Did Jimmy Kimmel LIE about Charlie Kirk | Trump.

Well, I haven't seen controversy like

this in a while. The Kimmel clip has

people on both sides freaking out,

arguing that this is not what Kimmel

meant. Other people saying that Kimmel

knew what he was doing and he's

blatantly lying on national television

to destroy

Americans right to the truth. And

therefore, Kimmel deserves to be panned

and sued and thrown into jail. Some

people say other people say Kim sucked

anyway. Get him off the air. But what we

really have to start with is what does

this mean for free speech? And what are

people who are actually the some of the

biggest cheerleaders of the right saying

about this? And from you know a

financial markets and political and more

dare I say reasoned perspective. I'm not

talking about like the trolls and

comments. I'm talking about uh things

like the editorial board of the Wall

Street Journal who tends to take very,

in my opinion, reasoned positions on

many different issues. That's just one

example. And so we're going to go

through a few different sources here,

but I think what the editorial board

says is very interesting. They make the

argument that the left has consistently

been the party of suppressing free

speech. that they've done it in the

past, that uh they'll do it again in the

future. And uh the very left

censorship is what helped the right win

power. that the censorship of the left

in Disney firing an actress in the

Mandalorian who expressed politically

incorrect views, NBC pushing out Megan

Kelly for comments deemed insensitive,

or the Biden administration censoring

contrarian views on CO. These censorship

campaigns or cancel campaigns were wrong

and they helped actually lead to the

rise of this MAGA movement of no, we

stand for free speech. It actually

helped propel the rise of Elon Musk

buying X the what Elon Musk calls the

platform of truth. But you know whether

it's the platform of truth or opinion is

to be argued but it is the platform of

free speech. See, when I ran for

governor in 2021, my campaign

announcement was censored by Facebook.

It was taken down by Instagram,

therefore Meta, because they were

donating to Gavin Newsome in California.

That's my assumption. We just know it

was taken down. Oh, wow. That's the one

thing you censor from Kevin. You don't

censor anything else, I say. But that's

what you take down my announcement post

that I'm running for. about right. But

the censorship that has so long been a

characteristic of, you know, leftleaning

corporations or just the left in general

has been decrieded by people on the

right and has led to this revitalization

of a demand for free speech. Free speech

is so important. You've got Obama

bringing out this, I think, beautiful

piece. I've read it before in the past

and I'm only going to read this little

portion to you here, but it's a

Frederick Douglas piece and this these

lines right here are so powerful in my

opinion. There can be no right of speech

were man. However lifted up, in other

words, however broke, however rich,

however strong, however weak, there can

be no right of speech where any man,

however young, however old, however

lifted up, however humble, is overroaded

by force compelled to suppress his

honest sentiments.

This is very powerful. You can't have

the right to free speech if you're being

compelled by some way or another not to

share your sentiment or your speech

because you're afraid of getting your

broadcast license revoked, for example.

Equally clear is the right to hear. To

suppress free speech is a double wrong.

It violates the rights of the hearer as

well as the speaker. It is just as

criminal as to rob a man of the right to

speak and hear as it would be to rob him

of money. Fantastic. The free speech is

the first amendment to the constitution

for a reason. It is so critically

important. And this is why I look at the

right leaning editorial board of the

Wall Street Journal who says, "Hey, wait

a second here. what's happening by core

and the threat of the Federal

Communication Commission's chair, a

administration official

to basically force the removal of Kimmel

from air. We'll go through the clips in

just a moment. Is the very censorship

that the left was proposing and it will

just be a matter of time. Uh, let me see

here. Yeah, this is insane. It will just

be a matter of time before, let me see.

I'm going to find the exact quotes here,

but it'll just be a matter of time

basically before

you'll end up with the very same thing

happening

to Republicans again when Democrats take

over power at some point in the future.

Because at some point in the future,

Democrats will be in power again. And

that's the argument that they're making

that you have to be really careful with

this because look at this.

So take a look here. Maybe now our

progressive friends understand why these

columns oppose government control of

business. Government should not control

business. Regulatory power in the hands

of a windful president or willful

president can too easily become a weapon

against political opponents including

the media. That's what happened

Wednesday when Brandon Claw said, "We

can do this the easy way or the hard

way." Just like a Jersey mob boss. The

FCC has the power over broadcast

licenses. Nextar Media, which is an

owner of a massive distribution of ABC

network distribution channels and in

current negotiations to let me see if I

have it here. Where is it? in current

negotiations on an over $6 billion deal.

There it is. Next are a suburban

Dallas-based broadcaster that owns and

operates more than 200 local television

stations needs SEC sign off on a $6.2

billion deal quickly washes their hands

of Jimmy Kimmel when Jimmy Kimmel says

something that people don't like. That

is bad. When Mr. car is probably the

catalyst for this happening. So, think

about the order of this. Okay, Kimmel

says something stupid. We'll go through

the clip in just a moment and we'll

break down an analysis on it because

there's a lot to analyze in it and a lot

of people don't think there's anything

to analyze in it, but there's actually a

lot to it and we'll use logic and facts

to go through it and break it down to

deconstruct it.

Well, what happens is Kimmel says

something stupid. Then you get Brandon

Carr at the FCC who basically says,

"Hey, we could do this the easy way or

the hard way. You know, maybe you

shouldn't be distributing Kimmel." And

Nexar's like, "Oh my gosh, our $6

billion deal hangs in the balance here.

This is just about Kimble." Mind you,

Bloomberg reports that Kimble loses

money for Disney, which a lot of people

on the right are like, "Hell yeah, the

good get rid of that clown who loses

money for the business. The guy who

sucks, whatever." Right? Those those are

all opinions. But the fact is Kimmel

said made a stupid statement that led to

a threat from the FCC that was heard

loud and clear and boom, he was gone.

The editorial board says as a private

company, Disney has the right to run

shows as it wishes. But anybody who

thinks this is a free market at work is

ignoring the ways the government can

punish companies. This is not a free

market. This is Trump's market and that

that's dangerous because it is a

violation of our first amendment rights

to free speech. Disney executives. Now,

I know this is where people are going to

go, "But he said something false." Hold

your horses. We're going to get to

breaking that down. Disney executives

had to look out for the best interest of

their shareholders on the day Kimmel was

fired. That's exactly what I said. I

said, "Bob Iger is taking over from Bob

Chapek, cleaning up the mess over at

Disney." And Bob Iger doesn't have the

time to deal with this bullcr. He will

fire him so fast if it means protecting

the Disney share price. That's why Bob

Iger is back. He's a businessman.

And businessmen realize you can't win in

politics. This is why Elon Musk had to

back off. This is why he's no longer

bagging on Trump being in the Epstein

files every single day because you're

going to lose against the political

machine.

Trump has used regulatory leverage

against Paramount and CBS in a weak

lawsuit. And he squeezed liberal law

firms to do liberal or to do pro bono

work for him while the Justice

Department is investigating prosecutors

who brought cases against Trump. Mr.

Carr might have ignored Trump in the

first term, but he doesn't need orders

in the second. He knows exactly what to

do to make Trump happy now. And this is

this is very true. I mean, this is what

the Trump administration is doing. It's

directing the Justice Department against

the people who were against him, which

is exactly what Trump said he wouldn't

do. Yes, the other side did it. Trump

said he wouldn't do it. He's doing it.

Let's be real. And he's leveraging his

power over these companies to sue them.

probably why he's also suing the New

York Times with a $15 billion lawsuit

because it does chill the media. It

chills especially the left-leaning

media. NPR, PBS losing funding. That's a

chilling of frankly left-leaning media.

Uh suing CBS, ABC in lawsuits that have

been settled with with um Donald Trump,

paying Donald Trump 15 and $16 million.

Now the Kimmel firing, the New York

Times lawsuit. This is Trump's

methodology here. This is project 2012

20 25 at work. And so the editorial

board of the Wall Street Journal, which

is usually a guardian of the right,

actually says that you should be careful

because the public is not outraged

enough at Carr's abuse of power. None of

this justifies what just happened. This

was censorship. And the victims of

cancel culture for so long,

conservatives more than anyone should

oppose it because they will be the

targets again when the left returns to

power.

This is because the FCC regulates

licensing. In other words, I actually

think the top comment here in the

comments was pretty good. Says, "I'm a

member of the public in Texas. I am

every bit as outraged about Mr. cars FCC

abuse of federal power because cancel

culture is cancel culture and no matter

who engages in it. Powerful statements

and so free speech is very important no

matter what side you're on. Now I

understand there are a lot of people who

say but what Kimble said was false.

We're going to talk about that in just a

moment. We're going to go through

exactly that. Just to give you some more

context, ABC last year paid $15 million

to settle a defamation lawsuit brought

by Trump against George Stephanopoulos.

Paramount agreed to pay $16 million to

settle a lawsuit with Trump over the

editing of a 60 minutes interview. These

aren't cases that went in front of a

jury and you know a full trial by our

peers. They're cases where companies

said you know what business decision

write off this expense and let's get our

billion dollar deals done. This is

business, but it's being directed by

crony capitalism, and that's dangerous

to our First Amendment rights. It's

dangerous to our Constitution. We're not

saying there aren't wrongs that are

being committed. We're not saying Jimmy

Kimmel isn't an idiot. That's not what

we're saying. We're not saying he didn't

make it oopsy dupsy. We're saying the

FCC

going to threaten regulatory

uh uh uh action for not getting rid of

Kimmel is a dangerous precedent. The

Financial Times even reporting this.

Disney's capitulation over Jimmy Kimmel

sparks fears for US media under Donald

Trump. This is a very very serious issue

right now for Disney. We can do this the

easy way or the hard way. Carr said the

threat was plain. the FCC could take

regulatory action. Probably would. This,

by the way, was all followed by people

saying that Jimmy Kimmel lied. And this

is the crux of the issue. Did Jimmy

Kimmel lie? That's what we're going to

break down. Take a look at this. Piers

Morgan. Jimmy Kimmel lied about Charlie

Cook's assassin being MAGA. Now,

something that you have to know about

Piers Morgan is he's like the old school

version of a jaw basically say shocking,

you know, algorithm sensitive things

that get people riled up because what

happens is when you say when you make

statements, this is why algorithms and

social media are so dangerous today.

This is why I refuse to be a part of

this. Yes, I'm on social media, but I

refuse to be a part of the shock of of

like the extreme left stuff or extreme

right stuff. I am somebody who will

always stand for giving you what I

believe is factual neutral information.

And if I piss everybody off, great,

because it means I will always stand for

what I believe is substantiated by

facts. And I'm not going to shill to one

side ever. Don't care if I piss

everybody off. I'm going to stand for

what I believe is the truth. And I'm

going to give you the facts that back up

the truth. And if those facts prove to

be wrong, then we have the right to

change our mind because when the facts

change, we change our mind. So the

question here is here's Morgan, somebody

who's really good at manipulating the

algorithm by by, you know, echoing

outrage, uh, who's also been on the

Celebrity Apprentice, mind you, under

Donald Trump. Chiml lied about Charlie

Kirk's assassin being MAGA. This caused

understandable outrage all over America.

Prompted TV station owners to say they

wouldn't air him and now he's being

suspended by his employees. Why is he

being heralded as some kind of free

speech martyr? Okay, so first of all, we

have to deconstruct this and then the

Kimmel clip.

Everything that Piers Morgan says that

is right here in blue follows the

yellow. So people are outraged. Kimmel's

getting cancelled. Why is being martyed

for free speech? All of that follows the

statement that quote, "Jimmy Kimmel lied

about Charlie Cook's assassin, Kirk's

assassin being MAGA."

Okay. Is this true? Did Jimmy Kimmel lie

about Charlie Cook's assassin being

MAGA? Now, many of you watching might

have watched the clip and said, "Oh,

yeah, Jimmy Kimmel totally at least

implied

that Krook's assassin was an

R. First of all, we have to then ask

ourselves, is an implication a lie?"

Then we have to ask ourselves, did Jimmy

Kimmel imply that or did Jimmy Kimmel

imply something else? Okay. So to break

this down, what we're going to do is

we're going to look at the clip and then

we're going to break this down using

logical analysis

and we'll come together and then we'll

decide what do we think about this. So

here's the clip. Let's go ahead and pop

it up on screen. I'm going to play it

once. We'll come back to it. We'll play

it once and then what we'll do is uh

we'll break this down in a in in the way

that somebody who's taking taken like

you know who studied logic and I'm not

talking about oh yeah that sounds

logical somebody who understands what is

a facious argumentation what is an

argument a claim with a fact right what

is the difference between a claim and

evidence right what what what are these

things that's that's what logical

analysis is that's what we're going to

do let's listen to the clip

>> over the weekend with the maggie gang

desperately trying to characterize

>> Hold on. Let the audio was screwed up

there. Let me just do this again because

it's important.

>> We hit some new lows over the weekend

with the MAGA gang desperately trying to

characterize this kid who murdered

Charlie Kirk as anything other than one

of them and doing everything they can to

score political points from it. In

between the fingerpointing, there was uh

grieving. On Friday, the White House

flew the flags at half staff, which got

some criticism, but on a human level,

you can see how hard the president is

taking this.

>> My condolences on the loss of your

friend Charlie Kirk, may I ask, sir,

personally, how are you holding up over

the last day and a half, sir?

>> I think very good. And by the way, right

there you see all the trucks. They've

just started construction of the new

ballroom for the White House, which is

something they've been trying to get, as

you know, for about 150 years. And it's

going to be a beauty. Yes, he's at the

fourth stage of grief. Construction.

Demolition.

Construction.

This is not how an adult grieavves the

murder of someone he called a friend.

This is how a four-year-old mourns a

goldfish. We get some.

>> Okay, this is very insensitive. The

Charlie Kirk shooting should affect

everyone of all political persuasions.

This is bad comedy. This there's no

question about this. To make an argument

that Donald Trump is not heavily

impacted by the Kirk shooting uh is

wrong. Even I as an influencer who sees

myself as in the middle or people that I

know who are on the left are impacted by

this because we all as Americans look

and go here's somebody who is sharing

their first amendment right to free

speech adding and and going out of their

way to provide perspective in the world.

They don't deserve to be shot. So

there's no question that this was

insensitive. There's no question that

you could call Jimmy Kimmel an [ __ ]

for this. There is no question about

that. But did he lie? Well, the crux of

the lie comes down to

the first line, which we're going to

play it again right here of they spent

the weekend arguing that he is anything

other than them. Just listen to that

portion again.

with the MAGA gang desperately trying to

characterize this kid who murdered

Charlie Kirk as anything other than one

of them and doing everything they can

anything other than one of them

desperately trying to do that. Okay, so

let's let's remove the words that don't

matter. Okay. What what mostly matters

like and the amplifications or

qualifications like the word desperately

or whatever that doesn't necessarily

really matter in in the sense that

matters in the term of of the way it's

heard but it doesn't matter from a

logical analysis point of view. So from

a logical analysis point of view what we

know is that he said spent the weekend.

This is time and what's doing. Okay. So

there's an action and a time that really

also doesn't matter. The part that

really matters is right here. Anything

other than one of them.

This is basically where people take away

this this argument that okay, Jimmy

Kimmel is calling

the shooter MAGA because if he's not

MAGA, then this is a double negative and

therefore he's MAGA.

But wait a minute, is that true? Is that

what this means? If I tell you that

somebody spent the weekend

saying an apple is anything other than

an apple,

does it make it an orange? Let me

explain that in a little bit more

detail. So,

opinion number one, arguing he's not

MAGA is the same as calling him MAGA.

The problem is this assumes there are

only two options. If you are not black,

then you are white. If you are not an

apple, then you are an orange. However,

this is a logical fallacy. Just because

you are not black does not make you

white and just because you are not white

does not make you black.

So, understand the logical fallacy that

is known as a false dilemma, which is

also known as an eitheror fallacy. Would

you like a bite of this apple? No. So,

you hate apples? No. Maybe I'm full.

Maybe I have a good taste in my mouth

from candy. Maybe I'm fasting. In other

words, a false dilemma is the argument

that, well, if you are not black, you

are white. No, maybe I'm Mexican. Maybe

I'm Hispanic. Maybe I'm Asian.

Maybe I identify as a Pacific Islander.

You don't want this bite of this apple?

You must hate apples. No. Maybe there's

another reason I don't want the bite of

the apple.

A in logical analysis, a false dilemma

or an eitheror fallacy is one that says

there are only two options.

And if there's anything else, it's

ignored. But that's logically false

because wait a minute, let's go to this.

If you spent the weekend saying you're

anything other than MAGA,

people are getting pissed because they

believe that Kimmel is saying he's MAGA.

But wait a minute,

there are many options here. He could be

MAGA, but he could also be a fascist, an

authoritarian. He could be uh, you know,

insane. He could be mentally ill. He

could be of no political persuasion. Uh,

he could be, you know, all sorts of

different things. He could be any kind

of party. He could be part of the

rainbow party. He could be part of the

trans party. You could call whatever you

want.

But just because

Kimmel says that they desperately spent

the weekend trying to make sure people

knew that he was anything other than

MAGA does not call him MAGA. It just

says he is not MAGA. And then Kimmel

reiterates the reason he said this in

the very next line. The reason is to

score political points. That's the next

line that he makes.

>> To score political points from and in

between the

>> That is not a lie. That's an opinion,

right? So

this is what Kimmel here said is true.

Almost everybody on the Trump side over

the weekend did make a very clear

argument that this is an assault on MAGA

and this is effed up. And part of the

benefit of that, and I hate to say it,

but part of the benefit that comes from

this, is what you end up doing is you

end up using the Kirk assassination as

somewhat of a tool to

get midterm votes. Now, that's very

insensitive, but look at this. So,

opinion number two. So, opinion number

one is he's not MAGA equals calling him

MAGA. No, that's a logical fallacy. It's

a false dilemma. It is factually

incorrect to say that calling someone

not MAGA means they're MAGA. That is

100% factually incorrect. And and we

could say that with 100% confidence.

Opinion number two, Kimmel didn't call

him MAGA. He said the right is working

overtime to make sure that everybody

knows he's not one of them. The shooter

is a madman. He's insane. He's mental.

You could do that. This serves as a

tool. People who don't want people don't

want to vote for madmen. So vote for

MAGA instead. What it really does is it

weaponizes the opportunity to to rally

votes for midterms. It's political

fundraising opportunity. It's a

marketing opportunity. It's a unifying

opportunity. It's an us versus them

opportunity. It's kind of like Ben

Shapiro marketing his college tour. Ben

Shapiro had this viral clip where he's

like, "I will not be shut down. We will

not give up on our college tour. we will

not cancel our college tour because we

will not be silenced. He's like, you

know, I've heard rumors that people

think we're going to cancel our college

tour because of the Charlie Kirk

assassination. We will not be canceling

our college tour. So, what that does is

it weaponizes outrage to market Ben

Shapiro's college tour. Now, that's

insensitive to say that, but it's a

fact. The reality is Ben Shapiro

capitalizing on this outrage markets his

own college tour

right

now. Then people get into sheep theory.

And that's opinion number three. Okay.

Opinion number three is sheep theory.

Well, how did most people feel? Well, a

lot of people on the right felt that

Jimmy Kimmel uh called him MAGA, but

that's an implication. That's a feeling.

That is not something that is

convincible beyond a reasonable doubt.

Now, it might hold in the perspective of

news because it's like, wait a minute,

like are are you make are you making an

implication here? But it's still not

doubt of guilt. An implication is not

equivalent to a lie. And I don't even

know that you can imply or or I I'm not

even convinced that you could say they

spent the weekend saying he's anything

other than MAGA implies he's MAGA. I'm

not even convinced you can go that far.

It just implies cuz like nobody called

him MAGA. Like let's also look at the

fact here for a moment. Nobody ever saw

him as associated with MAGA.

Like that like I don't think anybody

looks at the Kirk assassin as like oh he

was Maga. Like I don't even think

anybody was even like remotely thinking

that. I think what Kimmel here did was

very poorly try to create comedy

and he failed. Now does it rise to the

level of getting censored?

No, it shouldn't. You could choose not

to watch his show, but should he get

cancelled over this? No. And that's

where when we go back to this. Jimmy

Kimmel lied about the assassin being

MAGA. This is factually

wrong.

It is factually wrong. And we could see

it when we break it down with logical

analysis. from a logical

uh statistician style point of view, it

is factually wrong that Jimmy Kimmel

lied about Clark's assassin being mag

because we cannot prove that.

Now, with all of that out of the way,

it's worth knowing that what's the most

scary

>> as you've indicated there are

>> is this. This is what everybody should

be afraid of. This is the most scary,

disgusting

interview. First of all, Benny

eats this up hook, line, and synchron

doesn't challenge this at all,

and provides this avenue, which is fine.

People have the right to listen to it.

For for an administration official to

blatantly threaten our American

businesses, this is disgusting. Let's

listen to some of it. you know, avenues

here for the FCC. So, there are are some

ways in which I need to be a little bit

uh careful because we could be called

ultimately to be a judge on some of

these claims. You hear that? We could be

called to be a judge on some of these

claims. That is a direct threat. You

know, we might have to decide if your

license is going to stay active after

this. The direct threat

>> that come up, but I don't think this is

an isolated incident. I mean, you go

back to Representative Swallwell and he

had a tweet out last week where he was

saying that, you know, emphasizing that

Charlie Kirk's killer was a straight

white male from a Republican family that

voted for Donald Trump. In some

quarters, there's a very concerted

effort to try to lie to the American

people about the nature, as you

indicated, of one of the most

significant uh newsworthy

>> There it is. This right here is where

Carr sets up the argument that this was

a newsworthy event, implying that Jimmy

Kimmel is news, which frankly, if you're

getting your news from Jimmy Kimmel,

that's that's probably a, you know, a

big mistake to begin with. But

Car says there was a lie, but we just

proved that there was not a lie.

public interest acts that we've seen in

a long time and what appears to be an

action appears to be an action by Jimmy

Kimmel to play into that narrative that

this was somehow a MAGA or Republican

motivated person. If that's what

happened here with his conduct, that is

that is really really sick. And I've

been very clear from the moment that I

have become chairman of the FCC.

I want to reinvigorate the public

interest. And what people don't

understand is that the broadcasters, and

you've gotten this right, are entirely

different than people that use other

forms of communication. They have a

license granted by us at the FCC. See

that? He's basically saying here, hey,

the First Amendment doesn't apply to

broadcasters. They have a license and if

we think you're lying, you know, we

could revoke that license. This was a

clear as day shutdown

of American institutions, of American

business, of American speech, and it's

absolutely disgusting. This is the very

form of government corruption people

were worried about when voting for

Trump. A lot of people voted for Trump

but did not want to see project 2025.

There are a lot of people who believed

that Trump would be good for the economy

and maybe he will end up proving to be.

The stock market's doing great. It's at

all time highs, right? There are a lot

of things like Trump's done fantastic on

the border.

But there are a lot of people who love

what Trump is doing whether it's with

Iran or wherever it is. They love what

he's doing. even they'll even say, you

know what, what balls on him to meet

Putin in person, right? There are a lot

of people who support that. But then

they look at this censorship of American

free speech and they say, "This is a bad

precedent. If you don't like Kimmel and

you think he's a dumbass, don't watch

him. But don't take away the right to

watch him by threatening to take

action." Later in this video, Carr ends

up saying, you know, we could do this

the easy way uh or the hard way. Uh I'm

not going to play this whole thing

because you get the propaganda. I will

play that portion though, right here.

>> I mean, look, we can do this the easy

way or the hard way. These companies can

find ways to change conduct and take

action, frankly, uh on Kimmel, or you

know, there's going to be additional

work for the FCC

>> or there's additional work for the FCC

ahead. How clear as day was that? Listen

to how clear as day was that? Frankly,

these companies can find ways to change

conduct.

>> Find ways to change conduct and take

action, frankly, uh, on Kimmel or, you

know, there's going to be additional

work for the FCC.

>> Did you hear that? These companies need

to take action on Kimmel or, you know, I

guess there's going to be more work for

this government institution.

You cannot have a more clear as day

violation of free speech and corrupt

government action than this scumbag

right here. That is not a slight

against, you know, Trump. I'm not

shilling for Democrats. I don't give a

crap what anybody thinks. I'm sharing my

perspective.

This is messed up. It's wrong and it's a

bad president knows about this.

>> We'll we'll try a little advertising and

see how it goes. Congratulations, man.

You have done so much. People love you.

People look up to you.

>> Kevin Praath there, financial analyst

and YouTuber. Meet Kevin. Always great

to get your take.