Secret Service Faces New Scrutiny After Agent Cheers Charlie Kirk’s Murder

 by Susan Crabtree

Sen. Marsha Blackburn sent a letter to Secret Service Director Sean Curran Thursday, demanding the immediate firing of a special agent who argued in a social media post that Charlie Kirk deserved to die.  

Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican, wrote the letter after RealClearPolitics reported that the agent, Anthony Pough, blamed “karma” for the killing of the founder of the conservative organization Turning Point USA, who was fatally shot at Utah Valley University Wednesday. 

The assassin remains at large, and the FBI is engaged in a desperate manhunt to apprehend the killer. Kirk, 31, was a prominent conservative influencer  close to President Trump, who credits Kirk and his organization for helping him make substantial inroads with young voters leading to his electoral victory last fall. 

Pough posted on Facebook: “if you are Mourning this guy .. [sic] delete me. He spewed hatred and racism on his show.” 

“Especially when we should be mourning the innocent children killed in Colorado,” Pough continued. “At the end of the day, you answer to GOD and speak things into existence. You can only circumvent karma, she doesn’t leave.”

Earlier this year, Pough, who is black, also posted several Facebook posts criticizing Trump for attempting to ban diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and initiatives through the federal government. 

“DEI stops NEPOTISM,” Pough argued in one Facebook post. “That’s the problem they have, [sic] That’s the root issue.”

In another post, Pough took issue with Trump’s firing of Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., who served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President Biden and refused to resign after Trump was inaugurated for his second term. It’s customary for presidents to choose new military advisers, especially when the president representing a different party is elected.  

Pough took issue with the firing on his Facebook account, using angry and cursing emojis. 

“So you fired him because you don’t know if he was a “DEI” hire,” Pough wrote. “You assumed because he is BLACK he had to be. He is the chairman of the JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF [sic] and obviously you can only attain such a high class position based on MERIT.” 

“This is RACISM,” he added. 

In the letter to Curran, Blackburn blasted the agency, which she argued is in dire need of reform, and called for immediate action for what she called “inexcusable” conduct. 

“Put simply, your employee celebrated and attempted to justify a political assassination,” she wrote. “This conduct is inexcusable, and I urge you in the strongest possible terms to immediately terminate his employment.”

By the time Blackburn had sent the letter, Curran had already placed Pough on administrative leave, a knowledgeable Secret Service source told RCP. Two sources also said the agency has plans to fire Pough but did not provide a timeline for when that would happen. 

Kirk’s murder has been denounced across the political spectrum with almost every prominent elected Democrat speaking out against the political violence. Within conservative circles – and especially within the Trump administration – these concerns have been heightened by a sense of personal tragedy for a young husband and father whom many called a close friend. Vice President JD Vance solemnly carried Kirk’s casket, along with other pallbearers, after Air Force 2, Vance’s official plane, transported Kirk’s body from Utah to Phoenix, Arizona, on Thursday.

The outspoken MAGA influencer, who was famous for debating college students, encouraged political debate with political adversaries and this year appeared on California Gov. Newsom’s podcast, has plenty of detractors, many of whom have not reacted with solemnity, and in some cases have even celebrated his death on social media. 

After conservative influencers pointed out that several military personnel and Department of War civilians had posted derogatory remarks on social media about Kirk after his death, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, a friend of Kirk’s, on Wednesday called such public comments “completely unacceptable.” 

“We are tracking all these very closely — and will address, immediately.” Hegseth posted on X.com. 

Rep. Clay Higgins, a Louisiana Republican, on Thursday said he would use his congressional authority to pressure social media organizations to enforce their own rules about advocating or condoning violence. 

“I’m going to use Congressional authority and every influence with big tech platforms to mandate [an] immediate ban for life of every post or commenter that belittled the assassination of Charlie Kirk,” Higgins wrote.

Many conservative commentators, including investigative journalist Michael Shellenberger, have pushed back against the notion pushed by some leftists that Kirk created the environment that killed him. 

“It’s a grotesque lie,” Shellenberger said in an X.post Thursday. “For 20+ years, Democrats dehumanized conservatives to the point that half the Left says Trump’s murder can be justified. Little wonder their condolences are falling on deaf ears.” 

Even before Blackburn issued her letter to Curran, which RCP first reported, the Secret Service said it wouldn’t tolerate one of its agents, whose job description is to protect political figures from assassination, endorsing Kirk’s killing.

“The U.S. Secret Service will not tolerate any behavior which violates our code of conduct,” a Secret Service spokesperson told RCP in a statement. “We are aware of the employee’s social media post from today, and the individual has been placed on administrative leave as we investigate the matter.” 

Before the Secret Service took action against the agent, his Facebook post about Kirk was circulating within the federal law enforcement community with some sources expressing concern that an agent, entrusted with protecting political figures and the U.S. continuity of government, would effectively celebrate an assassination of someone so close to Trump after the two assassination attempts last year against the now-president. 

“If that’s all it takes to set you off, that’s dangerous to have around,” one source in the Secret Service community told RCP. 

“I’m mostly concerned about the morals of a person sworn to protect the rights of others to engage in politics and exercise free speech, celebrating the death of someone exercising those same rights,” the source added. 

Pough, a relatively new agent, having graduated from training in 2022, is part of the agency’s Presidential Protective Division but is not on a detail regularly charged with protecting Trump. Yet, all agents, at times, could be called off their official duties to contribute to presidential coverage.

Blackburn, who was highly critical of Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle after the assassination attempt against Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, last year, asserted in her letter that the Secret Service has been an agency “full of political actors and in desperate need of reform.” 

She was one of several Republican senators who chastised Cheatle during the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee last year, after the former director refused to answer their questions about the agency’s failures in Butler. 

The Tennessee senator, who is running for governor, in her letter to Curran said those failures would “forever be a stain on the Secret Service.” The agent’s postings about Kirk, she argued, “makes clear that one year later bad actors must be rooted out of your agency.”

“President Trump and all Secret Service protectees deserve nothing less,” she said. 

“You noted in a statement earlier this year that you recognize ‘the importance of accountability’ at the Secret Service,” she added. “I implore you to abide by that statement and ensure that this employee never steps foot in Secret Service headquarters ever again.” 

For many in the agency, Pough’s posts were like déjà vu all over again. 

Just before Trump’s first election, in October 2016, Kerry O’Grady, a now-retired senior Secret Service agent suggested in a Facebook post just weeks before the 2016 election that she wouldn’t take a bullet for Trump. 

The Secret Service didn’t take any disciplinary action against O’Grady, who was serving as the boss of the Denver Field Office, for that social media post, even though it was well known throughout the agency she had written it with many agents deeply concerned about the leadership’s lack of response. 

After this reporter wrote a story about O’Grady’s post, the agency placed O’Grady on paid administrative leave for nearly two years to allow her to hit her retirement date. She left the agency in 2019 with full pension benefits.

Susan Crabtree is RealClearPolitics' national political correspondent.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2025/09/12/secret_service_faces_new_scrutiny_after_agent_cheers_charlie_kirks_murder__153280.html

Donald Trump Jr.: If You're Effective Against Swamp, Establishment, Globalist Elites Will Take You Out

 Donald Trump Jr. reflects on Charlie Kirk's life and discusses the current climate on political violence:

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: All right. Joining us now is Donald Trump Jr. is with us. First of all, Don, thanks for being here. Our deepest sympathies. I know how much, how close you were to Charlie, how much he loved you, your entire family, especially your father, you know, for a lot of people, having a very hard time comprehending or making sense of this, because it doesn't make sense. Your reaction to all of it, I know he was a dear friend of yours.

DONALD TRUMP JR., EVP, TRUMP ORGANIZATION: No, it doesn't make any sense, Sean. Charlie was such a great guy, kind, articulate, one of the sweetest people I know. He frankly, he gave so many of those who disagreed with him. He actually gave them his platform to debate. We wanted to have that conversation. He understood without that conversation, that violence would ensue, and so he did everything to prevent that. And because he did so, and he did so articulately and so effectively, they killed him. His threat wasn't that he was a threat or malicious, or anything it was that he was very effective, and they had to make sure that that didn't continue. They tried doing the same thing with my father. I've now had to have a conversation about a loved one almost being assassinated or actually being assassinated now three times with my five young children, and it's just not acceptable, Sean. It has to stop. It is absolutely disgusting.

When you think of the things that Charlie spoke about, he spoke about God, he spoke about American values, he spoke about family. He was very controversial, Sean, very controversial that he said men can't be women. He was about as reasonable as it possibly gets, and it didn't matter. They still killed him. So it has been a rough day.

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: It has been rough time. It's been rough for everybody. And what he was doing was actually magical, it was brilliant in so many different ways. He'd go into a hostile environment, a university campus, knowing there is a lot of leftwing indoctrination often going on, inviting everybody, all political points of view, prove me wrong. Let's have a discussion. And he'd do it with a smile on his face, and he was always in good cheer.

I never saw the guy unhappy. He was always upbeat, always open, didn't care about people disagreeing, wanted to have that dialogue, that debate. I would think a university should be a bastion of free speech and discussion and debate like that.

TRUMP JR.: A hundred percent. And he did that so well. And I think that's why he was able to shift and move the needle so much for the youth of America who for decades were indoctrinated since kindergarten with leftist ideology. So he went to those places. He understood we couldn't just scream in our echo chambers to people who already agreed with us. We actually had to get out there.

And you're not going to win over everyone, Sean, but I think if you look at what he did on college campuses, and God knows I was with him many times at those places, and there were times I questioned it, certainly early on and be like, wait a second, we're conservatives. We're not supposed to go to a college campus. And we did it, and you realize when he made those arguments and he did it in his calm demeanor, he was able to win over, maybe not the radicals that were there to scream at him, but the people who went in there with an open mind, the people went in there wanting to find out more.

Those people heard the arguments, and they realized very quickly that the ideas of the left weren't just bad ideas, they were absolutely ridiculous. And so I truly credit Charlie with changing the minds and the mindset of so many millions of Americans. Not just youth, I think he probably reached out across the aisle to many people, even if his target demographic was the younger generation that so may Republicans avoided for so long. He did that so well.

It's funny, I was thinking about it earlier, I think I was the reason he was on your show the first time ever back in 16. I think I was supposed to do your show, and something was late, so I was going to on set. And I called you, and said hey, Sean, I've got a great one for you. I'm sending over Charlie Kirk. And you were like, who is Charlie Kirk? And I'm like, trust me, it'll be great. and you are like, but tell me. And I was like, he is 21 -- I can't believe at 21-year-old on prime time. Just Sean, I'm not going to be there. Congratulations, I have a great guest for you.

HANNITY: That's twice in my life I'd have to say you are right. That is an inside joke.

There is a real -- there's a more serious issue at hand here. And that is what has gone on the last 10 years since your father and Melania came down the escalator at Trump Tower. The names that you and your family and your father have been called, the weaponization of our justice system. I brought this up with Eric last night, nobody seemed to care that a judge got away with a phony evaluation of Mar-a-Lago. Nobody seemed to care that a misdemeanor whose statute of limitations had run out about a legal NDA was turned into a novel 34 felony count. Nobody cared about the double standard raiding Mar-a-Lago, but not raiding Hillary Clinton's home or Joe Biden. He had four locations, top-secret classified information.

It really is troublesome to me that the left -- and add to that their incendiary, insane language, which I do believe has a dehumanizing effect. Maybe we're now numb to it because I play it every night and I play it every day on the radio. I don't know. But we have to examine, they have to be held accountable for this never-ending rage, and it is rage, it is madness. Trump derangement syndrome is real.

TRUMP JR.: And Sean, the violence only goes one way. It only goes one way. We have seen that now, whether it's the assassination attempts on my father's life, whether it's Charlie Kirk, whether it's the threatening of a Supreme Court justice or doxing ICE agents, that goes one way. It is entirely owned by the left.

So when I watch the radical left television right now, well, it's really the fault of both sides. No, it's not. It is not the fault of both sides. What was Charlie's fault? What were the things that he did there were so radical and so terrible? He talked about God, family, country, the Constitution is good, men can't be women. These are not radical ideas. But they are radical if they're effective against the agenda of the left. You saw that. Trump was effective against the agenda of the left, so you take him out.

But they don't talk about the softball shooting of Congress. You have Steve Scalise and the others. Again, violence against Republicans. They don't talk about -- I can't, frankly, name a mass shooting in the last year or two in America that wasn't committed by a transgender lunatic that has been pumped up on probably hormones since they were three years olds because they want to normalize that, and if you say something about it is verboten because we are supposed to trust the science even if it's not science and even if everyone understands it.

Those people are protected, they are hidden, they are beyond reproach. You will never see the manifesto. Now you are reading about trans paraphernalia written on the cartridges of this rifle that killed one of my dearest friends in life. It is absolute sickness.

And I think the one thing that Charlie perhaps did better than anyone is Charlie actually brought people together. He brought people together that didn't necessarily agree with him. They showed up at those events. They heard him. They saw the exuberance of all these other youth, and they said, you know what? This guy is right. There's nothing wrong with family or loving your country or loving America and being a patriot, believing in the Constitution.

And the fact that he was able to be that effective is exactly why they had to take him out. Just like my father was willing and is willing to take on the swamp, to take on the establishment, to take on the globalists and the world elite and do what is right for the hardworking men in America. You know what, you can say those things, but if you actually start doing it, if you are effective at doing it, we are going to take you out.

This is a constant theme. Charlie was one of the kindest and mildest souls I have ever seen. He did those things, he have those conversations with a smile on his face. Again, as I said earlier, he gave his biggest detractors, the people who hated him the most in the world, he literally gave them his platform on a daily basis to argue their ideas. And they couldn't do it effectively, so they had to kill him. And that's a sad, sad place to be as a country, as a civilization, and certainly in America.

HANNITY: Don, I know you are close to his family. Have you had the chance to speak with them?

TRUMP JR.: I called Erika yesterday, his wife. And when we heard he was at the hospital, he was perhaps stable, he was getting a lot of blood. She actually called us back, and for some reason we just saw the missed call but it didn't actually wring. By the time we noticed that and got back, we had heard the news. So I have not yet. Obviously, we are praying for them, we're thinking of them, we have sent them notes.

But the way to make sure that Charlie's legacy lives on is just to stay active, maintain the unafraid posture that he had and he showed so many and opened the door for so many people to actually speak their minds, who speak the truth, who speak to that power. If we all learn something from Charlie and continue to do that, there is a great future for America.

But if the other side gets what they want, which is to make us cower in fear and hide in silence and to shut up, that's not going to work. You see what's going on, the way they are continuing even today trying to vilify him on leftwing media and anyone that defends him.

HANNITY: Unreal.

TRUMP JR.: But we are in a sick place. We must be unafraid, Sean. We must continue to speak our minds. We must all be out there. It can't just be Charlie Kirk or you or me or my father. It has to be everyone. And if we band together and unite like we united so many people, so many people that were not conservative, that didn't even necessarily even believe in those things that weren't even political, but they saw that movement. They saw the energy, they saw the good. I think Charlie would be incredibly proud to see that legacy live on, and it will.

HANNITY: I think it will. And I think your message of pushing forward in spite of the risk. You have had white powder scent to you. I've had white powder sent to me. You've had threats against you and your family. You've watched your dad have two would-be assassins coming within one millimeter of losing his life. And after yesterday we know what difference one millimeter can make. But there is nobody that I know that believes in the MAGA movement, your father, what's right for the country, that loves our Constitution that is going to back down. But is this now just the new reality we have to accept? I have about 30 seconds.

TRUMP JR.: Unfortunately, I think it is, Sean. They have shown that if we try to be nice and placate them -- we actually have to stand up for ourselves. If we don't, they are more than happy to take us out. That doesn't mean violence. We can do that with words, we can do that with actions, we can do that with voting, we can do that with getting involved. But we must get involved. Apathy is what is going to destroy us. If they shame us into a corner and they fear us into silence, that's when they win. And if they win, that's a truly, truly dark and scary place for America. We can't allow that to happen, and Charlie never would have allowed us to do that.

HANNITY: Don, I truly am sorry. As a friend, a longtime friend, I know how close you were to him. I know how much he admired and looked up to you and your entire family and your dad. I know this is a tough day. Thanks for being with us and sharing your thoughts about it. We appreciate it.

TRUMP JR.: Thank you.

 https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2025/09/12/donald_trump_jr_what_was_so_radical_about_what_charlie_kirk_believed_in_he_talked_about_god_family_and_country.html

Trump's Crackdown On Prescription Drug Ads: What To Know

 by Lawrence Wilson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump has directed the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ramp up its efforts to ensure that advertising of prescription drugs directed to consumers is transparent and accurate.

President Donald Trump speaks to the media while signing executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House on Sept. 5, 2025. Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

That includes requiring drug makers to provide more information on the risks of using the drug, and stepping up enforcement of federal laws regulating these ads.

This action, ordered by a presidential memorandum on Sept. 9, could have far-reaching implications for drug manufacturers, who collectively spend billions each year to present their products directly to prospective patients through broadcast media.

The ripple effect could impact new media, as the FDA ramps up enforcement in digital spaces, including via social media influencers, algorithmically served ads, artificial intelligence (AI), and chatbots.

Here’s what to know.

Direct-to-Consumer Ads Skyrocket

Direct-to-consumer advertising for prescription drugs has been regulated by the FDA since 1962 but was not generally used until the mid-1980s. At that time, lengthy descriptions of a drug’s risks and possible side effects were required in each ad.

The practice expanded rapidly starting in 1997, when the FDA added a provision allowing pharmaceutical companies to broadcast ads that included only the most important risks while referring consumers to other sources for more complete information.

This “adequate provision” of risk information could be as simple as including a toll-free phone number or website URL in the ad, or telling consumers to consult their doctor.

Since then, direct-to-consumer drug advertising has grown to a $13.8 billion business as of 2023. 

In 2024, seven companies spent a combined $3.3 billion to advertise 10 medications. The top advertiser, AbbVie, spent nearly $1.4 billion to promote the use of Skyrizi, Rinvoq, and Vraylar. 

Drug companies maintain that their ads are accurate and helpful.

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, an industry trade group, stated: “[Direct-to-consumer advertising] provides patients with important fact-based, useful and accessible information about potential treatment options.”

The Sept. 9 statement added that member companies are committed to responsible advertising practices that help Americans make informed health care decisions with their doctors.

The United States and New Zealand are the only countries to allow direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising.

Impact of Consumer Ads

The Trump administration maintains that the practice of omitting much of the risk information from broadcast advertising has negatively affected the health of Americans.

Researchers Janelle Applequist and Jennifer Gerard Ball found that most prescription drug ads—94 percent—relied on positive emotional appeals and did little to educate the consumer.

According to the FDA, advertising generates patient-physician conversations that emphasize the use of medication over lifestyle changes that might be equally beneficial.

One concern is that the ads may lead patients to ask for a prescription that their physicians are not convinced is medically appropriate. A 2002 study published by BMJ concluded that when patients requested a drug, “In most cases physicians prescribed requested medicines but were often ambivalent about the choice of treatment.”

A year later, a study published by the Journal of Medical Economics concurred that exposure to advertising “led to large increases in treatment initiation.”

However, that study reported that advertising also improved patients’ compliance with their prescribed medication regimen. Other researchers have said that direct-to-consumer ads may reduce the chance of illnesses going undiagnosed.

Prescription drug use has increased dramatically in the United States over the last 30 years, to the point where children born in 2019 can expect to spend roughly half of their lives taking prescription medications, according to Jessica Y. Ho, a researcher at Penn State University.

What FDA Will Do Now

First, the FDA will introduce a new federal rule to remove the 1997 Adequate Provision exception. That would likely mean that broadcast prescription drug ads will again have to include a fuller listing of risks and side effects of using a medication.

Federal rulemaking can be a lengthy process, taking one to three years to complete.

In the meantime, the FDA will ramp up enforcement of existing federal laws regulating consumer ads for prescription drugs.

The FDA noted that enforcement letters, a first step in gaining compliance with a regulation, numbered about 130 each year in the late 1990s. In 2023, the agency sent only three enforcement letters.

Federal officials sent 100 letters to drug companies on Sept. 9, advising them to comply with current federal regulations for direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising.

The FDA said it would also issue dozens of enforcement letters targeting “false and misleading advertising” that “misbranded” drugs. The FDA can take a variety of enforcement actions related to a misbranded drug, including recalls, seizures, and civil penalties. Serious cases of misbranding could result in criminal charges.

Also, the FDA will expand its oversight of direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs to include social media. That includes influencer partnerships, sponsored content, targeted ads, AI-generated content, and chatbots.

Other Administration Actions

The executive memorandum differs from an executive order in that it does not have the force of law. This is the latest action by the Trump administration aimed at pharmaceutical industry reforms.

Earlier on Sept. 9, the Make America Healthy Again Commission released its strategy report, stating its intention to evaluate the impact of current diagnostic thresholds and prescription trends on children’s mental health.

In July, the president asked U.S. drug makers to comply with his Most Favored Nation Prescription Drug Pricing policy, ensuring that U.S. consumers pay the lowest available price for prescription medications.

Manufacturers have said that if they lower prices in the United States, they will not be able to recoup research and development costs for expensive drugs.

Americans pay nearly three times as much for prescription medication as any peer nation, often even more. 

An April executive order included actions to ensure that pharmacy benefit managers, the middlemen in the drug supply chain, can’t hold on to rebates provided by pharmaceutical companies and instead must pass savings on to Medicare beneficiaries.

A spokesperson for Novo Nordisk referred The Epoch Times’ request for comment to Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. AbbVie, Johnson & Johnson, and Sanofi did not reply to requests for comment by the time of publication.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/trumps-crackdown-prescription-drug-ads-what-know

A Turning Point for America?

By Charlton Allen

Charlie Kirk is dead—struck down not by fate but by political hatred, murdered beneath a tent on a college green where the air should carry ideas, not the scream of an assassin’s bullet.

His killing at Utah Valley University was not the silencing of one man alone. It was an assault on the principles he lived for: civil discourse, free speech, constitutional accountability, and the American tradition of argument waged with words, not weapons.

Kirk was the “happy warrior”—a figure once familiar in American politics, now uncommon. He argued without apology, confident in his cause, yet willing to test it in the open square.

Turning Point USA was his creation—not a militia of grievance, but a student movement driven by optimism, humor, and the conviction that America was worth defending. To young conservatives marooned on hostile campuses, he gave voice, fellowship, and a steady anchor in rough waters.

Now that voice has been stolen.

And with it, one of Kirk’s own warnings returns to haunt us. He saw, more clearly than most, that an “assassination culture” was taking root on the left. He cited polls where shocking numbers of liberals admitted they would justify murder in politics. He warned it was the natural outgrowth of tolerating violence and mayhem in public life—a ticking time bomb.

That bomb has now exploded in Orem, Utah.

Charlie Kirk’s assassination must mark a national inflection point. Can we recover the civic virtue—in times past such a vital part of the American ethos, without which a republic cannot endure—the belief that citizens may disagree, even passionately, without resorting to violence?

Or will we surrender to a hellscape where voices are silenced for their point of view, where the bullet replaces the ballot, where terror replaces talk?

The Founders understood this risk. They built institutions to channel conflict into speech, association, redress, ballots, and laws—not bloodshed. Lincoln, facing another bitter divide, reminded the nation that “there is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law.”

The same holds true now. When assassins strike down voices because they cannot abide argument, they do more than silence individuals—they desecrate the republic itself, and if unchecked, will destroy it.

Too often, the mob now marches online—not to argue, but to ruin; not to persuade, but to intimidate. Its trade is fear. Its object is silence. Its end is violence.

Kirk’s murder is not an isolated act. It follows Butler. It follows Mar-a-Lago—both attempts to kill a former and future president. It follows an arson attempt during Passover, aimed at the Pennsylvania Governor and his family as they slept. It follows the slaying of a Minnesota legislator. It follows the Scalise baseball shooting. The near-miss at Justice Kavanaugh’s home. The cold-blooded slaughter of a health insurance executive. The assaults on ICE officers doing their jobs.

Each time, the refrain is sometimes heard: This is not who we are.

But too many know better. Worse, too many have cheered, even lionized, assassins and assailants—whether they failed or succeeded.

Some on the left have urged violence—so long as it falls on ICE officers or political foes. And online, the chorus swells: dehumanizing, scapegoating, reveling in bloodlust. From such poisonous rhetoric, can anyone feign surprise when violence follows?

As The Western Journal reported, on Wednesday afternoon, the editors at the far-left outlet Jezebel added an editor’s note to one of their stories: “This story was published on September 8. Jezebel condemns the shooting of Charlie Kirk in the strongest possible terms. We do not endorse, encourage, or excuse political violence of any kind.”

But, as The Western Journal observed, not enough, apparently, to delete—or don apologetic sackcloth for—the Monday story titled, “We Paid Some Etsy Witches to Curse Charlie Kirk” remained.

Published just two days before the assassin struck, it reveled in hexes and malice against a living man with a wife and young children.

The editors may call it satire ex post facto, but disturbed minds need little prompting—and disturbed editors offer little contrition.

We are past denial. Political violence is now a recurring fact of American life. Unless it is repudiated—decisively, unequivocally, and for more than a season—it will become normalized.

At only 31, Kirk’s impact was outsized. He proclaimed conservatism was not the domain of an aging generation but could take root in the hearts of high schoolers, college sophomores, and young professionals. His conservatism was not dour but joyful; not reactionary, but constructive and forward-looking. He insisted that our liberties were no relic of parchment but the living lifeblood of a self-governing people.

They mocked him, tried to cancel him, sought to dehumanize him. Undeterred, his reach widened, his impact deepened, his message sharpened.

In every sense, he was a rising star, his zenith still years—perhaps decades—away.

And for that, he was cut down—cruelly. Make no mistake: this was political terror, political repression, political murder.

The question now is whether Charlie Kirk’s death will prove a turning point—to borrow the name of his landmark organization—or a warning unheeded.

We must answer with more than mourning. We must respond with resolve.

We must say it plainly: America will not tolerate assassination—ever. Political violence is not debate. No grievance, no cause, no creed justifies the murder of a citizen for speaking his mind.

If we fail to speak boldly—if we permit equivocation or excuse—the republic itself is imperiled. The violence will repeat, with no end in sight. And Kirk’s warning of a rising “assassination culture” will draw nearer to fulfillment.

Thomas Paine once wrote:

The harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives everything its value. I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress and grow brave by reflection…he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.

Those words call Charlie Kirk to mind. He smiled in trouble. He gathered strength by walking onto campuses hostile to conservative ideas. He grew brave by reflection. His heart was firm, and he pursued his principles to the end.

His death is a national wound. His legacy is a summons to the living. The test before us is simple: will we rise to answer it?

We, the living, bear a duty: to defend civil discourse—the safeguard of the republic.

To honor Charlie Kirk by refusing to surrender to fear, by continuing the debates he championed, and by remembering that in America, the answer to speech is more speech—not the crack of gunfire across a college green.

For if we fail, then not only Charlie Kirk, but America itself, will be mortally wounded by the hands of unbridled evil.

Charlton Allen is an attorney and former chief executive officer and chief judicial officer of the North Carolina Industrial Commission. He is founder of the Madison Center for Law & Liberty, Inc., editor of The American Salient, and host of the Modern Federalist podcast. 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/09/a_turning_point_for_america.html

After Charlie, no excuses

 

By J.B. Shurk

The assassination of Charlie Kirk has changed everything.  In the thousands of articles that have already been written about his murder and in the millions of social media posts that have flooded the internet since his death, it is obvious that this historic event has profound meaning for America and the rest of the world.

With the corporate news media’s active assistance, the targeted assassination attempt of an entire softball field of Republican lawmakers eight years ago was transformed into an artificial kumbaya moment celebrating bipartisanship in D.C.  When President Trump escaped a similar assassination attempt last year by a fraction of an inch, the propagandists in the press blamed the Republican nominee for his “divisive” rhetoric.  

That’s what the political left has done for over a century: Those pushing the Marxist revolution across the West justify their own violence while persecuting others for their speech.  Leftist-globalists despise free speech.  They will kill you for speaking your mind.

Charlie’s assassination clarifies this dreadful reality in a way that past acts of leftist violence and murder have not.  Why?  Because he was the best of us: noble, articulate, compassionate, and willing to welcome anyone into the fold, Charlie’s virtuous nature was undeniable.  He never raised a hand against his political adversaries.  He disarmed opponents with reasoned debate, sincere empathy, compelling argument, and beautiful words.  Words were Charlie’s weapon of choice, except he never used them to hurt others.  He spoke in ways that could break through the veils of ignorance imprisoning the human mind.  His words liberated people.  And the demons on the left killed him for it.

Killing this lamb from Jesus’ flock has forced even those who would prefer to remain blind to open up their eyes and see.  All over the internet, leftists are celebrating Charlie’s murder.  Without fear of reprisal or shame in their hearts, they record themselves laughing and cheering.  They call this man who preached love a “hater.”  They justify executing a man of peace.  Non-leftists watching this morbid celebration of Charlie’s assassination are forced to recognize an unpleasant truth: Evil exists in this world, and leftist political parties have given evil a home.

It was strange, although not surprising, to see Democrat leaders across the country use Charlie’s murder as an opportunity to call for strict gun control.  After this assassination, gun control is dead.  No sane person will lay down his weapons when leftist monsters are murdering friends.  Usually, Marxists wait to slaughter citizens until after they have successfully disarmed the population.  Their bloodlust is so uncontrollable today, though, that they can’t wait to bury us in mass graves.

A Marxist shoots a businessman in the back of the head.  Jews are lit on fire and murdered in cold blood.  Christian schoolchildren are slaughtered because they follow Jesus and seek God’s mercy.  At some point, even the most peaceful among us must recognize the spiritual war now raging and rise to protect the vulnerable from evil incarnate bringing sin and death.

When President Trump rose from the ground after surviving an assassin’s bullet, his instincts drove him to deliver a clear message: “Fight!  Fight!  Fight!”  Why that message?  Because the Holy Spirit wants us to be resolute.  As God works through all of us, Trump spoke what the Almighty knows we must hear.  This is not the time to be timid.  This is not the moment for weakness.  Right now is when all believers must be bold and courageous.  

Charlie was bold and courageous.  He walked onto university campuses filled with professors and students who hated him, and he offered them the chance to prove his arguments wrong.  No subject was off-limits.  Religion, politics, the Constitution, race relations, technology, current events, foreign affairs, pop culture, music — everything was on the table.  There was only one stipulation: Everyone must be free to debate.  Charlie did not countenance censorship or intimidation.  Wielding his calm demeanor and infectious passion as instruments for welcoming everyone, he extended the Lord’s invitation wherever he traveled: “Come now, let us reason together.”

Charlie’s divinely inspired gift was his power to change minds.  Everywhere he went, people came to tear him down and tell him why he was wrong.  Time and again, he lifted those people up and placed them onto paths leading them to what is right.  The effect he had on strangers was immense.  With words, he melted away impurities that damage souls.  With words, he shaped the metal before him and turned those willing to listen into something stronger than they were before.  He provided that service without publicity or payment.  His charity was pure.  And we are all poorer now to have lost it.

When the sources of such generosity leave us, the spaces they once filled feel intolerably vacant.  It is perhaps only when the best of us leave this world that we truly understand how much of what is good had been shaped by their hands.  We feel small without their presence, and we feel lost without their guidance.  Yet God is always with us.  With courage and faith, we must pick up the weighty responsibilities Charlie left behind and carry them for as many miles as we can.  We must follow Charlie’s example by leading others down Christ’s path.

We cannot negotiate with evil.  We can only confront it and destroy it.  After Charlie, there are no excuses left.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/09/after_charlie_no_excuses.html