Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has alerted civilian and military employees that the Pentagon is closely monitoring and will address any expressions of celebration or mockery regarding the assassination of Charlie Kirk. This response comes after the Pentagon’s spokesperson, Sean Parnell, deemed it unacceptable for military and civilian personnel to celebrate the killing, highlighting the department’s zero-tolerance policy. Navy Secretary John Phelan and the U.S. Coast Guard have also issued warnings, stating that any behavior bringing discredit to their respective departments will face swift repercussions, and an investigation is underway concerning inappropriate social media activity from a member.
Read More
In a controversial move, Johnson County, Iowa, Supervisor Jon Green defied the governor’s order to lower flags in honor of Charlie Kirk. Green stated he would not honor a man who, in his opinion, harmed marginalized groups and degraded the political landscape. Green defended his actions, referencing his oath to protect constituents and stating he would accept any consequences. Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds called Green’s decision “disgraceful,” while at least two other supervisors supported Green’s decision.
Read More
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has instructed his staff to identify and punish military personnel and Defense Department affiliates who have mocked or condoned the recent assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Several service members have already been relieved of their duties due to their social media posts, and the Pentagon has urged the public to report any similar content. The department has emphasized that it has zero tolerance for such behavior, while also noting that some posts flagged do not necessarily condone the murder. In response, FEMA has placed an employee on administrative leave for posts critical of Kirk.
Read More
The publication is dedicated to delivering factual journalism and holding power accountable, a mission supported by reader membership. Reader support has been crucial in building and sustaining the newsroom, especially during challenging periods. As the publication moves forward, they are seeking renewed membership to further strengthen their ability to provide impactful reporting. The article expresses gratitude to readers for their past support and encourages them to continue contributing to their mission.
Read More
Charlie Kirk didn’t shy away from who he was. We shouldn’t either. This statement feels like the core of the discussion. He lived his life, espousing a particular ideology, and making specific pronouncements. It’s crucial to understand that the reaction to his death isn’t solely about the individual, but about the legacy he left behind.
The conversation seems to suggest a reluctance to mourn someone who actively promoted views considered harmful. The core of this stance is that his words, often filled with hate and division, are what defined him. To mourn him without acknowledging those views is to sanitize his history, to rewrite the narrative in a way that diminishes the impact of his actions.… Continue reading
Okay, so the central question here, the one Senator Schatz seems to be sidestepping, is: “What f—ing difference does it make?” when it comes to the political leanings of the suspect in the shooting of Charlie Kirk. And honestly, it makes a world of difference. It’s not about some abstract concept of political correctness; it’s about acknowledging a very real and present danger.
The issue isn’t just the act itself. It’s the *context*. It’s the environment, the echo chamber, the constant barrage of inflammatory rhetoric. We have a segment of the population – let’s be frank, a segment of the right-wing – that is being whipped into a frenzy.… Continue reading
Charlie Kirk, after the 2016 election, created a Professor Watchlist to expose professors deemed “radical left.” Professor Matthew Boedy, who has been on the list, is now concerned about Kirk being portrayed as a martyr following his recent death. Boedy, who was planning a presentation about Kirk’s “Seven Mountains” strategy for Christian influence, now contemplates how to address the topic of martyrdom and the potential for increased division. He views the situation as a tragic national moment, referencing Kirk’s assassination on a college campus due to gun violence, echoing his past involvement with the group, Turning Point USA. Boedy fears that framing Kirk as a martyr could exacerbate existing societal divides and incite further conflict.
Read More
Following the arrest of 22-year-old Tyler Robinson in the shooting death of Charlie Kirk, President Trump released a video response. In the video, Trump attributed blame for Kirk’s murder to his political opponents and the media, rather than denouncing violence from all sides. Trump threatened to use the force of government against those he deems responsible for the killing, including organizations and individuals. Despite the lack of information about the suspect’s motives, Trump has already indicated that he will exploit the tragedy to target dissent and stoke further division.
Read More
Charlie Kirk’s allies warning Americans: Mourn him properly or else, is a sentiment bubbling up from those who aligned themselves with his ideologies, a demand for specific displays of grief and reverence following his death. This creates a complex social landscape where mourning becomes a politicized act, a potential battleground for ideological clashes.
The core issue revolves around the insistence on a prescribed form of mourning. The expectation is that everyone should honor him by echoing his words and perspectives. This demand for uniformity is immediately reminiscent of “cancel culture” in reverse. To enforce a specific way of mourning is to undermine genuine human emotion and to transform grief into a tool of control.… Continue reading
In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, a subtle debate has emerged about how to remember his life, recognizing his commitment to free discourse while also acknowledging his role in promoting extremism. Some emphasize his engagement in democratic deliberation, while others highlight the damage he caused to the democratic process. The author argues that both perspectives are valid, emphasizing the need to condemn the killing without sanitizing Kirk’s actions or allowing allies to exploit his death to further degrade politics. The article stresses the importance of rejecting justification of violence and avoiding both a complete condemnation of Kirk and a whitewashing of his actions.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood