Democrat News

This post was originally published on this site

Jimmy Kimmel’s show is gone. So is Stephen Colbert’s. And if President Trump has his way, Seth Meyers and Jimmy Fallon will be next.

In the MAGA establishment’s ongoing censorship campaign against Trump’s critics, “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” became its latest victim when ABC announced Wednesday that it was pulling the show “indefinitely.” The network’s abrupt announcement followed an outcry from Trump’s supporters that the show’s host — a longtime critic of the president — had inaccurately described the possible political motivations of the suspect, Tyler Robinson, in last week’s killing of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.

The network’s announcement came hours after Brendan Carr, the Trump-nominated chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, targeted Kimmel on a right-wing podcast and suggested the FCC could take action against ABC because of remarks made by the host. He said Kimmel’s comments were part of a “concerted effort to lie to the American people,” and that the FCC was “going to have remedies that we can look at.”

“Frankly, when you see stuff like this — I mean, we can do this the easy way or the hard way,” he told the podcast’s host, Benny Johnson. “These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”

The alleged lies cited by Kimmel in his Monday night monologue? That MAGA was trying to paint Robinson as “anything other than one of them.”

“We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang 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, uh, grieving on Friday — the White House flew the flags at half-staff, which got some criticism, but on a human level, you can see how hard the president is taking this.”

Kimmel then cut to a clip showing Trump taking questions from reporters, and when the president was asked how he was holding up, he said, “I think very good, and by the way, right there where you see all the trucks, they just started construction of the new ballroom for the White House.” Trump went on to discuss the plans for the ballroom and said the results will “be a beauty.”

The monologue wasn’t Kimmel’s best work, but it certainly didn’t rise to a level so dangerous that the show needed to be yanked. Yet in today’s environment, where fear of retribution from the White House is driving programming decisions, it was enough to spook ABC into pulling a late-night franchise that’s endured for decades.

The FCC unsurprisingly did not apply the same standards to an outburst Monday by Greg Gutfeld, Fox News’ conservative answer to network television’s thinning herd of late-night hosts. Gutfeld cursed on air, demeaned the loss of life from another assassination earlier this year and cited information that was incorrect to back his tirade.

On Fox’s show “The Five,” Gutfeld asserted that political violence in the U.S. was only going one way — from left to right — during a conversation with co-host Jessica Tarlov. When she pushed back on his argument by bringing up the June assassination of the Democratic speaker of the Minnesota House of Representatives, Melissa Hortman, and her husband, Mark, Gutfeld exploded.

“What is interesting here is, why is only this happening on the left and not the right?” he asked. “That’s all we need to know.”

“You wanna talk about Melissa Hortman?” he shouted at her. “Did you know her name before it happened? None of us did. None of us were spending every single day talking about Mrs. Hortman — I never heard of her until after she died.”

“So, it doesn’t matter?” Tarlov asked.

“Don’t play that bulls— with me!” Gutfeld fumed . “You know what I’m talking … What I’m saying is there was no demonization, amplification about that woman before she died. It was a specific crime against her by somebody who knew her.”

No evidence has been publicly presented that the alleged killer of the Hortmans, Vance Boelter, knew the couple. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Boelter “had a list of possible targets,” and investigators have suggested that the suspect’s right-wing political views played a role in the attacks.

Carr’s assail of Kimmel is the latest attack against the media by Trump and his administration. Trump sued ABC last year in a case that the network paid $15 million to settle. On Monday, the president filed a $15-billion defamation lawsuit against the New York Times and four of its reporters.

In July, CBS announced it would not be renewing the storied network franchise, “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert,” claiming that the show’s cancellation was a financial decision. But the timing suggested the network was pandering to Trump in order to grease the wheels for a merger between its parent company, Paramount, and Skydance Media. The merger was awaiting the FCC’s approval. A few weeks after CBS agreed to pay $16 million to settle Trump’s lawsuit against CBS News’ “60 Minutes,” the merger was approved.

Ratings for late-night television have been slipping over the last decade due to a number of factors, including the decline of linear TV as a whole and changing viewing habits with the advent of streaming and online engagement. In the 1990s, for example, Johnny Carson’s final episode in 1992 drew 50 million viewers. Letterman averaged around 7.8 million viewers in the same year. In the second quarter of 2025, “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” topped the 11:35 p.m. hour with an average of 2.417 million viewers. “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” came in second with an average of 1.772 million viewers. NBC’s “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon” finished third with an average of 1.188 million viewers.

On Wednesday, Trump posted a celebratory comment about Kimmel’s show being pulled: “Great News for America: The ratings challenged Jimmy Kimmel Show is CANCELLED. Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done,” Trump wrote. “Kimmel has ZERO talent, and worse ratings than even Colbert, if that’s possible. That leaves Jimmy and Seth, two total losers, on Fake News NBC. Their ratings are also horrible. Do it NBC!!! President DJT”

But the true loser here isn’t Trump’s critics or his enemy, the left. It’s freedom of speech.

This post was originally published on this site

Comics have long been on the front lines of democracy, the canary in the cat’s mouth, Looney Tunes style, when it comes to free speech being swallowed by regressive politics.

So Jimmy Kimmel is in good company, though he may not like this particular historical party: Zero Mostel; Philip Loeb; even Lenny Bruce, who claimed, after being watched by the FBI and backroom blacklisted, that he was less a comic and more “the surgeon with the scalpel for false values.”

During that era of McCarthyism in the 1950s (yes, I know Bruce’s troubles came later), America endured an attack on our 1st Amendment right to make fun of who we want, how we want — and survived — though careers and even lives were lost.

Maybe we aren’t yet at the point of a new House Un-American Activities Committee, but the moment is feeling grim.

Wake up, Los Angeles. This isn’t a Jimmy Kimmel problem. This is a Los Angeles problem.

This is about punishing people who speak out. It’s about silencing dissent. It’s about misusing government power to go after enemies. You don’t need to agree with Kimmel’s politics to see where this is going.

For a while, during Trump 2.0, the ire of the right was aimed at California in general and San Francisco in particular, that historical lefty bastion that, with its drug culture, openly LBGTQ+ ethos and Pelosi-Newsom political dynasty, seemed to make it the perfect example of what some consider society’s failures.

But really, the difficulty with hating San Francisco is that it doesn’t care. It’s a city that has long acknowledged, even flaunted, America’s discomfort with it. That’s why the infamous newspaper columnist Herb Caen dubbed it “Baghdad by the Bay” more than 80 years ago, when the town had already fully embraced its outsider status.

Los Angeles, on the other hand, has never considered itself a problem. Mostly, we’re too caught up in our own lives, through survival or striving, to think about what others think of our messy, vibrant, complicated city. Add to that, Angelenos don’t often think of themselves as a singular identity. There are a million different L.A.s for the more than 9 million people who live in our sprawling county.

But to the rest of America, L.A. is increasingly a specific reality, a place that, like San Francisco once did, embodies all that is wrong for a certain slice of the American right.

It was not happenstance that President Trump chose L.A. as the first stop for his National Guard tour, or that ICE’s roving patrols are on our streets. It’s not bad luck or even bad decisions that is driving the push to destroy UCLA as we know it.

And it’s really not what Kimmel said about Charlie Kirk that got him pulled, because it truth, his statements were far from the most offensive that have been uttered on either side of the political spectrum.

In fact, he wasn’t talking about Kirk, but about his alleged killer and how in the immediate aftermath, there was endless speculation about his political beliefs. Turns out that Kimmel wrongly insinuated the suspect was conservative, though all of us will likely have to wait until the trial to gain a full understanding of the evidence.

“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, before making fun of Trump’s response to the horrific killing.

You can support what Kimmel said or be deeply offended by it. But it is rich for the people who just a few years ago were saying liberal “cancel culture” was ruining America to adopt the same tactics.

If you need proof that this is more about control than content, look no further than Trump’s social media post on the issue, which directly encourages NBC to fire its own late-night hosts, who have made their share of digs at the president as well.

“Kimmel has ZERO talent, and worse ratings than even Colbert, if that’s possible. That leaves Jimmy and Seth, two total losers, on Fake News NBC. Their ratings are also horrible. Do it NBC!!!” Trump wrote.

This is about making an example of America’s most vibrant and inclusive city, and the celebrity icons who dare to diss — the place that exemplifies better than any other what freedom looks like, lives like, jokes like.

If a Kimmel can fall so easily, what does that mean the career of Hannah Einbinder, who shouted out a “free Palestine” at the Emmys? Will there be a quiet fear of hiring her?

What does it mean for a union leader like David Huerta, who is still facing charges after being detained at an immigration protest? Will people think twice before joining a demonstration?

What does it mean for you? The yous who live lives of expansiveness and inclusion. The yous who have forged your own path, made your own way, broken the boundaries of traditional society whether through your choices on who to love, what country to call your own, how to think of your identity or nurture your soul.

You, Los Angeles, with your California dreams and anything-goes attitude, are the living embodiment of everything that needs to be crushed.

I am not trying to send you into an anxiety spiral, but it’s important to understand what we stand to lose if civil rights continue to erode.

Kimmel having his speech censored is in league with our immigrant neighbors being rounded up and detained; the federal government financially pressuring doctors into dropping care for transgender patients, and the University of California being forced to turn over the names of staff and students it may have a beef with.

Being swept up by ICE may seem vastly different than a millionaire celebrity losing his show, but they are all the weaponization of government against its people.

It was Disney, not Donald Trump, who took action against Kimmel. But Federal Communications Commission chair Brendan Carr threatening to “take action” if ABC did not sounds a lot like the way the White House talks about Washington, Oakland and so many other blue cities, L.A. at the top of the list.

Our Black mayor. Our Latino senator and representatives. Our 1 million undocumented residents. Our nearly 10% of the adult population identifies as LGBTQ+. Our comics, musicians, actors and writers who have long pushed us to see the world in new, often difficult, ways.

Many of us are here because other places didn’t want us, didn’t understand us, tried to hold us back. (I am in Sacramento now, but remain an Angeleno at heart.) We came here, to California and Los Angeles, for the protection this state and city offers.

But now it needs our protection.

However this assault on democracy comes, we are all Jimmy Kimmel — we are all at risk. The very nature of this place is under siege, and standing together across the many fronts of these attacks is our best defense.

Seeing that they are all one attack — whether it is against a celebrity, a car wash worker or our entire city — is critical.

“Our democracy is not self-executing,” former President Obama said recently. “It depends on us all as citizens, regardless of our political affiliations, to stand up and fight for the core values that have made this country the envy of the world.”

So here we are, L.A., in a moment that requires fortitude, requires insight, requires us to stand up and say the most ridiculous thing that has every been said in a town full of absurdity:

I am Jimmy Kimmel, and I will not be silent.

This post was originally published on this site

On a Wednesday podcast, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr said ABC had to act on Jimmy Kimmel’s comments about the murder of right wing activist Charlie Kirk. “We can do it the easy way or the hard way,” the Trump appointee told right-wing commentator Benny Johnson.

The intended audience, the owners of ABC stations across the country, heard the message loud and clear. They chose the easy way.

Within hours of Carr’s comments, Nexstar, which controls 32 ABC affiliates, agreed to drop “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” indefinitely.

Walt Disney Co.-owned ABC quickly followed with its own announcement that it was pulling Kimmel from the network. Sinclair Broadcasting, a TV station company long sympathetic to conservative causes, also shelved the show and went a step further by demanding that Kimmel make a financial contribution to Kirk’s family and his conservative advocacy organization Turning Point USA.

It is not clear if or when Kimmel’s show will return.

The situation reflects the power that Carr has over the companies with outlets that still reach the largest audiences in the U.S., even in the age of streaming. Over-the-air TV and radio stations are the only media licensed by the government due to their use of the public airwaves, and Carr, whose commitment to President Trump is unwavering, holds the keys to their future.

Companies that own TV stations are desperate to make acquisition or merger deals so they can compete with the clout of tech companies. Nexstar, for example, needs the FCC’s permission for a proposed $6.2-billion acquisition of rival station operator Tegna, and other companies are expected to swap and acquire outlets as well. All deals have to get approval of the FCC, which is also being lobbied to lift the cap on how much of the U.S. station owners can cover.

That gives Carr tremendous leverage.

The latest trouble for Kimmel started Monday when he seemed to suggest during his monologue that Tyler Robinson, the Utah man accused in the shooting death of Kirk, might have been a pro-Trump Republican. He said MAGA supporters “are 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.”

Carr, during Johnson’s podcast, called Kimmel’s comments “the sickest conduct possible.” Carr, who has previously styled himself as a free speech absolutist, argues that stations have the right to pull the show if owners believe the content conflicts with community standards.

“Broadcast TV stations have always been required by their licenses to operate in the public interest — that includes serving the needs of their local communities,” he wrote Thursday on X. “And broadcasters have long retained the right to not air national programs that they believe are inconsistent with the public interest, including their local communities’ values. I am glad to see that many broadcasters are responding to their viewers as intended.”

Meanwhile, Kimmel’s future is in doubt. His staff was told not to report to work Thursday but has been given no information about the program’s future. Kimmel has yet to comment.

Top Disney executives, including Chief Executive Bob Iger — who has a close relationship with the host — and Dana Walden, co-chairman of Disney Entertainment, made the decision to bench Kimmel.

Some Disney execs were belatedly uncomfortable with Kimmel’s monologue, which became a lightning rod for conservatives on social media. The call to dump Kimmel by Nexstar, whose CEO Perry Sook has praised the administration and said lifting ownership restrictions was the company’s top priority, put pressure on Disney to act because of the number of affiliate stations it owns.

Losing Kimmel would be a major blow to ABC.

While late-night ratings are in decline and profits on his show have greatly diminished, Kimmel is a recognizable personality who is strongly identified with the network. He has emceed the Emmys and the Oscars, where he has criticized Trump from the stage, and hosted game shows in addition to “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” He’s also the current host of ABC’s “Who Wants To Be a Millionaire?” After years of ABC being a non-entity in late-night TV, Kimmel put the network in the game when he arrived in 2003 after hosting popular shows on Comedy Central.

President Trump has long been comedic fodder for late-night hosts, and now he is extracting his revenge with Carr’s help. He called for the firing of Stephen Colbert ahead of CBS’ decision to cancel his program, “The Late Show,” for financial reasons. That decision came after Colbert blasted parent Paramount, which paid $16 million to settle a Trump lawsuit to get FCC approval of its merger deal with Skydance Media.

Trump has also gone after NBC’s late-night hosts Jimmy Fallon and Seth Meyers, saying they should be next on the chopping block.

The chilling effect is already evident on ABC. “The View,” the network’s daytime talk program that airs live and regularly skewers Trump, made no mention of the Kimmel controversy on Thursday. The story was covered briefly on the network’s “Good Morning America.”

The move was quickly condemned by Hollywood unions, progressive groups, free speech organizations and Democratic politicians.

“The right to speak our minds and to disagree with each other — to disturb, even — is at the very heart of what it means to be a free people,” the Writers Guild of America West and East chapters said in a statement. “It is not to be denied. Not by violence, not by the abuse of governmental power, nor by acts of corporate cowardice.”

“If free speech applied only to ideas we like, we needn’t have bothered to write it into the Constitution,” the writers group said. “Shame on those in government who forget this founding truth. As for our employers, our words have made you rich. Silencing us impoverishes the whole world.”

Tino Gagliardi, international president of the American Federation of Musicians, which includes members of Kimmel’s band, added: “This is not complicated. Trump’s FCC identified speech it did not like and threatened ABC with extreme reprisals. This is state censorship.”

Four prominent unions, including Directors Guild of America and SAG-AFTRA, issued a joint statement saying the removal of Kimmel “under government pressure” has added further uncertainty to the Hollywood workforce, which already has been reeling from a cutback in film and television production.

FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez, the lone Democrat on the three-member panel, said the agency “does not have the authority, the ability, or the constitutional right to police content or punish broadcasters for speech the government dislikes.” Gomez also was sharply critical of Disney, calling out what she called as “cowardly corporate capitulation.”

Disney has not commented beyond its initial announcement.

Gomez referenced an incident earlier in the week, when Trump threatened ABC News correspondent Jonathan Karl after the president bristled over a question Karl asked about a crackdown on free speech. Trump said Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi might “go after” the reporter “because you treat me so unfairly.”

“We cannot allow an inexcusable act of political violence to be twisted into a justification for government censorship and control,” Gomez said.

This post was originally published on this site

WASHINGTON — At a banquet table fit for a king, but set specially for him, President Trump called his state visit to the United Kingdom this week “one of the highest honors of my life.”

He then proceeded to tell guests at the white tie event that the United States was “a very sick country” last year before becoming “the hottest” again under his rule.

During a news conference with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer at the Chequers estate Thursday, hailing a bilateral deal on artificial intelligence investments said to be worth hundreds of billions of dollars, Trump called America’s relationship with Britain “unbreakable,” bigger than any single esoteric policy disagreement.

But he quickly pivoted from magnanimity on the world stage, denying the results of his 2020 election defeat and calling exclusively on conservative reporters, who asked questions about Britain’s Christian nature and his predecessor’s alleged use of an autopen.

It was a familiar study in contrasts from the president, who routinely mixes diplomacy with domestic politics in his meetings with foreign leaders. Yet the sound of Trump engaging in fractious political discourse — not at the White House or a political event in Florida or Missouri, but inside Britain’s most revered halls — struck a discordant tone.

The Mirror, a national British tabloid aligned with Starmer’s Labour Party, wrote that Trump’s “wild … political rant” at Windsor Castle alongside King Charles III “seriously broke royal protocol.”

On Wednesday evening, as the formal banquet concluded, Trump took to his social media platform to designate a far left-wing political movement called Antifa as “a major terrorist organization,” describing the group as “A SICK, DANGEROUS, RADICAL LEFT DISASTER.”

The move prompted a question to Starmer at the Chequers news conference from a right-ring reporter on whether he would consider taking similar action against leftist British groups.

“We obviously will take decisions for ourselves. I don’t want to comment on the decisions of the president,” Starmer said. “But we take our decisions ourselves.”

In another exchange, Trump repeated dramatically exaggerated figures on the number of undocumented migrants who entered the United States during the Biden administration, as well as false claims about the 2020 presidential election.

“I don’t want to be controversial, but you see what’s happened, and you see all the information that’s come out,” Trump said. “We won in 2020, big. And I said, let’s run. We gotta run. Because I saw what’s happening.”

The Royal Family went beyond its own rule book to show Trump extraordinary hospitality, honoring the president’s arrival with a 41-gun salute typically reserved for special, domestic occasions, such as the king’s birthday.

King Charles was hosting Trump for an unprecedented second state visit — a gesture never before extended to an American president — after the king’s mother, Queen Elizabeth II, greeted him at Windsor in 2019.

“That’s a first and maybe that’s going to be the last time. I hope it is, actually,” Trump said in his banquet speech, prompting the king to chuckle and balk.

At the stunning dinner, along a table seating 160 people in St. George’s Hall, guests were offered a 1912 cognac honoring the birth year of the president’s Scottish-born mother, as well as a whiskey cocktail inspired by his heritage. The president, for his part, does not drink.

First Lady Melania Trump, left, President Trump, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Lady Victoria Starmer watch the Red Devils parachute display team at Chequers, the country home of the British prime minister, on Thursday.

(Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)

But it is unclear whether the king’s soft-power diplomacy helped shift Trump closer to London’s priorities on foreign affairs. A growing chorus in Britain opposes Israel’s continued military operations in Gaza, and major U.K. parties are aligned on a moral and strategic need to support Ukraine against Russia’s invasion.

“Our countries have the closest defense, security and intelligence relationship ever known,” Charles said at the dinner. “In two world wars, we fought together to defeat the forces of tyranny.

“Today, as tyranny once again threatens Europe, we and our allies stand together in support of Ukraine, to deter aggression and secure peace,” the king added.

A king’s request for Europe

Trump’s reciprocal remarks did not mention Ukraine. But at Chequers, the president repeated his general disappointment with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the ongoing war, a conflict Putin has escalated with attacks on civilians and the British Council building in Kyiv since meeting with Trump in Alaska a month ago.

“He’s let me down. He’s really let me down,” said Trump, offering no details on what steps he might take next.

Starmer, pressing to leverage the pomp of Trump’s state visit for actionable policy change, said that a coordinated response to Putin’s aggression would be forthcoming and “decisive.”

“In recent days, Putin has shown his true face, mounting the biggest attack since the invasion began, with yet more bloodshed, yet more innocents killed, and unprecedented violations of NATO airspace,” Starmer said, referencing Russia’s Sept. 9 drone flights over Poland. “These are not the actions of someone who wants peace.”

“It’s only when the president has put pressure on Putin,” Starmer added, “that he’s actually shown any inclination to move.”

This post was originally published on this site

Following outrage over comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s innocuous remarks about the shooting death of Charlie Kirk, the network caved, and the late-night comedian’s show will now be preempted “indefinitely.” Cancel culture is real from the right. Donald Trump took to Truth Social to take a victory lap, then set his target on two more comedians, who have hurt his fragile feelings.

Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom slammed the move, calling it “dangerous.”

“Buying and controlling media platforms,” Newsom wrote on Xitter. “Firing commentators. Canceling shows.”

“These aren’t coincidences,” he added. “It’s coordinated. And it’s dangerous. The @GOP does not believe in free speech. They are censoring you in real time.”

He’s right. They are censoring us in real time, and MAGA is cheering it on. If you’re a Fox News personality, it’s OK to suggest killing unhoused Americans, including Veterans, as Brian Killpeople did last week. Kilmeade later offered a shitty apology over his thoroughly appalling remarks. But there are no takey-backsies when you call for killing vulnerable citizens.

And yet, FCC Chair Brendan Carr threatened to take away ABC’s broadcasting license with the false claim that Kimmel had “deliberately [misled] the public by claiming Charlie Kirk’s assassin was a MAGA Conservative.” That’s not what Kimmel said, though, and Carr knows it.

As Newsom suggested, these are deliberate moves. This is a five-alarm fire, which shouldn’t be confused with all the other five-alarm fires set off by the Trump administration. We’re not headed into fascism. We’re there already, and it’s going to get worse.

Also, for the people in the back, release the Epstein Files.

This post was originally published on this site

The Wall Street Journal and other media outlets are facing widespread criticism after publishing a false report that the assassin who shot right-wing activist Charlie Kirk in Utah this week had left behind symbols of “transgender ideology” at the scene of the crime.

On Thursday, with the assassin still at large, the Journal published a news update stating that “investigators found ammunition engraved with expressions of transgender and antifascist ideology inside the rifle that authorities believe was used in the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk.” The report did not identify what these markings were nor the source of the report, instead attributing it to “an internal law enforcement bulletin and a person familiar with the investigation.”

The New York Times reported hours later that the bulletin came from the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), but noted that “a senior law enforcement official with direct knowledge of the investigation cautioned that the report had not been verified by ATF analysts, did not match other summaries of the evidence, and might turn out to have been misread or misinterpreted.”

It was later revealed that the Wall Street Journal‘s source of the initial unconfirmed bulletin was Steven Crowder, another far-right influencer known for his antagonism of transgender people.

On Friday, officials revealed the identity of the suspect, a 22-year-old cisgender white man named Tyler Robinson, and Utah Gov. Spencer Cox (R) described the marked engravings in detail.

As Erin Reed, a transgender journalist who reports on LGBTQ+ rights, explained, “none were ‘transgender’ or ‘LGBTQ’ symbols”:

The bullet that killed Charlie Kirk was engraved with the phrase “notices bulges owo what’s this”—a furry and anime meme that has circulated online for a decade, generally meant as a joke about something unexpected. Three other unfired casings were recovered: “hey fascist! Catch! ↑ → ↓↓↓,” a reference to the Helldivers 2 video game code used to drop the 500kg bomb; “O bella ciao, bella ciao, ciao, ciao,” the Italian anti-fascist folk song; and “If you read this you are gay lmao,” a trolling insult common in meme subcultures.

In other words: internet detritus. Not a single engraving had anything to do with “transgender symbols,” let alone the trans community.

Data shows transgender people are no more likely to commit acts of gun violence than any other group. According to data from the Gun Violence Archive from the past decade analyzed by The Trace in July, out of more than 5,300 mass shootings, just four of them were committed by a person who identified as transgender or nonbinary.

Despite this, many right-wing activists online have attempted to foment the narrative of a “transgender violence epidemic,” often preemptively blaming trans people for shootings that turn out to be perpetrated by others.

This narrative has reached the Trump administration, with the Department of Justice reportedly considering a policy to strip transgender people of the right to own firearms following a school shooting in Minneapolis in August, that was carried out by a transgender person.

Following Kirk’s assassination, Donald Trump Jr. said in a Fox News interview, “I frankly can’t name a mass shooting in the last year or two in America that wasn’t committed by a transgender lunatic that’s been pumped up on probably hormones since they were 3-year-olds.”

Even after law enforcement and the Journal had begun to walk back the initial report that “transgender ideology” had influenced Kirk’s murder, Reed wrote, “the damage was already done, with the falsehood ricocheting across the internet.” By this point, numerous media outlets, including the Daily Beast, the New York Post, The Telegraph, and others, had already repeated the claim.

As Reed noted, “conservative influencers flooded social media blaming the killing on transgender people,” in some cases using dehumanizing rhetoric.

One conservative activist, Joey Mannarino, who has nearly 640,000 followers on X, and often interacts with elected Republicans, wrote: “If the person who killed Charlie Kirk was a transgender, there can be no mercy for that species any longer. We’ve already tolerated far too much from those creatures.”

The falsehood even reached Capitol Hill. Even as law enforcement said Thursday it still had no identity for the shooter, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) told reporters, “It sounds like the shooter was a tranny, or pro-tranny.”

Trump Jr., meanwhile, continued to assert that there was “trans paraphernalia written on the cartridges of this rifle that killed one of my dearest friends in life.” He described being transgender as “an absolute sickness.”

The Journal is now facing harsh criticism for spreading an unverified report that has further fueled the right’s demonization of transgender Americans.

“The FBI and Wall Street Journal doing a ‘whoops, our bad’ after spending a day saying they had evidence it was a trans antifa shooter is so deeply messed up,” wrote Ryan Grim of Drop Site News on X.

Charlotte Clymer, a transgender writer, called it a “truly disgusting week for American journalism.”

“Nearly 48 hours of relentless anti-trans propaganda and news reports over the murder of Charlie Kirk, and all of that for not a single shred of evidence that trans people or trans rights had anything to do with it,” Clymer said. “When do we get a retraction from the Wall Street Journal for erroneously claiming the assassination was related to trans people? When do we get apologies from every journalist who spread that disinformation?”

As criticism has continued to mount, the Journal added an editor’s note to the initial article, acknowledging that Cox “gave no indication that the ammunition included any transgender references.”

Jeet Heer, a columnist for The Nation wrote in response that the Journal’s reporting on this issue was “a scandal.”

“The news section of the Wall Street Journal has tarnished its great reputation,” Heer wrote. “The only way to recover is to appoint a public editor to review this and explain how it happened to readers.”

NOTE: This article has been updated to include the Wall Street Journal‘s editor’s note and subsequent criticism from Jeet Heer.

Republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

This post was originally published on this site

Trump’s pedo-protector, Deputy Atty. General Todd Blanche with the most pathetic response yet when asked about his so-called “interview” with Epstein accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell. As we’ve noted here, Trump has hinted at pardoning Maxwell, and she was moved to a cushy country club prison after shilling for Trump when she spoke to Blanche.

Blanche made an appearance on CNN this Tuesday, and was asked by Kaitlan Collins whether he believed Maxwell during the interview. Blanche initially tried to skirt the question entirely. Collins followed up and Blanche proceeded to spin like a top:

COLLINS: But when you met with her, did you find her to be credible?

BLANCHE: It’s an impossible question to answer. I met with her for two days. To determine whether a witness is credible takes weeks and weeks and weeks. I asked her questions that — that I believe all of us wanted answered, and she answered them. She answered them.

I didn’t — the point of the interview was not for me to pressure-test every single answer she gave. Of course, not. The point of the interview was to give her an opportunity to speak, which nobody had done before. And so, she had been — she had been in prison for many, many years, and she had offered to speak on many, many occasions, and she was never given that opportunity. And so, what I did is I gave her that opportunity to speak. It was recorded. My questions were there.

And whether — whether her answers were credible or truthful, there’s a lot of information out there about — about Mr. Epstein, about her, and whether she — what she said is completely wrong, or completely right, or a little of both, is for — that’s the reason why we released the transcript. That’s why we were transparent about the questions I asked, and the answers she gave, is because it’s really up to the American people to determine whether they believe that her answers were credible, or whether they found her not credible.

She was given plenty of opportunities to “speak” and she’s in jail because she’s a pedophile, a predator and a liar. Collins should have followed up and taken him to task for this nonsense, but thanked him and ended the interview instead.

This post was originally published on this site

The abrupt suspension of comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show on ABC might seem like the least of our worries amid the shuttering of government agencies, the collapse of congressional checks on executive power and bands of ICE agents detaining people on the basis of race or language. But humor matters.

While the news media is sometimes referred to as the fourth estate, alongside the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, few think of stand-up comedy as a pillar of democracy. But jokes allow a society to mock itself, spotlight uncomfortable truths, bridge differences and say what cannot otherwise be said. Humor is a crucial bulwark of a free society. To play that role, comedians need the leeway to embarrass, provoke and take risks, sometimes crossing the line into offense.

In the wake of Kimmel’s suspension it is hard to imagine any mass market humorist poking fun with abandon that biting satire demands. One of the most powerful salves for people under stress, and a particular lifeline during the Trump era, is the ability to laugh at the ridiculous or unfathomable. Lowering a curtain on comedy will not only dim one of our country’s most treasured cultural forms, but also accelerate the dark turn of American democracy.

Dating back to pre-revolutionary times, political satire has been a mainstay of American culture. Rebellious colonists skewered British taxation policies, military blunders and parliamentary pomposities through plays, songs and cartoons that rallied others to the cause of independence and made mass mobilization fun. Benjamin Franklin’s 1773 “Rules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One” used irony to lampoon British policy, undermining authority while avoiding direct flouting of the era’s harsh sedition laws. The juxtaposition of a lighthearted format with a pointed commentary has marked America’s comedic tradition ever since, encompassing literary humorists such as Mark Twain and Edgar Allan Poe, satirical magazines like Puck and MAD, political cartooning, vaudeville, radio satire, stand-up and the late-night juggernauts of variety shows, talk shows and, since 1975, “Saturday Night Live.”

While our 1st Amendment tradition has mostly protected satire over the years, it hasn’t prevented heavy-handed politicians from occasionally trying to silence their comedic critics. When Thomas Nast, known as the father of American political cartooning, took on New York City’s Boss Tweed and his Tammany Hall political machine in the 1870s, Tweed reportedly said: “Let’s stop those damned pictures. I don’t care so much what the papers write about me — my constituents can’t read, but damn it, they can see pictures.” But Nast kept up a furious pace of cartooning, hastening Tweed’s downfall on corruption charges.

Charlie Chaplin’s satire of capitalism and authoritarianism in films including “Modern Times” and “The Great Dictator,” alongside his outspoken politics and alleged communist ties, drew FBI surveillance. In 1952 his re-entry permit to the U.S. was revoked, effectively exiling him for nearly 20 years.

Around the world, autocrats have recognized the power of comedians to puncture preferred narratives, undermine authority and stoke dissent. The Nazi regime’s Reichskulturkammer, or chamber of culture, tightly censored cabaret and comedy. Cabaret performer Werner Finck opened a club in 1929 and dared Gestapo members in the audience to write down his every word. Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels ordered the venue shuttered in 1935 and sent Finck and his colleagues to a six-week stint in a concentration camp. In the Soviet Union, jokes about Joseph Stalin or the Communist Party were treated as serious crimes against the state, warranting time in the gulag.

In the age of international television and social media the potency, and the perceived threat, of comedy has only grown. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky built national stature as a television satirist playing a fictional president. His predecessor’s government, which did all it could to derail its political opponents, did not see Zelensky coming; until it happened, few imagined his leap from sound stage to presidential podium. In 2013 the Cairo government issued an arrest warrant for television comic Bassem Youssef, known as the Jon Stewart of Egypt, for jokes about President Mohamed Morsi and Islam. He was hounded into exile and has lived in the U.S. for the last decade.

In an increasingly polarized America, the place of comedy has been under attack from all sides. A decade ago Jerry Seinfeld said he would no longer do shows on college campuses because of ferocious politically correct backlash against his jokes. In 2019 the New York Times announced it would no longer publish political cartoons after apologizing for an antisemitic caricature of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This year the White House Correspondents’ Dinner canceled a planned appearance by comedian Amber Ruffin, the latest in a series of kerfuffles over controversial emcees of that event. The rising cost of reprisals, in the form of offended constituencies, online outrage and direct threats, is increasingly rendering humor too hot to handle.

The public threats issued by Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr against Kimmel and ABC, based upon comments by the comedian that were neither incendiary nor menacing, marks a sharp escalation in the battle against humor. The immediate capitulation of Disney, one of America’s largest and most revered corporations, is a shocking sign of just how quickly private, independent institutions are melting down under heated threat by a vindictive administration. If a comedian as mainstream as Jimmy Kimmel is not safe from silencing, it is hard to imagine who is.

In helping audiences understand what is happening around them and reckon with their fears, comedy is both a collective coping mechanism and a catalyst for unfettered, clear-eyed thought. Autocrats around the world understand this.

Suzanne Nossel is a senior fellow for U.S. foreign policy and international order at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the author of “Dare to Speak: Defending Free Speech for All.”

This post was originally published on this site

Donald Trump continued his serial lying in Ayelsbury, England, when he said 25 million people came over the border, inflation is down, and he won big in the 2020 general election.

Trump had so much orange bronzer painted on his face that he blended into the background of the two flags behind him.

He looks like a sarcophagus with two slits for eyes, but at least a sarcophagus wouldn’t be spewing lie after lie on foreign soil.

TRUMP: Millions of people flowing in, totally unchecked, totally unvetted by the Biden administration. 25 million, in my opinion, that would be about 25 million.

They came from prisons. They came from mental institutions. They were gang members. They were drug dealers. They came from the Congo. They came from all parts of South America. They came from everywhere. Think of it.

Prisoners from the Congo are being released into the United States. Prisons opened up in Venezuela and many other countries, pouring into the United States. And I couldn’t believe it.

Trump is claiming the entire population of the state of Florida is made up of criminals who crossed the border unimpeded.

Where are they? Soon, he’ll say it was 50 million people.

Now comes the BIG LIE on the 2020 presidential election.

TRUMP: One of the reasons I decided to run, I decided to run because I don’t want to be controversial. (WTF?)

But you see what’s happened and you see all the information that’s come out.

We won in 2020 big.

And I said, let’s run.

We got to run because I saw what was happening. And the worst thing that I saw was all of these people.

Trump lost by almost 8 million votes and nothing their election deniers and treasonous minions have claimed were true.

Ask Fox News how it felt to pay 787 million for election fraud lies.

TRUMP: You know, we’ve already solved inflation.

We’ve solved prices.

Oil is way down.

Energy is way down the United States. But what what I saw happening with millions of people pouring into our country, I couldn’t, I couldn’t stand to watch it.

The Gooogle machine tells us that “U.S. Inflation increased to 2.9% for the 12 months ending August 2025, a rise from the previous month’s rate of 2.7%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.”

Trump’s yo-yo tariffs are hitting the middle class now.

Why doesn’t FCC Brendan Carr ban Trump for lying to the public?

This post was originally published on this site

FBI Director Kash Patel testified under oath before the House Judiciary Committee he didn’t know how many times Donald Trump’s name appeared in the Epstein Files.

Patel didn’t say he never saw Trump’s name within the files, only that he don’t know how many times his name had appeared. This means Trump’s name is in the Epstein files.

Rep. Lofgren cut to the chase and got down to business. Patel danced around other questions and used the term “not accurate” as opposed to “that never happened.”

LOFGREN: Were the agents who were pulled from their duties to redact the President’s name from the Epstein files working on criminal cases or national security cases or child sex trafficking cases and are the number of agents that have been reported diverted for these purposes, is that accurate?

PATEL: No.

LOFGREN: No what?

PATEL: You asked if it was accurate, I said it wasn’t.

LOFGREN: So you’re saying that none of this happened?

PATEL: No, I’m saying it was inaccurate.

FBI agents were redacting Trump’s name from the Epstein FIles.

Gotcha.

Now comes the BIG reveal.

LOFGREN: I asked you, how many times did the President’s name appear?

PATEL: I don’t know.

LOFGREN: It’s your testimony.

You do not know that answer.

The number of times?

PATEL: No.

Wow.

Patel is careful in his answer so he can’t be brought up on perjury charges later.

The FBI Director all but confirmed Trump’s name appears in the files.