Garrett Downplays Posts Celebrating Kirk Death: All The Questions

Major Garrett filled in for usual host Margaret Brennan this week on Face The Nation. He asked an intriguing but incomplete question about about people being fired for posting “about Charlie Kirk,” because, “what they posted online has been viewed by their personnel directors or leaders as inappropriate.” Kirk was assassinated last week in front of a crowd of college students.

“At any governmental level or in the private sector, are you comfortable having someone fired for an utterance about Charlie Kirk’s death?” Garrett asked Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., and Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla. He minimized what has been said, failing to mention some people ghoulishly celebrated Kirk’s death.

Then he left viewers wishing he would have pressed for deeper answers and fleshed out the conversation.   

An employer has the right to sever relationships with people who reflect badly on a professional setting. That is the self inflicted result of stupidity. Kirk was murdered for his utterances, which never celebrated death. But somehow, the concern is greater over some firings for inflammatory speech.

Below, we’ve removed the questions so you can focus on the wording of just the questions from Face the Nation.   

Introduction

I’m Major Garrett in Washington.

And this week on Face the Nation: What will America do after the killing of political activist Charlie Kirk? Is the assassination of a high- visibility and effective conservative thought leader and vote mobilizer a moment when national divisions begin to close or will attitudes harden?

The criminal investigation continues, as does the quest to deduce a motive. Charges will be filed later this week.

House Speaker Mike Johnson joins us on the path ahead and a range of issues facing Congress, from avoiding a government shutdown to Russian sanctions.

And a conversation with Democratic Senator Chris Coons and Republican Senator James Lankford, longtime advocates both of finding common ground and minimizing political strife.

Also, University of Chicago Professor Robert Pape, one of the country’s foremost researchers on political violence, with a warning about where things stand.

Then: As consumers turn gloomy and the job market freezes up, high expectations for a Federal Reserve rate cut. CBS News business analyst Jill Schlesinger will break it all down.

It is all just ahead on Face the Nation.

Good morning, and welcome to Face the Nation. Margaret is on assignment for “60 Minutes.” I’m Major Garrett.

We have a lot to get to today, and I want to begin with justice correspondent Scott MacFarlane with the latest on the assassination of political activist Charlie Kirk and the ongoing investigation.

Utah Republican Governor Spencer Cox has been the most authoritative voice in this matter since it happened, Scott. We have some new comments from him this morning.

Scott Macfarlane:

It sounds like they have a lot to work with to start.

First of all, as the weekend began, they executed a search warrant on the family home in Washington County, Utah. It’s about three or four hours from the site of the shooting. The governor, though, says multiple people are talking here, including the roommate of the suspect, who he describes as incredibly cooperative.

The roommate, he says, had no idea this was happening, and he also says the roommate may have been in a romantic relationship with Tyler Robinson, may have been gender transitioning, but the governor says there’s no indication or no idea yet if that’s at all relevant to this case.

As for Robinson, he’s in the Utah County Jail, the one where Utah Valley University is. He’s in a special watch area. He’s inmate 460956. A special watch means they’re ensuring he’s not harmed or can do any self-harm. It doesn’t mean there’s a mental health issue, Major, but the severity of the crime, commonly in correctional facilities across the country, puts you in a special watch.

Major Garrett: State charges due to be filed later this week. And because of Utah’s approach to state charges, this will be a high-visibility prosecution when it comes.

Scott Macfarlane: Yes, the district attorney is Jeff Gray. We expect him to speak Tuesday. The probable cause statement already submitted for this arrest indicates the possible charges, aggravated murder, felonious discharge of a firearm. Those are possible come Tuesday in Utah County Court.

Whether the feds get involved, whole different issue. There may not be a foothold for federal charges here for the U.S. Department of Justice, unless they see something in the firearms or in the motives here that makes it federal, though we saw in Charlotte last week they brought federal charges in the alleged murder of a Ukrainian refugee. In that case, they found mass transit system foothold to bring the federal case.

Major Garrett: Scott, as you well know, in instances like this, authorities struggle to stay with the facts as they are known and as they evolve.

But there is rampant online speculation, rumormongering about motive. Authorities still very early in the stages of trying to identify one, if it exists…and can properly characterized.

Scott Macfarlane: And it’s happening at a moment of change inside the U.S. Department of Justice. The FBI has new leadership, and this really is a first big test for the new FBI leadership.

And the grades are incomplete right now. It was the father who seems to have turned in his son in this case, and the FBI director was called on some social media posts that were conflicting with other information, saying a subject was in custody, then a subject was released. And the FBI director also posted this weekend: “Against all law enforcement recommendations, we released that video of the suspect.” Governor of Utah today said: “We certainly never recommended against releasing video.”

So there’s some questions to answer for the FBI as this week begins.

Major Garrett: Little bit of tension there.

Scott MacFarlane, thank you very much.

Major Garrett Interviews Mike Johnson

We turn now to the Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, who joins us this morning from Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Mr. Speaker, it’s good to see you. I appreciate your time.

The burdens of speakership are always manifold. You know that. Previous speakers I have covered know that, but they feel particularly heavy after the events of this week. I just want to ask you, Mr. Speaker, how are you doing?

It’s not common for this show to pick up on something said by Connecticut’s Young Democrats and Connecticut’s Young Republicans, but they put out a statement that has gotten quite a bit of attention on the Internet, saying, as follows: “There is no place in our country for such acts, regardless of political disagreements.”

Do you believe, on Capitol Hill, there will be a method to forge any sort of bipartisan remembrance of Charlie Kirk?

Mr. Speaker, you mentioned the word fear a moment ago. It is on the lips of members of Congress in ways I have never experienced before. They are talking openly. They already have canceled events.

Other members are talking about whether or not it’s proper, and there are family conversations, to seek reelection. How do you feel this particular space of anxiety for your membership, Republican and Democrat?

 Would that turning point, from your vantage point, Mr. Speaker, because I know you had a long conversation with President Trump, extend to the White House itself?

Mr. Speaker, several issues pending before Congress, not the least of which is keeping the government open.

I know you prefer a seven-week clean C.R., but there is a press for other issues, extending Obamacare tax subsidies. There’s been a push this weekend for Russia sanctions backed by Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, in the Senate. Will either of those, from your vantage point, get into something to keep the government open?

 OK, Mr. Speaker, I believe there’s a technical glitch that has forced us to lose your audio.

We’re going to take a quick break, and we will come right back to House Speaker Mike Johnson in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, in just a moment.

(Break)

Welcome back to Face the Nation.

Because technical gremlins lurk everywhere, they got in between my conversation with House Speaker Mike Johnson.

Mr. Speaker. I’m glad to have you back.

You were in the middle of answering about Obamacare tax subsidies, possible sanctions against Russia and a government funding mechanism. Please continue.

Right, but are we going to get this done? Are those two other things going to be added to the process, Mr. Speaker?

And when Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, says, as he did this weekend, now is the time for Russia sanctions, President Trump opened the door on tariffs against India and China as a way to create economic leverage to end the war in Ukraine, where do you stand on all that?

Are you waiting for the president to give you the green light, or might Congress act on this on its own volition?

OK, Mr. Speaker, I’m told that the technical difficulties keep arising, so a bit prematurely, we’re going to end our conversation here to spare you and spare our audience from continued mayhem by technical gremlins.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time. Thank you for joining us on Face the Nation very much.

Major Garrett Interviews Jill Schlesinger

Jill Schlesinger joins now – joins us now. She’s CBS News business analyst. She’s on Long Island, as she often is when we talk.

Jill, I’m pleased to see you.

Look, everyone expects the Federal Reserve to cut rates this coming week. That’s not a mystery. I guess the only mystery is, is it 25 basis points or 50 basis points? And if it’s 50, how much more of a difference might that make?

Jill, the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, frequently says the Fed and he are data-dependent. That’s probably a virtue, except when the data is messy and cloudy and full of conflicting signals.

That seems to be prevalent right now.

 Jill, as you know, there’s a phrase going around describing the job market, and it goes as follows: “No fire, no hire.”

What does that mean practically for somebody in the job market or just graduating from college trying to break in?

Jill, let’s talk about tariffs, because it is a conversation and a way of trying to assess that this country has no recent experience with, at least 50 or 60 years, of trying to assess what a tariff does when it is widespread throughout the global economy.

So a lot of us are trying to get used to this. Economists are trying to get used to it. Policymakers are trying to get used to it. Our trading partners are trying to get used to it. What is the story of tariffs so far, and has it been fully written?

Jill, one other part of the economic scenario I want to discuss with you, because when people talk about inflation, they say, just tell me what energy cost is and I will tell you what inflation is going to be.

But yet there is a dual reality there. Natural gas and prices at the pump are down, but electricity paid for by consumers, either businesses or at home, are up.

Jill, deeply unfair, 40 seconds. What has A.I.’s influence been on the labor market?

 A few minutes to worry about that, among many other things. Jill Schlesinger, always a pleasure. Thank you so much for joining us.

We will be right back with Senators Chris Coons and James Lankford for a bipartisan conversation on uniting America, plus the leading researcher on political violence, University of Chicago Professor Robert Pape.

Major Garrett With Den. Chris Coons, D-Del. And Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla.

Welcome back to Face the Nation.

For a look at how Congress may, may help bridge political divisions the country presently, we turn to a couple of lawmakers with a lot of experience in that space. Democratic Sen. Chris Coons, who joins us from Wilmington, Delaware, Republican Sen. James Lankford, who joins us from Oklahoma City.

Gentlemen, you have a well-earned reputation both for preaching bipartisanship, taking the rhetorical temperature in Washington and nationwide down a notch or two.

Sen. Coons, I want to start with you. After the events of this week, do you feel that’s harder than ever to achieve?

Sen. Lankford, do you ever, at times, feel as if your appeals for better angels, calmer rhetoric, more bipartisanship is shouting into an internet void?

Sen. Lankford, first to you, then Sen. Coons.

Sen. Lankford, are you afraid for your own security right now?

 Sen. Coons?

The administering this weekend, as I’m sure you two are both aware, putting before Congress $58 billion in security for members of Congress, the judiciary and the like.

Senator Coons, you believe Congress will be disposed to agree to that?

 Sen. Lankford, I misspoke, that’s $58 million, not $58 billion, but it’s a substantial sum.

Sen. Lankford, I’m going to bring up something that’s playing out through the country right now, and it’s making all the things you and Sen. Coons have talked about more difficult, which is, people who have posted about Charlie Kirk have jobs and are being fired because what they posted online has been viewed by their personnel directors or leaders as inappropriate. At any governmental level or in the private sector, are you comfortable having someone fired for an utterance about Charlie Kirk’s death?

Sen. Coons, how about within the federal government?

Sen. Lankford, the country’s going to look to Congress here in the next couple of weeks to avert a government shutdown, also possibly extend soon to expire Affordable Care Act subsidies that help afford insurance. In this climate, and with those eyes on the nation upon Congress, how do you expect that to play out?

Sen. Coons, you’re going to get the last word. Respond to Senator Lankford on that.

Political Violence In America

Major Garrett:

We’re going to take a closer look at the problem of political violence in America. And we’re joined now, I’m glad to say, by University of Chicago Professor Robert Pape. He is the founding director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats.

Professor, it’s great to have you with us. Thanks for joining us.

What are the trend lines and what is the key terminology you want my audience to understand?

And in that survey data, is it that people who respond to your surveys say to reconcile myself to the political outcome I want, I will be willing to resort to violence. Is that the key connection point?

 Does your research buttress the point that both Sen. Lankford and Sen. Coons made, which is, the internet is an accelerant and amplifier?

So, this is a demographic story that is creating a political backlash that gets amplified and accelerated online? Do I have that right?

In other words, it’s too simplistic to say it’s the internet?

Professor, it has always been a hallmark of this country, we have sort of thought about ourselves as having this experiment that has lots of differences of opinion, spasms of violence, but in the end we reconcile and move forward. Are you any more or less optimistic about that and that underlying assumption about the core ability of America than you were previously?

Professor Pape, I am very glad you’re here. Modeling behavior matters in many contexts in life, political and otherwise. Thank you very much.

---

Beth Brelje is an elections correspondent for The Federalist. She is an award-winning investigative journalist with decades of media experience.

Read More From Original Article Here: Garrett Downplays Posts Celebrating Kirk Death: All The Questions