Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Charlie Kirk’s death leaves lawmakers on edge across party lines

Published

on

Charlie Kirk’s death leaves lawmakers on edge across party lines

Lawmakers are on high alert after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirkvoicing concerns about their safety and making calls for increased protection as the political atmosphere in the U.S. grows more tense.

Fears have been aired on both sides of the aisle. Democrats and Republicans, many of whom maintained a close relationship with Kirk, say they’re worried about their own security and that of their families, staffers and colleagues.

Some members of Congress are taking immediate action.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is postponing two upcoming events in North Carolina, according to her office. Democratic Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., canceled events this weekend, though he asked his staff that a church service remain on the schedule. And Reps. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., and Nancy Mace, R-S.C., told BLN they are pausing public events in the near term.

Moskowitz — who was targeted last year by an armed man who has been sentenced to 25 years in federal prison for illegal firearms offenses — said he is concerned about the safety of the entire House of Representatives.

‘We all go to things like that. We all speak at colleges, we all go to public events, we all do parades. That could’ve been anybody.’

“I’m worried about everybody in that chamber, including myself,” Moskowitz said. “I’m worried about my Republican colleagues that are vocal on TV and social media; I’m worried about my Democratic colleagues who are vocal on TV and social media.”

He called the shooting death of Kirk, video footage of which quickly went viral, “shocking and terrifying and dehumanizing” and said it hits close to home for politicians who routinely make public appearances. “We all go to things like that. We all speak at colleges, we all go to public events, we all do parades. That could’ve been anybody,” he said.

Mace said she has requested police officers be stationed outside her offices, is doubling her security team and now plans to carry a firearm. She said she planned to go to a gun range this weekend.

“I never thought we would get to this place, but here we are. I think an invisible line was crossed,” she said. “I don’t even feel safe walking outside, I don’t feel safe being in my own vehicle, and I certainly don’t feel safe going anywhere without someone with a gun on my side or carrying myself.”

The fears and emotions among members were still raw two days after Kirk, the 31-year-old darling of the right, was fatally shot during an event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday, sending shockwaves and sparking fury through conservative circles, Washington and the entire country. Authorities announced Friday morning that Tyler Robinson, 22, had been apprehended in connection with the killing.

The newfound concern comes as threats against lawmakers have already been spiking. The U.S. Capitol Police told BLN on Friday that the agency is “on track to work through roughly 14,000 Threat Assessment Cases by the end of 2025,” a nearly 50% percent increase from the prior year.

Capitol Police investigated 9,474 “concerning statements and direct threats” against members of Congress and their families and staff in 2024, compared to 8,008 incidents in 2023.

The stunning increase in threats against lawmakers is playing out against a heightened political environment nationwide, with attacks against politicians and activists on the rise. President Donald Trump has faced two assassination attempts, including the campaign rally incident in Butler, Pennsylvania, when a bullet grazed his ear.

And in June, Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman, a Democrat, and her husband, Mark, were fatally shot at their homes. Another Democrat in the state Senate, John Hoffman, and his wife, Yvette, were critically injured after both were shot at their house the same night.

In the wake of Kirk’s assassination, members of Congress in both parties are demanding increased security.

The House Administration Committee in August temporarily increased members’ monthly security allotment from $150 to $5,000 a month to allow them to hire personal protection through the end of the fiscal year, which closes on Sept. 30. The action also gave lawmakers an extra $10,000 to pay for residential security systems.

“I hope the speaker extends that and makes it more permanent, and I think that’s necessary, but I also don’t think that’s sufficient,” Moskowitz said, predicting that every member will soon need one staff member dedicated solely to security.

Mace, a vocal Trump ally, agreed the temporary funding increase is “not nearly enough, particularly for the higher profile members who are outspoken.”

Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters on Thursday “there’s been a lot of discussion” about how to address security for members of Congress following Kirk’s death, and how to pay for it.

“We’re under a very thorough review of the existing options and how we might need to enhance that to ensure member security and safety,” he said. “It’s a big concern of all of them and their spouses back home and their families and, and everything. So there’s a cost associated with that. I mean, a financial cost that is significant.”

The question of increasing funding for members’ security could come to a head in the coming weeks, as Congress stares down a Sept. 30 deadline to fund the government or risk a shutdown. Several sources said additional funding for protection could be dealt with during the government funding process.

“We’ve gotta protect people who run for public office or no one will,” Johnson said.

Mychael Schnell

Mychael Schnell is a congressional reporter at BLN, where she covers all happenings on Capitol Hill involving both Democrats and Republicans. She previously covered Congress at Blue Light News.

Mychael graduated from The George Washington University’s School of Media and Public Affairs with a bachelor’s degree in Journalism & Mass Communication and Political Science. She’s a native New Yorker, Billy Joel’s #1fan and a Rubik’s Cube aficionado.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

What the DOJ’s Southern Poverty Law Center indictment is really about

Published

on

ByMichael Edison Hayden

As one of the most high-profile employees of the Southern Poverty Law Center for five years — and as someone who has been outspokenly critical of the organization — I never once heard of the program that allegedly involved paying sources within the Ku Klux Klan, National Alliance and Aryan Nations until the Justice Department published its indictment this week.

What I did hear, frequently, was people in the MAGA movement saying we were some kind of criminal syndicate — part of a sustained propaganda effort to delegitimize the work we did tracking and labeling extremist groups.

Although I find the notion of paying extremists distasteful, even unethical, the indictment feels like the culmination of years of pro-Trump activists consuming and amplifying that kind of propaganda. And, the SPLC, for its part, has called these charges “false allegations.”

One quote from acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s press conference about the charges against the SPLC stood out to me as particularly absurd:

“The SPLC is manufacturing racism to justify its existence,” he said on Tuesday afternoon.

Imagine, for a moment, believing the SPLC — or any other civil rights organization — needed to fraudulently manufacture racism to sell it in today’s America. Just two months ago, the president shared an artificial intelligence-generated video depicting his Black predecessor and his predecessor’s Black wife as primates. In early 2025, the Trump administration suspended refugee admissions from majority non-white countries while investing in a special program to fast-track white South African Afrikaners into the United States. Racism is not a rare commodity in this country to be manufactured — it’s cheap and easy to find.

A closer look at the indictment raises more red flags. For one, the KKK, National Alliance and Aryan Nations have been largely defanged for years. You rarely hear those names now unless you’re a historian focused on the white supremacist movement. That doesn’t rule out the possibility of criminal wrongdoing on its own, but it does show that this DOJ, in 2026, had to reach back as far as 2013 to find a relatively obscure SPLC program — one that, as a former spokesperson, I had never even heard of.

Another issue is the indictment’s suggestion that the SPLC played a role in planning the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, based on the claim that an informant was “part of a leadership group.” The idea that an informant could have planted the seed for a gathering of white supremacists of that magnitude is completely implausible. We don’t need to speculate about the origins of that deadly event: Unite the Right was effectively a sequel to a similar rally in Charlottesville in May 2017, driven by widespread outrage within the movement over the removal of Confederate statues. Unicorn Riot preserved reams of Discord logs attesting to it.

The indictment feels like the culmination of years of pro-Trump activists consuming and amplifying that kind of propaganda.

So, leaving open the possibility that something comes out in the trial that I don’t know about yet, these charges look like a piece of political theater to shore up a wayward MAGA base beleaguered by the scandal around Jeffrey Epstein and an increasingly unwieldy debacle in Iran. It’s a MAGA base that understands the SPLC as one of the primary villains in its propaganda stories and enjoys seeing it suffer.

But if the DOJ argues that paying informants furthers hate, and that this makes the use of paid informants fraudulent, won’t the SPLC’s lawyers simply demonstrate how those efforts contributed to these groups no longer being around? If the SPLC propped up the National Alliance to defraud donors, why is it essentially defunct? Why does the once robust Aryan Nations group no longer exist?

If you’ve read this far and assumed I have an incentive to support my former employer, I don’t. I have a different life now — with a book out, a podcast and teaching. After producing some of the SPLC’s more notable investigative stories from 2018 to 2023, I’ve repeatedly criticized them in media appearances.

As chronicled in my book, “Strange People on the Hill,” the SPLC settled with me out of court after I raised allegations of racial discrimination and union busting against them. I have also publicly accused the organization of deliberately taking a lower profile during President Donald Trump’s second term — hoping to evade the kind of targeting that is befalling it now. The SPLC has done many things over the years, good and bad. It has been invaluable in tracing how MAGA brought fringe racist ideas into the mainstream conservative movement. It has also been clumsy, reactionary and, at times, foolish. This program involving paid informants may indeed be one of those clumsy and foolish chapters.

But to understand why a weaponized DOJ might choose this particular case amid all of the white-collar crimes it isn’t pursuing in America today, you first need to understand the narrative that’s been built around the SPLC for years — and how useful it has become to the corrupt men who run this country.

Michael Edison Hayden

Michael Edison Hayden is a leading expert on far-right extremism in the United States. His debut book, “Strange People on Blue Light News”— a chronicle of a West Virginia town in the five years following a white nationalist group’s purchase of a local castle — will be published by Bold Type Books/Hachette on April 7, 2026. Hayden also co-hosts the podcast, “Posting Through It,” with new episodes released every Monday and Thursday.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Judge temporarily strikes down Virginia’s redistricting referendum

Published

on

Judge temporarily strikes down Virginia’s redistricting referendum

A Virginia judge on Wednesday blocked the certification of a redistricting referendum that allows the state to redraw its congressional and legislative maps, less than 24 hours after voters approved the measure.

The rulingissued by Tazewell County Circuit Court, halts state officials from finalizing the results of the ballot measure, which sought to overhaul Virginia’s redistricting process.

This latest move prevents the Virginia Department of Elections and other officials from implementing the new redistricting referendum unless it is overturned by a higher court.

Other states attempting similar redistricting moves have faced lengthy legal battlesleaving the ultimate outcome uncertain.

Tazewell County Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley ruled Wednesday that the redistricting referendum violated parts of Virginia’s Constitution, including how such amendments must be approved and submitted to voters.

Hurley said the proposal had not been properly authorized by the General Assembly before being submitted to voters. The judge also called the ballot language “flagrantly misleading” and did not accurately describe the measure to voters.

The attorney general’s office said in a statement that it plans to immediately appeal the decision.

“As I said last night, Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People’s vote,” Attorney General Jay Jones said in a statement. “We look forward to defending the outcome of last night’s election in court.”

Redistricting has long been a contentious issue in Virginia, as in many states, with debates often centered on partisan gerrymandering and the fairness of electoral maps.

The move was considered a victory for Democrats and could offer a potential boost for the party as they head into the midterms because the proposed redraw could expand their advantage to 10-1.

For now, the judge’s order leaves Virginia’s redistricting process unchanged and raises new questions about the viability of reform efforts moving forward. Both sides are likely to press ahead with a prolonged legal fight.

The Virginia Supreme Court paused an earlier rulingby Hurley ahead of the referendum, which allowed Tuesday’s vote to move forward while it reviews the case, which remains pending.

Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Kalshi suspends 3 political candidates for betting on own elections

Published

on

Kalshi suspends 3 political candidates for betting on own elections

The prediction market Kalshi has suspended and fined three political candidates after an internal investigation found they placed bets on the outcomes of their own elections.

It marks one of the most significant steps yet by a U.S. prediction market to police insider behavior as the industry rapidly expands ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Prediction markets, which allow users to buy and sell contracts tied to real-world outcomes, have surged in popularity but remain under intense scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators. Prediction markets can be opened for any world event from election results to economic indicators to whether President Donald Trump will drink water during the State of the Union.

The candidates include Matt Kleina candidate in the Democratic primary for Minnesota’s 2nd Congressional District; Ezekiel Enriquezwho competed in the Republican primary for Texas’ 21st Congressional District; and Mark Morana former Democrat running as an independent candidate in Virginia’s U.S. Senate primary.

The three cases involved what Kalshi has described as “political insider trading,” violating exchange rules approved by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates how platforms like Kalshi operate and are designed to prevent insider trading and conflicts of interest in event-based markets.

Kalshi said the candidates violated its rules by trading on markets in which they had direct influence. Under Kalshi’s policies, individuals who can affect the outcome of an event, such as candidates in their own races, are prohibited from participating in related contracts.

Five-year suspensions and financial penalties were imposed on all three individuals, according to regulatory documents. Klein and Enriquez accepted responsibility through settlements, resulting in reduced sanctions. Disciplinary action was taken against Moran, who acknowledged placing a wager on his own candidacy in what he described as an attempt to draw attention to perceived flaws in the system.

“Finally, one of the moments I’ve been waiting for. YES, I did bet ~$100 on myself on Kalshi because I wanted to get caught…,” Moran said in a lengthy poston X.

“I traded $100 on myself, knowing this would happen (also knowing that I wouldn’t be vying for the democratic nomination) and the attention it would create to highlight how this company is destroying young men and as Senator I will go after Kalshi,” he said.

Klein was fined $539.85, Enriquez received a $784.20 penalty and Moran faces the largest fine at $6,229.30.

“Just like in traditional financial markets, bad actors will try to cheat. Regulated exchanges must constantly evolve and adapt their systems to address insider threats,” Bobby DeNault, the head of enforcement and legal counsel at Kalshi, said in a press release. “These three cases are an example of how developing proactive engineering solutions can help identify illicit trading activity.”

Kalshi said the suspensions underscore its commitment to maintaining fair markets. The company had already moved in recent months to tighten restrictionsincluding plans to preemptively block politicians and athletes from trading on their own campaigns or sporting events. Those measures came amid mounting bipartisan concern in Washington that prediction markets could enable insider trading or manipulation if left unchecked.

The controversy surrounding the three candidates isn’t the first wave of enforcement actions. Earlier this year, Kalshi penalizeda California gubernatorial candidate and a social media influencer for similar violations.

Regulators are also paying closer attention. The CFTC has increased its scrutiny of insider trading cases, while states and federal lawmakers consider new restrictions on the industry. Congress is also considering legislationthat could impose new limits on prediction markets or restrict participation by certain groups, including elected officials and government employees.

Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending