On September 10, 2025, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson shot and killed conservative activist Charlie Kirk at a Utah Valley University campus event. Police arrested Robinson at the scene, and the FBI opened an investigation. Within days, tributes and recriminations began. While supporters described Kirk as a champion of free speech, critics pointed to his long history of inflammatory remarks about women, minorities, and political opponents.

By September 15, the story shifted again. Vice President JD Vance guest-hosted The Charlie Kirk Show, using the platform to honor Kirk’s legacy, denounce what he called left-wing extremism, and defend his friend from accusations of racism. At this stage, investigators had not identified the shooter’s political affiliation, though his grandmother told the Daily Mail that the family were longtime Republicans. Vance’s defense began to collapse when clips of Kirk’s own words resurfaced online.

Vance Denies Kirk Attacked Black Women

During the broadcast, Vance declared that Kirk had “never uttered” the words critics claimed. He dismissed accusations that Kirk said Black women lacked the intelligence to be taken seriously. To Vance, the charge was a smear designed to dishonor a man who had just been killed.

Almost immediately, social media users circulated footage of Kirk saying exactly that about named individuals. The clip showed Kirk listing Joy Reid, Michelle Obama, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. He labeled them affirmative action picks and said, “You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken seriously.” You had to go steal a white person’s slot.” The footage made Vance’s denial appear hollow and sparked accusations of gaslighting.

The Right and Left Respond to the Fallout

Conservatives quickly rallied around JD Vance and the memory of Charlie Kirk. Texas Governor Greg Abbott suspended more than 100 teachers who endorsed the assassination. Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed to target what she called hate speech celebrating Kirk’s death, a pledge widely criticized as a violation of First Amendment rights. Supporters framed Kirk as a martyr of free expression and accused liberal culture of fueling hostility.

Liberals countered with data showing a very different reality. An analysis by Alex Nowrasteh charted political murders across decades, with right-wing violence far outpacing left-wing attacks since the mid-1990s. The Anti-Defamation League reported that between 2015 and 2024, right-wing extremists were responsible for 76 percent of extremist-related killings in the United States. Left-wing violence accounted for just 4 percent.

  • Bar chart showing politically motivated murders in the U.S. by decade from 1975 to 2025, with right-wing murders consistently higher than left-wing murders, peaking at 195 deaths between 1995 and 2004.
  • Infographic showing extremist-related killings in the U.S. from 2015 to 2024. Right-wing extremism accounts for 76% of 429 deaths, domestic Islamist extremism for 18%, left-wing extremism for 4%, and other extremism for 1%.

Related | ABC pulls Jimmy Kimmel Live indefinitely after Charlie Kirk comments

The same day Kirk was shot in Utah, another tragedy unfolded in Colorado. Sixteen-year-old Desmond Holly opened fire at Evergreen High School, killing himself after shooting two classmates. Investigators described him as a rabid antisemite and white supremacist who idolized the Columbine killers. His social media accounts were filled with references to mass shootings and violent hatred of Jews. Witnesses said Holly fired and reloaded repeatedly, attempting to break into locked classrooms before deputies arrived.

That attack, rooted in far-right ideology, underscored the very danger FBI statistics have long confirmed. Yet the killing of Kirk dominated headlines, overshadowing another act of extremist violence that fit the established pattern. Critics noted the irony of conservatives defending Kirk’s record while ignoring the systemic threat of right-wing radicalization.

A Divisive Legacy Amplified by Politics

By the end of the week, the conversation was less about the tragedy of the shooting and more about the words left behind. Vance had tried to clear Kirk’s name, but the evidence of his remarks only deepened scrutiny. Kirk’s critics argued that his rhetoric carried real consequences in a polarized environment. His defenders insisted he was unfairly maligned in death.

The gap between what was said and what was denied laid bare the strategies of political defense in an age of constant documentation. Video clips circulated faster than talking points, yet leaders like Vance pressed forward, counting on loyalty to outweigh fact. The clash over Kirk’s words showed how little common ground remains in America’s fight over speech, power, and truth.

Discover more from Feminegra

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.