The Media Can’t Tell the Truth About Left-Wing Violence

It’s become almost comical at this point if it weren’t so tragic. Every time someone on the left commits an act of violence, our corporate press twists itself into knots trying to excuse, soften, or even romanticize the story.

Take the assassination of Charlie Kirk. In Utah, prosecutors laid out devastating evidence against his killer: aggravated murder, obstruction, witness tampering. They even read text messages where the shooter incriminated himself. You would think the media would cover this with the gravity it deserves.

Instead, ABC’s Matt Gutman went on live television and gave the assassin a glowing résumé. We heard about his ACT score, his GPA, his scholarship. We heard about the “touching” love notes to his trans-identified boyfriend. Gutman actually described them as “robust” and “heartbreaking” as if we were watching Romeo and Juliet instead of a cold-blooded political murder.

A father of two young kids is gunned down in front of thousands, and the media wants to talk about the shooter’s college prospects. That’s not journalism. That’s propaganda.

And this isn’t a one-off mistake. It’s a pattern. When conservatives do wrong — when some nut on the right lashes out violently — the media never hesitates. They cover it straight, they condemn it, and they pin it on the broader right. The message is clear: this is who conservatives are.

But when it’s the left? Suddenly the coverage changes. Suddenly “context” matters. Suddenly the killer’s humanity must be emphasized. We’re told about his “troubled past” or his “passions.” Or we’re told both sides are guilty, that this is just the unfortunate byproduct of “political polarization.”

Think about it. The Boston Marathon bomber made the cover of Rolling Stone. CNN let Taylor Lorenz gush about another assassin as “morally good.” NPR once compared Antifa thugs to the Allied soldiers who stormed Normandy. And who can forget when CNN described riots in Kenosha as “fiery but mostly peaceful” while flames literally burned behind their reporter?

It’s a double standard so obvious it feels insulting. When it’s the right, the narrative is black and white — evil, hateful, dangerous. When it’s the left, the narrative is blurred into shades of gray — complicated, “touching,” misunderstood.

And yet these same outlets dare to lecture us on “truth” and “democracy.”

Here’s the reality. Charlie Kirk was doing exactly what the left claims they want conservatives to do — engaging in debate, speaking on a college campus, using words instead of force. For that, he was murdered. His wife is now a widow. His kids are fatherless. That’s not some tragic “duality.” That’s evil, plain and simple.

But the press can’t say that. Because to acknowledge it would mean admitting that left-wing ideology, just like right-wing ideology, can produce violence. And they simply refuse to go there.

So instead, they romanticize murderers, excuse rioters, and gaslight the public. And in doing so, they prove the very point conservatives have been making for years: our media isn’t neutral, it’s not objective, and it’s not interested in truth.

It’s only interested in protecting its side.