Stacey Abrams says Trump administration exploiting Charlie Kirk assassination to advance 'authoritarian rule'
On CNN Abrams invoked a 10-step autocracy framework, arguing the administration is using political violence as a pretext; the White House dismissed her remarks as false and inflammatory.
Former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams said Tuesday that the Trump administration is using the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk as an "excuse for the advance of authoritarian rule," arguing on CNN that the shooting fits a pattern she describes in a 10-step framework of autocracy.
Abrams said the country faced a binary choice between "American autocracy versus American democracy" and warned against allowing the killing to become "a false-flag conversation" that could be used to erode civil liberties and the rule of law. Kirk, 31, a father of two, was shot and killed during a campus event at Utah Valley University; he was struck in the neck as he spoke and later died at a hospital, authorities said.
Abrams told CNN she considered the alleged exploitation of the murder to be part of what she previously described as "step nine" of an autocratic playbook: encouraging or taking advantage of political violence to intimidate opponents and consolidate power. "Step nine, you start to encourage and incentivize private violence," she said. "Once you’ve done those nine steps, step 10 is easy. That’s when you decide there won’t be new elections because everyone is either afraid, poor, broken, or complicit."
A White House spokeswoman, Abigail Jackson, responded to Abrams’ comments in a statement to Fox News Digital, calling the remarks "radical, left-wing rhetoric" and asserting that Abrams was spreading lies. "In the wake of the tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk, two-time gubernatorial campaign loser Stacey Abrams has decided to double down on radical, left-wing rhetoric that drives Democrat supporters to violence," the spokeswoman said. "We won’t further dignify these deranged ramblings... but all you need to know is that every word that comes from her mouth is a lie."
Abrams reiterated criticisms she has leveled previously about the Trump administration’s appointments and dismissals of federal officials, saying loyalists have been installed in agencies in ways she said prioritized political allegiance over institutional duty. "We have watched people who know how to do their jobs be summarily dismissed and replaced by loyalists who have vowed only to hold the authority of the president and not the people as their central responsibility," she said on the program.
When asked about recent comments by Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., who said President Trump is not an autocrat or comparable to Adolf Hitler, Abrams said she disagreed with Fetterman’s assessment. She told the interviewer that lawsuits the president has lost, recent redistricting efforts done "in the middle of the decade," and stated intentions by the president and his allies to restrict voting access amounted to steps toward authoritarianism.
Abrams first presented her 10-step framework publicly earlier this year on the television program Jimmy Kimmel Live, where she outlined tactics she said autocrats use to undermine democratic norms, from delegitimizing opponents to manipulating institutions. In Tuesday’s interview she cited those steps to frame what she described as an accelerating erosion of democratic safeguards.
Kirk’s death has intensified national debate about political rhetoric, security at public events and whether partisan language contributes to political violence. Authorities are investigating the shooting; a suspect has been sought and law enforcement agencies have urged restraint in attributing motive until the inquiry is complete. Political leaders from across the spectrum have condemned the attack and called for a full accounting of the circumstances surrounding the killing.
The exchange between Abrams and the White House reflects broader tensions over how to interpret and respond to political violence and whether governmental actions are narrowing democratic protections. Both the use of partisan rhetoric and the conduct of public officials have become focal points in discussions about security, accountability and the health of U.S. democratic institutions.