Fox News host Greg Gutfeld unleashed a sustained critique of left-wing violence during Wednesday’s episode of The Five, taking aim at fellow panelist Jessica Tarlov and pushing back against what he called the misleading “both sides” narrative.

The exchange came in the wake of a violent attack on an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Dallas, Texas, which left one person dead and two others injured. Gutfeld framed the incident as part of a growing pattern of left-leaning violence, citing recent events such as the September 10 assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk and an August shooting at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

During the roundtable discussion, Gutfeld made clear his frustration with the tendency to equate right- and left-wing violence. “You have to understand, since Kirk’s death, there is no both sides,” he said.

Tarlov, often positioned as the liberal voice on the panel, questioned him about the removal of a Justice Department study analyzing right-wing extremism. “Why did the DOJ take down the study that showed how much right-wing extremism there is?” she asked.

Gutfeld responded sharply, dissecting the research in detail. “What study was that, which one? The one in The Economist that was sponsored by a group run by a guy in antifa? That study?” he asked rhetorically. “Jessica, I did the deep dive on that study. That study was offered by a project run by a guy who says he was in antifa.”

He continued, arguing that labeling individuals as “fascist, racist, or Nazi” has historically been used to justify attacks. “It’s real simple,” Gutfeld said. “You label someone a fascist, or a racist, or a Nazi, it makes you free to attack them, and that has been the ideology from the start.”

The tense exchange highlighted the ongoing debate over how media and political figures frame politically motivated violence, with Gutfeld taking a decidedly critical stance toward left-wing extremism.

After a heated back-and-forth in which the two talked over each other, Tarlov told Gutfeld, “I’m enjoying this.”

“You won’t be for long,” he shot back. Gutfeld launched into a sustained critique of left-wing rhetoric and its role in violent acts. “The left calls Trump a hate monger. They’ve called me a hate monger because I ridicule the left, I ridicule protesters, I ridicule academia, Hollywood, the news media. I make fun of The View every day. I make fun of the UN.

“Guess what? No one acts on the things I say because my side doesn’t do that. We say people are stupid. We say people are wrong. But we don’t say they’re evil. That is your game. And then you come, and you say, ‘OK, man, this is a mentally ill loner.’ Well, who do you think does this stuff? It’s not Ben Affleck. It’s not Tom Brady. It’s not even Carrot Top. People who do these acts are always that way. The question is, who points them in that direction? Why pick ICE? Why pick Kirk? Why target TV stations that put bombs under Fox trucks? Why vandalize memorials? Why kill kids in Catholic schools?

“Two things can be true: a person can be mentally ill, and you can guide him to that place in his life. That is how brainwashing works.”

Tarlov struggled to interject as Gutfeld continued, putting her entire political outlook on the defensive.

Gutfeld’s approach, he argued, draws a clear line: he mocks and critiques, but he does not incite violence or label opponents as inherently evil. By contrast, he claimed, many left-wing commentators frequently employ incendiary language, repeatedly calling people “fascists” or worse—words that, in his view, can inspire violent action.

Right-wing rhetoric, he insisted, does not motivate right-wing violence. Left-wing rhetoric, he contended, often aligns with subsequent acts of aggression. The “both sides” narrative, according to Gutfeld, says less about the political landscape and more about the person who embraces it