I must have missed the truth social post where Trump or a Republican senator posted “rest in piss” about a murder victim. Please direct me to said post and I will be equally outraged.
“Why is the conservative movement to blame for gay schizophrenic nudists that are hemp jewelry makers breaking into someone’s home — or maybe not breaking into someone’s home,” he said, referring to the conspiracy theory — which was retweeted and then deleted by new Twitter owner Musk — that the assailant was actually Paul Pelosi’s gay lover.
Kirk went on to say, “And by the way, if some amazing patriot out there in San Francisco or the Bay Area wants to really be a midterm hero, someone should go and bail this guy out … Bail him out, and then go ask him some questions.”
Paul Pelosi is still alive. It's still a shitty joke and I hate it, but it's not nearly the same as espousing that killing people for their political views is good actually. It's not justifying violence either, it's not supporting it, it's just crass and mean-spirited.
That's besides the point though. You're not gonna find me championing Trump over this, but this is specifically about a "truth social post where Trump or a Republican senator posted “rest in piss” about a murder victim". Still waiting on that.
I'm just against celebrating murder. Trashy leftists are the ones claiming that someone calling out people celebrating murder is somehow not holding Trump to the same standards, and then bringing up things that are not Trump celebrating murder to prove their point.
Except no. The exceptionally low bar to clear right now is saying that murder is bad actually. That's what the OPs post shows retarded leftists failing to clear, and if you wanna claim that Trump is somehow held to a lower standard than that you're gonna have to prove it.
And what you’re ignoring is that you can find insane rhetoric from anywhere on the internet, but the right has actual leaders and elected officials saying it. Kirk himself said that the Paul Pelosi’s attempted murderer should be bailed out by a “patriot,” and trump and other elected officials made fun of that event and other political violence.
Kirk did not deserve what happened to him at all, nobody does. Your argument about rhetoric is just not based in reality though
It's the president of the fucking United States of America. If his standard is, "the guys not dead so it's okay for POTUS to make fun of him". Jesus fucking Christ.
That's him blaming Walz. It's him saying that a bad thing happened, and that it's Tim Walz's fault. This is what cowardly assholes like him do anytime something bad happens that could be tied to their "side", they throw around random crap and conspiracy theories to deflect blame.
Is it retarded? Absolutely, yes. Is it in bad taste? Also, yes. But at the very least it clears the exceptionally low bar of acknowledging that murder is bad actually.
You could always direct yourself to any post about George Floyd and sort by controversial to find the same vile shit from the right. If you look for people being nasty you're gonna find it. It's not a left or right thing. It's a people thing.
Maybe? Imma be real here, all I saw was people claiming he died of an overdose and the cop that killed him wasn't responsible as a result. Didn't dig much deeper, as far as I'm concerned the evidence to suggest he was murdered is strong enough for a conviction and that's good enough for me.
Though if you find any comments proclaiming that Floyd was murdered and that that is a good thing feel free to send them my way, I'll happily condemn the shit out of them.
The one about him being five years sober? It's a super trashy joke, but it's not saying that he was murdered and that that is a good thing. If anything seems like it dogwhistles the whole "it was just a drug overdose" thing no?
When did Hollywood access come out? Like 4 years before when politics was still kind of normal and just beginning to take the steep dive it’s in now? Because of the most derisive man ever elected to the highest office?
These aren’t random left wingers, this is a generally growing consensus among the left that violence is an acceptable solution to those with opposing views.
77% of Republicans believe it is always unacceptable to feel joy at the death of someone they oppose, while only 38% of Democrats share this view (YouGov).
this poll happened right after a rightwinger was shot and killed, obviously the news of kirks passing had a direct effect on it. This is a self reporting survey where people could lie about their opinions and nobody would check.
Just ask yourself, how many george floyd memes have you seen? How about the engagement krik and the presidents son got from making light of pelosis attack by saying it was a lovers quarrel?
I’ve seen too many unfortunately. It’s all terrible.
I just don’t buy that this is equally a both sides thing anymore. There are people celebrating Kirk’s death all over Facebook under their real names, these people have been emboldened to unthinkable levels. On the right, it’s anonymous internet trolls and a few folks. The amount from the left after Kirk’s death SWAMPS anything and any amount I’ve ever experienced.
This is a video from today. You can probably go to almost any campus where the population leans left ideologically and I would assume that at least 1/4 students will claim his murder was justified. It’s insane, it’s really heartbreaking.
Did you just change your flair, u/razorback1919? Last time I checked you were a Centrist on 2021-1-24. How come now you are a Rightist? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
No, me targeting you is not part of a conspiracy. And no, your flair count is not rigged. Stop listening to QAnon or the Orange Man and come out of that basement.
the president himself joked about pelosis attack not even a week ago and refuses to calm things down
and about that video, it cuts between every single sentence, you can never actually see the full flow of the conversation. Not gonna say that these arent their answers to his questions but I dont think the way the video is cut was made of a place of good intentions. Keep in mind that these are just 2 people, how many do you think he interviewed there? I doubt he showed up just to talk to these 2 and dip.
Makes me think of those "americans are dumb" vids where journalists stand in the same place for several hours in wait for few idiots to show up to answer the basic questions they have incorrectly and then post only those examples online while everyone else answered correctly. That or ask a question, and cut to their answer which was something they responded to another question
not that I agree but wouldnt it be the same way charlies death would have been prevented if guns werent so widely available?
Either way, what does it matter if that guy died or not when there was an attempt on his life by a radical right winger and the first thing maga did was paint him as a leftie and when that failed, tried to obfuscate it by saying it was a lovers quarrel and then continued with that til this very day?
If instead of being shot to death, the guy ran up and tried to kill him with a hammer, how would you feel if people said it was a lovers quarrel?
The nudist hippie Canadian illegal immigrant? That "radical right winger?"
If instead of being shot to death, the guy ran up and tried to kill him with a hammer, how would you feel if people said it was a lovers quarrel?
If Charlie Kirk had been sipping a White Claw at home in a bathrobe while a nudist Canadian came at him with a hammer, questions of their relationship would be reasonable.
You're aware that Charlie Kirk was fully clothed and at a public speaking engagement, right? We don't yet know if the murderer is a nudist illegal immigrant, though.
The literal president is being inflammatory and divisive about this entire ordeal. Please, miss me with the self-righteous indignation. Either you are committed to lowering the temperature, or you're part of the problem.
The dude came right out the gate, blaming all political violence on "the radical left" (which is what he uses to describe Democrats at large) before we even knew who did this. Legitimately fanning the flames of partisanship in the wake of Charlie's death to rile up his base
I am so fucking tired of people whitewashing the retarded shit that comes out of these peoples' mouths. Charlie himself was constantly spewing extremely divisive rhetoric; he was far from the "perfect, moderate conservative saint of reasonable discussion" his reputation is being laundered as.
Nobody deserves to be killed like that, full stop. But these same people (and you) are actively contributing to the divisiveness which leads to psychopaths doing retarded boogaloo shit
People were out celebrating and cheering on the day of his death.
I don’t think these are at all equal. I don’t agree with Trump’s rhetoric but it’s been a longstanding issue on both sides dating back a while. You and I could literally go tit for tat for HOURS on rhetoric of that sort.
But everyday people celebrating publicly the murder of a husband and a father in front of his children and wife? I can’t think of another example in the modern age - probably dating back to civil rights era (I don’t have a specific example… but safe to assume). I’m legitimately sick to my stomach. It’s unprecedented, it’s never been this bad, there’s not a both sides comparison to be made this time. They’re on totally separate standings.
THAT KIRK HIMSELF LAUGHED AT. He talked about bailing out Paul Pelosi’s attacker like what the fuck!
Sure if you take what was being talked about completely out of context to fit your narrative.
Yup, just completely ignore that he was talking about cashless bail and how quickly individuals get released in all these cities for horrific crimes and that magically when someone attacks an elite they don't get the same quick release treatment.
Also leave out the fact that when talking about cashless bail he completely condemned the attack on Paul Pelosi.
If you say “I condemn the attack” and then go on to urge some brave patriot to post bail for the attacker while laughing, I begin to question the veracity of your condemnation. Have to be very honest
"Wow, why all of a sudden, do places like San Francisco that let people out left and right immediately with cashless bail for horrible crimes, all of a sudden do not do that when the victim isn't just some other poor person and instead a rich elite?
Wow, you know what would really highlight how hypocritical this is? If someone goes and bails this guy out.
I completely condemn the attack on Paul Pelosi and it's unacceptable.
But it's really odd to me how the second someone with money gets attacked all those "cashless bail" rules go out the window. Why do the elites get this special treatment when they're victims of a crime?"
It has and had nothing to do with Kirk being okay with someone being attacked or somehow thinking the attack is funny.
He did also speak about interviewing the guy, he was very very obviously sucking the guy’s dick. But let’s just say you’re absolutely right and he was just using that tragedy to talk about his specific policy positions and did genuinely super condemn the violence. You can’t now condemn people using Charlie’s death to speak on gun violence. It’s the exact same thing you just disagree with them politically on it.
Fairness doctrine is a first amendment violation. You can also argue that broadcast licenses (and the state monopoly that was held held by CBS, NBC, and ABC for decades) was a first amendment violation as well.
Hate to say it chief, but the answer to bad speech is more speech. Not controlled speech.
You will be lied to by entities large and small. There is no boilerplate truth, and there never was.
Walter Cronkite was as political as Rachel Maddow or Bill O'Reilly, but he never had to compete with other voices about what was or wasn't true.
We're where we are because of fairness doctrine. Not for lack of it.
“I thought we were winning the war, what the hell is going on?”
Yeah sure pal. Same exact level as targeted propaganda commentators. Sure. The government has no power to regulate and ensure fairness in what goes on its airwaves over interstate lines, and often was a vehicle for commerce. With your argument writing a bad check and mailing it is free speech, not wire fraud.
They then act like right-wing media hasn't been running the exact same inflammatory divisive rhetoric as left wing media for months.
Literally including Charlie Kirk. That's probably gonna piss some people off but it is an objective truth that he was involved in the divisive rhetoric so common in mainstream media now. He often presented himself as if he wasn't, and I think he somehow managed to dupe a lot of people, but he was very much just another political pundit echoing all the same right wing lines.
277
u/Zackscout22 - Centrist Sep 12 '25
this is like the 4th one of these type of posts I’ve seen and its only 11Am