President Trump Ordered US Flags Lowered At 276 Diplomatic Missions Because Charlie Kirk Was Murdered. Did Decision Reflect Tolerance Of Intolerance Or Intolerance of Tolerance?
Was Appropriate For President Trump To Order United States Flags Lowered To Half-Staff At 276 United States Diplomatic Missions Because Of The Murder Of Charlie Kirk?
Did Decision Reflect Tolerance Of Intolerance Or Intolerance of Tolerance?
For Those Mourning The Murder Of Mr. Kirk Is A Rare Political Opportunity To Exploit- Grow More Of Us, Leave Less Of Them, And Don’t Forget The Money
Executive Branch, Judicial Branch, And Legislative Branch Needs Less Funding For Security, Not More Funding For Security
The More Vulnerable They Are, Likely They Will Enhance Responsibility For What They Say, What They Do, And How They Vote
How Likely Will A Voter Argue, Confront, Debate, Engage, Or Greet An Official Who Is Escorted By At Least One A 6’4”, Balaclava-Wearing, Heavily Tattooed, Full Tactical Gear Wearing, Sidearm Carrying, Assault Rifle Holding Bodyguard?
Politicians Do Not Need Security. They Need To Behave Themselves
On 10 September 2025, thirty-one-year-old Charles “Charlie” Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, a political organization, was murdered while addressing an audience in the quad of Utah Valley University (UVU) in Orem, Utah. A mission statement from Turning Point USA reads “We are committed to identifying, educating, training, and organizing students to promote freedom.” Mr. Kirk was a member of the Republican Party.
His death turbo-charged, unleashed, and unmasked the always percolating, and now low boiling politically divisive issues of education, ethnicity, faith, gender, and race.
Once again, interpreting passages from the Bible, Koran, and Torah are the fulcrums upon which anger and hatred find their respective fuels and then spin to dangerously high speeds. Mr. Kirk often suggested that his followers and those not following him read “scripture.”
Later on 10 September 2025, Donald Trump, President of the United States (2017-2021 and 2025-2029), using executive branch authority, ordered “the flag of the United States shall be flown at half-staff at the White House and upon all public buildings and grounds, at all military posts and naval stations, and on all naval vessels of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia and throughout the United States and its Territories and possessions until sunset, September 14, 2025. I also direct that the flag shall be flown at half-staff for the same length of time at all United States embassies, legations, consular offices, and other facilities abroad, including all military facilities and naval vessels and stations.” State governments and local governments do not have to comply.
President Trump shared a message to his supporters that Charlie Kirk “was an advocate of non-violence. That's the way I like to see people.” What the political process has demonstrated consistently is the word violence may be defined in many ways and for many purposes. One person’s act of violence may be another person’s act of defense, freedom, and restraint.
There is no question about the authority of President Trump to order flags to be flown at half-staff at the approximately 276 United States diplomatic missions throughout the world. There is a question as to the appropriateness of using that authority.
J.D. Vance, Vice President of the United States (2025-2029), was scheduled on 11 September 2025 to represent the President of the United States and the American People at Ground Zero in New York City, the annual memorial for the 2,977 individuals who were murdered on 11 September 2001. He visited Utah and Arizona. Should Vice President Vance have honored 2,977 individuals rather than one individual?
Vice President Vance directed Air Force Two to transport the casket of Mr. Kirk from Utah to Arizona. Upon arrival in Arizona, Mr. Kirk’s casket was provided with a United States military honor guard. Mr. Kirk did not serve in the United States military. Why was he provided with a United States military honor guard?
President Trump on 11 September 2025 during the annual ceremony held at the Pentagon (United States Department of Defense) memorizing 187 United States citizens murdered on 11 September 2001, announced first that he would present Mr. Kirk with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest honor presented to a civilian. He then shared about Mr. Kirk’s “beautiful children” and said “I guarantee we will have a really big crowd” at the memorial service in Arizona for Mr. Kirk. Mentioning guests in front of him, “you’re a good-looking guy” and “you look good, you look good” and “last year we were a dead country. Today we are the hottest country in the world.” All shared before the grieving members of those who perished twenty-four years ago. The speaking opportunity was not about them, it was about him.
Tradition is United States flags are flown at half-staff in response to an event of significance to the country, to the nation. Specifically, an event impacting the soul of the nation. And, projecting throughout the world that the event, and how citizens in the United States respond, is the example the United States government wants to share with the world.
During their four-year term, the President of the United States is the nominal leader to project the ideas of the nation and ideals of the nation, and its people and its territories. Generally, a president is expected to reflect and project the best and reject the worst.
There is a rational argument that Mr. Kirk was not representative of the “best of us” rather he represented “one of us” and was meaningful not to the nation as a whole, but to parts of it. He may have been a “good person” but was he a flag flown at half-staff person?
A “they” did not murder Mr. Kirk. A “he” murdered Mr. Kirk. The “left” did not murder Mr. Kirk. An individual murdered Mr. Kirk. One young man fired one rifle. One bullet fired from that rifle caused the death of Mr. Kirk.
These are comments from individuals who would self-identify as “right” or “conservative” in terms of their political perspectives. Fox News presenter: “Charlie said have more children than you can afford.” The Governor of Utah referenced Mr. Kirk sharing that people should read Scripture. A former Trump-Pence Administration (2017-2021) White House chief of staff offered that Mr. Kirk “Proclaimed the name of Jesus.” A press secretary during the Bush-Cheney Administration (2001-2009) said “I assume they love their country too, but they’re wrong.” Ivanka Trump, daughter of President Trump, shared about Mr. Kirk that “tongue and brain, that was his sword.” And a wealthy Canadian national who was with President Trump in the Oval Office when confirmation arrived as to Mr. Kirks’s murder, shared “In an astounding coincidence, as the news arrived that Charlie Kirk, founder and head of the enlightened traditionalist movement Turning Point USA, had been assassinated.”
A deputy chief of staff in the Trump-Vance Administration said “There is an ideology that has steadily been growing in this country which hates everything that is good, righteous, and beautiful and celebrates everything that is warped, twisted, and depraved. It is an ideology at war with family and nature. It is envious, malicious, and soulless.” The chief of staff in the Trump-Vance Administration wrote “So in the coming days, the president will be telling the American people about what we plan to do. It will not be easy. There’s layer upon layer upon layer, and some of this hate-filled rhetoric is multigenerational, but you’ve got to start somewhere.”
Mike Johnson (R- Louisiana), Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, is “encouraging members to walk in the dignity of their office and treat one another with dignity and respect.” Not working out too well thus far.
“I'm gonna be louder than I've ever been until this shit stops.” Nancy Mace (R-South Carolina), United States House of Representatives
One member of the United States House of Representatives knows who is responsible for the murder of Mr. Kirk. However, for this member, there is not one culprit, there are many- 43,900 according to the United States Census. They all share the same job description: media.
“Every single one of you here, you’re at fault… knock it off. Knock it off. “You are responsible for that assassination yesterday. You should be ashamed of yourself, it’s disgusting.” Derrick Van Orden (R-Wisconsin), United States House of Representatives
“You caused this!” Anna Paulina Luna (R-Florida), United States House of Representatives, who previously worked at Turning Point USA
A tribute in Mumbai, India: “The killing of conservative US activist Charlie Kirk reverberated around the world, reflecting his influence on global right-wing politics. A central figure in Donald Trump’s MAGA movement, Kirk was active in motivating ideologically aligned factions in Europe and Asia particularly: Just last week, he addressed Trump-inspired groups in South Korea and Japan, touching on populist ideals, anti-immigration themes, and traditional social values. Reactions to Kirk’s death Wednesday also pointed to his reach among the highest echelons of world governments: Israel’s prime minister called him a “once-in-a-generation” figure and tributes flooded in from prominent European right-wing leaders, as well as some high-ranking Russian officials who blamed the left and “Ukraine supporters” for rising political violence in the US.”
Within one hour after the murder of Mr. Kirk, elected politicians, appointed politicians, and their respective pollsters and strategists began focusing intently on one question: Can and will Mr. Kirk in death be more valuable and more significant than Mr. Kirk in life? Will his ideology, particularly focused upon youth, be transferable to his widow, to members of his team, and provide the toolset for a person unknown yet today who could embrace Mr. Kirk’s mantle and continue to spread it- and expand it?
There are supporters of Mr. Kirk who believe his death should be defined as a watershed moment.
Definition: “A watershed moment is a critical event that marks a significant historical change, a turning point, or a pivotal moment in which important future developments depend. The idiom originates from the geographical term “watershed,” which refers to the area where water drains into a single river or a ridge that sends water to different rivers, symbolizing a dividing line or a point of significant development.”
If a watershed moment, then what type of watershed moment? Political? Spiritual? Generational? Profound? A moment in a series of moments. Certainly, meeting the definition as significant. However, unknown is the consequence or consequences that Mr. Kirk’s death will unleash or unwrap. Can his death bring nearer those who disagree? Unlikely. There is for some far too much untapped value from maintaining the status quo of anger, divisiveness, and hatred.
Less Security For Politicians, Not More Security
The Trump-Vance Administration and members of the United States Congress (435 members in the House of Representatives and 100 members in the Senate) want United States taxpayers to fund not a solution to the security problem, but fund security so the problem may continue unabated.
Putting another way- keeping them safe from the environment they created, nurtured, maintain, and seek to expand as a vital component for their position.
The Trump-Vance Administration has suggested an additional appropriation of US$58 million to fund additional security measures for the executive branch and judicial branch. Members of the United States House of Representatives have a taxpayer-funded US$5,000.00 per month security allowance. That appropriation expires on 30 September 2025 unless re-authorized for the next fiscal year.
In 2024, the United States Capitol Police investigated 9,474 “concerning statements and direct threats” to members of the United States Congress, representing an increase of 83% from 2023. There were 3,939 investigations in 2017.
Some believe political violence is a necessity to instill belief or need for others to believe a political position is relevant, has structure, can implement, and is worth the effort.
More security separates elected officials and appointed officials further from their constituents- taxpayers and voters, who will be hesitant to engage a politician if a heavily armed, tattooed, former military, burly bodyguard gives the taxpayer, the voter a look of disdain. So healthy for a democracy when the governed fears those who govern and the governing fear those they govern.
Politicians will neither abandon mobile and desktop applications, including the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) nor ask their supporters and those whose support they seek to abandon mobile and desktop applications, including the use of AI. If “social media” helps them to victory, they will never denounce or renounce it.
Politicians and those seeking to advocate, defend, explain, and promote political, religious, and social views will not abandon use of the Internet and specifically applications including Facebook, Instagram, Telegram, TikTok, Truth Social, and X because the cost is low- requires a computer or mobile device, Internet access, and use of free applications.
Politicians say they are not the problem. But, here is the problem with that position. If they all maintain they are not the problem, they are not at fault, their words do not divide, and their actions do not have consequences towards those with whom they disagree… then who is the problem? Everyone.
The extremes of political thought do control the political debates because those in the center- to the left or to the right, are in the minority in terms of numbers and in terms of having messages that media believes will provide viewer ratings- which determine advertising revenue.
Can Mr. Kirk’s death be more determinative than would have been his survival? How robust and sustained with be any transitioning to a political martyr?
Author’s Note: In high school, this writer held simultaneously chapter leadership of Young Democrats and Young Republicans. Today, no party affiliation.
From Sweetwater Now