audio version of the segment here > Don't fall for the left's "both sides" narrative
photo credit: Getty Images
Jay Weber Show transcript 9-18-25
Now-to some Charlie Kirk ‘fallout’ stuff.
I want to point out to you, today, that a week after this terrible murder, the elected democrats and most of their media mouthpieces have now arrived at the ‘both sides’ argument.
As if there is political violence occurring on both sides of the political aisle.
There’s not.
They are lying. But understand that- if they are setting into the ‘both sides’ share blame’ argument, it means that they genuinely understand that Kirk’s assassin was a far-left extremist of the sort that their rhetoric has been cultivating.
Flat out: if Barrack Obama, Nancy and Chuck, the top senators and dem house members are all suddenly signing from the ‘this is a problem on both sides’ hymnal...it means that they can no longer deny that they-and their side of the aisle- is spawning these monsters.
They are pivoting to this- to shift to the rhetoric that Barrack Obama is spouting...which is ‘Donald Trump and the republicans won’t preach unity. Look how terrible it is that conservatives won’t talk unity and bring the country together when that’s what’s called for now.
And that, of course, is crap. People on their side of the aisle-motivated by the relentless hate that they have cultivated- have tried to kill trump twice. They just killed a young man who had become a good friend of Trumps- over his views. We’ve seen catholic children ‘at prayer’ slain in a church recently. We’ve seen attacks on churches in Europe and on Jewish businesses in America’s major cities.
And they think trump and the rest of us on the right should be saying ‘both sides do it, and we’ve got to come together and ignore what’s been going on the activist left?
Come on.
They tried to kill Trump twice. They just killed Charlie Krk. Buy. But...Trump won’t cooperate and call for unity and accept some of the blame for his side.
Sorry-but bleep you...to anyone who is saying that. Barrack Obama, most especially.
This clown has always held himself up as some sort of ‘transformational’ moral compass...even though his history it to foment hate and division.
Some of these rancid democrats holding office spent the week insisting that Kirk’s killer was really Maga.
What sort of rancid individual do you need to be to do that? As some way to spin yourself out of responsibility?
And in the next breath ‘unity’?
JD Vance just CALLED IT LIKE IT IS: “This is a person [who] was radicalized by the far LEFT and got so far down the path of radicalization that he killed my friend [Charlie Kirk]! That is not a 'BOTH SIDES' problem.”
So, for the those pushing the 'both sides" narrative. Screw you.
Scott Jennings brought up a good point on CNN
“We‘re kind of tiptoeing around it here, but, you know, I can read some of them out loud if you want. These people were not online saying, 'Well, I disagree with Charlie Kirk.' They were online saying the world is better off without him. They were online saying, you know, his wife, in this case, 'She‘s a sick f-word for marrying him. I don‘t care about her feelings. We‘re better off living in a world without a disgusting psychopath.' That‘s who we‘re talking about here. And I‘ll tell you one more thing that‘s on my mind tonight and of conservatives everywhere. The idea that people are saying, well, he was an extremist or he was a racist or he was a Nazi or a misogynist, whatever, therefore we could get around to rationalizing it, Charlie Kirk was a mainstream conservative Republican. He had views that are held by tens of millions of people, including more than half the country in the last election. So if you‘re online saying this is justified, what you‘re actually saying is, 'Half the country I live in, there‘s some justification to commit violence or murder against them.' And that‘s what is concerning about the people who are doing this, and that‘s why I don‘t think anybody is losing any sleep about these folks not being able to teach our children."