General Discussion

Voter suppression, fraud, and schemes to overturn free and fair elections are direct attacks on democracy. J6 was the single greatest direct assault on our Democracy. Assassination of an elected official is also direct, because it overturned the choice of voters.

The killing of Charlie Kirk was a direct attack on free speech, which is a component of democracy. This may sound like nit picking or semantics, but I think the term "direct" is a bit of a stretch.

My view is likely colored by the fact that Kirk's influential rhetoric in support of Donald Trump and what he represents contributes to the very real ongoing direct assault on American democracy.

Of course, we should all remember the principle of "disagree with what you say, but defend to the death your right to say it."

So, maybe I need to reassess my objection to your subject title. Charlie Kirk certainly deserved to be rejected and publicly disgraced for his destructive poisonous rhetoric, but not to be killed for saying it.

I feel the same way about Donald Trump. Don't make him a martyr. Reject his poison, remove him from office, and see that justice is served. I want him to spend what remains of his life in prison, paying for his crimes.