President Donald Trump has ignited a political firestorm following his Oval Office address in the wake of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s murder on Wednesday. What could have been a moment to unify a divided nation instead turned into a partisan broadside, with critics from both sides of the aisle calling it dangerous, dishonest, and outright disgraceful.
During the address, Trump squarely placed the blame for Kirk’s killing on Democrats, accusing them of inciting hatred against conservatives.
“Wonderful Americans like Charlie [are compared] to Nazis and the world’s worst mass murderers and criminals,” Trump said.
“This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now.”
But what Trump didn’t say is sparking even more outrage than what he did. He made no mention of right-wing political violence—omitting events like the January 6th Capitol riot, the attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband, the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot, or even the recent firebombing of Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro’s home and the killing of Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota.
Critics didn’t hold back.
“What an absolutely disgusting speech from the Oval Office,” posted Republicans Against Trump on X. “Trump is truly incapable of uniting the American people, even in times of tragedy. Disgraceful.”
“In his Oval Office address on political violence, Trump lists the attempt on his life, the Scalise shooting, and attacks on ICE agents,” wrote Max Berger, co-founder of the Momentum Training Institute, on Bluesky. “He does not mention Jan 6th, the attack on the Pelosi family, the Hortman murders, the kidnapping attempt on Gretchen Whitmer, or the fire at Gov Shapiro’s house.”
For many observers, Trump’s selective outrage wasn’t just tone-deaf—it was calculated.
Alan Eyre, a diplomatic fellow at the Middle East Institute, reminded audiences that focusing on political rhetoric misses the broader issue.
“The issue is primarily gun violence, not political violence,” Eyre said on X. “Every country has political factions, but only the US has this many deaths by guns.”
And then there’s the uncomfortable truth about Kirk himself. Though lauded by Trump as a “wonderful American,” Kirk has frequently aligned with inflammatory, far-right ideologies and defended political violence abroad and at home.
“Charlie Kirk was defending political violence committed by Israel & white fundamentalist of USA,” posted political analyst Vikas Sai. “He became a victim of the same.”
Nicholas Grossman, professor of international relations at the University of Illinois, called out Trump’s unfounded claims and the disturbing subtext in some far-right circles.
“Trump lying in an Oval Office address that Charlie Kirk’s killing was caused by people comparing him and his organization to Nazis—lying because he has no idea, but declared it anyway—pairs interestingly with some prominent Trump fans saying they hope this can be their Reichstag Fire,” Grossman wrote on Bluesky.
The comparison to the infamous Reichstag Fire—used by Hitler to justify a sweeping crackdown on opposition—has fueled concerns that Trump is trying to weaponize Kirk’s death as political capital, not to calm tensions, but to inflame them.
The takeaway for many? This wasn’t leadership. It was opportunism. And in a country already teetering under the weight of division and violence, the Oval Office pulpit was used not to heal, but to wound.
