ReportWire

Tag: assassination

  • No, Gov. Tim Walz was not involved in lawmaker’s killing

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump amplified the unsubstantiated claim that Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz ordered a state lawmaker’s assassination. 

    In June, a gunman attacked Minnesota lawmakers, shooting and killing state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark, and shooting and injuring state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife Yvette.

    Vance Luther Boelter, 58, of Green Isle, Minnesota, was arrested June 15 on murder and attempted murder charges in connection with the shootings.

    Months later, Trump gave air to unproven conspiracy theories about Boelter’s motivation and mischaracterized the suspect’s connection to Walz. 

    “Did Tim Walz really have Melissa Hoertman assassinated???” read text on the video Trump shared in a Jan. 3 Truth Social post, misspelling Hortman’s name. 

    There is no evidence that Walz, the 2024 Democratic vice presidential nominee, was involved in the attack, which investigators described as politically motivated. The claim stems from a link between Walz and Boelter that sparked wild theories from conservative influencers. Hortman, a former House speaker, was a member of the state’s Democratic Farm Labor Party, as are Hoffman and Walz.

    The Trump administration did not respond to our request for comment. 

    Hortman’s children asked Trump to remove his post, the Minnesota Star Tribune reported. Republican state Sen. Julia Coleman called for people to reject “baseless conspiracy theories.” Walz and U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., also condemned Trump’s post.

    Months after announcing he would seek a third term as governor, Walz dropped out of the Minnesota governor race Jan. 5, amid questions of fraud in his state.  

    Minnesota Democratic Rep. Melissa Hortman, then House speaker, stands in front of a bookshelf in her office in St. Paul, Minn., May 23, 2023. Hortman and her husband, Mark, were fatally shot at their home June 14, 2025.

    The video draws on unproven theories about the attack

    The video Trump shared included multiple falsehoods, including that Boelter had been “Tim Walz’s aide” and that Boelter worked for Walz “for years.” 

    Conservative influencers first said Walz was implicated in the attack after noticing that in 2019 Walz reappointed Boelter to serve as a “business member” on the Governor’s Workforce Development Board, a nonpartisan group charged with advising the governor and Legislature on workforce policy. Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton, a Democratic Farmer Labor Party member, first appointed Boelter to the board in 2016, the Minnesota Star Tribune reported.

    The board has about 60 members from the public sector, the private sector, organized labor and community-based groups, its website said. The governor appoints 41 of its members.

    Walz’s spokesperson told PolitiFact in June that appointments to the workforce board aren’t the same as positions in the governor’s office or cabinet, and that Walz had no relationship with Boelter. 

    Steve Kalina, who places himself on the other side of the political spectrum from Walz and has served on the governor’s workforce board since 2019, told the Star Tribune in June that the board does not interact with the governor on a regular basis.

    “It’s goofy to make those stretches that the suspect was a close tie to the governor, a close appointee,” Kalina said. 

    The video said that Boelter had written a letter to the FBI saying “it was Tim Walz who forced him” to attack the Democratically-aligned lawmakers. 

    In July, federal prosecutors said Boelter had confessed to the shootings in a handwritten letter in which he’d also claimed to be acting on secret orders from Walz. Boelter said Walz had instructed him to kill Minnesota’s U.S. senators because “Tim wants to be senator.” Boelter wrote that he acted only after someone threatened his family. 

    The acting U.S. attorney prosecuting the case against Boelter said the letter was fantasy.

    People attend a candlelight vigil for former House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark, who were fatally shot, at the state Capitol, June 18, 2025, in St. Paul, Minn. (AP)

    No evidence the killing was linked to Hortman’s immigrant health care vote

    The video said Hortman had been killed in part because she voted “to take away health care from illegal immigrants.” 

    Before she was killed, Hortman voted with Republicans to pass a bill that included a measure removing adults who are in the U.S. illegally from the state’s MinnesotaCare health program. Hortman opposed the measure, but voted for it as part of a budget compromise. 

    Law enforcement officials have not linked Hortman’s killing to the vote. Officials said Boelter had carefully planned his attack and had a list of dozens of Democratic targets in Minnesota and at least three other states.

    After Trump posted the video, Melissa Hortman’s son, Colin, told the Star Tribune that his mother had voted for the bill because it was the only way to avoid a government shutdown. 

    The video also appeared to conflate Hortman’s health care vote and fraud scandals roiling Minnesota. The state’s oversight of federal and state funds had already been under scrutiny when conservative influencer Nick Shirley claimed in a YouTube video that Somali-run day care facilities in Minnesota had fraudulently taken funds meant to help low-income families afford childcare. 

    The day care allegations follow other high-profile fraud incidents in Minnesota: In 2022, dozens of people, most of them Somali, were charged in connection with a fraud scheme; prosecutors alleged the group stole $250 million in federal child nutrition programs. Late last year, federal prosecutors announced initial charges related to what they said were other welfare fraud schemes in Minnesota.

    The video said the fraud scandals all tie “back to Walz.” It questioned whether Hortman was killed “because she voted against a multibillion-dollar money laundering fraud” that “heavily implicated illegal aliens,” and Somali migrants in particular. An estimated 100,000 people who identify as Somali live in Minnesota and the majority are U.S. citizens.

    Law enforcement officials have not linked Hortman’s killing to fraud. 

    The Trump administration responded to these fraud allegations by freezing federal child care funds in several states and expanding its immigration crackdown. 

    Minnesota’s initial probe into the day care fraud claims has not uncovered widespread wrongdoing, CNN reported. State officials reported that the child care centers Shirley’s video accused of fraud were operating normally. The Minnesota Star Tribune and CBS News investigated the day care centers in Shirley’s video, finding that at least seven of the businesses’ received citations for various violations, but no evidence of fraud. 

    Our ruling 

    Trump shared a video that alleged Walz had Hortman killed. 

    In 2019, Walz reappointed Boelter to a state board, but we found no evidence the two were closely acquainted or that Walz was somehow linked to the shootings. Boelter was first appointed to the board by Walz’s predecessor. Walz’s spokesperson previously said the governor appoints thousands of people of all political affiliations to boards and commissions and Walz had no relationship with Boelter. 

    In July, prosecutors said Boelter had alleged in a letter that he was acting on Walz’s orders, but they dismissed the letter’s claim as unsubstantiated fantasy. Prosecutors have named no other suspects in the case.

    We rate Trump’s claim that Walz had Hortman assassinated False.

    PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.

    RELATED: How conservative X accounts promoted wild theory implicating Gov. Tim Walz in lawmaker’s killing 

    RELATED: Tim Walz says he takes responsibility for jailing MN fraudsters. He’s wrong

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Mystery of the Political Assassin

    [ad_1]

    As political acts go, an assassination is more like a natural disaster than a controlled explosion: it will wreak havoc, it will often change the course of history, but its perpetrators can never know in what direction. When Gavrilo Princip shot Archduke Franz Ferdinand, in 1914, his objective was South Slavic independence from the Austro-Hungarian Empire; what he got was the First World War and the slaughter of millions. On the other hand, in 1995, when a far-right extremist assassinated the Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, at a rally in support of the Oslo peace accords, he could be said to have achieved precisely what he intended: the lasting destruction of the peace process. For that reason, Rabin’s killing is sometimes called the most “successful” assassination in modern history.

    These appear to be two substantially different acts. But, if you go by the historian Simon Ball’s rubric in “Death to Order: A Modern History of Assassination,” they share a key set of characteristics. “Before 1914, assassination was the preserve of disgruntled individuals, plotters in royal courts, or small groups of fanatics pursuing lost causes,” Ball writes. Princip established a new template: even if the outcome of an assassination proved chaotic, the intention behind it generally was not. The assassin had become a rational figure, precise in his targeting, legibly motivated, and, crucially, often part of a wider movement or conspiracy to topple those in power. Though we usually hear about Princip alone, he acted along with a seven-man assassination squad, tied to a much larger underground network. The man who shot Rabin belonged to a burgeoning movement whose adherents included Itamar Ben-Gvir, a politician who threatened Rabin on live television shortly before his assassination, and who now serves as Israel’s minister of national security.

    Historically, Ball notes, the “direct results of assassination have almost always disappointed the assassins.” Rabin’s murder is one exception. Another might be the moment, in 1942, when British special agents and Czech resistance fighters acted in concert to murder Reinhard Heydrich, a brutal Nazi commander and one of the key authors of the Final Solution. It was certainly clear why, and Heydrich’s killing became “a template for ‘honourable assassination’ carried out by righteous democrats,” Ball writes. But the other consequences were horrific: the Nazis went to a village called Lidice, which had once sheltered a British radio operator, and killed all the men, sent all the women to a concentration camp, and gave the “Aryan” children to German families to raise but slaughtered the rest. Ball sums up the conclusion of the British report on the Heydrich assassination: “Technical success, operational disaster.”

    “Death to Order” is a dense, detailed, and sometimes dry read, unlikely to set a conspiracy theorist’s (or really anybody’s) blood racing, but its international scope and careful documentation are salutary. Importantly, it does not neglect state-sponsored assassination plots, especially those engineered by the C.I.A. during the Cold War. Ball manages to sound wryly appalled quoting the contents of a C.I.A. assassination manual: though murder cannot be justified, the guide advises, “killing a political leader whose burgeoning career is a clear and present danger to the cause of freedom may be held necessary,” which means that “persons who are morally squeamish should not attempt” assassination. For those who get past their qualms, the handbook recommends the “most efficient” method: dropping a person at least seventy-five feet “onto a hard surface.” Pistols are discouraged, but the manual accepts rifles, which, in the twenty-first century, have become a popular weapon of choice.

    What do assassins want now? It’s a case-by-case question, but one worth asking, not least because political violence appears to be on the rise in the United States. Among the recent notable examples are two attempts on Donald Trump’s life, including one in which a bullet struck him as he spoke at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, in 2024; the attempted arson of Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro’s home, in April, as he and his family slept inside; the killings, in June, of the Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark; and the murder of the right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, in September. Two weeks after the Kirk assassination, a man opened fire at an ICE facility in Dallas, killing not the officers who were his reported targets but two detainees; according to his parents, he had lately become overwhelmingly afraid that he had radiation sickness.

    A cursory appraisal of these events suggests that the age of Princip is over. We have returned to an era of disgruntled plotters and fanatics—of lone and often lonely men (many things have changed, but the vast majority of assassins are still men), whose hazy motives seem patched together by personal grievances, mental illness, and solipsistic internet quests. Thomas Matthew Crooks, the twenty-year-old who tried to kill Trump in Pennsylvania, was a registered Republican of otherwise jumbled allegiances, who seems to have been choosing between various prominent targets, including Joe Biden and Trump, in the months leading up to the event. We don’t yet know what Tyler James Robinson, the twenty-two-year-old Utah man charged with shooting Charlie Kirk, hoped to accomplish. (Robinson has not filed a plea.) The prosecutor in the case, Jeff Gray, has sketched out a scenario in which Robinson, who grew up in a Republican family, had recently moved to the left, and become, as his mother allegedly told police, “more pro-gay and trans-rights-oriented.” According to Gray, Robinson’s roommate and romantic partner was transgender. In a text exchange after Kirk’s shooting, the roommate asked Robinson why he did it. “I had enough of his hatred,” Robinson replied. “Some hatred can’t be negotiated out.” Whatever Robinson thought might happen, the short-term consequences of Kirk’s killing have included federal and local crackdowns on free speech, and a rising profile for the white supremacistNick Fuentes, who is trying to fill the vacuum left by Kirk. And as a would-be act of solidarity with trans people, if that is what it was, Kirk’s assassination left Robinson’s roommate, and arguably trans people in general, more vulnerable, not less.

    In the past, political violence in the U.S. was more likely to be carried out by groups—the left-wing Weather Underground during the nineteen-seventies; the right-wing militia and anti-abortion movements in the eighties and nineties. Now it is more often committed by individuals unaffiliated with any organization. As Rachel Kleinfeld, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, has written, there is a “deeper trend: the ‘ungrouping’ of political violence as people self-radicalize via online engagement.” The Antifa that Trump is always invoking as an all-purpose bogeyman—some lethal, disciplined underground network that resembles the Irish Republican Army—does not exist. Instead, we have individuals whose opaque, ad-hoc gestures rarely fit into a recognizable campaign. Even when they leave a message of some kind—partial manifestos, a crumb trail of social-media posts, or words etched on bullet casings—clarity is elusive. We’re left examining ghostly traces of ideas that won’t coalesce into an ideology. Speaking about the Trump shooting, Katherine Keneally, a threat-assessment expert, told the Times, “These sorts of incidents, where we can’t figure out why they did it, are becoming more common.”

    [ad_2]

    Margaret Talbot

    Source link

  • Tijuana assassination mystery deepens as Mexico arrests suspect in 1994 Colosio case

    [ad_1]

    MEXICO CITY — A breakthrough in the decades-long investigation of a political assassination that convulsed the nation?

    Or a political stunt meant to distract from more pressing issues?

    Those are the questions that emerged in Mexico after the arrest last weekend of an alleged “second shooter” in the 1994 assassination of presidential candidate Luis Donaldo Colosio, who was gunned down at a rally in the border city of Tijuana.

    His slaying is widely regarded as one of the most consequential — and contentious— events of recent Mexican history.

    Doubts and conspiracy theories have long swirled over Colosio’s killing, long blamed on a “lone gunman” who was captured at the scene. Many have compared the lingering uncertainty about Colosio’s demise to the never-ending debate in the United States surrounding the 1963 killing of President John F. Kennedy, an assassination also blamed on a lone gunman with ill-defined motives.

    Many in Mexico have disputed the prevalent theory: That an apparently nonpolitical factory worker, Mario Aburto, shot the candidate twice at point-blank range as Colosio mingled with citizens during the campaign event.

    “I looked up and saw the gun right in front of me,” Maria Vidal, who was walking with Colosio at the scene, told the Times in 1994. “Then I saw him fall to the ground. Blood was coming out of his head.”

    Colosio was shot once in the head and once in the abdomen, feeding speculation that a second gunman was involved.

    People place flowers on March 23, 2004, in tribute to Luis Donaldo Colosio during a ceremony marking the 10th anniversary of his assasination in Tijuana.

    (David Maung / Associated Press)

    Aburto, who says he was tortured into confessing, continues to serve a 45-year prison sentence.

    The Colosio case generated tens of thousands of pages of testimony from hundreds of witnesses, along with books, documentaries, and a TV miniseries on Netflix, all examining the question: What actually happened in Tijuana on March 23, 1994?

    Speculation has fingered everyone from political insiders to drug traffickers as the ones behind Colosio’s assassination, which contributed to a sense of upheaval in Mexico. The year 1994 opened with a Zapatista rebellion in the south, soon followed by Colosio’s stunning murder, and culminated with a December collapse of the peso, triggering an economic crisis.

    More than a quarter-century after the killing, Mexican writer Cuauhtémoc Ruiz captured the ubiquitous sense of ambiguity in his 2020 book, “Colosio: Sospechosos y Encubridores” — roughly, “Colosio: Suspects and Cover-ups,”

    The Colosio case even spawned its own version of the Zapruder film, the storied home-movie sequence of JFK’s assassination in Dallas. Video clips from the fateful 1994 rally show Colosio, his curly black hair flecked with confetti, shaking hands and signing autographs as he winds his way through a gleeful political crowd.

    Suddenly, the image of a hand grasping a pistol emerges from the scrum. The gun fires directly into the right side of the candidate’s head. Chaos ensues.

    On Saturday ,according to reports here, federal prosecutors in Tijuana arrested a former intelligence agent, Jorge Antonio Sánchez Ortega, who had been wanted since last year in connection with Colosio’s killing.

    Sánchez Ortega, authorities say, was part of federal protection team assigned to Colosio’s rally in Tijuana’s Lomas Taurinas neighborhood, near the city airport. The agent was arrested shortly after the killing, but prosecutors now say he was freed and whisked away as part of a cover-up. The agent’s clothing was stained with the victim’s blood, and ballistic evidence indicated he had fired a weapon, authorities say.

    His new arrest stems from a bombshell about-face last year by the office of Mexico’s attorney general, which abruptly retreated from the lone-gunman allegation. Instead, prosecutors endorsed the hypothesis of a second shooter and named as a suspect “Jorge Antonio S.,” now identified as Sánchez Ortega.

    But the former agent’s arrest has left more questions than answers. Prosecutors have provided no overarching theory on why Colosio was targeted, and who was behind his slaying.

    Neither the ex-agent or his lawyer have commented since his arrest.

    Jesús González Schmal, attorney for Aburto, the convicted assassin, hailed the arrest as a step toward clarifying what really happened to Colosio.

    “This will open a horizon of knowledge about what occurred 31 years ago,” the lawyer said in a television interview.

    But some labeled the arrest a thinly disguised attempt to distract people from more pressing current issues of crime and corruption.

    The government of President Claudia Sheinbaum is using the memory of Colosio “to cover up its ineptitude,” Alejandro Moreno Cárdenas, president of the opposition Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, declared on X. The president, he said, “has no shame and no idea of how to govern.”

    At the time of his slaying, Colosio was the presidential candidate of the PRI, which governed Mexico in authoritarian fashion for most of the 20th century. He was on track to be elected Mexico’s next president a few months later.

    Colosio, 44, was seen widely viewed as a charismatic and progressive voice inside the rigid hierarchy of the PRI. He vowed to institute reforms and clean up deeply entrenched corruption and cronyism. Some have speculated that hard-liners within the ruling party were behind his killing — a theory long rejected by the PRI leadership.

    After Colosio’s slaying, the PRI named Ernesto Zedillo, who had been Colosio’s campaign manager, as its candidate. Zedillo, a party loyalist and lackluster technocrat, won in a landslide and served a six-year term.

    But, these days, the PRI is a weakened minority player in opposition to the government of Sheinbaum, elected under the banner of the now-dominant Morena party.

    The arrest of an alleged accomplice in the Colosio killing comes days after another high-profile political assassination, this time of Mayor Carlos Manzo of the western city of Uruapan. He was gunned down at a Day of the Dead festival this month in what some call Mexico’s most sensational political assassination since Colosio’s slaying.

    The killing of Manzo — who assailed Sheinbaum’s government for not doing more to combat cartels — sparked massive protests in his home state of Michoacán, a cartel battleground. Many criticized Sheinbaum’s government for what they called its lax attitude toward organized crime, an allegation denied by the president.

    A generation after his assassination, Colosio’s slaying remains an epochal event that continues to cast a shadow over Mexican politics.

    Special correspondent Cecilia Sánchez Vidal in Mexico City contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Patrick J. McDonnell

    Source link

  • Why the Mexican president refuses to restart the drug war despite mayor’s assassination

    [ad_1]

    MEXICO CITY — Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum ruled out a new “war on drugs” as a response to the assassination of a regional mayor who was shot at a Day of the Dead celebration, a brazen killing that has sparked national outrage.

    “Returning to the war against el narco is not an option,” Sheinbaum told reporters Monday, referring to the bloody anti-crime offensive launched almost two decades ago. “Mexico already did that, and the violence got worse.”

    The president spoke as the nation was reeling from the killing Saturday of Carlos Manzo, mayor of Uruapan in the west-central state of Michoacán, which has become an organized-crime battleground. She condemned the assassination as “vile” and vowed to track down his killers.

    While Mexican mayors and other local officials are frequent cartel targets — scores have been assassinated in recent years as gangs fight for control of city halls, budgets and police forces — the killing of Manzo struck a nerve nationwide.

    A crowd in Uruapan, Mexico, mourns Mayor Carlos Manzo, who was fatally shot over the weekend during a Day of the Dead celebration in the city.

    (Eduardo Verdugo / Associated Press)

    Manzo, 40, gained notoriety as an outspoken proponent of taking a hard-line against the cartels that have overrun many regions of Mexico. According to Manzo, police and prosecutors coddle criminals ill-deserving of legal protections.

    Manzo’s unyielding stance won him considerable popularity in a nation where polls show security remains citizens’ major concern — despite Sheinbaum’s frequent citing of official figures showing that homicides and other violent crimes are decreasing.

    “The murder of the mayor is a clear signal of what we all know but what the government of President Sheinbaum denies: The country is governed by narco-traffickers,” Felipe Rosas Montesinos, 45, a flower salesman in Mexico City, said. “And if anyone challenges el narco, like the mayor of Uruapan did, they will kill him.”

    Added Gilberto Santamaría, 37, a mechanic: “This makes one feel defeated, losing hope that anything will ever change.”

    Manzo — who split with Sheinbaum’s ruling, center-left Morena party — was among a number of voices across Latin America who have called for more aggressive tactics to combat crime. Some labeled Manzo the “Mexican Bukele,” after Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, who has locked up tens of thousands of alleged gang members, many without due process, according to human rights advocates.

    The mayor’s killing “feels like a terror movie in which the bad guys win,” said María Guadalupe Rodríguez, 51, a nurse. “The sad part is that it’s not a movie: It’s what we live with in Mexico.”

    A day after Manzo’s killing, protesters filled the streets of Uruapan and Morelia, the capital of Michoacán state. Many condemned Sheinbaum and her Morena party for what they called a permissive attitude toward crime.

    While the protests were mostly peaceful, authorities said, some demonstrators broke into the state government palace in Morelia and trashed offices and other installations. Police responded with tear gas and arrested at least eight vandalism suspects.

    Manzo was shot multiple times Saturday at a candlelight Day of the Dead festival that he was attending with his family in downtown Uruapan. One suspect was killed and two accomplices arrested, police said.

    The killing was a well-planned cartel hit, Security Minister Omar García Harfuch told reporters.
    The suspects managed to circumvent Manzo’s contingent of bodyguards, García Harfuch said. Authorities were investigating which of the area’s many mobs were behind the slaying.

    Uruapan, a city of more than 300,000, is situated in the verdant hills of Michoacán, where most of Mexico’s avocados are grown. The lucrative industry — “green gold” generates $3 billion annually in exports to the United States — has for years been the target of a patchwork of armed groups who extort money from growers, packers, truckers and others.

    Almost 20 years ago, then-President Felipe Calderón chose Michoacán as the launching pad for a nationwide war on drugs, deploying troops to combat the growing power of cartels. That strategy is widely believed to have had the unintended consequence of increasing violence: Gangs acquired ever-more powerful weapons to match the firepower of the armed forces, while cartel infighting accelerated as police captured or killed capos.

    Upon taking office in 2018, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador promised a different approach, saying the military deployment had turned Mexico into a “graveyard.” He instructed troops to refrain from direct confrontations with cartels, when possible, and vowed to attend to poverty and other underlying social-economic social forces behind the violence.

    Critics labeled López Obrador’s “hugs not bullets” strategy a disaster, as violent crime spiked.

    Sheinbaum, a protege of López Obrador, embraced her predecessor’s approach but sought to improve Mexico’s intelligence-gathering and investigatory powers and strengthen the rule of law. Her government has aggressively arrested thousands of cartel suspects, several dozen of whom were sent to the United States to face trial.

    For Manzo, however, Sheinbaum’s strategy was a rebranded incarnation of “hugs not bullets.”

    The war on drugs, experts say, did nothing to cut the flow of cocaine, synthetic opiates like fentanyl and other substances to the United States, the world’s major consumer. And Mexico’s cartels, by all accounts, have only gotten stronger in recent years, despite the take-down of numerous kingpins.

    Special correspondent Cecilia Sánchez Vidal contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Patrick J. McDonnell, Kate Linthicum

    Source link

  • Former professor sues Auburn employees over firing tied to post on Charlie Kirk’s death

    [ad_1]

    A former educator at Auburn University and the University of Alabama is suing several school leaders over her firing, which she says occurred due to a statement she made on social media regarding the assassination of conservative activist and Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk.Candice Hale, formerly a lecturer in Auburn’s College of Liberal Arts, argues her comments about Kirk’s death were constitutionally protected speech on matters of public concern and that the university’s decision to fire her was a violation of her First Amendment rights.”Such retaliation cuts to the heart of democratic principles, where open discourse and the free exchange of ideas are essential to the preservation of liberty and justice,” the complaint reads.The statement that allegedly led to Hale’s firing was posted to Facebook on Sept. 11, the day after Kirk was killed.On Sept. 17, Auburn University released a statement announcing the termination of employees who had made “social media posts that were hurtful, insensitive and completely at odds with Auburn’s values of respect, integrity and responsibility in violation of our Code of Conduct.”While Kirk’s death was not mentioned in the statement, U.S. Senator and former Auburn football coach Tommy Tuberville attributed the move to comments about the assassination.”Thank you, @AuburnU, for taking action and FIRING these sick people who mocked the assassination of Charlie Kirk,” Tuberville posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, Wednesday. “They have NO PLACE in our state’s public education system.”That same day, Hale alleges that she was asked to join an online meeting with Scott Forehand, Director of Compliance, Investigations, and Security at Auburn University, and Chris Hardman, a Behavioral Threat Assessment Coordinator.Hale says she was asked several questions regarding her post, including:”How students who were in the University’s Turning Point USA chapter would feel about her comments.””How she would interact with white male students if they identified themselves with Kirk’s views.””If she had access to firearms or had any intent to harm anyone in the Turning Point USA chapter at Auburn.”Hale said that, following the meeting, Forehand and Hardman found her not to be a threat to the safety of those on campus.However, two days later, Hale was requested for another meeting, this time with Tami Poe, Senior Manager of Human Resources in the Dean’s Office, and Jason Hicks, Dean of the College of Liberal Arts. Ahead of the meeting, Hale was told that she was being placed on paid leave and would not be allowed to contact her students. On Sept. 22, Hale alleges she was told by Poe that she could not have legal counsel during the meeting. Hale joined the second online meeting the next day and was told they planned to fire her and offered her a severance agreement.Poe, Hicks, Forehand, Hardman and Auburn President Christopher Roberts are all named in the suit, which seeks both monetary compensation and job reinstatement, along with measures to prevent future retaliation.Hale said she is also pursuing legal action against leadership at the University of Alabama, where she was employed in an adjunct position and allegedly fired for her comments on Kirk’s death as well.”Both institutions have tried to silence my voice,” she said in a Facebook post Thursday. “I reject these efforts. I remain steadfast in defending my right to speak truth to power and to challenge white supremacy, misogyny, and injustice — especially within academic spaces.”

    A former educator at Auburn University and the University of Alabama is suing several school leaders over her firing, which she says occurred due to a statement she made on social media regarding the assassination of conservative activist and Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk.

    Candice Hale, formerly a lecturer in Auburn’s College of Liberal Arts, argues her comments about Kirk’s death were constitutionally protected speech on matters of public concern and that the university’s decision to fire her was a violation of her First Amendment rights.

    “Such retaliation cuts to the heart of democratic principles, where open discourse and the free exchange of ideas are essential to the preservation of liberty and justice,” the complaint reads.

    The statement that allegedly led to Hale’s firing was posted to Facebook on Sept. 11, the day after Kirk was killed.

    On Sept. 17, Auburn University released a statement announcing the termination of employees who had made “social media posts that were hurtful, insensitive and completely at odds with Auburn’s values of respect, integrity and responsibility in violation of our Code of Conduct.”

    While Kirk’s death was not mentioned in the statement, U.S. Senator and former Auburn football coach Tommy Tuberville attributed the move to comments about the assassination.

    “Thank you, @AuburnU, for taking action and FIRING these sick people who mocked the assassination of Charlie Kirk,” Tuberville posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, Wednesday. “They have NO PLACE in our state’s public education system.”

    That same day, Hale alleges that she was asked to join an online meeting with Scott Forehand, Director of Compliance, Investigations, and Security at Auburn University, and Chris Hardman, a Behavioral Threat Assessment Coordinator.

    Hale says she was asked several questions regarding her post, including:

    • “How students who were in the University’s Turning Point USA chapter would feel about her comments.”
    • “How she would interact with white male students if they identified themselves with Kirk’s views.”
    • “If she had access to firearms or had any intent to harm anyone in the Turning Point USA chapter at Auburn.”

    Hale said that, following the meeting, Forehand and Hardman found her not to be a threat to the safety of those on campus.

    However, two days later, Hale was requested for another meeting, this time with Tami Poe, Senior Manager of Human Resources in the Dean’s Office, and Jason Hicks, Dean of the College of Liberal Arts. Ahead of the meeting, Hale was told that she was being placed on paid leave and would not be allowed to contact her students.

    On Sept. 22, Hale alleges she was told by Poe that she could not have legal counsel during the meeting. Hale joined the second online meeting the next day and was told they planned to fire her and offered her a severance agreement.

    Poe, Hicks, Forehand, Hardman and Auburn President Christopher Roberts are all named in the suit, which seeks both monetary compensation and job reinstatement, along with measures to prevent future retaliation.

    Hale said she is also pursuing legal action against leadership at the University of Alabama, where she was employed in an adjunct position and allegedly fired for her comments on Kirk’s death as well.

    “Both institutions have tried to silence my voice,” she said in a Facebook post Thursday. “I reject these efforts. I remain steadfast in defending my right to speak truth to power and to challenge white supremacy, misogyny, and injustice — especially within academic spaces.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump erroneously thinks killing suspected smugglers is the key to winning the drug war

    [ad_1]

    During a press conference in the Oval Office this week, a reporter asked President Donald Trump about his new policy of summarily executing suspected drug smugglers in the Caribbean Sea, which so far has included five military strikes on speedboats, killing a total of at least 27 people. “Why not have the Coast Guard stop them,” as it is “empowered by law to do?” the reporter wondered. That way, he suggested, “you can confirm who’s on the boat” and “ensure that they’re doing what you suspect.”

    Trump’s answer was not that drug smuggling is tantamount to violent aggression, as he has repeatedly claimed, or that it merits the death penalty, as he has long argued. Nor did he aver that blowing up the boats is consistent with the law of war because the United States is engaged in an “armed conflict” with drug cartels, as the White House recently told Congress. Rather, Trump claimed his literalization of the war on drugs was necessary because the usual interdiction methods have been “totally ineffective” for “30 years.”

    The latter assessment is accurate; for more than a century, in fact, the government has been trying and failing to prevent politically disfavored intoxicants from reaching American consumers. But Trump is wrong to think that the added deterrent of simply killing people suspected of transporting illegal drugs will finally accomplish that impossible mission, and his overestimation of that policy’s benefits is coupled with a disregard for its costs. Ordering the military murder of drug suspects simultaneously corrupts the mission of the armed forces, erasing the traditional distinction between civilians and combatants, and obliterates longstanding principles of criminal justice, dispensing with the need for charges or proof.

    Historically, Trump said, 30 percent of illegal drugs imported into the United States would “come in through the seas.” Caribbean boats like the ones he is targeting account for a fraction of that fraction. “Despite the Trump administration’s portrayal of the Caribbean and Venezuela as a rampant conduit for drugs killing Americans,” The New York Times notes, “the vast majority of maritime drug trafficking bound for the United States actually occurs on the Pacific,” according to U.S. and United Nations data.

    Even in the Caribbean, the impact of Trump’s bloodthirsty program has been more subtle and complicated than he suggests. “We’ve almost totally stopped it by sea now,” he declared on Wednesday.

    Well, not really. “With the Trump administration cracking down on the U.S. southern border and flooding the Caribbean with military assets, drug traffickers are finding different ways to push drugs from Colombia, the world’s largest cocaine producer, to various markets,” the Times reports. According to “experts and law enforcement officials,” it says, “some smugglers are increasingly using cargo vessels in the Caribbean to hide contraband,” which “makes it particularly difficult to detect because the drugs are mixed in with legal goods, such as produce.”

    In Trinidad and Tobago, “the Trump administration’s crackdown in the region has led to a sudden surge in the number of illegal air flights from South America dropping bales of drugs at sea, to be picked by larger vessels.” In Jamaica, “anti-narcotics officials say drug dealers are moving drugs in smaller quantities to lessen their loss if their loads are confiscated.” According to one of those officials, “we are seeing changes in modus operandi,” meaning “more covert means are being used to transship drugs.”

    Blowing up speedboats in the Caribbean, in short, may affect smuggling patterns, but it cannot reasonably be expected to have a noticeable impact on the supply available to American consumers. Trump is attacking a specific smuggling method, but there are many alternatives, including other sea routes, transportation in vehicles across the southern border, smuggling by air and tunnels, and shipment by mail and courier services.

    Because there are so many ways to evade any barriers the government manages to erect, there is only so much that interdiction, no matter how violent, can accomplish. At most, it imposes costs on traffickers that may ultimately be reflected in retail prices. But that strategy is complicated by the fact that illegal drugs acquire most of their value close to the consumer. The cost of replacing seized intercepted shipments is therefore relatively small, a tiny fraction of the “street value” trumpeted by law enforcement agencies. As you get closer to the retail level, the replacement cost rises, but the amount that can be seized at one time falls.

    Trump sees no such difficulties, even as he complains that interdiction thus far has been “totally ineffective.” As he tells it, blowing up a drug boat reduces the supply to Americans by whatever amount the vessel was carrying. “Every boat that we knock out, we save 25,000 American lives,” he averred at the press conference.

    That claim is based on a dubious calculation that divides the weight of intercepted drugs by the estimated lethal dose. Trump’s logic implies that, by destroying five drug boats, he saved 125,000 lives, which exceeds the annual estimate of drug-related deaths in the United States. This is the same fallacious reasoning on which Attorney General Pam Bondi relied when she absurdly asserted that the Trump administration had “saved…258 million lives” by intercepting shipments of illicit fentanyl.

    That is not the only problem with Trump’s claim. He referred repeatedly to fentanyl, which accounts for more than two-thirds of drug deaths, implying that was the drug the boats were carrying. “Every boat is saving 25,000 lives,” he said. “The boats get hit, and you see that fentanyl all over the ocean.” But illicit fentanyl in the United States overwhelmingly travels by land across the border with Mexico, while the Caribbean traffic consists mainly of cocaine. Although “the Caribbean continues to be an important hub for the trafficking of Colombian cocaine, with some of it passing through Venezuela,” the Times notes, that country “plays no role in the movement of fentanyl.”

    Trump’s conflation of cocaine with fentanyl does not inspire confidence in his assertion that all of the destroyed boats were in fact carrying drugs, or that all of the people whose deaths he ordered were in fact “narcoterrorists.” As Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) notes, “Coast Guard statistics show that about one in four interdictions finds no drugs,” which suggests the potential for lethal error.

    Trump himself has repeatedly alluded to that risk. After the first strike, he joked about it: “I think anybody that saw that is going to say, ‘I’ll take a pass.’ I don’t even know about fishermen. They may say, ‘I’m not getting on the boat. I’m not going to take a chance.’” On Wednesday, Trump again suggested that the threat posed by the boat attacks is not limited to drug smugglers: “I don’t know about the fishing industry. If you want to go fishing, a lot of people aren’t deciding to even go fishing.”

    NBC News reports that “Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill have left briefings about the strikes frustrated with the lack of information.” Some legislators “have asked for unedited video of the strikes, reflecting the kind of basic information they seek, but the administration has so far refused to provide it.”

    Lawmakers “are also asking the administration to explain who was killed in the strikes, how they were positively identified as legitimate targets for lethal force, what intelligence indicated that they had possible links to drug trafficking gangs and what information showed that they were heading to the United States with drugs.” Even “Republicans who broadly support the attacks and the administration generally” are “concerned about the level of precision of the intelligence used to determine targets and the possibility that an American citizen could be killed in the operations.”

    These are all good questions. But there is no getting around the uncertainty inherent in killing people “assessed” to be drug smugglers. By treating drug law enforcement as a military matter, Trump avoids the inconvenience of arresting suspects and presenting evidence against them in court. In effect, he is imposing the death penalty, which does not ordinarily apply in drug trafficking cases, without statutory authorization or any semblance of due process. And he is doing all that based on the manifestly mistaken assumption that he has found the key to finally winning the unwinnable war on drugs.

    [ad_2]

    Jacob Sullum

    Source link

  • Turning Point, moving forward without Charlie Kirk, makes first return to Utah since his killing

    [ad_1]

    Turning Point USA’s college tour will return to Utah on Tuesday for its first event in the state since its founder, Charlie Kirk, was assassinated on a college campus earlier this month.The stop, at Utah State University in Logan, is about two hours north of Utah Valley University, where Kirk was killed Sept. 10 by a gunman who fired a single shot through the crowd while Kirk was speaking.The assassination of a top ally of President Donald Trump and one of the most significant figures in his Make America Great Again movement has galvanized conservatives, who have vowed to carry on Kirk’s mission of encouraging young voters to embrace conservatism and moving American politics further right. Kirk himself has been celebrated as a “martyr” by many on the right, and Turning Point USA, the youth organization he founded, has seen a surge of interest across the nation, with tens of thousands of requests to launch new chapters in high schools and on college campuses.Tuesday’s event, which was scheduled before Kirk’s death, will showcase how Turning Point is finding its path forward without its charismatic leader, who headlined many of its events and was instrumental in drawing crowds and attention.The college tour is now being headlined by some of the biggest conservative names, including Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly and Glenn Beck. Tuesday’s event will feature conservative podcast host Alex Clark and a panel with Sen. Mike Lee, Rep. Andy Biggs, former Rep. Jason Chaffetz and Gov. Spencer Cox.And it will further a pledge his widow, Erika Kirk, made to continue the campus tour and the work of the organization he founded. She now oversees Turning Point along with a stable of her late husband’s former aides and friends.‘Nothing is changing’Erika Kirk has sought to assure her husband’s followers that she intends to continue to run the operation as her late husband intended, closely following plans he laid out to her and to staff.“We’re not going anywhere. We have the blueprints. We have our marching orders,” she said during an appearance on his podcast last week.That will include, she said, continuing to tape the daily podcast.“My husband’s voice will live on. The show will go on,” she said, announcing plans for a rotating cast of hosts. She said they intended to lean heavily on old clips of her husband, including answering callers’ questions.“We have decades’ worth of my husband’s voice. We have unused material from speeches that he’s had that no one has heard yet,” she said.Erika Kirk, however, made clear that she does not intend to appear on the podcast often, and so far seems to be assuming a more behind-the-scenes role than her husband.Mikey McCoy, Kirk’s former chief of staff, said Erika Kirk is in daily contact with members of the Trump administration, and has described her as “very strategic” and different from her husband.The events have served as tributes to KirkThe events so far have served as tributes to the late Kirk, with a focus on prayer, as well as the question-and-answer sessions that he was known for.At Virginia Tech last week, the state’s Republican governor, Glenn Youngkin, urged the crowd to carry Kirk’s legacy forward.“The question that has been asked over and over again is: Who will be the next Charlie? And as I look out in this room and I see thousands of you, I want to repeat the best answer that I have heard: You will be the next Charlie,” he said. “All of you.”He also praised Erika Kirk as an “extraordinary” leader.“Over the course of the last two weeks, Erika Kirk has demonstrated that she not only has the courage of a lion, but she has the heart of a saint. We have grieved with her and her family. We have prayed for her and her family,” he said. “Is there anyone better to lead Turning Point going forward than Erika Kirk?”He then turned the stage over to Kelly, who said Charlie Kirk had asked her to join the tour several months ago. She said she knew appearing onstage carried risk, but felt it was important to be there “to send a message that we will not be silenced by an assassin’s bullet, by a heckler’s veto, by a left-wing, woke professor or anyone who tries to silence us from saying what we really believe,” she said to loud cheers.At another event at the University of Minnesota last week, conservative commentator Michael Knowles gave a solo speech in lieu of the two-man conversation with Kirk that was originally planned. Then he continued Kirk’s tradition of responding to questions from the audience, which ranged from one man quibbling about Catholic doctrine to another arguing that the root of societal problems stems from letting women vote. (To the latter, he responded that women aren’t to blame because “men need to lead women.”)As Knowles spoke, a spotlight shined on a chair left empty for Kirk.Knowles said Kirk was instrumental in keeping together disparate conservative factions, and he worries about the MAGA movement fracturing without Kirk doing the day-to-day work to build bridges between warring groups.“Charlie was the unifying figure for the movement. It’s simply a fact,” he said. “There is no replacing him in that regard.”“The biggest threat right now is that without that single figure that we were all friends with, who could really hold it together, things could spin off in different directions,” Knowles said. “We have to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

    LOGAN, Utah —

    Turning Point USA’s college tour will return to Utah on Tuesday for its first event in the state since its founder, Charlie Kirk, was assassinated on a college campus earlier this month.

    The stop, at Utah State University in Logan, is about two hours north of Utah Valley University, where Kirk was killed Sept. 10 by a gunman who fired a single shot through the crowd while Kirk was speaking.

    The assassination of a top ally of President Donald Trump and one of the most significant figures in his Make America Great Again movement has galvanized conservatives, who have vowed to carry on Kirk’s mission of encouraging young voters to embrace conservatism and moving American politics further right. Kirk himself has been celebrated as a “martyr” by many on the right, and Turning Point USA, the youth organization he founded, has seen a surge of interest across the nation, with tens of thousands of requests to launch new chapters in high schools and on college campuses.

    Tuesday’s event, which was scheduled before Kirk’s death, will showcase how Turning Point is finding its path forward without its charismatic leader, who headlined many of its events and was instrumental in drawing crowds and attention.

    The college tour is now being headlined by some of the biggest conservative names, including Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly and Glenn Beck. Tuesday’s event will feature conservative podcast host Alex Clark and a panel with Sen. Mike Lee, Rep. Andy Biggs, former Rep. Jason Chaffetz and Gov. Spencer Cox.

    And it will further a pledge his widow, Erika Kirk, made to continue the campus tour and the work of the organization he founded. She now oversees Turning Point along with a stable of her late husband’s former aides and friends.

    ‘Nothing is changing’

    Erika Kirk has sought to assure her husband’s followers that she intends to continue to run the operation as her late husband intended, closely following plans he laid out to her and to staff.

    “We’re not going anywhere. We have the blueprints. We have our marching orders,” she said during an appearance on his podcast last week.

    That will include, she said, continuing to tape the daily podcast.

    “My husband’s voice will live on. The show will go on,” she said, announcing plans for a rotating cast of hosts. She said they intended to lean heavily on old clips of her husband, including answering callers’ questions.

    “We have decades’ worth of my husband’s voice. We have unused material from speeches that he’s had that no one has heard yet,” she said.

    Erika Kirk, however, made clear that she does not intend to appear on the podcast often, and so far seems to be assuming a more behind-the-scenes role than her husband.

    Mikey McCoy, Kirk’s former chief of staff, said Erika Kirk is in daily contact with members of the Trump administration, and has described her as “very strategic” and different from her husband.

    The events have served as tributes to Kirk

    The events so far have served as tributes to the late Kirk, with a focus on prayer, as well as the question-and-answer sessions that he was known for.

    At Virginia Tech last week, the state’s Republican governor, Glenn Youngkin, urged the crowd to carry Kirk’s legacy forward.

    “The question that has been asked over and over again is: Who will be the next Charlie? And as I look out in this room and I see thousands of you, I want to repeat the best answer that I have heard: You will be the next Charlie,” he said. “All of you.”

    He also praised Erika Kirk as an “extraordinary” leader.

    “Over the course of the last two weeks, Erika Kirk has demonstrated that she not only has the courage of a lion, but she has the heart of a saint. We have grieved with her and her family. We have prayed for her and her family,” he said. “Is there anyone better to lead Turning Point going forward than Erika Kirk?”

    He then turned the stage over to Kelly, who said Charlie Kirk had asked her to join the tour several months ago. She said she knew appearing onstage carried risk, but felt it was important to be there “to send a message that we will not be silenced by an assassin’s bullet, by a heckler’s veto, by a left-wing, woke professor or anyone who tries to silence us from saying what we really believe,” she said to loud cheers.

    At another event at the University of Minnesota last week, conservative commentator Michael Knowles gave a solo speech in lieu of the two-man conversation with Kirk that was originally planned. Then he continued Kirk’s tradition of responding to questions from the audience, which ranged from one man quibbling about Catholic doctrine to another arguing that the root of societal problems stems from letting women vote. (To the latter, he responded that women aren’t to blame because “men need to lead women.”)

    As Knowles spoke, a spotlight shined on a chair left empty for Kirk.

    Knowles said Kirk was instrumental in keeping together disparate conservative factions, and he worries about the MAGA movement fracturing without Kirk doing the day-to-day work to build bridges between warring groups.

    “Charlie was the unifying figure for the movement. It’s simply a fact,” he said. “There is no replacing him in that regard.”

    “The biggest threat right now is that without that single figure that we were all friends with, who could really hold it together, things could spin off in different directions,” Knowles said. “We have to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Man Who Represented Himself Is Found Guilty Of Trying To Assassinate Trump At Florida Golf Course – KXL

    [ad_1]

    FORT PIERCE, Fla. (AP) — The man who attempted to assassinate Donald Trump at a Florida golf course last year tried to stab himself in the neck with a pen shortly after being found guilty of all counts on Tuesday.

    Officers quickly swarmed him and dragged him out of the courtroom.

    The jury of five men and seven women found Ryan Routh guilty on all counts that he was facing after about two hours of deliberation.

    The jurors were on their way out of the courtroom after the verdict was announced when Routh grabbed a pen off a desk and tried to stab himself in the neck.

    As marshals were dragging him from the courtroom, Routh’s daughter Sara Routh began screaming, “Dad I love you, don’t do anything. I’ll get you out. He didn’t hurt anybody.”

    She continued screaming as her father was taken from the courtroom, saying the case against him was rigged. She went outside the courthouse, where she and her brother Adam Routh waited by a guard gate for their father to be driven away.

    Back inside the courtroom, Routh was brought back before the judge. He was no longer wearing a jacket and tie, and was shackled. There were no signs of blood on his shirt. The judge announced Routh will be sentenced on Dec. 18 at 9:30 a.m. He faces life in prison.

    The standby defense attorneys for Routh did not have a comment following the verdict.

    Routh had been charged with attempting to assassinate a major presidential candidate, possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, assaulting a federal officer, possessing a firearm and ammunition as a convicted felon and possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial number. He had pleaded not guilty to the charges and defended himself in court.

    Prosecutors said Routh spent weeks plotting to kill Trump before aiming a rifle through shrubbery as the Republican played golf on Sept. 15, 2024, at his West Palm Beach country club.

    Routh told jurors in his closing argument that he didn’t intend to kill anyone that day.

    “It’s hard for me to believe that a crime occurred if the trigger was never pulled,” Routh said. He pointed out that he could see Trump as he was on the path toward the sixth-hole green at the golf course and noted that he also could have shot a Secret Service agent who confronted him if he had intended to harm anyone.

    Routh, 59, exercised his constitutional right not to testify in his own defense. He rested his case Monday morning after questioning just three witnesses — a firearms expert and two characters witnesses — for a total of about three hours. In contrast, prosecutors spent seven days questioning 38 witnesses.

    Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a post on X that the guilty verdict “illustrates the Department of Justice’s commitment to punishing those who engage in political violence.”

    “This attempted assassination was not only an attack on our President, but an affront to our very nation,” Bondi said.

    “This verdict sends a clear message. An attempt to assassinate a presidential candidate is an attack on our Republic and on the rights of every citizen,” Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement. “The Department of Justice will relentlessly pursue those who try to silence political voices, and no enemy, foreign or domestic, will ever silence the will of the American people.”

    U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon signed off on Routh’s request to represent himself following two hearings in July. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that criminal defendants have a right to represent themselves in court proceedings, as long as they can show a judge they are competent to waive their right to be defended by an attorney. Routh’s former defense attorneys have served as standby counsel since he took over his own defense and have been present during trial the past two weeks.

    Recounting what happened at the golf course, a Secret Service agent testified earlier in the trial that he spotted Routh before Trump came into view. Routh aimed his rifle at the agent, who opened fire, causing Routh to drop his weapon and flee without firing a shot, the agent said.

    Law enforcement obtained help from a witness who testified that he saw a person fleeing the area after hearing gunshots. The witness was then flown in a police helicopter to a nearby interstate where Routh was arrested, and the witness said he confirmed it was the person he had seen.

    Just nine weeks earlier, Trump had survived an attempt on his life while campaigning in Butler, Pennsylvania. That gunman had fired eight shots, with one bullet grazing Trump’s ear. The gunman was then fatally shot by a Secret Service counter sniper.

    Routh was a North Carolina construction worker who in recent years had moved to Hawaii. A self-styled mercenary leader, Routh spoke out to anyone who would listen about his dangerous and sometimes violent plans to insert himself into conflicts around the world, witnesses have told The Associated Press.

    In the early days of Russia’s war in Ukraine, Routh tried to recruit soldiers from Afghanistan, Moldova and Taiwan to fight the Russians. In his native Greensboro, North Carolina, he was arrested in 2002 for eluding a traffic stop and barricading himself from officers with a fully automatic machine gun and a “weapon of mass destruction,” which turned out to be an explosive with a 10-inch (25-centimeter) fuse, police said.

    In 2010, police searched a warehouse Routh owned and found more than 100 stolen items, from power tools and building supplies to kayaks and spa tubs. In both felony cases, judges gave Routh either probation or a suspended sentence.

    Besides the federal charges, Routh also has pleaded not guilty to state charges of terrorism and attempted murder.

    [ad_2]

    Jordan Vawter

    Source link

  • Leftist Group That Targeted Turning Point USA Has Long Carried Water For Antifa

    [ad_1]



    The organization that put Charlie Kirk’s organization on a “hate map” with chapters of the Ku Klux Klan ahead of his assassination last week also has a long history of carrying water for the violent Antifa movement that President Donald Trump has targeted for investigation.

    Tyler Robinson, 22, who faces murder charges in the assassination of Kirk, had reportedly adopted leftist political positions and endorsed the transgender movement, according to authorities. His bullet casings reportedly included anti-fascist messaging resonant of Antifa.

    Trump announced Wednesday night that he would be designating Antifa a terrorist organization.

    Antifa agitators brand their opponents as akin to Nazis, identifying themselves as “anti-fascist.” These agitators reportedly embed themselves in more mainstream protests, break away to engage in violence, and occasionally return to the safety of the crowd later. While the movement is largely disconnected, it sometimes forms organizations like Rose City Antifa in Portland.

    Antifa agitators have engaged in violence for years, most notably in the Black Lives Matter protests of 2020. The riots that grew out of those protests caused an estimated $2 billion in damage, measured by insurance payouts, and took the lives of 26 Americans, notably including black people like 77-year-old retired St. Louis Police Captain David Dorn.

    The SPLC

    The Southern Poverty Law Center, a public interest law firm that gained its reputation by suing Ku Klux Klan chapters into bankruptcy and presents itself as America’s premiere “hate” watchdog, has steadfastly refused to put any Antifa organization on its “hate map.” Meanwhile, the SPLC puts mainstream conservative and Christian groups on the map, calling them part of the “infrastructure upholding white supremacy.”

    A terrorist used the map to target the conservative Christian Family Research Council in 2012, and the man who opened fire at a Congressional Baseball Game practice in 2017 had “liked” the SPLC on Facebook. The SPLC condemned these attacks.

    This summer, the SPLC added Kirk’s Turning Point USA to the “hate map.” It remains unclear whether this may have inspired Robinson, and the SPLC condemned the assassination, but it has not removed Turning Point from the map.

    The SPLC has refused to add Antifa, Black Lives Matter, or vandals targeting churches and pro-life pregnancy centers to the “hate map.”

    One Condemnation Of Antifa

    Richard Cohen, who resigned as SPLC president amid a racial discrimination and sexual harassment scandal in 2019, did offer a rare explicit condemnation of Antifa violence in 2017.

    “We oppose these groups and what they’re trying to do,” Cohen said.

    “We think they are contributing to the problem we are seeing,” he added. “We think it’s likely to lead to other forms of retaliation. In Berkeley, antifa showed up and shut down speeches. The next time the white supremacists brought the Oath Keepers with them, they brought their own army.”

    Yet he said SPLC wouldn’t label Antifa a “hate group” because it does not discriminate people on the basis of race, sexual orientation, or other classes protected by antidiscrimination laws.

    “There might be forms of hate out there that you may consider hateful, but it’s not the type of hate we follow,” Cohen said.

    Carrying Water For Antifa

    In 2023, however, the SPLC added “antigovernment extremist groups” to the “hate map,” including parental rights organizations such as Moms for Liberty. Antifa remains absent.

    In June 2020, the SPLC attacked then-President Trump for announcing his intention to designate Antifa as a terrorist organization. It warned that “those who identify with” the Antifa label “represent a large spectrum of the political left” and that “far-right extremists use similar tactics” to the Trump administration in condemning Antifa.

    The SPLC condemned Trump’s move as “unprecedented and alarming” and minimized Antifa violence as “skirmishes and property crimes,” adding that “the threat of lethal violence pales in comparison to that posed by far-right extremists.”

    In 2023, authorities arrested an SPLC lawyer, charging him with domestic terrorism for his alleged role in an Antifa riot involving Molotov cocktails. The lawyer is one of 61 defendants, who are represented by many attorneys. That case remains ongoing, and prosecutors expect a ruling from the judge soon.

    Megan Squire, whom Wired profiled as “antifa’s secret weapon against far-right extremists” in 2018, reportedly worked closely with the SPLC, feeding the organization data on white nationalist and other groups. She said she does not consider herself antifa but is “sympathetic to antifa’s goal of silencing racist extremists.” She passed along information “to those who might put it to real-world use. Who might weaponize it.”

    Squire joined the SPLC full-time in 2022 before leaving the organization in March 2025, according to her verified LinkedIn profile.

    Neither Squire nor the SPLC responded to requests for comment about relationships with Antifa.

    While the relationship between Antifa rioters and the SPLC remains unclear, its history suggests an investigation may prove fruitful.

    Syndicated with permission from The Daily Signal.

    [ad_2]

    Tyler ONeil

    Source link

  • Video: Trump Escalates Attack on Free Speech

    [ad_1]

    new video loaded: Trump Escalates Attack on Free Speech

    By Zolan Kanno-Youngs, Christina Thornell and David Seekamp•

    Zolan Kanno-Youngs, a White House correspondent for The New York Times, describes how the Trump administration’s pressuring of ABC to take action against Jimmy Kimmel is part of a broader crackdown by the administration since the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

    [ad_2]

    Zolan Kanno-Youngs, Christina Thornell and David Seekamp

    Source link

  • Newsday ‘Apologizes’ For Vile, Anti-Charlie Kirk Cartoon

    [ad_1]



    Newsday, one of the nation’s largest newspapers, was forced to apologize for publishing a cartoon about Charlie Kirk that was labeled vile and insensitive.

    The cartoon showed the aftermath of last week’s assassination of the civil rights leader – a blood splattered tent – along with an empty chair and the words “Prove me wrong.”

    The grossly offensive cartoon was created by Chip Bok – a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize.

    The Republican Party in Suffolk County, New York said the newspaper mocked tragedy, stoked division and poured gasoline on the flames of political violence.

    Newsday issued an apology and said they regret that it was published.

    “On Saturday, Newsday published a syndicated editorial cartoon referring to the assassination of Charlie Kirk that was insensitive and offensive. We deeply regret the mistake and sincerely apologize to the family of Charlie Kirk and to all,” Newsday said in a statement. 

    “We made an error in judgement. The cartoon has been removed from our digital platforms. In his illustration, Chip Bok used the name of Kirk’s organization, Turning Point USA, and the theme of his Utah event — ‘Prove Me Wrong’ — to suggest that Kirk’s assassination might be a turning point for healing our nation’s divide,” the statement continued. “The imagery was inappropriate and should have never been published in Newsday.”  

    But Republicans are furious and are calling for a boycott of Newsday.

    “By publishing a vile cartoon about the political assassination of Charlie Kirk, the paper has mocked tragedy, stoked division, and poured gasoline on the flames of political violence. This isn’t journalism. It’s a reckless, partisan attack that blames the victim, silences free speech, and shames everything this country should stand for,” Suffolk County Republican Party chairman Jesse Garcia said in a statement.

    Nassau County Republicans urged people not to support a publication that normalizes hate and endangers lives. County executive Bruce Blakeman called the cartoon “unconscionable” and urged residents to cancel their subscriptions. 

    “The unconscionable cartoon in Newsday trivializing the assassination of Charlie Kirk is so over the top despicable that it is shocking even for the majority of us who realized long ago that Newsday abandoned any pretension of fairness. Cancel Newsday,” Blakeman posted on X.

    The good and decent citizens of Long Island should cancel their subscriptions and then target any local business that advertises with Newsday. We need to send a message that there is no place for assassination culture in the United States of America.

    Syndicated with permission from ToddStarnes.com – founded by best-selling author and journalist Todd Starnes. Starnes is the recipient of an RTNDA Edward R. Murrow Award and the Associated Press Mark Twain Award for Storytelling.

    [ad_2]

    Todd Starnes

    Source link

  • Tyler Robinson blocked from contacting Charlie Kirk’s widow

    [ad_1]

    A Utah judge has issued a pretrial protective order barring Tyler James Robinson, the man accused of killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk, from contacting Kirk’s widow, Erika.

    The order was filed in Utah’s Fourth Judicial District Court in Provo on September 16, and remains in effect until further order of the court.

    Why It Matters

    The protective order against Robinson is significant not only as a safeguard for Erika Kirk but also because it highlights broader issues surrounding political violence, public safety, and the justice system’s handling of high-profile cases.

    With prosecutors pursuing the death penalty and Turning Point USA‘s future now closely tied to how Erika Kirk carries forward her late husband’s mission, the case underscores the intersection of criminal justice, politics, and the risks facing public figures in today’s polarized climate.

    Pretrial protective order barring Tyler James Robinson, the man accused of killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk, from contacting Kirk’s widow, Erika, Provo, Utah Sept. 16, 2025. (District Court Of Utah)

    District Court Of Utah

    What To Know

    Protective Order Details

    The order identifies Erika Kirk as the protected party and prohibits Tyler Robinson from engaging in harassment, threats, stalking, or “any other conduct that would place the protected person or designated family or household members in reasonable fear of bodily injury.”

    The court found that Robinson “represents a credible threat to the physical safety of the protected person,” according to the filing signed by Judge Tony F. Graf.

    The terms further bar Robinson from contacting Erika Kirk directly or indirectly, including through phone, email, text, social media, or mail.

    Although incarcerated, he is also prohibited from visiting her residence, workplace, or school, and must remain away from her in any location where they may encounter one another.

    Violation of the order could lead to further arrest and new criminal charges, the filing states.

    Case Background

    Robinson, 22, was charged earlier the same day with aggravated murder, felony discharge of a firearm, and committing a violent offense in the presence of a child. Prosecutors also filed two counts each of obstruction of justice and witness tampering, according to Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray.

    The charges stem from the September 10 shooting at Utah Valley University, where Kirk, 30, was speaking at a Turning Point USA rally. Prosecutors allege Robinson used a high-powered bolt-action rifle in the attack.

    The hearing on September 16 marked Robinson’s first court appearance since the incident.

    Judge Graf told the court he would issue the protective order in favor of Erika Kirk, following the prosecution’s request for her safety.

    Robinson has not yet entered a plea and does not currently have legal representation. All suspects are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

    Graf said a public defender is expected to be appointed before Robinson’s next hearing on September 29.

    Responses and Public Statements

    Following her husband’s death, Erika Kirk issued a statement pledging to continue his work through Turning Point USA’s American Comeback Tour.

    “The evil doers responsible for my husband’s assassination have no idea what they have done,” she said. “If you thought that my husband’s mission was powerful before, you have no idea … you have no idea what you have just unleashed. You have no idea the fire you ignited within this wife.”

    Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, had been a high-profile figure in conservative politics. His killing drew national attention, with allies and critics alike weighing in on the implications for political discourse and public safety.

    Legal Implications

    Under Utah law, violation of a protective order in a felony case can be prosecuted as a third-degree felony, while violations linked to misdemeanor charges may result in a class A misdemeanor.

    The order also carries federal implications, making it unlawful for Robinson to possess or purchase firearms or ammunition while it is in effect.

    The filing emphasizes that “the parties cannot change or dismiss this order. Only the court has the authority to change or dismiss this order.”

    What People Are Saying

    Judge Tony F. Graf in the order: “[Tyler Robinson] represents a credible threat to the physical safety of the protected person.”

    Erika Kirk said: “The evil doers responsible for my husband’s assassination have no idea what they have done.”

    What Happens Next

    Robinson is scheduled to return to court on September 29, when a public defender is expected to be appointed, and the case will move toward an arraignment.

    The pretrial protective order barring him from contacting Erika Kirk remains in effect, and prosecutors have signaled their intent to seek the death penalty on the aggravated murder charge.

    No trial date has been set, and because capital cases often involve lengthy pretrial proceedings, the legal process could extend for months or longer, ensuring the case continues to draw national attention given its political and public safety implications.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Charlie Kirk shooting suspect charged with murder as prosecutors announce they will seek death penalty

    [ad_1]

    (CNN) — PROVO, UTAH — Tyler Robinson, the suspect in the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, appeared virtually for his first court hearing since he was formally charged with aggravated murder on September 16.

    Judge Tony F. Graf said Tuesday that Tyler Robinson, the suspect in the killing of Charlie Kirk, will remain in custody, without bail.

    “Mr. Robinson at this time, you will remain in custody, without bail,” Graf said.

    Graf said he reviewed Robinson’s financial situation and found that he is “indigent,” meaning he cannot afford legal fees.

    Graf said he was “provisionally” appointing an attorney for Robinson, and that person need to file paperwork about their qualifications to the court before the next hearing.

    Robinson faces seven criminal counts, including aggravated murder.

    The next hearing date for the suspected shooter is set for September 29, 10 a.m. local time (noon ET).

    Earlier Tuesday, Robinson was formally charged with aggravated murder, two counts of obstruction of justice and felony discharge of a firearm causing serious bodily injury, two counts of witness tampering, and commission of a violent offense in the presence of a child. Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray announced the charges at a press conference Tuesday.

    Utah County Attorney General Jeff Gray speaks at a press conference regarding Tyler Robinson, the suspect in the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk on September 16, 2025 at the Utah County Health & Justice Building in Provo, Utah. Credit: Chet Strange / Getty Images via CNN Newsource

    Gray said he intends to seek the death penalty.

    Gray noted it was the mother of the suspected shooter who identified her son through photos released by authorities.

    Court documents allege that Robinson’s mother, “explained that over the last year or so, Robinson had become more political and had started to lean more to the left – becoming more pro-gay and trans-rights oriented.”

    “She stated that Robinson began to date his roommate, a biological male who was transitioning genders,” court documents filed Tuesday say.

    “This resulted in several discussions with family members, but especially between Robinson and his father, who have very different political views.”

    After Tyler Robinson’s parents became concerned that surveillance images of a suspect that authorities released looked like their son, and that a rifle that police believed was used in Charlie Kirk’s killing “matched a rifle that was given to his son as a gift,” his father called him, Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray said.

    The father contacted his son and asked him to send a picture of the rifle, but Robinson didn’t respond, Gray said. The father subsequently spoke on the phone with his son, who “implied that he planned to take his own life,” Gray said.

    Robinson’s parents were then “able to convince him to meet at their home,” Gray said.

    While talking to his parents at their home, Robinson implied that he shot Kirk, “and stated that he couldn’t go to jail, and just wanted to end it,” Gray said. When Robinson was then asked why he did it, “Robinson explained there is too much evil, and the guy (referring to Charlie Kirk) spreads too much hate,” Gray said, reading from a probable cause statement filed in court.

    Booking photo of Kirk shooting suspect, Tyler Robinson has been released by the Utah Governor’s office. Credit: Utah Governor’s Office via CNN Newsource

    The day of the shooting, Robinson texted his roommate to locate a note he had left which said he had the “opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk,” Gray said.

    “On September 10, 2025, the roommate received a text message from Robinson, which said, ‘Drop what you’re doing, look under my keyboard.’ The roommate looked under the key board and found a note that stated, ‘I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it.’ Police found a photograph of this note,” Gray said.

    According to Gray, after reading the text from Robinson, the roommate had responded, “What? You’re joking, right?”

    [ad_2]

    Chris Boyette, Michelle Watson and CNN

    Source link

  • Suspect left note saying he planned to kill Charlie Kirk, later confessed in texts, prosecutor says

    [ad_1]

    Prosecutors brought a murder charge Tuesday against the man accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk and outlined evidence, including a text message confession to his partner and a note left beforehand saying he had the opportunity to kill one of the nation’s leading conservative voices “and I’m going to take it.”DNA on the trigger of the rifle that killed Kirk also matched that of Tyler Robinson, Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray said while outlining the evidence and announcing charges that could result in the death penalty if Robinson is convicted.The prosecutor said Robinson, 22, wrote in one text that he spent more than a week planning the attack on Kirk, a prominent force in politics credited with energizing the Republican youth movement and helping Donald Trump win back the White House in 2024.”The murder of Charlie Kirk is an American tragedy,” Gray said.Kirk was gunned down Sept. 10 while speaking with students at Utah Valley University. Prosecutors allege Robinson shot Kirk in the neck with a bolt-action rifle from the roof of a nearby building on the campus in Orem, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Salt Lake City. Robinson appeared briefly Tuesday before a judge by video from jail. He nodded slightly at times but mostly stared straight ahead as the judge read the charges against him and appointed an attorney to represent him. Robinson’s family has declined to comment to The Associated Press since his arrest.Was Charlie Kirk targeted over anti-transgender views?Authorities have not revealed a clear motive in the shooting, but Gray said that Robinson wrote in a text about Kirk to his partner: “I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.”Robinson also left a note for his partner hidden under a keyboard that said, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it,” according to Gray.The prosecutor declined to answer whether Robinson targeted Kirk for his anti-transgender views. Kirk was shot while taking a question that touched on mass shootings, gun violence and transgender people.”That is for a jury to decide,” Gray said.Robinson was involved in a romantic relationship with his roommate, who investigators say was transgender, which hasn’t been confirmed. Gray said the partner has been cooperating with investigators.Robinson’s partner appeared shocked in the text exchange after the shooting, according to court documents, asking Robinson “why he did it and how long he’d been planning it.”Parents said their son became more politicalWhile authorities say Robinson hasn’t been cooperating with investigators, they say his family and friends have been talking.Robinson’s mother told investigators that their son had turned left politically in the last year and became more supportive of gay and transgender rights after dating someone who is transgender, Gray said.Those decisions prompted several conversations in the household, especially between Robinson and his father. They had different political views and Robinson told his partner in a text that his dad had become a “diehard MAGA” since Trump was elected.Robinson’s mother recognized him when authorities released a picture of the suspect and his parents confronted him, at which time Robinson said he wanted to kill himself, Gray said.The family persuaded him to meet with a family friend who is a retired sheriff’s deputy, who persuaded Robinson to turn himself in, the prosecutor said.Robinson was arrested late Thursday near St. George, the southern Utah community where he grew up, about 240 miles southwest of where the shooting happened.Robinson detailed movements after the shootingIn a text exchange with his partner released by authorities, Robinson wrote: “I had planned to grab my rifle from my drop point shortly after, but most of that side of town got locked down. Its quiet, almost enough to get out, but theres one vehicle lingering.”Then he wrote: “Going to attempt to retrieve it again, hopefully they have moved on. I haven’t seen anything about them finding it.” After that, he sent: “I can get close to it but there is a squad car parked right by it. I think they already swept that spot, but I don’t wanna chance it.”He also was worried about losing his grandfather’s rifle and mentioned several times in the texts that he wished he had picked it up, according to the texts shared in court documents, which did not have timestamps. It was unclear how long after the shooting Robinson was texting.”To be honest I had hoped to keep this secret till I died of old age. I am sorry to involve you,” Robinson wrote in another text to his partner.Prosecutor says Robinson told partner to delete textsRobinson discarded the rifle and clothing and asked his roommate to conceal evidence, Gray said.Robinson was charged with felony discharge of a firearm, punishable by up to life in prison, and obstructing justice, punishable by up to 15 years in prison.He also was charged with witness tampering because he had directed his partner to delete their text messages and told his partner to stay silent if questioned by police, Gray said.Kash Patel says investigators will look at everyoneFBI Director Kash Patel said Tuesday that agents are looking at “anyone and everyone” who was involved in a gaming chatroom on the social media platform Discord with Robinson. The chatroom involved “a lot more” than 20 people, he said during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in Washington.”We are investigating Charlie’s assassination fully and completely and running out every lead related to any allegation of broader violence,” Patel said in response to a question about whether the Kirk shooting was being treated as part of a broader trend of violence against religious groups.The charges filed Tuesday carry two enhancements, including committing several of the crimes in front of or close to children and carrying out violence based on the subject’s political beliefs.Gray declined to say whether Robinson’s partner could face charges or whether anyone else might face charges.Kirk, a dominant figure in conservative politics, became a confidant of President Donald Trump after founding Arizona-based Turning Point USA, one of the nation’s largest political organizations. He brought young, conservative evangelical Christians into politics.In the days since Kirk’s assassination, Americans have found themselves facing questions about rising political violence, the deep divisions that brought the nation here and whether anything can change.Despite calls for greater civility, some who opposed Kirk’s provocative statements about gender, race and politics criticized him after his death. Many Republicans have led the push to punish anyone they believe dishonored him, causing both public and private workers to lose their jobs or face other consequences at work.___Seewer reported from Toledo, Ohio.

    PROVO, Utah —

    Prosecutors brought a murder charge Tuesday against the man accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk and outlined evidence, including a text message confession to his partner and a note left beforehand saying he had the opportunity to kill one of the nation’s leading conservative voices “and I’m going to take it.”

    DNA on the trigger of the rifle that killed Kirk also matched that of Tyler Robinson, Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray said while outlining the evidence and announcing charges that could result in the death penalty if Robinson is convicted.

    The prosecutor said Robinson, 22, wrote in one text that he spent more than a week planning the attack on Kirk, a prominent force in politics credited with energizing the Republican youth movement and helping Donald Trump win back the White House in 2024.

    “The murder of Charlie Kirk is an American tragedy,” Gray said.

    Kirk was gunned down Sept. 10 while speaking with students at Utah Valley University. Prosecutors allege Robinson shot Kirk in the neck with a bolt-action rifle from the roof of a nearby building on the campus in Orem, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Salt Lake City.

    Robinson appeared briefly Tuesday before a judge by video from jail. He nodded slightly at times but mostly stared straight ahead as the judge read the charges against him and appointed an attorney to represent him. Robinson’s family has declined to comment to The Associated Press since his arrest.

    FBI

    Tyler Robinson, suspect in Charlie Kirk’s assassination

    Was Charlie Kirk targeted over anti-transgender views?

    Authorities have not revealed a clear motive in the shooting, but Gray said that Robinson wrote in a text about Kirk to his partner: “I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.”

    Robinson also left a note for his partner hidden under a keyboard that said, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it,” according to Gray.

    The prosecutor declined to answer whether Robinson targeted Kirk for his anti-transgender views. Kirk was shot while taking a question that touched on mass shootings, gun violence and transgender people.

    “That is for a jury to decide,” Gray said.

    Robinson was involved in a romantic relationship with his roommate, who investigators say was transgender, which hasn’t been confirmed. Gray said the partner has been cooperating with investigators.

    Robinson’s partner appeared shocked in the text exchange after the shooting, according to court documents, asking Robinson “why he did it and how long he’d been planning it.”

    Parents said their son became more political

    While authorities say Robinson hasn’t been cooperating with investigators, they say his family and friends have been talking.

    Robinson’s mother told investigators that their son had turned left politically in the last year and became more supportive of gay and transgender rights after dating someone who is transgender, Gray said.

    Those decisions prompted several conversations in the household, especially between Robinson and his father. They had different political views and Robinson told his partner in a text that his dad had become a “diehard MAGA” since Trump was elected.

    Robinson’s mother recognized him when authorities released a picture of the suspect and his parents confronted him, at which time Robinson said he wanted to kill himself, Gray said.

    The family persuaded him to meet with a family friend who is a retired sheriff’s deputy, who persuaded Robinson to turn himself in, the prosecutor said.

    Robinson was arrested late Thursday near St. George, the southern Utah community where he grew up, about 240 miles southwest of where the shooting happened.

    Robinson detailed movements after the shooting

    In a text exchange with his partner released by authorities, Robinson wrote: “I had planned to grab my rifle from my drop point shortly after, but most of that side of town got locked down. Its quiet, almost enough to get out, but theres one vehicle lingering.”

    Then he wrote: “Going to attempt to retrieve it again, hopefully they have moved on. I haven’t seen anything about them finding it.” After that, he sent: “I can get close to it but there is a squad car parked right by it. I think they already swept that spot, but I don’t wanna chance it.”

    He also was worried about losing his grandfather’s rifle and mentioned several times in the texts that he wished he had picked it up, according to the texts shared in court documents, which did not have timestamps. It was unclear how long after the shooting Robinson was texting.

    “To be honest I had hoped to keep this secret till I died of old age. I am sorry to involve you,” Robinson wrote in another text to his partner.

    Prosecutor says Robinson told partner to delete texts

    Robinson discarded the rifle and clothing and asked his roommate to conceal evidence, Gray said.

    Robinson was charged with felony discharge of a firearm, punishable by up to life in prison, and obstructing justice, punishable by up to 15 years in prison.

    He also was charged with witness tampering because he had directed his partner to delete their text messages and told his partner to stay silent if questioned by police, Gray said.

    Kash Patel says investigators will look at everyone

    FBI Director Kash Patel said Tuesday that agents are looking at “anyone and everyone” who was involved in a gaming chatroom on the social media platform Discord with Robinson. The chatroom involved “a lot more” than 20 people, he said during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in Washington.

    “We are investigating Charlie’s assassination fully and completely and running out every lead related to any allegation of broader violence,” Patel said in response to a question about whether the Kirk shooting was being treated as part of a broader trend of violence against religious groups.

    The charges filed Tuesday carry two enhancements, including committing several of the crimes in front of or close to children and carrying out violence based on the subject’s political beliefs.

    Gray declined to say whether Robinson’s partner could face charges or whether anyone else might face charges.

    Kirk, a dominant figure in conservative politics, became a confidant of President Donald Trump after founding Arizona-based Turning Point USA, one of the nation’s largest political organizations. He brought young, conservative evangelical Christians into politics.

    In the days since Kirk’s assassination, Americans have found themselves facing questions about rising political violence, the deep divisions that brought the nation here and whether anything can change.

    Despite calls for greater civility, some who opposed Kirk’s provocative statements about gender, race and politics criticized him after his death. Many Republicans have led the push to punish anyone they believe dishonored him, causing both public and private workers to lose their jobs or face other consequences at work.

    ___

    Seewer reported from Toledo, Ohio.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Suspect left note saying he planned to kill Charlie Kirk, later confessed in texts, prosecutor says

    [ad_1]

    Prosecutors brought a murder charge Tuesday against the man accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk and outlined evidence, including a text message confession to his partner and a note left beforehand saying he had the opportunity to kill one of the nation’s leading conservative voices “and I’m going to take it.”DNA on the trigger of the rifle that killed Kirk also matched that of Tyler Robinson, Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray said while outlining the evidence and announcing charges that could result in the death penalty if Robinson is convicted.The prosecutor said Robinson, 22, wrote in one text that he spent more than a week planning the attack on Kirk, a prominent force in politics credited with energizing the Republican youth movement and helping Donald Trump win back the White House in 2024.”The murder of Charlie Kirk is an American tragedy,” Gray said.Kirk was gunned down Sept. 10 while speaking with students at Utah Valley University. Prosecutors allege Robinson shot Kirk in the neck with a bolt-action rifle from the roof of a nearby building on the campus in Orem, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Salt Lake City. Robinson appeared briefly Tuesday before a judge by video from jail. He nodded slightly at times but mostly stared straight ahead as the judge read the charges against him and appointed an attorney to represent him. Robinson’s family has declined to comment to The Associated Press since his arrest.Was Charlie Kirk targeted over anti-transgender views?Authorities have not revealed a clear motive in the shooting, but Gray said that Robinson wrote in a text about Kirk to his partner: “I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.”Robinson also left a note for his partner hidden under a keyboard that said, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it,” according to Gray.The prosecutor declined to answer whether Robinson targeted Kirk for his anti-transgender views. Kirk was shot while taking a question that touched on mass shootings, gun violence and transgender people.”That is for a jury to decide,” Gray said.Robinson was involved in a romantic relationship with his roommate, who investigators say was transgender, which hasn’t been confirmed. Gray said the partner has been cooperating with investigators.Robinson’s partner appeared shocked in the text exchange after the shooting, according to court documents, asking Robinson “why he did it and how long he’d been planning it.”Parents said their son became more politicalWhile authorities say Robinson hasn’t been cooperating with investigators, they say his family and friends have been talking.Robinson’s mother told investigators that their son had turned left politically in the last year and became more supportive of gay and transgender rights after dating someone who is transgender, Gray said.Those decisions prompted several conversations in the household, especially between Robinson and his father. They had different political views and Robinson told his partner in a text that his dad had become a “diehard MAGA” since Trump was elected.Robinson’s mother recognized him when authorities released a picture of the suspect and his parents confronted him, at which time Robinson said he wanted to kill himself, Gray said.The family persuaded him to meet with a family friend who is a retired sheriff’s deputy, who persuaded Robinson to turn himself in, the prosecutor said.Robinson was arrested late Thursday near St. George, the southern Utah community where he grew up, about 240 miles southwest of where the shooting happened.Robinson detailed movements after the shootingIn a text exchange with his partner released by authorities, Robinson wrote: “I had planned to grab my rifle from my drop point shortly after, but most of that side of town got locked down. Its quiet, almost enough to get out, but theres one vehicle lingering.”Then he wrote: “Going to attempt to retrieve it again, hopefully they have moved on. I haven’t seen anything about them finding it.” After that, he sent: “I can get close to it but there is a squad car parked right by it. I think they already swept that spot, but I don’t wanna chance it.”He also was worried about losing his grandfather’s rifle and mentioned several times in the texts that he wished he had picked it up, according to the texts shared in court documents, which did not have timestamps. It was unclear how long after the shooting Robinson was texting.”To be honest I had hoped to keep this secret till I died of old age. I am sorry to involve you,” Robinson wrote in another text to his partner.Prosecutor says Robinson told partner to delete textsRobinson discarded the rifle and clothing and asked his roommate to conceal evidence, Gray said.Robinson was charged with felony discharge of a firearm, punishable by up to life in prison, and obstructing justice, punishable by up to 15 years in prison.He also was charged with witness tampering because he had directed his partner to delete their text messages and told his partner to stay silent if questioned by police, Gray said.Kash Patel says investigators will look at everyoneFBI Director Kash Patel said Tuesday that agents are looking at “anyone and everyone” who was involved in a gaming chatroom on the social media platform Discord with Robinson. The chatroom involved “a lot more” than 20 people, he said during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in Washington.”We are investigating Charlie’s assassination fully and completely and running out every lead related to any allegation of broader violence,” Patel said in response to a question about whether the Kirk shooting was being treated as part of a broader trend of violence against religious groups.The charges filed Tuesday carry two enhancements, including committing several of the crimes in front of or close to children and carrying out violence based on the subject’s political beliefs.Gray declined to say whether Robinson’s partner could face charges or whether anyone else might face charges.Kirk, a dominant figure in conservative politics, became a confidant of President Donald Trump after founding Arizona-based Turning Point USA, one of the nation’s largest political organizations. He brought young, conservative evangelical Christians into politics.In the days since Kirk’s assassination, Americans have found themselves facing questions about rising political violence, the deep divisions that brought the nation here and whether anything can change.Despite calls for greater civility, some who opposed Kirk’s provocative statements about gender, race and politics criticized him after his death. Many Republicans have led the push to punish anyone they believe dishonored him, causing both public and private workers to lose their jobs or face other consequences at work.___Seewer reported from Toledo, Ohio.

    PROVO, Utah —

    Prosecutors brought a murder charge Tuesday against the man accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk and outlined evidence, including a text message confession to his partner and a note left beforehand saying he had the opportunity to kill one of the nation’s leading conservative voices “and I’m going to take it.”

    DNA on the trigger of the rifle that killed Kirk also matched that of Tyler Robinson, Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray said while outlining the evidence and announcing charges that could result in the death penalty if Robinson is convicted.

    The prosecutor said Robinson, 22, wrote in one text that he spent more than a week planning the attack on Kirk, a prominent force in politics credited with energizing the Republican youth movement and helping Donald Trump win back the White House in 2024.

    “The murder of Charlie Kirk is an American tragedy,” Gray said.

    Kirk was gunned down Sept. 10 while speaking with students at Utah Valley University. Prosecutors allege Robinson shot Kirk in the neck with a bolt-action rifle from the roof of a nearby building on the campus in Orem, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Salt Lake City.

    Robinson appeared briefly Tuesday before a judge by video from jail. He nodded slightly at times but mostly stared straight ahead as the judge read the charges against him and appointed an attorney to represent him. Robinson’s family has declined to comment to The Associated Press since his arrest.

    FBI

    Tyler Robinson, suspect in Charlie Kirk’s assassination

    Was Charlie Kirk targeted over anti-transgender views?

    Authorities have not revealed a clear motive in the shooting, but Gray said that Robinson wrote in a text about Kirk to his partner: “I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.”

    Robinson also left a note for his partner hidden under a keyboard that said, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it,” according to Gray.

    The prosecutor declined to answer whether Robinson targeted Kirk for his anti-transgender views. Kirk was shot while taking a question that touched on mass shootings, gun violence and transgender people.

    “That is for a jury to decide,” Gray said.

    Robinson was involved in a romantic relationship with his roommate, who investigators say was transgender, which hasn’t been confirmed. Gray said the partner has been cooperating with investigators.

    Robinson’s partner appeared shocked in the text exchange after the shooting, according to court documents, asking Robinson “why he did it and how long he’d been planning it.”

    Parents said their son became more political

    While authorities say Robinson hasn’t been cooperating with investigators, they say his family and friends have been talking.

    Robinson’s mother told investigators that their son had turned left politically in the last year and became more supportive of gay and transgender rights after dating someone who is transgender, Gray said.

    Those decisions prompted several conversations in the household, especially between Robinson and his father. They had different political views and Robinson told his partner in a text that his dad had become a “diehard MAGA” since Trump was elected.

    Robinson’s mother recognized him when authorities released a picture of the suspect and his parents confronted him, at which time Robinson said he wanted to kill himself, Gray said.

    The family persuaded him to meet with a family friend who is a retired sheriff’s deputy, who persuaded Robinson to turn himself in, the prosecutor said.

    Robinson was arrested late Thursday near St. George, the southern Utah community where he grew up, about 240 miles southwest of where the shooting happened.

    Robinson detailed movements after the shooting

    In a text exchange with his partner released by authorities, Robinson wrote: “I had planned to grab my rifle from my drop point shortly after, but most of that side of town got locked down. Its quiet, almost enough to get out, but theres one vehicle lingering.”

    Then he wrote: “Going to attempt to retrieve it again, hopefully they have moved on. I haven’t seen anything about them finding it.” After that, he sent: “I can get close to it but there is a squad car parked right by it. I think they already swept that spot, but I don’t wanna chance it.”

    He also was worried about losing his grandfather’s rifle and mentioned several times in the texts that he wished he had picked it up, according to the texts shared in court documents, which did not have timestamps. It was unclear how long after the shooting Robinson was texting.

    “To be honest I had hoped to keep this secret till I died of old age. I am sorry to involve you,” Robinson wrote in another text to his partner.

    Prosecutor says Robinson told partner to delete texts

    Robinson discarded the rifle and clothing and asked his roommate to conceal evidence, Gray said.

    Robinson was charged with felony discharge of a firearm, punishable by up to life in prison, and obstructing justice, punishable by up to 15 years in prison.

    He also was charged with witness tampering because he had directed his partner to delete their text messages and told his partner to stay silent if questioned by police, Gray said.

    Kash Patel says investigators will look at everyone

    FBI Director Kash Patel said Tuesday that agents are looking at “anyone and everyone” who was involved in a gaming chatroom on the social media platform Discord with Robinson. The chatroom involved “a lot more” than 20 people, he said during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in Washington.

    “We are investigating Charlie’s assassination fully and completely and running out every lead related to any allegation of broader violence,” Patel said in response to a question about whether the Kirk shooting was being treated as part of a broader trend of violence against religious groups.

    The charges filed Tuesday carry two enhancements, including committing several of the crimes in front of or close to children and carrying out violence based on the subject’s political beliefs.

    Gray declined to say whether Robinson’s partner could face charges or whether anyone else might face charges.

    Kirk, a dominant figure in conservative politics, became a confidant of President Donald Trump after founding Arizona-based Turning Point USA, one of the nation’s largest political organizations. He brought young, conservative evangelical Christians into politics.

    In the days since Kirk’s assassination, Americans have found themselves facing questions about rising political violence, the deep divisions that brought the nation here and whether anything can change.

    Despite calls for greater civility, some who opposed Kirk’s provocative statements about gender, race and politics criticized him after his death. Many Republicans have led the push to punish anyone they believe dishonored him, causing both public and private workers to lose their jobs or face other consequences at work.

    ___

    Seewer reported from Toledo, Ohio.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Clemson Professor Calls For More Assassinations

    [ad_1]



    Clemson University is standing by at least three professors who were caught celebrating the assassination of civil rights leader Charlie Kirk, including one professor who called for the outright murder of all conservatives.

    “In a world full of Charlie Kirks and Brian Thompsons, be a Tyler Robinson or a Luigi Mangione,” wrote one Clemson staffer.

    President Trump shared a post on Truth Social accusing the university of inciting violence against conservatives and called on the South Carolina legislature to hold a special session to deal with the controversy.

    The university confirmed that one person had been suspended.

    “Effective immediately, an employee has been suspended pending further investigation into social media posts. This action reflects the seriousness with which Clemson approaches violations of its standards and values,” Clemson said in a statement. “As this is a personnel matter, no further details will be disclosed at this time. Clemson University remains committed to upholding the principles of the U.S. Constitution and the employment laws of the State of South Carolina.”

    Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) says that’s not enough.

    “Clemson must hold ALL accountable,” she wrote on X. “Suspension is not enough. Call an emergency meeting of the Board of Trustees. SC Legislature should call a special session to defund Clemson until they do what is right, ethically and morally. No radicalization of our kids in colleges. Enough is enough.”

    Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) added his voice to the growing number of outraged taxpayers.

    “Your First Amendment rights do not include a right to a job,” he wrote on X. “Clemson’s professors were completely inappropriate. The vile and disgusting celebration of a murder must compel the university to take clear and immediate action.”

    The Board of Trustees is expected to hold an emergency meeting later Monday.

    “Sadly, this comes from the tone Clemson set by not immediately firing the employees who glorified political violence,” Rep. Ralph Norman wrote on X. “Other universities have fired employees and expelled students for this behavior. For the safety of the students, Clemson must take action or lose every cent of funding.”

    Syndicated with permission from ToddStarnes.com – founded by best-selling author and journalist Todd Starnes. Starnes is the recipient of an RTNDA Edward R. Murrow Award and the Associated Press Mark Twain Award for Storytelling.

    [ad_2]

    Todd Starnes

    Source link

  • Social media didn’t kill Charlie Kirk

    [ad_1]

    In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, a new cottage industry of rage has arisen. And while anger and horror at this act of violence are understandable, they’re also taking Americans to some dark places, where retribution must be had against anyone who said negative things about Kirk after his death and politicians posture about punishing people who (crassly, but nonviolently) celebrated Kirk’s death. A lot of this seems to hinge on the idea that hateful “rhetoric” is responsible for Kirk’s killing; one particularly prevalent strain of this specifically indicts online speech and social media.

    It’s social media that led to Kirk’s assassination, the refrain goes, and it’s social media that’s driving all sorts of political violence.

    But social media platforms don’t kill people. People kill people.

    That seems banal to point out, I know. Reductive, perhaps. But so much discourse right now attributes an almost supernatural influence to social media and to online speech and communities. And that’s reductive, too—in addition to being pretty unmoored from reality.

    “I believe that social media has played a direct role in every single assassination and assassination attempt that we have seen over the last five, six years,” said Utah Gov. Spencer Cox on Meet the Press yesterday. Social media companies “have figured out how to hack our brains” and “get us to hate each other,” Cox said.

    It’s not just politicians spewing a mind-control theory of political violence. “I think the main problem here isn’t this killer’s ideology,” posted the pundit Noah Blum on Friday. “It’s that the internet radicalizes people to do increasingly greater violence on a scarily regular basis and nobody really knows what to do about it.”

    We hear some version of this in the aftermath of many tragic or senseless events. It’s not enough for people to blame disturbed or immoral individuals who do bad things. It’s not even enough to blame the dubious influence of “right-wing extremism” or “left-wing extremism” or “political polarization.” People blame tech companies, sometimes even suggesting they’re directly responsible because they failed to stop hateful speech—or misinformation, or divisive rhetoric—on social media.

    But the idea that people—especially young men—would not be radicalized if it weren’t for social media belies most of human history.

    I’ve been listening recently to a podcast called A Twist of History. One episode details Adolf Hitler’s attempt to overthrow the Weimar Republic in 1923. Another episode features a riot during a Shakespearean performance in New York City in 1849, fomented by Ned Buntline, a nativist newspaper pundit with ambitions of fame and notoriety. Both instances featured fringe political elements, violence, and deaths.

    History is littered with examples like these: men driven to violence by people in close physical proximity, sometimes with the help of inflammatory political rhetoric printed in pamphlets and newspapers.

    The type of violence that people engage in does seem somewhat era-dependent. Sometimes it was more likely to be large group violence, acting as part of political movements or criminal gangs. Sometimes it was more likely to be small group violence, committed by racist clubs, radical activist groups, and so on. (And, surely, many manically violent men throughout history have been killed in wars or bar fights before they had a chance to do other damage.)

    Ours is an era of lone-wolf violence, though it is not the first one.

    Because of our hyper-connected world, and because of the sensationalistic nature of public shootings, it can feel like things are worse than ever. In another time, we wouldn’t have have heard of every racist lynching, every street gang fight, and so on.

    But even from what we can glean, looking back, it seems clear that we’re not living in some exceptionally violent time.

    Is the internet capable of radicalizing people?

    On some level, the answer is yes, of course. But this is simply because the internet, and social media, are such huge parts of our lives. They are where people spend time, spread ideas, and consume ideologies. They are locusts of just about everything good, and everything bad, about our offline world.

    “The internet is culture now, the way television once was for our parents, our grandparents, maybe even us,” Katherine Dee wrote on her Substack this week. “Every aspect of our lives flows through it. There’s no such thing as ‘very Online’ or ‘not Online.’ It’s all of us, all the time, always.”

    People will point to algorithms and profit motives, epistemic closure and endless scroll—all sorts of things that supposedly make social media or the internet generally a unique breeder of polarization and radicalism and misinformation. But we have an ever-growing body of research suggesting that, for the average person, being on social media isn’t making things worse (and, in some ways, could be making it better).

    We live in ideologically charged and politically polarized times. A lot of our media and our political debates and our discussions with each other reflect this. But the fact that so much of this comes seeping out on social media may simply be a symptom.

    Online speech is the most visible manifestation of any rot in our system or culture. But it does not mean that Facebook, or TikTok, or X, or any of the countless niche forums out there are the cause of the rot.

    Yes, the shooter was steeped in internet meme culture, as evidenced by messages printed on his bullets: “an internet-specific brand of trollish nihilism adopted by many recent shooters,” as my colleague C.J. Ciaramella put it. But I think it’s foolish—a combination of determined presentism, tech panic, and lack of imagination—to suggest that Kirk’s shooter pulled the trigger only because of ideas or attitudes that he encountered online.

    For one thing, we can’t actually say what spawned the shooter’s idea that assassinating someone was a good idea, or his belief that Kirk was an appropriate symbolic target for his agenda. Maybe people around him offline encouraged it. Maybe voices in his head told him to. At this point, we don’t know.

    But if he encountered bad ideas online, it’s because the internet is now where we encounter ideas. If he cloaked his violence in the language of internet memes, it’s because that’s where culture is these days.

    In another era, he may have encountered bad ideas at a town hall and dressed up his horrific act in different slogans. But a man with a capacity for such premeditated and dramatic violence is a man with a capacity for such things in any era. And conversely, countless billions of people encounter the same online ecosystem without committing assassinations.

    Reaching for modern technology as the explanation reeks of an ideological agenda of its own.

    None of this is to say that particular vectors of online radicalization shouldn’t be identified. People can and should study such routes, and consider ways to combat them, just as their predecessors tried to stop people from being sucked into the Ku Klux Klan, the mob, and so on. But looking for particular pathways here (if such a thing can be done) is different from condemning social media and the internet universally. We might as well have blamed the buildings where extremists gathered, or the paper and ink that allowed them to communicate.

    “Social media is simply the way we talk and communicate in this day and age, for better or worse,” Colorado Gov. Jared Polis said yesterday on ABC’s This Week. “What I would focus on is condemning the act of violence. It’s not the free speech that led to this. It’s not the fact that people can talk and communicate online. It’s the actions of an unhinged, evil individual.”

    More Sex & Tech News

    @seungminkim/X

     

    • Kaytlin Bailey, founder and executive director of the sex worker rights group Old Pros, will be debating Melanie Thompson of the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women about whether paying for sex should be a crime. The debate, part of the Soho Forum, is happening live tonight in Manhattan and will also be livestreamed on Reason’s YouTube channel.

    • The Trump administration is referring to birth control as an abortifacient (that is, something that causes abortion). “President Trump is committed to protecting the lives of unborn children all around the world,” a United States Agency for International Development spokesperson told The New York Times when asked about birth control pills, IUDs, and hormonal implants that had been slated for low-income countries. “The administration will no longer supply abortifacient birth control under the guise of foreign aid.”

    • “Federal regulators and elected officials are moving to crack down on AI chatbots over perceived risks to children’s safety. However, the proposed measures could ultimately put more children at risk,” writes Reason‘s Jack Nicastro.

    • Korean “comfort women” are suing the U.S. military.

    • “OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, is supporting a California proposal to impose age verification requirements on app stores and device-makers, adding to the chorus of tech giants praising the measure hours before state lawmakers’ deadline to approve bills for this year,” reports Politico.

    • A new study pitted some researchers against humans in debates and some against artificial intelligence chatbots. Can you guess who fared better? (The answer is not as straightforward as one might expect.)

    Today’s Image

    Turning Point USA booth at CPAC | 2014 (ENB/Reason)

    [ad_2]

    Elizabeth Nolan Brown

    Source link

  • Video: What Charlie Kirk Meant to His Young Supporters

    [ad_1]

    new video loaded: What Charlie Kirk Meant to His Young Supporters

    transcript

    transcript

    What Charlie Kirk Meant to His Young Supporters

    At a memorial outside of the hospital where Charlie Kirk died, mourners described his impact on younger generations.

    “He actually played a big role in how I thought about politics, and how I put politics and God together. One day I was scrolling on TikTok. It was probably like 2020. I found him and I really just loved what he was saying.” “I think her finding him helped her develop that sense of confidence. This will affect us.” “I wanted to come put big balloons or flowers. Pay my respects.” “I was so heartbroken.” “I bet.” “When they told me Charlie was gone. Just because somebody says something you don’t like doesn’t mean you get to kill people. He didn’t deserve it. I am 10 years old, and how I learned about Charlie Kirk was he did these really great shows. And one of the most important things that he said is: I love God, I love my family, and I love my country.” “He kind of said what we were all thinking. Just that traditional families is just — that’s just how families are supposed to be done. That’s what resonated with a lot of us.” “I’m not really big on politics. I was a little bit more in between, and just kept the peace and didn’t speak my mind. Honestly, going forward, this makes me more empowered to feel a little bit more conservative and speak my mind honestly, because I’m just so sick of it.” “It feels we’re on the brink of something that’s a little bit scary, but a little bit revolutionary.” “Him passing is just I feel like hard on everyone in our community right now.”

    [ad_2]

    Kassie Bracken, Jeremy Raff, Mark Boyer, Monika Cvorak and Shawn Paik

    Source link

  • What we know about Charlie Kirk shooting suspect Tyler Robinson

    [ad_1]

    (CNN) — Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old in custody as the suspect in the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, registered to vote with no party affiliation and hadn’t cast a ballot in the two most recent elections.

    But a family member told investigators that Robinson “had become more political in recent years,” Utah Governor Spencer Cox said at a press conference Friday morning – and in particular had lashed out at Kirk, the family member said.

    Authorities, who have described Kirk’s killing as a “political assassination,” discovered anti-fascist messages engraved on ammunition with a rifle near the site of the shooting that hint at that political transformation, Cox said.

    Those messages included one that said, “Hey fascist! Catch!” and another that appeared to reference an Italian anti-fascist song.

    Robinson grew up in Washington, Utah, and earned a scholarship to attend Utah State University after a strong academic record in high school, but dropped out after just one semester, according to public records, social media and a university statement.

    Voter registration records show that Robinson is registered to vote unaffiliated with any party, although he is also listed as an “inactive” voter, meaning he hadn’t voted in at least the most recent two general elections.

    Social media photos show Robinson wearing grey Converse shoes and sunglasses that appear similar to those worn by the shooting suspect in photos released by law enforcement earlier this week.

    Cox said at the press conference that a family member of Robinson had reached out to a family friend Thursday night, and the family friend told the Washington County Sheriff’s Office that “Robinson had confessed to them or implied that he had committed the incident.”

    Robinson was taken into custody around 10 p.m. Thursday night, after a 33-hour manhunt, FBI Director Kash Patel said Friday.

    Robinson’s hometown is a quiet suburb of St. George, a city in the southwest corner of the state. It’s about a three-and-a-half-hour drive from Utah Valley University, where Kirk was gunned down on Wednesday afternoon while holding a campus event.

    Cox said that a family member of Robinson had told investigators that at a recent family dinner, Robinson had mentioned Kirk’s upcoming Utah Valley event, and “they talked about why they didn’t like him and the viewpoints that he had,” Cox said. “The family member also stated Kirk was full of hate and spreading hate.”

    The bolt-action rifle Robinson used and left in a wooded area near the campus had various phrases engraved on the bullet casings, Cox said, including “Oh bella ciao, bella ciao, bella ciao, ciao ciao,” which appeared to reference an Italian anti-fascist song.

    Other engravings hinted more at connections to online trolling and memes, including one that said, “If you read this, you are gay LMAO.”

    Robinson graduated from Pine View High School in St. George in 2021, a spokesperson for the school confirmed. He received a resident presidential scholarship to attend Utah State University, according to a Facebook video his mother posted of him reading a letter about the award.

    A spokesperson for the university said in statement Friday that Robinson “briefly attended Utah State University for one semester in 2021.”

    Kirk’s American Comeback Tour had an event scheduled at Utah State University on September 30.

    [ad_2]

    Casey Tolan, Isabelle Chapman, Allison Gordon and CNN

    Source link

  • ‘We Got Him:’ Charlie Kirk Shooting Suspect In Custody

    [ad_1]



    Authorities on Friday confirmed the suspect in the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk is in custody.

    The suspect was identified as Tyler Robinson, 22, of Utah.

    “We got him,” Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said at a Friday news conference.

    Cox said that on Thursday night, a family member of Robinson’s “reached out to a family friend,” saying Robinson had implicated himself in the shooting. The friend then contacted authorities, who took Robinson into custody.

    Law enforcement interviewed a family member of the suspect, who said that Robinson had become “more political in recent years,” Cox said.

    The unidentified family member shared a recent incident in which Robinson mentioned Kirk was coming to speak at the Utah Valley University campus, where Kirk was shot and killed.

    Robinson said he didn’t like Kirk’s political viewpoints and thought he was “full of hate and spreading hate,” the family member told authorities, Cox said.

    Investigators then interviewed Robinson’s roommate, who showed them various messages on Discord, a free communication platform, one of which referenced Robinson saying he needed to retrieve a rifle from a drop point. The messages also referenced engraving bullets.

    Authorities found the bolt action rifle Thursday believed to be used in Wednesday’s assassination. Bullets were found inside the rifle, one of which was engraved with the message, “Hey fascist! Catch!” Cox said. 

    Earlier Friday, President Donald Trump told Fox News the suspect in the killing of  Kirk has been caught. Kirk was a close ally of Trump.

    “I think with a high degree of certainty, we have him,” Trump told Fox & Friends. “Essentially, someone who knew him turned him in.” 

    As previously reported by The Center Square, the Utah Department of Public Safety released photos depicting the person of interest on Thursday.

    Authorities had initially detained two individuals at different times following the shooting but released them after determining neither was involved.

    Kirk, the Turning Point USA founder and ally of Trump, was shot in the neck while speaking at his “American Comeback Tour” on Utah Valley University’s campus Wednesday. He was pronounced dead shortly thereafter, leaving behind his wife and two children under the age of 5.

    School authorities traced the shots to the roof of the Losee Center, about 200 yards from the outdoor event.

    The FBI, along with the Utah Department of Public Safety, is leading the investigation.

    Syndicated with permission from The Center Square.

    [ad_2]

    Dan McCaleb – The Center Square

    Source link