AOC uses House floor speech to smear Charlie Kirk: ‘His rhetoric and beliefs were ignorant, uneducated’

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., on Friday opposed a resolution honoring the life and legacy of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, who was assassinated Sept. 10 during a speaking engagement at Utah Valley University.

In a speech on the House floor, Ocasio-Cortez claimed the resolution was introduced on a “purely partisan basis, instead of uniting Congress.”

After condemning Kirk’s murder, she noted the resolution “brings great pain to the millions of Americans who endured segregation, Jim Crow and the legacy of bigotry today” and tore into the late 31-year-old’s ideology.

“We should be clear about who Charlie Kirk was, a man who believed that the Civil Rights Act that granted Black Americans the right to vote was a mistake, who, after the violent attack on Paul Pelosi, claimed that ‘some amazing patriot’ should bail out his brutal assailant and accused Jews of controlling ‘not just the colleges – it’s the nonprofits, it’s the movies, it’s Hollywood, it’s all of it,'” Ocasio-Cortez said. 

58 HOUSE DEMS VOTE AGAINST RESOLUTION HONORING ‘LIFE AND LEGACY’ OF CHARLIE KIRK

“His rhetoric and beliefs were ignorant, uneducated and sought to disenfranchise millions of Americans — far from the ‘working tirelessly to promote unity’ as asserted by the majority in this resolution.”

The resolution described Kirk as a “devoted Christian,” “dedicated husband” and a “loving father” of two, explaining his founding of Turning Point USA and commending his personification of the First Amendment.

It resolved the House of Representatives to condemn Kirk’s assassination and all forms of political violence; commended law enforcement for catching Kirk’s alleged killer; extended condolences to Kirk’s family; honored Kirk’s life, leadership and legacy; and called upon all Americans — regardless of race, party affiliation or creed — to “reject political violence, recommit to respectful debate, uphold American values, and respect one another as fellow Americans.”

‘FEARLESS’ TOUR TAKES CHARLIE KIRK’S FREE SPEECH MISSION TO COLLEGES NATIONWIDE

In addition to Ocasio-Cortez, 57 other Democrats voted against the resolution, including Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Maxine Waters of California. 

However, 95 Democrats voted to adopt the resolution, including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., and Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar, D-Calif.

Here is a breakdown of public comments Kirk made regarding the topics Ocasio-Cortez mentioned in her dissent.

AOC CLAIM: Charlie Kirk was “a man who believed that the Civil Rights Act that granted Black Americans the right to vote was a ‘mistake'”

During a Feb. 2, 2024, podcast episode with “Fearless” host Jason Whitlock, Kirk acknowledged his ideas about the Civil Rights Act and its role in American society were “provocative,” thanking Whitlock for the opportunity to further explain.

“It’s an awful provocative conversation I started. I stand by it, and I appreciate the opportunity. I mean this sincerely, Jason — to explain it. There’s even some people on the right that have been just throwing insults, and they would never have me on the show to explain it.”

Kirk went on to say he extensively researched what the Civil Rights Act was, what it tried to accomplish, how it was sold to the American people at the time and how it is perceived now by the modern academic consensus.

“At the time, of course, there were legislative priorities that needed to be done by the federal government to stop bitter segregation — I’ve always held that,” Kirk said. “The American people thought they were getting minor legislative adjustments to say that segregation based on race is evil and wrong. In reality, what they got was the birthing of a permanent deep state of bureaucrats that were looking for racism where it didn’t exist, eventually with affirmative action, quotas and hiring practices expanded beyond race into LGBTQ-type issues. 

“What the Civil Rights era really birthed was this idea that it’s the federal government’s job not just to say that discrimination is wrong, but to actively go against any sort of disparate outcome and try to even the score under the guise of equity.”

ANTI-TRUMP VOICES PRAISE CHARLIE KIRK’S LEGACY AFTER ASSASSINATION, SAY HE WAS DOING POLITICS ‘THE RIGHT WAY’

Kirk went on to discuss Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I have a dream” speech, saying he “100% bought into” the need for equality, but adding he believed the Civil Rights Act was expanded further than the initial intention.

“At the time, a majority of Americans wanted to see an end to desegregation,” he said. “They didn’t want to see new segregation put forward in eventually anti-White hiring practices, affirmative action or the entire federal bureaucracy having racial hiring quotas.

“Eventually, you look around and you have the left defending Black-only dormitories at hundreds of universities across the country, Black-only graduation ceremonies. … You look back to the Civil Rights Act and you say maybe we overreached and built something we didn’t intend, a federal Leviathan in the form of anti-racism.”

WATCH: CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE FULL PODCAST EPISODE

AOC CLAIM: After Paul Pelosi’s violent assault, Charlie Kirk claimed ‘some amazing patriot’ should bail out his brutal assailant

In an Oct. 31, 2022, episode of “The Charlie Kirk Show,” titled “A Naked Smear of MAGA,” Kirk discussed the Oct. 28, 2022, attack against Nancy Pelosi’s husband, saying directly, “I’m not qualifying it, I think it’s awful.”

David DePape, a Canadian citizen living in the U.S., was sentenced to life in prison in 2024 after attacking Paul Pelosi with a hammer, causing two head wounds and injuries to his right arm and hand.

DePape, who Kirk described in the episode as someone who was “not sane,” admitted to devising a plot to hold then-Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hostage and “break her kneecaps” if she did not admit to allegedly telling “lies” about the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign. She was not home at the time of the attack.

Kirk’s comments about “bailing out” DePape were in relation to the concept of disparity within cashless bail policies.

Under cashless bail policies, a suspect who is arrested for a crime is released before a trial without having to pay bail or bond. The fees were put in place to ensure suspects do not flee and incentivize them to make scheduled court appearances.

While many liberal jurisdictions have enacted the policies, critics claim cashless bail puts the public at risk and enables repeat offenders.

“I’m not qualifying [the attack], I think it’s awful,” Kirk said. “It’s not right. But why is it that, in Chicago, you’re able to commit murder and be out the next day? Why is it that you’re able to trespass, second-degree murder, arson, threaten a public official, [and receive] cashless bail? This happens all over San Francisco, but if you go after the Pelosis … you’re [not] let out immediately. Got it.”

CHARLIE KIRK PAINTED AS ‘CONTROVERSIAL,’ ‘PROVOCATIVE’ IN MEDIA’S ASSASSINATION COVERAGE

Kirk went on to question why DePape was still incarcerated in San Francisco, a Democratic stronghold that had cashless bail policies in place at the time of Paul Pelosi’s attack.

Just a few months prior to the assault, San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins announced her office established a policy that would seek cash bail in certain misdemeanor cases, claiming bail “unfairly penalizes those with less financial means and disproportionately affects defendants of color.”

“Why is the conservative movement to blame for gay, schizophrenic nudists that are hemp jewelry makers, breaking into somebody’s home?” Kirk said while discussing DePape’s ideology. “Why are we to blame for that exactly, and why is he still in jail. Why has he not been bailed out? By the way, if some amazing patriot out there in San Francisco or the Bay Area wants to really be a midterm hero, someone should go and bail this guy out. I bet his bail is like 30[,000] or 40,000 bucks. Bail him out and then go ask him some questions.”

WATCH: CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE FULL EPISODE

Kirk went on to wish Paul Pelosi a quick recovery and condemned the attack a second time.

“So, look, I wish him the best. I wish him a speedy recovery,” Kirk said. “No one should have to encounter that sort of violence.”

AOC CLAIM: Charlie Kirk “accused Jews of controlling ‘not just the colleges – it’s the nonprofits, it’s the movies, it’s Hollywood, it’s all of it.'”

In an Oct. 26, 2024, episode of the “The Charlie Kirk Show” podcast, Kirk claimed Jewish donors have been the No. 1 funding mechanism of radical, open-border neoliberal quasi-Marxist policies, cultural institutions and nonprofits.

“This is a beast created by secular Jews,” Kirk said. “Now it’s coming for Jews, and they’re like, ‘What on Earth happened?’ It’s not just the colleges. It’s the nonprofits, it’s the movies, it’s Hollywood, it’s all of it.”

Kirk, a longtime supporter of Israel, later argued in a Nov. 16, 2023, episode of “The Charlie Kirk Show,” titled “Elon Musk Smashes the Digital Narratives,” that some Jewish organizations and donors, including the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), helped fund “anti-White” or “cultural Marxist” ideas aligned with the Black Lives Matter movement or Diversity and Equity Inclusion (DEI).

He noted he does not believe all Jewish people are anti-White, specifying that he did “not like generalizations.”

“I don’t like generalizations,” Kirk said in the episode. “Not every Jewish person believes that. But it is true the Anti-Defamation League was part and parcel with Black Lives Matter. It is true that some of the largest financiers of left-wing anti-White causes have been Jewish Americans. They went all in on woke, and it wasn’t just ADL. It was some of the top Jewish organizations in the country that have done that. In fact, we have seen this with the recent retreat of Jewish donations that are no longer going to be administered to colleges.”

Kirk added that, after the October episode, critics labeled him antisemitic, clarifying he was “glad that Jewish Americans are reconsidering their financing of cultural Marxism, and people misunderstood it intentionally and slandered us as being antisemites.”

While “Cultural Marxism” has been used as an antisemitic phrase, commentators have been known to use it without antisemitic intent.