|
 |
Welcome back to False Flag. The killing of Charlie Kirk last week has continued to reverberate throughout our nation’s politics. Today’s newsletter explores the fallout—and how it’s surprisingly come to divide the right. I also dive into the theory that the alleged assassin was a “groyper” and explain why that doesn’t add up. If you appreciate this type of journalism—straightforward, fact-based, deeply relevant to the times we’re in—consider becoming a Bulwark+ subscriber.
–Will
 |
Right-wing media demands the “real” truth about Kirk’s death
ON THE SURFACE, the MAGA movement appears to be united after the murder of prominent activist and conservative media figure Charlie Kirk. They’re getting people fired from their jobs for social media posts that made light of, or even celebrated, Kirk’s death. They’re cruising the streets to demand random businesses lower their flags in his honor. And they’re plotting how to attack the institutions of the left, with Trump deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller vowing Monday to pursue a “vast domestic terror movement” targeting liberal foes.
Yet beneath that façade of unity, that appetite of anger, and that thirst for retribution, cracks are emerging as the always-paranoid right is pulled apart by conspiracy theories about Kirk’s murder and a sense that the Trump administration isn’t telling the truth about it.
After the arrest of suspect Tyler Robinson was announced on Friday, prominent right-wing media figures began to complain that the Trump administration couldn’t be telling the public the real story, noting that Robinson was a young white man from a Mormon family with no immediately clear political affiliations that could have inspired the shooting.
Prominent right-wing podcaster Michael Savage was one of the first MAGA figures to accuse the government of spinning the real truth of the assassination, claiming it was impossible for the killer to disassemble his gun and escape as quickly as the government had claimed.
“Something is wrong with this whole fucking picture!” Savage said in an episode of his show over the weekend.
Trump adviser-turned-podcaster Steve Bannon has been one of the most prominent critics of the White House and FBI narrative of the shooting. On Monday, Bannon complained that the “timeline [of the assassination] makes no sense.” He warned that the Trump administration needed to seize control of the case’s narrative from Utah law enforcement by holding daily press conferences in Washington. Without that, Bannon added, the murder would spawn conspiracy theories akin to the John F. Kennedy assassination—a “Grassy Knoll 2.0” as he put it.
“It seems like we’re spoonfed a narrative, and this audience is not going to take it,” Bannon said.
Bannon even suggested an investigation of Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, who has served as a sort of responsible counterweight to Trump administration demands for revenge after Kirk’s killing. Bannon demanded answers Monday as to why Cox was given a “speaking role” at a press conference about the assassination, seemingly sidelining FBI Director Kash Patel in that capacity.
“Cox should be investigated,” Bannon said.
Confusion and uncertainty are the features of the immediate aftermath of nearly every major shooting—a phenomenon that has only accelerated in the internet age. That has certainly been no different here. Patel’s initial tweet that a suspect was in custody proved wrong, though he said Monday on Fox News that he had no regrets about the post.
Early reports suggested that trans symbols were found on cartridges, leading to rampant speculation that the shooter was trans, but while Robinson reportedly lives with (and may be dating) someone who is transitioning, he is not believed to be transgender himself. Cox has said that the suspect has lefty views, but the digital breadcrumbs we’ve seen so far do not offer many insights. And Patel’s statement in a Fox appearance Monday that Robinson had written a note about the shooting, only for it to be mysteriously “destroyed,” raised even more questions.