'There was a shooter on a rooftop': Charlie Kirk assassination witness says shot did not come from the crowd



A family that witnessed conservative influencer Charlie Kirk's murder said panic struck the crowd when a gunshot went off.

Kirk was shot in the neck Wednesday during an event at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah.

Deana Holland drove to the event with her family from Utah County, about 20 minutes away. Holland told Blaze News that she brought her two daughters, ages 14 and 18, and her son, 12, because they were huge fans of Kirk and wanted to meet him in person.

'From what I can tell, there was a shooter on a rooftop.'

Holland said her young son was standing in line to ask Kirk a question as she watched from behind in the crowd.

"[He stood] just to the side of that line because he's small and he was excited to speak with Charlie," Holland told Blaze News.

While nearby with her two daughters, "there was one very loud shot," she recalled.

"My son and my 14-year-old daughter both saw Charlie get shot."

RELATED: Charlie Kirk murdered in college campus assassination

Image provided to Blaze News by Deanna Holland, taken Sept 10, 2025 at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah.

"Everybody dropped," Holland said.

Immediately, the elder daughter went looking for her brother, while Holland and the younger daughter headed for safety.

"I took my 14-year-old and went down towards the front underneath the cement. Right behind Charlie, there was a cement walkway that had [an overhang]. You could walk underneath it."

The mother then started yelling for her other child.

"At that point in time, I just was yelling for my son, asking people to yell his name."

Thankfully, Holland quickly noticed that her son was underneath the same cement walkway.

Police soon came down to the location, Holland remembered, and her family was then ushered into a grassy area to safety.

Holland described the gunshot as "very loud" and claimed that it came from her right and "up high," which would have been to Kirk's right as well.

"From what I can tell, there was a shooter on a rooftop," Holland added. "There was not a shooter that I could tell in the general crowd."

RELATED: Charlie Kirk shot during college campus tour

Photo by Nordin Catic/Getty Images for The Cambridge Union

Despite the chaos, Holland said she was having a great time at the event while it was happening. She described the crowd as "a bunch of very patriotic college students" who would have "done what they needed to do" to protect Kirk if they could have.

After the fact, Holland's young son revealed to her that he was brought to the cement area by a college-aged girl was also waiting in line to ask Kirk a question.

The boy wondered if she was there to disagree with or debate Kirk, given she was wearing what he described as a "Satanic T-shirt."

"After the shot was fired, she was the one to take my son to safety under the bridge. He was even wearing a pro-life shirt at the time," Holland said. "I just want to thank that young woman, whoever she is.”

Kirk's murder is still under investigation at the time of this writing. FBI Director Kash Patel announced on X Wednesday evening, "The subject for the horrific shooting today that took the life of Charlie Kirk is now in custody."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Van Jones claims there's 'NO EVIDENCE' of racial animus in Charlotte stabbing. Audio in murder footage suggests otherwise.



Former Obama adviser Van Jones and CNN talking head Abby Phillip attacked Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk on Monday for daring to suggest that racial animus may have been a factor in the savage Aug. 22 murder of a Ukrainian refugee in Charlotte, North Carolina.

The liberal chatterboxes' eagerness to avoid the controversy over the murder becoming — as Phillip put it — "some sort of, like, reciprocal George Floyd situation" evidently had them overlook what the alleged murderer apparently says in the gruesome footage of the stabbing.

From avoidance to spin

The liberal media appeared keen to overlook 23-year-old Iryna Zarutska's murder last month on the Lynx Blue Line in Charlotte, even in the wake of revelations about suspected killer Decarlos Brown's lengthy criminal history and the release of footage showing the stabbing.

When the horrific story and the reaction to it online became too big to ignore, some outfits belatedly attempted to cure the narrative on Monday.

The New York Times, for instance, concern-mongered about the unprovoked stabbing turning into "an accelerant for conservative arguments about the perceived failings of Democratic policies," suggesting it might be "successfully used" like Laken Riley's murder by an illegal alien.

CNN, among the liberal outfits that delayed covering the murder, similarly attempted to orient the public's focus away from what set the stage for Zarutska's murder and toward political implications of the backlash.

RELATED: Wikipedia editors are trying to scrub the record clean of Iryna Zarutska's slaughter by violent thug

AzmanL/Getty Images

The eponymous host of "NewsNight with Abby Phillip" kicked off the panel discussion Monday evening stating that she was "trying to understand why this has become such a flashpoint on the right."

Phillip, Van Jones, and other liberal panelists did not appear particularly receptive to the explanation offered early on by Republican strategist and commentator Brad Todd — that every murder is a tragedy but this one is particularly tragic because it was so avoidable.

"The man who committed this crime was out on cashless bail, which has been a crusade of the political left. He also has a repeat offender, career criminal, 14 times he was arrested," said Todd. "He clearly is someone who should not have been out on bail in January when he was released on bail."

Strategic deafness

After some of the panelists tried to center the conversation on the theme of mental illness, Phillip played a clip from Charlie Kirk where the conservative noted:

A white Ukrainian refugee was murdered just because she was white. Everybody knows that, obviously. ... If a random white person simply walked up to and stabbed a nice, law-abiding black person for no reason, it would be an apocalyptically huge national story used to impose national, sweeping political changes on the whole country.

"Van, they've been looking for opportunities to make this some sort of, like, reciprocal George Floyd situation," said Phillip. "And that's the part that I think he's almost giving away the game. It's sad to see a lot of people going along with it."

RELATED: Mainstream media turns a blind eye to vicious stabbing of young Ukrainian woman

Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Before suggesting that there were no "sweeping changes imposed on society" following the death of George Floyd, Jones first stated that "we don't know why that man did what he did."

"For Charlie Kirk to say, 'We know he did it because she's white,' when there's no evidence of that, is just pure race-mongering, hate-mongering. It's wrong," continued the former Obama adviser. "He should be ashamed of himself. No one mentioned the word 'race,' 'white, 'black,' or anything except him."

Contrary to Jones' suggestion, the violent thug who murdered Zarutska, an aspiring veterinarian assistant, appears to repeatedly say in the video as blood dropped from his knife, "I got that white girl."

Blaze News has reached out to Kirk for comment.

FBI Director Kash Patel indicated Monday evening that the "FBI has been investigating the Charlotte train murder from day one."

Decarlos Brown has been charged with first-degree murder. Blaze News has reached out to the DOJ about whether Brown might face federal hate crime charges as well.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Why progressives want to destroy Christianity — but spare Islam



In 1939, George Orwell coined the phrase "Judeo-Christian ethic" to include the values that formed the moral foundation of Western civilization.

This ethic influenced the American founders and helped shape their views on liberty, rights, and law. Post-Enlightenment philosophers have criticized the irrational aspects of religion and its role in the politics of state, but most have acknowledged the role that the Judeo-Christian ethic has served in preserving the fabric of society.

The idea that secular humanism is salvific for the individual or for society at large has been repeatedly discredited when Marxist ideology has been put into practice.

"Progressivism," on the other hand, is a political philosophy focused on social progress through systemic reforms. It demands a strong central government dedicated to countering societal inequality and injustice. The progressive movement historically shares roots in Christianity and secular humanism, although in recent decades it has emphasized a reliance on science and technology and antipathy toward any expression of religion in the public square.

Left-leaning since its inception in the 19th century, progressivism has, since the 1960s, adopted misotheistic Marxist ideology. Its proponents have focused primarily on discrediting Christian religious practice.

In the Biden administration, for example, both public and private expressions of Christianity came under attack by federal agencies despite First Amendment guarantees that Americans can practice their religion without government interference. These government transgressions are currently being reversed by the new faith-friendly Trump administration.

The big question

So why does progressivism target Christianity specifically?

The obvious answer is that Christianity has been the dominant religion in America since its founding, and at least until recently, most Americans continued to engage with its practice. But religious affiliation constitutes a challenge to the progressive secular state, as this state insists that there can be no greater authority than itself.

The emphasis on freedom of individual within Christianity also tends to resist the enforced conformity that is central to neo-Marxist ideology and identity politics. Progressivism is best viewed as a secular humanist civic religion that is engaged in a religious war with monotheistic faith.

RELATED: Christianity's real crisis isn't atheism — but a far more sinister deception

D-Keine/iStock/Getty Images Plus

As Bertrand Russell opined, Marxism is in many respects an atheistic restatement of Christianity, but unlike the Christian “kingdom of God,” its utopian goals can only be realized through the authority of the state.

For this reason, all Marxist states are openly antagonistic to theistic religion.

Cultural infiltration

Since the 1960s, Marxist ideologues, many having fled Nazi fascism in Europe, recognized that a revolution to install socialist and communist values was unlikely to succeed in America. Instead, they envisioned a less radical evolutionary strategy aimed at infiltrating the institutions that define American culture — including its educational systems, news media, entertainment industry, and corporations — with Marxist ideas.

But for this strategy to succeed, it would first have to transform the values of the Judeo-Christian ethic in the direction of Marxism.

A document in the 1963 "Congressional Record" outlines the plan of Marxists to undermine America by targeting the family unit, promoting deviant sexualities, and fostering criminal behavior. This strategy was aligned with neo-Marxist postmodern philosophies being taught in universities that questioned the possibility of objective truth and viewed virtually all societal transactions through the post-colonial polarized lens of “oppressors” and “oppressed.”

But in order to succeed, this strategy could not break radically with the past. Rather, it was necessary to retain those aspects of the Judeo-Christian ethic that had been established as part of the American “social imaginary.”

To this end, neo-Marxism adopts Judeo-Christian concerns with “social justice” but ignores its focus on law. This has allowed progressivism, in its current neo-Marxist “woke” avatar, to “stand for social justice” while simultaneously attacking white privilege, normative sexuality, law and order, and religion.

Although Christianity has been the primary focus of progressive vitriol, it stands to reason that the other source of the Judeo-Christian ethic would also be a target for hostility.

Following the October 7 terrorist attacks in Israel, anti-Israel protests led by progressives erupted on America’s college campuses and streets. Jews represent a small minority of Americans and, as such, do not represent a numerical challenge to progressive goals.

However, loyalty to religion and the state of Israel, as well as Judaism’s focus on law, elicited the age-old criticisms of Jewish particularism by Marxists.

Why not Islam?

Why, then, has Islam, a monotheistic religion, been spared the wrath of progressives? There are several likely reasons.

First, Islam is a newcomer to the American scene and, until recently, had little political influence and did not constitute a noticeable resistance to progressive goals.

Second, “woke” progressives imagine all Muslims as oppressed peoples of color who have suffered at the hands of imperial governments. Moreover, radical Islam, like Marxism, seeks to undermine the Judeo-Christian traditions of the West.

Radical Islam, like Marxism, seeks to undermine the Judeo-Christian traditions of the West.

Jihad against the West with the goal of restoring a theocratic caliphate has been a goal of fundamentalist Islam since its inception. Indeed, nowhere in Islamic countries have Christians or Jews ever enjoyed equitable freedom with Muslims, nor are women or the LGBTQ+ afforded equal freedoms with Muslim men, a fact that progressives assiduously avoid admitting.

Although Marxists and Islamists have banded together to undermine Judeo-Christian values in the West, theirs is an uncomfortable alliance, as the atheistic Marxist state is ultimately incompatible with an Islamic caliphate. Only in Muslim countries governed by secular strongmen has an alliance with Marxism achieved even a modicum of success.

Finally, one must always “follow the money.” And in recent years, Islamic governments have provided substantial financial resources to progressive causes because they share in common the goal of “transforming” America.

Faithful resistance

If the right to practice the Judeo-Christian traditions is to be preserved, it is incumbent upon America’s religious leaders to recognize that the goals of progressivism are antithetical to faith, and they must resist being co-opted by misotheistic ideology out of fear or ignorance.

The idea that secular humanism is salvific for the individual or for society at large has been repeatedly discredited when Marxist ideology has been put into practice.

Marxist ideology, therefore, should be seen in its true light, which is as the product of a destructive impulse within the human psyche that will only be fully extinguished in the messianic future.

Smug Obama speechwriter provides damning reminder of Democrats' intolerance for conservatives, vax-refusers



There is an editorial genre kept alive at liberal publications around the country that is focused on questions about what to do with conservative kin and how best to prevent family members from similarly adopting viewpoints at odds with leftist values.

The HuffPost, for instance, published a long-winded essay from a stereotypical Bluesky progressive about whether she should cut her "right-wing, Trump-loving in-laws out of [her] kids' lives."

New York magazine ran an essay last year from a mother of white boys expressing terror over their potential slide to the right and over "having a flesh-and-blood oppressor-in-training eating [her] spaghetti and meatballs."

The Delaware News Journal published an open letter in December in which the former president of the Delaware teachers' union defended the decision to ditch Trump-supporting family members, claiming that "it comes from a deep sense of betrayal, a need to preserve our mental and emotional well-being, and the refusal to stay silent in the face of harm."

Obama speechwriter David Litt recently contributed to the genre with a piece in the New York Times titled "Is It Time to Stop Snubbing Your Right-Wing Family?"

Litt ultimately answered yes, that "keeping the door open to unlikely friendship isn't a betrayal of principles — it's an affirmation of them."

RELATED: CDC knew the COVID jab was dangerous — and pushed it anyway

Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

However, prior to signaling his beneficence, Litt provided Times readers with a reminder both of the elitism that has helped the Democratic Party alienate much of the electorate and of Democrats' chronic abuse of those who failed to fall in line during the pandemic.

At the outset, Obama's former speechwriter noted that he "felt a civic duty to be rude" to his wife's younger brother.

"He lifted weights to death metal; I jogged to Sondheim. I was one of President Barack Obama's speechwriters and had an Ivy League degree; he was a huge Joe Rogan fan and went on to get his electrician's license," wrote Litt.

Although the speechwriter did not dwell on these differences, they appear to fit thematically with voters' understanding reflected in a poll recently conducted by the Democratic super PAC Unite the Country — namely that the Democratic Party is "out of touch," "woke," and "weak."

According to Litt, the imagined chasm between him and his conservative brother-in-law grew during the pandemic, particularly when the in-law refused to take the COVID-19 vaccine — a decision that various studies and recent warnings from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration have vindicated, especially when it comes to healthy men.

'It felt like he was tearing up the social contract that, until that point, I'd imagined we shared.'

The Ivy League Democrat admitted that had the man "been a friend rather than a family member, I probably would have cut off contact completely."

Although Litt did not end up cutting off his brother-in-law, he indicated that he was for a period of time strategically unfriendly, claiming that such treatment of the unvaccinated "felt like the right thing to do" — a tactic then advocated in the pages of USA Today.

Democrats at the time were apparently willing to go far beyond unfriendliness in their efforts to bring the unvaccinated to heel.

In a Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey of 1,016 likely voters conducted in January 2022, pollsters asked, "Would you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose a proposal to limit the spread of the coronavirus by having federal or state governments require that citizens temporarily live in designated facilities or locations if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine?"

Whereas 71% of all voters — and 84% of Republicans — signaled opposition to throwing the unvaccinated in quarantine camps, 45% of Democrats said they strongly or somewhat favored the proposal.

According to the same poll, 48% of Democrats supported federal or state governments fining or imprisoning Americans who questioned the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines on social media, TV, radio, or in digital publications.

The same month that nearly half of polled Democrats expressed a desire to see their fellow citizens locked up for wrongthink or tossed into camps for avoiding an experimental vaccine, the Los Angeles Times ran a piece suggesting it was "not necessarily the wrong reaction" to "celebrate or exult in the deaths of vaccine opponents."

"Turning down a vaccine during a pandemic seemed like a rejection of science and self-preservation," wrote Litt. "It felt like he was tearing up the social contract that, until that point, I'd imagined we shared."

RELATED: Polling reveals: Whatever Democrats are doing, it ain't working

Photo by Jim Vondruska/Getty Images

While certain that conservatives will continue to be shunned over the MAGA agenda — in particular over President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown and over Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s reform of the medical establishment — Litt questioned the efficacy of Democrat cancel culture, suggesting that "it's counterproductive."

In what might be the most telling sentence in the piece, Obama's Democratic speechwriter characterized as "radical" the notion that individuals can like each other despite disapproving of each other's political choices.

More in Common, a research outfit that studies social division, noted in a 2019 study concerning the root causes of political polarization that "Americans have a deeply distorted understanding of each other. We call this America's 'Perception Gap.'"

According to More in Common, Democrats have a much wider perception gap, "likely because they have fewer Republican friends." The likelihood of Democrats reporting most of their friends sharing the same political beliefs increases depending on their level of educational attainment, whereas the likelihood remains flat for Republicans.

Although he claimed shunning family with opposing views wasn't worthwhile, Litt made sure to indicate that ostracizing strangers was still okay, claiming he'd avoid White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller on account of his supposed "odiousness."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'Superman' director faces backlash for 'racist' India mention; responds with heroic backpedaling



The director of the new "Superman" movie has found himself under attack from online critics after he talked about what it feels like to be attacked by online critics.

For director James Gunn, it may feel like he is living in an alternate timeline (much like his superhero movies), but unlike the Avengers, he cannot be snapped into a different reality.

Gunn was doing a press junket interview with popular outlet the Reel Rejects (1.37 million subscribers on YouTube) when he was asked how he deals with online hate. Gunn's response was seemingly innocuous, but as usual, nothing could prepare him for the offense that was taken.

'It may not be directly racist, but it does contribute.'

"I do tune out most of social media, but every once in a while someone will say something, it's always the weirdest stuff," Gunn told reporter Greg Alba.

The director, touching on how the Superman character is faced with criticism in the new movie, explained that he typically comes to terms with online remarks after thinking about the insignificance of them.

"It's never what you expect, some weird thing ... and then I go, I think I might be getting upset about something a 12-year-old in India is saying, you know what I mean? I'm like, let it go."

Sadly, the backlash for simply saying "India" was immediate.

RELATED: New 'Superman' and 'Fantastic Four' face fearsome foe: Audience fatigue

The Financial Express noted immediate calls for a boycott by those reacting to a clip of the exchange on X. Viewers called Gunn's remarks "casual racism" and labeled him "racist to the core."

"He could've just avoided mentioning the location knowing the fact India already faces so much racism online," another viewer wrote on X. "These guys very well know what they speak. It may not be directly racist but it does contribute," the person claimed.

The Reel Rejects published the interview on July 1, with another interview with Gunn and Rachel Brosnahan (who plays Lois Lane) published by the Hindustan Times out of India the very next day.

The dates of the interview are significant because in the latter, Gunn appeared absolutely head-over-heels in love with India.

RELATED: Donald Trump wants to save Hollywood. Can he count on 'Superman'?

"Bollywood films are important to me when I'm telling stories," Gunn told the Indian outlet. "What those films give to me is that they aren't afraid of making a movie that has heart, that has drama, but that's also funny, there's music, and all of those things are beautiful."

From there, Gunn continued to shower praise on India and Indians:

"I would love to see an Indian actor be a part of the global superhero universe, but I would also love to have Indian filmmaking collaborators. ... Who's our Indian superhero, and who are the Indian filmmakers that want to be a part of this universe, that's important to us. We've already got things started in Korea, Japan, and Brazil. So it would be great to collaborate with some Indians."

The 58-year-old went on to say how "grateful" he is for Indian fans and that he thought about how much Superman means to the people of India while he was making the movie.

While it is difficult to tell the original recording date of each interview, Gunn's worldwide press tour started on June 19, which indicates both were likely filmed in late June.

However, the only two stops in June were in Manila and Rio de Janeiro, nowhere in India.

Movie critic and "Hollywood in Toto" podcast host Christian Toto told Blaze News that he thinks Gunn will "pander to any and every group (except conservatives) to ensure" the success of his latest film.

"[Gunn] famously got canceled for inappropriate jokes prior to 'Guardians of the Galaxy 3.' Now, he needs his 'Superman' to be an unmitigated success."

Toto added, "He doesn't realize it's 2025, and this kind of hostage-style apology no longer goes over like it used to."

The film critic was referring to Gunn getting dropped as the director for the "Guardians of the Galaxy" series in 2018, after old social media posts of his resurfaced that showed him making jokes that were deemed inappropriate by the powers that be. The jokes reportedly were about "pedophilia and rape."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Conservative women have decided they're better looking than liberals



Many young women have had enough of being told men can be in their locker rooms, that being alone is better, and that Republicans want to take their rights away.

In fact, hundreds of thousands of conservatives — particularly in big cities — have been searching for alternatives to transactional dating experiences that push liberal indoctrination, which has included banning guns and forced gender ideology, as part of matchmaking.

'It's OK to take up space, have fun, look good, and still stand firm in your values.'

The counterculture has even swung in the online dating marketplace with the popularity of an app called Date Right Stuff. Launched in 2022, the app for conservative singles has around 400,000 downloads, according to co-founder Dan Huff.

Huff told the New York Post that after President Trump's re-election, the app saw a download boom of "tens of thousands," which has only helped his team focus on getting conservatives out and meeting each other.

"There’s a spark in New York now, a reawakening," Huff added, noting that he has helped organize events for conservatives in blue cities with "hundreds of attendees."

With the stated goal of letting conservatives know they are not alone in Democratic strongholds, the app spawned another not-so-liberal venture: a female entrepreneur's attempt at popularizing traditional dating by hosting events that openly boast conservatives are better looking than liberals.

RELATED: ‘Coded Casanovas’: The AI trend stirring dread, disgust, and fury

Raquel Debono puts these gatherings together and unabashedly calls them "Make America Hot Again."

Debono stresses that she is focused on "what actually works: meeting in person."

"It's the most traditional, genuinely human way to connect," Debono told Blaze News.

The 29-year-old is actually the former chief marketing officer of Date Right Stuff but says her vision expanded into its own movement, away from dating apps.

"Dating apps, for all their promises, have made dating transactional, isolating, and shallow. They're what's ruined dating, not meeting face to face. My events flip that script and remind people that real chemistry doesn't happen behind a screen."

Debono hosted a NYC party in May and had no problem drawing out notable attendees. The host was pictured alongside popular female influencers like Paula Scanlan, a former NCAA swimmer turned women's sports activist, and Christine Clark, a conservative commentator and podcast host.

Sporting a "Make America Hot Again" hat, Debono says she has found success in helping people build "real connections."

"If that means being 'hot' and confident while doing it? Even better. I'm showing that you can be young, right-leaning, and still be the life of the party — that's what scares [liberals] most."

Debono expressed her desire to enforce the same, basic idea through her events and commentary: "It's OK to take up space, have fun, look good, and still stand firm in your values."

RELATED: Why indoctrinated kids just handed the Big Apple to a radical Marxist

Photo by Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Blaze News asked Justine Brooke Murray, a conservative host and former Miss Central Jersey 2024, if right-wing-themed dating apps and meet-ups represent a moral contradiction for conservative women.

"Of course, people shouldn't be calling themselves 'hot,' but looking good is not a crime," Murray retorted. "How else are people going to meet and truly get to know each other, without opportunities for it? Mixers like these are considered old-fashioned, and frankly, kosher in an online age that bred my generation to think hooking up with random people they 'meet' on an app is normal."

Murray agreed that making America "hot again," and what it represents, is the right way to combat "vapid" Marxists who want to center society around the concept of "oppression" and posting "edited, scantily clad pictures on Tinder."

As well, the influencer vehemently rejected the idea that the conservative gatherings were just another way for women to get attention.

"Attention-seeking would be women posting those pictures for quick affirmation. And on social media, you never know who the dirty old guy (or woman) on the other end of the screen actually is."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

JD Vance joined liberal Twitter knockoff Bluesky. Things went off the rails REALLY fast.



Vice President JD Vance is not exactly a shrinking violet. The Marine veteran who rose from relative poverty to become second in command of the world's greatest nation has a habit of seeking out fruitful confrontation.

At the Munich Security Conference in February, for instance, Vance told European officials to their faces that they were stepping toward tyranny and turning their backs on the values they once shared in common with the United States. Just weeks later, he bashed the U.K.'s censorship regime with leftist British Prime Minister Keir Starmer seated right next to him in the Oval Office.

While he has long participated in fiery exchanges with Democratic lawmakers and other antagonists, both in person and on Elon Musk's X, Vance evidently wanted to bring the conversation to leftists on their own turf.

The vice president created an account Wednesday on the liberal Twitter knockoff Bluesky. Things went off the rails pretty quickly.

Vance kicked off his Bluesky residency by writing, "Hello Bluesky, I've been told this app has become the place to go for common sense political discussion and analysis. So I'm thrilled to be here to engage with all of you."

'I might add that many of those scientists are receiving substantial resources from big pharma to push these medicines on kids.'

Accompanying his initial post was a screenshot of the Supreme Court's majority decision in United States v. Skrmetti, in which the court upheld Tennessee's ban on sex-change genital mutilations and sterilizing puberty blockers for minors — clearly a touchy subject for the Bluesky crowd.

RELATED: Sacrificing body parts and informed consent to the sex-change regime

Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images

Vance highlighted a portion of the decision in which Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, "There are several problems with appealing and deferring to the authority of the expert class. First, so-called experts have no license to countermand the 'wisdom, fairness, or logic of legislative choices.'"

Roberts noted further in the excerpt, "Contrary to the representations of the United States and the private plaintiffs, there is no medical consensus on how best to treat gender dysphoria in children. Third, notwithstanding the alleged experts' view that young children can provide informed consent to irreversible sex-transition treatments, whether such consent is possible is a question of medical ethics that States must decide for themselves."

Vance added in a follow-up message, "To that end, I found Justice Thomas's concurrence on medical care for transgender youth quite illuminating. He argues that many of our so-called 'experts' have used bad arguments and substandard science to push experimental therapies on our youth."

"I might add that many of those scientists are receiving substantial resources from big pharma to push these medicines on kids," continued Vance. "What do you think?"

— (@)

Regardless of whether Vance's intention was to troll the netizens of Bluesky, the result was the same.

Apoplectic leftists immediately piled into the comments various smears and accusations. Many threatened to report Vance in hopes of getting him banned for some perceived offense or another.

The attacks were, however, interrupted roughly 12 minutes after Vance's first post when the platform suspended him, according to Axios reporter Marc Caputo.

Leftists looking to vent were confronted with a message that read, "Not found. Account has been suspended."

RELATED: Runaway judges, rogue rulings — and JD Vance is having none of it

Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images

Despite the appearance that Vance's account may have been suspended because of his politics or perhaps because he shared a court ruling that struck at the heart of the sex-change regime, Bluesky claimed in a statement obtained by Forbes, "Vice President Vance's account was briefly flagged by our automated systems that try to detect impersonation attempts, which have targeted public figures like him in the past."

"The account was quickly restored and verified so people can easily confirm its authenticity," continued the statement. "We welcome the Vice President to join the conversation on Bluesky."

As of Thursday morning, Vance's initial posts were buried in negative comments, although he had netted over 7,500 followers. According to the user tracker Clearsky, he had been blocked by over 81,000 users at the time of publication.

Blaze News reached out to the vice president's office for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!