Citizen Sourced

People need to slow down before turning every tragedy into instant political ammunition. In the hours after the White House Correspondents’ Dinner shooting, social media filled with claims, assumptions, screenshots, and theories about the suspect, Cole Tomas Allen. Almost immediately, people online began labeling him as transgender, LGBTQ, far-right, far-left, mentally ill, or whatever fit the narrative they already wanted to push. Much of it spread before even the most basic facts were confirmed.¹ As of late April 2026, there is still no verified evidence or official confirmation that Allen is transgender or identifies as LGBTQ.² But that didn’t stop thousands of people from repeating the claim as if it were already proven fact. Sadly, this is becoming predictable. A tragedy happens, emotions run high, and within minutes people rush online searching for information that confirms what they already believe about the world and about the “other side.” Facts become less important than scor...

A moment for clarity, not conjecture The shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner on April 25 is a stark reminder that political violence—no matter the target or motive—is an assault on the basic functioning of a free society. The apparent attempt on Donald Trump was not just an attack on an individual, but on the principle that political disagreements are meant to be resolved through persuasion, elections, and law—not bullets.¹ Anyone who knows me knows I strongly dislike Trump as a person and have been deeply critical of his presidency. That hasn’t changed. But precisely because of that, it needs to be said plainly: violence is not the answer to the “Trump question.” It never has been, and it never will be. In the immediate aftermath, we know the outline but not the full story. A suspect—Cole Tomas Allen—arrived armed, opened fire near a security checkpoint, and was quickly subdued. Trump was evacuated and unharmed; a federal officer survived because of body armor. The spee...

Let me say this plainly from a Christian perspective. When political leaders start correcting the Church on theology, something is out of order. That’s what’s happening in this situation with Donald Trump, JD Vance, and the Pope. Trump’s attacks on the Pope weren’t thoughtful or rooted in Scripture—they were reactive. Reports of his social media posts criticizing the Pope’s stance on issues like crime and global conflict reflect a pattern that is more impulsive than principled⁸. Calling the Pope weak or dismissing calls for peace doesn’t reflect biblical wisdom; it reflects impulse. And that matters, because Christianity doesn’t just care about being right—it cares about how you carry yourself. Scripture makes that clear: “Let your speech always be gracious” (Colossians 4:6)¹, and “Let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger” (James 1:19)². What we’ve seen instead is a pattern of harsh responses, quick reactions, and a tendency to escalate rather than reflect. That’...

Some political moments are routine, but this one deserves closer attention because of what it reveals. It began with criticism from Pope Leo, who spoke about the responsibility of leaders to show compassion toward migrants, the poor, and those affected by conflict¹. His comments were consistent with long-standing Christian teaching about caring for the vulnerable and using power with humility². Donald Trump responded by attacking the Pope personally, calling him “weak” and “terrible”³. Rather than addressing the substance of the criticism, the response focused on discrediting the messenger. Shortly afterward, Trump posted an AI-generated image of himself depicted in a Christ-like role, robed and elevated⁴. Taken together, these actions shift the focus away from the original issue. Instead of engaging a moral critique about compassion and responsibility, the situation became centered on a provocative image and the reaction it generated. This kind of shift is not new. It refl...