The other thought that springs to mind: "they that take the sword shall perish with the sword". Kirk lived in the realm of stochastic terrorism and deniable incitement of political violence.
Laura Loomer had been attacking him in recent months, and accusing him of stabbing Trump in the back.
Over what issues?
Primarily not hewing closely enough to the Administration's line on Trump's association with Epstein.
The other thought that springs to mind: "they that take the sword shall perish with the sword". Kirk lived in the realm of stochastic terrorism and deniable incitement of political violence.
Laura Loomer had been attacking him in recent months, and accusing him of stabbing Trump in the back.
Over what issues?
Primarily not hewing closely enough to the Administration's line on Trump's association with Epstein.
Thanks.
And just to clarify, you mean that on the issue of Epstein and Trump, Loomer is nothing-to-see-here-folks, and was criticizing Kirk for supposedly being closer to a release-the-files position?
Asking, because I've actually seen people in the last few hours describing Kirk's position as nothing-to-see-here, or at least perceived as such by full-disclosure Republicans.
The other thought that springs to mind: "they that take the sword shall perish with the sword". Kirk lived in the realm of stochastic terrorism and deniable incitement of political violence.
Laura Loomer had been attacking him in recent months, and accusing him of stabbing Trump in the back.
Over what issues?
Primarily not hewing closely enough to the Administration's line on Trump's association with Epstein.
Thanks.
And just to clarify, you mean that on the issue of Epstein and Trump, Loomer is nothing-to-see-here-folks, and was criticizing Kirk for supposedly being closer to a release-the-files position?
Yes, that's correct. It's true that in the last few days he had changed his position, saying that he now trusted the administration - which might have also upset a different set of people.
Yes, that's correct. It's true that in the last few days he had changed his position, saying that he now trusted the administration
Yeah, the one X post about Epstein I saw from Kirk was saying that the signature on the birthday letter was a forgery.
- which might have also upset a different set of people.
A QAnon type angry that Republicans are supposedly covering up Trump's complicity in Epstein's crimes would be my most likely right-wing suspect for the assassin. Not that I think the odds are particularly great for the killer being right-wing.
A QAnon type angry that Republicans are supposedly covering up Trump's complicity in Epstein's crimes would be my most likely right-wing suspect for the assassin. Not that I think the odds are particularly great for the killer being right-wing.
I think the odds are pretty high, the right wing tends to be fissiparous in its own way. They'll very probably be right wing, but with a set of other non-coherent beliefs, because those are the kinds of people who become lone wolf assassins (see the Trump shooter).
Seems like America has crossed over a line with political assassinations. There were the two Democratic legislatures in Minnesota, the attempts on Pelosi, and Governor Whitmer of Michigan. The shooting up of the CDC building. I had said the shooting of Kirk was an example of the rats eating their own. Well...
Seems like America has crossed over a line with political assassinations. There were the two Democratic legislatures in Minnesota, the attempts on Pelosi, and Governor Whitmer of Michigan. The shooting up of the CDC building. I had said the shooting of Kirk was an example of the rats eating their own. Well...
Have we crossed a line? Or is this the continuation of a regular cycle in our history?
Assassinations and assassination attempts are nothing new in American politics and society, aside from Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy. Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Huey Long, George Wallace, Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Robert F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, both Bill, and Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and Donald Trump are just some of the assassination targets in a very long list from American history.
I assume all presidents are assassination targets. We only hear about it if someone makes a public attempt, but I'd be willing to bet the Secret Service and the FBI prevent attempts we never hear about. And I'm sure more than one nation has plans thought out to one degree or another about how they'd kill the US president given the right circumstances.
I assume all presidents are assassination targets. We only hear about it if someone makes a public attempt, but I'd be willing to bet the Secret Service and the FBI prevent attempts we never hear about.
Definitely true from Nixon on, and likely true before then.
But there’s also a long history of assassinations and assassination attempts of lower-ranking public officials (I meant to include George Moscone and Harvey Milk in my list above) and public figures in the US, many if not most of which involved people who aren’t well remembered. That’s why I’m pushing back a bit on the “crossed a line” characterization.
That said, I think it’s quite appropriate to consider the role that the rhetoric of Trump and others on the right is playing in recent assassinations and assassination attempts.
Oh, I agree about the wrong-headedness of the "crossing a line" remarks. A country that jails roughly 1 out of every 180 people, a country with more guns than people, a country riddled with places with stand your ground laws and open carry laws, a country where the cops kill people with impunity, is fully okay with political violence.
Seems like America has crossed over a line with political assassinations. There were the two Democratic legislatures in Minnesota, the attempts on Pelosi, and Governor Whitmer of Michigan. The shooting up of the CDC building. I had said the shooting of Kirk was an example of the rats eating their own. Well...
Have we crossed a line? Or is this the continuation of a regular cycle in our history?
Assassinations and assassination attempts are nothing new in American politics and society, aside from Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy. Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Huey Long, George Wallace, Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Robert F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, both Bill, and Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and Donald Trump are just some of the assassination targets in a very long list from American history.
I may have noted this earlier, but assassination of American political leaders seems to have fallen off since the 1980s, about the same time shootings where someone goes to a public place to kill a lot of strangers started picking up in popularity. Maybe with the rise of cults of personality in American politics the more personalized form of public violence is also making a comeback.
Comments
Primarily not hewing closely enough to the Administration's line on Trump's association with Epstein.
It is my understanding the shooter is still at large, but one has to wonder if it is a matter of the rats eating their own.
When I first heard of the shooting, I had to wonder when Trump would be sending in the troops to revenge Kirk's demise.
AP reports the following exchange happened just before the shot:
Video shows Kirk had been taking questions from an audience member about mass shootings and gun violence.
“Do you know how many transgender Americans have been mass shooters over the last 10 years?” an audience member asked.
Kirk responded, “Too many.”
The questioner followed up: “Do you know how many mass shooters there have been in America over the last 10 years?”
“Counting or not counting gang violence?” Kirk asked.
Then a single shot rang out.
Thanks.
And just to clarify, you mean that on the issue of Epstein and Trump, Loomer is nothing-to-see-here-folks, and was criticizing Kirk for supposedly being closer to a release-the-files position?
Asking, because I've actually seen people in the last few hours describing Kirk's position as nothing-to-see-here, or at least perceived as such by full-disclosure Republicans.
Yes, that's correct. It's true that in the last few days he had changed his position, saying that he now trusted the administration - which might have also upset a different set of people.
Yeah, the one X post about Epstein I saw from Kirk was saying that the signature on the birthday letter was a forgery.
A QAnon type angry that Republicans are supposedly covering up Trump's complicity in Epstein's crimes would be my most likely right-wing suspect for the assassin. Not that I think the odds are particularly great for the killer being right-wing.
I think the odds are pretty high, the right wing tends to be fissiparous in its own way. They'll very probably be right wing, but with a set of other non-coherent beliefs, because those are the kinds of people who become lone wolf assassins (see the Trump shooter).
Assassinations and assassination attempts are nothing new in American politics and society, aside from Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy. Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Huey Long, George Wallace, Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Robert F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, both Bill, and Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and Donald Trump are just some of the assassination targets in a very long list from American history.
But there’s also a long history of assassinations and assassination attempts of lower-ranking public officials (I meant to include George Moscone and Harvey Milk in my list above) and public figures in the US, many if not most of which involved people who aren’t well remembered. That’s why I’m pushing back a bit on the “crossed a line” characterization.
That said, I think it’s quite appropriate to consider the role that the rhetoric of Trump and others on the right is playing in recent assassinations and assassination attempts.
More like Horst Wessel.
I may have noted this earlier, but assassination of American political leaders seems to have fallen off since the 1980s, about the same time shootings where someone goes to a public place to kill a lot of strangers started picking up in popularity. Maybe with the rise of cults of personality in American politics the more personalized form of public violence is also making a comeback.