In a political climate already supercharged with grief and outrage, a new and stunning firestorm has erupted, this time from the unlikeliest of sources: a sitting member of the United States Congress. In a move that has been widely condemned as an act of profound insensitivity, Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar delivered a blistering, no-holds-barred verbal assault on the memory of the late Charlie Kirk, just one day after his tragic assassination. With a tone of unfiltered contempt, Omar did not mince words, launching a tirade that has sent a chilling tremor through a nation already grappling with a painful loss.
Appearing on the podcast “Zeteo,” Omar looked squarely into the camera and, with a straight face, declared that it was “Full of Sh!t, Says It’s ‘F**ked Up” for people to remember Kirk for his good deeds. It was a statement so jarring that it immediately captured the attention of the media and the public. In a matter of minutes, the clip went viral, turning a moment of solemn reflection into a new battleground for a deeply fractured country. Omar’s comments were more than just a political opinion; they were a raw, emotional condemnation of a man and his legacy, delivered at a time when traditional norms would call for a moment of quiet reflection.
The congresswoman’s accusations were as specific as they were brutal. She accused Kirk of being a callous and uncaring figure, dismissing his attempts at civil dialogue as nothing more than a facade. “Charlie was someone who once said guns save lives after a school shooting,” Omar told host Mehdi Hasan, attempting to paint a portrait of a man with no empathy. She then went further, invoking some of the most sensitive and painful moments in recent American history. “Charlie was someone who was willing to debate and downplay the death of George Floyd in the hands of Minneapolis Police. Downplayed slavery and what black people have gone through in this country by saying Juneteenth should never exist,” she continued, her voice filled with conviction.
Omar’s claims were a direct refutation of the very legacy many of Kirk’s supporters have sought to uphold: that of a brave and courageous debater who brought civil political discussion to college campuses. In Omar’s view, that legacy was a lie. “And I think there are a lot of people out there talking about him just wanting to have a civil debate. There is nothing more f**ked up than to completely pretend that his words and actions have not been recorded and in existence for the last decade or so,” she stated. Her final, and perhaps most jarring, accusation was reserved for those who had spoken fondly of Kirk. “These people are full of stand it’s important for us to call them out,” Omar concluded, leaving no doubt about where she stood in the wake of the tragedy.
Omar’s comments have a long history of their own. The far-left lawmaker, who once declared her allegiance to Somalia over the United States, has been a lightning rod for controversy throughout her career. But even by her own standards, these remarks represented a new and shocking level of vitriol. Baselessly alleging that Kirk believed “empathy should not exist,” she attempted to dismantle his public image in a way that resonated with his critics. The fact that Kirk was a devout Christian who traveled the country to debate liberals, and whose last public words were about his faith and his courage, seemed to matter little in her scathing assessment. During a June 29 interview on “The Iced Coffee Hour” podcast, Kirk said, “I wanna be remembered for courage for my faith. That, that would be the most important thing. The most important thing is my faith in my life.” This was the man Omar was now mercilessly condemning.
Omar’s comments are not an isolated incident. They are part of a broader, and deeply unsettling, trend. In the wake of Kirk’s death, several other left-wing figures have celebrated the assassination or attempted to justify it. A professor at the University of Michigan, Charles H.F. Davis, wrote on X that Kirk’s assassination was a “solution” to “violent rhetoric.” MSNBC fired political analyst Matthew Dowd after he suggested that Kirk’s assassination was a consequence of his own “hate speech.“ Meanwhile, a former assistant dean at Middle Tennessee State University, Laura Sosh-Lightsy, was fired for posting on Facebook that she had “zero sympathy” for Kirk. These incidents, combined with Omar’s tirade, paint a bleak picture of a nation unable to find any common ground, even in the face of tragedy.
The political divide has never been clearer. As Democrats on the House floor erupted in anger after Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert requested a prayer for Kirk, House Speaker Mike Johnson was forced to intervene, demanding order and granting the prayer request. Meanwhile, the Republican response to Kirk’s death has been swift and solemn. President Donald Trump has announced that he will award Kirk the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and Vice President J.D. Vance arranged for Kirk’s casket to be flown on Air Force Two, accompanied by his friends and family. These actions, in stark contrast to the vitriol from the left, highlight a deep ideological and emotional chasm in America.
The assassin is not in custody as of Thursday night, though the FBI in Salt Lake City has released photographs of a suspect. Investigators found a high-powered, bolt-action rifle, and authorities discovered cartridges with pro-transgender and pro-Antifa messages. This detail, brought to light by President Trump, adds a chilling layer to the story, suggesting a political motive for the killing. In the end, the assassin’s actions were not just about a single life; they were about a deeper, more fundamental conflict in America. And Ilhan Omar’s comments, in their raw and unfiltered brutality, prove that the battle over Kirk’s legacy is only just beginning.
