Jeffrey Blehar writes for National Review Online about the political left’s indefensible approach toward Charlie Kirk’s murder.

I want to express my burning contempt for the social media charade that I and every other conservative just had to endure: the experience of watching Charlie Kirk murdered, and then watching vast numbers of cynical propagandists and people who know better tell us that Kirk was actually shot by a far-right “Groyper,” or a Nick Fuentes fan, or a MAGA true believer — anyone but a person associated with a left-coded cause, which Occam’s razor already suggested was the likely reality.

As each new detail trickled out, and the killer’s transgender associations became clearer and clearer, the hysterical spin and assertions of blunt unreality mounted. Cynical pros began inserting outright lies into the mix, as partisan myrmidons took up their work and used it in desperate, craven attempts to either spin facts in ridiculous ways (“his parents are Republicans!”) or simply pretend the facts weren’t “facts” at all. All of it was done with the intent of trying to will into existence — through the spread of fear, uncertainty, and doubt — an alternate narrative whose intended moral calculus amounted to, in so many words, Charlie Kirk was killed by his own team, and this is actually your fault.

So, no, I’m not about to move on just yet.

I could understand a certain amount of denialism at first, because I understand human nature. For those on the left who treat politics like a substitute religion — an increasing number of people in our irreligious age — this moment has been akin to seeing several of the central tenets of your faith publicly refuted. The revelation of the identity of the alleged shooter and the reports about his beliefs were arguably the worst possible scenario for the sorts of loud Democratic types who are deeply invested in the idea of the MAGA right as America’s true fever-swamp of hatred and violence.