Yesterday, the United States entered a new and chilling stage of what I have called the “age of rage.” After two attempted assassinations of President Donald Trump, leading conservative leader Charlie Kirk, father of two, was gunned down at a campus event at Utah Valley University. I learned the news while I was in Prague to speak on my book,“The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” and the growing attacks on free speech around the world. I never imagined that I would be speaking about Charlie’s murder and what it represents for free speech.
I cannot claim to have been a close friend of Charlie Kirk, but I knew him and respected him. In his relatively short life, Charlie energized a generation of conservative college students at a time of intense liberal orthodoxy and intolerance.
Kirk came up with the brilliant idea of challenging liberals to simply debate issues from abortion to immigration. His group would go to campuses and invite debate with signs reading “prove me wrong” and encourage liberals to engage in dialogue rather than violence.
The left had particular reason to hate Kirk. Campuses have long been the bastions of the left, reinforced by faculties which now have few, if any, conservatives or Republicans. Higher education has long been an incubator for intolerance; shaping a generation of speech phobics who shout down or attack those with opposing views.
Kirk struck at the heart of that power base. Polls show that most students do not feel comfortable speaking about their values in our universities and many conservatives hide their views to avoid retaliation from faculty and students.
Kirk was changing that but showing students that they could be open and bold about their views. He told them that they did not have to yield to orthodoxy and the groupthink. Now he’s dead.
What is most chilling about the murder of Charlie Kirk is that it was not in the least surprising. Not anymore.
The response to TPUSA was all too often rage and violence. Liberals and anti-free speech groups like Antifa would trash their tables and threaten the students. Recently, at UC Davis, police simply watched as a TPUSA tent was torn apart and the tent carried off.
Violent speech has long been acceptable on campuses so long as it targets conservatives. Teachers have called for others to “take out” Trump supporters and for the Secret Service to assassinate him.
University of Wisconsin Professor José Felipe Alvergue, head of the English Department, turned over the table of College Republicans supporting a conservative for the Wisconsin Supreme Court. He reportedly declared, “The time for this is over!”
At universities, professors have called for “detonating white people,” denouncing police, calling for Republicans to suffer, strangling police officers, celebrating the death of conservatives, calling for the killing of Trump supporters, supporting the murder of conservative protesters, and supporting the attempted assassination of President Trump. One professor who declared that there is “nothing wrong” with such acts of violence as killing conservatives was actually promoted.
At Hunter College in New York, Professor Shellyne Rodríguez trashed a pro-life display of students, telling the students that “This is bulls–t. This is violent. You’re triggering my students.”
When the students tried to engage the professor and apologized for upsetting her, Rodríguez yelled, “No you’re not — because you can’t even have a f–king baby. So you don’t even know what that is. Get this s–t the f–k out of here.” In an Instagram post, she is then shown trashing the table.
Hunter College, however, did not consider this unhinged attack on students to be sufficient to terminate Rodríguez. It only fired her after she later chased reporters with a machete. She was then hired by another college. She was shown in a later rally exciting the group with references to “slitting the master’s throat.”
At the University of California Santa Barbara, they did not even bother to fire a professor who pleaded guilty to assaulting pro-life students on campus. Professors actually rallied around feminist studies associate professor Mireille Miller-Young. She was later honored as a model for women advocates at the University of Oregon.
In my book, I detail prior “ages of rage,” including periods of political violence by anarchists, socialists, and other groups. I previously warned that we were not only following this same trajectory, but it was accelerating. The reason is the curious nature of rage:
“What few today want to admit is that they like it. They like the freedom that it affords, the ability to hate and harass without a sense of responsibility. It is evident all around us as people engage in language and conduct that they repudiate in others. We have become a nation of rage addicts; flailing against anyone or anything that stands in opposition to our own truths.
Like all addictions, there is not only a dependency on rage but an intolerance for opposing views. The difference between rage and reason is often one’s own views. If one agrees with the underlying grievance, rage is viewed as passion or justified fury at injustice. If one disagrees with those views, it takes on a more threatening and unhinged quality. We seem to spend much of our time today raging at each other. Despite the amplification of views on both sides, there is also an increasing intolerance for opposing views. Those views are treated as simply harmful and offensive—and, therefore, intolerable. Indeed, to voice free speech principles in a time of rage is to invite the rage of the mob.”
That addiction to rage has now claimed another victim who had the audacity to speak boldly and openly about his conservative views. What will follow will be the usual perfunctory expressions of sympathy and denouncing of violence by the very politicians who have fueled the rage.
In recent months, some of us have warned Democratic politicians about their violent rhetoric. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) has called for people to take to the streets to save democracy and posted a picture brandishing a baseball bat.
Former Democratic National Committee deputy chair Keith Ellison, now the Minnesota attorney general, once said Antifa would “strike fear in the heart” of Trump. Liberal sites sell Antifa items to celebrate the violent group.
California Governor Gavin Newsom declared, “I’m going to punch these sons of bitches in the mouth.” It follows other violent rhetoric from Democratic leaders.
One House member explained to Axios, “Some of [our supporters] have suggested … what we really need to do is be willing to get shot.” Yet another admitted that constituents have told them to prepare for “violence … to fight to protect our democracy.” Others reported that liberals are talking about the need “to storm the White House and stuff like that.”
In one encounter, a lawmaker recounted that “I actually said in a meeting, ‘When they light a fire, my thought is to grab an extinguisher’. And someone at the table said, ‘Have you tried gasoline?’”
Some have. Protesters are burning cars, dealerships, and even lawyers and reporters on the left are throwing Molotov cocktails at police. We have also seen a massive increase in attacks on ICE officers, who are now covering their faces to avoid doxxing or retaliation against themselves or their families. The left has rolled out guillotines and chanted “We got the guillotine, you better run.”
Just before he was shot at Utah Valley University, Kirk rallied the group with its signature chant of “prove me wrong.” The response was to kill Charlie Kirk.
His death could succeed in forcing the thousands of conservative and libertarian students back into the shadows of our campuses and classrooms. We cannot allow that to happen. Charlie Kirk challenged not just the left to debate but the right to be heard in higher education.
Yes, this is an age of rage. However, amidst the rage and the violence, there are a special few who have defied the threats and the attacks. The writer George Bernard Shaw once said that unreasonable people expect the world to conform to them. He then added that that was why all history is made by unreasonable people.
Kirk was one of those wonderfully unreasonable people who refused to yield; refused to be silenced. Despite unrelenting attacks by the media and the establishment, he remained undeterred and unbowed. Students need to remember not how Kirk died, but why he died. His loss is Charlie’s final challenge to all those today wringing their hands and muttering the usual expressions of shocked regret. Kirk would likely say, “prove it.” Speak. Defy those who spend their time silencing others rather than speaking themselves. If you want to honor Charlie Kirk, speak out, speak boldly on both the right and the left. Prove them wrong.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of the best-selling “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
A nice reminder about Sep 11, 2001.
https://www.firstpost.com/world/9-11-and-pakistan-the-story-that-trump-has-forgotten-13932975.html#goog_rewarded
Dang it, I want to see a congressional resolution condemning this murder. NOW!
I want to see on record which Democrats won’t condemn it.
I want to see on record which Republicans won’t allow a vote.
We saw what happened after the brutal killings, rapes, dismemberings, beheadings, and burnings-alive of Jews on October 7. The sharks got a taste of blood and went after Jews that much more fiercely; it became a feeding frenzy.
Looking at what Elon Musk posted, as quoted below by Upstate Farmer, what I’ve heard through friends, and the social media compilations of liberals celebrating the brutal murder of a loving husband and devoted father of two young children, it seems the same thing might happen in this case too: the sharks have tasted Charlie Kirk’s blood and they want more.
Be careful out there people. We’re dealing with sick, depraved, vicious wolves. We must defend liberty without sinking to their depraved level. We must keep the civilizational veneer over the darkness that lurks below the surface of our society.
Elon Musk’s posts are not helping the situation. Like Trump he’s inflaming the issue with unverified claims and accusations. it’s the same rage rhetoric Professor Turley keeps talking about. The right is getting itself all worked up and is looking for someone to blame and seek vengeance on in the absence of actual facts. We still don’t know who the shooter is and the motives. Filling that void is rampant assumptions and angry people wanting to blame Democrats and the left to justify more violence and smearing.
The right wants to get violent and they are looking for an excuse to justify using it against the left, anyone on the left. Irrational minds are looking for any excuse to act on their impulse to retaliate. That is not good for anyone.
I find it odd that President Trump is not calling for calm and seeks to assure people that the culprit will be found. Instead he is out there laying blame and accusing Democrats without evidence of being complicit in Kirk’s killng. He’s adding fuel to the rage. Not descalating the situation.
Every one of your posts today, starting with your first early morning post at 0700, is not helping the situation. “Not descalating the situation
The person to blame is the person who pulled the trigger.
But the left is culpable of not just using violent rhetoric, but of almost celebrating someones murder.
We saw this with the near miss on Trump. We saw this with the left wing loons who trashed Teslas.
We saw this with Luigi Mangione’s assassination of a UHC ceo.
Way too many on the left think this is acceptable, or that Kirk brought this on himself.
That is FALSE.
“Elon Musk’s posts are not helping the situation.”
What are they not helping ? The FBI will catch this guy he will be tried, convicted and spend the rest of his life in prison. Nothing Musk or Trump is saying interfere with that.
Do you mean that Trump and Musks rhetoric make YOU fearful that maybe those on the right will reciprocate ?
” Like Trump he’s inflaming the issue with unverified claims and accusations.”
Do you mean like the collusion delusion ?
When someone on the left says “unverified claims and accusations” – that nearly always means TRUE.
” it’s the same rage rhetoric Professor Turley keeps talking about.”
Accusing a violent left of being violent is not rage rhetoric.
“The right is getting itself all worked up and is looking for someone to blame”
No they know who to blame – the shooter.
But they are also using this to point out the penchant for violence of those on the left.
If the shoe fits …
“seek vengeance on in the absence of actual facts.”
Not aware of anyone assassinating left wing nuts today.
You SHOULD be affraid that your lawless and violent conduct will result in efforts at revenge.
But it won’t.
“We still don’t know who the shooter is and the motives.”
Photos have been released. Honestly what are the odds this was a Hit by Ben Shapiro ?
“Filling that void is rampant assumptions and angry people wanting to blame Democrats and the left ”
Of course people do – democrats and the left ARE violent.
“justify more violence and smearing.” No one is being smeared – those of you on the left are immoral and violent.
There will likely be more violence – By The Left.
“The right wants to get violent and they are looking for an excuse to justify using it against the left, anyone on the left.”
Yes MAGA folk are constantly assassinating people, throwing molotov cocktails at police. Trying to blind law enforcement with lasers. …
“Irrational minds are looking for any excuse to act on their impulse to retaliate. ”
While I do not expect right wing violence – it is GOOD that you are scared.
It might get you to behave better.
“That is not good for anyone.”
This is not good for Kirk, or his family. This is not good for the left.
Assassination is not good, But as Maya Angelou said
When people show you who they are – beleive them the first time.
Once again the left shows us who they are.
“I find it odd that President Trump is not calling for calm and seeks to assure people that the culprit will be found. ”
He has.
“Instead he is out there laying blame and accusing Democrats without evidence of being complicit in Kirk’s killng. ”
You are – and many of you are being open about it.
“He’s adding fuel to the rage. Not descalating the situation.”
It would be a good thing for the left to fear retaliation.
That will not happen – but the fear might modify YOUR behavior.
“
John Say,
Well said and an excellent take down of the slow and dumb one.
I just came from our local, super, ultra-MAGA, bash everything left meeting (coffee with some friends at the local greasy spoon). We talked about the assassination of Kirk, what was known about the shooter, what was unknown still. Is there going to be a manifesto found? Online posts? Others involved? Will there be more violence against conservatives?
In the end, we gave a collective shrug, thoughts to the widow and the children, finished our coffee and went home. Left Fran a good tip!
So, not sure what the slow and dumb one is ranting about us MAGA types calling for violence.
The left wings nuts – especially those here are unfortunately easy targets – as Kirk Demonstrated on Campus.
They can not defend their views and get tangled easily in their own views.
Everytimes there is something like this – everyone jumps to conclusions.
But it is VERY RARE that an attack on the right is not correctly identified as politically motivated violence from the start.
One of the many weaknesses of the left is complete ignorance of probability.
I joked this might be a hit by Ben Shapiro. The point is while we do NOT know the details.
We KNOW the general outline.
There is atleast a 90% chance this shooter is on the left.
We know there were messages on the shell and rifle.
There is a 90% probability they are some left wing form of hate speech.
The best hope for the left – is this parson turns out to be nuts.
We we see shootings that do not target anyone – the left JUMPS to conclude right wing nut – only to later have a left wing nut or psychoitic manifesto revealed.
Often the press and even govenrment LIES to us. The Trans christian school shooter – did not Target the christian school. Seh wanted to kill kids, lots of kids, Her intended target was a public school where she had been bullied. but security was escalated and she choose a different target in the last minutes.
But the left painted this as about bullying by christian school students.
The bullying the shooter responded to was in Public school
“ Everytimes there is something like this – everyone jumps to conclusions.”
Which is exactly what you are doing. To pretend you’re above the fray because you’re pointing out only the left is delusional. Nearly everything you post is a conclusion. Not facts.
You do not want to accept any accountability for the violence of the right because you only want it to be about the left.
F off George, you twat.
It is about the left. Listen to them applaud and justify.
GFY, you cant explain that behavior away.
While no one should be “inflaming rage,” another “curious” thing about this serious issue is that those who practice it most (and BEST), ON THE LEFT, are so quick to spew the very kind of pious rhetoric you engage, here,
never realizing that the INFLAMERS are their own, who have clearly acted, heinously and quite obviously, on behalf of the “progressive” ideology, and ideology that expects the usually-peaceful right to be stomped upon and eradicated violently, taking out a peaceful hero of “the other side,” with their mouths shut,
the violence of which you NEVER speak against, directly. How bout using your voice to call upon the young Marxists and tans-genders to calm down, to stop fueling their own rage and impulses to retaliate [against mere speech] so luridly.
Why can’t you make any attempts at that?! WHY?—Because you’re on the striking end of it, not the receiving. Your pious advice is the epitome of hypocrisy.
Anger, rage, and wide-ranging violence are trademarks of the left, and pretending that you’re not witness to it is nothing short of willful ignorance. From the democrat-MSM to democrat politicians, the violent rhetoric is non-stop ………. “Prove Me Wrong.”
Most have fallen for a PsyOps lie.
The shooter was not a raging lunatic.
The shooter was a professional sniper paid by a rogue group within our intelligence agencies.
If true, that is very interesting news. Can you back that up with any evidence?
We do not know that. But we do know that Kirk was shot by a bolt action rifle at 200yds.
This shooter was FURTHER than the Trump shooter and appears to have hit on the first shot.
That suggests skill and practice.
Definitely that. It was bolt action? Sounds like his grandfather’s rifle?
A professional sniper, using a older model Mauser hunting rifle that could not make the head shot at just under 200 yards. And engraves transgenderism and antifascist ideology on the cases.
Rriiigghhhttt . . .
I did not say a marksmen. The Trump shooter was purportedly a member of a gun club – and missed wildly from a shorter distance.
John Say,
I get what you are saying, but I have a Expert rating with the USMC with the M16A2 service rifle. It was not until I started competing in NRA High Power rifle and hand loading did I then under stand the ballistics of shooting. The Trump shooter could of been a member of a gun club and still not know a dang thing about even the basics of shooting as the Trump shooter demonstrated. I have been to a number of ranges and seen guys popping off shots as fast as they can pull the trigger and not hit what they were aiming at, unless they were shooting off a bench. It was also clear the Trump shooter did not have any kind of discipline. If he did, he would of taken the shot, saw he missed, adjusted and made a second, killing shot. Could it have been Trump moving his head or the shooter jerked the trigger?
I could belong to a wine club and still not know the difference between a Cabernet Sauvignon and Mad Dog 20/20.
The skill level needed to make this shot or those at Trump is NOT high.
I am not disagreeing that most any hunter could have made either shot.
At the same time the percent of ordinary people that can hit a head sized target at 150 or 200 yds is small.
That takes practice – not thousands of hours of practice. but you can not just go to a gun store buy a bolt action rifle and expect to hit on the first shot.
This person had SOME practice – but far short of marksman.
When the president travels a known route – the SS looks for snipers out to 500yds I beleive. There are people who can make a head shot at about 3700yds There are very very few of them.
The president is protected to 500yds because only a small portion of shooters can hit beyond that distance and they are all known.
Sometimes Crazies are also disciplined. But the FACTS in this case – such as the rifle used and the range suggest someone who is not “crazy” – though political assassination requires atleast a little bit of “crazy”
I doubt this is a part of a bigger plot – because if it were the shooter would be even more trained and would have avoided security cameras.
None of my analysis above is based on KNOWLEDGE – beyond what everyone has.
It is based on probabilities given the facts that we DO know.
As this unfolds we will see how good my analysis is.
You know more about shooting than I do. But expert skill and knowledge is only marginally helpful here.
I recall after the Trump shooting a former Seal saying that he could have pulled off a head shot on Trump from 150yds with a handgun. But he qualified that with – very few people could.
Regardless trying to gauge the shooters skill (or lack) is part of profiling them.
Most ordinary people could not have made this shot. But most hunters could.
“ None of my analysis above is based on KNOWLEDGE – beyond what everyone has.
It is based on probabilities given the facts that we DO know.”
Its based on assumptions and conclusions. Nothing more.
Missed wildly?? What are you, stupid? His miss would have hit the black. He missed by 3 inches.
With people shouting “hey, there’s a dude on the roof with a gun”.
You say the stupidest shlt sometimes, John say.
No, it’s an actual loon.
Fools who started major conflicts are plentiful in History. I don’t know if this particular assassination will have the same results as other killings, but I have no doubt there will be an impact against the shooters cause(s). As for the competency as a rifleman, any apt hunter familiar to a AR or .30-06 scoped could make that shot, the only different is the target (pray), it takes a depraved individual to kill another human that is not a physical treat. Which takes us to the mindset, of the illiberal democrat, where darkness resides and evil is protected.
Percy Wyndham Lewis “The Art of Being Ruled’ might be described from some points of view as n infernal Utopia…. An account, comprising man chapters, of the decadence occupying…. introduces us to a moronic inferno of insipidity and decay (which is likewise the inferno of ‘The Apes of God’.
Rude Assignment (1950) Ch. 31
George W,
Someone might be familiar with the rifle and shooting at paper at 100 yards off a bench or prone but this shooter clearly did not know to compensate for the elevation difference. He was aiming for the head but got Kirk in the neck. There are entire courses dedicated to high angle shooting for defense of maritime vessels against pirates boarding.
This monster took a human life. Another college person? True, a hunter could and that’s where he learned to shoot?
Shot a man for no reason.
The monster shot an unarmed man for no reason.
While Professor Turley wishes to sound fair, and to provide a bit of cover for the political side he identifies with, the italicized words from his book need correction concerning “the curious nature of rage” and violence in the context of the public execution of Charlie Kirk:
“What DEMOCRATS today DON”T want to admit is that they like it [VIOLENCE]. They like the freedom that it affords, the ability to hate and harass without a sense of responsibility. It is evident all around us, as EXTREME-LEFTISTS engage in language and conduct that they INFLICT UPON in others. THEY have become a RADICAL CELL of rage addicts; flailing against anyone or anything that stands in opposition to THEIR own VERSIONS OF truth.
Like all addictions, there is not only a dependency on rage but an IRRATIONAL intolerance for opposing views. The difference between rage and reason is often one’s own views. If one agrees with the underlying grievance, rage is viewed as passion or justified fury at THEIR DEMAND FOR FULL CONTROL. If ANYone disagrees with THEIR EXTREME views, it takes on a more threatening and unhinged quality. THEY seem to spend much of THEIR time today raging at THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH THEM. Despite the amplification of views on both sides, there is also an increasing intolerance for opposing views FROM THE LEFT. Those views are treated as simply harmful and offensive—and, therefore, intolerable. Indeed, to voice free speech principles in a time of rage is to invite the rage of the EXTREME-LEFTIST mob.”
* Charlie Kirk is a martyr to the cause of free speech, logic and reason, the good and right, and the normal. He was murdered by the whole-cloth-IDEOLOGY represented by the VIOLENT AND EXTREME-LEFT, whose proponents (present at the execution) stood up and cheered like deranged sociopaths, the instant he was shot.
Rest in the peace Charlie Kirk, the boldest intellectual, speaker, and leader of our times.
This post of Turlely’s is exactly why the liberal trolls hide behind the anonymous label. Because they spew lies, hate and violence.
They cheer the death of a man who only asked to debate, was always polite, listened to the opposition and won them over, which is why the left hated him
They are cheering the death of a husband and father of two young children. How dispicable, how disgusting.
“I’d like to report @LauraLoomer for incitement and glorification of violence against other American Citizens who don’t align with her political views. Thank you for your attention to this matter,”
And what has she purportedly said ?
HEAR, HEAR!
Yes, public execution. The celebration is most telling.
Thank you Dianna Bec
Draw and Quarter
Putin is to award a medal to Decarlos Brown for doing his part to kill Ukrainian civilians.
Really, get some mental health. I feel sorry for you and wonder what happened in your life to make you a troll?
The good news is there is help for you with mental health professional. But I encourage you to seek Christ in your life to heal you. You can lead a normal joyful life if you just choose to try.
I will pray specifically for you, but also all the other trolls that suffered such pain in their lives to cause them so many mental prayers.
Remember Jesus loves you, seek him
More Likely Brown was an agent provocateur sent to American to inflame things to keep the war in Ukraine going to turn Ukraine and Russia into globalist colonies. As good a conspiracy theory as Putin giving him a medal. Brown belonged in a mental Hospital, but the Federal government through a warped interpretation of the ADA act has shut them all down.
(apologies to all for my comment appearing twice. Tried to catch it but failed.)
Darren, please don’t print my comment twice. My mistake, and I do not want to take up such space, thx
I had a good conversation with my dentist. I asked if it was safe to attend a political rally. Don’t forget to brush your teeth before going to bed he replied.
The MSM is doing it, again. If they suspect the perp is a Democrat, they claim nobody actually knows what the motive is. They stonewall with this line, hoping the story will move out of rotation before the truth fully emerges. They do this every time.
The MSM doesn’t expect to hide the truth from everyone, but they’re still determined to hide it from their viewers, and–I have to admit–with their idiot viewers, it works.
The rifle that killed Charlie was found. The ammo had pro-trans and antifa statements engraved on it. MSNBC and Colbert viewers will never hear that last part. That’s the plan.
Diogenes,
It is like with the stabbing of Iryna Zarutska. It was not until the story had spread on Independent media and social media, it was so big MSM could not ignore it anymore. And even then, they tried to spin it for the alleged attacker and away from the victim and the crime.
They found what they think is the rifle used to kill Kirk. Ballistics will be able to prove if it was, assuming they recovered the bullet. The engravings are disturbing and are an indicator of possible motive but will only be confirmed once the shooter and if the shooter had accomplices. If the shooter and accomplices are in fact of the far leftist types, I would expect MSM to bury that in the sixth or ninth paragraph and have some vague, even misleading headline, knowing full well their non-thinking viewers wont read past the headline.
Yep
Diogenes,
“ The rifle that killed Charlie was found. The ammo had pro-trans and antifa statements engraved on it.”
That rumor has not been verified. It’s already being used to justify the attacks on Democrats and the left. There are individuals hell bent on blaming Democrats and the left. It’s easy to spread rumors and use bits and pieces of information to “corroborate” their assumptions. Don’t let rampant unverified rumors and gossip get the better of you. All that is known is that a rifle was found and a potential image of the shooter. Nothing else beyond that has been confirmed.
“It’s already being used to justify the attacks on Democrats and the left. There are individuals hell bent on blaming Democrats and the left.”
X, there are lots of lefties posting their support for Charlie’s murder. Stop feeling sorry for the Left. A shocking number have no pity for their victims.
And let’s face it, it was very likely a lefty that did this assassination. That’s the profile any reasonable LEO would be investigating. You can nitpick the evidence, but that won’t age well.
Diogenes,
Also, it is NOT a rumor. It was reported by the FBI and Utah LEOs. The slow and dumb one is spreading more lies.
Diogenes, there is always going to be lefties celebrating or cheering Charlie Kirk’s demise. Just as there will always be those on the right celebrating the demise of some famous or well known lefty. If Biden died by assasination it there would be righties celebrating too.
“ And let’s face it, it was very likely a lefty that did this assassination. That’s the profile any reasonable LEO would be investigating. You can nitpick the evidence, but that won’t age well.”
You already decided without evidence that the left is to blame. Because others including Trump are enabling that view. We cannot be making such assumptions. You’re still making assumptions and speculating without evidence. You WANT your assumptions to be true. But we both know that is wrong.
X, knock it off. It’s clear you’re just engaging in obscurantism to keep people confused until the story goes away. The violence is far more prevalent on the Left and far more encouraged by leading Democrats.
The rifle and ammo (with engravings) are the assassination weapons. See Upstate and John’s comments above. I’m addressing that to everybody but you. I’m beginning to doubt your sincerity.
Diogenes,
Quite right. The slow and dumb one is trying to spin it as “leaks” when it is a fact the FBI, ATF, and Utah LEOs have confirmed what information they have as of now.
Whatever will the slow and dumb one, Gigi, the annony moron do if and when it come to light, factually, that the shooter was a far left wing nut job? Anyone with any degree of common sense, logic and critical thinking can see where this is going. I will not be surprised or shocked if they play dumb, per their MO, and just ignore the facts of the situation.
Just look at how MSM tried to ignore the Iryna Zarutska stabbing. And then tried to gaslight us all on how the criminal was the real victim and not the poor young woman who died.
“X, knock it off.”
It’s the same rotten MO as when it was “Anon” (before it was “George”):
An attempt to undercut your confidence by demanding that you not judge.
““ The rifle that killed Charlie was found. The ammo had pro-trans and antifa statements engraved on it.”
That rumor has not been verified. ”
By the FBI – no, and that will not likely happen for a long time.
But it has been leaked.
And it is likely true.
It is pretty clear the assassin was sending a message.
And that message was not about warm puppies.
“It’s already being used to justify the attacks on Democrats and the left.”
What attacks on the left ?
Oh you mean criticism ? Yes, we all know that know one is allowed to stand up to your B$ – that is why Kirk is dead
Some left wing nut tried to Prove him wrong” with a bullet
“There are individuals hell bent on blaming Democrats and the left.”
Do not make youself an easy target.
“It’s easy to spread rumors and use bits and pieces of information to “corroborate” their assumptions. Don’t let rampant unverified rumors and gossip get the better of you. All that is known is that a rifle was found and a potential image of the shooter. Nothing else beyond that has been confirmed.”
That is false – the FBI has noted that they have LOTS of video of the shooter traveling accross campus.
They have also confirm that there are slogons on the gun and bullet casing. They have just not confirmed the messages.
John Say,
“ By the FBI – no, and that will not likely happen for a long time.
But it has been leaked.
And it is likely true.
It is pretty clear the assassin was sending a message.
And that message was not about warm puppies.”
No, it’s not “pretty clear” you have zero evidence that there was a messege or anything engraved. Making conclusory statements and asserting that it’s “clear” when it’s not shows us you are already convinced without evidence.
“ They have also confirm that there are slogons on the gun and bullet casing. They have just not confirmed the messages.”
You contradict yourself Johh.
“By the FBI-no.” Then you claim the FBI confirmed slogans on the Gun. They didn’t confirm anything. These leaks are not confirmations.
The FBI has lots of video confirming nothing more than a person of interest. They don’t even have a clear idea who that person is. If they are announcing $100,000 reward for information it means they are nowhere close to identifiying who the shooter was and they have little to no information to go further. They will eventually find him, but spreading unconfirmed rumors of engravings and such only fuels more speculation and hate to irrational minds.
Photo, bullet inscriptions and audience questions: The evidence driving the Kirk assassination probe
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/fbi-utah-authorities-have-recovered-gun-used-charlie-kirk-assassination
So, what had been leaked?
Or, official publications from the FBI and Utah LEOs?
We must ask ourselves a fundamental question: What good to us is the First Amendment if we must lose our lives in exercising its freedoms?
I am only mildly familiar with Charlie Kirk’s name, but it appears that his M.O. was to commonly invite and engage in sit-down, open debate with persons who disagreed with his thinking. Such an open forum is full circle to early Socratic method of engagement and learning, and a person attends with full anticipation of hearing opposing views.
It is superior to demagoguery, i.e., “flattering the prejudices of the people, and exciting their jealousies and apprehensions, to throw affairs into confusion, and bring on civil commotion…” Alexander Hamilton, Objections and Answers Respecting the Administration, 1792. http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_9_3s5.html
If we cut off these channels of learning/debate, we are left with only the option of violent elimination of opposing views. Without resolution/consensus, It only buys time until the next opposition manifests, potentially more violent than the last.
Charlie Kirk’s debates were not always erudite forms of debte. They were often a means to goad students into arguments to “show” how poorly educated they were and prove his point that a college education was not worth it. That is how what he was famous for, originally. It grew out to become an in-your-face challenge of liberal students at their own schools. He was not always a honest debater and when he did debate people with real debate experience he was often shown his “debates” were nothing more than a way to “stick-it-to-libs” on their own turf. His popularity hinged on his ability to make liberal students look stupid and poorly prepared to his fans. It was like a sport to him and his fans.
^^^clearly gigi, as she is the only one who learns new words like “erudite” from yesterday’s comments section.
Good tribute to Charlie here:
https://x.com/LiveAction/status/1965964317972684800
Save our Republic and our Planet, save Mankind [Womankind]. Stop ignoring the obvious. No more Age of Darkness. Ruse must end forever. Stop Roman curia, Treaty of Verona family scammers. All Eugenicist, must be fired, fined, incarcerated. Put in cages in zoos for making to see
1. N. Tesla proved we have free energy per the earth’s electromagnetic field. Let’s use it.
2. Autos can run on water. No more drilling! No more contamination of our waters. With oil spill as done in Rifle CO.
Nor chemicals on crops. As I protested to my Dad at age 3, when piolet wanted to spay our crops with chemicals. I Screamed “But Daddy it will get in the water.”
3. Thus stop oppression by psychopaths’, stop all evil.
4. Stop AI, the spreader of lies.
5. Live God’s Ten Commandments, they are not in conflict with the laws of physics and mother nature.
6. When a forest is cut down, immediately replant it.
7. Stop all foreign wars, George Washington remains correct. Our entire economic battle is normalized internal treason. This is inexcusable.
Stop forcing; then, making vast profit off homelessness. It’s the biggest business in town for tax salaried parasites’ personalities, sinister!!! The existence of human capital funds it inexcusable. Stop Title 31:3128.
8. Require China to pay back the Gold lawyer=thug FDR stole and hired China to subvert us with.
A monetary standard, i.e. invariant, is as necessary as is an invariant inch for a builder.
Insurance companies have ruined this country.
Thus stop, Insurance companies [concept created in Sicily] who turned AMA into AMA [American Murder Association’s Satanism, that I, and millions of Americans, have endured repeatedly.
9. Return our schools, to respecting, empowering, an infant’s/little one’s innate gifts. Provide them truth, do not hide essential information from them, as I was.
10. Every thought you think, every action you take, must align with our Declaration of Independence. “We are all created equal, endowed, by our Creature with Unalienable Rights”. Life, liberty [no DMV treason], pursuit of Happiness, = the American dream.
11. No more dot gov. Correct: public servants our employees this is dot PS. This coup by marketing, misinformation, that Khrushchev forewarned, just prior to the JFK slaughter, “We will overcome from within”. Is inexcusable.
12. Stop the Farce.
We lose our Planet, our little ones, our Republic, at this critical value bifurcation, if this reality is not faced.
remove the fascist symbols from our House put their post 1812 War by Roman Curia mafia – British lawyer aligned BAR to cover up the Original 13 Amendment.
We must ask ourselves a fundamental question: What good is the First Amendment to us if we must lose our lives in exercising its freedoms?
I am only familiar with Charlie Kirk’s name, having seen him a few times during media appearances. But it appears that his M.O. was to invite and engage people in sit-down, open debate over opposition to or clarification of his thinking. It takes us full circle back to Socratic Method debate/engagements of old.
That is superior to demagoguery, i.e., “flattering the prejudices of the people, and exciting their jealousies and apprehensions, to throw affairs into confusion, and bring on civil commotion…” Alexander Hamilton, Objections and Answers Respecting the Administration, 1792. In another context, Hamilton said, “Nothing is more common than for a free people, in times of heat and violence, to gratify momentary passions, by letting into the government, principles and precedents which afterwards prove fatal to themselves.” http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_9_3s5.html
If we cut off such forums/fora of communication and learning toward consensus and resolution, we are left with only violent elimination of opposing ideas. We kill ourselves to preserve our liberties.
Lin – the despicable actions of the Left in bringing about this brutal murder, and the equally despicable and shameful reactions of the Left in celebrating it with glee, show why our situation involving constitutional freedoms is not the norm throughout human history. Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction (a/k/a, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance). The forces of darkness are trying to extinguish it as we saw yesterday. For the sake of future generations, we have to keep the light burning as brightly as we can. We have to not be cowed by such evil, but instead to speak out ever more boldly and clearly the truths that we know to be true, the very same truths for which Charlie Kirk was assassinated.
Hello Not-so-Old: (I was not implying reticence as answer to avoiding the loss of one’s life over disfavored speech.
I was implying (and imploring) full knowledge and consideration of “having the courage of our convictions” to speak them.)
No worries Lin, I wasn’t really attributing any implication to you.
-Uncle Henry
(oops, I hope this doesn;t appear twice…)
Political violence against Kirk and Turning Point is, of course, not never justified.
But, I also think it is wrong to suggest that his organization simply invites young people to debate political issues.
There are plenty of actions the organization has taken, which suggest otherwise.
The organization has attacked faculty members with opposing views. See for example the ASU violent attack back in 2023.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty-issues/diversity-equity/2023/10/14/arizona-state-instructor-followed-injured-turning
TPUSA also maintains the controversial “Professor Watchlist” that targets liberal professors for their political viewpoints. Their “outing” of professors in this manner has drawn the ire of free speech groups like TheFIRE for tactics, which do not promote the First Amendment, and instead erode it. Here is an example: https://www.thefire.org/news/former-graduate-instructor-blacklisted-over-testy-exchange-tpusa-student-sues-university
I support the desire to have conservative political tables on college universities (and as a young conservative on a very liberal college campus many years ago would have certainly been a part of such a movement), but TPUSA’s goals have certainly not been to engage in open and honest debate in respect of multiple viewpoints. Outing liberal professors on social media in an attempt to get them fired is very different from simply responding to their political views with “better speech.”
sorry “never justified, not “not never” …
“The organization has attacked faculty members with opposing views.”
If they have actually used physical violence this is to be condemned.
But you have not established that.
“https://www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty-issues/diversity-equity/2023/10/14/arizona-state-instructor-followed-injured-turning”
This does not support your claim. The two supposed TPUSA crew are not identified so we have only the reporters word they were affliated with TPUSA.
There is no idication in the acticle who stated the violence.
“TPUSA also maintains the controversial “Professor Watchlist” that targets liberal professors for their political viewpoints. ”
Typical left wing claptrap.
There is nothing wrong with identifying left wing nut professors.
“Their “outing” of professors”
It is not “outing” if you are a professor and you teach with an ideological bent students have the right to know.
“in this manner has drawn the ire of free speech groups like TheFIRE for tactics, which do not promote the First Amendment, and instead erode it. Here is an example: https://www.thefire.org/news/former-graduate-instructor-blacklisted-over-testy-exchange-tpusa-student-sues-university”
And you example does not support your claim. Fire is defending a left wing nut professor for flipping the bird. and then getting fired.
“I support the desire to have conservative political tables on college universities (and as a young conservative on a very liberal college campus many years ago would have certainly been a part of such a movement)”
Good that is what TPUSA and even FIRE want – debate and the oportunity to debate.
“but TPUSA’s goals have certainly not been to engage in open and honest debate in respect of multiple viewpoints.”
What TPUSA goals ? Making unspecified moral judgeements is a typical LEFTWING tactic.
TPUSA wants honest and open debate. That does not mean viewpoints deserve respect.
Respect must be earned, it is not a right.
“Outing liberal professors on social media”
Is a good idea. We should know who is teaching our kids.
“in an attempt to get them fired”
The fact that the professor you linked to should not be fired for free speech it is perfectly acceptable for TPUSA and others to seek to get her fired.
“is very different from simply responding to their political views with “better speech.””
No, it is not.
There is an anonymous troll on here who is suggesting Charlie Kirk reaped what he sowed when he was brutally murdered because he (Charlie) always supported people’s constitutional rights, including Second Amendment rights. There is no dispute that Charlie Kirk always debated issues in a civil and engaging manner, he always invited logical discourse, and he always condemned violence. He was a loving husband and devoted father of two young children. The troll who says Charlie reaped what he sowed is a much, much lesser human being than Charlie was. This troll always comments anonymously because he always spews stupid garbage.
He did not always condemn violence. Where was his condemnation of the violence his organization perpetrated against an ASU professor in 2023?
Charlie Kirk did not apologize for the 2023 incident involving Turning Point USA (TPUSA) affiliates and ASU professor David Boyles. Instead, the organization defended its employees and accused Boyles of initiating the physical altercation.
Details of the incident and subsequent reactions:
The event: In October 2023, two TPUSA affiliates confronted Boyles on campus while he was leaving a class on LGBTQ+ topics. The TPUSA members filmed the encounter and harassed Boyles with homophobic accusations related to his work with Drag Story Hour Arizona.
The physical altercation: University surveillance footage showed Boyles reaching for the camera to block the recording, after which one of the TPUSA affiliates shoved him to the ground. Boyles sustained a laceration to his face.
TPUSA’s response: The organization claimed that Boyles was the aggressor and had attacked their crew. They stated that their affiliate only pushed Boyles to protect the camera operator.
Kirk’s stance: Charlie Kirk, as the head of TPUSA, did not issue an apology. In December 2023, a TPUSA spokesperson promised to defend the employees and accused the university and media of “gaslighting”.
Aftermath: In April 2024, the two TPUSA members admitted to harassing Boyles in a plea deal. ASU President Michael Crow condemned the organization’s actions, and other academic groups spoke out against the targeted harassment of faculty.
Again YOUR article does not say what you claim.
“The TPUSA members filmed the encounter and harassed Boyles with homophobic accusations related to his work with Drag Story Hour Arizona.”
That is called free speech.
“University surveillance footage showed Boyles reaching for the camera to block the recording”
That would be theft and simple assault.
“after which one of the TPUSA affiliates shoved him to the ground. Boyles sustained a laceration to his face.”
Generally the first party to get physical is held accountable unless the escallation is egregious.
Boyle reponded physically to being filmed.
“TPUSA’s response: The organization claimed that Boyles was the aggressor and had attacked their crew. ”
He was. He initiated violence. The only question is whether the TPUSA response was proportionate – and proportionate does NOT mean equal.
“They stated that their affiliate only pushed Boyles to protect the camera operator.”
Your own assertion has boyle lashing out at the camera.
“Kirk’s stance: Charlie Kirk, as the head of TPUSA, did not issue an apology. In December 2023, a TPUSA spokesperson promised to defend the employees and accused the university and media of “gaslighting”.
Aftermath: In April 2024, the two TPUSA members admitted to harassing Boyles in a plea deal. ASU President Michael Crow condemned the organization’s actions, and other academic groups spoke out against the targeted harassment of faculty.”
We have seen exactly this all over. LEft wing nuts attack the Proud Boys – and the courts sharge the proud boys.
Left or right it does not matter – when YOU initiate violence a proportionate violent response is justified.
Boyle should have been charged.
He would have in my community.
The Fact that ASU does not abide by the “rule of law” is not a good argument.
Reply
This rare occurrence was not adjudicated, and one party admitted guilt to harassment, while the other admitted guilt to harassment, assault, and disorderly conduct. Anonymous makes two claims. Kirk didn’t apologize, and the recording was illegal.
The second claim is false since Arizona requires only one party to agree on the filming done in a public area. Therefore, that claim can be considered a lie, and we have to ask ourselves how we can trust the other?
Yes, they signed, but I see no evidence of harassment in the filming since it was legal in Arizona (one-person state). One defendant could have gotten off based on that, since he did nothing else. The second defendant was charged with disorderly conduct and assault as well. If the first was innocent, one has to determine why he might have signed. Because if he lost, he would have a record, and if he signed the record would disappear, and he wouldn’t have to pay attorney’s fees. The same can be said for the other defendant.
Kirk was correct in what he said. The person being filmed in a public area laid hands first by pushing the camera and the cameraman. There was no assault by either of the two from TPA. Anonymous had one lie and one open to interpretation. One cannot trust Anonymous.
“ The State Department will “undertake appropriate action” against foreigners who praise, rationalize or make light of Charlie Kirk’s death on social media, said Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau.”
But… freedom of speech allows them to do that. It may be unsavory or disrespectful, even offensive, but a government body “taking action” to silence speech thru threats is antithetical to the 1st amendment. The Westboro Baptist Church taught us that the government cannot silence or threaten punishment or “action” because of grossly offensive speech.
Why did you eliminate the State Department’s qualifier of taking “appropriate” action when you said, “…but a government body ‘taking action’ to silence speech thru threats is antithetical to the 1st amendment”…?
I think it is literally disgusting that the right has used this event to attack what they call “the left”. Even Turley claims that “the left” “hated” Kirk. First of all: we don’t know anything about WHO shot him, much less the reason–it might have had nothing whatsoever to do with Kirk, “the right” or “the left”, or Kirk’s politics. The shooter may well have seen a chance to make a name for himself, may have been a victim of mental illness, might have been jealous of the attention Kirk received, might have had a crush on Kirk and was rebuffed, or might have known Kirk, a member of his family, a member of his organization and wanted to kill him to hurt these people. The bottom line is: at this point, no one knows either the shooter or the reasons for what he did, much less that the shooting was politically-motivated. Secondly, all of the accusations that the “the left” have been celebrating Kirk’s demise are simply not true. Every comment I’ve seen–both from pundits and politicians alike, have expressed the theme that killing someone for expressing their beliefs even those with which you may strongly disagree, is as un-American as it gets. Third: it is outrageous for Turley or anyone else on the MAGA payroll to use this killing as an attack against: “the left”, colleges, college professors or anyone else. Turley speaks of the “age of rage”, that he blames on the left–but today’s piece proves that Turley is one of those who is stirring the “rage pot” here.
I think it is literally disgusting that the right has used this event to attack what they call “the left”.
– signed, a self-identifying spokesman for The Left who hated Kirk as much as they hate Trump, and wished him dead and threatened him to the point that he had to live with a security detail
And of course the inevitable BBBBBUUUUTTTTT…. MUH TURLEY!!!
Before yesterday, I had no idea who Kirk was, much less anything about what he did.
Who is this ——- idiotic fascist troll?
You MAGAs live in your own world of reality, believing that people and ideas you like are shared by the rest of us–they are not. Part of MAGA indoctrination is to convince followers that you are in the majority and that most people in the US agree with you–we don’t. I knew nothing about Kirk before yesterday, and stand by my comment that his killing is murder and the shooter deserves to be held to account. I had heard of “Turning Point”, but didn’t know anything about it or who started or ran it. Therefore, I couldn’t wish ill to him or his family, and I stand by my comment–the shooter is not known, nor his his motivation–but what he did was wrong. Equally wrong is Turley and other MAGA pundits stoking political rage by blaming “the left” when, they don’t even know who shot him or why.
Wrong again, Gigi,
Elon Musk, who responded with an exclamation mark to an X post that stated: “I have a friend at Reddit who says they have had over 16,000 posts calling for the Revolution to continue They are saying Charlie Kirk wasn’t enough SO, they aren’t just celebrating Charlie’s demise they are calling for more…”
!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 11, 2025
Here’s one of Kamala Harris’s biggest supporters on TikTok, celebrating the murder of Charlie Kirk.
You can’t hate these people enough! pic.twitter.com/RIoZn2OpxZ
— Vince Langman (@LangmanVince) September 10, 2025
Expose all of the EVIL pic.twitter.com/Ghl6UeNGjE
— TaraBull (@TaraBull808) September 10, 2025
Democrats all over social media are now celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk. pic.twitter.com/eKxk94Dirh
— Shadow of Ezra (@ShadowofEzra) September 10, 2025
Elon Musk has friends?
So When will you ADMIT the Democrats are Fascists?
This is how rumors and assumptions are used to lay blame.
“ A bulletin from a law enforcement official with unverified information was circulating online Thursday morning that said authorities collected firearm cartridges believed to be from Charlie Kirk’s shooter that were engraved with words “expressing transgender and anti-fascist ideology.”
Those already raging and frothing at the mouth with anger will immediately latch on to this information and start running with it making assumptions and delcaring war on Democrats for implying a connection that is not verified or corroborated.
“ Another person familiar with the ATF said that such memos are routine and typically contain all the information that authorities have collected through interviews and evidence at the crime scene. The person said these bulletins are meant to tell ATF officials across the country what information authorities are collecting. Sometimes, the person said, the information in the bulletins is eventually verified, but sometimes the information turns out to be untrue.“
There are already attempts to claim an illegal alien was the shooter and calling for the arrest of all foreign looking suspects and to report them. Age of rage indeed.
X
Just stop it you fool. No one for sure.
People are indeed enraged that such a bright star who promoted civil discourse, a husband, and a father of two young children was murdered by an sick, evil person. That does not count as rage rhetoric, which is almost universally a left-wing phenomenon and involves raging at people that are not aligned politically with your views, and suggesting they be killed.
His organization did not promote civil discourse. They attacked (both online and physically) liberal professors rather than engaging in civil disclourse.
Political violence, whether the idiot who shot Kirk or TPUSA on liberal faculty, is wrong. Period.