmy Kimmel Live! off the air indefinitely following comments he made in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s murder.Trump’s FCC chair earlier appeared on MAGA propagandist Benny Johnson’s show and threatened to revoke ABC’s broadcast license if they didn’t take action against him.
Canceling Stephen Colbert and now Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert – and Matthew Dowd is horrendous- and pure fascism. Shame on those networks for caving We have a right to freedom of speech and we want it back. This is textbook fascism.
It is not about Kimmel or what he said. It is about the US government forcing a network to fire someone – no government should have that power. If the network decided this on their own, that’s one thing. But in this case they absolutely did not.
It’s happening. The takedown of Jimmy Kimmel is likely the start of a campaign to use the murder of Charlie Kirk as a pretext to use the power of the White House to wipe out Trump’s critics and his political opponents.But we aren’t powerless. We can mobilize and organize. Now.
JJ spoke for me in her post yesterday. I too am completely exhausted by the news as well as personal stuff. I imagine any American who is paying attention is struggling to take it all in. I hope I can make some kind of sense today.
Trump is out of the country for awhile. He’s over in the UK where they are sucking up to him in hopes of getting more friendly treatment on his ridiculous tariffs and other policies. The Brits absolutely despise Trump, so there will be large protests. The powers that be are trying to keep Trump away from the protesters as much as possible.
President Donald Trump is set to spend nearly all of his two-day state visit to Britain this week behind closed doors — or, at least, manicured hedges — far from massive planned protests and without delivering a traditional address to potential critics in Parliament, which is scheduled to recess as his plane speeds over the Atlantic.
Although the invitation from King Charles III appears designed to please a president whose “America First” policies are upending trade and security relationships, that doesn’t mean Trump’s royal moment can’t be derailed. The president and the king have differences on a laundry list of geopolitical issues they will have to navigate as they project friendship before a global audience.
Trump gets the royal coach ride he always wanted.
Charles and Trump are notably at odds on environmental policy, for example. The British king recently delivered a subtle rebuke of Trump’s calls for Canada to become the 51st U.S. state, proclaiming in May that Canada should remain “strong and free.” As recently as last weekend, Trump told European leaders that they must apply economic pressure on Moscow to end the war in Ukraine before he would levy additional U.S. sanctions.
And the controversy over the ousted British ambassador to the United States still simmers. Last week, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer fired Peter Mandelson after more details emerged about his relationship with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, a former friend of Trump’s whose case has dogged the president.
Bloomberg News and the Sun reported that they obtained email messages sent by Mandelson to Epstein, who died in 2019 while in federal custody after his conviction on sex offenses. In one, Mandelson reportedly wrote: “I think the world of you and I feel hopeless and furious about what has happened.” The former envoy has not denied the authenticity of the emails but said he was duped by the assurances of Epstein and his team.
The agreed-upon European method of dealing with Trump?
During the trip,Trump will eschew public-facing traditions for foreign dignitaries that could lead to moments of tension, such as addressing Parliament or joining in a parade through British streets, as French President Emmanuel Macron did in July. The schedule also allows for tighter security at a time of heightened tensions after the killing of high-profile conservative commentator Charlie Kirk.
“The U.K. government has decided, like a lot of other allied governments, that there is this sort of formula to dealing with Trump,” said Jeremy Shapiro, a research director at the European Council on Foreign Relations and a former State Department official. “You flatter him, you appease him, you distract him, and, hopefully, he never figures out that you’re not actually doing what he wants.”
“There’s a lot of people from the first Trump administration going around telling governments that this is the way to do things,” Shapiro added. “The U.K. government has really taken this on in the second term, and the royal family is central to that.” [….]
So far, Starmer has led the charm offensive to bridge areas of divergence — using Trump’s fascination for the royals as a diplomatic carrot.
The British leader unveiled the invitation from Charles during an Oval Office meeting in February, presenting the letter-loving Trump with a cream-colored envelope and encouraging him to read the note on the spot.
“It’s an invitation for a second state visit. This is really special. This has never happened before. This is unprecedented,” Starmer said later. U.S. presidents are routinely invited for a state visit during their first terms.
It’s disgusting. Trump behaves like a spoiled child and other countries, as well as the U.S. media and Republican politicians, do everything they can to pacify him.
Police in the U.K. arrested four people after photos of President Donald Trump and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were projected onto Windsor Castle on Tuesday night.
Police in the U.K. arrested four people after photos of President Donald Trump and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were projected onto Windsor Castle on Tuesday night.
The projections included photos of Trump and Epstein; of the two joined by first lady Melania Trump with Epstein and his co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell; and of a lewd birthday message Trump allegedly sent Epstein in 2003 for a 50th birthday book.
Trump arrived in London on Tuesday for a state visit. He’s expected to spend most of Wednesday at the castle with King Charles III and Queen Camilla and other members of the royal family.
Thames Valley Police said in a statement Tuesday night that they arrested four adults “on suspicion of malicious communications following a public stunt in Windsor.” The police added they will conduct an investigation into the incident, and that all four people arrested remain in custody.
“Our officers responded swiftly to stop the projection and four people have been arrested,” the statement read.
President Trump accused The New York Times and four of its reporters of defaming him ahead of the 2024 election, claiming that a series of articles sought to undermine his candidacy and disparage his reputation as a successful businessman.
In a lawsuit filed on Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Mr. Trump said the articles and a book published by two of the journalists were “specifically designed to try and damage President Trump’s business, personal and political reputation.”
According to the complaint, the articles and the book were published with “actual malice” toward Mr. Trump and caused “enormous” economic losses and damage to his “professional and occupational interests.” The lawsuit asked for damages of at least $15 billion.
The defendants named in the suit were The New York Times Company and Susanne Craig, Russ Buettner, Peter Baker and Michael S. Schmidt. The complaint also named Penguin Random House, which published a book about Mr. Trump written by Ms. Craig and Mr. Buettner, as a defendant.
The complaint claims that the defendants timed the publication of the articles and books “at the height of election season to inflict maximum electoral damage against President Trump.”
A spokesman for The Times responded: “This lawsuit has no merit. It lacks any legitimate legal claims and instead is an attempt to stifle and discourage independent reporting. The New York Times will not be deterred by intimidation tactics. We will continue to pursue the facts without fear or favor and stand up for journalists’ First Amendment right to ask questions on behalf of the American people.”
A.G. Sulzberger, the publisher of The Times, said in a note to staff on Tuesday that the lawsuit was “frivolous,” adding that “everyone, regardless of their politics, should be troubled by the growing anti-press campaign led by President Trump and his administration.”
A spokeswoman for Penguin Random House said: “This is a meritless lawsuit. Penguin Random House stands by the book and its authors and will continue to uphold the values of the First Amendment that are fundamental to our role as a book publisher.”
That sounds like an interesting book. Susanne Craig is a fantastic economics reporter.
Kirk’s assassination six days ago at an event at Utah Valley University sent shockwaves across the country and is the latest incident of violence tearing through American politics.
Utah County prosecutors charged Robinson through an information document rather than an indictment. An information court document allows prosecutors to charge someone directly and requires a probable cause hearing, during which a judge determines if there is sufficient evidence to proceed.
The charging document for the 22-year-old suspect outlines evidence collected by investigators, including DNA on the suspected murder weapon and a texted confession.
The charging document says Robinson “intentionally” targeted Kirk because of Robinson’s “belief or perception regarding Charlie Kirk’s political expression.” While prosecutors stopped short of specifically detailing what issues motivated Robinson to carry out the September 10 shooting, the charging document provided some clues.
In separate conversations with his roommate and family, Robinson shared that Kirk “spreads too much hate,” and he “had enough of his hatred,” the document said.
The document also said the suspect’s mother told investigators that “over the last year or so, Robinson had become more political and had started to lean more to the left – becoming more pro-gay and trans-rights oriented. She stated that Robinson began to date his roommate, a biological male who was transitioning genders.”
I admit I was wrong in my Saturday post. I suggested that Robinson was to the right of Charlie Kirk. Despite what Utah authorities are claiming, he wasn’t particularly involved in politics, based on his on-line postings. Investigative reporter Ken Klippenstein gained access to Robinson’s Discord chats, and the members of these groups appear to be friends who have varied political points of view and are mainly interested in playing video games. Everyone who is interested in this case should read this post.
“Hey guys, I have bad news for you all … it was me at UVU yesterday.” Thus Tyler Robinson messaged his friends on Discord, seemingly apologizing for murdering Charlie Kirk. “I’m sorry for all of this.”
I obtained this and other Discord chats I’ve decided to publish (the legacy news media, as usual, refuses), along with new information I’ve learned about Robinson from the people who knew him best.
Trump and company portray the alleged Utah shooter as left-wing and liberals portray him as right-wing. The federal conclusion will inevitably be that he was a so-called Nihilist Violent Extremist (NVE); meanwhile, the crackdown has already begun, as I reported yesterday. The country is practically ready to go to war.
“It’s been so terrible and seeing it from an inside perspective is so frustrating,” a friend of Robinson’s since middle school told me. The childhood friend, who asked not to be named for fear of threats, provided me with the above non-public photo of Robinson on a camping trip (a favorite activity of his) to corroborate their relationship.
“I think the main thing that’s caused so much confusion is that he was always generally apolitical for the most part,” the friend told me. “That’s the big thing, he just never really talked politics which is why it’s so frustrating.”
The picture that emerges bears little resemblance to the media version. Robinson, I am told, though quiet, was a well-liked person with a supportive family. The friend group who he interacted with on Discord, far from some kind of militia camp or Antifa bunker it’s been portrayed as, represented a range of different political views but mostly talked video games.
Yesterday, FBI Director Kash Patel said in an interview that Robinson “subscribed to left-wing ideology,” citing his family’s remarks to investigators. But those close to Robinson say there was a lot his family didn’t know about him.
“Their ideas are based on someone they didn’t fully understand,” the childhood friend told me. Though the family was generally supportive of Robinson (a claim corroborated by his mother’s Facebook account, brimming with praise for Tyler) they didn’t seem to know about his relationship with a transgender person named Lance, the friend said.
We haven’t heard directly from the transgender roommate, and Robinson is refusing to talk to authorities, which suggests that he has a good lawyer. We can’t know for sure what his motive was, but it seems possible that he objected to Kirk’s hatred of LGBTQ people. More from Klippenstein:
When I asked if his family would have been accepting, the friend replied: “I don’t think even Tyler knew the answer to that question, which is why he kept it so low key between themselves.”
Tyler’s bisexuality, the friend said, was coupled with openness on LGBT issues. But his wasn’t some cookie cutter lefty position on every or even most issues, his friends say.
Tyler Robinson appeared in court in a suicide vest.
“Obviously he’s okay with gay and trans people having a right to exist, but also believes in the Second Amendment,” the friend said, referring to the right to bear arms.
The friend described Robinson as fairly typical of a young man his age from Utah: someone who loved the outdoors, was a gamer, and into guns.
“To all of us he just seemed like a simple guy who liked playing games like Sea of Thieves, Deep Rock Galactic and Helldivers 2, loved to fish and loved to camp,” the friend said. “It really did seem like that’s all he was about.”
The phrase inscribed on one of the bullet casings from the shooting — “Hey fascist, catch!” — though widely reported to mean he was a man of the left, is in fact a reference to the Helldivers 2 game. Three arrows initially believed by federal agents to be a reference to Antifa are also a reference to Helldivers.
Private Discord messages shared with me by a friend of Robinson’s confirm that Robinson wasn’t some political martyr. A search for posts of Robinson’s containing keywords like “Biden” and “Trump” turned up just one hit each. The Trump post was a passing reference to the 2019 impeachment inquiry. The Biden one came on the day of the 2020 election, where he provided an update to another friend asking about the status of the vote count.
I hope you’ll go read the rest of Klippenstein’s piece.
Of course the Trump administration isn’t interested in Robinson’s real motives; they just want to pin the blame for Kirk’s death on Democrats, or as Trump puts it, “the radical left lunatics.”
In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, President Donald Trump and his allies have threatened to bring the weight of the federal government against what they refer to as the “radical left.”
“It is a vast domestic terror movement,” Stephen Miller, Trump’s top policy adviser, said Monday.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller during a television interview outside the West Wing of the White House on Aug. 29.Andrew Cabarello-Reynolds AFP – Getty Images file
“With God as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks and make America safe again for the American people,” he added. “It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie’s name.”
But the suggestion that a secret network of violent left-wing extremists was behind the killing stands in contrast to the evidence that law enforcement officials presented on Tuesday in Utah, where Kirk was fatally shot. There was no indication presented Tuesday that the suspect, Tyler Robinson, was a member of a group or that he fell under the sway of a particular leader. The investigation is ongoing.
Utah County Attorney Jeffrey Gray laid out seven counts — including aggravated murder — against Robinson, and detailed the evidence against him in a 10-page court filing. In the hours after the shooting, Robinson was asked twice, by his father and his roommate, why he shot Kirk. He responded that Kirk “spreads too much hate” and “I had enough of his hatred,” the documents show.
Experts told NBC News that the Trump administration appears to be using Kirk’s assassination as an excuse to crack down on left-wing individuals and groups. While administration officials have yet to detail their plans, statements by Miller and others raise questions of who exactly would be targeted, how, and what effect this might have in stifling political dissent.
Russia moved to amplify online conspiracy theories about Charlie Kirk’s killing just hours after it happened, seeding social media with the frightening claim that America is slipping into civil war.
Chinese and pro-Iranian groups also spread disinformation about the shooting, with those loyal to Iran’s interests backing antisemitic conspiracy theories while bots linked to Beijing claimed that Kirk’s death shows that the United States is violent, polarized and dysfunctional.
America’s adversaries have long used fake social media accounts, online bots and disinformation to depict the U.S. as a dangerous country beset with extremism and gun violence. Kirk’s killing has provided another opportunity for those overseas eager to shape public understanding while inflaming political polarization.
“Charlie Kirk’s Death and the Coming Civil War,” tweeted Russian ultranationalist Alexander Dugin, whose influence earned him the moniker “ Putin’s brain,” referring to Russia’s president. Pro-Russian bots blamed Democrats and predicted more violence. Russian state media published English-language articles with headlines claiming a conspiracy orchestrated by shadowy forces: “Was Charlie Kirk’s Killer a Pro?”
Foreign disinformation makes up a tiny fraction of the overall online discussion about Kirk’s death, but it could undermine any efforts to heal political divisions or even spur further violence.
Q: Do you think it would've been fitting to lower the flags to half staff when Melissa Hortman, the Minnesota House Speaker, was gunned down by an assassin?TRUMP: I'm not familiar. The who?
It needs to be said that by rebranding Charlie Kirk's views as moderate by both right wingers and liberal cowards resets the extremist views he held as normal and pushes the Overton window to the far right
New from me — There’s been a lot of ink spilled since Charlie Kirk's murder about the "right" way to honor his death. Getting liberals fired from their jobs and forcing devoted civil servants to resign in disgust couldn’t be a more fitting tribute to his life.
“Seems one of trump’s top advisors excited the frogs. This would have never happened if Biden was president.” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
Today, I’m going to suggest we give up on the old Greek saying “Don’t speak ill of the Dead” and replace it with “Speak honestly about the Dead.” I’ve just about had it with all the forced piety behavior surrounding the death of a person well known for his antisemitism, racism, GLBTphobia, and keeping women subservient. I’ve already printed my reaction here and on Facebook. If we are not honest about the actions and words of the dead, we start sounding like this … I’d better speak badly about Putin now because when he’s dead, I’ll be breaking some ancient Greek saying.
I’m sorry, students, if I have to, I can’t speak badly of Pol Pot since he’s dead, but we should learn about what he did in Cambodia, so we just have to avoid mentioning him.
You know, George Wallace did questionable things to black people while governor, but we mustn’t talk about him… speaking ill of the dead and all is not allowed to speak ill of the dead. So, let history forget about all that.
Yeah, let’s talk about the hypocrisy in those piety performances … sounds a lot like sick right-wing Political Correctness to me. From the Link:
“How the concept of ‘don’t speak ill of the dead’ is typically utilized is fraught with dismissal and erasure. Every time someone problematic dies, it is nearly inevitable to hear statements of “don’t speak ill of the dead,” but who does that idea serve? What benefit does it have? Certainly, if we want to learn from the past and honor those who have been harmed by people now deceased, we must speak honestly of the dead, even if being honest means speaking ill.”
So, does not speaking ill of the dead Hitler erase the Jewish community and the holocaust experience, or what? I guess that probably doesn’t apply to Stalin or Saddam Hussein, though. They’re on the official approved right-wing Slander List.
Opps, my bad … I’m so politically correct, but I must not speak ill of the dead! Or is not speaking ill some sort of contorted “political correctness” that shows your “woke” to hatred in the name of right-wing politics? I really hoped we’d seen the last of making a martyr of someone who hid behind the First Amendment to normalize hate speech. He even dropped out of college and spent time studying the career of Rush Limbaugh, whose antics included taking trips to Latin America to purchase children trafficked for sex.
The thing that pushed me over last night was reading that the NFL mandated a pre-game tribute for Kirk. It appears that only five teams ignored the order. I would like to announce that the Saints are dead to me now. I dumped my one jersey that I bought after the Hurricane Katrina season in the trash this morning. I was still wearing it up to yesterday. It’s gone where my shrimp scales and tales go. It’s gone where all of the worthless things go. It’s in my trash can.
My Saint shirt is on the way to the New Orleans Garbage Dump. It’s cotton, so it should disintegrate nicely.
This is from Heavy.com, and I still can’t believe I’m reporting on sportsball anyway. “Five NFL Teams Don’t Hold Moment of Silence for Charlie Kirk.
Among the 13 NFL home teams that held a game on Sunday, five chose not to hold a moment of silence for slain political organizer Charlie Kirk.
Just a day after he was shot on a college campus in Utah, the NFL chose to hold a moment of silence for Kirk before the “Thursday Night Football” between the Detroit Lions and Green Bay Packers at Lambeau Field.
The NFL said it was a league decision not a team decision, but Sunday’s decision to hold a tribute would be left to the franchises.
“Last night’s moment was the league’s decision,” the league said in a statement Friday. “It’s up to the clubs for this Sunday’s games. There have been a variety of moments of silence and tributes in-stadium and on-air in all games or a game immediately following events that rise to a national level. Clubs also often hold moments following a tragic event that affects their community.”
The Saints team reportedly added all victims of gun violence to the tribute but did not feel the need to even show the pictures of the 168 children (ages 0-11) who were killed by gun violence, and 716 teenagers (ages 12-17) who were killed, according to the Gun Violence Archive as of September 15, 2025. Team owner Gail Benson has also been involved in the Archdiocese of New Orleans pedophile priest scandal. This scandal has been adjudicated and active since 2018, but the Archdiocese still hasn’t provided any of the compensation required by the courts.
The New Orleans Saints say they only did “minimal” public relations work on the area’s Roman Catholic sexual abuse crisis, but attorneys suing the church allege hundreds of confidential Saints emails show the team’s involvement went much further, helping to shape a list of credibly accused clergy that appears to be undercounted.
New court papers filed this week by lawyers for about two dozen men making sexual abuse claims against the Archdiocese of New Orleans gave the most detailed description yet of the emails that have rocked the NFL team and remain shielded from the public.
“This goes beyond public relations,” the attorneys wrote, accusing the Saints of issuing misleading statements saying their work for the archdiocese involved only “messaging” and handling media inquiries as part of the 2018 release of the clergy names.
Instead, they wrote, “The Saints appear to have had a hand in determining which names should or should not have been included on the pedophile list.”
It appears that some Saints Fans did not approve of the so-called tribute. This is from marca.com. “NFL fans reportedly boo during moment of silence honoring Charlie Kirk and victims of gun violence. An eyewitness report from the Saints’ game suggests a divided fan reaction, though broader video confirmation has yet to emerge.”
At the New Orleans Saints’ home game, KADN News15 sports director Will Herren reported that the team did observe a pre-game moment of silence. According to Herren, who was in attendance, “some fans booed, while others cheered” during the pause before the national anthem.
His account remains one of the few on-the-ground reports, as no widespread video evidence has yet surfaced to corroborate the extent of fan reaction. Renowned X.com account MLFootball reported the same.
Several teams, including the Jets, Cardinals, Dolphins, Saints, Steelers, Titans, Chiefs, and Cowboys, held moments of silence. Some displayed images of Kirk on stadium screens.
Others, such as the Bengals, Lions, Colts, Vikings, and Ravens, opted not to take part in the tribute.
The Saints’ game has drawn the most attention due to the reports of booing. Fans online seized on the reported boos as evidence of growing divides over how public tributes intersect with political identities.
Others argued the cheers, which Herren also noted, highlighted that not all fans reacted negatively. There are also unconfirmed reports that San Francisco 49ers fans had filled home areas of the Saints’ stadium.
Still, the lack of broad, independent video confirmation leaves uncertainty about how widespread the reaction truly was. Most social media claims of booing come from individual users and have not been backed by national outlets.
This reeks of forcing religion-specific enforced prayer when it’s not your religion or belief system. Right-wing political correctness has shown itself boldly this week. The Washington Post steps in its shit by firing Karen Attiah. This is posted on her blog, The Golden Hour. “The Washington Post Fired Me — But My Voice Will Not Be Silenced. I spoke out against hatred and violence in America — and it cost me my job.” Right-wingers only let wipipo define what hatred and violence are.
Last week, the Washington Post fired me.
The reason? Speaking out against political violence, racial double standards, and America’s apathy toward guns.
Eleven years ago, I joined the Washington Post’s Opinions department with a simple goal: to use journalism in service of people.
I believed in using the pen to remember the forgotten, question power, shine light in darkness, and defend democracy. Early in my career, late Washington Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt told me that opinion journalism is not just about writing the world as it is, but as it should be. He told me we should use our platform to do good. That has been my north star every day.
As the founding Global Opinions editor, I created a space for courageous, diverse voices from around the world — especially those exiled for speaking the truth. I was inspired by their bravery. When my writer, Global Opinions columnist Jamal Khashoggi was brutally murdered by Saudi Arabia regime agents for his words, I fought loudly for justice for years, putting my life and safety on the line to pursue accountability and defend global press freedom. For this work, I was honored with global recognition, prestigious awards and proximity to the world’s most powerful people.
As a columnist, I used my voice to defend freedom and democracy, challenge power and reflect on culture and politics with honesty and conviction.
Now, I am the one being silenced – for doing my job.
On Bluesky, in the aftermath of the horrific shootings in Utah and Colorado, I condemned America’s acceptance of political violence and criticized its ritualized responses — the hollow, cliched calls for “thoughts and prayers” and “this is not who we are” that normalize gun violence and absolve white perpetrators especially, while nothing is done to curb deaths.
Charlie Kirk, the far-right commentator and ally of Donald Trump, was killed on Wednesday doing what he was known for throughout his career – making incendiary and often racist and sexist comments to large audiences.
If it was current and controversial in US politics, chances are that Kirk was talking about it. On his podcasts, and on the podcasts of friends and adversaries, and especially on college campuses, where he would go to debate students, Kirk spent much of his adult life defending and articulating a worldview aligned with Trump and the Maga movement. Accountable to no one but his audience, he did not shy away in his rhetoric frombigotry, intolerance, exclusion and stereotyping.
Here’s Kirk, in his own words. Many of his comments were documented by Media Matters for America, a progressive non-profit that tracks conservative media.
On race
If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 23 January 2024
If you’re a WNBA, pot-smoking, Black lesbian, do you get treated better than a United States marine?
If I’m dealing with somebody in customer service who’s a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action?
If we would have said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. Now they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us … You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.
Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. You’re not in charge.
– Discussing news of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s engagement on The Charlie Kirk Show, 26 August 2025
The answer is yes, the baby would be delivered.
– Responding to a question about whether he would support his 10-year-old daughter aborting a pregnancy conceived because of rape on the debate show Surrounded, published on 8 September 2024
We need to have a Nuremberg-style trial for every gender-affirming clinic doctor. We need it immediately.
I think it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational.
– Event organized by TPUSA Faith, the religious arm of Kirk’s conservative group Turning Point USA, on 5 April 2023
On immigration
America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever. We should be unafraid to do that.
The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different.
This huge compilation of quotes was provided by Chris Stein. There are pages more of it on things like Islam, debate, and religion. Charlie Boy had no respect for the U.S. Constitution.
There is no separation of church and state. It’s a fabrication, it’s a fiction, it’s not in the constitution. It’s made up by secular humanists.
This man was a hero only to the vast White Nationalist Basket of Deplorables. I have one more to share, which specifically focuses on his bigotry against Black Americans. This was written by Vernellia Randal at Race, Racism, and the Law. Charlie Kirk, White Supremacist, Dead at 31.”
Charlie Kirk built himself into the face of a conservative youth movement through Turning Point USA (TPUSA). Behind the branding of “patriotism” and “freedom,” the record shows a pattern of rhetoric, organizational culture, and alliances that echoed white supremacist and Christian nationalist ideologies. The Southern Poverty Law Center documented how TPUSA repeatedly framed immigrants, LGBTQ+ people, and racial justice advocates as existential threats to “white Christian America,” warning followers that their families, religion, and entire way of life were under attack. In later years, Kirk openly embraced Christian nationalist language, claiming that liberty was only possible with a Christian population—a narrative tying freedom to demographic dominance, a cornerstone of supremacist logic (SPLC).
On race, Kirk was blunt and dismissive. He denied the existence of systemic racism, called white privilege a “racist idea,” and vilified critical race theory as dangerous indoctrination. In one speech, he called George Floyd a “scumbag,” showing open contempt for a man whose death triggered a national reckoning on race and policing (WHYY). These rhetorical choices were not accidental—they functioned as a political strategy to delegitimize Black pain and deny the realities of structural racism in America.
Inside TPUSA, the culture reflected the same hostility. A New Yorker investigation described the workplace as “difficult … and rife with tension, some of it racial.” One African American staffer reported being the only person of color when hired in 2014, only to be fired on Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The organization’s then–national field director, Crystal Clanton, was exposed for texting, “I hate black people. … End of story.” TPUSA claimed it acted after the texts surfaced, but the damage was undeniable—the rot reached the top (New Yorker).
Kirk’s movement also courted or tolerated figures openly tied to the far right. Political Research Associates documented cases where TPUSA chapters hosted or aligned with Nick Fuentes and his white nationalist followers. Kirk’s allies relied on antisemitic tropes, praising authoritarianism in Israel while denouncing “liberal Jews” in the United States (PRA). TPUSA severed ties when public exposure threatened its reputation, but the repeated associations revealed how far Kirk was willing to go in pursuit of influence.
The mainstream press tracked this trajectory. The Guardian reported that Kirk’s rhetoric increasingly mirrored white supremacist and authoritarian themes, while campus watchdog groups chronicled repeated incidents of racist, homophobic, and transphobic speech at TPUSA events (Guardian; AAUP). This was not about “a few bad apples.” It was a culture, nurtured by leadership, that normalized bigotry and dressed it up as “truth-telling.”
The evidence remains overwhelming: Kirk and TPUSA did not need to wear hoods or wave Confederate flags to advance the logic of white supremacy. By denying systemic racism, vilifying movements for justice, and legitimizing extremists, Kirk and his organization reinforced the architecture of racial dominance in America. That was the through line of his political project. He positioned himself as a defender of liberty, but the liberty he envisioned was conditional—anchored in whiteness, Christianity, and exclusion. His legacy is not simply conservatism. It is a record of advancing ideas and practices that aligned with white supremacy, even if he never wore the label himself.
The deepest irony of Kirk’s legacy came in the manner of his death. In 2023, he declared that “it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights,” framing gun deaths as a tragic but acceptable price for liberty (Wikipedia). Two years later, he was killed by gunfire at one of his own public events (AP News). His own words came back in the most devastating way, embodying the very cost he had justified. For critics, this was not just irony but a brutal illustration of how the normalization of preventable violence eventually consumes even its defenders. For supporters, his death was framed as tragic but consistent with the risks of freedom. Yet the broader truth remains: when a society accepts death as the “price” of a constitutional right, it abandons any serious effort to build policies that protect life alongside liberty. Kirk’s fate exposed the hollowness of his argument. He did not just preach the acceptance of gun deaths as a cost of freedom—he became that cost.
I’ve spent enough time on the literal white-washing of Charlie Boy. I’m likely to the point where I may be testing my University’s Academic Freedom and Diversity policies. I just cannot sit aside while someone so vile and dangerous is being sanctified to rile up a base needed for the midterms. Tolerance only works so far for me. You may have different political views, but hatred of others is not a political view. It’s a sign there’s something seriously evil working inside your brain. This one was a cold-hearted snake. I don’t care if you’re dead or alive. The truth about you shall set the rest of us free.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
The Sky Dancing banner headline uses a snippet from a work by artist Tashi Mannox called 'Rainbow Study'. The work is described as a" study of typical Tibetan rainbow clouds, that feature in Thanka painting, temple decoration and silk brocades". dakinikat was immediately drawn to the image when trying to find stylized Tibetan Clouds to represent Sky Dancing. It is probably because Tashi's practice is similar to her own. His updated take on the clouds that fill the collection of traditional thankas is quite special.
You can find his work at his website by clicking on his logo below. He is also a calligraphy artist that uses important vajrayana syllables. We encourage you to visit his on line studio.
Recent Comments