SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The fiery shards from the murder of Charlie Kirk still ricochet in baleful ways, even as his shooter's views and motives remain murky. Despite rabid calls by a regime eager for revenge to extinguish leftist "scum" who rendered their bigot hero "a martyr for truth and freedom," the killer seems to be a muddled mix of gun freak, devout gamer and violent nihilist. In his bloody wake, many now beset by irrational vitriol are left to argue, "I don't support what happened to Charlie, but Charlie supported what happened to Charlie."
Political violence is, of course, as old as America: Federalists vs. anti-Federalists, indigenous genocide, slavery, lynching, war, Lincoln, the 1960s' white and black assassinations, civil, women's and gay rights struggles, Jan. 6 riots, police state troops, racist ICE raids and, in a country with perhaps 500 million guns, an estimated 125 Americans killed daily with guns - a rate 26 times higher than any other developed nation - and up to 800 children killed in school shootings impacting over 360,000 students. In 2023, the most recent year with full data, nearly 47,000 people died in gun violence. The first six months of this year saw an almost 40% surge in gun-related acts of terrorism and targeted violence over last year, with over 520 reported plots or acts of violence and, to date, 300 mass shootings, forty-seven at schools. In a nation awash in killing machines, an increasingly right-wing GOP and a mood of rage-fueled paranoia and polarization, each act of political violence makes the next more likely.
Charlie Kirk, 31, was shot and killed by an assassin's bullet in the neck while speaking under a tent that read "Prove Me Wrong" on the campus of Utah Valley University on the first of a 15-stop "America Comeback Tour" by his right-wing Turning Point USA; he was struck just as he responded to a question about mass shootings by blaming gangs. It was the day before a historically freighted Sept. 11 symbolizing myriad acts of or against violence: It was the day when Gandhi launched the first nonviolent resistance in South Africa in 1906 to stunning political effect; when Chile's democratically elected Socialist President Salvador Allende was assassinated; when Al Qaeda attacked the World Trade Center and Americans came together with such inspiring grace and strength the event came to represent "the ultimate failure of terrorism against the United States" - until a pernicious Bush Administration launched two bloody, pointless, illegal wars, which still haunt us, in its name.
Kirk was a vibrant, hateful, genial, incendiary mouthpiece for a MAGA worldview of bigotry and intolerance, a "loathsome human being (who) celebrated violence against people he didn’t like" and used his mocking, performative "debates" with students to effectively spread misinformation, inflame young, impressionable, vaguely discontent people, surreptitiously urge democracy be replaced by an emergent Christian Fascism, and make millions. "The language has been violent. The discord has been great," wrote Rev. Graylan Scott Hagler. "There has been a consistent invitation to dine at the table of heated racist discussion posing as legitimate political speech," in which Kirk "rhetorically violated" the safety of Blacks, Muslims, queers, immigrants and multiple 'others' in the name of a defaming, divisive "free speech." "He (did) not care about the security of others. He did not show empathy," said Hagler. "Charlie Kirk expanded hatred (and) marketed the vile speech of old racisms in new wineskins."
Kirk claimed America was full of "prowling Blacks" who target white people "for fun." He said "God's perfect law" says gay people should be stoned to death, Black people were better off during Jim Crow, Democrats “stand for everything God hates," the Civil Rights Act was a mistake, Islam is "the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America." He put liberal academics on watch lists to be targeted and harassed, called Dems "maggots, vermin and swine," mocked the death of George Floyd, "joked" a "patriot" should bail out Paul Pelosi's attacker, urged "a Nuremberg-style trial for every gender-affirming doctor," charged prominent Black women like Michelle Obama "don't have the brain power" to succeed unless they "steal a white person's slot." A fierce critic of gun control, he argued we cannot allow mass shooting victims to "emotionally hijack the narrative," and championed as "prudent" and "rational" the cost of gun deaths in exchange for having "the 2nd Amendment to protect our other God-given rights."
Like much of the right, he practiced "eliminationist rhetoric," wherein political opponents aren’t just wrong but evil, less than human. Still, when the 2nd Amendment came for Charlie Kirk, thoughtful opponents wrestled in a deeply human way with the complexities. "He was a vile human being," said one, "but I do not want to live in a society where vile human beings are assassinated." Again and again, people echoed that pivotal duality: "We can condemn political violence and Kirk’s murder while also condemning Kirk for the hate he fomented," "Murder is bad, and sometimes bad people are murdered," "Kirk said and did many despicable things, but he did not deserve to die," "Kirk should not have been shot and killed for his beliefs, and nobody else" - Minnesota lawmaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, whose deaths Trump still refuses to acknowledge, no pol, no child - "should be either." This was not vengeance-tinged schadenfreude, he said; it was a moral and political reckoning with America's dissonant reality.
The right, obviously, ignored those subtleties, unable to recognize any space between "endorsing over-the-top grief for white men who espouse violence" and not endorsing that violence. Here, as usual, appeasement is in vain. "They are going to claim we (left/liberals/Democrats/non-white non-supremacists) said whatever is most convenient for them to say we said, no matter what we say," wrote Rebecca Solnit. "They've already decided all of us were the shooter." And they did. Within minutes, with zero information on the killer, Trump, elected on a platform of fomenting online rage against the "other," seized the deadly moment to foment more. He raved against "a radical left group of lunatics" - "we just have to beat the hell out of them" - "the agitator," "the scum," who for years "have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis...This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country." Elizabeth Warren, asked if Dems should "tone down" their rhetoric: "Oh, please."
After he ordered the nation's flags flown at half-mast - never once done for the hundreds of schoolchildren gunned down over the years - fellow brownshirts picked up the vengeful tiki torch and feverishly ran with it. Musk: "The Left is the party of murder...Our choice is to fight or die." Libs of Tik Tok: “THIS IS WAR." Matt Walsh: "We are up against demonic forces from the pit of Hell.” Seethed Paulina Luna, "EVERY DAMN ONE OF YOU WHO CALLED US FASCISTS DID THIS," charging, "You were busy doping up kids, cutting off their genitals, inciting racial violence...YOU ARE THE HATE you claim to fight." Logically, they also vowed to use the power of the state to exact retribution against Dem pols, "libtard" pundits, anyone who may have viewed Kirk as anything but a flawless hero and martyr. Clay Higgins urged social media posts be banned, business licenses revoked, students or teachers be kicked out, non-citizens be banished: "Cancel with extreme prejudice these evil, sick animals."
As usual, a spewing, psychotic Stephen Miller won the talking-evil-bullshit-out-of-your-Nazi-ass award, raving about "a wicked ideology" that "hates everything that is good, righteous and beautiful and celebrates everything that is warped, twisted and depraved," an ideology that views "the perfect family with bitter rage while embracing the serial criminal with tender warmth" as its adherents "tear down and destroy every mark of grace and beauty while lifting up everything monstrous and foul." Say what the fuck? In a posthumous Kirk podcast in the White House hosted by J.D. Vance - who flew Kirk's body home in Air Force Two and pledged to "go after" fictional leftist NGOs, including The Nation, that "foments violence" - a smitten Miller decried those "cheering the evil assassination that cruelly robbed this nation of one of its greatest men" and vowed to use his "righteous anger," "as God is my witness," to "use every resource" to destroy the left's "vast domestic terror movement...in Charlie's name."
Experts say the first, vital violence the authoritarian right commits is against fact, truth, history, meaning, language - reality itself. And so, again, it comes to pass. There has been no "cheering" of an act everyone knows with "horror" will spiral into chaos and repression. Though Miller said his last message from Kirk "before he joined his creator in heaven" was "we have to dismantle radical left organizations...fomenting violence," there is no such organization; nor is there a leftist "vast domestic terror movement." But there is, well-documented, on the right. See here, here, and here: Far-right plots and attacks have "significantly outpaced terrorism by other types of perpetrators" since 1994, and 2024 was the third year in a row that all extremist-related killings in the U.S. were carried out by right-wingers." A study by the DOJ itself likewise found, "The number of far-right attacks continues to outpace all other types of terrorism." It was just scrubbed from its website.
But who needs facts. Not a desperate, unhinged right that increasingly views everyone else as an existential threat to the white, straight, Christian nationalist oligarchy they seek to create. And now, notes Chris Hedges, they have their martyr, "the lifeblood of violent movements"- albeit "a reprehensible human being and Christo-fascist who enacted his agenda by preying on weak minded people" - often critical to "turn the moral order upside down" en route to "full-scale social disintegration." Inevitably, he predicts, the right's new-found, giddy, sanctimonious "intoxication with violence will feed on itself like a firestorm." In less than a week, it already is, with dozens of people across the country facing retribution - hounded, fired, threatened, arrested - in a GOP-sanctified "witch-hunt" against anyone who dares to not mourn Kirk, or accurately, scathingly quote him, or decline "to be sad that a guy willing to sacrifice school children for the Second Amendment wound up getting shot at a school."
MSNBC fired political analyst Matthew Dowd for musing, “Hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which lead to hateful actions." The Washington Post fired Karen Attiah, their sole Black columnist, for noting Kirk's racist history, especially toward Black women. Dem Rep. Seth Moulton was flooded with threats - "Cute kids - be a shame if they didn't have a father" - for arguing Trump should make it clear political differences can't and shouldn't be solved by violence. And in what Thaddeus Howze calls "deafening hypocrisy," a populace who long (if selectively) quoted Scripture to make their pious points has abruptly banished their "live by the sword" tenet after "the gun culture (Kirk) championed did not exempt him." "Here was a man who minimized other people’s agony, suddenly forced to taste the violence he once dismissed," he writes. As a result, his "2nd Amendment justice" is neither celebration nor solution; it's simply the fact that, "The logic he defended and normalized folded back on him."
Enter Tyler Robinson, who on Tuesday appeared by video in court to be charged with aggravated murder and six other counts; prosecutors will seek the death penalty. After Kash Patel's error-ridden, "amateur hour" clown show of an FBI search, Robinson was ultimately convinced by his father and a family friend to turn himself in. Described as a quiet, "squeaky clean" kid, he came from a Trump-voting, gun-loving family; his father was a sheriff turned evangelical pastor, online, his mother often posted (now-deleted) photos of Tyler and his brother grinning with guns, and they'd gifted him the rifle he killed Kirk with. Early reports suggested he was part of Nick Fuentes' “Groypers," a white-nationalist group from the "toxic underbelly of the MAGA ecosystem" who use Internet memes, underground cultural references and racist dog whistles to covertly spread hate, and who'd publicly harassed Kirk as not extremist or "pro-white” enough. Now, it's only clear that Tyler was "a guy who plainly had Internet brain poisoning."
As "experts" struggled to decipher reported markings on the killer's ammunition - "Hey fascist, catch!" with a sequence of arrows etc - gamers quickly identified them as symbols from Helldivers 2, in which elite forces battle against aliens on behalf of a fascist state. Meanwhile, more facts emerged: Tyler, his politics shifting left, was in a romantic relationship with a roommate transitioning from male to female, and he'd told them and his father he killed Kirk because he "had enough of his hatred." All told, his views were so hazy he could be deemed a "nihilist violent extremist" (NVE), often alienated young men, desensitized to violence by gaming and right-wing subcultures, who lack a coherent political belief system but feel an inchoate rage - a reminder to a partisan world, wrote Ken Klippenstein, "of the actual diversity of the nation, and the cost of polarization that demonizes the other side." The lack of "tidy narrative," said Rep.Sean Casten, suggested this was merely the tale of "a young man who made a bad choice with a gun."
Online, some declared MAGA's civil war had been cancelled "due to shooter being demographically uncooperative." But the regime, fired up, had no interest in leading us out of "this ugly toxic pit." Ignoring facts, law, nuance and their ostensible mission to unite, they've used the shooting to launch "the biggest assault on the First Amendment in our country’s modern history.” Pam Bondi, appearing on Goebbels' wife Katie Miller's malignant podcast, vowed the Justice Department would "go after" those engaging in "hate speech," or "violent rhetoric designed to silence others from voicing conservative ideals," aka accurately quoting Charlie Kirk. "There's free speech and there's hate speech," she said. "We will absolutely target you." Heather Lyle on the "staggering irony" of selectively outraged, right-wing grievance politics "collapsing under the weight of its own contradictions...A movement that insists mass death is acceptable collateral in the name of liberty also demands national mourning when its own suffers."
Trump, meanwhile, has helped stifle free speech by threatening an ABC News reporter who asked about it - "We'll probably go after people like you. You treat me unfairly - you have hate in your heart" - an Australian reporter - "You are hurting Australia right now. Your leader is coming to see me soon, I’m going to tell him about you...Quiet" - and "the degenerate" New York Times with a bizarre, "hilarious," $15 billion libel lawsuit packed with lies, boasts and juvenile praise for his "transcendent ability to defy wrongful conventions" and "greatest personal and political achievement in American history" despite a pernicious paper that "has engaged (in) decades-long lying about your Favorite President (ME!).” Like any eight-year-old sociopath, he has a notably short attention span: Asked how he's doing after losing his "friend" Kirk, he said, "Very good. And by the way, right there, you see the trucks just started construction of the new Ballroom...It's going to be a beauty...one of the best in the world, actually. Thank you very much."
Elsewhere, everyone spoke of Kirk and the havoc his death has wrought. "Pay attention," urged Sen. Chris Murphy of moves to crush dissent: "Something dark may be coming." A somber Bernie warned of political violence that "threatens to hollow out our public life"; many followers, citing the "paradox of intolerance," argued tolerance is a social contract the right has already ravaged: "Charlie Kirk is a self-inflicted gunshot statistic. Kirk's widow Erika, 36, a glossy former Miss Arizona with a "Christian clothing company" and "devotional blessings" podcast, gave an "address to the nation" at a lectern reading, "May Charlie be received into the merciful arms of Jesus, our loving savior"; she told "evil-doers" they have "no idea what you have unleashed," and vowed the tour, mission and "wisdom" of Charlie, "wearing the glorious crown of a martyr," "will endure." At a shabby Kennedy Center vigil - bad music, red caps, USA chants, shrieking pastors - regime fans and officials proclaimed, "We are all Charlie Kirk now."
Not quite. "Grief is not a performance," offered a therapist to those struggling to respond. "When a public figure dies, you are not obligated to manufacture sorrow (to) honor a life (that) caused harm." "You are inheriting a country where politics feels like rage," Utah Gov. Spencer Cox told traumatized students. "Words are not violence. Violence is violence." After the arrest, Cox said he'd been praying the shooter "wouldn't be one of us" - a queer immigrant would be better? - "so I could say, 'We don't do that here.'" But of course he was, and we do. "What the actual hell have we become?" asked Catholic writer Emily Zanotti. From another, "We have met the enemy, and he is us." White, male, home-grown, needy, beset by an inchoate animus and fury now wretchedly reflected in a regime whose leaders choose to use power only for hate. Compare and contrast with, say, Stephen Colbert, who this week spoke of love, and loss, and "desperately loving" a country now unrecognizable. Even Tyler Robinson decried hate, and, to his partner, voiced love.
The same day he shot Charlie Kirk, the "uniquely American cycle" was reprised one state over when a male student opened fire at a Colorado high school, wounding two before killing himself; so much blood was already flowing it barely made the news. Two days later, also under-reported, a police SWAT team arrested a 13-year-old boy near Seattle for "unlawful firearms possession." Evidently fixated on school shootings, the boy had amassed an arsenal of 23 guns with accompanying ammunition, including tactical style rifles mounted on the walls of his room, handguns strewn through the house and, in a backpack beneath a turtle habitat, AR assault magazines; police also found drawings of school shooters and social media posts that said, "When I turn 21 I am going to kill people" and, "It's over! My time is almost hear!" (sic). In an interview, his mother, who home-schooled him, said the posts were an attempt by her son to "be cool," and he had no intention of harming anyone.
The attorneys general of Connecticut and Rhode Island on Thursday joined renewable energy companies in a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's suspension of an offshore wind farm that, if completed, will power hundreds of thousands of homes in the two New England states.
Connecticut Attorney General William Tong and Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha, both Democrats, announced they are suing "to overturn the baseless stop-work order abruptly issued on August 22, 2025, which halted the construction of Revolution Wind," a project located 15 miles south of the Rhode Island coast.
"Revolution Wind is fully permitted, nearly complete and months from providing enough American-made, clean, affordable energy to power 350,000 homes," Tong said in a statement. "Now, with zero justification, [US President Donald] Trump wants to mothball the project, send workers home, and saddle Connecticut families with millions of dollars in higher energy costs. This kind of erratic and reckless governing is blatantly illegal, and we're suing to stop it."
Acting US Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management (BOEM) Director Matthew Giacona issued the order directing Rob Keiser, head of asset management at the North American branch of the Danish firm Ørsted—the world's largest offshore wind developer—to "halt all ongoing activities related to the Revolution Wind project on the outer continental shelf."
Giacona's order—which cited "concerns related to the protection of national security interests of the United States"—is to remain in effect pending review by BOEM, which is part of the US Interior Department.
Ratepayers could have saved $400 million last winter if the 3.5 GW of offshore wind in New England was operational.Meanwhile, Trump just halted construction on Rhode Island's Revolution Wind and is trying to ban wind energy entirely. You can thank Trump when your energy bills continue to rise.
[image or embed]
— LCV – League of Conservation Voters 🌎 (@lcv.org) September 4, 2025 at 6:31 AM
At the time of the order, Ørsted said that Revolution Wind was "80% complete, with all offshore foundations installed and 45 out of 65 wind turbines installed."
The lawsuit filed by Revolution Wind—a joint venture between Ørsted and Skyborn Renewables—seeks to lift BOEM's order. An attorney for Ørsted contended Thursday in the US District Court for the District of Columbia that Trump's "apparent hostility toward offshore wind" was behind the stop-work order.
"The project has spent billions of dollars in reliance on these valid approvals," the Revolution Wind filing states. "The stop-work order is invalid and must be set aside because it was issued without statutory authority, in violation of agency regulations and procedures and the 5th Amendment's due process clause, and is arbitrary and capricious."
US Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who previously condemned the stop-work order, said Thursday that "if Trump's plan is to raise families' energy prices, cut American jobs, turbocharge climate change, and accelerate the Great Climate Insurance Crisis, he's knocking it out of the park with his all-out attack on American offshore wind."
"Wind power is one of the fastest, safest, cheapest ways to meet rising electricity demand and cut energy prices," the senator continued. "The only winners here are the corrupt fossil fuel donors who bankrolled Trump's campaign."
In a separate social media post on Thursday addressing the new lawsuit, Whitehouse said that "my experience tells me the discovery phase will be fascinating as the lawyers dig into the true motivations and scheming behind this ugly fossil fuel thuggery."
Revolution Wind is at least the second major wind project hit with a BOEM stop-work order during the second administration of Trump, who campaigned on a "drill, baby, drill" pro-fossil fuels platform.
Trump has also antagonized Denmark by threatening to take control of Greenland, a Danish territory. Last month, Denmark's Foreign Ministry summoned Mark Stroh, Trump's charge d'affaires in the Nordic nation, following a report by the main Danish public broadcaster alleging that three Americans with ties to Trump have been attempting to instigate tensions between Denmark and Greenland.
Thursday's lawsuit follows another multistate complaint filed in May by 18 attorneys general seeking to block Trump's effort to pause offshore wind development via an executive order issued on the president's first day in office.
"This arbitrary and unnecessary directive threatens the loss of thousands of good-paying jobs and billions in investments, and it is delaying our transition away from the fossil fuels that harm our health and our planet," Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the coalition of states, said at the time.
A federal judge late Tuesday ruled against President Donald Trump's unlawful attempt to fire Federal Reserve Board Governor Lisa Cook last month, determining that the president's "for cause" argument was unconvincing as it was based on unsubstantiated accusations of wrongdoing and represented an executive overreach with worrying implications.
Trump claimed his attempted removal of Cook, whose legal team challenged it as politically motivated and an "unprecedented and illegal" violation of the Fed's statutory independence, was for falsified mortgage applications for homes Cook purchased prior to her appointment to the board, However, Judge Jia M. Cobb of the US District Court for the District of Columbia found that the alleged infractions were neither substantiated and also took place prior to her taking the position.
"According to the government, the determination of cause is committed to the president's discretion by statute, leaving no role for this court. The court disagrees," Cobb said in her decision.
The accusations against Cook center on accusations brought by Bill Pulte, a prominent political supporter of Trump appointed by the president to lead the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which operates the public lending arms of both Fannie and Freddie Mac. Critics of Pulte have accused him of weaponizing his access to private mortgage data by sifting through records of Trump's perceived political enemies.
As economist Dean Baker wrote in a column last week, people would be wise to recognize Pulte's outsized role in the accusations Trump made against Cook.
"While the validity of Pulte's allegations will have to be determined by the courts, the real scandal is Pulte himself," wrote Baker. "He is supposed to be running the agency that oversees the processing of tens of millions of mortgages by two huge quasi-public agencies. We are not supposed to be paying him to rifle through mortgage documents to find and disclose dirt that Trump can use against his political opponents."
By ruling against Trump on Tuesday, Cobb sided with Cook's request for a temporary injunction. This means she will remain in her post, with full voting rights as a governor of the Fed Board, as the case proceeds in the courts.
"Today's ruling recognizes and reaffirms the importance of safeguarding the independence of the Federal Reserve from illegal political interference," said Abbe Lowell, an attorney on Cook's legal team. "Allowing the president to unlawfully remove Governor Cook on unsubstantiated and vague allegations would endanger the stability of our financial system and undermine the rule of law."
For now, Lowell added, Cook will "will continue to carry out her sworn duties as a Senate-confirmed Board Governor."
A Democratic US senator over the weekend issued an ominous warning about Republicans using the murder of Charlie Kirk as a pretense to clamp down on political speech.
In a lengthy social media post on Sunday, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) outlined how President Donald Trump and his allies look set to wage a campaign of retribution against political adversaries by framing them as accomplices in Kirk's murder.
"Pay attention," he began. "Something dark might be coming. The murder of Charlie Kirk could have united Americans to confront political violence. Instead, Trump and his anti-democratic radicals look to be readying a campaign to destroy dissent."
Murphy then contrasted the recent statements by Republican Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, who accurately stated that political violence is not confined to a single political ideology, with those of Trump and his allies, who have said such violence is only a problem on the left.
Murphy highlighted a statement from Trump ally and informal adviser Laura Loomer, who said that she wanted "Trump to be the 'dictator' the left thinks he is" and that she wanted "the right to be as devoted to locking up and silencing our violent political enemies as they pretend we are."
He then pointed to Trump saying that progressive billionaire financier George Soros should face racketeering charges even though there is no evidence linking Soros to Kirk's murder or any other kind of political violence.
"The Trump/Loomer/Miller narrative that Dems are cheering Kirk's murder or that left groups are fomenting violence is also made up," he added. "There are always going to be online trolls, but Dem leaders are united (as opposed to Trump who continues to cheer the January 6 violence)."
Murphy claimed that the president and his allies have long been seeking a "pretext to destroy their opposition" and that Kirk's murder gave them an opening.
"That's why it was so important for Trump sycophants to take over the DoJ and FBI, so that if a pretext arose, Trump could orchestrate a dizzying campaign to shut down political opposition groups and lock up or harass its leaders," he said. "This is what could be coming—now."
Early in his second term, the president fired FBI prosecutors who were involved in an earlier political violence case—the prosecution of people involved in the violent attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 by Trump supporters who aimed to stop the certification of the 2020 election.
A top ethics official and a lawyer who spoke out against the president’s anti-immigration policy are among those who have been fired from the DOJ.
Murphy ended his post with a call for action from supporters.
"I hope I'm wrong. But we need to be prepared if I'm right," he said. "That means everyone who cares about democracy has to join the fight—right now. Join a mobilization or protest group. Start showing up to actions more. Write a check to a progressive media operation."
One day after Murphy's warning, columnist Karen Attiah announced that she had been fired from the Washington Post over social media posts in the wake of Kirk's death that were critical of his legacy but in no way endorsed or celebrated any form of political violence.
"The Post accused my measured Bluesky posts of being 'unacceptable,' 'gross misconduct,' and of endangering the physical safety of colleagues—charges without evidence, which I reject completely as false," she explained. "They rushed to fire me without even a conversation. This was not only a hasty overreach, but a violation of the very standards of journalistic fairness and rigor the Post claims to uphold."
Attiah only directly referenced Kirk once in her posts and said she had condemned the deadly attack on him “without engaging in excessive, false mourning for a man who routinely attacked Black women as a group, put academics in danger by putting them on watch lists, claimed falsely that Black people were better off in the era of Jim Crow, said that the Civil Rights Act was a mistake, and favorably reviewed a book that called liberals 'Unhumans.'"
President Donald Trump threatened on Monday to jail the peace activists who disrupted his dinner with pro-Palestinian chants last week, referring to their behavior as "subversive."
Last Tuesday, members of CodePink, a women-led antiwar group, verbally confronted the president and several top members of his administration—including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth—as they dined on steak and seafood at a swanky DC eatery.
The small group of activists castigated the president for his support for Israel's genocidal war in Gaza and its blockade on humanitarian aid, which has caused mass starvation throughout the strip.
The activists chanted, "They feast while Gaza starves," and called Trump "the Hitler of our time" for supporting the military campaign, which an Israeli general recently admitted has resulted in over 220,000 people being killed or wounded.
On Monday, as Trump and his administration continued to map out a sweeping crackdown against left-wing speech following the murder of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, the president suggested that the women of CodePink should also be punished for their peaceful display of dissent, referring to them as "professional agitators" and "total phonies."
"They started to scream when I got into the restaurant," he said, "'Ohhh'...Something with Palestine. And I said, 'Well, I'm doing a great job for peace in the Middle East, I should get lots of awards for that, right, with the Abraham Accords and everything else.' But the woman just stood up and started screaming. And she got booed out of the place."
Trump called the protester a "mouthpiece" and a "paid agitator," before saying that he'd "asked [Attorney General Pam Bondi] to look into that in terms of RICO, bringing RICO cases against them. Criminal RICO. Because they should be put in jail, what they're doing to this country is really subversive."
RICO refers to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, which the government has traditionally used to prosecute organized crime groups. But following Kirk's shooting, Trump has suggested it be used to carry out what his deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller said on Friday would be an effort to "dismantle" left-wing organizations in the United States.
Trump has threatened to use RICO charges against liberal nonprofits, including the Open Society Foundations and the Ford Foundation, which Vance referred to on Monday as "terrorist networks." The vice president claimed that these groups push "messaging designed to trigger and incite violence," with his leading example being an article published in The Nation that harshly criticized Kirk's political views following his assassination.
Melissa Garriga, a spokesperson for CodePink, told Common Dreams that Trump's allegations against her antiwar group are untrue.
"CodePink has a very small staff," Garriga said. "A majority of our work is done by CodePink volunteers, who are not paid. They represent the majority of the American public and are not 'mouthpieces' of any foreign government or political party. They are workers, veterans, artists, and peace activists from across the country. We are committed to peaceful, nonviolent means of protest when executing our actions."
"This is not new for us," Garriga added. "Over the past few years, elected officials, more often Republican elected officials, have constantly called for investigations into progressive organizations such as ours. They've launched baseless congressional investigations over CodePink's funding sources that their Democrat colleagues often parrot."
Earlier this year, Senate Intelligence Committee chair Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) claimed that the group was funded by "Communist China" after a retired Army colonel working with the group disrupted a committee hearing with chants of "Stop funding Israel!" CodePink filed an ethics complaint against Cotton in response, calling his accusation "untrue and libelous."
In 2024, when CodePink was castigating the Biden administration's unwavering support for Israel, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) made a similar suggestion that the group should be investigated by the FBI because, "when they advocate for a ceasefire, it's Putin's agenda at play." Prior to that, when a member of the group confronted Pelosi, the congresswoman responded, "Go back to China."
CodePink strenuously denied having received any funding from the Chinese government or any other foreign governments following calls from several Republicans for the group to be investigated over its campaign against military escalation with China.
"Our financial records are transparent and audited, and any suggestion that external governments or political entities influence us is ludicrous," Garriga reiterated to Common Dreams. "As we have officially stated multiple times, CodePink receives no money from any foreign government, and we are funded by thousands of individual donors and US-based foundations."
"President Trump is trying to intimidate people who speak up for peace and justice, and we won’t be intimidated," she continued. "We represent the popular opinion in the United States: the majority who are against war and genocide."
According to a Quinnipiac poll released at the end of August, 60% of voters across all parties said they opposed sending more military aid to Israel, compared to just 32% who said they supported it. Half of the respondents said they agreed with the international community's growing consensus that Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza.
"It is all very reminiscent of McCarthyism," Garriga said of Trump's threats to crack down on left-wing speech. "It's a critical moment for other organizations to stand in solidarity, loud and clear solidarity with organizations facing repression."
US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar on Tuesday condemned the Trump administration's attack the previous day on a second boat allegedly transporting drugs off the coast of Venezuela as blatantly illegal, highlighting her introduction last week of a war powers resolution in a bid to stop the aggression.
President Donald Trump announced Monday that the US destroyed what he said was a boat used by Venezuelan drug gangs, killing three people in what one Amnesty International campaigner called "an extrajudicial execution."
The strike followed a September 2 US attack on another alleged drug-running boat that killed 11 people, which Omar (D-Minn.) called a "lawless and reckless" action.
Responding to Monday's attack, Omar said on the social media site X that the Trump administration "is once again using the failed War on Drugs to justify their egregious violation of international law."
"There is NO legal justification," she said of the attack. "It risks spiraling into the exact type of endless, pointless conflict that Trump supposedly opposes. I have a war powers resolution to fight back."
Introduced last Thursday, the measure aims to stop the US attacks, which coincide with Trump's deployment of a small armada of warships off the Caribbean coast of Venezuela, a country that has endured to more than a century of US meddling in its affairs.
"All of us should agree that the separation of powers is crucial to our democracy, and that only Congress has the power to declare war," Omar said at the time.
The War Powers Act of 1973—enacted during the Nixon administration at the tail end of the US war on Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos—empowers Congress to check the president’s war-making authority. The law requires the president to report any military action to Congress within 48 hours and mandates that lawmakers must approve troop deployments after 60 days.
Also last week, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) led a letter signed by two dozen Democratic colleagues and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) asserting that the Trump administration offered “no legitimate justification” for the first boat strike.
Omar's condemnation of the US attacks followed Monday's announcement by US Reps. Nancy Mace (R-SC) and Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) of separate resolutions to strip Omar of her committee assignments and, in the case of Mace's measure, censure the congresswoman after she reportedly shared a video highlighting assassinated far-right firebrand Charlie Kirk's prolific bigotry.
Trump also attacked Omar on Monday, calling her a "disgraceful person," a "loser," and "disgusting."
Omar is no stranger to censure efforts, which critics say are largely fueled by Islamophobia—and haven't just come from Republicans. In 2019, she was falsely accused of antisemitism by leaders of her own party and was the subject of an anti-hate speech resolution passed by House lawmakers after she remarked about the indisputable financial ties the pro-Israel lobbying group American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and members of Congress.
In February 2023, Omar was ousted from the House Foreign Affairs Committee for years-old comments that allegedly referenced antisemitic tropes.
Last year, Congressman Don Bacon (R-Neb.) introduced a censure resolution after Omar said of Jewish students at Columbia University, "We should not have to tolerate antisemitism or bigotry for all Jewish students, whether they're pro-genocide or anti-genocide."
The measure failed to pass, as did another put forth earlier last year by Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) after she mistranslated remarks Omar made in Somali.
"The TikTok ban wasn’t primarily about national security or influence... but rather political control," one tech columnist wrote.
President Donald Trump is pushing to finalize a deal that would hand majority control of TikTok over to a consortium that includes two of his closest billionaire allies.
On Tuesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that under the planned deal, 80% of the stake will be controlled by a group of American investors, while the remaining 20% will remain with Chinese firms.
The American companies include the investment firm Silver Lake, the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, and the technology company Oracle. The latter two are controlled by some of Trump's most prolific supporters.
Marc Andreessen and his partner Ben Horowitz each donated $2.5 million to Trump's super PAC during the 2024 election.
Andreessen, who said at the end of 2024 he was spending roughly "half" his time at Mar-a-Lago, was tapped as an economic adviser to Trump earlier this year, where he helped to recruit staffers to Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). After unleashing a bevy of false claims, Andreessen led the charge for DOGE to virtually kill the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which he'd long loathed for its investigations into his investment firms.
Oracle, meanwhile, was founded by Larry Ellison—one of Trump's earliest backers in the Silicon Valley world—who reportedly advised the president during his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss. Over the next five years, Ellison accumulated enough wealth to briefly overtake Musk as the world's richest person and has used those riches to consolidate control over the media. After taking office in January for his second term, Trump began to champion Ellison as the man to take over TikTok.
In August—with the help of Trump's Federal Communications Commission (FCC)— SkyDance, owned by Ellison's son David, purchased Paramount, which owns CBS News. The younger Ellison quickly began making moves to reshape the network's politics, most notably by planning to purchase the "anti-woke" publication the Free Press and recruiting its founder, Bari Weiss, to a senior editorial role, which has left newsroom staffers fearing for their editorial independence. Ellison also has designs on a $70 billion deal to acquire Warner Bros., which would give him control over CNN as well.
Matthew Gertz of Media Matters for America warns that soon, "one Trump-aligned billionaire family could end up controlling CBS News, CNN, and TikTok."
Gertz noted that TikTok would join a media ecosystem that is increasingly bowing to the president, with X and Meta controlled by Trump-aligned billionaires and the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times shifting their coverage to flatter his worldview. Meanwhile, nominal holdouts like the New York Times and Wall Street Journal have been slapped with multibillion-dollar lawsuits, as Trump has accused them of trying to harm him with negative coverage.
Trump said that he plans to speak with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday to finalize the sale of TikTok, which is currently owned by the Chinese firm ByteDance.
The sale of the platform was set into motion in 2024 under President Joe Biden, who signed legislation banning TikTok in the United States unless it was sold to a US company. Congress justified the decision at the time by claiming that China was using the app to surveil Americans and using the platform's algorithm to feed them propaganda, though free press advocates criticized the ban as an effort to censor opinions and information unfavorable to the US government.
One persistent gripe from advocates for the ban was that the platform had become a major source for videos depicting the visceral horrors of Israel's military assault on Gaza. In one infamous exchange, then-Secretary of State Antony Blinken and then-Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) pointed to TikTok as a reason why “the PR has been so awful” for Israel since the war began and said that this was a primary motivation behind the ban among legislators.
Its soon-to-be new partial-owner, Ellison, however, is one of Israel's staunchest supporters. He has donated at least $26 million to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) via a nonprofit called "Friends of the IDF" and once offered a seat on Oracle's board to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Independent journalist Jack Poulson also reported this week that David Ellison once coordinated with former Israeli military commander-in-chief Benny Gantz on an effort to spy on and disrupt American activists for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
"The panic over TikTok was always in part because it is a prime source for factually accurate coverage of the Gaza genocide," said Nathan J. Robinson, the editor-in-chief of Current Affairs magazine, on X. "Now one of the leading pro-Israel fanatics is set to take control and ensure that young people don't keep getting videos telling the truth about Palestine."
According to the Journal, TikTok's new proprietors will not be reconstructing the app's much-maligned algorithm from the ground up. Rather, "TikTok engineers will re-create a set of content-recommendation algorithms for the app, using technology licensed from TikTok’s parent ByteDance."
As tech columnist John Herrman points out for New York magazine, this deal doesn't resolve the "stated reasons" for the ban, since it still gives its Chinese owners a stake in the company and uses their underlying technology.
"When it comes to the TikTok ban, though, 'stated reasons' were never especially useful," Herrman wrote. "In the end, the TikTok ban wasn’t primarily about national security or influence—although this new arrangement will have implications for both—but rather political control, and the demonstration thereof."
“I believe the EU will find it extraordinarily difficult to ever be a union in any sense again when some of its strongest members are deciding to stay silent in watching emaciated," said Irish President Michael Higgins.
Irish President Michael Higgins on Tuesday shamed fellow European nations for their inaction in ending the conflict in Gaza.
As reported by Turkish news website AA, Higgins pointed to the finding by the United Nations' (UN) commission of inquiry that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza to argue that the world needed to do more to end the carnage.
Specifically, Higgins argued that Israel and any nations that supply it with arms should be expelled from the UN. He also had harsh words for European Union (EU) nations whom he accused of looking the other way in the face of mass atrocities.
"I believe the EU will find it extraordinarily difficult to ever be a union in any sense again when some of its strongest members are deciding to stay silent in watching emaciated children in what is a human, manmade, really atrocious infliction on people," he said.
Higgins also highlighted some particularly gruesome findings from the commission's report to push for the EU to take action to "stop this carnage" and the "slaughter of civilians."
"That report says 90% of all housing has been destroyed, education facilities have been destroyed, and healthcare facilities and fertility facilities are being destroyed—in other words, you're attacking birth," he said.
The UN commission's report concluded that Israel had committed four distinct kinds of "genocidal acts," as defined by the 1948 Genocide Convention: Killing members of a group, causing serious bodily or mental harm to a group, deliberately inflicting conditions aimed at bringing about a group's destruction, and imposing measures intended to prevent births within a group.
The only genocidal act that Israel has not yet committed, the report said, was forcibly transferring children of a group to a different group.
Navi Pillay, the commission chair and former UN high commissioner for human rights, said that report shows Israel has shown "an intent to destroy the Palestinians in Gaza through acts that meet the criteria set forth in the Genocide Convention."
"This isn’t about left or right," said the group behind the survey. "It’s about protecting our democracy’s foundation: Congress makes the laws. The president enforces them."
Amid US President Donald Trump's authoritarian policies and practices, Americans are increasingly worried that too much power is concentrated in the White House, polling published Wednesday revealed.
YouGov surveyed 1,070 registered US voters on behalf of the campaign finance reform nonprofit Issue One and found that they "overwhelmingly support our constitutional system of checks and balances."
Fifty-six percent of those surveyed said the US political system is "too centralized," more than twice as many respondents who said it isn't centralized enough. Among Democrats, two-thirds agreed that political power is too centralized in the US, while 47% of Republicans and 56% of Independents agreed.
At least two-thirds of respondents of every political affiliation agreed that specific checks and balances—including congressional oversight (78%), Congress' power of the purse (68%), and judicial review (70%)—strengthen democracy.
Respondents were also asked whether they believe the president should be allowed to cross certain "red lines":
Asked if Trump "is going too far," 59% of overall respondents said yes, including 95% of Democrats, 79% of Independents, and 21% of Republicans.
“Americans want a Congress that will stand up to the president when they go too far—that’s the whole point of checks and balances,” Issue One founder and CEO Nick Penniman said in a statement.
“Our Constitution was designed to prevent any one president from acting like a king," Penniman continued. "But if our country keeps heading down this path, power will keep concentrating in the White House—and a representative government that is by and for the American people will be replaced with a government that only serves the president and those connected to him."
“Congress needs to step up and do its job," he added. "Upholding the Constitution is not about right versus left—it is about being on the right or wrong side of history.”
In an effort to "restore checks and balances" and "defend the Constitution," Issue One is launching a We The People Playbook, "a set of bipartisan policies rooted in Article I of the Constitution, designed to protect our freedoms, hold presidents accountable, and restore the balance of power."
The new poll and playbook are part of Issue One's Check the Exec campaign, which is fighting for the "restoration of critical checks and balances."
"This isn’t about left or right," says Issue One on the campaign's website. "It’s about protecting our democracy’s foundation: Congress makes the laws. The president enforces them."