President Donald Trump escalated his attacks on political opponents and critics this week, describing protesters who interrupted him at a Washington dinner as “a threat,” announcing plans to designate the anti-fascist antifa movement as a terrorist organization, and questioning whether television broadcasters should keep their licenses if their late-night hosts ridicule him.
The remarks, delivered on September 18 while flying back from a state visit to the United Kingdom, underscore the president’s increasingly hardline posture following his deployment of federal law enforcement and National Guard troops to Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and Memphis, Tennessee.
The latest controversy stems from Donald Trump’s September 9 dinner at Joe’s Seafood, Prime Steak & Stone Crab, located just blocks from the White House. Trump had chosen the venue to showcase what he called a “safer” Washington since taking direct control of the Metropolitan Police Department and sending National Guard troops into the capital.
As he arrived, four women disrupted the event by shouting slogans such as “free Palestine.” Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche later suggested the demonstrators could face criminal investigations.
Days later, Donald Trump escalated his rhetoric, saying on September 15 that the protesters “should be put in jail” under racketeering charges, calling them “professional agitators” engaged in “really subversive” behavior. When pressed again on September 18 about whether he believed jail time was warranted, Trump said, “Certainly, I thought it was very inappropriate. Yeah, I think they were a threat.”
Donald Trump also announced on September 17 via social media that he was designating antifa, a loosely organized anti-fascist movement, as a terrorist organization to be “thoroughly investigated.”
The move raised immediate questions about its legal foundation. Experts note that antifa is not a formal group but a diffuse ideological network without centralized leadership or membership rolls, making it difficult to classify under existing U.S. terrorism laws.
When asked how the administration planned to pursue antifa, Trump responded vaguely: “We’re going to find out. We’re going to see. People have been talking about it for a long time.” He told Fox News’ The Story with Martha MacCallum that federal investigators would probe the movement’s sources of funding.
In another escalation, Donald Trump took aim at broadcast networks that host late-night comedians critical of him. He praised ABC for suspending Jimmy Kimmel Live! host Jimmy Kimmel following Federal Communications Committee head Brendan Carr’s call for disciplinary action. Carr cited the host’s commentary about slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
CBS had already announced The Late Show with Stephen Colbert would end in 2026, and Trump urged NBC to “get rid of” Tonight Show host Jimmy Fallon and Late Night host Seth Meyers.
“When you have a network and you have evening shows and all they do is hit Trump. It’s all they do,” Trump said. “They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that.” He suggested the FCC should weigh program content when deciding whether to renew broadcasting licenses.
Donald Trump’s remarks drew sharp rebukes from across the political spectrum.
Former Vice President Kamala Harris, who lost to Trump in the 2024 presidential election, called his attacks “a frontal assault on free speech.” In a September 18 post on social media, Harris wrote: “What we are witnessing is an outright abuse of power. This administration is attacking critics and using fear as a weapon to silence anyone who would speak out.”
Illinois Governor JB Pritzker (D) echoed those concerns in an interview with MSNBC’s The Briefing with Jen Psaki. “It’s intimidation, clearly,” Pritzker said. “They’re using the power of the government to go after businesses.”
The president’s comments follow weeks of heightened political tension and security crackdowns in major U.S. cities. With his declaration against antifa and his threats to jail protesters and strip broadcasters of their licenses, Trump appears to be testing the boundaries of presidential power against critics, dissenters, and the media.
Whether these moves carry legal weight or serve primarily as political messaging remains unclear, but they have already sparked intense debate over free speech, protest rights, and the role of government power in silencing opposition.