How Media Matters Assassinated Charlie Kirk – Part 5

Media Matters was so obsessed with attacking Charlie Kirk that they created a standalone “Charlie Kirk” directory that contained most of their attack pieces. Counting just the pieces that were in this directory, they created at least 720 attack pieces targeting Charlie. And of course, there were many more outside this directory that referenced Charlie and Turning Point USA.

They present themselves as if they’re an objective media watchdog group that “speaks truth to power”. But there is zero content here that is close to objective, fair, or honest. It is all propaganda intended to smear, malign, and ultimately destroy their target.

What makes them especially dangerous is that they have powerful connections to media and politicians whose thirst for power and influence is so great that they have sold any semblance of integrity in order to help Media Matters “win” debates not on the battlefield of ideas as America’s founders intended, but by dishonestly casting aspersions and impugning their targets.

Since Charlie’s death they have updated their description to say that Charlie Kirk “had a history of pushing right-wing hoaxes and conspiracy theories”. The only ones who deal in hoaxes and conspiracy theories are themselves.

Remember how Media Matters works. They don’t make up stories. Instead, they carefully select and frame their target’s actual words in ways that they know will be taken out of content in order to promote whatever narrative they wanted to push. They are propagandists, no different than Joseph Goebbels, Hideki Tojo, or Mao Tse-Tung.

Citizens in Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, or Communist China couldn’t say anything about the propagandists of their day. But as long as we have the First Amendment, we can speak against propagandists that surround us.

Let’s take a look at how Media Matters systematically attacked Charlie Kirk to the point where millions of people irrationally saw him as a danger to society, and one lunatic with a gun decided to act on it.

I don’t have the time to go through all 720+, but I chose 56 different attack pieces that demonstrate the dishonest tactics they use and the danger they pose to the spirit of the First Amendment.

2016 – A 23 year old Charlie Kirk gets on Media Matters’ Radar

Media Matter published its first hit piece on Charlie Kirk when he was 23 years old. This first piece was an “expose” on one of Charlie’s earliest projects: a Web site called Professor Watchlist where students could report professors who advanced leftist propaganda.

Note Media Matters’ tactics this early in the game. We’ll see these patterns repeated over and over again.

  1. False equivalency. In the headline they immediately compare Charlie Kirk to Joseph McCarthy. Lazy readers will instantly think “Joseph McCarthy had a list, and Charlie Kirk has a list too”.

    It’s only after you think about it that you realize there’s no equivalency. McCarthy’s “list” was to blacklist people into losing their jobs for having associations with Communists. Kirk’s “list” was simply a Web site where students could help each other out by sharing information about professors who showed bias in their teaching and their grading, so conservative and independent students could avoid them. No one was getting bullied, no one was getting publicly humiliated, no one was calling for these professors to be fired.

    You see the irony, right? It’s Media Matters who routinely bullies people, tries to publicly humiliate them, and calls for them to be fired or boycotted. But they are allowed to continue with their lies and distortion, while hypocritically called a 23 year old kid who put up a Web site to be publicly shamed.
  2. Optics. Look at the image of Charlie Kirk that they used. Sometime went through an entire video to find a screen capture where they could present him in the worse light possible. Propagandists do not stop at words, they use every method available to belittle, denigrate, and mock their victims.

2018 – Media Matters begins painting Charlie Kirk as a “racist”

By 2018, Media Matters was already sensing the “danger” of Charlie Kirk and Turning Point USA.

Let’s take a look at this article. It’s the first example of many where Media Matters will employ what Scott Adams calls “talking past the sale”. They want you to scan the headline and see “Fox news ran 50 segments”, “fearmongering”, “driving outrage”.

Notice the one thing they didn’t address: were these segments on Fox News accurate?

The segments on Fox News were them rebroadcasting videos from Campus Reform where they interviewed college students (all, mind you, who have signed releases permitting their use on TV).

Here’s what I never liked about the way Campus Reform cut these videos. They take a small soundbite of a few words, string them together, and play them in a way that the Fox News hosts can laugh and mock them.

Here’s the irony. They were doing the exact same thing that Media Matters had been doing for years. It’s the trick of being able to say, “this is what this person said this IN THEIR OWN WORDS, and here they are ON VIDEO” saying it. But it’s dishonest and isn’t real journalism. It’s propaganda, no matter who does it.

But this was the first of many examples of Media Matters taking the splinter out of Campus Reform’s eye without looking at the log in theirs.

Speaking of “in their own words”. this is the first of many examples I found where Media Matters simply posted a video and a short transcript without comment.

Why did they do this? The answer is simple. They know that practically no one is going to click on the video or read the transcript. The vast majority of people will simply read the headlines. And the headline they want people to come away with is Charlie Kirk saying “Diversity…is Not Skin Color“.

Remember what was happening in the country at that time. The vast majority of Americans still believed The Fine People Hoax from Charlottesville a year earlier. The concept of DEI was starting to take root corporate America—it just needed a catalyst, which George Floyd would provide in two years.

Do you notice the “MMFA” in the upper right-hand corner? It means that Media Matters didn’t link to the original video, but created a copy of the original video that they could host on their own site. One of the main purposes is so they can choose the “freeze frame” that appears as the image on the site. Notice that even in this small detail they propagandize; their goal was to juxtapose a young, relatively unknown “White supremacist” against a Black Senator who many felt at the time would be the Second Coming of Barack Obama.

What was lost in all this, of course, was that every word Charlie Kirk said in this interview was true. But truth doesn’t matter to Media Matters. All that matters is the smear.

Just three posts in you can already start to see the first pattern that Media Matters plans to smear Charlie Kirk. Charlie is a white young man wearing a suit and tie. They wanted Charlie to be the face of what they would come to call “White supremacy”, and would continue to paint Charlie Kirk as a racist for the rest of his life.

Facts mean nothing to these people. It’s all about optics. Again, look at how carefully the headline is crafted for those who just skim it. “Charlie Kirk…blames….Black community”.

But if you listen to the video (which Media Matters counts on people NOT doing), you’ll see that Charlie is not attacking the black community. Instead, he’s seeing the enormous rise of violence in the Black community and is desperately trying to help them. And he’s not just speaking in generalities, he brings facts. The single motherhood rate in the Black community in Chicago rose from 18% in the 1960s to 75% today. When young boys do not have a father figure in their lives, they turn elsewhere for that influence.

Here’s what the left does. Instead of working together to find a solution, they immediately accuse the right of racism. The Chicago Tribune talks about “The dangerous myth of the ‘missing Black father'”, and accuse the right of attacking single mothers.

Who gets hurt the most when the left does that. Ask any Black single mother if they wished they had a loving husband and father in the house to help lead and provide for her family. Ironically, it’s the destruction of the nuclear family and the decay of morality and personal responsibility that the Left has pushed for since 1964 that caused most of these single mothers’ situation in the first place.

Did you also notice one thing? Charlie believes that the Black community can improve themselves and change for the better. The left does not. The only solution they have is for the Black community to come begging to the White community with their hands out for money that may buy stuff but will never address the root problem. That is the true racism.

Here, Media Matters turns to mockery, another one of their go-to weapons and the fifth of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, which they follow faithfully.

I asked ChatGPT to analyze the design choice of this image. Here’s what it said. Remember that Media Matters does not just use words, but visuals in their smears.

The article itself reviews one of Charlie’s early books and mocks it as a “sloppy and incoherent mess”. It peppers in phrases like “white grievance”, “mocking the plights of minorities”, “posturing as an alpha tough guy”, “performatively howl like a whipped dog”.

The article itself is almost too pathetic to address. In it, the author whines that he was blocked by Charlie on Twitter for a single post, failing to mention that he spammed Charlie’s account with post after post of insults without the slightest interest of honest debate.

2019 – Was Charlie Kirk a Racist? Media Matters continues spreading its poison

By 2019, Turning Point USA started to gain traction in college campuses. Media Matters whipped out a new tactic: Guilt By Association.

Remember that their weapon of choice is the headline. And here it’s clear what their intent is. To present Turning Point USA as a racist organization, no different than the KKK or a white supremacist group.

What was Media Matters’ “overwhelming proof” of Turning Point USA’s supposed “racism”?

  • Words that people who simply attended Turning Point USA conferences shared on their personal social media accounts.
  • Words from people who were fired from Turning Point USA for the very offenses Media Matters accuses Turning Point USA of espousing.
  • Words that Charlie Kirk typed that reported factual information (e.g. that it is rare for police officers to kill unarmed black men).
  • Words that were clearly said as jokes (e.g. Benny Johnson quipping about “how many white people” he saw in the audience)
  • Words that Charlie Kirk said in defense of friends like Tucker Carlson.

Let’s do a little mental exercise. If the tables were turned and Media Matters for America were to be judged by every inarticulate, uninformed, or outlandish, or despicable thing THEIR audience said, how do you think that would go for THEM?

But Media Matters had its headline. These incidents of racism just keep happening.

If to this day you still believe that Charlie Kirk was a racist, and if you are interested in intellectual honesty, I invite you read these:

There are so many more examples from the Black community of people who loved Charlie Kirk that this post would not be able to fit them.

Here, Media Matters describes the following “extremists” who were invited by the Trump Administration to attend a social media summit: Carpe Donktum, Prager University, Will Chamberlain, Brent Bozell, Heritage Foundation, Ryan Fournier, James O’Keefe, Matt Gaetz, Marsha Blackburn, Tim Pool, Benny Johnson, The Gateway Pundit, and Lila Rose, and of course, Charlie Kirk.

Note the intellectual dishonesty in its “proof” that Charlie Kirk is an extremist.

  • Cherry picking isolated incidents of individuals to paint the entire TPUSA as “racist”.
  • Citing a statistic that Charlie quoted as “proof” of his racism. The only problem with that is the statistic was absolutely true.
  • More “guilt by association”. Unbelievably, Media Matters is accusing Charlie Kirk of pushing “hoaxes and smears” simply because he cited a video that had also been cited by another account that (supposedly) was pro-QAnon.

This is an early case where Media Matters looks to paint Charlie as a “climate change denier” as by now they have successfully branded him as a “known racist” in their circles. Remember that climate change hysteria was being pushed by the mainstream media; 62% of Americans had already been brainwashed into thinking that every snowstorm, hurricane, and temperature high was caused by man-made climate change.

Charlie was one of the early people to call the alarmism for what it was: political theater. Notice even at this young age he didn’t fall into the trap of saying that rising temperatures was a hoax, a common trap that Media Matters sets. Instead, he cut through the crap and went straight for those in power exploiting climate change for their political power.

2020

At this point, Charlie is still not well know, so Media Matters still has to remind people that he’s a “top Trump ally” as it works non-stop in preparation for the 2020 Election to hit Trump from every angle they can.

In this case, they’re using COVID to paint Charlie as a “dumb white guy” and a “science denier”. Again, look at the carefully crafted headlline. “Charlie Kirk”, “doesn’t believe”, “science”. It’s a ludicrous attempt to frame one of the most brilliant and well-read political figures on either side.

History would prove him to be correct. While a properly fitted N95 mask can be effective in blocking viruses, the vast majority of people wore cloth masks (which did nothing), surgical masks (which did nothing), or KN95 or N95 masks (which were usually put on wrong). We saw ludicrous videos of kids playing musical instruments through masks, people cutting holes in their masks to eat, and more insanity during these years.

But truth means little to the progressive Left. Masks became the Left’s favorite way of virtue signaling (years before they would discover the Ukranian flag).

This was one of several incidents where Charlie’s Twitter account, at the time with a reach of almost 2 million followers, was locked. Media Matters doesn’t waste time in branding him as a “liar”.

What was the real story? ProPublica had published a story titled “Pennsylvania’s Rejection of 372,000 Ballot Applications Bewilders Voters and Strains Election Staff”. Many media outlets had amplified this story, using “Ballots” instead of “Ballot Applications”. Charlie’s Tweet simply reflected what many media outlets were reporting.

The leftists we learned about in The Twitter Files were quick to single out Charlie for “election misinformation”. Media Matters gleefully piled on, calling Charlie a “liar”.

What was lost in all this? While Media Matters pilloried Charlie’s Tweet over one missing word, they intentionally glossed over the main point: that whether you’re talking about “ballots” or “ballot applications” being rejected, in both cases it points to the inherent problems with mail-in voting, and how easily it can be used for fraud.

In 2020, Biden’s margin of victory was 0.23% in Georgia (11,779). In 2024, Trump’s margin of victory in that same state was 2.2% respectively when mail-in ballots declined.

A handful of states have instituted mandatory all-mail voting, where ballots are mailed to all voters without requiring a request. Those states include California, Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington.

I’ll pull a Media Matters and leave that last sentence as “presented without comment”.

2021

To understand this accusation, it’s important to recall the broader context of that period. At the time, Twitter, still under its previous management, repeatedly suspended Charlie Kirk’s account for so-called “COVID-19 misinformation.” One of those suspensions stemmed from discussions about hydroxychloroquine as a possible therapeutic, a topic that was being actively debated among scientists and physicians worldwide. He was later suspended again for alleged “voter misinformation,” and yet again in March 2022 for “misgendering.”

These incidents occurred before Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter, which led to the reversal of many politically motivated suspensions. In retrospect, it’s remarkable how swiftly mainstream platforms and their media allies sought to silence dissenting viewpoints rather than engage them.

Accusing others of “fascism” has long been a rhetorical habit of the left, but the censorship and narrative control practiced during that era reveal something far closer to authoritarian behavior on their own side. Media Matters, rather than serving as a watchdog for truth, often acted as an enforcer for that orthodoxy.

This one got a lot of play. There was a questioner at a TPUSA event that asked a hypothetical question.

“At this point we’re living under corporate and medical fascism. This is tyranny. When do we get to use the guns? That’s not a joke. I mean literally, where’s the line, how many elections are we going to steal before we start killing these people”.

Charlie Kirk recognized right away that this man was falling into a trap, and given how quickly Media Matters instantly pounced on it, his instincts were spot on.

When people started to applaud, he told them “no”, “hold on” and “stop”. He immediately said, “I’m going to denounce that and I’ll tell you why. Because you’re playing into all their plans…they are trying to provoke you and everyone here. They are trying to make you do something that will be violent, that will justify a takeover of your freedoms and liberties the likes of which we have never seen”.

Media Matters does post the unedited video and the transcript, but again, they know no one will read it. They had their headline that people could scan and read “election lies”, “TPUSA member”, “use the guns”, “kill these people”.

Did you see all the rioting on the Right when Charlie Kirk was murdered? Of course not. And that’s the living legacy of Charlie Kirk. The BLM riots showed us all that MLK’s legacy of non-violence is gone. Charlie Kirk was confident in teaching us all about non-violence because he knew that when your side has the truth, you don’t need to resort to violence.

Media Matters decided to play the same card that they used to get Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck in trouble: thinking they had a “smoking gun” with the last comment, they wrote this piece as a “greatest hits” piece that aggregated all of their previous hit pieces.

Their goal was obviously to get their hoards of useful idiots to take this link and spread it en masse to colleges, speaking venues, donors, and sponsors to warn them: if you associate with Charlie Kirk, we’re going to drag your name into the mud along with his.

What Media Matters didn’t realize at this time that they had met their match in Charlie Kirk. In fact, Charlie Kirk had defeated them. In the case of Rush and Glenn, they could attack through advertisers’ woke marketing departments and cowardly executives and boards. But Charlie Kirk’s movement was grassroots—not astroturfed like Media Matters’ own followers, but genuine. Sponsors saw millions of customers in their target demo and those who hitched their wagon to TPUSA saw huge success.

TPUSA and events such as AmFest would continue to grow, and would go on to play a major role in the 2024 election.

Just 5 hours after posting the last article, TPUSA is still pathetically trying to make “when do we use the guns” a thing. They’re seeing that the social posts of their useful idiots aren’t gaining traction, so they amplify those posts trying to paint them as “grassroots” reactions.

CNN dutifully aired the question of the TPUSA audience member, but then made the cardinal sin of including Charlie Kirk’s quick (and in retrospect, unbelievably prescient) response. Media Matters accused CNN of “misleadingly editing” the segment BECAUSE CNN included Charlie’s response and didn’t cut the video off at the “when do we use the guns” mark.

The desperation of Media Matters at this point is pathetic. And to the credit of the American people, they didn’t fall for this attack…this time.

The words “Actually, do blame Charlie Kirk” would go on to be hauntingly true. If you haven’t figured it out by now, by their own measure that “words are violence”, Media Matters has a good amount of Charlie Kirk’s blood on their hands.

Perhaps sensing that their attempts to paint Charlie Kirk as a dangerous insurrectionist were going nowhere, Media Matters introduces another attack vector that would go on to get Charlie killed less than four years later.

A widespread story from that time happened in Loudoun County, New Hampshire. A 15 year old girl was raped by a male who identified as a female. Distraught, the girl’s parents tried to tell their daughter’s story, but they were ignored by the mainstream media.

When they finally got their story to conservative media, Media Matters and mainstream outlets tried desperately to “debunk” the story.

  • The parents complained about a policy by the Loudoun school board to allow boys in girl’s bathrooms…but the Washington Post countered by saying that policy hadn’t been put in place yet.
  • Media Matters is downplaying the rape by saying that the victim knew the male who assaulted her.

Notice what Media Matters and the mainstream media does. If there’s one iota of something even said inarticulately on the right, they will jump on it and not let go of it for days. But here, a 15 years old child was raped, and they’re painting those who report it—including the parents of the victim—as the villains, and giving every possible excuse to the assailant.

And again, notice the headline, which is all anyone will read. “Charlie Kirk”, “grotesque”, “weaponize”, “minor”, “attack trans people”. Do you see it? Just by reporting this story, they’re accusing Charlie Kirk of somehow exploiting this minor, instead of blaming the assailant who truly exploited her and caused her pain she will have for the rest of her life.

2022

I present this headline that Media Matters “presents without commentary” without commentary.

Media Matters doesn’t just fling their feces randomly like a caged monkey. They use analytics to see which of their attacks are being amplified and going viral.

With Charlie Kirk they failed with racism. They failed with science denial. They failed with election denial. They failed with insurrection. They failed with abortion. They failed with sexism. Unlike with Limbaugh and Beck, nothing would stick.

But clearly they were noticing that they were hitting a nerve amongst transgender activists on social media. And so they would begin the series of attacks on Charlie that would eventually radicalize the lunatic who killed Charlie Kirk.

And if you’d like a nice taste of the Orwellian future awaiting the media if the people behind Media Matters ever gain power again, check out this little description of the lengths they went to correct Charlie’s “thoughtcrime”.

Of course, Media Matters isn’t going to let go of the “can we use our guns” angle so easily, so they post this clip of Charlie with the headline that includes the words “Charlie Kirk”, “using weapons”, “Biden Administration”.

They know no one will watch the actual video. Anyone who did received an excellent civics lesson about the purpose and importance of the Second Amendment.

While Joe Biden ludicrously talked about gun rights as protecting deer hunting, Charlie accurately said that no, the right to bear arms was put in place to serve as a check against tyranny. Government should fear the people, not the other way around.

His message was a challenge to Joe Biden to consider what checks would be in place should HIS government become tyrannical. He expressly said, “I don’t think that’s happening any time soon. I don’t want that to happen.” But Media Matters didn’t care. They crafted their headline to paint Charlie Kirk as dangerous.

They don’t teach this in schools anymore, but let’s look at some places where the Second Amendment did not exist.

Nazi Germany (1933-1945) – The Weimar Republic introduced strict gun control in 1928, the Nazi regime tightened controls. The 1938 German Weapons Act loosened restrictions for Nazi Party Members, but prohibited Jews and political opponents from owning weapons.

Soviet Union (1917-1991) – Following the Bolshevik Revolution, the new regime moved quickly to control weapons. Lenin’s decree of 1918 required all citizens to surrender firearms.

Communist China (1949-present) – After Mao’s Communist Party seized power, local militias and former Nationalist supporters were disarmed. Widespread confiscations happened in the 1950s to “suppress counterrevolutionaries”.

Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge (1975-1979) – After taking power, Pol Pot immediately disarmed civilians and executed perceived enemies.

Ottoman Empire (early 20th century) – Before and after the Armenian Genocide (1915-1917), the Ottoman government implemented gun registration and confiscation. Armenians were disarmed under the guise of national security.

North Korea (1948-present) – Civilian gun ownership has been completely prohibited since the founding of the regime.

Venezuela (2012-present) – The 2012 Control of Arms, Munitions and Disarmament Law banned private ownership of guns. The Maduro regime intensified confiscations.

The quickest way to ensure that this happens in America is to believe the lie, “this could never happen in America”.

“Separation of Church and State” has become one of the essential doctrines of the Left, and the phrase has become so widespread that most Americans think it’s written in law or in the Constitution. Media Matters is counting on this ignorance so that people will be shocked to read Charlie’s words here.

Guess what? Charlie Kirk is 100% correct.

The First Amendment of the Constitution prohibits the government from establishing a state religion. It also prohibits the government from prohibiting any group from exercising their religious liberty. The phrase comes from a letter that President Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists in 1802 in response to a letter they had written to him expressing concern that they would be discriminated against because they were not a part of Congregationalist Church, which as Connecticut’s de-facto state church.

Jefferson spoke of a “wall of separation between church and state” to reassure the Danbury Baptists that they had full religious liberty.

And yet as progressives do, they took these seven words and twisted them to somehow mean that citizens who work in government had to keep their faith to themselves and not to let their faith influence their decisions.

I can name one Founding Father who would have disagreed with this. Thomas Jefferson.

“… enlightened by a benign religion, professed indeed and practised in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude and the love of man, acknowledging and adoring an overruling providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here, and his greater happiness hereafter …” (From his First Inaugural Address, 1801)

“Whilst we devoutly return thanks to the beneficent Being who has been pleased to breathe into them the spirit of conciliation and forgiveness, we are bound with peculiar gratitude to be thankful to Him …” (From his State of the Union Address, 1801)

“To the corruptions of Christianity, I am indeed opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; … ascribing to himself every human excellence & believing he never claimed any other.” (Letter to Benjamin Rush, 1803)

“It is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the Platonists …” (Letter to Charles Thomson, 1816)

“I hold the precepts of Jesus, as delivered by Himself, to be the most pure, benevolent, and sublime which have ever been preached to man. I adhere to the principles of the first age; and consider all subsequent innovations as corruptions of his religion…” (Letter to Jared Sparks, 1820)

Media Matters and the Progressive Left have turned Christianity into a bogeyman, using every opportunity to paint Christians as intolerant and illiberal.

Why are they doing this? Because they have their own religion called Wokism — complete with their own gods (Greta Thunberg, George Floyd), their own prophets (Ibram X. Kendi, Robin DiAngelo), their own sacred texts (How to Be an Antiracist, White Fragility), their own rituals (public confessions, pronoun declarations), and their own heresies. Christianity is in their way.

This is another segment from Charlie’s radio show where he goes into thoughtful depth about climate change fanaticism. The segment itself is 5 minutes long and begins with Charlie’s recollection of Rush Limbaugh’s warning about how the Left would use climate change to deteriorate American sovereignty. Media Matters truncates the transcript to fit their needs, but if you want to hear it yourself, you can do so here, starting at the 11:40 mark.

He plays a cut of an interview with Chris Murphy filled with what sounds like quasi-religious fervor. He repeats “people’s lives will get better”, suggests that we’ll be able to control “storms, droughts, and wildfires”, and waxes on about how coal and gas will be replaced by solar and wind (which would destroy America’s energy independence and make America completely dependent on China).

Note that Charlie does not “deny” climate change, but he does rightfully shine a light on Democrats who exploit the issue to give handouts to cronies, pass laws without considering the unintended consequences, and seek to expand their power and control over every part of your life.

So what did Media Matters focus on? There’s one sentence in the entire 5+ minute segment where he mentions the word “pseudo-paganism”. It’s an apt description when you listen to the rantings of people like Murphy with eschatological fervor. But of course, Media Matters believes that this one word is enough to paint Charlie as a religious fanatic. All it does is open our eyes to how the Woke Left is just as “religious” as the right.

The phrase “ideological purity test” here is a classic example of some loser at Media Matters watching every minute of The Charlie Kirk Show to look for one word or phrase they can take out of context.

For the 5 minute, 7 second segment, Charlie talks to Russ Vought. Notice right away that Media Matters refers to Vought as a “Christian Nationalist”, even though at the time he was the former Director of OMB (and is in that role again today).

The phrase “Christian Nationalist” is itself a dog whistle. It’s meant to make people think that Vought wants to change the United States to a Christian theocracy and force everyone to become Christian. Anyone who knows anything about the Heritage Foundation knows that this is a complete falsehood.

As he’s wrapping up the segment, Charlie quips at the 4 minute, 59 second point “ideological purity tests are an interesting…approach”. His smirk and his hand gestures show clearly that he was joking, but Media Matters had their three words.

The headline is meant to get people to scan the words “Charlie Kirk,” “Christian nationalist,” “ideological purity tests,” and “Schedule F”. An uninformed reader scanning this headline will immediately put these together and conclude that “Schedule F” is some kind of government program to mandate Christian purity tests

Ironically, the point of Schedule F is to give the President the power to REMOVE a government employee who is using their office to push an ideological agenda. So the conversation is precisely the OPPOSITE of what Media Matters is intimating. Charlie and Vought wanted to make sure sure that government employees who want to push their ideology should NOT have a “job for life”, but should be treated more like an at-will employee.

With this headline, Media Matters furthers the lie that Charlie is a supposed “Christian Nationalist” who wants to force all citizens through government power to become a Christian, a ludicrous notion for anyone who has ever heard Charlie speak in person.

On one of Charlie Kirk’s radio shows, he used the word that Media Matters calls a “slur”. The problem is, even to this day, no one outside of Leftist circles even knows it’s a slur. Even as recently as 2014, VICE showed there was confusion even among the Trans community. But somewhere along the line, someone decided that yes, the “T” word is as offensive as the “N” word.

The Progressive Left, of course, loves to set arbitrary rules around language and then use them as a weapon to beat down heretics. As Orwell said, “Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought-crime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.”

Today, of course, we all know Matt Walsh from The Daily Wire. Back in 2022, most people outside of conservative circles had no idea who he was. Media Matters counts on that in this headline.

Everyone who knows Matt Walsh knows he has a dry wit and a great sense of humor. He was clearly being sarcastic, mocking organizations like Media Matters when he addressed the 2022 AMFest audience as “my fellow right-wing extremists”.

Media Matters, of course, presented it as if he weren’t joking. And to the millions of people at that time who never heard of Matt Walsh and who didn’t bother to click the play button, this was enough to shock them into believing that AmFest was nothing more than a convention of white supremacists.

In late 2022, Turning Point USA was making inroads in college campuses and high schools, a welcome counterpoint to the leftist takeover of elementary schools. The progressive left love to pretend that conservatives are “conspiracy theorists” when they say that progressivism has infiltrated K-12 education. But any parent with eyes can see it with their own eyes. 69% of 4th graders aren’t proficient in reading. 82% of 8th graders fall below math and reading proficiency levels. But 93% of students have been taught Critical Race Theory and gender-related concepts in school.

Turning Point Education is a division of Turning Point USA that was established to help anyone who wanted to start private K-12 schools that stressed classical learning and Christian values. Media Matters, of course, saw this as a threat to the left’s monopoly over young minds.

2023

Here, Media Matters continues its goal of branding Charlie as a “white nationalist” using the same strategy that Joseph Goebbels used. “Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”.

Once again, Media Matters publishes the video (knowing no one will watch it) and the transcript (where the … is doing an awful lot of work).

Have you ever wondered why politicians name their bills things like “Inflation Reduction Act” and “Patriot Act”? It’s to shut people down. “What??? You oppose inflation reduction??”

This was a case where Governor DeSantis prevented a course on African American studies. The reason was simple—the curriculum was complete leftist propaganda garbage, just like Howard Zinn’s disastrous A People’s History of the United States and Nikole Hannah-Jones’s disastrous The 1619 Project.

But remember, all Media Matters needs is the headline. The implication? That Charlie Kirk found redeeming qualities in slavery. They did it very subtly, but it was enough to continue to plant the seed


Again, remember that the goal of the propagandist is not to show truth, it’s to plant an exaggerated or false perception in the minds of its viewers

Read ChatGPT’s analysis of the design of the cover image on this blog post. And consider that every word that Media Matters writes and every image they produce is done with this level of planning. Every one.

In this article, the writer mocked Charlie Kirk for warning his audience about a “demonic and tyrannical force that was targeting then for their conservative political views”. Media Matters called it “extreme rhetoric”.

After September 10, 2025, do you still think this was “extreme rhetoric”?

Media Matters goes on to produce more examples of “extreme rhetoric” which were simply Charlie commenting on issues of the day.

In the wake of the Nashville shooting, Media Matters ominously warned of this.

“The trans movement is almost on a jihad. They have been told that people like us want them dead and I’m afraid they’re on some sort of unholy crusade,” adding, “We have to stop it immediately.”

Again, how does this read to you after September 10, 2025.

And what did Charlie mean by “stop it”? Media Matters wants you to think of gulags and prison camps, because that’s the only thing they know. Charlie meant going to these communities directly and telling them that there is a better way to live than the sinful choices they made. The radicals killed him not because they knew he would be effective.

One of the biggest lies that Progressives have managed to have take hold in the American psyche is that when Jefferson said that there is a “wall of separation between church and state”, it meant that public officials cannot practice their faith in public. We addressed that above.

The other big lie is that we are a “Democracy”. You hear left-wing politicians say the phrase all the time. “This is a danger to our Democracy”.

The United States of America is NOT a Democracy. In fact, the Founders rejected direct democracy. John Adams said, “Remember, Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself.” Alexander Hamilton (the real one, not the rapping one) said, “The ancient democracies, in which the people themselves deliberated, never possessed one feature of good government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity.”

Direct democracy is mob rule. It ensures that the loudest and most bullying voice always wins. That’s why the Founders decided on a Republic with democratically elected representatives.

Notice how in the past Media Matters would capture entire excerpts of videos. At this point they’re realizing how dangerous this is, because some of their viewers are actually WATCHING the video to learn the context. Now how they abruptly cut off this video at the point where Charlie says, “I’m not a fan of democracy”. The intent isn’t to inform, it’s to shock and outrage low-information viewers.

Again, this is a quote that is twisted completely out of context.

Read my commentary above about the consequences for a society without the Second Amendment.

The Left, of course, denies and mocks the very notion of the possibility of government tyranny, because they control so much of the deep state and the media (for now). What they forget is that the groups that tyrants like Hitler and Mao murdered first were groups like homosexual and college professors, all of whom could have been saved had they not dutifully handed over their guns to their governments.

Do you think the 15,000 gay men who died in Nazi concentration camps or the 142,000 university professors rounded up by the CCP would have agreed with Charlie Kirk?

If anyone thinks that Charlie Kirk would have changed his opinion on this, even knowing that a lunatic with a gun would one day take his life, they don’t understand either Charlie Kirk or the Second Amendment. Sadly, very few Americans do. Yes, government should be doing everything in its power to punish and make examples of lunatics who commit crimes with guns. But confiscating guns from lawful citizens is a path to national suicide.

After trying and failing to get its attacks to stick to Charlie Kirk, Media Matters moves to another attack vector: branding Charlie Kirk as a “Christian Nationalist”.

Like most phrases the Left uses like “diversity”, “extremism”, and “intolerance”, the phrase “Christian Nationalism has no clear definition.

It can refer to individuals who practice the teachings of Jesus such as “love God with all your heart, soul and strength” and “love your neighbor as yourself”, and wish for their political leaders to also reflect these traits.

Or it can refer to individuals who wish to convert others to Christianity by force and to turn the United States into a theocracy. Which, incidentally, would be contrary to the teachings of Jesus and to the deepest held principles of the Founding Fathers.

Remember that everything the Left says is projection. They believe that “Christian Nationalism” is about forced conversion because that’s precisely what they’re attempting to do in their “religion” of Wokeness.

This is no coincidence. The religion of Wokeness teaches that babies are a “punishment” for practicing your “right” to be as promiscuous as possible, that there is no single definition of “male” and “female”, and that rights are granted by government and not by God.

From this point forward, there’s a large escalation of content about what Charlie Kirk has to say about the Trans movement.

Remember, this is not by accident. Media Matters sees this line of attacks gaining traction on extremist far-left social media, and so they will continue to reinforce these attacks where they can.

What do people see in the headline? “Charlie Kirk”, “profane”, “trans”, “go to jail”.

Similar to their attacks on Glenn Beck years ago and their attacks on Elon Musk, what their victim actually said or meant makes no difference. The important thing is The Smear.

As with many things, Charlie was prophetic. It didn’t take me long to find this screen grab of an incident where a man was arrested for insulting the Trans flag in the UK. Had Trump not been elected in 2024, this would absolutely have been happening in the US.

Take a look at the rhetoric here.

“In multiple cases, speakers suggested death is an acceptable punishment for promoting supposed leftist ideology or even staying silent against it”.

Let’s do Scott Adams’s “really” test.

Really?

In a gathering of highly respected Christian pastors, the consensus of the speakers was that if you supported the LGBTQ movement, abortion, or multiculturalism, they wanted to literally execute you.

Really?

Anyone who has ever had any encounter with any of the evangelical Christian pastors that would go to an event like this knows that this is a lie. Media Matters sees this all as a game. But Tyler James Robinson didn’t see it as a game.

Media Matters like to “warn” us that extreme rhetoric is equal to violence. If we measure them by the same measure they use, then I can say the following with impunity: Media Matters was complicit in the murder of Charlie Kirk.


Remember when the Left was up in arms because Sarah Palin released flyers depicting crosshairs on her political opponents? What ensured was weeks and weeks of painting Palin as a radical, terroristic extremist

Take a look at this photo. Let’s do a Rorschach test. What comes to your mind when you see Charlie’s darkened eyes, along with the arrow of the Turning Point USA pointed at Charlie’s forehead?

I asked ChatGPT and it did a fair analysis of the design style. Of course its programming won’t allow it to speculate beyond a certain level.

But what came to your head and what came to my head is what comes to many people’s heads.

Did this particular image radicalize the shooter? Probably not. But did it add to a continuing narrative of painting Charlie as someone who deserved a bullet through his forehead?

And let’s talk about the “far-right extremism” that Media Matters mentions in their attack piece. What exactly do they consider “far-right extremism”?

  • Asking questions about the 2020 election
  • Asking questions about whether the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a net positive for the Black community
  • Believing that there are two sexes: male and female
  • Encouraging and supporting women who decide that spending time raising their children is more important than pursuing a career.
  • Associating with other “extremists” like Jack Posobiec, Scott Presler, Mike Lindell, Jim Caviezel, Moms for Liberty, and evangelical pastors.

Again, Media Matters is counting on people reading the headline and not taking the time to look too deeply. Millions of Americans will do exactly what they want.

Watch what happens here. Again, all Media Matters needs people to do is to read the words “White nationalist”, “Nick Fuentes”, “Charlie Kirk”, and “adopted” to plant another seed painting Charlie Kirk as a white nationalist.

What are the facts? Charlie Kirk banned Nick Fuentes from TPUSA events, and has criticized Fuentes and the Groypers as being extremists and “low-IQ losers”.

But Media Matters took a lie that Fuentes spoke and used it to create their headline, also a lie. Just as two wrongs don’t make a right, two lies don’t make a truth. But Media Matters got their headline.

Here, Media Matters pivots to attacking Charlie Kirk as a supposed mysogynist. But if you read this article, it says more about the self-loathing of the writer herself. She defends transgenders in women’s sports. She insults the decision of women who decide that being a mother is a far more noble calling than climbing a corporate ladder (which usually ends up in her making more money for a man). She frames one speaker’s encouragement for young women to glorify God as “Christian extremism”.

Here’s the irony. These conversations were happening at an event called the Young Women’s Leadership Summit held by Turning Point USA that featured highly successful women in the Conservative movement encouraging and lifting up college students and young women to become Leaders.

Literally as I was writing this, this live video was playing on my screen. The Left does a lot of caterwauling about how conservatives hate women and want to keep women down, but who are you going to believe, them or your own lyin’ eyes?

The headline sounds horrible, right? But here’s the real story behind it.

A biological man who “identified a woman” demanded that he be allowed to become a sorority sister at the University of Wyoming. The University mandated it, so the sorority had to allow him in. While he was there, reports are that he watched the women undress and sometimes had an erection while doing so.

The sorority filed a lawsuit that was rejected by the US District Court in Wyoming. This meant that they had to continue living with this biological man in their sorority.

What was Charlie’s advice to the women? The same advice he’d give if a man who “identified as a man” demanded to live in their sorority and watch them undress. If the government will not support you, you need to get rid of him however you can. Does that sound “mean”? If you’re the father of a girl, hell no.

But of course, Media Matters added yet another piece of kindling to the tinder box with the headline that people read as “Charlie Kirk”, “trans”, “bullied”, “imprisoned”.

And again, Media Matters had to replace all instances of “he” with “she” to adhere to the “Trans Journalists Association Style Guide”. Because of course.

Desperate to get attention to the hit pieces it has written about Charlie that are getting zero attention, Media Matters releases yet another “best of” compilation.

Every single one of these articles listed is a grotesque exaggeration, a quote twisted out of context to create a lie, or classic “guilt by association”. Just scan the headlines. “I hate black people”. “Spoke badly about black women”. “Liked Tweets by White nationalists”. “The Nazis should have kept going”. “Racist memes”. “Rape jokes”. “Antisemitic rhetoric”. “White power!”. “Racial slurs”. “Racist talking points” .”Mocking the death of Black students”. “Anti-LGBTQ slurs”.

Most of these are taken out of context, and none of these had anything to do with Charlie Kirk himself. But there’s Charlie’s picture right on the cover, complete with yet another image that’s intended to suggest violence.

The VERY FIRST line of the transcript here reads “Look, for current beneficiaries, none of your obligations should be touched” and later follows with “in the future, and I’m talking about my generation” and proceeds to provide commentary on ways to save Social Security from insolvency—something NO politician is touching. He also points out that so many senior citizens are talented with experience and skills and society SHOULD be able to pay them as long as they are able and willing, and that the notion of putting them to pasture robs America of so much talent.

But remember, context means nothing. Millions of retirees will see the headline “Charlie Kirk calls for cuts to Social Security” and “I’m not a fan of retirement” and think “Charlie Kirk wants to take my social security check away” and “Charlie Kirk wants me to work like a slave”.

If you listen to this entire radio show, you’ll realize that Charlie was spending the whole show berating the Republicans. Charlie rightly warned his listeners not to grow complacent. During the show, he actually complimented Hakeem Jeffries and the Democrats, stating that they were raising far more money and had a better understanding of their base than Republican party leaders did of the grassroots of their party.

As with many of these “shocking” comments, these three words were cherry-picked out of an impassioned segment where Charlie tried to get the Republican base to wake up. To the Republicans who shrugged their shoulders and implied that it was acceptable for Republicans to lose the House. Charlie (rightly) warned his listeners that when the Democrats won the House back, they would immediately push to make DC and Puerto Rico States, push to open “investigations” into Republicans, push to abolish the Electoral College, and do whatever it takes to gain permanent power while Republicans continue to navel gaze.

These were THREE words that he addressed TO his base to try to get them to understand the enormity of the situation. But thanks to Media Matters, this headline was used as supposed “proof” that Charlie Kirk engaged in hateful rhetoric.

If you’ve made it this far, you can see where the hateful rhetoric really came from. And there is absolutely no comparison as to who really spread rhetorical poison that ended up in murder.

We all know the horrific events in Israel on October 7, 2023. Media Matters wasted no time in trying to exploit this situation.

Here’s what they did.

Immediately after October 7, Charlie went on his radio show to express his support for Israel and its right to exist and defend itself.

A few days later on October 12, Charlie went onto the PBD podcast. By that time, the world had seen six full hours of Hamas live-streaming their barbaric slaughter of Jews. Charlie was rightfully perplexed. He’d been to Israel and he knew that the entire country was teeming with IDF, and that it took 45 minutes to get from Jerusalem to Gaza by helicopter. How, then, had the killing been able to continue for 6 hours?

He started speculating out loud, going through every single possibility he could think of as to why the killing had gone on for so long. One of the possibilities he mentioned: had rogue elements within the IDF issued some kind of stand down order? He went out of his way to avoid even the suggestion that Netanyahu would do such a thing.

The very process of asking questions was called by two staunchly pro-Israel people on the right, Benjamin Domenech and Erick Erickeson, as “anti-Semitic”. I understand that at the time emotions were raw, but it gave a huge opening to Media Matters.

Media Matters immediately pounced on to show that “The Jews” were unified in their condemnation of Charlie Kirk as an “anti-Semite”.

Funny how the President of Israel recently eulogized Charlie by calling him “a lion-hearted friend of Israel”.

But Media Matters knows better. These white liberal WASPs know more about anti-semitism than, oh, Jews like Benjamin Netanyahu and Ben Shapiro.

What they’re doing, of course, is parroting words from the Anti-Defamation League, an organization that began with good intentions but has since been taken over by far-left progressives. But if anyone says anything against the ADL, they’re immediately branded as “anti-semitic”.

I grew up in the New York area, so I know a lot of Jewish people. I know some who are far-left Bernie Sanders supporters. I know others who are far-right MAGA. And I know dozens and dozens who fall between or who have no political opinions. For the most part, they are my friends who like me and any other American love our country and contribute to it.

Charlie states a fact that much of the far left is funded by donors who happen to be Jewish. He challenges the Jewish community to police themselves and stop donating to causes that ultimately will come back against them. Media Matters, of course, characterizes this as an “anti-Semitic trope”.

There are some nuts on the right who warn the world about “the jooooos”, and calls anyone who has any positive opinions at all about any Jewish person or group a “Jew lover”.

How is that different than Matters calling anyone who has any negative opinions at all about any Jewish person or group an “anti-Semite”?

Watch the actual video (which Media Matters KNOWS nobody does), and you’ll see that every single thing that Media Matters says is a complete lie.

I wrote extensively on Media Matters’ attack on Elon Musk. The tactics used against Elon were exactly the same ones used against all their victims: 1) Have their armies of trolls monitoring every word looking for one they can twist, 2) Create a story on Media Matters, 3) Have a reliably leftist outlet like The Atlantic publish it, and 4) Have the mainstream media and troll armies amplify it.

Whether the story is true or not is irrelevant. The important thing is the Smear.

I observed this happen in real-time. I saw many conservative outlets and influencers remain completely silent. Some of them didn’t take the time to investigate the accusations, others did but didn’t want to get their hands dirty, preferring to let Elon flail in the wind on his own.

To Charlie’s great credit, he saw exactly what Media Matters was doing and jumped to Elon’s defense.

Notice that a month after October 7, 2023, Media Matters still sees blood in the water and still tries to exploit the horrific events in Gaza to attack Charlie (again, who would go on to be eulogized by the President of Israel as one of the best friends of Israel).

Remember that leftist organizations like Media Matters don’t see individuals. They see “oppressed groups”. And when someone questions someone of Jewish heritage like George Soros or a group like the ADL that’s masquerading as an objective, fair-minded organization and not the far-left group it has become, they brand it as “anti-Semitism”.

If you watch his videos, Charlie Kirk very clearly delineates between Jewish organizations that have been co-opted by the Left and patriotic, freedom-loving people of Jewish descent.

Finally, Charlie addresses “Jewish donors”, noticing a real trend where wealthy individual who happen to be Jewish contributed disproportionately—and in some cases unwittingly—to causes that pushed a far-left Progressive agenda that ultimately despised Judaism. Media Matters paints this as “anti-Semitism”. But doesn’t the true anti-Semitism come from leftists who claim that all Jews, all Blacks, and LGBTQ individuals should only donate to their causes, and if anyone doesn’t, they “ain’t” Black, Jewish, or LGBTQ?

2024

I wrote in detail about this line of attack in my post about Wired’s hit piece. Be sure to read that post for the full story.

Given the amount of vitriol that came out of the leftist wing of the Black community, it’s clear that Media Matters’ poison had taken hold and thoroughly brainwashed many people who I would otherwise consider normal and decent people. Which is a shame, because the people this hurts the most are the most vulnerable among the Black community who could have been helped by Charlie Kirk’s wisdom and new ideas.

Here’s an example of how Media Matter’s poison works.

In February 2024, Media Matters planted the seed. Another leftist media organization called Meidas News picked up the story.

On September 14, 2025, an X account used this article as “proof” that Charlie Kirk was a monster that actively pushed for public executions. You’ve seen the pattern by now. Statements made in the course of a casual and in some cases frivolous conversation are presented on an official-looking new site as if they’re official policy statements from Charlie Kirk.

I spent a little time in this thread to debunk it. You can read what I wrote here.

https://x.com/DeplorableSEO/status/1967467200123474307

As of today, the original post has amassed 133,000 views. My debunk? 77 views.

Here, Media Matters is once again pulling out the old trope of “The great replacement theory” being some kind of right-wing conspiracy.

Is it?

Did anyone notice when the Biden administration opened the floodgates of the Southern Border to illegal aliens? Only a fool would think that was for humanitarian reasons” and not to hasten the huge demographic shifts that they’ve used in their favor.

Their model is California. Prior to 1992, California voted Republican in every presidential election except 1964. Since 1992, every Democratic candidate has carried California. How? Democrats cemented their majority by allowing lower-income migration (both legal and illegal) from Mexico and Central America—ensuring that huge numbers of people would be reliant on public welfare which, of course, the Democrats handed out as their generous benefactors.

This headline is intended to paint Charlie as a religious fanatic that espouses things like numerology.

Let’s look at the headline in context.

Charlie is reflecting on the 12 years that Turning Point has been in existence. He takes the opportunity, as he often did, to educate his audience on the signficance of the number 12 in the Bible.

Media Matters quotes him as saying “Maybe that’s a sign for what’s coming in November”. The deliberately chose a screen cap that showed Charlie looking serious.

But if you listen to the actual video, Charlie says that whole sentence with a big smile. And in the same breath he says, also with a big smile, “I have no idea”.

Media Matters, once again, strips out ALL context and adds to their character assassination of painting Charlie as an unhinged fanatic.

2025

Towards the end of his life, Charlie Kirk started to reach out more and more to people on the left to seek meaningful dialogue and to find common ground.

Cambridge: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkiM-z0Mzyg

Oxford: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnqSNEiLTeY

Jubilee: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV29R1M25n8

Bill Maher: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OblCcO7-Alg

and Gavin Newsom: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XJ6rQDRKGA

I’m guessing that Charlie felt that his radio show and the videos of him on campuses were only reaching a small audience, so he courageously reached out to his “enemies” on the left to have dialogue with them.

I saw “courageous” because I can’t name any other personalize on the left OR right that was so confident in the correctness of his cause AND in his ability to promote and defend it .

The fact that Charlie Kirk was even at all willing to do this showed the confidence he had that he had truth on his side and could go toe-to-toe with any argument. In some cases the environment was truly hostile, with audience members and debaters loudly scoffing, mocking, and rolling their eyes at him. Charlie never wavered.

But Media Matters saw danger. They had invested so much of their time and resources to paint Charlie as a monster, and these appearances did the most dangerous thing they could imagine. They humanized him. They allowed him to present his side. They allowed people on their site to hear him in full context.

And so they put together this headline, making sure to reinforce that Charlie was “violent”, “bigoted” in his rhetoric. They know that very few people will actually watch Newsom’s podcast, so they ensure they provide pre-emptive commentary.

The Democratic Party and their strange bedfellows the Neocons has done a phenomenal job of painting the Ukraine War as one that’s in the United States’ national interest. But is it really? Isn’t the threat from China to Taiwan much bigger? If Ukraine loses some territory, that would be terrible. But if free Taiwan is taken over by communist China, that would be catastrophic.

This was one of many cases where Charlie disagreed with the President (so much for the Media Matters narrative that Charlie was supposedly a sycophant to President Trump). Trump went above and beyond to try to broker peace between Zelensky and Putin. Most recently it was Putin who promised to come to the table but ended up reneging on the deal (so much for the Media Matters narrative that Trump is supposedly a sycophant to Putin).

This is a case where Media Matters isn’t reading the room. All Americans outside of the virtue signals with Ukrainian flags and “Slava Ukraini” chants are coming to agreement that this stupid war has gone on long enough. And yet Media Matters felt by painting Charlie as “anti Ukraine” they’d somehow make him lose support.

Remember what I said above about how Media Matters doesn’t link to outside videos, they copy videos and host them on their own site?

Again, this isn’t for monetization (they don’t serve ads on these videos). It’s so they can control the cover photo. And here, the combination of the headline and the cover photo is meant to imply that Charlie Kirk is a white nationalist, and that he called out the fire chief of Atlanta because he was black (notice how the screencap is carefully chosen to depict a frowning Charlie Kirk and a smiling Joel Baker).

Yes, Charlie Kirk called out Baker, but only because he said his priority was to evaluate firefighters based on their skin color and not on their ability to fight fires. But no matter—the headline and the image did its job.

This is another prime example of “guilt by association”. Producing a daily radio show doesn’t give producers a lot of time to create graphics, and so In this case, whoever was preparing the graphic for his likely Googled a chart and used it as-is without thinking much of it.

Notice how Media Matters immediately puts out a headline about the source without even discussing whether the facts and data are accurate (which they are).

But this is one of their preferred methods of character assassination. And the combined effect of all of this led to literal assassination.

Look carefully at this headline. The image is of Leticia James, and the words that pop out of the headline are “savages”, “test case”, and “jail”. Media Matters is piling onto the lie that Charlie is a white supremacist racist who wants black “savages” to be thrown into jail systematically.

Did anyone notice the number of black Americans who stood up to tell us how much Charlie helped them, mentored them, and honored them, without any expectation of anything in return?

But again, truth means nothing to Media Matters.

The word “savages” of course refers to the how Leticia James weaponized and thoroughly corrupted the Justice system in order to defeat her political enemies. Since James was elected as New York AG, the number of index crimes in New York State rose 26%. As a New Yorker living under a rigged election system, I could only watch helplessly as she used MY state tax dollars to persecute President Trump.

“Savage” is a much nicer word than I would use for the extent to which she abused the criminal justice system for political reasons.

We’re three weeks from the date Charlie Kirk was shot.

The headline for this one reads “Charlie Kirk says he can’t find ‘Christ-like compassion'”.

First of all, this is a lie. Charlie Kirk said, “I really try to have Christ-like compassion, I really do”. So Media Matters’ portrayal is the exact OPPOSITE of what he said.

But take a look at the “transcript” that Media Matters wrote. Notice the … Those ellipses are doing a LOT of heavy lifting…

“And I know so many Cubans and Venezuelans and Colombians and Nicaraguans and Poles and Hungarians and Japanese and Vietnamese that DID learn English, actually. They came here and they learned the language out an immediate sign of respect, and it’s not even good for THEM not to learn English. It holds YOU back if you’re here. It actually holds the entire nation back and creates this balkanization. A common language is the glue that holds a country together. Without it you have no unity. You just have tribes. We’re already fractured enough as a country. Adding dozens of competing languages only deepens division.”

My dad and mom came to this country from China (back when it was good). My dad received a PhD, my mom a Masters degree from top universities, and they both went on to work for pharmaceutical companies (back with they were good). There were no “communities” of Chinese people back then, so dad and mom made friends with friends with Americans (who they never referred to as “white”, just “Americans”). My siblings and I were born here, and of course our English was perfect. And we’d often make gentle fun when they made little mistakes in their English. But their English was perfect, and their dream was the American dream—to have a nice house with a yard where they could raise their family, go to church every week, volunteer for the community, go on family vacations, entertain friends (who were also all “Americans”), and contribute to society as an American.

At my child’s local school, we have a few immigrant parents who are also this way. But there is a growing number of immigrants who stay in their own closed communities, never learn English, and some who even turn their nose down at American culture (I was lectured by an immigrant from China who felt that America needed to learn more from the CCP).

That is the sort of thing Charlie is hearing all over on college campuses. Is anything that he said, in the full context in which he said it, wrong? Hell no. But truth and context mean nothing to Media Matters.

We’re now two weeks from the date that Charlie Kirk will be murdered.

Charlie reacts to the news that Taylor Swift is engaged. He hopes aloud that what happens to many liberal women will happen to her once she gets married and has kids: that she will become more conservative. “Conservative” in this case simply means things like 1) not having the government steal your child’s milk money to pay for luxury hotels for illegal aliens, 2) letting your children be kids and not sexualized at younger and younger ages by progressives, and 3) living in places where you don’t have to worry about your kids being hurt.

Charlie also throws in a line: “Submit to your husband, Taylor”.

This is of course a quotation from Ephesians 5:22.

Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord.

Media Matters isn’t just in the business of distorting Charlie’s words, but the apostle Paul’s words as well. The Progressive Left loves to use this verse to prove that Christians are backwards, mysogynistic, and male chauvinists.

That is a gross misreading of this verse. To truly understand the verse, you need to read verse 21…

Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ

…and verse 25.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.

The full context (which Media Matters will never tell you) is that when Paul was writing to the church in Ephesus, he was dealing with a culture where there was confusion over gender roles (sound familiar?) On the one hand, husbands in the Roman Empire typically had absolute control. But in Ephesus, the cult of Artemis (Diana) elevated women to positions of prominence in the culture (sound familiar?)

What was Paul’s solution, which was inspired by the Holy Spirit?

The first thing he said was that BOTH spouses had to submit to the other.

The second thing he said was that wives should submit to their husbands as to the Lord. That means maybe letting him have the last word once in a while in an argument, maybe letting him choose which restaurant to eat for dinner, maybe letting him lead the family.

But everyone forgets the third thing that Paul said.

Husbands should love their wives as Christ loved the church.

How did Christ love the church?

He had patience with her. He was kind to her. He brought her joy. He was good to her. He was faithful to her. He was gentle with her. He served her every day of his life. And when the time came, he sacrificed his life for her. That is the calling of a husband.

I’m sure there are some Christians who work at Media Matters. And they will be judged for not speaking up when Scripture is twisted in the way that Media Matters twists it.

This one hits close to home. I live near New York City, where it’s well known that organizations in China have “pregnancy tourism” schemes where they fly pregnant women to cities like Flushing to have babies who will have American citizenship. It’s a gross abuse of the concept of birthright citizenship.

Media Matters knows this is happening, but they choose to frame Charlie’s comments as one that’s supposedly anti-woman. In their quest to destroy Charlie Kirk, they deliberately ignore real problems that threaten the country’s sovereignty.

This was the last hit piece Media Matters published that focused on Charlie Kirk, and it shows how completely out of touch Media Matters had become.

Conclusion

When I saw Americans—including some of my closest friends—celebrating and dancing over the death of a young man with a 3 year old daughter and a 1 year old son who adored him, I knew something was terribly wrong. There’s nothing new under the sun, of course.

These last 5 posts outline precisely how Media Matters chose Charlie Kirk as a target. Their goal was never to engage in honest debate or dialogue. Their goal was never to understand those they disagreed with to find common ground. Their goal was what it always was. To destroy, using whatever means they could to achieve that end.

Was their goal for Charlie Kirk to literally be shot and killed? I will let you read these five posts and be the judge of that yourself.

You hear a lot of talk about hate speech. You hear a lot of talk about misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda. Those are all tools that Media Matters used.

Is hate speech illegal? No, hate speech is guaranteed under the First Amendment of the Constitution.

Are lies illegal? No, even lies are guaranteed under the First Amendment. The exception, of course, is whether they are a direct threat to someone’s life. Media Matters very skillfully avoided doing that. But they did everything up to that point and managed to

There are those calling for the government to use all of its power to shut down organizations like 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) groups like Media Matters for America. That would be a mistake. Why? Because once power shifts to the other side, that same government power will be yielded against organizations like Turning Point USA.

So what’s the solution?

The solution is YOU.

Media Matters and the mainstream media have a right to spew hate speech and a right to spread lies. But they do NOT have a right to be protected from the consequences of their hate and the lies.

What has protected them so far? Like the precursor suppliers of fentanyl, they operate so far in the shadows so that by the time Google News and the mainstream media amplifies their lies, they’ve moved on to the next lie.

Many of us in the conservative world have seen this for years and just shrugged our shoulders. When Glenn Beck’s advertisers were bullied off his show, we shrugged our shoulders and let Glenn deal with it. When Elon Musk’s advertisers were shamed off of Twitter, we shrugged our shoulders and let Elon deal with it. And yes, we let Media Matters pushing over 720 attack pieces on Charlie Kirk and TPUSA with impunity.

A quote often attributed to Dietrich Bonhoeffer says:

Silence in the face of evil is itself evil. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act. God will not hold us faultless.

If you prefer, let’s look at a quote from the book of James:

So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.

Does that mean we shout Media Matters down with an even louder voice than theirs? That we ourselves direct our hate speech back and them and their followers? That we spread lies about them?

That’s one option. But there’s a better way, and Charlie Kirk showed us what that way was.

When someone spreads lies about you, you counter it with truth.

He set the example. On MLK Day 2024 when Charlie Kirk was being attacked as a “racist, Wired Magazine and Media Matters twisted the truth he spoke to make a trap for fools.

He didn’t whine about it. He didn’t call for the government to shut them down. He and Blake Neff recorded a radio show that laid out the truth. If you listen to the whole thing you’ll realize it was one of the most articulate, objective, and intelligent discussions you’ll ever hear about MLK and the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Charlie and Blake did their part.

But there’s an even more important thing that needs to be done. When someone speaks truth, you amplify it.

As of this date, less than 400,000 people have watched this program. While that might sound like a lot, remember that the Wired articl—after it was amplified, quoted, and repeated by the mainstream media, Google News, and social media—likely reached over 50-100 million readers.

Too many of us sat on our hands. Too many of us conservatives cowered in the corner, perhaps wishing well for Charlie but not uttering a word in his defense for fear that WE ourselves would be called “racist”.

That must stop now. If you see injustice and lies, your and my job is not to whine about it or ask “why isn’t anyone doing something about this”. Our job is to do something about it. We have the most powerful weapon right in our hands: our free speech. Tyrants and dictators are terrified of free speech, which is why it’s always the first thing they get rid of when they take over a country.

After Charlie was shot, something compelled me to use my free speech to write this. I have no idea who’s going to read this or what’s going to happen with it. But if something is compelling YOU to do something after reading it, I hand you the torch.