AURORA | Aurora Democratic Congressperson Jason Crow became the center of a firestorm of controversy Sunday over social-media reaction to the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
Crow on social media defended members of the military being targeted by the Trump administration who are ferreting out soldiers recently posting messages critical of the slain activist.
“(Defense Sec. Pete Hegseth) hunting down and prosecuting service members for their individual political beliefs is dangerous and un-American,” Crow said Sunday in a social media post on X. “We must condemn political violence AND allow peaceful speech that doesn’t impact the chain of command.”
Crow referred to Hegseth announcing earlier on social media that he would launch a “zero tolerance” policy for any posts or comments from troops that make light of or celebrate the killing of Kirk.
The policy, announced Thursday on social media by the Pentagon’s top spokesman Sean Parnell came hours after numerous conservative military influencers and activists began forwarding posts they considered problematic to Parnell and his boss, Hegseth.
“It is unacceptable for military personnel and Department of War civilians to celebrate or mock the assassination of a fellow American,” Parnell wrote Thursday, as reported by the Associated Press.
In the days following the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, numerous American workers have been fired for their comments on his death, among them MSNBC political analyst Matthew Dowd.
Several conservative activists have sought to identify social media users whose posts about Kirk they viewed as offensive or celebratory, targeting everyone from journalists to teachers. Right-wing influencer Laura Loomer said she would try to ruin the professional aspirations of anyone who celebrated Kirk’s death.
Crow pushed back against the energized effort to seek out members of the military for making comments that are unfavorable to Kirk.
His efforts drew a sharp rebuke from Trump advisor and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, which, subsequently, drew a tsunami of criticism from pro-Kirk and MAGA social media users across the country.
“Member of Congress (Rep. Jason Crow) says that Armed Forces personnel should be allowed to support and encourage the assassination of conservative and religious Americans. Those in positions of power have been deeply, chillingly radicalized,” Miller posted Sunday afternoon on X.
Crow is a former decorated Army Ranger and longtime advocate for the rights of military members and veterans. He currently sits on the House Armed Services and House Intelligence committees.
Some of the thousands of replies to Miller’s post were supportive of Crow, pointing out that the United States Military Code is clear on prohibiting political public political commentary, but members of the military are not prevented from offering public opinions on many controversial topics.
Many people posting worried that the orders by Hegseth would be used to identify non-conservative members of the military for harassment.
But the vast majority of linked posts were supportive of Miller and Hegseth’s determination to search for, identify and punish members of the military who made posts about Kirk the administration deems unfavorable.
“This is absolutely shockingly unacceptable,” one respondent to Miller’s post said. “It’s not OK for civilians to engage in extra-judicial vigilantism for political reasons, even worse that we have disloyal members in government and military. This is going to require a thorough top down eradication program to remove them from their positions and prosecute as needed.”
Others went further, demanding punishment for Crow and others who say public comments about Kirk were protected by free speech.
“(Stephen Miller), prosecute all congressmen for ever once expressing sympathy for Tyler Robinson and/or hostility to Charlie Kirk for sedition and treason,” offering citations to articles in the Constitution that could be used.
The focus on punishing members of the military for making unflattering or insensitive comments about Kirk and the Kirk assassination came amid a parallel demand by Trump and Kirk supporters to discipline and fire anyone who made disliked public Kirk comments, especially teachers, government workers and others identified as employees of larger corporations.
In the U.S., laws can vary across states, but overall, there’s very little legal protections for employees who are punished for speech made both in and out of private workplaces.
“Most people think they have a right to free speech…but that doesn’t necessarily apply in the workplace,” said Vanessa Matsis-McCready, associate general counsel and vice president of HR Services for Engage PEO. “Most employees in the private sector do not have any protections for that type of speech at work.”
Crow said Sunday night that efforts by Miller and Hegseth crossed a line from a government that requires a non-partisan military to one that is harassing members of the military for holding political views deemed unpopular among Trump and his supporters.
“No, Stephen,” Crow responded to Miller Sunday evening. “unlike you I have unequivocally condemned political violence in all its forms. This was a moment that required leaders to unite Americans and put us on a better path. You on the other hand are using this tragedy to target political opponents and incite more violence. You are the problem.”
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Support for Charlie Kirk was to be expected from President Trump and conservatives. He helped Trump win votes among young voters and win the election. It is the extent of the effort to squelch public opinion to which I object. Mr. Kirk was known for open debate with people from all sides of the political spectrum. I find it confusing that in the wake of his death, the military has taken sides and is trying to silence Mr. Kirk’s opponents. This harkens to the troubled McCarthy era, where people were arbitrarily labeled Communists and publicly harassed. Possessing a political opinion, even about someone who has been assassinated, is supposed to be protected. The recent calls by the GOP to engage fellow soldiers to report instances of dissent are shocking and frankly very creepy!
Representative Crow and every other lib-tard who defends anyone who supports this political assassination need to resign immediately. If they don’t resign, then they need to be voted out at the next opportunity. Military members who posted support or praise of Charlie Kirk’s death should be dishonorably discharged. There is no place for this kind of rhetoric in our military or government and this is not a free speech protection.
Miller is a petty would-be tyrant, who would be sitting home alone had he not hitched his wagon to the Trump train. No one other than Trump is as hateful as Miller.