‘Free Speech’ President Trump, Once Again, Tries To Get Jimmy Kimmel Fired For Jokes
from the no-laughing-matter dept
Apparently we’ve reached the stage of the second Trump presidency when we’re doing reruns of the old hits. As you’ll recall, Donald Trump has been desperate to get late-night TV host and comedian Jimmy Kimmel fired for quite some time. While Trump has long complained about any late night comedian making fun of him, he really has gone after Kimmel in particular. Things went into overdrive last fall when America’s top censor, FCC chair Brendan Carr, threatened an investigation if Disney didn’t punish Kimmel for a joke. Disney initially caved, before millions started canceling their subscriptions, leading to a backtracking.
But, since then, both Trump and Carr have continued to look for opportunities to get Kimmel fired for his speech.
In any normal world this would be a huge five alarm fire as an attack on the First Amendment. The president and his minions keep trying to get a comedian fired for his jokes because they are critical of the president. That’s not how any of this is supposed to work. But because Trump does it so often, almost everyone seems to just shrug and move on.
And now Trump is at it again. Both Donald and Melania went on social media to whine about Kimmel mocking Trump again — and to demand he be fired again. Because he told a pretty standard joke about Donald Trump being old.
While the White House Correspondents Dinner this past weekend was shut down after someone tried (and failed) to rush past security with a couple of guns (you know, the kind that Trump and the Republicans have made sure it’s easy for anyone to purchase), even before that the Correspondents Association knew better than to hire the usual comedian to entertain the journalistic elite in the room, preferring instead to hire a magician/mentalist.
Kimmel decided last week, on his show, to present an alternative — effectively what his own White House Correspondents Dinner roast would have been. It’s a pretty typical WHCD comic routine, interspersed with “audience reaction” shots spliced in from other events. You can watch it here:
One joke in it referred to Melania Trump, pretending that she was present (like she would be at the actual dinner) and saying: “Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow.”
Anyone not desperate to exploit a situation for political gain would hear that joke and recognize immediately that it’s about the fact that the president is decades older than his third wife, and that his health does not appear to be that great (in multiple ways).
But, because no big news story can go unexploited by the Trumps for personal and political gain, they’re pretending that this mid-level joke, combined with the failed security breach by a lone nut, somehow… demands the firing of Jimmy Kimmel all over again..
In his social media post Monday afternoon, Mr. Trump described the comedian’s joke as “really shocking” and “something far beyond the pale.” He ended his post: “Jimmy Kimmel should be immediately fired by Disney and ABC.”
The first lady had posted about Mr. Kimmel a few hours earlier.
“His monologue about my family isn’t comedy,” she wrote. “His words are corrosive and deepens the political sickness within America.” She called Mr. Kimmel “a coward” who “shouldn’t have the opportunity to enter our homes each evening to spread hate.” She said he “hides behind ABC because he knows the network will keep running cover to protect him.”
“Enough is enough,” she wrote. “It is time for ABC to take a stand.”
Oh come on.
This theatrical pearl-clutching over a joke is pathetic and ridiculous on almost every level. First, Kimmel was making an obvious joke about the age difference and the obvious decline in health of the president. It had nothing to do with political violence. Second, claiming that this joke has anything to do with the attempt at violence makes no sense. Kimmel’s joke about the age difference between the Trumps was made two days prior to the scheduled WHCD. The comments above act as though they’re somehow associated with the lone nut’s failed assassination attempt, but unless time works backwards that makes no sense.
Third, if we’re going to talk about “corrosive” dialogue that “deepens the political sickness within America,” the only one to talk about is President Trump, who can barely go a day without issuing corrosive attacks on anyone who criticizes him… or just anyone who is a non-white, non-male who doesn’t praise him.
Fourth, Trump has had it in for Kimmel for years, so of course he’d jump on this excuse to attack him again and demand he be fired — even though the last attempt not only failed badly, but made millions more people aware of Trump’s insecure lashing out at comedians.
Finally, Trump and his MAGA cultists keep pretending that they’re all about free speech, when he is actually (by far) the most censorial president of our lifetime. And here he is demanding someone be fired (not for the first time) over a simple joke. That is authoritarian, censorial bullshit.
Yet, we hear nothing from the folks who spent years insisting that when the Biden admin sent emails to Facebook asking them how they were going to handle health misinformation, that was the greatest attack on free speech in history. Those same people are still making things up about the Biden administration… and have nothing to say about yet another actual attack on free speech. We don’t need to review this all over again, but some Biden officials sent weak emails asking Facebook and Twitter to improve their policies on disinformation, which were mostly ignored. As the Supreme Court said clearly in the Murthy ruling, there was no evidence presented of any actual coercion by the government, which meant the plaintiffs had no standing to bring the case (there needs to be an actual case or controversy, and they could present none).
Meanwhile, between Trump and Carr, we see clear, detailed attempts by the administration to punish a comedian and the company he works for speech that is critical of the president. It’s about as big an attack on the First Amendment as we’ve seen from a President in decades.
Kimmel, for his part, mentioned the latest verbal attacks and attempt to get himself fired on his monologue Monday night, seemingly taking it in stride, but having the President of the United States repeatedly target a comedian for making jokes about him is about as far from a free speech presidency as you can get.
Filed Under: 1st amendment, donald trump, free speech, jimmy kimmel, jokes, melania trump, whcd
Companies: disney


Comments on “‘Free Speech’ President Trump, Once Again, Tries To Get Jimmy Kimmel Fired For Jokes”
Hey, so, anyone stumping for censorship in these comments sections: Y’all want to tell me again how this isn’t the kind of situation I was talking about when I talked about how giving the government any power to censor speech on political grounds was going to end poorly once an authoritarian got his hands on that power?
Re:
Just look at Russia for what happens when you have no free speech protections, or really no protections at all against a dictator’s whims. Kimmel would be doing forced labor in Siberia. That’s where Trumpism leads. Right now with the DOJ going off the deep end, the courts are one of the last bullwarks against tyranny. Courts are using robust free speech protections to throw out bogus lawsuits and prosecutions. Without those protections we’d be in a much worse place.
Re:
Plus, there’s the new Comey indictment.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
I don’t think that’s what happened here.
Re: Re:
You could have stopped after the third word.
But yeah, no new powers have been granted to the president by law regarding the first amendment, but the administration arrogates powers to itself which it does not have and performs sham investigations and makes illegal demands anyway.
Does that cover whatever unstated nuanced distinction you are attempting to foist upon us?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:
I don’t think your comment is true and does not represent the events that occurred.
Re: Re: Re:2
Fortunately for the rest of us, your ignorance doesn’t dictate reality.
Re: Re: Re:3
Agree to disagree. Perhaps we just see this differently.
Re: Re: Re:4
Do you realize you’re not actually saying anything meaningful? Perhaps? It’s obvious you disagree. And you don’t need to agree to disagree. Just disagreeing without substance is useless.
Re: Re: Re:5
I believe your statement incorrect for a myriad of reasons. I found my posts quite substantive.
Re: Re: Re:6
A substantive post might contain any of the myriad reasons. All of your posts amount to “I disagree.”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Yet “free speech” liberal hypocrites loved it when Roseanne was fired from her show by ABC for making a joke tweet about one of Obama’s people, and loved it just as much when Biden’s admin ordered Google and social media companies to censor conservatives.
Re:
I’m not gonna do your homework for ya, buddy. If you had sources, you’d post ’em – “Google it” isn’t a substitute.
Re:
Why do you hate free speech?
Re:
I’m sorry but if you cannot understand the difference between “private company chooses who to associate with” and “government demands you fire someone” you’re too clueless to understand how to tie your own shoes.
Also, no the Biden admin never ordered Google or social media companies to censor conservatives. Even the conservative justices on the Supreme Court said there was no evidence of any such thing.
Re: Re:
To be fair, they’re likely so fascistic in their thinking that they conflate corporate and government authority. Daddy Musk would make the best president king dictator CEO of the Mars patriot profit colony.
Re:
Remember when conservatives claimed they were being persecuted because they were expected to obey the rules of platforms they agreed to when they signed up, the same rules applied to everyone regardless of political affiliation? Remember when it turned out people like Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg were working behind the scenes to ensure that no bans of right wing grifters were ever permanent, swapping chummy DMs with right wing agitators informing them of their protected status, while actively blocking attempts to create a level playingfield for political content and news by closing loopholes exploited by the likes of the Daily Wire? Remember how people like Jay Grande of Bluesky actively protect serial harassers of their own userbase like Jesse Singal? Oh the persecution of right wingers? When will this injustice end?
Re: Re:
No. Because they’ve always gotten kid gloves. If conservatives had to follow the same rules as everyone else on the internet, there would be no conservatives on the internet.
Re:
Did the government demand she be fired? Did the government coerce Disney into firing her? Because I’m pretty sure the answer in both cases is “no”, but if you have any evidence to the contrary, I’d love to see it.
Two things.
Re:
At no point did the federal government pressure anyone over Roseanne. Your false equivalence is bad, and you should feel bad.
The FCC has called for every ABC affiliate to reapply for its broadcast license within 30 days.
They’re citing DEI, which goes to show even Brendan Carr knows that if he tries to punish them for the content of Kimmel’s show he’s going to get laughed out of court and Daddy will be angry with him.
Re:
How can business make a profit where the “rule of even handed law” only applies to you (and only you) if you’ve made a recent “donation” to the President’s private piggy bank?
How can business exist where even the pretense of the rule of law doesn’t exist?
If the rules for businesses and society change faster than Calvinball everyone loses
Having the key rule that the law is “don’t upset a particular dementia patient” doesn’t work
After all what is the dementia patient going to be demented about tomorrow? Or the day after?
Re:
It looks like this just relates to the O&Os (WABC, KABC, WLS, WPVI, KGO, KTRK, WTVD, and KFSN). While that’s certainly bad enough, going after all of the true affiliates (i.e., those that aren’t owned by Disney) might still be too much for even this FCC.
Re:
If calling for Kimmel’s firing (again) was a “five alarm fire,” this should be a goddamned air raid siren.
This is an attempt to silence an entire television network because one comedian made a joke that hit too close to home.
Never mind that it’s not gonna happen, practically. This is getting into dangerous territory.
So Trump threatens an entire nation with eradication, but this is where they draw the line on “violent” rhetoric.
Every single conservative, to the last, is just a crybully bitch.
What gets me the most confused is that Kimmel gave his monologue multiple days before the WHCD. No one objected at the time. No one, not even the administration, is implying that his monologue inspired the gunman (who probably already has his hotel reservation booked). There is absolutely no nexus, real or even alleged, between Jimmy Kimmel’s joke and the attempted assassination. The demand to fire Kimmel is a complete non sequitur. What next? “The sky is blue today, so fire Jimmy Kimmel”?
Re:
What next? “The sky is blue today, so fire Jimmy Kimmel”?
Well yeah, what did you think they would do? An introspective review on what went wrong, lessons learned, and implementing improvements to prevent future occurrences?
There’s way too much reading and thought required for that. Blaming Jimmy Kimmel is the only logical thing, given all of their kind words for everyone else.
Re:
They’re doing what they already wanted to do. Every excuse is a good excuse.
Re:
And that besides, Trump has literally said far worse about his political enemies.
Re: Re:
And Trump has already been fired many times, but the Congress hasn’t revoked his parking place so he continues to come to the White House as nothing as ever happened.
Re:
We saw this post-9/11. The attacks (or terrorism in general) were used as an argument in favor of whatever cause a politician wanted to push. It didn’t require even the thinnest thread of a connection in their minds.
“I’m a proud American patriot and the terrorists are coming for our precious dairy industry, so the farmers in my district deserve a special tax break!”
It’s just abject and obvious opportunism.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Making jokes about killing the president is really bad, actually.
If you’re defending what he said, you’re really bad, too.
1A means Kimmel can’t be arrested for a “joke”. A worthwhile company would not continue to hire him and it is ABSOLUTELY ok to pressure the company to fire them.
What is it you retards always said when cancel culture was its height? “Freedom of speech, not freedom of consequence”.
Yeah, so anyway, GTFO.
Re:
It wasn’t a joke about killing the President, you absolute fool. It was obviously a joke about the fact he’s old and decrepit.
Also, making jokes about killing the President are still TOTALLY protected under the First Amendment so long as they’re not considered true threats.
You know how I know? Because a guy arrested for saying people should kill Obama was acquitted based on a court saying it wasn’t a true threat.
Tell me: do you think this case was properly decided: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/07/19/09-50529.pdf
Oh come the fuck on, you utter hypocritical piece of shit. You spent YEARS polluting our comments insisting that Biden merely saying that he was upset that Facebook wasn’t taking down Covid misinfo was the biggest attack on free speech ever.
Don’t even fucking pretend you didn’t, or that this isn’t way more of a direct attack on free speech.
I mean, I never said that, but that meant social consequences, which means (by definition) not the government punishing you for your speech.
You truly are the dumbest fucking hypocrite.
Re:
This website isn’t yours, dickweed. So how about YOU GTFO.
Re:
It is fine for individual citizens to pressure that company. It is not fine for the government to pressure that company. You will whine all the live-long day about the Biden administration “censoring” social media, but Trump and his regime actively try to silence his critics through the use of political power and you’re out here defending censorship as a good thing. You have no principles, no morals, and no ethics—which makes you more like Donald Trump than you might think.
Re: Re:
He does have one principle: “What’s good for M&M Enterprises is good for the country.”
Donald Karen Trump
Re:
Donald K. Trump
8647
Re:
Speaking of 8647, today there’s a new James Comey indictment (even stupider than the last one, if you can believe it) over an 86 47 post he made last year (Brandenburg, anyone?).
Re: Re:
Maybe the DOJ got bored with the slow moving Kilmar Garcia trial and wants a different group of vindictive prosecution hearings to attend.
And what about Karoline Leavitt?
Let’s not forget that Karoline Leavitt, right outside the event, told a reporter to expect “shots fired tonight” (she was referring to Trump’s speech, but if Kimmel can be misread, so can she).
Re:
And the great thing for Trump is that he doesn’t need to pressure anyone, he can just decide to fire her.
Well now… It turns out Melania really does care, after all.
If the licenses actually fail to get renewed by the FCC, which, from what I have read, is nearly impossible to achieve, they will probably just have to go to court and claim it is retaliation over Kimmel’s and the station’s first amendment protected activity and have the FCC decision thrown out.
And since the companies involved aren’t government contractors or grant recipients I don’t think they can force them to discontinue DEI, if they actually have a DEI program. It’s only unlawful (potentially, in some people’s opinion) in government work and government contracts. Private companies can hire how they want generally. (IANAL)
If they have government contracts I suppose they could pulled, but I don’t think revoking FCC licenses is actually an option.
MAGAts: Make humor legal again!
Liberal Comedian: [Exists]
MAGAts: Not that kind!