Watch: Katie Couric Presses Fetterman On Charlie Kirk, But He Holds Firm!

However, Fetterman chose not to partake in the posthumous critique.

Following the assassination of Kirk on September 10, a wave of celebration and criticism of his rhetoric swept across some quarters, leading to multiple dismissals. As reported by the Daily Caller, Couric highlighted on her podcast that critics were against the Trump administration's decision to honor Kirk posthumously. However, Fetterman did not voice any objections.

November 13, 2025

Couric posed a series of questions to Fetterman, asking, Do you think that flags should have been flown at half-staff? Do you think his body should have been flown on Air Force Two? Do you think he should have posthumously been given the Presidential Medal of Freedom?

She added, I think some people felt that that was perhaps over the top in terms of mourning someone like Charlie Kirk. How did you feel about that?

Fetterman responded, Id say that that was his choice and his prerogative, and that was really entirely up to him.

Couric then probed further, questioning whether Fetterman had any issues with Kirk's rhetoric in retrospect. Fetterman admitted to having disagreements with Kirk but confessed he was not particularly familiar with his views. Despite Couric's insistence that he must have learned about them after Kirk's death, Fetterman maintained, No, I havent done a deep dive on it.

Fetterman condemned the political violence that led to Kirk's assassination, calling it "unacceptable." He stated, And engaging in a debate and views I strongly disagree on thats part of the American democracy. And for me, that would never justify whats happened. He added, And I just chose not to take the opportunity to argue his views after children lost [their] father in the most violent public way.

The senator also criticized "extreme rhetoric," suggesting it played a part in incidents like Kirk's assassination and urged Americans to tone down their discourse.

Couric suggested that Kirk's rhetoric could be considered extreme, stating, You know, I think thats the conversation that happened. People condemned political violence, but they also felt a great deal of discomfort with his language, suggesting that these kinds of words lead to violence. I dont know. Im just kind of sharing my observations as I saw the conversations unfold.

Fetterman agreed, saying, Yeah, I agree. I mean, I think we agree that we probably didnt agree with much of what he said. And Im sure we both agree that you shouldnt shoot people and you shouldnt execute them in public. He added, And I think two things must be true: that free speechIm an absolute free speech guy and you have the right to say these things. And you definitely also have the right not to get shot by sharing your views.

In the aftermath of Kirk's assassination, some media figures and influencers misled their audiences about Kirk's views on subjects such as race and sexuality. The New York Times had to issue a correction for wrongly attributing an antisemitic comment to Kirk in an article about his political views. The correction stated, An earlier version of this article described incorrectly an antisemitic statement that Charlie Kirk had made on an episode of his podcast. He was quoting a statement from a post on social media and went on to critique it. It was not his own statement.

Fetterman, during an appearance on Fox News Jesse Watters Primetime on Nov. 3, stated his refusal to demonize his opposition. Im not gonna call you a fascist or a Nazi. Im not gonna compare anyone to Hitler or anything, he said. Thats wrong. And if you resort to that thing, youve lost the plot.

Couric, on the other hand, confessed on a Nov. 6 episode of her podcast that she no longer aims to be impartial when covering Trump, claiming the Presidents conduct is beyond the pale. This admission raises questions about the objectivity of her journalistic approach and the potential influence it may have on her audience's perception of events and individuals.