Even Tucker Carlson Is Warning About How Trump Might Use Charlie Kirk's Death To Take Away Free Speech

Former Fox News talking head Tucker Carlson joined a rising chorus of conservative voices speaking out against plans by the administration of MAGA Republican President Donald Trump to exploit the death of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk to attack the First Amendment right to Freedom of Speech.

Trump's Attorney General, Pam Bondi, stated she plans to use the Department of Justice that she oversees to target anyone who engages in hate speech. Bondi falsely claimed the First Amendment includes a hate speech exception—something the Supreme Court has ruled on more than once.

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Bondi's interpretation of established federal law and the First Amendment were called out by legal and constitutional experts and Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Carlson also took exception to Bondi's plans.

On his latest episode of The Tucker Carlson Show entitled "America After Charlie Kirk", Carlson stated:

"A human being with a soul, a free man, has a right to say what he believes."

"That thinking [from Bondi] is exactly what got us to a place where young people think it's okay to shoot people you disagree with."

"They define hate speech as speech that hurts people, speech that's tantamount to violence."

Carlson added:

"I doubt very many young Americans want to applaud the death of a husband and father."

"But they've been told in schools exactly what Pam Bondi just said... there's free speech, but then there's also hate speech."

"That's a lie."

"Any attempt to impose hate speech laws is a denial of the humanity of American citizens and cannot be allowed under any circumstances."

"That has to be the red line."

Carlson concluded:

"You hope that a year from now the turmoil we're seeing in the aftermath of [Charlie Kirk's] murder won't be leveraged to bring hate speech laws into this country. If that does happen, there is never a more justified moment for civil disobedience."

Carlson's take on the Trump administration's First Amendment plans quickly spread online.

Many were shocked to discover they agreed with Carlson.

The Resistance/Facebook

Ikhide R Ikheloa/Facebook

When Trump was asked to comment on Bondi's plans during a press gaggle, he replied:

"Probably go after people like you, because you treat me so unfairly, you have hate in your heart. ABC paid me $16 million for a form of hate speech, your company paid me $16 million for a form of hate speech, maybe they'll have to go after you."

Trump had his settlements confused.

Experts and insiders speculate CBS parent company Paramount paid Trump $16 million and made additional undisclosed concessions to secure FCC approval for a business deal with Skydance Media—under the guise of settling a nuisance lawsuit by Trump against 60 Minutes that legal experts said CBS would win.

While industry speculation is that ABC parent company Disney paid Trump $15 million and made undisclosed concessions to curry favor by settling their own nuisance lawsuit that they were also predicted to easily win in court.

What's clear in the discussion on hate speech is that, according to Trump, the definition of hate speech is anything that hurts his delicate feelings and bruises his fragile ego. But for countries that do have laws that restrict or prohibit hate speech, the definition is very different.

The United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech defines it as:

"[A]ny kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor.”

Under the UN definition and most international hate speech laws, Trump and his cronies in the White House would be purveyors of hate speech, not victims of it.

Be careful what you wish for, Donald.