Let's look at the quote again:

“The MAGA gang (is) desperately trying to characterise this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,”

That is no more an accusation or a statement of fact as me saying "politicians are anything other than self-interested." It's a rhetorical claim, not a statement of fact.

It wasn't one of them. The implication of the statement was pretty clear. I'm twitchy about this because my TL and all the spaces I talk about politics in were lit up with people trying to find some combination of tea leaves indicating Robinson was a Nick Fuentes follower. I was personally convinced the shooter would be ideologically illegible, like the Minnesota shooter --- another "O9A" case. I was wrong. So was Kimmel.

And there was just no reason for him to be! I was mouthing off on local politics boards and in Slack channels; there were no consequences. Kimmel went out on that limb on broadcast television. It's a dying medium, but it's still a bigger deal than saying it privately.

Again: none of this is to say that he deserved the outcome he got. Though, I've said this before and will repeat it: the administration probably did us a huge favor here, shifting the narrative from the Kirk shooting to Kimmel's censorship.