“Following the killing of right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk, confusion has mounted about the motives of the alleged shooter, 22-year-old Utah resident Tyler Robinson. Despite uncorroborated claims by Utah Gov. Spencer Cox that Robinson was steeped in ‘leftist ideology,’ Robinson’s personal politics aren’t yet clear and may never be. Pundits and other commentators have struggled to fit him into the familiar mold of a politically motivated killer. Part of the confusion is the memes. … As details about his online life emerge, so does the possibility that Robinson performed a violent, real-life ‘shitpost’ — an intentionally meaningless act.” (09/15/25)
“We are not likely to overturn the macro-aggressions in our politics by violently erasing those whom we believe are engaged in the micro-aggressions in our culture. Yes, culture matters. The toxicity in our culture is both a reflection of — and a driving force for — the toxicity in our politics, whether it is coming from the ‘left’ or the ‘right.’ That said, political toxicity is nothing new. The political history of the United States has been bathed in blood. The very phrase ‘political violence’ is almost a redundancy. Most political action entails violence. Still, a distinction must be made between those who engage in the ideological legitimation of political action, however harmful, and those who implement violent interventions in people’s lives. Murray Rothbard once used the phrase ‘court intellectual’ to describe the former class.” (09/15/25)
Source: Future of Freedom Foundation
by Jacob G Hornberger
“The U.S. Code provides that a murder of a foreigner by an American citizen on the high seas is a federal criminal offense. The pertinent sections are 18 U.S.C. Section 1111 (Murder) and 18 U.S.C. Section 7 (Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction of the United States). The U.S. Constitution provides that the president shall be removed from office on impeachment and conviction of ‘high crimes.’ It goes without saying that murder is a ‘high crime.’ So, the question arises: Why shouldn’t President Trump be both criminally prosecuted and removed from office through impeachment for murdering those 11 Venezuelan citizens on the high seas? Indeed, why shouldn’t the military personnel who loyally followed his orders also be prosecuted and convicted of murder?” (09/15/25)
“In 1894, the French intellectual Émile Henry nursed two beers in a Parisian café as the orchestra played to a room of wealthy patrons. After paying his bill and getting up to leave, Henry removed a bomb from his overcoat pocket, lit the fuse with his cigar, and threw the bomb into the café, toward the orchestra, leaving five widows and ten orphans. ‘This was the first modern terrorist act,’ wrote the late historian John Merriman in his book The Dynamite Club. ‘It was the day that ordinary people became the targets of terrorists.’ Today, such terror has become frighteningly normal in America.” (09/15/25)
“It is an exceedingly popular but absurd game to try to count coup on one’s political opponents based on the actions of a single fringe participant in some of their beliefs. In my lifetime pretty much every major public assassination of this type has been by someone who turned out to be mentally unbalanced or a total loony. … There is a funny dynamic in which both team Red and team Blue believe their side to be well-behaved while the other side is steeped in violent rhetoric. There is a reason for this, as alluded to earlier: Opinion-makers from both teams love to explore the other team’s fringe supporters to look for craziness, and inevitably find it.” (09/15/25)
“While bounties and private detectives may seem like relics of the past, they offer valuable insights into how markets fill in the gaps when the government fails.” (09/15/25)
“Political crime, like the murder of Charlie Kirk, is one thing, and we are committed to crushing it – at this writing, there is a suspect in custody in Utah, which shoots criminals, and I’d hate to be his life insurance underwriter. Street crime is another issue, and after the assassination briefly took the focus off Iryna’s public transit murder, it will be back. As Republicans, solving street crime is a moral obligation as well as our ticket to victory in 2026. Luckily, the solution to the criminal disorder sweeping blue-run cities – yeah, Governor Hairstyle, the chaos in the red states is entirely within those parts of them that are deep blue – is pretty simple.” (09/15/25)
Source: Ludwig von Mises Institute
by Artis Shepherd
“The war of words between President Donald Trump and Fed Chairman Jerome Powell has been revealed as largely histrionic. Like their predecessors — Richard Nixon and Arthur Burns — over 50 years ago, Trump and Powell have been acting out a performative charade regarding when and to what extent artificially low interest rates should go even lower in the midst of persistent inflation. The supposed sparring between Trump and Powell merely guarantees the result both want — more easy money.” (09/15/25)
“Inevitably, in the wake of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, some observers looked at the problem of a radicalized young man who drove hundreds of miles to plan and carry out the murder of somebody whose political views he abhorred and concluded that the problem is the tool used by the assassin. A few of those observers even gloat that Kirk was shot after defending the right to keep and bear arms when he discussed the tradeoffs inherent in balancing the benefits and dangers of liberty. Much political discourse was already stupid, but too many people want to make it even stupider.” (09/15/25)
Source: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression
by staff
“Last week, an assassin silenced speech on a college campus. A family lost a father and a husband. As we have said without equivocation, political violence is never an acceptable response to free speech. Appropriately, we can expect colleges and universities to place even greater emphasis on safety and security ahead of outside speakers arriving on campus moving forward. They have a moral and legal obligation to redouble their efforts to protect free speech as well as their campus community. However, administrators must not pass those security costs along to speakers or use security concerns as pretext to cancel a speaker’s appearance. Rewarding threats of violence by taxing speech or silencing speakers will only invite more threats and more violence.” (09/15/25)
