School employees in Tennessee, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Mississippi, and Ohio are being investigated for posts made on social media celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
MSNBC contributor Matthew Dowd was fired for saying on-air, "You can’t say these awful words and not expect awful actions to take place.”
Conservative activist Laura Loomer posted on X, “I will be spending my night making everyone I find online who celebrates his death Famous, so prepare to have your whole future professional aspirations ruined if you are sick enough to celebrate his death. I’m going to make you wish you never opened your mouth.”
True to her word, Loomer's media feed on Thursday was filled with names, pictures, and job titles of people who she thinks should be fired for their celebratory comments about Kirk's death.
Emotionally satisfying? Sure. Would it be "deserved" to fire someone who posts something tasteless or grossly insensitive about Kirk's murder? PJ Media's Jamie K. Wilson has some thoughts on that.
It is entirely consistent to defend free speech while also reporting people who publicly celebrated Charlie Kirk’s assassination. Free speech protects them from government punishment, not from the consequences of their own words in civil society. Employers, publishers, and licensing boards have every right to decide they don’t want to be associated with individuals who cheer political murder. You can both uphold their right to speak without state interference and exercise your own right to call out that speech to those who have a stake in it. That isn’t censorship — it’s accountability.
Indeed, at the time of the athletes' "take a knee" protests during the anthem hysteria, the players seemed genuinely shocked that anyone would call them out for disrespecting the national anthem. They cited the First Amendment free speech protection, thinking that should have given them a a pass. Sorry, not happening. Holding someone accountable for their speech is the least that can be done by those of us who found the act offensive.
Another far-right social media influencer, who posts under the account Libs of TikTok, was also on the case. A firefighter in New Orleans had posted an Instagram comment, which she later deleted, suggesting Kirk deserved to die and the bullet was “a gift from god.” But the deleted comment had been screenshotted and shared on Libs of TikTok, drawing the attention of the fire department’s superintendent and the Louisiana attorney general.
Kirk was shot while speaking at an event at Utah Valley University Wednesday afternoon. He was taken to the hospital where he died. As of Thursday afternoon, the suspect was still at large.
Charlie Kirk himself seemed to sense that left-wing violence was getting out of control. An April 7 tweet proved to be extraordinarily prescient.
"The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response," he tweeted. "This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb."
Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) April 7, 2025
In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
The… pic.twitter.com/xiGAAvoPHy
Would Charlie Kirk have approved of cancelling people who celebrated his death? Do you think he would have approved of them losing their jobs?
I called Charlie Kirk a "Single Combat Warrior" after the ancient tradition of a king's "champion" going out to meet the opposing army's champion to do battle, sometimes to decide the war.
A "warrior" he certainly was. I have never seen anyone so relish verbal jousting, matching wits with left-wing geniuses and dummies alike. He was incorrigibly polite, rarely lost his cool (he occasionally became exasperated, never angry), and always had that light in his eyes that gave him some inexplicable inner glow. I imagine his Christian faith armed him and gave him the serenity to persevere.
Would that same deep, abiding faith in the teachings of Jesus Christ have led him to refrain from wishing ill will and bad fortune on his tasteless, ignorant critics who were either sincerely glad to see him dead or, just as likely, feeling that the way to gain clicks and attention on social media was to say something cruel and amusing (to a left-wing audience)?
I did not know Charlie Kirk, but anyone who clearly demonstrated a generosity of spirit and a magnanimous soul as he did would urge his followers to be understanding. After all, that was Kirk's magic: his uncanny ability to grasp the essence of his interlocutor's points and answer with civility and grace.
I don't feel sorry for people who lose their jobs or are suspended for rank stupidity, cruelty, and tastelessness in posting terribly hurtful things about Charlie Kirk's death. But I wonder if Kirk would have approved.
Help PJ Media continue to tell the truth about the Trump administration's accomplishments as we continue to usher in the Golden Era of America. Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member