Welcome to the resistance, Tucker Carlson? Forgive me—I’m sorry, mea culpa. After reflecting on the events of the past week, I realize I owe a public apology for some of my past statements. So here it goes: I’m sorry for expressing what some might call radical and dangerous opinions, like saying women deserve equal rights and shouldn’t be treated as walking wombs. I’m sorry for suggesting Palestinians shouldn’t be systematically exterminated while Donald Trump talks about building a resort in Gaza. Moving forward, I’ll do better and make sure to run all my opinions by the government first. There isn’t an official Department of Thought Control yet, but I’m sure we’ll get there soon.
I wish I were joking, but as you’ve likely noticed, we’re at a critical moment for free speech in the U.S. The killing of Charlie Kirk was a tragedy for his family, but the Trump administration has been ruthlessly using his death to crack down on dissent and weaken First Amendment protections.
For example, the day after Kirk was shot, Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau urged people to report any “foreigners” to the State Department who post on social media “praising, rationalizing, or making light of the event.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio later stated that the department has “most certainly been denying visas” to those celebrating Kirk’s death. While it’s in poor taste to celebrate anyone’s murder, the idea that criticizing Kirk’s divisive and bigoted views could be seen as “rationalizing” his death—and lead to deportation—is chilling.
It’s not just foreigners being told to watch what they say. On Monday, Vice President JD Vance, who was guest-hosting an episode of the Charlie Kirk Show, encouraged people to report anyone celebrating the influencer’s death to their employer—presumably so they could be fired.
There have already been numerous firings and suspensions related to Kirk. A FEMA employee was reportedly placed on administrative leave for an Instagram post calling Kirk a “literal racist homophobe misogynist.” MSNBC fired political analyst Matthew Dowd after he suggested Kirk’s “awful words” fueled “awful actions.” Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show was suspended “indefinitely” after he noted that “many in Maga Land are working very hard to capitalize on the murder of Charlie Kirk.” Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah also said she was fired over social media posts following Kirk’s killing.
The weaponization of Kirk’s death is so alarming that even one of Trump’s former allies is concerned. Tucker Carlson, the former Fox News host who was once a leading voice in the Maga sphere, recently issued a stark warning about how the Trump administration appears to be using Kirk’s murder to trample civil liberties.
“You hope that a year from now, the turmoil we’re seeing after [Kirk’s] murder won’t be leveraged to bring hate speech laws to this country,” Carlson said on his podcast Wednesday. This was in response to Attorney General Pam Bondi’s comments—which she has since walked back—that the Trump Justice Department would “target” people spreading “hate speech” after Kirk’s killing.
“And trust me, if it is, if that does happen, there is never a more justified moment for civil disobedience than that, ever,” Carlson added. “Because if they can tell you what to say, they’re telling you what to think… There is nothing they can’t do to you because they don’t consider you human.”
Like Marjorie Taylor Greene, the far-right congresswoman who has recently started speaking a limited amount of…Tucker Carlson is no friend to progressives. His hateful rhetoric and past support for Trump have contributed significantly to our current political turmoil. Yet the fact that even a far-right figure like Carlson is alarmed by the authoritarian path the U.S. seems to be taking is deeply unsettling. He appears to have realized that in the dictatorship Trump seems determined to create, no one is safe—not even him.
In Austria, three elderly nuns—Sister Regina (86), Sister Rita (81), and Sister Bernadette (88)—have taken matters into their own hands. Defying their diocese, they left their nursing home and returned to their former convent, which lacks electricity and running water. They’ve started an Instagram account and are crowdfunding for supplies.
In France, the first lady, Brigitte Macron, is set to present “scientific evidence” in a U.S. court to prove she is a woman. This comes after right-wing commentator Candace Owens repeatedly claimed Brigitte was born male, even staking her “professional reputation” on it. The Macrons are suing Owens for defamation.
In Colombia’s Catatumbo region, near the Venezuelan border, violence has escalated. Over 150 girls and women, aged 11 to 50, have escaped what they describe as sexual slavery by armed groups. Survivors warn that many more remain captive.
The Trump administration has compared birth control to abortion, ordering the destruction of millions of dollars’ worth of contraceptives meant for low-income countries. A USAID spokesperson stated that Trump is committed to “protecting the lives of unborn children” and will no longer provide “abortifacient birth control” as foreign aid. Experts warn this false equivalence could pave the way for a broader ban on contraception.
Israel’s far-right finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, referred to Gaza as a “real estate bonanza,” stating that demolition—the first step in “renewal”—is complete, and now it’s time to build. This language reveals that what is often called a “war” is, in fact, a genocidal land grab.
Pete Buttigieg has criticized Kamala Harris for passing him over as a running mate because he is gay. In her memoir, Harris called Buttigieg her “first choice,” adding that he “would have been an ideal partner—if I were a straight white man.” Beyond his sexuality, it’s notable that Harris viewed a former McKinsey consultant—who polled at 0% with Black voters and epitomizes the out-of-touch elite—as a viable option.The idea that voters would have been a good running mate is mind-boggling.
The Week in Pawtriarchy
A new study suggests chimpanzees may consume the equivalent of about one beer a day due to the fermented fruit they eat. Some researchers think this supports the “drunken monkey” hypothesis—the theory that humans developed a taste for alcohol because our primate ancestors were regularly consuming fermented jungle fruits. It seems the apocalyptic state of the world is enough to drive anyone to drink.
Arwa Mahdawi is a Guardian columnist.
Frequently Asked Questions
Of course Here is a list of FAQs about the topic designed to be clear and helpful for readers at different levels of familiarity
General Beginner Questions
1 What is this article about
This article written by Arwa Mahdawi discusses former President Donald Trumps plans to limit free speech if reelected and points out the irony that even a strong supporter like Tucker Carlson has expressed concern about it
2 Who is Tucker Carlson and why is his opinion important here
Tucker Carlson is a wellknown conservative political commentator His opinion is significant because he has historically been a strong supporter of Donald Trump so his public concern suggests that Trumps proposed actions are extreme even to his allies
3 What specific actions is Trump proposing that threaten free speech
While plans can evolve they have historically included using government power to pressure or punish media companies he labels as fake news changing libel laws to make it easier to sue critics and potentially revoking licenses of broadcast networks he disagrees with
4 What is free speech and why is it important
Free speech is the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint by the government Its a fundamental right in a democracy essential for holding power accountable debating ideas and ensuring an informed public
Intermediate Contextual Questions
5 Why is it surprising that Tucker Carlson is concerned
Its surprising because Carlsons show often echoed Trumps views and criticized the mainstream media For him to voice alarm indicates that Trumps proposed measures might go beyond typical political rhetoric and threaten core democratic principles they both claim to support
6 Isnt free speech protected by the First Amendment How can a president crack down on it
Yes the First Amendment protects free speech from government infringement A president cannot directly overturn it but they can use the power of their office to intimidate critics influence regulatory bodies and encourage lawsuits creating a chilling effect where people selfcensor for fear of retaliation
7 What is a chilling effect on free speech
A chilling effect is when the fear of punishment or retaliationeven if the punishment isnt always carried outdiscourages people from exercising their right to free speech For example if a president threatens to sue news organizations others might avoid publishing critical stories to avoid a costly legal battle
