In a twist of irony, California Gov. Gavin Newsom swiftly condemned the shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, even as his own recent fiery comments against Republicans come under fresh scrutiny.
The incident unfolded when Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, was shot during a speech at Utah Valley University, prompting Newsom to denounce political violence while highlighting inconsistencies in his stance, given past rhetoric that included threats of physical confrontation with political opponents.
Breitbart reported that earlier this year, Newsom invited Kirk onto his podcast for a discussion that turned pointed when Kirk pressed him on allowing transgender women, who are biologically male, to compete in girls' sports.
Newsom conceded during the exchange that the situation seemed "deeply unfair," a remark that drew sharp criticism from LGBTQ+ advocates who felt he had turned his back on their cause.
This moment underscored the tensions in progressive policies that sometimes prioritize inclusivity over traditional fairness in athletics, leaving conservatives like Kirk to highlight what they see as overlooked inequities.
Fast forward to August, when Newsom appeared on "The Siren Podcast" and unleashed strong language against Republicans, including then-President Donald Trump.
In that appearance, Newsom described Trump as someone who took election advice from figures like Vladimir Putin and accused Republicans of undermining democracy through radical means.
He escalated by saying, "This is not about; he doesn’t care about the Republican Party. He took it over. He’s an invasive species."
Newsom continued, "The Republican Party doesn’t even reflect itself. I mean, look at these Republicans cowering to this guy. Look at your Republican governor [Texas Gov. Greg Abbott], who used to claim to be a conservative." He added, "What a farce. Nothing conservative about this. I mean, by definition, nothing conservative about this."
Newsom then intensified, stating, "This is radical rigging of a midterm election, radical rigging of an election, destroying, vandalizing this democracy, the rule of law. So I’m sorry. I know some people’s sensibilities. I respect and appreciate that."
Wrapping up his rant, he declared, "But right now, with all due respect, we’re walking down a damn different path. We’re fighting fire with fire. I’m going to punch these sons of bitches in the mouth."
Such words, while perhaps meant to rally his base, now appear jarringly out of step with Newsom's call for rejecting violence, offering a polite reminder that leaders should model the civility they preach.
Then, on Wednesday, Sept. 10, Kirk took the stage at Utah Valley University for an event that included a question-and-answer session with students. Midway through, a single shot rang out toward the speaker, as detailed in a university alert to students.
The alert stated, "A single shot was fired on campus toward a visiting speaker. Police are investigating now, suspect in custody." Authorities quickly apprehended a suspect, and the campus was evacuated to ensure safety.
Bystanders reported the shooting happened during the interactive portion of Kirk's talk, leaving the conservative leader wounded in the neck and now battling for his life.
In response, Newsom posted on X, declaring, "The attack on Charlie Kirk is disgusting, vile, and reprehensible. In the United States of America, we must reject political violence in EVERY form."
While commendable, this stance invites reflection on whether Newsom's earlier podcast threats—framed as "fighting fire with fire"—might inadvertently fuel the very divisions he now decries.
Former President Donald Trump also weighed in via Truth Social, urging, "We must all pray for Charlie Kirk, who has been shot. A great guy from top to bottom. GOD BLESS HIM!"
Trump's call for prayers contrasts with Newsom's approach, emphasizing unity and faith in a moment of crisis rather than pointed accusations.
The shooting has reignited conversations about rising political tensions, particularly how heated language from figures like Newsom can exacerbate divides in an already polarized landscape.
Conservatives argue that while condemning violence is essential, leaders must consistently practice restraint in their words to prevent such tragedies, a point that feels especially poignant here.