Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why his supporters aren't happy that he died. He died by his own ideas and wishes. So many congratulations to Kirk and his followers.

This other angle is that Charlie played a dangerous game. Someone funded him and his organization. Whoever that person (or people are) gets to hide in the background, gets to live.

I'm not defending CK at all. Terrible person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Over and over again, the motive points to Israel

He stepped out of line with Israel.

Bigot much?
I can't see how jumping to "maybe the jews did it" this early with such little information is anything but bigoted.

He himself said he feared Israel might kill him. So this isn't about me or "bigotry." Try to keep up and pay better attention.

Most of the world is against Israel right now. This guy's single voice isn't worth a mossad operation. The Epstein angle on the other hand....

I really don’t understand the Epstein angle. It makes you guys sound crazy.

Then your being willfully ignorant that the most powerful man in the entire world is under threat of being canceled due to his friendship with a known pedophile.

But Charlie Kirk wouldn’t be the one to kill. Who was he? I don’t even know. That is how influential Charlie Kirk was. Sorry but he wasn’t important enough to assassinate.

Yes he is because he was the one who brought up the topic, when he called for the release of all government files related to Jeffrey Epstein.

But who was listening to him other than radical right wing white young white males? Who else knew of his existence really?

I was aware of Kirk and his hate machine, but I didn't follow him on SM, etc. I think there are a number of Dems who were similar to me - knew about Kirk, TPUSA, etc, but didn't track him on a daily basis unless that was part of their work brief.

I had never heard of him but my teens definitely had. They texted me immediately upon the news and I was like “who?” I was surprised because they are not consumers of right wing media but they said he has a big present on progressive feeds as well, because progressives are often dunking on him, making fun of how bad his arguments are, etc.
I’m very sorry this man was killed by some crazy person and wish that crazy people in this country did not have access to such guns. But I don’t see why we are treating him like an American hero.

Pretty much the same with my kid. Sadly, his friends were also amused. I think for kids, it’s entertainment. It’s like watching a basketball game where the cocky, trash talking point guard with a weak jumpshot gets posterized on a dunk after chirping all game. It ends up all over SM, and the kids laugh about it.

All I can do is explain why that’s wrong, and why they should 100% not watch the assassination video. However, the reality is they had no respect for CK. They all knew him but there was little respect. Just being honest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, a handsome really smart clean-cut kid.

Now THAT's sad. Why would he throw away his life for this...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My parents are who I go to for opinions of the non-perpetually online and here is my mother’s take, which I think was spot on:

“All the news was talking about was this guy that was killed yesterday, like the whole time. Who is this guy anyway? Kids are being killed every day, let’s care about that, not some stupid YouTube guy. I don’t know what’s going on with NBC, I’m going to stop watching if this is what the coverage is like.”

Essentially my mother honed in on how the media is desperately flailing to make people care about Charlie Kirk more than the dozens of children dying every day due to gun violence.

The way the GOP is carrying on you would think the Almighty himself was the one who passed.

I don’t know why people that called themselves Christian idolized some men so much. Isn’t idolatry against the scripture?

Calling yourself Christian is the easiest way to fleece the dumbest Americans.

He wasn't even a real Christian, he was a "Judeo-Christian" i.e. nothing but a pro Israeli Zionist warmongering mouthpiece. Kid didn't even go to college, they prop these people up to brainwash Americans. Without Zionist money this guy would have been, what, working at a cell phone store in the Midwest?

He mocked and cyber-bullied poor Americans losing their health insurance and poor Americans in trapped in crippling student loan debt (usury). He told his right wing rube audience to avoid going to college, in other words, give up and hand over all the political power and best jobs to... foreigners? He got filthy rich off the suffering of others. He was a prostitute for the oligarchy, Zionists, and the defense industry. This guy didn't empower conservative Americans, he was totally subversive to their interests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think many of you leftists have no idea why Kirk's assassination has turned into such a big deal.

Kirk was doing it "the right way" according to the left. Disagree politely, listen, give the other side space.

And he was killed because leftists didn't like what he had to say (as this thread amply shows) and they didn't want him to keep saying it.

Lots and lots of the "Democrat base" are celebrating and cheering the deliberate murder of someone who had the guts to publicly disagree with the left. "Debate this!" I see the signs being posted on college campuses, with a drawing of Kirk bleeding out from his neck.

So.

What value is there is "peace" and "restraint" when leftists murdered the most prominent guy on the right who was all about peace and restraint? And celebrate his death?

If you leftists are so glad to see Kirk killed... well, there's no possibility of peace, is there. He WAS the "peaceful solution". And leftists murdered him for it. Or at least are very happy about it.

If Kirk is not acceptable to the left.... we all know you guys would GLADLY kill the rest of us, too.

Kirk was a sort of "ambassador" to the left... and he was murdered because of it. What happens when an ambassador is killed? That's a casus belli and has been since Ghengis Khan, at the very least.

I don’t appreciate the broad generalization happening here. First off, this person probably worked alone, 75 million people and or anyone official is involved here. I have no control over what others say or do. And I think “lots” is an exaggeration. The celebrators are a minority amongst a large group of people.

It's been less than 24 hours since he was killed, and I've already seen coworkers, people just out in public - and certainly a lot of people on this very board, openly cheering that he was killed.

I think you're wrong in thinking that this is a 'small' segment of people on the left. I wasn't even looking, and saw dozens of examples of it, less than a day after he was killed.

I didn't agree with much of anything Charlie Kirk said. But first and foremost, he was a human being, with a wife and two young kids that will now grow up without a father. I'm deeply disappointed and kind of shocked by my own political party at the moment. There's some sickening stuff being said on reddit/bluesky/twitter, and it's not even been a day.

If you have receipts, then post them.

The party of free speech has assembled a website doxxing people online who have criticized Kirk calling it “Charlie’s Murderers.” Real normal behavior there.

Here’s a little taste. He should be remembered as he was, not as people wanted him to be.


https://cloakinginequity.com/2025/09/12/from-watchlists-to-cruelty-the-true-legacy-charlie-kirk-left-behind/

https://www.thenation.com/article/society/charlie-kirk-assassination-tragedy/

[Anonymous]

Calling for the death penalty immediately is frustrating.

The death penalty requires certain aggravating factors that must be legally established. We have seen cases where a prosecutor over charges and wastes time on aggravating factors they cannot prove which undermines the entire case (Casey Anthony is a classic example of this).

Jumping to the death penalty can undermine your entire case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, a handsome really smart clean-cut kid.

So all those posts about some trans person named Skye were right wing lies?

Tbf, she did compose a song about killing Kirk, or something similar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Over and over again, the motive points to Israel

He stepped out of line with Israel.

Bigot much?
I can't see how jumping to "maybe the jews did it" this early with such little information is anything but bigoted.

He himself said he feared Israel might kill him. So this isn't about me or "bigotry." Try to keep up and pay better attention.

Most of the world is against Israel right now. This guy's single voice isn't worth a mossad operation. The Epstein angle on the other hand....

I really don’t understand the Epstein angle. It makes you guys sound crazy.

Then your being willfully ignorant that the most powerful man in the entire world is under threat of being canceled due to his friendship with a known pedophile.

But Charlie Kirk wouldn’t be the one to kill. Who was he? I don’t even know. That is how influential Charlie Kirk was. Sorry but he wasn’t important enough to assassinate.

Yes he is because he was the one who brought up the topic, when he called for the release of all government files related to Jeffrey Epstein.

But who was listening to him other than radical right wing white young white males? Who else knew of his existence really?

I was aware of Kirk and his hate machine, but I didn't follow him on SM, etc. I think there are a number of Dems who were similar to me - knew about Kirk, TPUSA, etc, but didn't track him on a daily basis unless that was part of their work brief.

This describes me, too. I don’t think I heard his name until he paid for so many buses to send people to the Capitol riot. I watched the South Park episode about him but I didn’t realize it was him until my daughter told me.

I'd love to know where all the money came from for those buses and for paying Charlie and paying for his podcast production. Someone paid his fake-o organization the big bucks to spread hate.

It’s a youth movement, funded by small young donors like 82-year-old billionaire Richard Kurtz ($250k donation).

https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/detail/2022?cmte=Turning+Point+USA&tab=donors_all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[img]

Anonymous wrote:To all the people who say that no one knew this guy and that their well-informed kids didn't know him... sorry, but your kids are not well-informed.

I am 50-year-old mom and I get that, if you don't ever look at social media you may not have heard of him, but if you have teens you absolutely should have.

Charlie Kirk was uber famous. There are memes about the memes about him.

I am looking forward to when the 48-hours expire and we can discuss some of his views here. I wholeheartedly respect DCUM's rules and I condemn in the strongest possible terms what happened to Charlie Kirk. No one asks or deserves to me murdered. Political violence is horrible for all of us. But Charlie Kirk was a very famous public figure and there is no contradiction between denouncing the assassination and critiquing his views.

I’ve never heard of him nor have my tweens. We aren’t big into SM though. Is Kirk kinda like Mr. Beast? I have heard of Mr. Beast? Is that his name? He had his own brand of lunchables.

If you had an 18 year old boy he would have heard of him. My college freshman said the killing was all his team talked about at practice yesterday. The team is a mix of conservative and liberal kids and opinions on Kirk ranged from adoration to disgust. He said they had a respectful discussion, which gave me great hope.

I'm struggling with adoration of hate and why people who were the targets of Kirk's hate need to be respectful.

What people or individuals were targeted of “Kirk’s hate”? When did he said he hated person XYZ or a group of people abc?

Or did he said he hates crime? Or murderers? Or hates the lack of morals out there?

What did he say he hated exactly? A thing? A concept? A proper noun person? A group of benign people? A country?

He said he wouldn’t feel comfortable with a Black pilot, no? Kind of hate adjacent.

Let’s put this in context….
Kirk’s comments were part of a broader critique of DEI. He was pointing out that when the emphasis on hiring is all about skin color and gender, then merit takes a back seat. Example: United Airlines goal to have 40% of its pilots be women or people of color which would relax the standards of hiring.
This is certainly a legitimate point about the potential effect of diversity initiatives on hiring standards.
When the focus is on skin color and gender, how can the public be certain that qualifications for pilots have not been compromised?

[Anonymous]

He is from a rural area in Utah, Washington is in the area near the four corners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know why his supporters aren't happy that he died. He died by his own ideas and wishes. So many congratulations to Kirk and his followers.

This other angle is that Charlie played a dangerous game. Someone funded him and his organization. Whoever that person (or people are) gets to hide in the background, gets to live.

I'm not defending CK at all. Terrible person.

Charlie had his own security detail of, what, 10 guys? He knew he was dancing on a razor's edge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, a handsome really smart clean-cut kid.

Look how fast they pivoted from trans to autistic. These RWNJs are something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think many of you leftists have no idea why Kirk's assassination has turned into such a big deal.

Kirk was doing it "the right way" according to the left. Disagree politely, listen, give the other side space.

And he was killed because leftists didn't like what he had to say (as this thread amply shows) and they didn't want him to keep saying it.

Lots and lots of the "Democrat base" are celebrating and cheering the deliberate murder of someone who had the guts to publicly disagree with the left. "Debate this!" I see the signs being posted on college campuses, with a drawing of Kirk bleeding out from his neck.

So.

What value is there is "peace" and "restraint" when leftists murdered the most prominent guy on the right who was all about peace and restraint? And celebrate his death?

If you leftists are so glad to see Kirk killed... well, there's no possibility of peace, is there. He WAS the "peaceful solution". And leftists murdered him for it. Or at least are very happy about it.

If Kirk is not acceptable to the left.... we all know you guys would GLADLY kill the rest of us, too.

Kirk was a sort of "ambassador" to the left... and he was murdered because of it. What happens when an ambassador is killed? That's a casus belli and has been since Ghengis Khan, at the very least.

I don’t appreciate the broad generalization happening here. First off, this person probably worked alone, 75 million people and or anyone official is involved here. I have no control over what others say or do. And I think “lots” is an exaggeration. The celebrators are a minority amongst a large group of people.

It's been less than 24 hours since he was killed, and I've already seen coworkers, people just out in public - and certainly a lot of people on this very board, openly cheering that he was killed.

I think you're wrong in thinking that this is a 'small' segment of people on the left. I wasn't even looking, and saw dozens of examples of it, less than a day after he was killed.

I didn't agree with much of anything Charlie Kirk said. But first and foremost, he was a human being, with a wife and two young kids that will now grow up without a father. I'm deeply disappointed and kind of shocked by my own political party at the moment. There's some sickening stuff being said on reddit/bluesky/twitter, and it's not even been a day.

If you have receipts, then post them.

The party of free speech has assembled a website doxxing people online who have criticized Kirk calling it “Charlie’s Murderers.” Real normal behavior there.

Are you saying that site is officially sponsored by the Republican Party? If so, can you please provide proof of this?

Also, while the name of the site is hyperbolic (obviously to get clicks), it would appear to be a collection of postings that is no different than any other site (regardless of political alignment) that assembles outrageous statements to amplify and call attention to them. Isn't this what politicians and political activists do every day? That would seem to be "normal" behavior (aside from the site name itself). The disgusting postings it collects seem to be abnormal behavior.

By the way, "Free Speech" only relates to the right of the government to restrict your speech. Even in that context, while you are free to say what you want, you are not free from the consequences of such speech by the broader society in general.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[img]

Anonymous wrote:To all the people who say that no one knew this guy and that their well-informed kids didn't know him... sorry, but your kids are not well-informed.

I am 50-year-old mom and I get that, if you don't ever look at social media you may not have heard of him, but if you have teens you absolutely should have.

Charlie Kirk was uber famous. There are memes about the memes about him.

I am looking forward to when the 48-hours expire and we can discuss some of his views here. I wholeheartedly respect DCUM's rules and I condemn in the strongest possible terms what happened to Charlie Kirk. No one asks or deserves to me murdered. Political violence is horrible for all of us. But Charlie Kirk was a very famous public figure and there is no contradiction between denouncing the assassination and critiquing his views.

I’ve never heard of him nor have my tweens. We aren’t big into SM though. Is Kirk kinda like Mr. Beast? I have heard of Mr. Beast? Is that his name? He had his own brand of lunchables.

If you had an 18 year old boy he would have heard of him. My college freshman said the killing was all his team talked about at practice yesterday. The team is a mix of conservative and liberal kids and opinions on Kirk ranged from adoration to disgust. He said they had a respectful discussion, which gave me great hope.

I'm struggling with adoration of hate and why people who were the targets of Kirk's hate need to be respectful.

What people or individuals were targeted of “Kirk’s hate”? When did he said he hated person XYZ or a group of people abc?

Or did he said he hates crime? Or murderers? Or hates the lack of morals out there?

What did he say he hated exactly? A thing? A concept? A proper noun person? A group of benign people? A country?

He said he wouldn’t feel comfortable with a Black pilot, no? Kind of hate adjacent.

Let’s put this in context….
Kirk’s comments were part of a broader critique of DEI. He was pointing out that when the emphasis on hiring is all about skin color and gender, then merit takes a back seat. Example: United Airlines goal to have 40% of its pilots be women or people of color which would relax the standards of hiring.
This is certainly a legitimate point about the potential effect of diversity initiatives on hiring standards.
When the focus is on skin color and gender, how can the public be certain that qualifications for pilots have not been compromised?

Some would say the focus has *always* been on skin color...

[Anonymous]

Charlie K. was taking a salery from at least three nonprofits so making about a million a year
Turning Point US
Turning Point Action and the
Turning Point PAC.

Here's one of the three 990s which lists his salery. "other benifits" could be 401K, 457f and other deferred compensation. https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/800835023