Below is my column that ran earlier on Fox.com on the calls for the termination of academics and others who have criticized Charlie Kirk or expressed satisfaction with his murder. Unfortunately, such hateful remarks are nothing new in academia. However, this is not about them. It is about us, and more importantly, it is about Charlie and what he fought for his entire life. We cannot allow our anger or sorrow to lead us into becoming the very people that Charlie denounced in his life. If you “Stand with Charlie,” you stand with free speech.
Here is the column:
“Stand with Charlie!” That message spontaneously appeared throughout the world after the unspeakable violent attack by an extremist. No, it was not the response to the murder of Charlie Kirk this week. It was ten years ago with the killing of staff at the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. World leaders, including the French, German, and Turkish presidents, joined a march for free speech despite their own speech crackdowns, including prior targeting of the magazine and the victims.
The chief editor, Stéphane Charbonnier, had refused to be silenced by the French government and declared, “I would rather die standing than live on my knees.” He was the first person the gunmen asked for in their attack on the office, and he was one of the first to be killed.
At the time, I wrote about the breathtaking hypocrisy and noted that one of the few surviving editors of the magazine refused to join the march with those who relentlessly pursued them with criminal investigation. After the march, France, Germany, and other Western governments expanded their censorship laws and the prosecution of viewpoints deemed inflammatory or hateful.
In the ultimate dishonoring of the memory of the Charlie Hebdo staff, the French officials then proceeded to use their own murders to justify increasing prosecution of speech
The killing of Charlie Kirk in the United States ten years later is clearly different in one critical respect. There will be no “I am Charlie” campaign on the left. Some on the left have celebrated the killing while others, mouthing regret, attacked Kirk and suggested that he brought this upon himself.
That is hardly a surprise. Kirk spent his tragically short life exposing the hypocrisy and intolerance of the left, particularly in higher education. They hated him for it. Universities and colleges have long been bastions of the left with the purging of most conservative or Republican faculty from most departments and the maintenance of an academic echo chamber in classrooms.
Kirk challenged all that. He drove many mad by inviting them to debate issues. The response was often violence, including the trashing of tables of his group, Turning Point USA. Ultimately, he was killed for insisting on being heard.
However, we are facing the same danger of self-consuming hypocrisy — ten years after that other Charlie shooting. Some on the right are calling for people who denounce Kirk or celebrate his death to be fired. That ranges from professors to public employees.
I knew Charlie. While I cannot call myself a close friend, we spoke about the lack of free speech on our campuses and the efforts to cancel or fire those with opposing views. More than anyone today, Kirk brilliantly exposed that hypocrisy by putting himself and his group in harm’s way.
The way to honor Charlie Kirk’s life and legacy is not with hypocrisy and intolerance. That is what he died fighting against.
To fire people on campuses for speaking out against Charlie Kirk would make an utter mockery of his work and his death. It would be like banning LGBTQ groups in response to the assassination of Harvey Milk in 1978.
Charlie Kirk wanted unfettered debate. He wanted people to be able to express themselves regardless of how the majority felt about their views. He was the victim, not the advocate, of cancel campaigns.
There are instances where hateful views may raise grounds for termination. A secret service agent is under investigation after dismissing the assassination. Given the need to protect conservative as well as liberal figures (including those in the current administration), the bias in the postings can raise legitimate grounds for inquiry.
Likewise, those who use their official, academic, or corporate positions to espouse hateful messages risk termination.
However, many of these individuals were speaking as individuals outside of their positions, and their hateful commentary is not necessarily compromising or conflicting with their positions.
Hate speech in the United States is protected speech. The crackdown on speech deemed hateful, inflammatory, or intolerant has been the signature of the left, the very thing that Charlie campaigned against.
It is never easy to show restraint when you are angry or grieving. After all, many of those objecting to these cases today were silent or supported crackdowns on conservatives for years on and off campuses. They lack any self-awareness or shame in demanding protections that they rarely extend to others with opposing views. That is the value of an age of rage. It gives you license to silence and attack others for their views while insisting that you are the real victim.
However, we cannot become those we have long fought against in the free speech community. More importantly, we cannot become those whom Charlie fought against up to the very moment of his murder. We honor his legacy by protecting the thing that Charlie cherished the most. We need to “Stand with Charlie” and support free speech.
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.”
Dear Prof Turley,
There’s a certain implied humility with anybody whose motto is ‘Prove Me Wrong’.. . it’s one of my few redeeming qualities.
Free speech, of course, stands on its own two feet. .. all we mere mortals can do is walk in its footsteps.
The Free Market is like the free speech (That’s why ‘it’s the economy, stupid’.).. . they are joined at the hip.
*together, they are like the great forces of nature, and Nature’s God. .. or just cold and lonely, lovely works of art.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdBsu7jiYTU&list=RDHdBsu7jiYTU&start_radio=1
There are ways to deal with hate spewing, mudslinging people without censoring them or threatening violence – but these ways takes focus and commitment.
1. Shun them. If you happen to run into a podcast, website, blog or any other form of social networking you find, to their comment section, leave a comment about why you are exercising your freedom of speech to NOT listen (yes freedom to listen or freedom to not listen are part of freedom speech per several Supreme Court rulings -do your own research on this one) and leave the site. DO NOT ARGUE OR ENGAGE WITH THEM.
2. Develop a list of the sites you visit (you may need to actually enter their world to find them), do the above and then send that list to your networked people asking them to do the same.
3. Do all of the above but spend some time on their advertisers, visit their advertisers site, find a way now to leave comment, and tell them you will not be interested in any of their products, tell them why, and leave. DO NOT ENGAGE OR RESPOND TO ANY OF THEIR ADVERTISERS ATTEMPTS TO CONTACT YOU. And it goes without saying – don’t buy the product.
Send your list of advertisers to your network people and ask them to do the same.
4. Overwhelm them. If you find any non-profit organization or any government entity like a city hall or a state capital or a school who believes that they have the right to fly flags based on ideologies that you don’t like approve of (rainbow flags for example), then demand that they apply flags of all ideologies and religions. This would include flags like American flags, Chinese flags, Russian flags, Christian flags, Muslim flags, Israeli flags, Democrat donkey flags, Republican elephant flags, libertarian porcupine flags, etc. Yes even Nazi flags. Basically if you fly one flag demand they fly all flags. This should be effective especially with schools and local governments because you can make comments on government and school sites and you can attend your local Town Council and school board meetings requesting the same. Free speech for one means free speech for all and school boards and local government entities can not discriminate. Do this in a matter of fact way without provoking or engaging in arguments.
5. If you know any organizations or are part of any organizations that already have the base of people that know how to do this or want to do this then feel free to copy the suggestions and send this to them.
THESE ARE SOME NON-VIOLENT, HATE FREE WAYS OF CHANGING THE WORLD. JESUS CHRIST WAS THE FIRST NONVIOLENT REVOLUTIONARY SO BE NOT AFRAID TO MODEL YOUR RESPONSES AFTER HIM. DO NOT, AND I REPEAT DO NOT, LET HATRED OR ANGER BE YOUR GUIDING LIGHT.
COMPASSION, CARING, GRATITUDE, AND APPRECIATION. These are the thoughts and emotions we want to flood the world with.
Peace be unto you.
Fun with flags .. .
I’ve been unfriending people on FB. They are free to express themselves. I don’t want their hateful posts in my feed
Does Professor Turley think a man, who is best known for his doxxing of college professors, is an advocate for free speech?
^ CCP Troll. Ignore. ^
^ DNC paid troll. Ignore. ^
So no response to the content of the message? Cool.
Step out of adolescence and try asking an honest question.
There is no question – there is not a single fact in your post – you posted a hypothetical about an unknown person.
Yes, Exposing the people who are teaching our children and exposing what they are teaching our children is free speech.
“If You Want to “Stand with Charlie,” Stand With Free Speech”
– Professor Turley
_____________________
Free speech et al. were absolute and codified by the American Founders and Framers in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The Supreme Court decided to do a full rewrite, extirpating the critical word “absolute,” as in speech, religion, keeping and bearing arms, executive power being vested in ONLY “a President of the United States,” etc., and, importantly, private property.
“The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”; that’s pretty clear, wouldn’t you say?
How many infringements are placed on arms in all aspects?
“No person shall be deprived of property,” which is similarly evident.
In how many instances are owners of private property denied the exercise of absolute dominion?
Nowhere in the Constitution is the power to “interpret,” modify, or amend conferred on the judicial branch or Supreme Court.
You might have a word with them.
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS
I don’t see a problem with some of these people getting fired after posts on social media.
They are revealing who they truly are.
If they had done that in a job interview would they have gotten the job?
In some cases, particularly for positions of trust, it is a business decision to get rid of them.
Turns out a lot of public school people as well as university folks have made vile remarks about murder. Do we want to trust our children to such people? If one such were in our school system I would be urging the school board to get rid of him.
When Mangione murdered an insurance executive most of us were deeply shocked when so many people we thought were fundamentally decent actually celebrated the killer. It was like a horrible scene from Invasion of the Body Snatchers or The Thing.
It appears many souls have been corrupted in ‘our’ educational system and professions. Firing and shaming them is much kinder than what they would do, and have been doing, to us.
They say they are in a war. That war is against us. It is time we realize it and act accordingly.
Young, “Do we want to trust our children to such people? If one such were in our school system I would be urging the school board to get rid of him.”
My God, man, Comrade Secretaries Becky Pringle and Randi Weingarten (pronouns unk), the heads of the illegal and criminal organizations, the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), have full and complete control of American children.
Have you noticed? Has anyone noticed?
Yes, I noticed. I think public teacher’s unions need to be abolished.
I think it was teacher’s unions that undercut Jaime Escalante [Stand and Deliver] who had remarkable success teaching calculus to Hispanic students in California.
It’s customary to refer to Hispanic students as underserved. In fact, everyone is underserved by our dysfunctional system of public education and much of the damage to it is down to teacher’s unions.
I also think teaching certification for accomplished engineers, builders, lawyers, and medical professionals should be readily granted to people who have not gone to colleges of education.
Colleges of Education have evolved into indoctrination centers worthy of a gulag.
Agreed. There is a gleeful bloodthirsty strain of leftism that is affecting many who not only hold the opinion that “he had it coming” but that their own righteousness is so intoxicating they can’t see what ghouls they’ve become.
Rush taught me many truths relevant to the current situation. Here are a few:
– When your opponents are telling the world who they are by their words and deeds, best to shut up, don’t distract from their message.
– When your opponents try to shut you up, it means that your arguments have hit home, and that they are unable challenge you with facts and logic.
– When your opponent stoops to ad hominem attacks, consider this a fortuitous development, as they are revealing much about themselves and nothing about their target.
Part of Rush’s signature style was dedicating a significant amount of air time to playing recordings of the other side speaking, with excerpts long and self-contained enough that you knew nothing was taken out of context. He insisted that people will always tell you who they are if you just take the time to listen to them. Admittedly I still have much room for improvement on this point, as I tend to tune out very quickly at the first ad hominem or the first falsehood. I’ve gotten to the point where I will let them have two or three before moving on, especially if the sanctimony level isn’t insufferable.
Actually, I don’t think DJT really cares about the death of Charlie Kirk. When told by reporters Kirk had been killed DJT diverted and said” I was in the midst of, you know, building of the great–for 150 years they wanted a ballroom at the White House, right?” Who are the “they”? Not most Americans think spending $200 million on a WH ballroom is a waste of taxpayer money. But DJT wants the WH to look like Mar-a-Lago so the ballroom is going up. Probably due to DJT growing dementia. A recent YouGov poll found 49% of Americans think DJT is too old to be President. That’s a 15% increase from a similar poll in Feb. 2024. It’s clear DJT is losing his marbles. In his press conferences and on Fox his mind wanders. He can’t answer simple questions and meanders on to unrelated topics.
Then we have the Epstein scandal. DJT doggedly refuses to admit the obvious–that it is his signature on the birthday greeting to Epstein on his 50th birthday. DJT wants us to believe that one of his enemies went back to the future and forged his signature on the birthday greeting, knowing it could be used against him 30 years later. Pretty bizarre stuff!
Even in his cognitive decline DJT knows that the Epstein files could bring him down. That’s why he refuses to release them. Releasing all the files would show DJT was deeply involved in Epstein’s trafficking of under age girls to DJT and his powerful friends. Exposing that would be worse than Nixon’s Watergate and could threaten DJT’s Presidency. That is why DJT had Pam Bondi delete all references to him in the files. So the coverup continues! That’s what we can expect from a dictator who always wants to rewrite history to serve his own personal interests!
DOUBLE YAWN.
You fools have nothing and the polls show you are crashing. Yet you stay on the same path.
Enjoy the lost again
More lies and gaslighting
You can always count on Anonymous Gigi to wander off the subject of the article for her usual paid attacks of DJT and conservatives in general. She has to justify the payments she receives from her masters.
Then why didn’t the Biden Regime release the “files” years ago ?
” spending $200 million on a WH ballroom is a waste of taxpayer money.”
Taxpayers aren’t paying for it. The Whitehouse renovations are being done through donations.
” Releasing all the files would show DJT was deeply involved in Epstein’s trafficking of under age girls to DJT and his powerful friends.”
Then why didn’t Biden release them to stop Trump from being elected?
Anonymous,
The answer to that question should be self-evident.
I’m gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that maybe as much as 50% of our government — House, Senate, and perhaps judiciary has connections to Epstein.
To release these files would, necessarily, ensnare the very parties who were releasing them.
Methinks Washington DC is so corrupt we need to dedicate the Village People’s song, “Soddom and Gomorrah” to them.
In other words, taking down Trump with the Epstein stuff is mutually assured destruction.
I can quibble over the details
I am sure that far more than 50% of DC is corrupt, but I doubt 50% were sucking up to epstein – Sorros maybe
but much of congress does have wealthy contributors who would like to see everything epstein related vanish.
Separately – there is a serious legal problem.
It is virtually impossible to release GJ material – unless your target is trump.
DOJ speaks through prosecutions. Not data dumps
And if they did have something on Trump – it would have leaked long ago.
Any day now – the Pee Tape will be made public!
Just wait – any day now!
Professor Turley, is this a bit of a rhetoric game? You recognize that free speech can have legitimate consequences when it runs into the area of defamation, but you’re offended and upset that there can be employment consequences for some of those cheering Mr. Kirk’s murder?
Do I, as a private sector employer, not have a MORAL RIGHT to terminate an employee associated with my business when their conduct is so egregiously outside the norm that it has the potential to harm my business, the value in my company that my stockholders have, etc?
A teacher that takes to social media and posts billboards that they’re forming a local chapter of NAMBLA inviting all to join, or posts that their greatest hope in life is to see Obama assassinated – it’s all First Amendment free speech and legal. But it can also have consequences if the parents of children being taught by that teacher and the school board that employs that teacher don’t find that to be suitable character for teachers they employ.
Should anyone serving in the military have the right to say pretty much any vile thing that comes to their mind, and do so with a guarantee that they are protected from any consequences coming from their employer the government/taxpayer, because it’s First Amendment free speech? That should be a rhetorical question, right Professor Turley?
There is a huge difference between governments of any level charging and punishing with legal actions, and consequences leveled by your employer due to the nature and type of your actions.
Just as there is a difference between firing somebody just because they were seen at a Trump rally, and firing a teacher who went online to celebrate and cheer Mr. Kirk’s murder.
Context and nuance is very important in the logic that is employed in honest debate, Professor Turley; I would think you should know that by now.
And like the Constitution, the First Amendment is not a suicide pact, where anything that can have the label “free speech” attached to it must be protected from any resulting consequences whatsoever.
Prof. Turley – I am overall more absolutist on Free Speech than you are
But you do not seem to get that Rights are protections from government.
Government protects us from FORCE, and fraud, as well as adjudicating disputes.
Everything else is FREEDOM.
The left is correct that bad speech has consequences – Just NOT consequences from government.
You seem to waffle in that you appear to allow the firing of people who incite violence.
But most things are on a spectrum which is precisely why we keep government away from them as government is force and force is binary.
Some posters who reveled in Charlies assassination may be being fired – because of poor performance – but their Assassination remarks provide an easy out to get rid of an unproductive employee.
That is one example – there possibilities are infinite. And some of those possibilities as you note are wrong and unfair.
But you can not have freedom to any meaningful degree and strive for perfect fairness.
It is extremely rare that people are fired for ONE and only ONE reason. It is also extremely rare that productive employees are fired no matter how egregious their other behavior.
You do not seem to grasp how the market place of ideas actually works.
All of us are JUDGED constantly for what we say. And that is how it should be.
Regardless it is Wrong and unworkable to apply the standards and constraints that apply to government to private interactions.
Budweiser featured Dillan Mulvaney on a beer can and consumers chose to boycott destroying 1/4 of the value of Anheiser Busch.
Was that a violation of AHB’s free speech ? Was that Boycott a violation of Dillan Mulvaney’s civil rights ?
The answer is NO!
Each of us is free to “punish” speech that we do not like for good or bad reasons – with our judgement only subject to the same judgement of us by others. That is what FREEDOM means.
That is true so long as Government is not taking sides. So long as the use of force is prohibited.
Trump is using civil rights law and government funding to end DEI in colleges accross the country.
While he is correctly following the law – the RIGHT answer is to end all govenrment funding to education.
Then colleges (and primary schools) can make their own choices regarding programs and are subject to the discipline of market forces in those choices.
You say that people should not be fired for the views they express, but that is wrong. Not only can they be fired for the views they express, they can be hired for the views they express.
AHB decided to express in a small way a view on the Trans issue and its consumers made it clear they did NOT want that with their beer. Almost certainly some were virulently anti-trans, some just did not want their beer to come with political expression on sexuality. At the same time the very same people could respond favorably to american flags on their beer or hunky body builders.
My point being you just can not make rules for what speech can be punished by a free market and what can not.
The people who are being fired over their posts supporting the Kirk assassination – will get jobs.
Some will modify their views, others will find employers that share those views or that do not care.
Regardless there is no right to a job.
You value open debate – but do not seem to grasp that at the end of a debate the views of the debaters are weighed and decisions are made.
Various people – mostly academics expressed support for Kirks assassination – they got the opportunity for debate.
and the decision of their employers was to disentangle themselves with these people. Or to use their speech as a pretext to get rid of an otherwise undesirable employee. We can not know the real reasons they were fired, only the public reasons.
Regardless, this is a small part of how free and open debate works – how it MUST work.
You can not possibly think that we must have open debate but that we are not ever allowed to draw conclusions.
Government is their to prevent the use of Force as in the attack on Charlie Hebedo. Not to as they did in the aftermath in Europe supress the same speech using the FORCE of government.
Free speech is messy – people will get their feelings hurt. People good and bad will lose their jobs.
Peoples speech will legitimately and illegitimately result in consequences.
Overall, speech that is judged good will be rewarded – not in every instance, freedom does not get it perfect it just does a better job than anything else we have ever found.
If god forbid those who celebrated Kirks assassination are overall judged positively for their speech – fired or not – they will be rewarded. But if as most of us – including you think is likely – the impact of their speech on them is negative – that is a reflection of the results of free and open debate.
When Kirk says “Prove me wrong” – he is saying – You get to speak, and I get to speak, and then the world gets to judge.
The firings of those celebrating the Kirk assassination are not violations of free speech, they ARE free speech.
They are those colleges and employers saying – this speech does not reflect our values.
While I tend to agree with what Professor Turley said about the firings, I would like to see him join the comments section and respond to John Say and other commenter criticisms of what he said in his column. Professor Turley’s participation in the comments section would greatly improve the quality and civility of his blog. — Concerned Citizen
Concerned Citizen
It would be nice if some folks would STOP posting as Anonymous.
Absolutely although most times is not hard to separate the everyday Anonymous to the paid trolls Anonymous
John Say is beginning to sound like our resident know-it-all Georgie.
You do not come on the blog of world-renowned and respected lawyer, author and educator and make comments like “Turley is being dishonest and disingenuous,” (georgie) or (as John Say says to Turley) “You do not seem to grasp how the market place of ideas actually works.”
I think Turley is quite capable of grasping a lot more than John Say does, particularly based on some of John Say’s sermons.
Go ahead and tell us your opinion, John. But do it without putting down the opinion or knowledge of YOUR HOST. There is a respectful way of disagreeing with someone of higher stature than you.
How dare you. Both of you.
John Say is the Oracle of Delphi.
He is the source of divine truth
Are you not aware of John’s infallibility.
He is always right on all things.
He knows everything there is to know about all things .
There is absolutely nothing that John does not know.
That is a fair criticism, but I find their points valid at the same time. The “anonymous” comments are kind of foolish.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that Tyler Robinson is a Groyper, a follower of Nick Fuentes, the ultra right wing extremist who has been feuding with Charlie Kirk for years.
Fuentes has accused Kirk of being insufficiently conservative, and even a covert leftist.
His Groyper army regularly attended Kirk’s events with the purpose of disrupting and discrediting him. They have co-opted the song O Bella Ciao as a meme and often chant it at Kirk events to try to drown him out. O Bella Ciao was inscribed on one of the Robinson bullet casings.
All of the other engravings on the bullet casings track back to memes that have been co-opted by the Groypers as part of their feud with Kirk.
There is an image of Robinson dressed as a Pepe the Frog meme used by Groypers.
https://bylinetimes.com/2025/09/13/deadly-memes-tyler-robinsons-far-right-groyper-ties/
Here is a more detailed explanation of the connection between Robinson and the Groypers.
https://x.com/BreakingNews4X/status/1966905427494580264
Yup, just another lying sack of you know what. How many right wingers date trans people? How many right wingers write antifa slogans on bullets? How many right wingers hate conservatives to the point of wanting to kill them?
I am so sick of the stupidity of the far left on this site and on shows like the View and in media like the Guardian and Salon. It is just so stupid.
None of the bullet engravings have been associated with antifa.
That is a MAGA falsehood.
ALL of the engravings can be found as memes in the dark online world of the Groyper Army.
Your blathering is a textbook example of the effectiveness of leftist propaganda. Regardless of how preposterous the nature of the claim is, you plow head-first into your own manufactured reality. The left owns the current violence and destruction in America, and the evidence is overwhelming. You’re as ridiculous as Biden and his “CornPop” adventures.
Methinks you are this imaginary groyper. This murderer was a homosexual leftist with a trans boyfriend. You cant change those facts groyper.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that Tyler Robinson is a Groyper, a follower of Nick Fuentes, the ultra right wing extremist who has been feuding with Charlie Kirk for years.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that the violent Biden/Antifa “anti-fascist” wing of the Democrat party are being increasingly desperate in their attempts to separate themselves from the murderer of Mr. Kirk who took the time to engrave Biden/Antifa hate speech and rhetoric on his rifle’s cartridges.
Where’s your links showing Fuentes identified with and supported the Biden/Antifa “anti-fascist” ideology seen on those rounds? Or just Antifa or Biden?
Where’s your links showing Fuentes identifying with the Democrats’ Tranny Revolution?
Pretty sophomoric, cupcake.
LMAO
Fuentes and the Groyper’s are virulently anti-trans.
Robinson is in a relationship with a Trans person – he is NOT a Groyper nor would he be accepted by Groypers.
More and more is comping out – While Robinson clearly lived in a world that was mostly conservative he is uniformly described as shifting to the far left starting in his sophmore year in HS.
This is the judgement of his freinds, classmates, family and community.
While those people express shock that Tyler resorted to violence, his left wing nut views and his hatred of Kirk are not secret.
There is ZERO evidence that he is some kind of Crypto Groyper
Utah governor Cox stated to the WSJ that Robinson was indoctrinated into leftist ideology. He did in fact have a trans boyfriend. Interviews with friends stated he was deeply leftist despite his strong Republican family.
You are losing the narrative
If you and the left actually beleive this crypto gropyer nonsense – then you should NOT be celebrating Kirks assassination on Social Media.
You should be joining everyone else and condemn the murder as well as those celbrating Kirks murder – regardless of ideology.
Ultimately I still think Robinson is nuts, likely paranoid Schitz.
Excellent links. Thank you very much. I am more confused than I was, almost ready to accept the headlines indicating that the motive is unclear. But my mind can’t make the leap from a man with a transgender roommate (lover?) and a follower of Nick Fuentes being the same person.
Your fabricated nonsense is so childish. Hullbobby has you pegged for the stupidity you project.
In Toronto a teacher showed the murder to a group of 5th and 6th grade school children. DOes anyone think that this idiot should not be fired?
This is step 2 in showing Americans (and Canadians) what teachers are all about these days. Step 1 was the covid lockdowns that were forced upon blue cities and states by the poisonous teacher’s unions. During the lockdowns we got to see teachers in their natural habitat through Zoom classes and we got to see their arrogance by demanding to stay out of work longer than any other group in the country. These same jerks DEMANDED to stay home as they then went out to shop at the grocery stores filled with lower paid workers as well as then marching for BLM in mass protests that included 1000s of SCREAMING people all bunched together. Now in step 2 we see the ugliness, the pettiness and the complete ignorance of this cohort of morons that hate Charlie Kirk for things he never said or believed.
Actually this may be step 3 because due to Zoom classes and parents paying more attention we saw the radical Drag Reading Hours and the extreme support for all things trans including hiding gender information from parents regarding THEIR OWN CHILDREN.
The teachers are radical leftists and it needs to be made more well known. They decided to go after education in the 60s and 70s and they have succeeded. When you have the radical supporter of the Weathermen, a terror group that BOMBED sites in America being a leading light in the education system you know we lost. Ladies and Gentlemen I give you Bill Ayers, radical Weatherman and Obama supporter.
Unions are illegal criminal organizations that commit breach of contract, trespass, harassment, incitement to riot, denial of constitutional rights, vandalism, property damage, bodily injury, mayhem, etc. as their sole and only bargaining points.
No union contract may be entered into by any level of government—that act causes government to be complicit as an accomplice.
Just all more the reasons why Alberta, Saskatchewan, and maybe Manitoba separate from the former country known as Canada. Besides this one.
“Canada’s BREAKING POINT!: The HIDDEN Crisis No One is Telling You!” – PJ the Belt (YouTube)
I also respectfully disagree, specifically where educators are involved. This is not canceling, it is holding adults responsible for their actions. Charlie was about free speech and accountability. Those professors are demonstrating that they can not be neutral in a classroom and thus forfeit the chance to influence the students at their schools. They are quite free to seek employment where they do not possess that kind of influence. We have too many examples of teachers using their position of power to punish students with whom they disagree, whether it is through grading or public humiliation. It is because of the imbalance of power that their own actions require accountability. We are not asking them to be imprisoned or cast out of society. They can continue to advocate for their views, regardless of how we might disagree with them. That is free speech. We just do not want them in a position of control of young people who might not have a choice to sit their classroom. They can set up a table outside, just like Charlie, and engage all they want.
Standing with Charlie Kirk on ‘free speech,’ I want to reiterate that ever since the illegal (FFDCA) FDA approval of the expanded use of added artificially cultured “free” (can cross the blood-brain barrier) MSG, in 1980, a number of chronic physical and mental health conditions have presented and escalated, including mass/school shootings (https://k12ssdb.org/), as the consumption of added MSG has increased. While statistics may not be proof of cause and effect, as a more investigative, objective and dedicated politically independent observer, I find that along with physical illnesses, the ‘rage’ in general (more so among younger adult US males) has increased along with mass/school shootings, specifically; res ipsa loquitur. Permanently ban added MSG (minimally) for better mental health. “Prove me wrong.” Charles G. Shaver/anonymous.
After the unspeakable violent attack by an extremist.
It was a premeditated murder; not a “violent attack”.Just another generic “extremist” – one who took the time to self-identify with the Biden/Antifa “anti-fascist” movement by engraving their messaging on his rifle cases.
Professor Turley: would you be just as equally carefully generic in your description if it were a murder of a Democrat voice like Rachael Maddow, and the word “MAGA” was engraved on the ammunition instead?
In all fairness I think we are missing the real concern here. Any teacher who praised the execution of Charlie Kirk on a college campus is a danger to students because that bullet was shot at head level across a crowd of students. THIS is the justification for firing them.
Good point Anon, I also thought about that when it happened. He could very well have killed someone in the crowd that otherwise was in agreement with his political views. Like terrorists who consider that justified all in the name of their cause. Some have said Robinson was an expert shot. I would beg to differ. He may have had practice, but there’s a wide space between practice-qualified to use a rifle, and being an expert shot with it. And I would think very few experts would hobble around town with a rifle stuck down their pants on the way to commit the crime…
——————————
–Oddball
“Take it easy Big Joe, some of these people got sensitive feelings.”
. I’d get outta here even for a few years. Rosie went back to her roots. Then it’s invaded.
Beat wishes
If anybody wants to stand with Charlie… and the rest of us… don’t threaten or harm a liberal. That’s exactly what they are hoping for. The NYT and WAPO articles are already written, and they’re just hoping to fill in the blanks with the names of some right-wing extremists.
We’re winning, so the Blue Wall needs a fresh coat of lies. Don’t help them by threatening violence. Leave it to LEO.
If you’re a loudmouthed lefty who openly danced on Charlie’s grave and somebody posted a threat against you, fine, report the guy to his employer and law enforcement, but don’t expect our outrage to go away. You’re still getting fired.
This about a NJ nurse being fired for blowing the whistle on an alleged loudmouth:
https://nypost.com/2025/09/13/us-news/nj-nurse-suspended-without-pay-for-calling-out-doctor-who-cheered-charlie-kirks-death-lawsuit/
. . . don’t threaten or harm a liberal.
It depends what you’re threatening or what kind of harm you are talking about. In terms of physical threats or physical harm, I totally agree. Not just the right, but any decent human being should avoid that. With certain well defined exceptions such as self defense, physical threats and physical harm have no rightful place in a civilization that wants to remain a civilization.
But threatening and harming can have different meanings besides physical. In terms of threatening not to shop at their stores if they make clear that they’re celebrating the murder of an innocent man, that’s a different story. In terms of harm to their careers by exposing their inhumanity, I think people who display who they really are in a non-private way deserve to be exposed. They’re already putting it out there for the world to see, so bringing that to the boss’s attention or the corporation’s attention is acceptable, IMHO.
I agree, Kansas. I meant physically threaten. Thanks for the clarification.
How to “Stand with Charlie”? All the conspiracy types on your blog think that means promoting all sorts of bizarre theories that Tyler Robinson, the young man charged with killing Charlie Kirk, is the product of, in DJT’s words, “radical left political violence”. Fox News is even promoting the wild theory that “Charlie Kirk’s alleged assassin lived with trans gender partner…”. Blaming trans genders for Kirk’s death!
DJT is standing with Charlie by flying the flags at half staff–a courtesy he did not extend to Minnesota Dem rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband who were murdered in June by another white right-wing zealot. DJT didn’t bother to call Gov. Walz to offer his condolences. DJT considered that a “waste of time”.
When the dust settles we will probably find out that Tyler Robinson was a typical white young Utah,man, raised by a MAGA Mormon family who voted for DJT and trained their son in the use of lethal weapons. That is a toxic combination. Utah Gov. Cox had to admit that Robinson did not come from out of state, he is “one of us”. Robinson was not imbued with “left-wing ideology”. It may turn out Robinson was motivated by some personal grudge against Charlie Kirk. Stay tuned because the truth will eventually come out,
LOL
1. I don’t recall seeing ANY reporting-by ANYone- “blaming trans genders for Kirk’s death!” What I did see was simply an attempt to correct MEDIA’s originally-selective and intentional suppression of any ties he had with the transgender community. Would you care to expound?
2. While MEDIA continues to identify an instance of “white conservative Republican kills Minnesota Democrat legislators,” the TRUTH is that Minnesota killer Vance Boelter had recently been non-party/unaffiliated; he was appointed by Democratic governor(s); and he had anti-Trump “NO KING” literature/posters in his car that he intended to distribute.
3. It is widely reported that Tyler Robinson was NOT in sync with his Republican upbringing, was NOT affiliated with any particular political party, –and it was his own family that was instrumental in his identification and arrest.
4. Speaking for myself, I believe most of us would not fail to assist or help a fellow human in need during a crisis, irrespective of his/her political ideology. Even though you speak many untruths in your comment, I dismiss them as opinion and would help you if you were in critical need of some sort.
“DJT is standing with Charlie by flying the flags at half staff–a courtesy he did not extend to Minnesota Dem rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband who were murdered in June by another white right-wing zealot. ”
Still lyin’ Like A Proud Biden! The man charged in that killing is the “white right-wing zealot” who was so right wing that the war veteran Command Sergeant Major, Governor “Tampon Tim” Walz picked him to appoint to one of his governor’s boards. Who knew – Tim Walz is a Republican lover who hasn’t come out of the closet yet!
Now… is this the point where you cosplay as a tranny seagull? Now that you’ve landed, dropped your load of shyte, you swiftly fly out of sight leaving nothing behind except what might be the best of you?
Ano
June by another white right-wing zealot
____________________________
Wrong, that killer was picked by the governor Timmy W.
nice lie
Whether you love him, hate him, or are utterly indifferent, Charlie Kirk was a figure on the national stage, and had been an advisor to President Trump. Mark and Melissa Hortman deserved the U.S. and state flags flown at half mast at St. Paul, but, as state-level officials only, not in D.C.
You really are sick. It’s been quite factually noted that the murderer broke with family , god etc and was a fully indoctrinated leftist homosexual. This individual killed for antifa ideology…he is a corrupted soulless POS. Fact.
” Fox News is even promoting the wild theory that “Charlie Kirk’s alleged assassin lived with trans gender partner…”.”
This has been confirmed and the partner in question is cooperating with the authorities.
Honestly, in it’s simplest form – your comment is willful ignorance.
Are there liberal politicians who are hated by the right?
Those that lie. Elizabeth Warren. Newsom. Those who don’t protect their constituents. Pritzinger, Wu, et al.
I agree that most of these hateful comments are protected speech. I disagree with calling it “speaking out against Charlie.” Mocking someone’s death is not speaking out against Charlie. It is a sign of mental instability and low IQ as well as moral bankruptcy. Further, I believe that medical professionals and teachers have a different standard to meet. A patient should be able to trust his doctor or nurse. How do you trust someone who wants you dead? A teacher has students’ future in his or her hands. An open bias like this is very concerning.
See my link above. Touches on your comment.
Absolutely.