'America's Government Teacher' who maligned Charlie Kirk right after his assassination wants you to know she's the victim



A liberal author who refers refers to herself online as "America's Government Teacher" was asked to give the 2026 commencement speech at Utah Valley University. Sharon McMahon's invitation to speak was, however, rescinded last month following significant backlash over her criticism of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk in the immediate aftermath of his assassination.

McMahon has since gone on a media tour in an apparent effort to convince the American public that she's not just a free-speech warrior but the victim of conspiring forces.

How it started

Two days after Kirk's Sept. 10, 2025, assassination at Utah Valley University, McMahon joined other radicals in maligning the murdered father of two.

'She is a force of nature.'

McMahon — a middle-aged former high school teacher who purportedly fights "misinformation" and routinely criticizes conservatives and conservative initiatives — shared a series of de-contextualized quotes from Kirk on social media, then stated, "These aren’t sound bites taken out of context. Millions of people feel they were harmed, and the murder that was horrific and should never have happened does not magically erase what was said or done."

McMahon proceeded to accuse the just-murdered conservative of advancing "bigoted ideas on a stage that reached tens of millions."

While acknowledging that Kirk's assassination was a tragedy, she emphasized that the bloodletting "does not erase the harm many experienced from his words, and the ensuing actions his followers took."

On March 26, Utah Valley University announced that McMahon would keynote its annual commencement ceremony on April 29 and receive an honorary doctorate of education.

"Sharon McMahon is an original. She is a force of nature and a force for good," stated the university's then-president, Astrid Tuminez, who stepped down last week. "She underlines how each of us can contribute to a vibrant democracy and how strength comes from knowledge, kindness, and collective action."

RELATED: Judge APOLOGIZES to suspected would-be Trump assassin — and compares him to Jan. 6 defendants

Trent Nelson/Salt Lake Tribune/Getty Images

That a woman who maligned Kirk would feature as the commencement speaker at the very institution where the young father of two was murdered did not sit well with members of the school's TPUSA chapter, some Republican lawmakers, and other conservatives.

'Why does UVU think this is okay? It’s not.'

Caleb Chilcutt, president of the school's TPUSA chapter, stated, "Hours immediately after Charlie's assassination, Sharon McMahon posted a now deleted series of out-of-context quotes from Charlie in an effort to tarnish his name and minimize the tragedy, rather than offering condolences or condemning political violence."

"Platforming someone who treated a historic and tragic political assassination not as a moment to grieve but as an opportunity to create content is tone-deaf and disrespectful to those still affected, especially on campus," continued Chilcutt. "There are countless better alternatives, and the fact that the university is choosing McMahon is entirely disappointing to all of us still reeling from his loss."

Former Republican Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz told Fox News that McMahon was a "liberal hack" and a "horrific choice" for commencement speaker.

Utah Sen. Mike Lee (R) also blasted the decision, writing, "What if Charlie Kirk had been a beloved figure on the left, rather than among conservatives? And what if Sharon McMahon were a conservative — one who had defamed Charlie Kirk immediately after his horrific assassination at UVU? Would UVU have scheduled her to speak at commencement? Not in a million years. Not in ten million years. So why does UVU think this is okay? It’s not."

Republican state Rep. Trevor Lee cited McMahon's planned speech as cause to "withhold taxpayer funds from UVU."

The university evidently had a change of heart amid the scrutiny of McMahon's past remarks.

"Due to increased safety concerns related to the speaker and in consultation with public safety professionals and Sharon McMahon, Utah Valley University has decided to proceed without a featured commencement speaker for this year’s ceremony," UVU announced on April 16.

How it's going

Last month, McMahon told her sob story to the New York Times, then complained in subsequent interviews with the Minnesota Star Tribune and Newsweek's "The 1600" podcast about her "cancellation" and Republican officials' alleged "concerted effort" to silence her speech.

The Free Press, the neocon blog founded by Bari Weiss, rolled out the red carpet this week — just days after the Salt Lake Tribune published the speech she allegedly planned to give at UVU — for McMahon to push her victimhood narrative in full.

McMahon claimed in a lengthy and self-aggrandizing opinion piece that the university's decision to cancel her speech "is so serious" and a "lesson for everyone who cares about freedom of speech."

After defending her criticism of Kirk — writing both "that condemning Charlie Kirk’s assassination did not require treating his public record as untouchable" and that she was trying to "educate those who had never thought of Kirk as anything but a positive force in the world" — McMahon said that her disinvitation to give the UVU commencement speech was the result of the government "using its power to punish protected speech."

While McMahon accepted the grounds for her speech's cancellation, acknowledging that there were "real and visceral" safety concerns, she blamed "government officials and Turning Point USA" — those who, exercising their own free speech, questioned the university's speaker selection — for helping to supposedly create the "danger."

"America's Government Teacher" leaned harder into the victimhood narrative toward the end of her piece, suggesting that her disinvitation "should concern people who loved Charlie Kirk" and painting herself as something of a free speech canary in the coal mine.

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

Online Outrage After Michelle Obama Tries to Play the Victim Card
play icon

Online Outrage After Michelle Obama Tries to Play the Victim Card

These Uncomfortable Facts About Immigration in Australia Should Be a Warning | John Anderson
play icon

These Uncomfortable Facts About Immigration in Australia Should Be a Warning | John Anderson

Evil never announces itself — it seduces the hearts of the blind



Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

RELATED: Evil unchecked always spreads — and Democrats are proof

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

Leftists’ Victimhood And Narcissism Are Two Self-Obsessed Sides Of The Same Coin

If you think you're a victim, even when things are going well for you, then you're obviously spending too much time thinking about yourself.

Shedeur Sanders set to start tonight for Browns’ preseason opener, but is he being set up to fail?



Tonight, the Cleveland Browns will face the Carolina Panthers for their preseason opener at Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte, North Carolina. To the surprise of many, rookie draft pick Shedeur Sanders will start as quarterback, making his NFL debut.

Some critics suspect that he’s being intentionally teed up for failure. One of them is Stephen A. Smith.

“I think he’s being set up to fail,” Smith said on a recent episode of ESPN’s “First Take.”

“There’s been 11 practices, if I remember correctly. [Sanders] has been playing against the third unit, he’s fourth on the depth chart, and then suddenly you throw him into the starting lineup, and he hasn’t had any reps with the first team at all?” he asked skeptically.

“It’s like you want him to fail. I’m not accusing the coaches of doing this; I’m not accusing the [general manager] of doing this. But that owner — Mr. Haslam — that’s a different animal right there.”

Jason Whitlock accuses Smith and other black broadcasters of turning Shedeur Sanders into a victim when he’s the furthest thing from it.

For starters, Whitlock notes, the claim that Sanders is being intentionally set up to fail falls flat when you consider that the Browns’ top two quarterbacks — Kenny Pickett and Dillon Gabriel — are currently dealing with hamstring injuries. That leaves the team with 40-year-old veteran Joe Flacco, who should be reserved for emergency situations; Tyler Huntley, who just signed with the Browns days ago; or the only option that makes sense — Shedeur Sanders.

Given the circumstances, Sanders is a competitor with an opportunity to shine, not a victim of a rigged system, Whitlock says.

Smith and others “constantly want to turn black men into victims rather than warriors, rather than competitors, rather than opportunity seekers. Everything is about, ‘We’re being set up for failure,’” he condemns.

There’s zero chance, he argues, that Sanders, as the son of NFL Hall of Famer Deion Sanders, is being intentionally victimized.

“This is an incredible opportunity for Shedeur Sanders tonight,” Whitlock says.

The victim narrative, he speculates, is coming straight from Deion, who’s paved the way for Shedeur’s entire career.

Smith and others are “falling under the spell of Deion Sanders, who wants to make excuses for his boy. ... This is all about lowering the bar for Shedeur,” Whitlock says.

To hear more of his commentary, watch the episode above.

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

From 'The Decision' to billionaire: Is LeBron James really a victim?



During LeBron James’ appearance on "The Pat McAfee Show” last Wednesday, the Lakers power forward addressed leaving the Cleveland Cavaliers for the Miami Heat in 2010 – an event widely known as “The Decision.”

This move, LeBron argued, is the origin of the narrative that labeled him a villain.

“I'm doing everything I need to do on the court; I'm not out in the streets; I'm not being caught in all the bulls*** that doesn't respect the game and respect my craft,” he said.

Despite his squeaky clean record, the second he “decided to go on TV and make a decision for [his] career,” the media pounced on him, acting as if it “made a little chink in the armor.” It’s been downhill since then.

That’s his narrative anyway.

Jason Whitlock and “Fearless” guest TJ Moe say LeBron is just playing the victim card.

“He has never been a victim,” says Moe.

He points to the fact that LeBron is not only a billionaire, but in high school, he signed a $90 million contract with Nike that allowed him to move his mom out of the hood, where he claims he grew up.

While Jason agrees that the media’s condemnation of “The Decision” in no way victimized LeBron James, he does acknowledge some potential victimization in the athlete’s life.

“He didn't know his father; his mother had substance abuse problems ... doesn't that make him some sort of a victim?” he asks.

“Well, then we’re all a victim of something, right?” counters Moe, who speculates that LeBron very well could’ve gotten in lots of legal trouble, but we’d “likely never know about it” because there’s too many people who would cover for “the golden child.”

“He's one of the most privileged people to ever exist, so I'll never buy the victimhood narrative,” he tells Jason.

As far as money goes, Jason agrees that LeBron is no victim: “He's been rich far longer than he's been poor,” he says.

But can a case still be made that LeBron has experienced some level of victimization?

To hear more of the conversation, watch the clip above.

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Repugnant Outburst In New Zealand Parliament Proves ‘Native’ Cultures Should Be Assimilated

Repudiating Maori culture and fully assimilating the Maori into Western culture would have benefitted all parties and avoided the shameful impudence shown toward the rules that facilitate good governance.

Hell Hath No Fury Like A Single Liberal Woman

I know because I was one.

HEATED debate: Do women belong in the NFL?



Last Sunday, Blaze News published an article on Jason Whitlock, Warren Sapp, and Marshall Faulk’s debate over whether opportunities are given or created, especially when it comes to former black athletes in the NFL.

Sapp and Faulk’s opinions diverged strongly from Whitlock’s insistence that the lack of former black athletes in high-up positions in the NFL is a direct result of their victimhood mentality.

However, their disagreement didn’t end there.

The conversation shifted to women in the NFL.

“Y’all are sitting around pretending y’all can’t get an opportunity ... but y’all are saying nothing as they inject all these women into the NFL,” fired Whitlock, explaining that in recent years, the NFL has added female sideline judges, assistant coaches, and executives despite the fact that the NFL was built by and designed for men.

Faulk thinks that the root of this shift can be found in the industry of journalism.

“It all started when the expert opinion about playing a sport and how to play a sport” fell into the hands of journalists, Faulk explains, adding that “when you don’t actually have to do something to be an expert, then everybody can do it,” which then opened the door for women in a traditionally all-male sport.

But Whitlock doesn’t think that’s the issue.

To hear how their debate plays out, watch the clip below.


Your browser does not support the video tag.

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.