Political Rhetoric and Domestic Extremism
Last week, President Donald Trump addressed the assassination of Charlie Kirk, indicating that many voices in politics and media have raised alarms about the rising threats of “far-right extremism.” He, along with others, has suggested that such rhetoric may justify violence from the left. Consequently, the administration is intensifying efforts against those deemed responsible for this climate.
Reports indicate that the Department of Justice has quietly removed a controversial National Institute of Justice study titled “NIJ Research on Domestic Terrorism.” This was first brought to light by Daniel Mulmer, a PhD student researching online extremism at UNC-Chapel Hill.
“My administration will find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity and other political violence, including the organizations that funded and supported it,” Trump stated.
He expressed concerns during a speech following Kirk’s death, mentioning that “great Americans like Charlie” have been wrongly compared to Nazis and criminals by extreme leftists. Trump highlighted that this form of rhetoric is partially responsible for the terrorism witnessed in the U.S. today and urged an immediate halt to it.
The study in question suggested that there has been an increase in violence from extremist groups, particularly nationalist and white supremacist factions, with far-right attacks surpassing all other forms of terrorism in the U.S.
It elaborated that, since 1990, far-right extremists have committed more ideologically motivated murders than those from any left-wing or radical Islamic groups, totaling 227 incidents that have led to over 520 fatalities.
In her 2023 Congressional testimony, Heidi L. Beyrich, co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, reaffirmed these findings.
“Data on political violence clearly indicates that the far-right is the primary driver of terrorism in the United States, including incidents involving law enforcement. While there is violence from the far-left, it is not as significant or deadly as that from far-right actors.”
Research from the Biden administration is no longer accessible on the DOJ website, but documentation can still be found elsewhere.
Kyle Sidderer, director at the Center for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, remarked that the typical approach to dealing with terrorist threats has been flawed, often by equating terrorist and hate incidents in ways that can obfuscate the truth.
Shideler also noted the tendency to misclassify or downplay leftist extremism, even confusing black extremists with white supremacists or misreporting drug trafficking as hate crimes. He criticized the recent cancellation of funding intended for a database on this issue, issued by the Trump administration.
Geoff Ingersoll, director at the National Center for Journalism, referenced similar research from the Cato Institute and argued that the issue of political violence today cannot be attributed solely to the left. He pointed out troubling statistics, such as one in four university students believing violence can justify silencing speakers.
A section of the now-deleted study discusses the connection to white supremacist groups, noting that it involved several human rights organizations.
This marks another significant move by the Trump administration to challenge the narratives justifying left-wing violence, which have leaned on flawed studies for support. There is also the potential for further investigations into such research and the federal funding related to these institutions.
Stephen Chelmack from the DOJ, who co-authored the study, has not responded to requests for comment.
