Anxious
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Trump chose wrath over unity following Charlie Kirk’s killing.

Trump chose wrath over unity following Charlie Kirk’s killing.
After the influential MAGA activist was shot, the president pledged to use the force of government to go after his political opponents.

Sept. 12, 2025, 8:05 AM CDT
By Anthony L. Fisher, Senior Editor, MSNBC Daily

After the horrific killing of influential MAGA activist Charlie Kirk — who was struck down by a sniper’s bullet as he answered students’ questions at Utah Valley University on Wednesday — President Donald Trump had a rare opportunity to call for a moment of national unity. The president could have mourned his close ally, who was a 31-year-old husband and father, a highly effective unofficial adviser to Trump’s administration and a popular leader of a mass movement of young conservatives. And he could have taken the opportunity to denounce violence emanating from any spot on the political spectrum.

Instead, Trump saw another opportunity: to squarely lay the blame for Kirk’s murder on the media and his political opponents.

The president posted a roughly four-minute video from the Oval Office, during which he paid tribute to Kirk’s career and life as a young family man. But then he made wildly irresponsible assumptions about the then-unknown suspected killer’s motives. He completely ignored right-wing violence (like the kind he incited in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021), and he explicitly threatened to bring down the force of government on his political opponents.

Trump said “all Americans and the media” must “confront the fact that violence and murder are the tragic consequence of demonizing those with whom you disagree day after day, year after year, in the most hateful and despicable way possible.” He added, “For years, those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world’s worst mass murderers and criminals,” and he blamed “this kind of rhetoric” as being “directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today.”

So far, none of this is out of character for Trump. While lamenting Kirk’s killing as the “tragic consequence of demonizing those with whom you disagree day after day,” Trump ignored his own statements referring to immigrants as “vermin,” calling the media the “enemy of the American people” and saying he hates Democrats, whom he also on different occasions referred to as “evil” and “demonic.” But Trump’s hypocrisy and serial deployment of violent rhetoric are such a part of his character that Americans — both supporters and detractors of the president — are mostly inured to it.

What was most notable — and disturbing — in Trump’s video statement is that he sees himself as the avenger of Kirk’s killing. And though there’s no indication he had any insight into what motivated the shooter, while avoiding specifics, he telegraphed whom he holds responsible: “My administration will find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organizations that fund it and support it, as well as those who go after our judges, law enforcement officials and everyone else who brings order to our country.”

Some of Trump’s most influential supporters also made wild accusations in the immediate aftermath. To cite just a few, Trump’s unofficial “loyalty enforcer,” anti-Islam activist Laura Loomer, posted, “They sent a trained sniper to assassinate Charlie Kirk”; the richest man in the world, Elon Musk, opined, “The Left is the party of murder”; and right-wing activist Christopher Rufo declared, “It is time, within the confines of the law, to infiltrate, disrupt, arrest, and incarcerate all of those who are responsible for this chaos.”

As I wrote this week, Trump has made it no secret that he’s itching to use brute force to go after his political opponents or anyone he deems undesirable. We would be foolish to dismiss Trump’s words as oh-so-much bluster. And as I’ve written repeatedly since he has been back in power, second-term Trump doesn’t issue idle threats, nor does he have any regard for the rule of law or constitutional limits on his power.

It’s too early to know whom Trump intends to hold responsible for Kirk’s killing. But there was no guarantee a clear motive would ever be determined (as was the case with the 20-year-old who killed a bystander in his attempt to assassinate Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, in July 2024). And even if the suspected killer's motive wasn’t what Trump and his allies assumed it was, there’s no reason to believe Trump would stand down on his attacks blaming his political opposition for Kirk’s tragic death.

We know facts don’t matter to Trump. What’s important to him is having enemies to blame and punish. Charlie Kirk’s murder is a horrible moment for America and the most profound loss imaginable for his family. It could have been a moment for the president to shock the world by demonstrating some basic universal humanity. But that’s not Trump, who seems determined to exploit this tragedy to stoke rage and use his increasingly unrestrained power to tamp down on dissent.



Anthony L. Fisher is a senior editor and writer for MSNBC Daily. He was previously the senior opinion editor for The Daily Beast and a politics columnist for Business Insider.
Top | New | Old
BohoBabe · M
Of course. Trump will use anything as an excuse to incite violence. That's why I disagree with people saying it's bad that Kirk was killed because now Trump is going to use this to crack down. Trump just made up crimes in order to crack down in California and DC.
FreddieUK · 70-79, M
It is a well known tactic (and well used my this person) to attack the 'enemy' for using the exact same behaviours as you are. There is no moral high ground in this argument.
Prison1203 · 61-69, M
For one thing, how did Trump incite Jan 6? His words were go protest peacefully and patriotically, answer me this , how does that incite a riot? And you use mslsd and cnn as reliable sources? Can you find anything that’s not liberally biased?
JSul3 · 70-79
@Prison1203 I have no issue with correcting AOC's numbers.

Why did Trump pardon those who were convicted in a court of law for their actions on J6?
Prison1203 · 61-69, M
@JSul3 I guess you will have to ask Trump, why did the J 6 committee destroy the evidence? Could it be that it would prove everything false or that officer byrd actually murdered Ashli Babbit? Which he did
JSul3 · 70-79
@Prison1203
Those who testified at the hearings were almost all Republicans.....minus those who scream the loudest about the investigation but refused to come and testify under oath.
Wonder why?

Reports from the Republican-led House Administration Committee, headed by Representative Barry Loudermilk, allege the January 6th Committee failed to properly preserve all evidence.

In contrast, the J6 Committee's former chairman, Bennie Thompson, stated that they properly archived records according to House rules, and other evidence was transferred to the National Archives and other agencies. The conflicting claims center on unarchived video recordings and certain interview transcripts.

Republican claims of unpreserved evidence

Video interviews: In 2023, Representative Loudermilk claimed that the J6 committee failed to adequately preserve video depositions and interviews, arguing that they did not archive all video recordings of witness interviews for which written transcripts were released. The J6 committee responded that providing transcripts fulfilled House rules for record preservation.

Encrypted and deleted data: A report from the House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight, released in December 2024, alleged that the J6 committee failed to preserve more than a terabyte of digital data and over 100 deleted or encrypted documents. These files were reportedly deleted shortly before Republicans gained the House majority.

Sensitive information: The J6 committee transferred some material to the White House and Department of Homeland Security for archiving, citing sensitive information and witness protection. Loudermilk has suggested this was an attempt to hide information, while the White House has maintained that redactions were for security reasons.

Democrats' and J6 committee's defense
Proper archiving: Former J6 committee chairman Bennie Thompson confirmed that the committee archived over one million records in coordination with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and the Committee on House Administration.

Public releases: The J6 committee released its 845-page final report, plus hundreds of interview transcripts and other documents, many of which remain publicly available online.

No "mass destruction": PolitiFact rated as false Donald Trump's claim that the committee "deleted and destroyed all of the information," citing the large volume of materials that were publicly released and archived.

Legal and political context
Ongoing oversight: The dispute over evidence preservation has continued since the J6 committee dissolved in early 2023. Republicans created a new subcommittee, led by Loudermilk, to investigate the handling of the documents.

Judicial review: During Trump's 2023 federal election subversion case, his lawyers requested certain committee materials, citing Loudermilk's claims that some records were unarchived. The judge in that case, Tanya Chutkan, denied the request, calling it a "fishing expedition".

Broader controversy: The controversy over the J6 committee's records is part of a larger, ongoing political debate regarding the legitimacy and integrity of its investigation.
Northwest · M
“all Americans and the media” must “confront the fact that violence and murder are the tragic consequence of demonizing those with whom you disagree day after day, year after year, in the most hateful and despicable way possible.”

Yes, and he should preface this with: and this is my confession,
@NerdyPotato Umm no, it means Rump is talking about himself, his exact mental state, his forever gameplay. He makes it sound like someone else, but exactly describes himself.
Northwest · M
@NerdyPotato He's doing exactly what he's accusing others of doing.
@Northwest and he admitted that doing so would eventually lead to murder, so it sounds like that was his goal.
Of course. Trump has never chosen unity under any set of circumstances. A united United States would never have served his purposes.
In 2020, the most unified we’d been in years—he lost.
badminton · 61-69, MVIP
I'm not distracted from the Epstein file. Come on, let's see them EPSTEIN EPSTEIN EPSTEIN!
One would assume any president would call for calm and respect for people being murdered. Regardless of their political ideology.
FreddieUK · 70-79, M
@TangledUpInBlue It sounds like you are more suited to the role than the current incumbent.
@FreddieUK we all bleed red in the end.
JSul3 · 70-79
@TangledUpInBlue Go read what Biden said in his address to the nation after the attempt on Trump's life at a rally.
You can bash Biden all you want, but his address to the country was spot on, calling for a stop to the violence and unite...let your voice be heard at the ballot box, not with a gun.
JoyfulSilence · 51-55, M
Last time I checked, Dear Leader also incites violence and riots, lauds terrorists, and goes after judges.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
Donald Trump, Charlie Kirk, Brian Thompson, Yaron Lischinsky, Sarah Lynn Milgrim, Steve Scalise

 
Post Comment