SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
steve bannon
The Ugly Aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s Assassination
A war against evil, which some voices on the right now suggest is underway, means a fight to the death. In a democracy, that’s an ominous approach to political disagreement—and Trump fosters it.
Sep 21, 2025
In the final minutes of FBI Director Kash Patel’s appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 16, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) acknowledged the obvious: Individuals on the left should not have celebrated Charlie Kirk’s assassination, but influential voices on the right were inflaming the situation.
The bottom line, Tillis observed, was that escalation of the rhetoric on the right was making the FBI’s job of law enforcement more difficult.
Trump Disagrees
Sen. Tillis’s analysis would have come as a shock to President Donald Trump, who blamed the episode on the “radical left.” Speaking Wednesday night from the Oval office only hours after Kirk’s death on September 10—before the identity or motives of the assassin were known—he issued a video message from the Oval Office:
“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.”
Listing recent attacks against himself and other conservative figures, he didn’t mention violence against Democrats, including: the assassination of a Minnesota lawmaker and her husband; the shooting of another Minnesota legislator and his wife; the arson attack on Gov. Josh Shapiro’s (D-PA) residence; or the attack on Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) husband. Those omissions were an important tell: Trump is going after Democrats and what he otherwise considers the left—and them only.
On Thursday, Sept. 11, he confirmed the identity of his targets: “We have a radical left group of lunatics out there, just absolute lunatics, and we're going to get that problem solved.”
And then, with an appearance the next day on Fox & Friends, Trump resumed his rant:
“I’ll tell you something that’s going to get me in trouble, but I couldn’t care less. The radicals on the right oftentimes are radical because they don’t want to see crime. They don’t want to see crime. Worried about the border. They’re saying, We don’t want these people coming in. We don’t want you burning our shopping centers. We don’t want you shooting our people in the middle of the street.”
“The radicals on the left are the problem,” Trump continued his series of non sequiturs, “and they’re vicious and they’re horrible and they’re politically savvy, although they want men and women sports, they want transgender for everyone, they want open borders.”
Meanwhile on the Right
Here’s a sample of what Sen. Tillis was talking about:
Steve Bannon on his “War Room” broadcast: “We have to have steely resolve. Charlie Kirk is a casualty of war. We are at war in this country. We are.”
Fox News host Jesse Watters: “They are at war with us, whether we want to accept it or not. What are we gonna do about it? Everybody’s accountable … the politicians, the media, and all these rats out there. This can never happen again. It ends now. This is a turning point and we know which direction we’re going.”
Podcaster Matt Walsh: “We are up against demonic forces from the pit of Hell. This is existential. A fight for our own existence and the existence of our country.”
Elon Musk: “If they won’t leave us in peace, then our choice is to fight or die.”
Conservative actor James Woods: “Dear leftists: we can have a conversation or a civil war. One more shot from your side, and you will not get this choice again.”
What’s Next?
Seeing the world through Trump’s hyperpolitical lens leaves no room for doubt, ambiguity, facts, or reasoned discussion. Everyone is either friend or foe, ally or enemy, angel or devil. War requires battling the opposition. And the opposition is anyone who opposes or criticizes Trump.
But a war against evil—which some voices on the right now suggest is underway—means a fight to the death. In a democracy, that’s an ominous approach to political disagreement. Trump fosters it.
The day after Kirk’s assassination, Sen. Tillis told the National Journal: “What I was really disgusted by yesterday is a couple of talking heads that see this as an opportunity to say we’re at war so that they could get some of our conservative followers lathered up over this. It seems like a cheap, disgusting, awful way to pretend like you’re a leader of a conservative movement.”
It’s remarkable how Republicans in Congress acquire wisdom after they have announced that they’re not seeking re-election.
Keep ReadingShow Less
EJ Antoni, Trump's Pick for Key Economic Post, Spotted in Jan 6 MAGA Mob
"The inmates are not only running the asylum. They're bringing in more inmates to help," said one observer.
Aug 14, 2025
EJ Antoni, President Donald Trump's controversial nominee to head the Bureau of Labor Statistics, was among the insurrectionist mob that stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, NBC News revealed Wednesday.
Video footage archived from the right-wing social media site Parler and posted online by a Republican-led congressional subcommittee shows Antoni among the crowd about half an hour before the MAGA mob began breaching barricades, attacking police, and swarming the Capitol. He is also seen walking away from the crowd.
The White House attempted to downplay the news, with spokesperson Taylor Rogers saying that "these pictures show E.J. Antoni, a bystander to the events of January 6th, observing and then leaving the Capitol area."
"E.J. was in town for meetings, and it is wrong and defamatory to suggest E.J. engaged in anything inappropriate or illegal," Rogers added.
See the man circled here? That's E.J. Antoni, Trump's Bureau of Labor Statistics nominee, walking through a crowd of Capitol rioters.#ICYMI, we've got an archive of 500+ Parler videos taken during Jan. 6. You can spot Antoni starting at around 1:41 here: projects.propublica.org/parler-capit...
[image or embed]
— ProPublica (@propublica.org) August 14, 2025 at 9:06 AM
Other MAGA figures also defended Antoni. Felonious fraudster Steve Bannon, who pleaded guilty in a border wall fundraising fraud case this year, said Thursday on his War Room podcast: "They came up with a photo of E.J. Antoni in the crowd outside the Capitol on January 6, and NBC went absolutely nuts over it. I think it makes E.J. even more based. I didn't know that about E.J.—makes us want him even more."
Critics, however, expressed alarm, given the important post to which Antoni was nominated.
"We just discovered a Trump [Department of Justice] official was at January 6, telling other traitors to 'kill' police," journalist and attorney Adam Cohen wrote on the social media site Bluesky, referring to Jared Wise, who was pardoned by Trump.
"Now we learn Trump's BLS nominee, E.J. Antoni—apart from being totally unqualified—was ALSO part of the insurrection," Cohen added. "The inmates are not only running the asylum. They're bringing in MORE inmates to help."
The West Virginia Federation of Democratic Women noted on the social media site X that "Trump fired the vetted woman who reported honest stats on job losses. His new guy was in the mob on January 6 and wrote Project 2025."
Journalist Ahmed Baba wrote on X: "So, E.J. Antoni is the chief economist at the Heritage Foundation, a contributor to Project 2025, and was literally outside the Capitol on January 6. This is who Trump wants to be in charge of the BLS data that shapes global decisions and moves markets—an extremist sycophant."
Trump nominated Antoni after firing former BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, whom the president accused without evidence of manipulating employment statistics to discredit him and other Republicans.
Keep ReadingShow Less
How to Use 197 Forbidden 'Woke' Words and Still Get a Grant From the Trump-Musk Government
A grant proposal concerning reparations for the descendants of slave owners, submitted in good faith to Elon Musk during this cruel and unusual time of oppressive wokeness.
Mar 27, 2025
Dear Elon,
On behalf of the Diversified Organization of Grant Enablers, (the original DOGE), thank you for ordering the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation to flag proposals that contain certain oppressive “woke” words you don’t like. We’re not wild about them either.
Forbes leaked the list of the 197 terms, rendered here in bold italics. (And kudos, dear sir, for not banning George Carlin’s seven dirty words!)
BTW, the biased media is inflating the number of forbidden words, trying to make you look bad. For example, it counts as individual terms diverse, diverse backgrounds, diverse communities, diverse community, diverse group, diverse groups, diversified, diversify, diversifying, and diversity. Fake news, is it not?
But we have a suggestion. Rather than ban them, giving the liberals something easy to roast you with, why not put them to work in an anti-woke context? That’s what our professional team of DOGE grant writers has done in a model culturally appropriate proposal. You will love it, even though it uses just about all the barred terms. (Sorry, we failed to squeeze in people + uterus.)
We don’t want to brag, but this can’t-miss proposal will shake up the lunatic left. You will want to immediately fund it, even while chain-sawing so many others into sawdust. And when you spread the word on X, your popularity with anti-woke key groups is going to skyrocket! Even Steve Bannon will snuggle up to you.
Thanks for purifying our thoughts and bringing your antiracist Afrikaner sensibility to our great nation.
Proposal For Reparations for the Descendants of Slave Owners (DSO)
Britain abolished slavery in 1833 and provided former slave owners 20 million British pounds (the equivalent today of $22.1 billion US dollars) as compensation. Racial justice demands a similar response from the U.S. federal government for the descendants of U.S. slave owners.
In South Africa today, oppressed white farmers face land confiscation without compensation from its BIPOC government. Slave owners in the U.S. were victims of a similar injustice after the Civil War, punished for their identity. Without reparations, which have been too long denied, their descendants are victimized again generation after generation.
To promote a truly inclusive society based on equity, equality, and diversity for all, we must recognize and celebrate our cultural differences. While we are a nation of immigrants, we also are a nation of slaveowners!
For too long implicit bias and hate speech have been used against those, due to no fault of their own, who were born into slave-owning families. These key populations, labeled DSO here, should be considered at risk minorities. They helped create our national identity and contributed significantly to our cultural heritage. Racism in America would have little meaning without them.
Our proposal is a multicultural exploration of race and ethnicity among the slave-owning class, and their extended contact with indigenous communities and the Hispanic minority along the Gulf of Mexico. These marginalized non-white groups, including males and females, also owned slaves and suffered losses due to emancipation.
We must put aside our stereotypes about the plantation class. This underappreciated and undervalued population is difficult to analyze due to our own unconscious bias against all aspects of slavery. The DSO have lost their voice and its once fearsome power, since some ancestors of slaveowners are burdened by a crippling sense of guilt and so are underrepresented in modern political discourse.
To advocate for reparations for DSO members is not to whitewash their faults. Slave-owners promoted systemic racism, segregation, and white privilege— even for white non-slave-owners— but we should acknowledge their genuine sense of belonging formed though the intersectionality of sociocultural and socioeconomic factors in plantation society.
Even though white women were systematically placed on a pedestal, they were never excluded from institutional slave-owning power. They adored their narrow gender identity. These women of high status were never marginalized by aggressive feminists. They were totally at ease with being biologically female and with the gender they were assigned at birth.
Also, we can find no transgender and transexual members of slave-owning society and the DSO. Women did not run domestic plantation life in order to overcome disparities or spew meaningless pronouns in polite society. This wholesome tradition has been carried on by the DSO and provides another reason for just compensation.
A key, but seldom discussed factor, is the gender-based violence suffered at the hands of marauding Yankee soldiers. The DSO may deserve additional compensation for the trauma suffered as well as any resulting mental disabilities of their forebearers.
Meanwhile, slave-owning men were real men, biologically males with no wanton legacy of men having sex with men (MSM). And please forgive us for a personal judgement: These god-fearing slaveowners left their descendants with not the faintest expressions of non-binary awareness, thank goodness.
Because of the uncompensated destruction of the slave-holding structures, we regret to report that more than a few white plantation women became commercial sex workers in order to survive the marauding armies. The anguish and mental health problems facing white plantation prostitutes should be considered when awarding reparations. While it is too late to do something for them, our unconscious bias about sex should not distract us from a path of justice for their descendants.
Another important thread connects the slave owners to the climate crisis they and their descendants experienced. Monocrops repeatedly planted to raise cash in trade depleted the soil on Southern farms, creating pollution in their drinking water and a more generally degraded environmental quality. Westward expansion of slavery took more and more land from Native American tribes. Without climate science to inform them, effective solutions were missed and succeeding generations paid the price. We compensate farmers today for crop failures and tariff losses, why not do the same for the DSO including tribal DSO?
We hope that grant reviewers will look beyond their built-in anti-slaveowner confirmation bias, as well as their preconceived notions about race and ethnicity. It’s time to hone our cultural sensitivity and embrace a true cultural diversity, one that includes both descendants of slaves and slave owners. Our all-inclusive survey will make plain the biases we hold against this DSO class.
Since the Civil War, polarization has led to oppression and vilification of our great but marginalized plantation heritage. This injustice can only be rectified by fair and equitable compensation for the undervalued and underserved, whose relatives had their Black human capital stripped from them.
Our project asks only that we adjust our orientation and increase the diversity of those considered the victims of slavery. We must foster inclusiveness, devising just and equitable compensation programs for all descendants of slavery, including the DSO.
Social justice requires that we overcome our own prejudices and promote diversity of thought. By doing so, we all should recognize that slave-owning descendants too should be considered among our most vulnerable populations, entitled to equal opportunities when reparations are considered.
Now is the time to rectify the historical inequity faced by the DSO.
Now is the time to enhance the diversity of reparations recipients and the way they are viewed.
Now is the time to fund our bold proposal which strives, like no other, to bring community equity to all our people.
Cc: Rober Kennedy Jr., J.D. Vance, and the descendants of Robert E. Lee
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular