The Loss Of Charlie Kirk Is Still Rippling Through MAGA Movement A Year After Assassination
His death left a kind of diplomatic vacuum and some nasty politicos — neocons and other grifters — stepped in to fill the breach.Before the 2024 election, conservative America was united under President Trump’s “Make America Great Again” banner. But that unity didn’t last.
Less than two years later, the base is deeply divided over many issues, especially Israel/Iran, the Epstein files, and whether MAGA still means the promises supporters voted for — or just blind loyalty to Trump.
“How did a once unified coalition with a stated goal of making America great again come to a place where some of the most powerful voices in the movement are now leaving? Who has caused the MAGA divide?”
Those are the questions debate host Brandon Straka asked eight of the right’s most provocative voices to go head to head over on last night’s #WalkAway MAGA vs. America First debate.
BlazeTV’s John Doyle was one of those voices. With him on the MAGA team was conservative debate host Andrew Wilson, MAGA attorney and commentator Will Chamberlain, and CEO of “Louder with Crowder” Gerald Morgan Jr.
Their America First opponents were Infowars founder Alex Jones, former Trump counterterrorism official Joe Kent, pastor and Christian nationalist podcaster Joel Webbon, and College Republicans political director Kai Schwemmer.
Despite being on opposite sides of the debate, Doyle and Jones agree that hidden psychological operations are manipulating public opinion and distracting regular Americans from the truth — but their alignment ends when it comes to identifying the biggest threat.
Doyle sees the psyop issue primarily through the lens of Israel's influence and the risk of young Americans being dragged into foreign wars.
“Israel is losing the PR war, which Trump himself acknowledges,” he argued.
“There has been an effort in the last three or four years with people like Andrew Tate, his brother, Sneako, to make the online right wing, which informs, frankly, the actions of the federal government, something that is at least not hostile to Islam, maybe even sympathetic,” he explained.
“We've seen this with the Muslim-Christian alliance; we've seen this with them giving us permission to laugh at Hitler jokes again. Focusing too much on mass deportations is some kind of psyop to distract you from being drafted to go die in the sand for Israel,” Doyle continued. “This is what young people are tuning into when they are on Instagram and Facebook.”
While Jones agreed that major political events are controlled by secret, billionaire-funded operations rather than organic movements, he argued that focusing solely on Israel is a narrow trap that leads people to miss larger threats — like the multi-million dollar tech-funded campaigns working behind the scenes to crush anti-establishment candidates.
“Bill Gates spent over $200 million through a couple different dark money groups ... just to try to block [Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s] nomination — and it wasn't to Congress,” Jones countered. “It was stories of fake doctors, and they had these online petitions that they themselves were using bots to put fake names on to then deliver to Congress.”
To hear more, watch the video above.
To enjoy more of the truth about America and join the fight to restore a country that has been betrayed by its own leaders, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Darline Nordone’s rise in South Carolina threatens to turn one of MAGA's founding promises into a punch line. The movement that vowed to "drain the swamp" is now watching establishment money, inherited political machinery, and a presidential endorsement converge behind the sister of one of the Senate's most durable establishment figures.
It also risks making Republicans look ridiculous as they denounce the rise of the Democratic Socialists of America.
Democrats will use this cartoonish spectacle to argue that the Republican Party has been captured by corporate interests and turned its back on ordinary Americans.
Nordone (recently rebranded as Darline Graham) remains something of a political blank slate. Beyond the relationship with her late brother Lindsey, her support for a pro-abortion political ally, her years in state bureaucracies, and her association with diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, voters have relatively little record from which to judge what she would actually do in the Senate.
Her refusal to state clearly what she is for and against only deepens the uncertainty.
What voters can reasonably expect, however, is continuity with the Graham political brand: Lindsey Graham's fanatical interventionist foreign policy, establishment instincts at home, and comfort with bipartisan deals that many MAGA voters spent the past decade rejecting.
That is precisely what the MAGA movement was supposed to oppose. We do not need to consult America’s founders to remember why. We need only go back to 2015, when candidate Donald Trump declared war on the political establishment and won by promising to change it.
Obviously, the call to “drain the swamp” reigns supreme in setting the frame, but there is an embarrassment of riches in terms of quotes to choose from to make the point even more specifically. How about at the first Republican debate in 2015:
I will tell you that our system is broken. ... I give to everybody. When they call, I give. And you know what? When I need something from them, two years later, three years later, I call them. They are there for me. ... And that’s a broken system.
How about candidate Trump on Hillary Clinton:
These interests have rigged our political and economic system for their exclusive benefit. Big business, elite media, and major donors are lining up behind the campaign of my opponent because they know she will keep our rigged system in place. They are throwing money at her because they have total control over everything she does. She is their puppet, and they pull the strings.
And what about the special interest support of failed military interventions supported by his then-opponent Senator Lindsey Graham:
Judging by the incompetent way he ran his campaign, it is easy to see why his military strategies have failed so badly — we can’t even beat ISIS!
That is the political movement I signed up for, volunteered for, worked for, and still fight for.
RELATED: ‘Birthright senatorship’ betrays America First

How can that movement be squared with an extension of establishment politics rather than its replacement? It can't. Everything Trump once condemned is now reappearing in almost cartoonish form.
So who is spending so heavily to support Darline Graham Nordone — and what do those interests expect in return?
A group called the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition is flooding money to support Darline Graham Nordone against her conservative opponent Ralph Norman. The group has announced $1 million in the race, as part of a $15 million larger pledge across the country, having already spent millions to defeat conservatives Chip Roy and Andy Ogles in their primary races.
The group is a super PAC, made possible by the 2010 Citizens United decision and its progeny, and funded by "clean energy" interests that favor government support for their industry. Conservatives have spent years attacking that kind of arrangement as corporate welfare — or, less politely, socialism. The point is not that every donor buys a politician outright. It is that political money is rarely charitable. Donors spend because policy matters to them.
Darline Graham Nordone has also received support from the establishment Senate campaign arm, the National Republican Senatorial Committee. While she can’t take over her late brother's campaign account directly, it can be transferred to the NRSC, which is funding her already. Notably, her opponent, Ralph Norman, is an original co-sponsor of the Save America Act from six years ago. For an establishment Senate already twisted into knots over its obstruction of that critical legislation, it makes sense that they wouldn’t want another fierce advocate for it.
There are others in this one-sided spending race as well. The Security is our Strength PAC, formerly associated with Lindsey Graham, is of course supporting her to the tune of $900,000. This group makes it clear that it views her as the one who will be “carrying the legacy forward.”
I take it from their perspective that they want the same out of this Graham that they got out of the last one, which is a different political tune than others suggesting that Darline may be more focused domestically. There is also a group called Palmetto Action that is coming in north of $1 million to oppose Ralph Norman, on similar lines.
RELATED: The Biden autopen scandal has one big winner: Anthony Fauci

Put simply, a great deal of money is flooding into South Carolina, and most of it is either supporting Darline Graham Nordone or opposing Ralph Norman. For a movement built around draining the swamp, the optics could hardly be worse.
South Carolinians should brace for a deluge of ads from every screen and speaker they own. Special-interest money can move votes; that is why people spend it. But the underlying question will remain: Why is Darline Graham Nordone a serious contender for this Senate seat? Her birthright senatorship via a famous last name, President Trump's endorsement, and a flood of outside money are doing much of the work.
South Carolinians should see this for what it is: a rejection of one of MAGA's core promises. This is not draining the swamp. It is restocking it.
Democrats will happily use this cartoonish spectacle to argue that the Republican Party has been captured by corporate interests and turned its back on ordinary Americans. They will also have an easy answer when Republicans denounce democratic socialism: Why should voters take that charge seriously if a Republican senator reaches office with the help of interests seeking to socialize the costs of private investment?
That will be a tough charge to rebut.
The internet has done an admirable job hobbling the corporate left-wing media’s ability to control the population through a single narrative. But that blessing comes with regrettable costs.
The speed of information and the incentive to push hot takes onto social media mean that when a public figure dies, there is an immediate race to decide which competing narrative will define his legacy.
Was Graham a true convert to MAGA and its values? Unlikely. But politics is not a contest over who believes harder.
When Lindsey Graham died suddenly of heart failure over the weekend, conspiracy theories about foreign assassination plots immediately began to circulate online. Many leftists openly celebrated his death, and the reactionary impulse of conservatives drove others to recast Graham as a stalwart crusader for MAGA.
The truth is more complicated. But in the eternal battle for narrative supremacy, there is little time for reflection, even in response to death.
No one is above criticism. But in a healthy society, some space exists between a public figure’s passing and attacks on his legacy.
That standard now seems quaint, perhaps naive. It is also better for the soul of the nation.
Unfortunately, wishing to live in that kind of society does not make it real. The information war is relentless. Abstaining from the fight only means someone else defines the truth.
The news cycle does not observe a respectable period of mourning. The battle begins the moment the headline drops.
Wild conspiracy theories now seem obligatory whenever a prominent figure dies, and Graham was no exception. The senator toured a Ukrainian weapons factory the day before his death, and several figures speculated that he had really been killed in an attack on that facility or poisoned by the Russians.
Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin suggested on social media that Graham had likely been killed by Israel, despite Graham’s long record of advocacy for that country.
This is not to denigrate conspiracy theories in general. One thing we learned after COVID is that such theories can often prove correct. But the narratives around Graham’s death were bizarre.
Graham was a 71-year-old man with a family history of fatal heart conditions who did not take care of himself. His death is sad, but its cause was hardly mysterious.
RELATED: Lindsey Graham’s sister appointed to serve out the rest of his term in the Senate

Progressives reacted exactly as expected. There was gloating, celebration, mockery, and even speculation about who should come next.
Graham’s death was nowhere near as visceral or violent as Charlie Kirk’s assassination, but the left’s response carried unnerving echoes. It was a brutal reminder of a lesson conservatives have worked hard not to learn since Kirk’s murder.
Even the average Democrat is emotionally unhinged.
Your progressive neighbor may not be willing to commit violence personally against you over politics. But many are happy to cheer those who do and dance on your grave once you are gone.
The reaction on the right was strange in a different way. Some conservatives rushed to construct a hagiography, transforming Graham into a MAGA saint, a lion who died fighting for the cause.
That impulse may have been an understandable response to the left’s disgusting vitriol. It was not wise.
Graham served in the Senate for 31 years. He supported every disastrous war during his tenure, including the war in Ukraine that Donald Trump ran on ending and the war in Iran now costing the administration dearly.
Graham pushed for the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. He backed Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton during military operations in Syria and Libya.
He pushed to send hundreds of billions of dollars to foreign governments while inflation was driving up the cost of living for ordinary Americans. After Graham’s death, Benjamin Netanyahu claimed that when he told the senator Israel should pay for its own defense, Graham insisted that American taxpayers should foot the bill.
On immigration, the core issue of the MAGA coalition, Graham was even worse.
He was part of the Gang of Eight and pushed for amnesty alongside men like Marco Rubio. In 2006, Graham teamed up with John McCain to pursue a similar pathway to citizenship. His attempts to secure amnesty for illegal aliens were so common that he earned the nickname “Grahamnesty.”
Lindsey Graham was, in almost every way imaginable, the essence of the Washington swamp Trump promised to drain.
He was also a savvy political operator.
Graham initially fought Trump tooth and nail. Like many Republicans, he slowly changed his rhetoric. Despite still pushing horrible foreign policy and endless war, the senator became a reliable vote for Trump on many domestic issues. His work advancing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and the SAVE Act deserves note.
Was Graham a true convert to MAGA and its values? Unlikely. But politics is not a contest over who believes harder.
It would have been unwise to trust Graham. Many Republicans have discovered new respect for Trump to get what they want, only to betray him the moment he stops prioritizing their issues.
RELATED: Conservatives are blowing the easiest political win in America

But Graham delivered votes and support at key moments. That made him politically useful in scenarios that cannot be ignored.
Graham spent most of his career as an institutional neoconservative advancing policies that were disastrous for the country. He eventually corrected course on amnesty and delivered some key votes for the Trump administration. Yet his monomaniacal obsession with war made him one of the central proponents of a foreign policy quagmire threatening to derail the MAGA agenda.
Does his opportunistic support for Trump in the final years of his life make him a true MAGA patriot? No.
Does he deserve the hatred poured on him by the left after his death? Also no.
That is not mercy for a political enemy. It is moral clarity. Refusing to lie about a man’s record does not require joining the mob that cheers his death.
Those are entirely separate moral sins.
In the rush to define the narrative, the complicated nature of Graham’s legacy disappears.
The internet has made immediate judgment mandatory and thoughtful reflection almost impossible. It turns public figures into mascots, villains, saints, and demons before the body is cold.
In the end, the internet makes fictional characters of us all.
The owner of a Texas bakery said it was staying open for the Fourth of July out of fear and anger over the policies of the Trump administration, and many responded by calling for a boycott of the bakery.
Haley Popp used the Facebook account for the Hive Bakery in Flower Mound to issue a scathing attack on supporters of President Donald Trump after initially saying she didn't feel like celebrating the holiday.
This is hardly the first time Popp has used her politics to rile up Republicans and get free marketing for her business.
"We expressed not wanting to celebrate the 4th this year, as we're embarrassed, afraid, and disappointed in what this country has become," reads the post on the bakery shop account.
"MAGA is adversarial. It's a cult of unintelligent, rabid, immoral sycophants. Those conservatives who still have rational thought have left the MAGA movement. Those who remain and continue to support the most corrupt administration in our nations history, are here, wishing for our bakery to burn to the ground," she added.
"Enjoy a little taste of this Americana," she concluded. "We are open tomorrow from 10-6 as we refuse to observe this holiday. F**k this fascist regime and every single person perpetuating the downfall of our country. Still holding out hope for an AOC revolution."
That post went viral after the popular Libs of TikTok account posted it on social media.
She has since claimed that the anger and hatred led to a response from liberals, who bought her T-shirts and ordered woke baked goods to show their support for her and their opposition to Trump.
But this is hardly the first time Popp has used her politics to rile up Republicans and get free marketing for her business.
In 2022, Popp posted pro-abortion messages from the bakery's account and later posted screenshots of the angry responses she got. She said she had a line out the door and sold out of many items when liberals came out to support the bakery.
She told the Dallas Eater at the time that she had been very open about her support for "LGBTQ rights, Black Lives Matter, and women's rights" since opening the bakery.
Then in 2025, she made the news again for the same thing. A WFAA-TV report said she profited greatly from the reaction of Trump supporters.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
COVID tyrant didn't want the unvaccinated in public, now says vaccines are 'debatable'