Hours after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, Suzanne Swierc shared two thoughts on her private Facebook page — that the killing of the right-wing activist was wrong, and that his death reflected “the violence, fear and hatred he sowed.”
The post upended her life.
Indiana Republican Attorney General Todd Rokita soon obtained a screenshot of the post by Swierc, an administrator at Ball State University, and added it to an official website naming and shaming educators for their comments about Kirk.
Libs of Tik Tok, a social media account dedicated to mocking liberals, shared her comments with its 4.4 million followers on X. A week after the post, the university fired her.
“The day that my private post was made public without my consent was one of the worst days of my life,” Swierc told reporters this past week. She said she received calls, texts and other harassing messages, including one suggesting she should be killed, that left her terrified.
A wave of firings and investigations has swept through academia and government in the wake of Kirk’s death, as state agencies, colleges and local school districts take action against employees over comments perceived as offensive or inappropriate. Dozens of workers in higher education alone have lost their jobs.
A Texas State University student was expelled after he publicly reenacted Kirk’s assassination; Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and other Republicans had called for the student’s expulsion. Clemson University in South Carolina fired one worker and removed two professors from teaching. The University of Mississippi fired an employee. An Idaho Department of Labor employee was terminated.
The purge is driven in part by Republican elected officials who are encouraging Americans to report co-workers, their children’s teachers and others who make comments seen as crossing the line. They have been egged on by the Trump administration, with Vice President JD Vance urging listeners of Kirk’s podcast to call the employer of anyone “celebrating” his killing.
President Donald Trump has threatened to expand the crackdown beyond Kirk, warning falsely in the Oval Office last week that negative press coverage of him is “really illegal,” despite constitutional protections for freedom of the press.
At Kirk’s memorial service, Trump said, “I hate my opponent.” His choice to lead the Federal Communications Commission threatened ABC over comments about the reaction to Kirk’s death made by the late-night comedian Jimmy Kimmel and the network pulled his show for several days.
Mark Johnson, a First Amendment attorney based in Kansas City, Missouri, who has been practicing law for 45 years, said he had never seen a moment like the current one.
“Not even close,” Johnson said. “What’s been happening in the last month is astonishing.”
In Indiana, Rokita is using his office’s “Eyes on Education” webpage to publicize examples of educators who have made controversial remarks about Kirk. The page, billed as a transparency tool, housed a hodgepodge of submitted complaints about teachers and schools in the past. Now, it also includes 28 Kirk-related submissions as of Thursday afternoon.
Wisconsin Republican U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden threatened to strip an entire town of federal funding after a high school math teacher noted on her personal Facebook page that Kirk had in the past said some gun deaths are worth it to have the Second Amendment. The teacher has been suspended.
Oklahoma State Superintendent Ryan Walters, who is leaving his job next month to head up a conservative teachers organization, has launched investigations of school employees in response to tips submitted to Awareity, an online platform that allows parents and others to report concerns. Last week the Oklahoma State Department of Education said it had received 224 reports of “defamatory comments.”
Florida Republican U.S. Rep. Randy Fine has urged people with information about anyone celebrating Kirk’s death who works in government in Florida to contact his office. And South Carolina Republican U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace wants federal funding cut off for any school that fails to fire or discipline staff who “glorify or justify” political violence.
“It’s at a scale never before seen and I think it’s completely unhinged,” Todd Wolfson, president of the American Association of University Professors, said of the rush to fire higher education faculty.
Free speech consequences?
Kirk, who founded the campus conservative activism organization Turning Point USA and was close to Trump, was a hero to many Republicans. They saw a charismatic family man and a Christian unafraid to take his hard-right vision onto liberal college campuses.
But many Democrats and liberals experienced Kirk as a provocateur with a record of incendiary remarks about people of color, immigrants and Islam. While many of Kirk’s opponents have condemned the assassination, some have also emphasized their disagreement with his views or suggested his death arose out of what they saw as his hateful rhetoric.
“I have faculty who are getting fired, who have tenure and are getting fired, for saying things like ‘I condemn political violence but the words that Charlie Kirk used, he sort of reaped what he sowed,’” Wolfson said. “All things told, I may not agree with that statement, but that’s a perfectly reasonable thing for somebody to say. Certainly not something to be fired for.”
Some Republicans have long denounced what they view as past Democratic censorship, including Biden administration efforts to pressure social media companies to censor content during the COVID-19 pandemic. They have also criticized firings and pushed back on perceived political correctness run amok during the height of the #MeToo and Black Lives Matter movements, moments of ascendant progressive influence.
But as the current round of terminations plays out, some conservatives argue public employees who speak out about Kirk are facing the consequences of their actions. Oklahoma state Rep. Gabe Woolley, a Republican, said individuals in a taxpayer-funded role who work with children should be held to a high level of accountability.
“I think the most important factor to consider … is that these people chose to enter the public square on public social media accounts and to mock and celebrate the death of an American patriot who was a Christian martyr who was killed for his faith doing what God called him to do,” Woolley said.
Woolley added that “if you choose to make something public, you should not be shocked or surprised by any type of public pushback.”
Swierc described a relatively restricted Facebook account. It was private and couldn’t be found by searching for her name; only individuals with mutual Facebook friends could request to add her as a friend. She did not list her employer on her profile.
Swierc’s post on Kirk could only be seen by her Facebook friends. At some point, someone — Swierc doesn’t know who — made a screenshot of the post. It was then circulated publicly and ended up on Indiana’s “Eyes on Education” page.
On Sept. 17, Ball State University President Geoffrey Mearns fired Swierc, who had been director of health promotion and advocacy within the Division of Student Affairs. In a letter informing Swierc of her termination, Mearns wrote that many current students had written to the university to express concern and that her post had caused unprecedented disruption.
Swierc filed a federal lawsuit against Mearns on Monday, alleging he violated her First Amendment rights. Swierc, who is represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, wants a court to order Mearns to expunge her termination from her Ball State University personnel file, along with unspecified damages.
“I do not regret the post I made, and I would not take back what I said,” Swierc said during a virtual news conference organized by the ACLU of Indiana. “I believe that I, along with every person in this country, have First Amendment rights to be able to speak on a number of things.”
Ball State University declined to answer Stateline’s questions, citing the lawsuit. In an unsigned public statement on the day of Swierc’s firing, the university said the post was “inconsistent with the distinctive nature and trust” of Swierc’s leadership position and had caused significant disruption to the university.
Swierc’s lawsuit is one of a growing number of legal challenges to firings and employee discipline over comments about Kirk. On Wednesday, a federal judge ordered the University of South Dakota to reinstate an art professor who had placed on administrative leave after calling Kirk a “Nazi” but later deleted the post and apologized.
Aggressive state attorney general
Swierc didn’t name Rokita, the attorney general, as a defendant in her lawsuit, but the official has loomed over the situation.
Two days after Kirk’s assassination, Rokita urged his followers on X to submit to him any evidence of educators or school administrators celebrating or rationalizing the killing. He wrote that they must be held accountable and “have no place teaching our students.”
But Rokita has also said the Indiana Attorney General’s Office isn’t investigating individuals submitted to his “Eyes on Education” page — suggesting the effort is mainly intended to generate public pressure against employers. Each example on the page lists contact information for the school’s leadership and in some instances information about the next local school board meeting.
“For a government official, especially of that caliber, to be creating a database and doing this has an incredibly chilling effect on speech,” said Ashkhen Kazaryan, a senior legal fellow at The Future of Free Speech, a nonpartisan think tank located at Vanderbilt University that promotes the values of free speech and free expression.
Rokita didn’t agree to an interview. “Our goal is to provide transparency, equipping parents with the information they need to make informed decisions about their children’s education,” Rokita said in a news release.
On Monday, Rokita sent a six-page letter to school superintendents and public university administrators, providing guidance on the legal authority to fire and discipline teachers for speech related to Kirk. The letter suggested that speech occurring on social media is a factor that weighs in favor of the authority to fire an employee because it carries the risk of being amplified and disrupting school operations.
Rokita also analyzed comments about Kirk by a U.S. history teacher in Indiana who had said the assassinated activist can “suck it” and referred to comments made by Kirk in 2023 that some gun deaths every year are the cost of Second Amendment rights. The district’s employer had chosen not to terminate the teacher, but Rokita laid out a legal justification for firing the employee.
He concluded the letter by writing that many schools would be within their legal authority to fire teachers “who have similarly contributed to the divisive and, for many, painful eruption of controversial discourse on social media and elsewhere concerning Charlie Kirk.”
Joseph Mastrosimone, an employment law professor at Washburn University, said private employers have broad discretion to fire workers over speech. But the government is different, he said, with the First Amendment providing at least some level of protection to employees.
Decades of court cases have established the core principle that if a public employee is speaking in their capacity as a citizen on a matter of public concern, then the government can only take action if the speech causes significant disruption to the delivery of the public service and that disruption outweighs the employee’s interest in the speech, he said.
Mastrosimone said if a teacher’s message made in his or her own time is causing community outrage and pandemonium, “that’s probably going to count as some disruption.”
“And there might be sufficient disruption to outweigh whatever interest the employee has in the speech,” Mastrosimone said. But the closer the teacher’s message is to core political speech — such as voicing support for a candidate for office — the more the scales tip in favor of the employee being able to speak without fear of discipline.
“It is certainly a matter of public concern, what’s going on here with the Charlie Kirk assassination. The interests are probably pretty high, I would think,” Mastrosimone said.
Push to honor Kirk
As some Republican officials have called for action against public employees who have made comments about Kirk, they have often drawn a line at what they see as celebrating or glorifying his assassination. Walters, the outgoing Oklahoma state superintendent, has gone further and is investigating districts for “refusing to honor his memory.”
The Oklahoma State Department of Education last week said in addition to reports on individual teachers, it was investigating 30 reports of schools that didn’t observe a moment of silence. Three reports alleged schools weren’t flying their flags at half-staff.
On Tuesday, Walters announced an official push to start a Turning Point USA chapter in every Oklahoma high school. Later that day, he announced he would resign as superintendent to become CEO of the Teacher Freedom Alliance, a new group that casts itself as a conservative alternative to teachers’ unions.
Walters’ Turning Point effort comes after Oklahoma state Sen. Shane Jett, a Republican, filed three pieces of legislation to honor Kirk, including one that would establish “Charlie Kirk Free Speech Day” and another requiring public colleges and universities to develop a “Charlie Kirk Memorial Plaza” on their campuses.
Walters and Jett didn’t respond to interview requests.
“Charlie Kirk inspired a generation to love America, to speak boldly, and to never shy away from debate. Our kids must get involved and active,” Walters said in a news release on Tuesday. “We will fight back against the liberal propaganda, pushed by the radical left, and the teachers unions. Our fight starts now.”
–Jonathan Shorman, Stateline
Deborah Coffey says
Free speech, free speech, free speech. Impeach every Republican in sight beginning from the top down. Stop this horrid Nazi regime. Did you all vote for a country where you’re supposed to spend your time turning in your friends and neighbors to your government? No you didn’t, but it’s what you got and you got it for the rest of us, too. Stop it!
Sherry says
Read “banned” 1984 again while you still can! Fascism is spreading like wildfire!
Here we go says
The left invented cancel culture. Google came out and admitted they were pressured by the government to remove posts that they did not line. Now the Dems want to talk about the 1st Amendment and government overreach! This is too rich.
Bo Peep says
Yeah because anyone who says those disparaging remarks should not be a public servant that should be supporting all citizens instead of just who they align with.
Jake from state farm says
[Disallowed. You have about six billion sites, pages, blogs and venues in Flagler County alone to troll FlaglerLive, some of them devoted exclusively to that purpose (thank you for the free advertising). You’re not going to use our bandwidth to do it. Comply with our comment policy. Repeat violators like you get banned.–FL]
Laurel says
The crazies are using Charlie Kirk, to which he cannot protest. Every last one of you, reading this now, knows damn good and well the actions, done on Kirk’s part, is not free speech. They do not do justice in Kirk’s passing. Mr. Kirk, I am sorry what they are doing to your memory. Whether I agree with you or not, I don’t believe this is what you stood for. Rest in peace.
Joe D says
Wow….so HERE WE ARE!!!
At the risk of bringing out the HATERS yet again…here goes…
I ABSOLUTELY DETEST Charlie Kirk’s ASSASSINATION. He had EVERY RIGHT to present his views on a public or private forum, for those that wished to hear them. He did NOT deserve to be KILLED for them.
That being said, many of his comments/views/ opinions, seem anti minority, antisemitic in nature, and took women’s roles back to the 1950’s (the old phrase “barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen” seems to match Kirk’s role for women in the world). That they need the STRONG Arm of a MAN to make family decisions for them…no “joint” decision making was appropriate. He quoted passages from the OLD TESTAMENT to back him up….many of the passages taken out of context. The UNOFFICIAL “Canonization” of SAINT Charlie Kirk by mainstream MAGA Republicans hits me in my very DEVOUT Roman Catholic stomach (although I don’t agree 100% with some of the teachings of the Catholic Religion).
Unless you had a VERY good history teacher, and unless you are 65+ years old, you PROBABLY don’t remember that during the spread of Nazism across Europe. Citizens were encouraged to spy on neighbors and in some cases were REWARDED with money or advanced government positions and assistance if they reported neighbors or even FAMILY MEMBERS who didn’t support or agree with the Nazi Regime. They were ESPECIALLY concerned with groups who challenged the Nazi view of the world, as ORDAINED BY GOD.
Even the current Pope at the time, although he secretly spoke out against Nazi actions and SECRETLY assisted the escape of thousands of Jews out of occupied territories, to the point where the Pope had to evacuate the Vatican, and made plans to resign the position of Pope, if he was arrested (so he couldn’t be used as propaganda for millions of the worlds Catholics) because Mussolini had told his generals he wanted to be “Rid of this troublesome Priest.” The goal at the time was to get rid of England first, then the USA, then get rid of the Pope. There is a Documentary I saw recently about the PUBLIC vs The PRIVATE behind the scenes actions of the Pope during WWII. He even sanctioned the assassination of Hitler by some German Generals who realized Hitler was a danger to the world…the assassination attempt was UNFORTUNATELY unsuccessful.
So here we are AGAIN, with the Nazi references between Hitler and behaviors exhibited by those in the MAGA Trump administration. If the “Swastika” fits…etc…etc!
People should not be put on professional or governmental “hit lists,” or loose jobs, because they do not support Charlie Kirk’s views…he was ENTITLED by the CONSTITUTION to make them…but others have EXACTLY the same right to challenge his views (without condoning his ASSASSINATION of course).
I guess I’m not surprised our local representative Randy Fine is one of the MAGA torch bearers calling for reporting and removal of anyone not “towing” the Charlie Kirk for Sainthood “line” who hold Florida government jobs.
Of course….the ABOVE COMMENTS …are just my PERSONAL OPINION 🙂
***let the HATE SPEECH begin!***
SCRUFFY says
Ist amendment protects all of these folks that were punished. Why aren’t they fighting back. Lawyers of principle should be offering pro bono support!
JimboXYZ says
Every employer has it’s share of cancel culture types. Better to just excuse yourself to go to the bathroom, instead, report them to HR. There’s always a troublemaker on staff looking to be offended & report to another they were somehow offended because they sought an opinion to be offended by. It’s usually the Liberal DEI Democrat type that is race baiting or anything else. And it might be that co-worker is part of a bigger behind the scenes collusion to fabricate a reason to have another terminated ? Some posts on social media though are flimsy excuses to terminate. Sometimes it’s better to exercise your free speech among like-minded circles. Some co-workers are just that co-workers, they aren’t social media or your career network of real/true friends. Remember, they may be co-workers, but they are also the competition for promotions & raises internally at any employer. Family, friends, moles & enemies. Don’t confuse those with their categories. Employment is just the adult version of K-12 with more on the line for a career that one has invested themselves in.
Greg says
Free speech is a right! But if you say the wrong thing, be prepared for the consequence’s of what yor freely said.
perry says
To Here we go:
“In late September 2025, a rumor spread that Google had admitted to censoring content on YouTube at the behest of the administration of Democratic former U.S. President Joe Biden.” You and Gym Jordan are making selective cuts out of what actually was done.
https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/09/25/google-youtube-biden-censorship/
Deborah Coffey says
@ Here we go
Yes, because the You Tube posts were LIES and CONSPRACY theories. Meantime, this month Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google, met with Trump in the White House with all the other tech giants, each one kissing Trump’s butt around the table. Actually protecting the public is not “cancel culture.” But, in a way you’re correct. The Democrats are trying to cancel Nazism in the United States of America and there is no doubt about it: MAGA is Nazism.
Laurel says
Here we go and Bo Peep: So you like snitching on your friends, coworkers and neighbors for simply thinking differently from you? Have them lose their livelihoods? You like Trump going after Americans he perceives as his personal enemies? This, to you, is free speech? This, to you, is the American way?
This is not the country you grew up in, and you know it. Maybe you would be happier in North Korea, China or Russia. That’s the way they run their governments. Make people disappear.
Your paranoid hero has overstepped government and the rule of law, and has succeeded in dividing our citizens better than any outsiders.
Help him fight his Scottish windmills. This will make your lives better, right?
He is not your retribution.
You are his.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tj3OcfMS4AU&pp=0gcJCRsBo7VqN5tD
Here we go again says
@ Deborah- To compare Trumps Administration to a Nazi Regime is totally absurd and nonsensical. Do you even realize how many criminals he has deported? How much safer our country already is?
PaulT says
Led by Vice President JD Vance, Republicans in the United States are condemning European governments for policing online hate posts, calling this an attack on free speech.
But in this country the same Republicans are intent on destroying the lives of educators and public (and corporate) employees, in some cases for merely repeating Charlie Kirk’s 0wn words. Because, they claim, Charlie is a Christian and a martyr who did God’s work so he can not be criticised or apparently even quoted?
Maybe these vindictive Christians should step away from their Old Testament tracts and read Matthew 7:5 then think on what Jesus said about hypocrites with a ‘beam’ their eyes.
Matthew 7:5 (Sermon on the mount)
‘You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.’
Carl K says
This is my opinion, take it or leave it. I still believe in the American freedom af speech.
Speaking of Nazis, free speech? Do you have any idea of what the Nazis did to their own people that dared to disagree with their beliefs DC??? I can tell you what the Nazis did. They executed them. The people were scared to utter a single negative word about Nazis, even within their own families. that’s exactly what we are witnessing now, and we all know which party is responsible. There is no denying it no matter how hard some are trying to push their agenda.
Charlie Kirk was executed because of his beliefs. The same way the Nazis eliminated their own people and the Jewish people that didn’t agree with them.
You can’t get it any less American than that. We live in America land of the free home of the brave. It’s very sad that the guy that killed Charlie Kirk is a victim of brainwashing.
Pogo says
@Laurel
Sincerely, the winner.
Your reward: get back to work — and my thanks.😊
Pogo says
Ray W. says
Given the fact that more than one newspaper owner favorable to King George had their offices and printing equipment burned and their publishers tarred and feathered during the Revolution in an effort to cancel their culture, I find it hard to accept the idea that the Left, whatever that means, created today’s cancel culture. Cancel culture has existed since the beginning of time. It is human nature to want to cancel other person’s views and beliefs. Some commenters just type things, thinking that expressing the words makes it true. My mother called it talking to hear one’s head roar.
So long as the “pestilence” of faction exists among us, the “other” will be blamed for all ills and cancel culture will exist, left and right.
Perhaps it is time once again to quote from Federalist Paper #37, attributed to James Madison, once again:
“… The history of almost all the great councils and consultations held among mankind for reconciling their discordant opinions, assuaging their mutual jealousies, and adjusting their respective interests, is a history of factions, contentions, and disappointments, and may be classed among the most dark and degraded pictures which display the infirmities and depravities of the human character. If, in a few scattered instances, a brighter aspect is presented, they serve as exceptions to admonish us of the general truth; and by their lustre to darken the gloom of the adverse prospect to which they are contrasted. In revolving the causes from which these exceptions result, and applying them to the particular instance before us, we are necessarily led to two important conclusions. The first is, that the convention must have enjoyed, in a singular degree, an exemption from the pestilential influence of party animosities — the disease most incident to deliberative bodies, and most apt to contaminate their proceedings. The second conclusion is that all the deputations composing the convention were satisfactorily accommodated by the final act, or were induced to accede to it by a deep conviction of the necessity of sacrificing private opinions and partial interests to the public good, and by despair of seeing this necessity diminished by delays or by new experiments.”
To Madison, the most virtuous among us were those who could set aside “… private opinions and partial interests to the public good”, i.e., they favored country over party. The most diseased among us favored party over country.
On this comment thread alone there are a couple of examples of “pestilential” partisan political thought. Each of you know who you are. Madison, the man considered the most gifted of our founding fathers, understood that people like you, the most pestilential among us, would always exist. They created checks and balances for each and every delegated political power so as to protect the rest of us should people like you ever achieve political office.
Kennan says
Charlie Kirk was a young man that’s evangelical. Christian beliefs were used to force-feed his vision of America on people thinking that it would somehow unify us. He used rhetorical and dangerous talking points that applied to” Uber Christians.” Uber Christians alone. He excluded the vast majority of the country and leaves me scratching my head.
Charlie Kirk certainly did not deserve to be murdered. Kirk had very strong opinions. I wanna ask people in general:
Is it unifying when you describe Martin Luther King Jr. as a flawed man whose mythology does not warrant the reverence he received in the United States? Is it unifying when you suggest that the Black Lives Matter(BLM) movement of 2020 happened because a guy overdosed on the streets of Minneapolis? Really? No Charlie, he had a policeman’s knee on his neck for eight minutes and 49 seconds until he was dead. The man’s name was George Floyd. The officer’s name was Derek Chauvin. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison for the depriving, George Floyd, and a minor victim of their constitutional rights.
When Kirk said at America first,” we made a huge mistake when we passed the civil rights act in the 1960s.” Was that a statement that would unify people? Was it anywhere in the vicinity of unifying to say that if he was on a plane with a black pilot that he would worry if the pilot was qualified? That really brings people together?
Charlie Kirk died needlessly. Snuffed out by a deranged individual.
In the aftermath of Kirk‘s death, what does Donald Trump and MAGA do?
They put on a evangelical, nationalist Trump rally disguised as a funeral.
They give psychos like Stephen Miller, Pete Hegseth, Tulsi, Gabbard, Mark, Rubio, and others the fodder and false license to do nothing more than use Charlie Kirk’s death as a basis for building a fascist movement in America.
The entire tenor of the event was deranged and violent. Speaker after speaker proclaimed that America could not succeed to any extent without the embraced conception of Christ. Speaker after speaker blamed the left and Democrats for Kirk‘s death? Yeah, that happened.
MAGA, You are now at the crossroads. Freedom of speech applies to no one unless it applies to everyone. Too many American see people’s civil, constitutional, and even human rights taken away. Do you believe it just won’t happen to you? The dictator behavior of the current administration will not affect you? Why? Are you better people? Doesn’t everyone want the same basic things?
The economy is poised to burn to the ground. We are kidnapping people off the street. No due process. Immigrants who pay taxes and stimulate the economy. People who have not just had their constitutional rights, bypassed, but have been called criminals and arrested without formal charges.
Divide and conquer works great in a war, but to use it against your own people? Is that unity?
“ The country now Smulders away under the ashes of its own hatred.”
Joe D says
Depending on WHO you are suing, it can be VERY expensive…and drawn out for years. There are very few Legal firms than can afford to support a case PRO BONO, that could total $1million+ and be dragged out on appeal…even if you WIN…that’s frequently the TACTIC of large companies and even government groups: “Sue them until they’re into BANKRUPTCY.”
Joe D says
But that’s the whole POINT to FREE SPEECH. There shouldn’t be the “WRONG THING”….that is just someone’s OPINION.
You can agree to disagree, but there shouldn’t BE CONSEQUENCES for what you “freely say.” That of course excepts outright threats made in personal speech.
This of course is all my personal opinion.
Atwp says
Who was this man? He was no savior, king, just an ordinary person. The Republicans are going crazy. They need to purge themselves starting with their leader. They are a crazy bunch of people.
Carl K says
Atwp who called Charlie Kirk a Savior or a King. You’re the only one I have heard calling Charlie Kirk either of those two names. He really was an ordinary person as normal people are
You also say you want to purge Republicans and their leader just because you disagree with there beliefs and philosophies? . You say they are going crazy. That really is an alarming thing to say about anyone. Wow! That sounds very much like you are what you are accusing them of.
Kennan says
I certainly don’t wanna beat up on a dead guy that didn’t deserve to die, but to deify and martyr, this man is dangerous. It’s nothing more than political. 75% of the country didn’t even know who this guy was.
I saw more than a few of Charlie Kirk’s debates, and I never saw him win one. It is far harder to justify a lie, than to simply tell the truth. He had his opinions and he was entitled to them under the first amendment. It’s too bad we live in a country with the first amendment apparently seems to apply to awin one. It is far harder to justify a lie, then to simply tell the truth. He had his opinions and he was entitled to them under the first amendment. It’s too bad we live in a country with a first amendment apparently seems to apply to a certain number of people, but to the majority not at all.
Here we go again says
It is pretty simple. Your 1st amendment right does not extend to employers! Teachers cannot spew anything they want to children. Celebrating an assassination and even encouraging more sounds like grounds for termination in certain circumstances. I guess some of you have not got the memo……