JP Sears Questions Whether ABC's Suspension of Jimmy Kimmel After Charlie Kirk Comments Threatens Free Speech Principles
Enjoying this? Share it with someone who needs to see it.
Up Next
Seth Dillon Explains Why The Babylon Bee Gets Censored While Stephen Colbert Stays Safe
29:54
Kim Iversen Exposes Hypocrisy as Both Parties Embrace Cancel Culture After Charlie Kirk Assassination
24:53
Tucker Carlson Examines Free Speech Under Attack Two Weeks After Charlie Kirk's Assassination
1:45:02
JP Sears Questions Whether ABC's Suspension of Jimmy Kimmel After Charlie Kirk Comments Threatens Free Speech Principles
JP Sears examines the indefinite suspension of Jimmy Kimmel Live by ABC and Disney following offensive comments about Charlie Kirk's assassination. While celebrating the removal of what he calls a "propagandist" from the airwaves, Sears raises serious concerns about whether the decision came from ABC's independent judgment or pressure from the Trump administration through FCC chairman Carr. He warns that if government coercion was involved, this represents the same First Amendment violations as the Biden administration's social media censorship, especially given Attorney General Pam Bondi's recent statements declaring war on hate speech. Sears argues that defending free speech requires protecting even despicable speech, and questions whether conservative principles are being compromised in the name of victory.
Disney and the ABC network pulled Jimmy Kimmel Live off the air indefinitely following a controversy over comments the late-night comedian made about Charlie Kirk's suspected killer and the MAGA movement. An ABC spokesperson confirmed that the show would be "preempted indefinitely," though they stopped short of announcing an official cancellation or firing. The decision came after Kimmel stated on air: "Some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it."
The response has been predictably divided. Conservatives are celebrating what they see as accountability for spreading misinformation and disrespecting the murdered Charlie Kirk. Leftists are claiming this represents an unprecedented attack on free speech. But JP Sears argues there's a much more important question beneath the surface celebration: Was this right?
Why Many Are Celebrating Kimmel's Removal
Sears doesn't hide his satisfaction at seeing Kimmel removed from the airwaves, calling him a "propagandist disguised as a comedian" who hasn't done real comedy for years. He points to Kimmel's role as a COVID propagandist and leftist activist rather than an entertainer. Sears argues that just as he's happy to see toxins removed from the food supply, he's happy to see toxins removed from the "psychological supply."
The key distinction Sears makes is between cancel culture and legitimate consequences for poor moral character. Cancel culture, he explains, is silencing someone because you don't like what they said or because it threatens your perspective. That's wrong. But an employer firing someone for displaying objectively poor moral character is completely different and justified. As one social media post Sears highlighted stated: "Getting fired for celebrating murder is not cancel culture. It's your employer deciding they don't want a disgusting and potentially homicidal person working for them. People get fired for less all the time."
The Lies Kimmel Told About the Assassin
Piers Morgan called out what made Kimmel's comments particularly egregious: "Jimmy Kimmel lied about Charlie Kirk's assassin being MAGA. This caused understandable outrage all over America, prompted TV station owners to say they wouldn't air him, and now he's been suspended by his employers. Why is he being heralded as some kind of free speech martyr?"
Kimmel's central lie was directly implying that Charlie Kirk's assassin was part of the MAGA movement and that MAGA supporters were trying to pretend he wasn't one of their own. This is objectively incorrect. The Utah District Attorney confirmed that the shooter was leftist, that his parents were concerned about his leftist ideology, and that the shooter had a trans boyfriend—not exactly characteristics of the MAGA base.
Kimmel also mocked President Trump's grief over Kirk's death, cherry-picking footage where Trump briefly changed subjects when asked about the assassination to make it appear he didn't care. Kimmel joked: "This is not how an adult grieves the murder of someone he called a friend. This is how a four-year-old mourns a goldfish." The insensitivity and distortion of reality in these comments is what led to the massive backlash.
The Left's Hypocrisy on Free Speech
Sears points out the blatant hypocrisy from leftist activists now claiming Kimmel's suspension represents an attack on free speech. Leftist activist Harry Sisson posted: "We are witnessing the most brazen attack on free speech in modern American history. Elon Trump and MAGA said they were free speech warriors. It's the exact opposite."
The problem? Sisson had previously posted celebrating the one-year anniversary of Donald Trump being banned from Twitter, which represented a genuine threat to free speech. This pattern shows these individuals aren't standing on principle—they only care about free speech when it's their own speech being threatened.
Similarly, leftists were silent when Disney fired Gina Carano for speaking out against COVID mandates, but are now melting down over Kimmel's suspension. The selective outrage reveals this isn't about defending free speech principles at all.
The Critical Question: Government Coercion or Independent Decision?
This is where Sears pumps the brakes on the celebration and raises serious concerns. The question isn't whether Kimmel said terrible things—he clearly did. The question is why ABC actually suspended him, and the answer to that question has profound implications for free speech in America.
There are two possible scenarios. In the first scenario, ABC independently decided that Kimmel's comments reflected such poor moral character that they no longer wanted him representing their company. They exercised their free will as an employer to fire someone based on what they said. Kimmel had every right to say what he said, and ABC had every right to fire him for it. In this scenario, Sears says the suspension was completely right and proper.
But the second scenario is far more troubling. According to Rolling Stone (which Sears acknowledges is a propaganda outlet but may have gotten this right), senior executives at ABC, Disney, and affiliates held emergency meetings in the hours leading up to the decision. Two sources said that multiple executives felt Kimmel hadn't actually said anything over the line, "but the threat of Trump administration retaliation loomed."
The FCC Chairman's Suspicious Involvement
What makes this scenario plausible is the involvement of FCC chairman Carr, who is reportedly a Trump appointee. Carr publicly stated that "a public apology from Kimmel would be a very reasonable, minimal step for the comedian, ABC and parent company Disney to take." He added: "I think you could certainly see a path forward for a suspension over this. And the FCC is going to have remedies that we could look at. This is a very, very serious issue right now for Disney."
If ABC felt pressured by a Trump administration official to fire Kimmel because he said something that offended President Trump and the MAGA base, then this represents a serious violation of the First Amendment. Sears explains: "If this is the Trump administration essentially putting pressure on ABC to silence an American citizen, granted he's not our best and brightest, but to silence an American citizen because he said something the Trump administration and quite honestly the MAGA base doesn't like, that is as guilty of a violation of freedom of speech as the Biden administration was guilty in instructing Facebook and old Twitter to censor people."
Pam Bondi's Alarming Attack on Free Speech
What makes the government coercion scenario even more concerning is Attorney General Pam Bondi's recent statement declaring war on hate speech. When asked if law enforcement would go after groups using hate speech, Bondi responded: "There's free speech and then there's hate speech. And there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie in our society. We will absolutely target you, go after you if you are targeting anyone with hate speech, anything. And that's across the aisle."
Sears is blunt in his assessment: "Well, Pam, you sound like a leftist tyrant and I don't like it." He explains that Bondi is fundamentally wrong about the First Amendment. There absolutely is a place in America for hate speech—it's called free speech. You don't have to like it, amplify it, or agree with it, but you have to protect the right to say it, or you don't have free speech at all. You have tyrannical censorship.
Critically, Bondi wasn't drawing a distinction between free speech and threatening violence or death (which is legitimately illegal). She was saying there's no place for hate speech in America. Sears warns: "You do not have free speech if you eliminate hate speech. You have tyrannical censorship."
The Principle Matters More Than the Victory
Sears concludes by saying he would love to simply celebrate with everyone on the right that Kimmel is off the air. He admits he's personally happy about it because Kimmel is someone he considers a propagandist who spreads lies. But standing on principle requires asking the harder question about whether this was right.
"We have to stand on principle and support the other side's right to say terrible things," Sears explains. "We don't have to like it. We don't have to amplify it. We have to support that right or else we do not support freedom of speech."
The definitive answer to why ABC fired Kimmel isn't currently available. But the question matters immensely. If they fired him because they independently judged his moral character to be unacceptable, that's their right as an employer. If they fired him because they felt pressure from people like Pam Bondi and the Trump administration, then even though it appears to make conservatives happy, it's the exact same thing the Biden administration was doing—treating the First Amendment like toilet paper.
Sears suspends his celebration to focus on the more important principle: "Is this violating free speech or was this ABC the employer exercising their free will to fire them of their own accord without pressure from the federal government? That's the question I'm sitting in."
Comments
Be the first to comment on this video.