I think Charlie Kirk thought he was safe because he was a good person. He didn't provoke political division, he tried to reconcile it.
R.I.P.
> Many people didn't like what they heard, but it wasn't because it was mean or wrong
He was often wrong, as most people are, and he often doubled down on it. For example, he repeatedly lied about the 2020 election being stolen.
> He didn't provoke political division, he tried to reconcile it.
He paid for people to attack the capitol on January 6 and advocated for Joe Biden to be given the death penalty[1]. He repeatedly tried to frame "the left" for things they didn't do or didn't even happen, and said things like "prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people" (verbatim quote from his podcast).
He was extremely, intentionally divisive.
1. https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-has-h...
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/media-matters/
There is much to question about the 2020 election, and much of the evidence is now gone.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1742670648433090764.html
What was divisive were the attacks and mockery of Kirk, not the man himself. I noticed that Comedy Central has now pulled their "Charlie Kirk" episode.
https://www.azcentral.com/story/entertainment/television/202...
Also please skip the "there is much to question" nonsense. The conspiracy theorists had dozens of days in court and ended up with losses, fines, dismissal, and jail time because they couldn't provide proof.
It would also be very strange for people to partially steal an election, allowing their opponents to take statewide offices in states like Georgia where the vote split between parties.
This is a sad, sad day.
Keep trying. It's all you can do. Also, you can't expect everyone to accept your facts. A few % of the population are going to be nutjobs (specially when there are various propaganda networks around which compound it), and that's fine, thankfully I think they aren't majority.