Politics

(WASHINGTON) — FBI Director Kash Patel kicked off two days of questioning on Tuesday from congressional committees about his tenure leading the FBI so far. He’s also facing questions about the assassination of conservative activist and influencer Charlie Kirk last week.

In his appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday, Patel addressed his handling of the Kirk investigation — something he faced criticism for after he shared on social media at one point that a suspect was in custody, but then had to backtrack an hour and a half later.

Ranking Member Dick Durbin, a Democrat, slammed Patel during his opening remarks on Tuesday, saying Patel sparked “mass confusion” in his posts about Kirk’s killing. Patel stood by his performance, touting the fact that Kirk’s suspected shooter was caught in less than 36 hours.

Patel said he directed authorities to release the photo of the suspect, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, in the Kirk shooting. Kirk was killed in Utah on Wednesday and Robinson was apprehended after his father recognized him in photographs released by authorities, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said on Friday. His father told Robinson to turn himself in, with the 22-year-old initially saying no, but later changing his mind, officials said.

Patel contends this only happened because he ordered “against all law enforcement recommendations,” as he said on X on Saturday, the release of video and enhanced photos of the suspect.

“We cannot do our job without the American public and credible reporting in the media,” Patel said. “And that’s why Tyler Robinson is in custody today about to face charges.”

Patel addressed criticism that he has faced for how he handled the investigation on “Fox & Friends” on Monday morning.

“I was telling the world what the FBI was doing as we were doing it. I continue to do it. I challenge anyone out there to find a director who has been more transparent and more willing to work the media with high profile cases or any cases that the FBI [is] handling.”

For his part, President Donald Trump is standing behind Patel. Asked for his thoughts on Patel’s performance Tuesday morning, Trump said he supports Patel and that he has “confidence in everyone in the administration.”

Patel is facing questions on a host of other issues while he has been at the helm of the FBI, including the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files.

The Trump administration has been dealing with blowback it received from MAGA supporters for its decision to not release more materials related to the investigation into Epstein, the wealthy financier and convicted sex offender who died by suicide in jail in 2019.

Epstein, whose private island estate was in the U.S. Virgin Islands, has long been rumored to have kept a “client list” of celebrities and politicians, which right-wing influencers have baselessly accused authorities of hiding.

The Justice Department and FBI announced in July that they had found no evidence that Epstein kept a client list after several top officials like Patel, before joining the administration, had themselves accused the government of shielding information regarding the case.

Patel squarely blamed former U.S. Attorney and Labor Secretary Alex Acosta, who initially oversaw the Epstein investigation. Acosta resigned amid controversy over his role in a 2008 plea deal with Epstein and defended his decision, saying his goal “was straightforward” and included putting Epstein behind bars.

“I’m here to testify that the original sin in the Epstein case was the way it was initially brought by Mr. Acosta back in 2006. The original case involved a very limited search warrant, or set of search warrants, and didn’t take as much investigatory material it should have seized,” Patel said. “If I were the FBI director, then it wouldn’t have happened.”

Patel testified that Epstein was not an FBI informant as some have claimed.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Attorney General Pam Bondi faced bipartisan backlash Tuesday over her comments that the Justice Department “will absolutely target” anyone who targets others with “hate speech” in the wake of the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Bondi made the comments in a podcast interview with Katie Miller, the wife of White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller.

“There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech, and there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society,” Bondi said.

“Do you see more law enforcement going after these groups who are using hate speech and putting cuffs on people so we show them some action is better than no action?” Miller asked in response.

“We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech — and that’s across the aisle,” Bondi responded.

Bondi’s comments quickly gained traction across social media, with some users replying with a 2024 post from Charlie Kirk, in which he wrote: “Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment. Keep America free.”

“Someone needs to explain to Ms. Bondi that so-called ‘hate speech,’ repulsive though it may be, is protected by the First Amendment. She should know this,” conservative commentator Brit Hume wrote on X.

Bondi issued a defiant statement from her X account on Tuesday morning in response to mounting backlash.

“Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime,” Bondi wrote. “For far too long, we’ve watched the radical left normalize threats, call for assassinations, and cheer on political violence. That era is over.”

Bondi listed out several criminal statutes the Justice Department has historically deployed to prosecute threats of violence.

“You cannot call for someone’s murder. You cannot swat a Member of Congress. You cannot dox a conservative family and think it will be brushed off as ‘free speech.’ These acts are punishable crimes, and every single threat will be met with the full force of the law,” Bondi wrote.

“Free speech protects ideas, debate, even dissent but it does NOT and will NEVER protect violence. It is clear this violent rhetoric is designed to silence others from voicing conservative ideals,” she posted.

In a separate interview on Fox News’ “Hannity” on Monday evening, Bondi also suggested she has directed the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division to “prosecute” businesses that refuse to print Kirk’s pictures for vigils. It is not clear what criminal statute would be relevant in that instance.

Bondi’s comments come as President Donald Trump and other senior White House officials have repeatedly said they would use the Justice Department in the wake of Kirk’s assassination to explicitly target left wing groups.

During Trump’s first administration, Justice Department officials repeatedly resisted attempts by Trump and the White House to designate Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization — a move they described as “highly problematic” and which would likely run afoul of the First Amendment.

The First Amendment protects the rights of Americans who like spewing “hateful speech” and “assembling with others who share the same hateful views,” so “unless an organization engages solely in unprotected activity, such as committing crimes of violence, any designation of a (U.S.-based) organization as a terrorist organization … would likely run afoul of the First Amendment,” Mary McCord, the former head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division, told a House panel in January of 2020.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Minnesotans are set to vote Tuesday in the special election to replace Melissa Hortman, the former Democratic Minnesota House speaker who was killed alongside her husband at their home in June, a politically motivated killing thrust back into the spotlight after the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk.

The election has significant political implications, too, due to Republicans’ one-seat edge in the statehouse.

Voters will choose between Democratic nominee XP Lee, a former Brooklyn Park City Council member, and Republican nominee Ruth Bittner, a real estate agent.

Lee told The Associated Press that continuing Hortman’s legacy is one of the reasons why he is running for her former seat.

“It makes me want to focus on healing and coming together even more,” he said. “You know, I wouldn’t be running if it wasn’t for the murder of Melissa Hortman. So I am very conscious of political and gun violence. So I want to help our community heal.”

Born in a refugee camp in Thailand after his family fled the Vietnam War, Lee says he is focused on improving education and access to health care.

Lee won the Democratic primary last month over two others with 59% of the vote, according to KSTP. On Sunday, he was joined for a door-knocking event by Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who encouraged the community to cast their ballots in favor of the Democratic candidate.

Lee is favored to win in Hortman’s blue-leaning home district, which would restore the chamber to a 67-67 deadlock.

The Republican contender similarly seeks to honor the late Minnesota House speaker, with Bittner telling MPR News that Hortman was a “very unique individual” and that “we will not be trying to replace her.”

According to the Los Angeles Times, Bittner was concerned about running for office amidst the heightened environment of political violence, but she emphasized that “we have to move forward as a country” and argued that “there’s no way to solve this problem if we shrink back in fear.”

Bittner is capitalizing on her lack of political experience, branding herself as a new voice that is focused on eliminating government inefficiencies and improving public safety and education.

The candidates have acknowledged the fear plaguing Minnesotans in recent days, with Lee noting that he has spoken to citizens that have brought up the Charlie Kirk shooting and the Annunciation Church shooting that took place in their state — two instances of violence that had occurred after Hortman’s murder.

Hortman’s alleged killer, Vance Boelter, is charged with shooting and killing Hortman and her husband Mark at their home in Brooklyn Park and shooting and wounding state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife Yvette at their house in nearby Champlin in the early hours of June 14, authorities said.

Boelter allegedly showed up at their doors, impersonating a police officer and wearing a realistic-looking latex mask to carry out his “political assassinations,” prosecutors said.

Investigators recovered a list of about 45 elected officials in notebooks in Boelter’s car, according to prosecutors. The alleged shooter’s list of potential targets also included the names of abortion providers and pro-choice activists, several sources told ABC News. Many of the Democratic lawmakers on the list have been outspoken about pro-choice policy positions, two sources said.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(LONDON) — President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump on Tuesday head to the United Kingdom for a historic second state visit, where he will also meet with top U.K. officials to deepen ties with one of America’s closest allies.

The visit and invitation for the state visit are historic because Trump will become the first elected political leader in modern times to be hosted for two state visits by a British monarch.

During a background call on Monday with reporters, White House officials said that this visit will highlight what they called the deep ties between the United States and the United Kingdom.

“This historic second state visit is set to highlight and renew the special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom. At the same time, the visit will recognize and celebrate the upcoming 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States,” a White House official told reporters during a background call previewing the trip.

Pomp and circumstance at Windsor Castle
The visit will have much of the same pomp and circumstance as Trump’s first state visit to the U.K., but there will be some notable differences. For one thing, the events will take place at Windsor Castle, while Trump’s previous visit was held at Buckingham Palace.

Another notable difference: the royals themselves. Trump’s previous visit was headed by then-monarch, Queen Elizabeth II. This time King Charles III will host the president, supported by the Prince and Princess of Wales — William and Catherine — who will play a major role as the red carpet is rolled out for Trump for the second time.

Back in February, in the Oval Office, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer hand-delivered an invitation from the king to Trump.

There will be gun salutes from Windsor and London, and for the first time a U.S. president will take a carriage ride through the grounds of Windsor Castle, and enjoy a joint flyover performed by the Red Arrows and U.S. F-35 military jets.

One notable royal will not be present at all during the visit. Prince Andrew will not participate. Andrew’s ties to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were major U.K. news.

The disgraced Duke of York’s lack of attendance comes as the Epstein files and his own relationship with the late financier have been a political headache for Trump. And just days before Trump’s visit, the U.K. sacked their ambassador to the U.S. over emails showing his close relationship with Epstein.

Deepening US-UK ties
In addition to the ceremony and regalia, Trump will take time for diplomacy. On the final day of his visit, Trump is set to meet with the Starmer. The leaders will hold a bilateral meeting at Chequers, the Prime Minister’s country estate outside of London.

Pressing global issues, including Russia and Ukraine, Russia’s threat to NATO’s Eastern flank and the war in Gaza will surely be a main topic for the leaders. Their visit comes after Starmer and other European leaders traveled to the White House to meet with Trump and Zelenskyy just after Trump’s summit in Alaska with Russian President Putin. But since that meeting, during which allies expressed optimism of a path forward on security guarantees, no progress has materialized.

The meeting also comes as Russia has shown staggering provocation by violating Polish airspace with drones. Poland then invoked NATO’s Article 4 and European nations are rattled by the overt action. But Trump has seemed to suggest that the drone incident may have been a mistake. Starmer will surely want to discuss the issue with Trump, a leader who has not always been keen on the U.S. upholding Article 5 of NATO’s treaty — calling for mutual defense when one member is attacked.

The leaders will also surely discuss their relationship, namely announcing deals to strengthen tech partnerships between the nations and a deal to vastly increase the U.K.’s investment in nuclear power with the US.

Starmer will also likely make the case more favorable trade terms with the U.S. While the U.K. has solidified a tariff deal with the U.S., negotiations remain for some things, including steel and pharmaceuticals.

The White House adds that Trump will meet with U.S. and U.K. business leaders, but White House officials declined to confirm ones.

Asked for a dollar amount for how much these investments could be, a White House official on the call could not give an exact figure but said that the White House was “looking at more than 10 million, perhaps tens of billions.”

The visit will also highlight mutual cooperation in civil nuclear power, research, investment and development. The U.S. and the U.K. are expected to sign new deals that will enhance the build-out of new nuclear power stations in both countries and clear the way for a significant expansion of new nuclear projects in the U.K.

​​The agreement will enable companies to build new nuclear power stations more quickly in both countries by reducing bureaucratic hurdles and delays, officials said.

Kelly also said there will be advances in defense technology cooperation and an examination of how both the U.S. and U.K.’s leading financial hubs can be sustained into the future.

Other top officials will be traveling alongside Trump in the U.S. delegation include Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, Ambassador Warren Stevens and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — FBI Director Kash Patel is set to begin two days of questioning on Tuesday from congressional committees about his tenure leading the Federal Bureau of Investigation so far. He’s also sure to get questions about the assassination of conservative activist and influencer Charlie Kirk last week.

Patel will first be in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee in its oversight role of the agency before he faces its House counterpart on Wednesday.

Patel has been criticized for his handling of the Kirk investigation — sharing on social media at one point that a suspect was in custody but having to backtrack an hour and a half later — but Patel has stood by his performance, touting the fact that the FBI caught the Kirk’s suspected shooter in less than 36 hours.

Kirk was killed in Utah on Wednesday and the suspect, Tyler Robinson, was caught after his father turned him in to authorities on Friday. Patel contends this only happened because he ordered “against all law enforcement recommendations,” as he said on X on Saturday, the release of video and enhanced photos of the suspect.

“For comparative sake, the Boston bombing, the FBI didn’t release images for three days,” Patel told “Fox & Friends” on Monday morning. “I made an executive decision on an investigative and operational need, and it turned out to be the right move.”

He also addressed the criticism that he has faced for how he handled the investigation.

“I was telling the world what the FBI was doing as we were doing it. I continue to do it. I challenge anyone out there to find a director who has been more transparent and more willing to work the media with high profile cases or any cases that the FBI [is] handling.”

For his part, President Donald Trump is standing behind Patel, telling Fox News on Saturday that “I am very proud of the FBI. Kash — and everyone else — they have done a great job.”

Patel is also set to face questions on a host of other issues during his tenure at the FBI, including the firing of three senior agents who sued for reinstatement last week.

Brian Driscoll, who formerly served as the acting director of the FBI during the early days of Trump’s second term, Steven Jensen, former acting director of the FBI’s Washington field office, and former director in charge of the FBI’s Las Vegas field office Spencer Evans all joined in the lawsuit represented by Abbe Lowell, an attorney who has represented other high-profile figures ousted or otherwise targeted by the Trump administration.

The three former officials, whose careers collectively spanned over six decades of law enforcement experience across the ranks of the FBI, allege that the firings violated their due process rights as well as their First Amendment rights to free association and speech.

“Patel not only acted unlawfully but deliberately chose to prioritize politicizing the FBI over protecting the American people,” the lawsuit alleges. “As explained herein, his decision to do so degraded the country’s national security by firing three of the FBI’s most experienced operational leaders, each of them experts in preventing terrorism and reducing violent crime.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., a member of the Judiciary Committee, told ABC News that the lawsuit “contains pretty damning allegations that are now sworn to as part of a court proceeding.”

The director is also set to face questions about his so-called “enemies list,” a campaign promise to root out who he saw as bad actors in government, as well as his use of the FBI plane.

Whitehouse told ABC News that Patel “brings a genuinely political motive to the repeated instances of political decision making at the FBI.” He said it is “really, really, really, really ironic about the people who are supposedly so irate about weaponization is now doing weaponization at an unprecedented scale.”

He is also expected to face questions over the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files.

The Trump administration has been dealing with blowback it received from MAGA supporters for its decision to not release more materials related to the investigation into Epstein, the wealthy financier and convicted sex offender who died by suicide in jail in 2019.

Epstein, whose private island estate was in the U.S. Virgin Islands, has long been rumored to have kept a “client list” of celebrities and politicians, which right-wing influencers have baselessly accused authorities of hiding.

Trump promised during the 2024 presidential campaign to release the files in their entirety and Patel before taking the FBI job had pushed unsubstantiated claims about who was in them.

The Justice Department and FBI announced in July that they had found no evidence that Epstein kept a client list after several top officials like Patel, before joining the administration, had themselves accused the government of shielding information regarding the case.

Last week, the House Oversight Committee released what it said was a note from Trump to Epstein on his birthday, which the White House and Trump deny was written by him.

On Sept. 2, the committee released more than 33,000 pages of Epstein-related records after it subpoenaed the Justice Department for them, but Democrats on the committee said that most of the files are already public.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A new memoir from former West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, who clashed with former President Joe Biden over his legislative agenda, highlights the sharp disagreements the former moderate Democrat had with the Biden White House and his party — and describes Biden’s campaign to pressure Manchin to back his plans.

ABC News obtained excerpts of Manchin’s memoir, “Dead Center: In Defense of Common Sense,” before its release on Sep. 16.  

One of the swing votes in the evenly split Senate, the longtime senator from the coal-producing state opposed Biden’s $2 trillion-plus Build Back Better proposal, a sweeping domestic policy, tax and social safety net package that included climate and tax provisions that Manchin rejected.

Manchin said his rejection didn’t stop Biden from trying to use the bully pulpit to convince Manchin to change his position.

In a private White House meeting, Manchin said he told Biden “this isn’t your legislation. It’s Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren’s. I’ve known you for a long time, and I do not believe that you believe this is the right thing for the country.”

“He grabbed my arm,” Manchin wrote of Biden. “‘Joe,’ he said, ‘the country needs you.'”

“When the most powerful man in the world is putting the weight of the world on you, it causes you to pause. I took a deep breath and grabbed his arm. ‘Mr. President,’ I said, ‘the country needs you too,'” Manchin wrote. 

Manchin also criticized the Biden White House’s handling of negotiations with House and Senate Democrats over the infrastructure package, which at one point were held up in the House by progressives in what Manchin called “a misguided effort” to pass the larger domestic agenda.

“The political incompetence of his staff was staggering,” Manchin wrote about Biden’s trips to the Hill to meet with House Democrats. 

“[Biden] came from a working-class family. He built his career fighting for hardworking families, the very people who felt forgotten by Washington,” Manchin wrote. “But now he seemed beholden to the elite and far-left social agenda baked into [the Build Back Better Act]. This wasn’t the Joe Biden I knew — or maybe, as a senator from Delaware, he wasn’t able to show his true stripes before.”

Manchin said he felt that Biden “was losing touch with the very values that defined his career.”

Once Manchin revealed in a Fox News interview that he would not support the proposal, effectively killing it in the Senate, Manchin said he received a “hostile” voicemail from Biden, and that Biden was “irate” when he returned his message. 

Manchin said he told Biden he was frustrated with the White House’s outreach, and the fact that Biden singled out his opposition in a statement, telling Biden he believed it put his family “in harm’s way and disregarded my genuine attempt to work with you.”

Biden ended the conversation on a cool note, according to Manchin.

“‘We have a pissed off Irishman and a pissed off Italian, I think we should let things cool off.’ We didn’t talk for three months,” Manchin wrote.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Vice President JD Vance hosted Charlie Kirk’s podcast on Monday, during which he said “left-wing extremism” is “part of the reason” Kirk was killed last week.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — While many states have at least partially banned cellphones in the classroom this back-to-school season, some are still leaving those decisions to their local education agencies, according to a new data analysis conducted by ABC News.

ABC News reached out to the education departments of every state, D.C., the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico by email this summer to discuss the policies.

Overall, 20 states (including D.C. and the Virgin Islands) have completely banned wireless communication devices — including personal phones or tablets — for the entire instructional day. There are, however, exceptions for students with disabilities who have individualized education programs.

In contrast, 17 states — such as Maryland and Wyoming — that have not banned the use of wireless communication devices in schools on the state level.

The remaining 16 states have chosen a more relaxed approach, with some recommending the individual school districts decide their own policies, and others, like Puerto Rico, only requiring a policy to be formed by 2026.

The Department of Education is on a quest to return all education responsibilities and decisions to the states. It leaves cellphone guidance to the local level.

Cellphone usage continues to be one of the most contentious issues for education leaders. Education experts told ABC News that electronic devices stifle engagement, disrupt learning by causing distractions, and create adverse mental-health issues in adolescents.

Thomas Toch, the director of FutureEd — an education policy center at Georgetown University, said he believes using cellphones in schools is generally problematic with the harm outweighing the good.

“It’s a problem,” Toch argued. “We’re trying to get kids to engage, to immerse themselves in the subject at hand, to communicate with their peers, to be part of a learning community,” he said.

“There’s lots of research to suggest that [phones] are very detrimental to students’ levels of concentration and undermine, for those reasons and others, their learning,” Toch added.

‘Even worse after COVID’

The modern smartphone debuted in 2007 — nearly 20 years ago — but school cellphone issues were exacerbated over the last few years, according to educators who spoke to ABC News.

When students returned to the classroom after the COVID-19 pandemic, they brought back their phones, according to Vermont’s Harwood Union Middle and High School Assistant Principal Jessica Deane. She said phones in school have been a problem since their invention, and emphasized that the problem has never been more prominent than since the pandemic.

“I’ve been asking students to put their phones away since 2005,” Deane told ABC News. “It seemed even worse, coming back after COVID.”

Teachers across the country, such as Julia Casey in Missouri, said the new ban has made her job more manageable because she doesn’t have to police students.

“I don’t have to, like, correct that behavior,” Casey said, adding that the ban has helped students “stay on task a lot more.”

‘Bell-to-bell’

The most strict cellphone measures include implementing a “bell-to-bell” school-day ban for this academic year. The bans are mandated in places such as Arkansas, Texas, Virginia and more.

The states require phones be stored separate and away from students.

Oregon Governor Tina Kotek signed an executive order banning phones in her state, too.

“This will help improve focus, mental health and safety — so every student can learn and thrive without distractions,” Kotek said in a recent post on X.

New York City Public Schools, the nation’s largest school district, also has a bell-to-bell policy in place for its nearly one million students, but the schools will be required to provide at least one method for families to reach their children during the school day in the case of an emergency.

In Kansas, the state board of education commissioned a task force — consisting of parents, educators and students — on student screen time, which found that its schools should limit cellphone use, with some school going with a bell-to-bell ban.

“We wanted the local school districts to have that control,” Kansas Commissioner of Education Randy Watson told ABC News. “What we have found is that most school districts in Kansas are implementing a bell-to-bell ban.”

Emergency situations

One of the top concerns for parents and families is their ability to contact their children in case of an emergency.

School safety is the No. 1 priority for educators, according to interviews with city leaders and education officials, especially with the influence of recent school shootings.

For communication purposes, phones can be valuable tools for students during the school day, according to Toch.

“There could be instances where kids don’t … have a way to communicate with family members — or don’t have an ability to communicate a problem that they see and that they might want to use their phone to alert others to,” Toch told ABC News.

Celebrating Washington, D.C.’s bell-to-bell policy, D.C. Schools Chancellor Lewis Ferebee argued that if there’s an emergency “the last thing we want students to do is to be on their cellphone.”

“We want them to be focused on the guidance and direction that they will be receiving from adults in the situation,” he said.

Kansas Commissioner Watson said any school incident is tragic, but he claimed there was “no evidence” to suggest having cellphones helps in the case of an emergency, according to his conversations with law enforcement.

In his state, Watson said districts are making their own choices and it’s paying off for the students.

“Kids are more engaged,” Watson explained.

“Kids are happier. There’s less bullying that takes place. There’s less distractions academically. That daily behavior goes on and on.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

 (NEW YORK) — Gov. Spencer Cox, R-Utah, said Sunday that the suspect in the shooting that killed conservative activist Charlie Kirk is not cooperating with authorities.

“He has not confessed to, to authorities. He is, he is, he is not cooperating, but, but, but all the people around him are cooperating. And I think that’s, that’s, that’s very important,” Cox told ABC News’ “This Week” co-anchor Martha Raddatz.

Authorities identified Kirk’s alleged shooter as 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, who now remains in custody. Charges are expected to be formally filed on Tuesday, Cox said.

Cox was also asked about a Sunday New York Times report that alleged Robinson had communicated with others on Discord after the shooting. The Times reported Robinson had made jokes about being the alleged gunman.

ABC News has not independently confirmed the Discord messages.

“All we can confirm is that those conversations definitely were happening, and they did not believe it was actually him. It was, it was all joking until, until he, you know, until he admitted that it actually was him,” he said.

The Utah governor, who has been the public face of the investigation, also addressed reports Saturday that the suspect’s roommate is transitioning from male to female.

Cox previously told the Wall Street Journal that Robinson was “deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology.” Asked if investigators have uncovered evidence to show that, Cox replied, “Well, so far that — that has come from his acquaintance and his family members. That’s where that initial information has come from. Certainly, there will be much more information that is released in the charging documents as they’re bringing all of that together.”

Cox said there will be “much, much more information” revealed in the coming days when charges are filed. The governor urged Americans to choose kindness in a time of high political tension.

“These are very tragic circumstances that impact all of us,” Cox said.

Here are more highlights from Cox’s interview and those with Gov. Jared Polis, D-Colo., and Sen. John Curtis, R-Utah:

On Trump not talking about political violence against Democrats
Raddatz: President Trump said nothing about the political violence against Democrats. In fact, he blamed the radical left. What’s your reaction to that? Is that something you think he should be doing?

Cox: Well, look, President Trump is very angry and, Charlie is his close personal friend. There is a lot of anger, a lot of anger on the right, on my side of the aisle. And I’ve certainly felt that. And in this case, it does appear that that’s true. Again, more, more information is coming and we’ll learn more over time.

You know, I don’t know that that that matters as much as the the radicalization piece. I brought up the, the Democrats who were assassinated recently. And how quickly we move on from these things. But, but the body count is, is piling up. And so I’m so concerned about this radicalization piece. And that’s what we’re trying to understand. Again, this person made a choice, and it was this person’s choice. And this person will be held responsible.

Cox on how to get out of the ‘dark place’ the country is in
Cox: Right now, we’re in a dark place. Everybody gets that, I think, and we have choices and we in my political philosophy and my, and my religious philosophy, we believe in agency, that every one of us gets to make our own decisions … Every one of us has to make a decision. Are we going to hate our neighbor? Are we going to hate the other side? Are we going to return violence with violence? Or are we going to find a different path? Are we going to get out of those social media, those dark places of the internet where the conflict entrepreneurs reside, who are praying upon us, these, these companies with trillion dollar market caps who are using dopamine just like fentanyl, to addict us to their product and, and lead us again — those algorithms — lead us to more outrage. Can we put that aside? Can we go and serve our fellow human beings? Can we do some good in our neighborhood? Can we hug a family member? Can we talk to a neighbor that we disagree with? That’s, that’s up to us. And that’s the only way out of this. There is nothing else we can do to, to solve this, this dark chapter in our history.

Polis on the country’s political division
Raddatz: How did we get to these moments?

Polis: I think, as Governor Cox said, it really is an important reflection point. Violence in political theater, in our schools, on college campuses, is unacceptable. It’s fine, and we should even celebrate, having different opinions on things, right? Charlie Kirk’s catchphrase, “prove me wrong,” encouraging peaceful debate, discussion.

But it’s wrong to resort to violence and killing. And I think that’s a message we need to reemphasize in this age when sometimes there’s to many conflicting messages out there. We need to speak unequivocally, celebrate our differences. They should lead to discussion, not violence.

Curtis on the pervasiveness of political violence
Curtis: If it were up to me, I think you need to take the word “radical” and remove “right” or “left,” and radical coming from any direction is not good, it’s not healthy, and it should be called out. And that’s, that’s my mission, is to say, look, this to me, this is this is not right. This is not left. We’re talking about radicals, and that’s where we need to put our attention…

Raddatz: Senator, how do you think we got to this point in this country with so much political violence?

Curtis: You know, I was — you mentioned I live not far from the university. I was mayor of Provo, Utah, right next to it. I know you know where that is. That was just a decade ago, and it wasn’t like this.

And I think a number of things have come along. I don’t think COVID helped. I think — we have to look really hard. I mentioned social media before. I think we have to look really hard at what’s just occupying nearly 100% of brain weight of not just the youth, but of all generations, and what’s coming across, and actually what we’re allowing to come across, and there’s just zero liability for what people are putting out there. And I just think that’s if we’re going to fix this, we have to look really hard at that.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(STANFORD, Calif.) — Some college chapters of the Democratic and Republican parties are trying to turn down the temperature on discourse surrounding Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk’s assassination, as several groups across the country issued joint statements condemning the attack and calling for non-violence.

One of the first examples came from Rhode Island, where the Rhode Island Young Republicans and Rhode Island Young Democrats issued a rare joint statement on Wednesday evening.

“We may disagree on policy, but we are united in our belief in the value of life, civil discourse, and mutual respect,” said Ken Naylor, chairman of the Young Republicans. Anthony Cherry, vice president of the Young Democrats, added that young leaders must “make political nonviolence our pledge,” warning that “when our dialogue becomes toxic it has unimaginable consequences.”

In a phone interview, Naylor told ABC News that Kirk’s death “hit home with a lot of activists” who came of age watching his videos and campus debates. He said he immediately called up the leaders of the Democratic group and they agreed to put out a statement together.

“All of us believe that if you’re independent, Republican or Democrat there’s no reason for this to be happening. In this country we have the right to express ourselves and nobody should be silenced,” he said.

That message soon echoed across the country.

The Ohio College Republican Federation and College Democrats of Ohio released a joint statement on Thursday, rejecting “political violence in all its forms” and calling the killing “unacceptable,” writing that “violence undermines the very foundations of our republic” and urging students to “foster a culture where disagreement never escalates to harm.”

At The Ohio State University, the OSU College Democrats and OSU College Republicans issued their own joint statement on Wednesday, warning that political violence “erodes trust in our institutions” and “threatens the very foundations of civil discourse.” They said college campuses should remain “institutions of education and free speech” and affirmed their commitment to making OSU “a place where students feel safe to express their opinions, regardless of their political affiliation.”

The College Democrats at the University of Utah condemned the killing on Wednesday evening and offered condolences to Kirk’s family and to the students who witnessed it. Their statement said the tragedy “underscores the need to address the epidemic of gun violence in the U.S.” while also affirming the right of all Americans “to engage in civil dialogue without fear of violence.”

At Georgetown University, the Georgetown Bipartisan Coalition, Georgetown University College Democrats, and Georgetown University College Republicans Thursday said violent attacks “inject poison into the very heart of political dialogue” and urged Hoyas of all ideologies to “foster an environment of respect” and reject all forms of aggression. They emphasized that “the right to express one’s political beliefs without fear for one’s personal safety — particularly on college campuses — is fundamental to American life and a key component to a healthy, fully functioning democracy.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.