The rifle that federal investigators believe was used in the shooting that killed conservative activist Charlie Kirk contained ammunition inscribed with anti-fascist messaging, shedding light on the suspect’s motive.

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox confirmed the messaging at a news conference Friday, saying investigators discovered inscriptions on casings found with a bolt-action rifle near the Utah Valley University campus, where Kirk was killed during an event.

One used casing and three unused casings contained the writings, Cox said.

News of the ammunition inscriptions was first shared on social media Thursday morning in a preliminary bulletin attributed to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. 

According to the bulletin, circulated on X by political commentator Steven Crowder, federal officials recovered a .30-06 caliber Mauser rifle in the woods that contained ‘engravings,’ including messaging expressing anti-fascist ideology and other messages.

Fox News Digital confirmed the veracity of the ATF bulletin through talking to multiple sources, but the sources stressed on Thursday that the information was preliminary.

The information about the firearm surfaced nearly 24 hours after Kirk, 31, was shot and killed during a speaking engagement in Utah. Both his graphic death and the scant public information revealed in the early hours of the investigation into his killing left the nation reeling and revived heated debate about political violence in the U.S.

Law enforcement officials worked frantically in the aftermath of Kirk’s death to track down and arrest the gunman, who they announced Friday was Tyler Robinson, a 22-year-old Utah man.

Cox on Friday called the shooting a ‘political assassination.’

‘This is certainly about the tragic death, assassination, political assassination of Charlie Kirk, but it is also much bigger than an attack on an individual,’ Cox said. ‘It is an attack on all of us. It is an attack on the American experiment.’

FBI Director Kash Patel laid out the timeline of the investigation Friday, saying it took the FBI and Utah law enforcement 33 hours to make an arrest. Patel said authorities made ‘historic progress’ in such a short duration of time.

The FBI’s Salt Lake City Field Office released an image Thursday of a man they had said was a ‘person of interest’ in Kirk’s death and asked the public for help identifying him. The bureau also announced it was offering a $100,000 reward for information leading to his capture. Cox said a tip from a family friend of Robinson’s led to his arrest.

The FBI’s success in apprehending Charlie Kirk’s alleged assassin came one day after Director Kash Patel initially misreported that a suspect was in custody, a move that sparked consternation and criticism as the nation reeled over Kirk’s violent death.

Patel’s misstep during the fast-moving investigation was overshadowed Friday by the breakthrough news that a 22-year-old Utah man had been detained and will face charges for the deadly shooting. But the flaws during the whirlwind 33-hour manhunt did not go unnoticed.

Patel on Thursday announced — then quickly retracted — that authorities had detained the person responsible for killing Kirk.

Fox News’ Laura Ingraham responded ‘unreal’ to Patel’s revelation that the gunman was still at large. Conservative activist Chris Rufo said Friday he was ‘grateful’ authorities arrested a suspect but that it was ‘time for Republicans to reassess’ whether Patel was fit for the job.

‘He performed terribly in the last few days,’ Rufo wrote on social media Friday, adding that he has been talking with conservative leaders who are questioning the FBI’s leadership structure, which includes Patel, Deputy Director Dan Bongino, and, as of next week, Andrew Bailey, who is taking on the unprecedented role of FBI co-deputy director.

The backlash began after Patel said Thursday that ‘the subject for the horrific shooting today that took the life of Charlie Kirk is now in custody,’ before saying less than two hours later that he had the wrong person.

‘The subject in custody has been released after an interrogation by law enforcement,’ Patel said, adding the investigation was ongoing.

At the same time that Patel said the killer had been caught, Utah law enforcement officials were giving a news conference saying the gunman was at large, leading social media users to convey confusion over the mixed messages.

The blip during the manhunt for the person responsible for Kirk’s killing also put a spotlight on Patel’s and Bongino’s apparent fixation on social media, a point that a lawsuit against Patel and the Department of Justice laid out in thorough detail days prior.

The lawsuit was brought by three top FBI officials who alleged their constitutional rights were violated when they were fired without explanation. One of the fired officials said Patel and Bongino lamented the ‘political capital’ they had to spend to keep the official on the job, a reference to pressure Patel and Bongino were getting on social media about the official. Patel’s and Bongino’s actions were often dictated by social media comments, the lawsuit said.

Also fueling the fire was a delayed news conference on Thursday that offered little new detail as the investigation was underway. Patel appeared at the news conference but did not speak. Upon announcing the suspect’s arrest Friday morning, the FBI director gave remarks of gratitude to the agency, local law enforcement, the media and public for contributing to the arrest. Patel made clear that he had been directing the FBI behind the scenes during the past couple days.

‘Warroom’ podcast host Steve Bannon, a former Trump adviser, said on his show that he didn’t ‘know why Kash Patel flew out there, thousands of miles’ merely to thank people. Bannon suggested he wanted more details about the suspect and any possible accomplices.

At this stage, the Trump administration has shown no outward signs of wavering on Patel. Fox News Digital reached out to the White House and the FBI for comment.

The White House did not respond. One source familiar said Patel’s social media posting during the Kirk case could have been handled better but that his initial erroneous message and the surrounding criticism of it came during the ‘fog of war,’ as the investigation was rapidly evolving and emotions were high. The source said the focus should be on the success of the FBI’s operation and the ‘good police work’ involved.

A spokeswoman for Patel pointed to a statement she posted online highlighting that the FBI’s mission to identify Kirk’s assassin was a success and that Patel was intentional every step of the way.

‘Over these last few days, what has mattered isn’t ignorant criticism or petty assumptions — it’s been the pursuit of justice. Justice that was promised, justice that has now been delivered,’ spokeswoman Erica Knight said.

One retired FBI agent who worked at the bureau for two decades said Patel’s premature post seemed ‘reckless’ and ‘too quick to the draw,’ but the retired agent also said he viewed it as a problem that went beyond Patel.

‘It’s becoming a popularity contest,’ the retired agent told Fox News Digital. ‘It’s not necessarily something that’s new either, because J. Edgar Hoover was big about leveraging the press to make the FBI look good. I mean, he was notorious for that. That tradition in the bureau has continued, but now it’s sort of like that on steroids.’

On Day 5 of Ryan Routh’s federal trial, jurors heard from prosecutors who presented evidence they said connected Ryan Routh’s clothing and belongings to the alleged sniper’s nest at Trump International Golf Club during the alleged assassination attempt last year.

FBI Special Agent Jose Loureiro walked jurors through photos they argued tie Routh’s clothing to the scene. Images showed Routh in a long-sleeve pink shirt, pants and leggings. 

Prosecutors highlighted a red stain on the pants and compared it to red paint on a bag recovered at the sniper hide, suggesting a direct link between the defendant and the site. They also displayed a blue Harbor Freight flashlight recovered from the area.

Routh’s cross-examination was brief. 

‘Fortuitous that the blue flashlight with the name on it landed straight up on it?’ he asked.

‘I wouldn’t know,’ Loureiro replied. Routh asked no further questions.

Also on Friday, Lt. William Gale, commander of the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s bomb squad, testified he was monitoring radio traffic when he heard a panicked voice yell, ‘Shots fired, shots fired, shots fired!’ 

He said he crawled through hedges near the sixth hole of Trump International Golf Club and found ‘two backpacks hanging on the fence, a rifle leaning on the fence and a GoPro-type camera zip-tied to the fence.’ 

On the ground nearby, he said, were Vienna sausages, the same brand prosecutors said they tied to a selfie Routh allegedly took hours before. Routh declined to cross-examine him.

Sgt. Kenneth Mays, a tactical officer with the sheriff’s office, also took the stand and described forcing his way into ‘pretty thick’ brush and finding a rifle and bags clipped to the fence in a spot that ‘looked like someone had been in there.’ On cross-examination, Routh quizzed him on how AK-47 rifles function, repeatedly interrupting with, ‘right, right, right.‘

Before the lunch break, jurors also heard from FBI Special Agent Kathryn Rose, who spent about an hour on the stand. Prosecutor Maria Medetis Long walked her through a series of exhibits, including the rifle itself, which was still sealed in its evidence box and cut out with scissors, as well as the magazine, the single bullet left in the chamber, the black metal plates, two bags that had been spray-painted a different color and the GoPro-style camera. 

When Judge Aileen Cannon asked jurors if they wanted a closer look at any of the evidence, they declined. 

The day began with FBI forensic specialist Erin Casey, who guided jurors through drone footage, laser scans and animated ‘fly-through’ reconstructions of the alleged sniper nest. She testified the hideout was ‘126 feet and 10 inches from the flag on the sixth green.’ 

Routh has pleaded not guilty to federal charges, including attempted assassination of a former president, assault on a federal officer with a deadly weapon and multiple firearms offenses. U.S. prosecutors allege he plotted for months, traveled from Hawaii to Florida and positioned himself at Trump International Golf Club with a rifle chambered and ready to fire on Sept. 15, 2024.

Court was still underway Friday afternoon, with additional FBI witnesses expected. Cannon told jurors proceedings are scheduled to run until 5:30 p.m. daily. Court will resume Monday with prosecutors expected to continue calling FBI witnesses as they build their case.

Former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told House investigators that she did not see a change in former President Joe Biden’s competency over several years, but she acknowledged that he was ‘not the same speaker he was when she met him.’

Jean-Pierre was the latest in a string of former Biden White House officials to be interviewed by House Oversight Committee investigators over an alleged cover-up of the ex-president’s mental acuity.

She did not speak to reporters on her way into the interview just off Capitol Hill, nor did she speak after the nearly five-hour, closed-door transcribed interview.

But a source familiar with the interview shared with Fox News Digital that Jean-Pierre told investigators that while working for Biden in various capacities from 2009 to 2025, ‘she did not see a change in President Biden’s competency.’

‘She did acknowledge President Biden is not the same speaker he was when she met him,’ the source noted.  ‘She does not know why his speaking changed and never asked him.’

Jean-Pierre, who is one of the most high-profile figures from the Biden administration to appear before the committee, was among those who publicly defended Biden after his June 2024 debate against then-presidential candidate Donald Trump.

During the debate, Jean-Pierre said she was told by ‘senior staff that President Biden had a cold,’ the source said.

Shortly after the debate, she told reporters at a press briefing in early July that Biden was ‘as sharp as ever.’

Jean-Pierre told investigators that talking points were entered into her binder for press briefings by ‘various advisors,’ but specifically ones related to Biden’s health and mental acuity ‘were handled exclusively at the senior level.’

She cited the ‘cheap fakes’ talking point, which at the time, Jean-Pierre charged were people online manipulating videos of Biden to mislead the public on his health and cognitive ability. She told investigators that point in particular ‘appeared as a talking point in her binder, but she does not know specifically who added it.’

She also said that she never spoke with anyone in the White House ‘personally concerned about President Biden’s health.’

Jean-Pierre began her role as White House press secretary in 2022, shortly after former White House press secretary Jen Psaki left the position, and she stayed on until the end of Biden’s presidency in January.

But her relationship with Biden-world became estranged after her departure from the Democratic Party earlier this year, which was announced in a press release for her forthcoming book, ‘Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines.’

Jean-Pierre’s appearance before investigators came as House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., said earlier this week that his panel’s ongoing probe into Biden’s use of an autopen was coming to its conclusion.

The focus in particular was whether top officials engaged in a cover-up of Biden’s mental and physical state in the White House, and whether any executive actions or a litany of pardons were approved via autopen without the then-president’s full awareness.

Comer said heading into the hearing that one of the questions at the top of his mind were whether ‘these pardons and executive orders [are] legal?’

‘I don’t think anyone’s going to argue that the process that was used for these autopens is the ideal process,’ Comer said. ‘And what we’ve seen with the emails that have surfaced in the last week — even the Merrick Garland Department of Justice was very concerned about how this administration was using the autopen.’

‘When people in the Department of Justice email people who they believe were the ones making the decisions on the autopen,’ he continued. ‘And asked the question via email from the Department of Justice, ‘Does the president even know who they just pardoned?’ I mean, that’s very concerning.’ 

Fox News Digital reached out to Jean-Pierre’s lawyers and Biden’s office but did not immediately receive a response.

The horror that unfolded at Utah Valley University is still hard to process. A few minutes into a joyous meeting before thousands of people, conservative activist Charlie Kirk was gunned down in cold blood. 

As they tried to make sense of this senseless murder, the broadcast networks roughly suggested that Kirk was shot because he was ‘polarizing.’ ABC correspondent Kyra Phillips explained that Kirk was ‘known for his outspoken views on politics, culture, religion, often taking his messages to colleges and universities, sparking sometimes pretty heated debates on campus.’ 

Reporter Aaron Katersky added, ‘there were people on both sides debating whether he should even be allowed to bring his message, often loyal to the agenda of President Trump, to campus.’ White House reporter Mary Bruce doubled down: ‘It’s no secret that Kirk has said a number of controversial things over the years, in particular about DEI, Jews, women, LGBTQ community, people of color.’ 

As Kirk was bleeding out, ABC News was suggesting this was how ‘pretty heated debates’ ended on campus, and that maybe it wouldn’t have happened if Kirk’s ‘controversial’ appearance hadn’t been ‘allowed.’ 

Leftists surely found Kirk’s conservative arguments ‘polarizing’ ‘divisive,’ and ‘controversial.’ But they seem to lack any introspection inside the liberal bubbles of their ‘news’ networks. Spreading their leftist arguments on DEI or LGBTQ or abortion or Trump — often implying that dissent is unacceptably hateful — somehow never polarizes people and is somehow the opposite of controversy. How can their sweet reason be ‘controversial?’ 

By the time the Wednesday evening newscasts came on, there was an appropriate tone of horror at the shooting. But on Thursday, ‘CBS Mornings’ co-host Nate Burleson told former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy that Kirk’s speech was ‘offensive to specific communities’ and asked if Republicans needed to watch their mouths. ‘Speaking of this tragedy, is this a moment for your party to reflect on political violence? Is it a moment for us to think about the responsibility of our political leaders and their voices and what it does to the masses as they get lost in misinformation or disinformation that turns into and spills into political violence?’ 

McCarthy tried to stay on a unifying message, but Burleson’s question was ‘offensive to specific communities,’ in this case the Trump-voting half of America. Everyone who agreed with Kirk on many issues felt like this could have been the violent fate of any conservative speaker out in public, especially on ‘progressive’ campuses. 

Kirk’s alleged assassin was not a Republican. CBS didn’t wonder if the shooter had been influenced by wild leftist rhetoric from any kind of media or political figure. The rhetoric of the Left is somehow always above scrutiny. 

The morning after the murder, NPR turned to Kyle Spencer, a leftist author of a 2022 book about ‘The Untold Story About America’s Ultraconservative Youth Movement And Its Plot For Power.’ She claimed ‘Charlie really positioned himself as somebody who was supporting Whiteness, White people, White culture and the White culture of this country against what he saw as efforts that were efforts to create equity in the country and to support the disenfranchised.’ 

‘Public’ broadcasting is deeply suffused with the ‘DEI ethic’ that they must ‘center the marginalized,’ and so anyone who opposes the Black left should be marginalized as a far-right racist fringe. But they loved Black Lives Matter and their racial ‘reckoning’ in 2020. 

As news bubbled up that there were political markings on the shooter’s ammunition, on Thursday’s ‘World News Tonight’ on ABC, they took the reports of ‘anti-fascist’ and pro-transgender messaging and dumbed them down. Matt Gutman could only say law-enforcement sources found ‘a high-powered rifle wrapped in a towel, and three unspent cartridges inscribed with words and symbols. Tonight, authorities [are] working on what the markings might mean.’ 

Leftists surely found Kirk’s conservative arguments ‘polarizing’ ‘divisive,’ and ‘controversial.’ But they seem to lack any introspection inside the liberal bubbles of their ‘news’ networks. 

On Friday, authorities revealed one shell casing read: ‘Hey fascist! Catch!’ Another said ‘O bella ciao, bella ciao,’ which refers to a leftist song celebrating the end of Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini, but the left still uses it against the current conservative Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. 

The news networks have spent the last 10 years wildly using terms like ‘fascist’ and ‘authoritarian’ to describe not just President Donald Trump, but Republicans and conservatives in general. By contrast, the radical left ‘Antifa’ movement has largely escaped any critical scrutiny and in recent years, the media have pretended that this is some sort of kooky invention of conspiracy theorists. 

When the network newscasts casually allow Democrats to compare Trump to Adolf Hitler and suggest he and his voters are an ‘existential threat’ to democracy, they are the ones raising national tensions. Not conservatives.

The White House issued a rare public rebuke of Israel for its strikes on Hamas leaders in Qatar, putting Washington in an awkward position between two key allies.

The Trump administration almost never breaks publicly with Israel on military campaigns. But analysts say the deeper question is how much the U.S. knew in advance — and whether it quietly offered its blessing.

Hamas said the strike killed five of its members but failed to assassinate the group’s negotiating delegation. A Qatari security official also died, underscoring the risk of escalation when Israeli operations spill into the territory of U.S. partners.

‘There’s a lot of opaqueness when it comes to exactly what the United States knew and when,’ said Daniel Benaim, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute. ‘But the President has been pretty clear that he was unhappy with the substance and the process of what happened yesterday. This kind of public statement by a U.S. president in the wake of a strike like this is already very notable in its own right.’

Just days before the strike, Trump issued what he called a ‘last warning’ to Hamas, urging the group to accept a U.S.-backed proposal to release hostages from Gaza. The timing has fueled speculation about whether the strike was connected to Washington’s frustration with Hamas and whether Israel acted with at least tacit U.S. approval.

‘It just seems like the Israelis wouldn’t have done this without him knowing,’ said Michael Makovsky, CEO of the Jewish Institute for National Security of America. 

‘They’ve got a U.S. base right in that country with everything going on with the hostage talks. I got a sense that he knew, and it’s hard to understand exactly what happened — that if he knew, he sat on it, and then he told the Qataris only when the missiles were flying.’

But Trump on Tuesday had harsh words about the strike, writing on Truth Social that it ‘does not advance Israel or America’s goals.’

The White House claimed it learned from the U.S. military that missiles were on the move, and gave warning to the Qataris. Qatar has denied getting any sort of advanced warning. 

If Washington knew in advance, why issue the rebuke? If it didn’t, how could Israel act so freely in airspace dominated by the U.S. military? Either option raises uncomfortable questions about America’s leverage.

‘Israel would not do what it did without some sort of an approval by the U.S.,’ said Dr. Yoel Guzansky, senior researcher and head of the Gulf program at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies. ‘The Trump administration wants to distance itself, and it’s understandable, because it has good relations with the Qataris.’

That relationship is anchored in hard power. The U.S.’s biggest overseas air base, Al Udeid, sits on Qatari soil and hosts more than 10,000 American troops. Qatar is a top buyer of U.S. weapons and recently gifted the administration with a new Air Force One jet. Yet none of that deterred Israel’s strike. ‘If indeed the U.S. wasn’t aware, then we have a big problem, because Israel surprised the U.S., and it might cause damage to U.S.-Qatari relations,’ Guzansky said.

Others argue the U.S. may have been more aligned with the operation than its rhetoric suggests. ‘The fact that U.S. defenses at Al Udeid were not used against Israeli jets is a great indicator that Washington was not opposed to the strike,’ Ahmad Sharawi, a researcher at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. 

But Qatar’s international Media Office called claims that Qatar was re-evaluating its security partnership with the U.S. ‘categorically false.’ 

‘It is a clear and failed attempt to drive a wedge between Qatar and the U.S.’

Strains on Gulf relationships

The reverberations extend beyond Washington and Doha. The strikes risk unsettling the delicate outreach between Israel, the U.S., and Gulf states, particularly Saudi Arabia, which has been under quiet but sustained pressure to join the Abraham Accords — the U.S.-brokered normalization deals between Israel and Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates.

‘Regional power dynamics are shifting,’ said Benaim. ‘Gulf states are a bit less concerned about the threat from Iran, which was pushing them closer to Israel, and they’re seeing that Israel is engaged in activities across the region, whether it’s Syria or inside Iran or now inside Doha.’

The divergence is stark. Gulf leaders want de-escalation and stability to rebrand their states as hubs of investment, tourism, and economic recovery. Israel, meanwhile, is pursuing a strategy of direct confrontation with Iran across multiple fronts.

‘Gulf states that are really focused on their own economic recovery don’t like the image of smoldering, smoking Gulf cities subject to bombs because they’re trying to attract investment and create an image of common stability,’ Benaim said.

That mismatch could slow normalization, even if it doesn’t derail it. ‘Israel is probably underestimating the power of Gulf solidarity and the barrier being crossed when you see Israel striking inside of a GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] state,’ one former senior State Department official added. ‘I don’t think that means their relationships are going to fall apart or unravel, but these things cast a long shadow.’

Sharawi counters that Gulf outrage may be less about Israel itself than about the precedent of a strike on GCC soil. ‘It was an Israeli action against a fellow GCC partner, despite the hostile relationship that countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE had with Qatar in the past,’ he said. ‘But Gulf leaders are also deeply critical of Qatar for hosting Hamas. Privately, many will understand why Israel acted, even if publicly they condemn it.’

Qatar’s balancing act

For Qatar, the strikes open up both a vulnerability and an opportunity. On the one hand, it cannot allow itself to appear passive in the face of foreign attacks on its soil. Analysts expect Doha to respond through diplomatic channels, critical media coverage, and perhaps limited economic measures against Israel.

But Qatar also has a long history of turning crisis into relevance. ‘Qataris want to be again the mediator, because they earn a lot of points internationally — especially from the U.S.,’ said Guzansky. ‘It’s in their DNA.’

That means Qatar’s public outrage may coexist with a return to shuttle diplomacy, positioning itself once more as indispensable to ceasefire negotiations.

Sharawi argues that Qatar’s victim narrative also obscures its complicity. ‘The leadership of a terrorist organization has failed to bring in a sustainable ceasefire, and Qatar has empowered Hamas by hosting them,’ he said. ‘Even though Gulf leaders won’t say it publicly, they are very anti-Hamas. That context matters for how normalization prospects are viewed after this strike.’

Earlier this week Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade told a Qatari spokesperson it sounded more like the nation was ‘taking Hamas’ side’ than playing mediator. 

‘When one of the parties decides to attack our sovereignty in a residential neighborhood where my countrymen, the residents of Qatar, live in schools and nurseries right next door. Believe me, it’s very difficult to maintain a very calm voice,’ foreign ministry spokesperson Majed Al Ansari said. 

A different reaction than Iran

The Doha strikes also highlight an asymmetry in Gulf reactions. When Iran struck Al Udeid Air Base earlier this year, Gulf solidarity with Qatar was muted. This time, condemnations poured in minute by minute.

‘You didn’t see Gulf leaders coming and hugging the Qataris after Iran’s strike,’ Guzansky noted. ‘But with Israel, the reaction was much louder, with strong rhetoric across the Arab world.’

Sharawi agrees but frames it differently: ‘They were overly critical of Israel compared to Iran. The Jordanian king even said Qatar’s security is Jordan’s security — a very strong statement. The Arabs don’t hesitate to latch onto anything that criticizes Israel, and that showed yesterday, even in comparison with Iran.’

The contrast underscores a regional reality: Gulf leaders fear escalation with Tehran, but criticizing Israel carries little risk. For Qatar, the difference offers a chance to rally sympathy and spotlight its sovereignty — even as its neighbors quietly question its choice to host Hamas.

A shadow over normalization

Israel’s military reach is undeniable. But by striking inside Doha, it may have paid a hidden diplomatic price — reinforcing perceptions of Israel as a destabilizing actor at a time when Gulf states seek calm.

The fact that Hamas leaders survived while a Qatari security official was killed may further complicate fallout, heightening anger in Doha while leaving Israel’s core objective incomplete.

Israel’s defense minister Israel Katz has promised to strike ‘enemies everywhere.’

‘There is no place where they can hide,’ Defense Minister Israel Katz said in a post on X, raising questions about whether a sovereign nation like Turkey, a NATO ally, which houses Hamas senior leaders, may be next.