By Pat Trevino | September 15, 2025
In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, Republican leadership and right-wing media outlets leaned hard on a familiar scapegoat: “the left.” The implication was swift and politically convenient—liberals, Democrats, LGBTQ individuals, and racial minorities were blamed for the ideological chaos. But this framing isn’t just lazy. It’s a calculated deflection from the real fracture threatening not only our country but the Republican Party: its own internal war. People keep forgetting the left is the party pushing for gun control. We’re the party who are outraged that children are being killed because Republicans don’t want to discuss gun control. And yet Pam Bondi and mainstream media are blaming the radical left. WE DON’T HAVE A RADICAL LEFT.
If by “radical left” they mean the faction within the Republican Party itself, then they’re absolutely right. But blaming Democrats creates a dangerous ideological disconnect-especially given what’s unfolding in the media around Kirk’s assassination. The Republican President, a Republican-led FBI, and right-leaning media outlets are spinning this narrative to deflect responsibility and redirect public outrage. It’s a calculated misdirection, and frankly, I shouldn’t be surprised given the way in which President Trump made accusation without evidence.
Mainstream coverage did not rush to unpack the ideological feud behind Kirk’s death. Early reports leaned on vague references to “political violence,” while MAGA-aligned voices flooded social media with cries of “Civil War.” Within hours, critics of Kirk were doxxed, harassed, and in some cases fired from their jobs. Bomb threats targeted several universities with predominantly minority student populations. The tactics weren’t just punitive—they were ideological enforcement, punishing anyone who refused to conform to the movement’s increasingly rigid Christian nationalist framework and its dangerous march toward authoritarian control.
Rep. Chip Roy and other Republicans have ramped up efforts to discredit the Southern Poverty Law Center—especially after SPLC included Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA in its latest report on hate and extremism. Rather than confronting the documented rise of far-right and white nationalist movements, they’ve flipped the narrative: accusing SPLC of being part of an anti-American agenda. It’s a calculated tactic, designed not to challenge extremism but to silence one of the few organizations still tracking it. In this reversal, SPLC isn’t just criticized—they’re blamed for the very hate they expose.
Meanwhile, Utah Governor Spencer Cox stood beside FBI officials and admitted what many were privately thinking: “I kept praying, please don’t let it be one of our own.” His words—raw and revealing—acknowledged the uncomfortable possibility that the shooter might be white, conservative, and ideologically adjacent to Kirk himself.
It wasn’t until independent and international outlets began reporting on social media speculation that the public learned of Tyler Robinson’s alleged ties to Nick Fuentes and the Groyper movement—a faction that had long branded Kirk a traitor to their extremist cause. Whether mainstream media deliberately withheld this context or simply failed to investigate, the result was a dangerously incomplete narrative. The truth isn’t just inconvenient—it’s deeply unsettling.
Robinson’s bullet casings were inscribed with cryptic messages drawn from far-right meme culture, including antifascist references that Groypers have co-opted and distorted. His social media history included coded language and visual cues associated with Groyper subculture. He also appeared in a Facebook photo mimicking the “Slav squat” pose popularized by 4chan, wearing a black Adidas tracksuit—a visual echo of the Pepe-style frog imagery Groypers use to signal affiliation. While law enforcement has not confirmed formal membership, these symbols, references, and Robinson’s documented disdain for Kirk align with the Groyper movement’s long-standing hostility toward him.
Yet instead of connecting these dots, mainstream media gave airtime to Fuentes’s denial—allowing him to claim he was being “framed” by the press, while ignoring his years of inciting hostility toward Kirk and encouraging followers to disrupt his events. Why aren’t they taking that into consideration. Kirk and Fuentes had bad history together. Authorities have the proof, but nah! it’s much easier to blame it on the Democrats. This wasn’t just a missed opportunity for truth—it was a failure of editorial courage.
The Groypers didn’t just emerge from MAGA—they’ve been at war with it. Led by white nationalist Nick Fuentes, they’ve spent years heckling Kirk at Turning Point USA events, accusing him of being too moderate, too pro-Israel, and too inclusive. Kirk wasn’t targeted by political opponents across the aisle. It wasn’t Democrats or liberals who followed him from campus to campus, disrupting events and sowing chaos. He was targeted by extremists within his own ideological neighborhood. This wasn’t fringe-on-fringe violence. It was ideological cannibalism.
Republican elites continue to weaponize the term “left” as a catch-all for dissent. In their rhetorical shell game, anyone who challenges the party’s radical flank becomes “the left”—even if they’re lifelong Republican conservatives. This tactic masks a deeper truth: the GOP is hemorrhaging unity, and the most dangerous insurgents aren’t Democrats—they’re Republicans who’ve abandoned any pretense of shared values.
By refusing to name their own extremists, Republican leaders protect their base while scapegoating the opposition. And the media plays along, parroting the “leftist threat” while ignoring the right-wing purges happening in plain sight. Kirk’s death becomes sanitized: a lone extremist, a tragic loss, and no reckoning.
The truth is more complicated. Charlie Kirk wasn’t killed by political enemies from the other side—he was targeted by people from within his own movement. This wasn’t about Democrats vs. Republicans. It was a sign of deep division inside the Republican Party itself. If the media wants to be honest, they need to stop blaming outsiders and start telling the real story: the Republican Party is so divided it’s begun to devour its own.
What investigators are saying: Pam Bondi’s rush to label Robinson a product of “leftist ideology” isn’t just premature—it’s politically convenient. With no manifesto, no group affiliation, and no coherent belief system, the accusation rests on cultural shorthand, not evidence. This is how the term “leftist” gets weaponized: not to describe a worldview, but to trigger fear. It’s a distraction tactic, and it masks a deeper fracture within the GOP itself.
By scapegoating the SPLC and invoking vague ideological threats, they’re not fighting extremism. They’re enabling it.