Van Jones, of CNN, related a tale of Christian martyr Charlie Kirk. Although, to CNN viewers it may have seemed nice, it was hate-praise. A Direct Message from Kirk went into Jones’ account before Kirk died. Jones was not aware of the DM until well after Kirk had been murdered. He went on air to bask in reflected glory and be relevant.

For those who don’t remember, Van Jones was the “Special Advisor for Green Jobs” to Barack Obama from 2009-2009. He has pretty much been with CNN since then. Sort of like he’s been locked in the basement for the last 15 years. He never gets any clicks or ink. This is his chance to get out of the basement. From CNN:

The day before he was horrifically murdered, Charlie Kirk sent me a direct message on X.

He and I had been sparring publicly over the killing of a Ukrainian refugee and its relationship to race.

He said the gruesome killing of a White woman by a Black man was motivated solely by anti-White hatred. I denounced those comments on CNN as unfounded. He went on TV and denounced MY denunciation. Then he unleashed a firehose of tweets, challenging my argument.

Kirk’s pushback sparked an online torrent of racist death threats against me, the likes of which I have rarely seen.

Things were seriously heading off the rails.

Then — in the middle of all this — Charlie Kirk reached out.

He invited me to come on his show to talk with him. He wrote:

“Hey, Van, I mean it, I’d love to have you on my show to have a respectful conversation about crime and race. I would be a gentleman as I know you would be as well. We can disagree about the issues agreeably.”

Unfortunately, before I could even respond, Charlie Kirk was killed — seemingly assassinated for the words he’s spoken, though the killer’s exact motives are still being investigated.

I’ve taken issue with many of those words — sometimes strongly — but never his right to speak them. Never his right to express those views and then go home to his family. That is a sacred American value.

snip–

Violence like this should compel people in both parties to turn down the heat, seek common ground and look for off-ramps from the vitriol — as Kirk was doing with me, the day before he died.

ut instead, the opposite is happening. People are using his horrific assassination to call for MORE violence — justifying murder or even calling for a civil war! Government officials are using his killing as an excuse to censor and silence dissent.

Hold up! Wait a minute!

That’s NOT the way Charlie Kirk handled disagreement. Not at all.

When our public dispute started going sideways, what was Kirk’s response?

He pushed for more conversation, not more silencing or censorship.

He pushed for more civility, not more stridency or venom.

Whatever you think of Kirk’s legacy, that simple fact is commendable — and it’s something that everyone should uphold and seek to replicate.

If you are on the Right, please don’t give up on open debate and dialogue. Charlie didn’t. I won’t. And I make the same plea to folks on the Left.

You can read this rest of the Van Jones humble-brag yourself. I keep reading people on the Left say the Right wants Civil War. I do not hear or see this on the Right.

OOPS! I did find one:

The rabid hatred coming from the left is not new, it's just now being fully exposed.

Anyone who thinks this divide can be healed without Civil War is not paying attention. The Democrats are nothing but God hating communists who are encouraging the shooting of Christians and… pic.twitter.com/4LjwLwMtOh

— Mark Tyndale (@mark_tyndale) September 21, 2025

But, I want to focus on the testimony that Van Jones gave to Anderson Cooper:

Jones is getting praise for his civility in the wake of Kirk’s murder. But is he really civil. Really? From Van Jones:

He and I had been sparring publicly over the killing of a Ukrainian refugee and its relationship to race.

He said the gruesome killing of a White woman by a Black man was motivated solely by anti-White hatred. I denounced those comments on CNN as unfounded. He went on TV and denounced MY denunciation. Then he unleashed a firehose of tweets, challenging my argument.

This is the hate-praise I was talking about. “Unleased a firehose of tweets” conjures up something that can not be handled. It is too much. It will kill you with its force.

Kirk’s pushback sparked an online torrent of racist death threats against me, the likes of which I have rarely seen.

Then — in the middle of all this — Charlie Kirk reached out.
l
Again this sounds so civil, but a torrent is like a firehose too much to be handled. Things were “heading off the rails”. Charlie Kirk slid into Van Jones’ DM’s. But Jones didn’t see it until after Kirk was dead. He didn’t share it for days after he did see it.

Charlie Kirk didn’t call names or talk out of both sides of his mouth, he engaged in civil debate. Van Jones ought to learn a lesson here.

— Deborah Stramaglio (@DStramaglio) September 21, 2025

Van Jones could have used neutral language, but he used loaded words like “torrent” and “firehose”.

More:

Unfortunately, before I could even respond, Charlie Kirk was killed — seemingly assassinated for the words he’s spoken, though the killer’s exact motives are still being investigated.

No. Charlie Kirk was “killed – seemingly assassinated” before Van Jones even saw the message.

Violence like this should compel people in both parties to turn down the heat, seek common ground and look for off-ramps from the vitriol — as Kirk was doing with me, the day before he died.

No. The Left needs to find those off-ramps. Steve Scalise, Lee Zelden, President Donald Trump, Corey Comperatore and Charlie Kirk have all been visited by political violence. Van Jones needs to speak to The Left

Van Jones hate praise does nothing to win him more clicks or links. Too obvious.

Featured Image: Gage Skidmore/Wikimedia Commons.org/cropped/Creative Commons 2.0