Charlie Kirk shot

[Tellafriend]

everyone in this thread is actually gay

says the guy who enjoys his beef n' cheddar with rose wine.

[sonatine]

everyone in this thread is actually gay

im on a gin rummy bender fr

[lol wow]

literally buying a carrom set

[lol wow]

fiiiiiiiiine carrom app

[sonatine]

i bet charlie kirk would have loved a good game of carrom.

[sonatine]

apparently a 20" x 20" board is like $400 so christ only knows how much an actual grownup one could cost, i cant even find one for sale

[Phinnster]

I always propose this exercise for anyone who has either switched parties or is frequently taking the side of the opposite party to theirs, and yet blames it on how their party has changed and lost them.

I say, "Go back and read the platform in the year 2000 for your party. If you mostly agree with it, yet you can't agree with that same party today, then the party changed on you. If you mostly disagree with it, then it was mostly you who changed."

Most people refuse to go do this, because they don't want to accept the truth that they changed, rather than their party's ideology.

I will say that Democrats have changed more since 2000 than Republicans, ideology-wise. Republicans have mainly changed in Demographics, as they have become more working class and rural in their appeal, and that has made up for losses in the upper and upper-middle class demographic.

[Phinnster]

https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/me...1311-Phinnster


oh cool cool another deluxe retard has entered the arena

Says the Marxist fuckstick with a double digit IQ.

[mickeycrimm]

I see Orko is back to ranting about Israel even though he already conceded Israel had nothing to do with this.

He just can't get his mind off the Jews.

Hurricane Katrina? Jews fault. Ask Orko. He knows.
Indian Ocean tsunami's. Fucking Jews again. Ask Orko. He knows.

[Orko]

I see Orko is back to ranting about Israel even though he already conceded Israel had nothing to do with this.

He just can't get his mind off the Jews.

Hurricane Katrina? Jews fault. Ask Orko. He knows.
Indian Ocean tsunami's. Fucking Jews again. Ask Orko. He knows.

Nah, i'mn disappointed how many peoplie lose objectivity.
The latest theory is the camera behind Kirk did the shooting.
Ok why is there a dude sprinting on the rooftop who will probably plead guilty in court?
They just ignore that. Also the theory he didn't have a rifle has been debunked.

He did it, i know googley eye Patel doesn't inspire confidenmce but the evidence is overwhelming.

As far as Israel goes, pay for your own war and stop buying our politicians, it;s humiliating and wrong.
Then you can tell me to mind my own business and I would agree..

[Dan Druff]

Hurricane Katrina? Jews fault. Ask Orko. He knows.
Indian Ocean tsunami's. Fucking Jews again. Ask Orko. He knows.

Nah, i'mn disappointed how many peoplie lose objectivity.
The latest theory is the camera behind Kirk did the shooting.
Ok why is there a dude sprinting on the rooftop who will probably plead guilty in court?
They just ignore that. Also the theory he didn't have a rifle has been debunked.

He did it, i know googley eye Patel doesn't inspire confidenmce but the evidence is overwhelming.

As far as Israel goes, pay for your own war and stop buying our politicians, it;s humiliating and wrong.
Then you can tell me to mind my own business and I would agree..

I'm at least proud of you that you're not blaming Israel for this one, nor agreeing with any other conspiracy theory.

You're growing.

[nightmarefish]

Animal fucker.

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1968697247282909315

[Kalam]

Neither has anything to do with their desire for a more authoritarian and efficient method of governance.

JD Vance will carry this flag forward if given the chance. He’s fully bought in. How they navigate that exchange will be intriguing. I rule nothing out.

Fuentes has stated it is his mission to make sure JD Vance isn't the next president, apparently because he committed race treason by marrying an Indian.

Seems to be a right wing Civil War brewing between the technocratic right (Yarvin/Thiel/Musk), racist Groypers (Fuentes/Bannon), and low IQ antisemitic conspiritard MAGA (Tucker/Owens/MTQ); with Trump's cult of personality the only thing keeping the ship upright right now. It isn't obvious what is going to happen in a post Trump world. Probably Democrats just take control again, which honestly is probably preferable to either the Groypers or low IQ MAGA taking over.

[Dan Druff]

I moved the Kimmel discussion over to a separate thread, as that's a separate (but related) issue which warrants its own discussion: https://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sh...g-FCC-pressure

[Dan Druff]

Here's a mess of an article being shared everywhere on social media:

'No evidence' found yet of ties between Charlie Kirk's shooting and left-wing groups, officials say


Lefties are screen shotting the headline and posting it as "proof" that Kirk wasn't left-wing.

Of course, this is absurd, because you don't need to be a member of a left-wing group in order to be left wing. For example, I am not part of any right-wing groups, but I think everyone here would agree I could accurately be classified as right-wing.

It turns out that the "group affiliation" thing is just a side investigation to see if a larger network supported the murder of Kirk, but there has never been any credible evidence that such a thing is true. It was worth investigating, of course, but not worthy of the big misleading headline.


The article also shared a second thing which I keep seeing on Facebook and X:

Right-wing ideologies have fueled more than 70% of all extremist attacks and domestic terror plots since 2002 in the U.S., according to the Anti-Defamation League.

Right wing (white supremacist) 385
Right wing (anti-government) 148
Islamist 135
Right wing (other) 64
Left wing 51
Other 5
Unknown 1

The problem?

This list is put together by the ADL and other left-wing groups, who clearly want to see an outcome presenting the right as a bigger threat.

The major flaw is that this list omits riots and street attacks by groups like BLM and Antifa, and instead just focuses upon planned violent plots, whether successfully carried out or not.

This does not accurately depict the left wing violence problem, as their attacks tend to be more of the variety of riots, spontaneous street attacks, and attacks/intimidation of opportunity of right wingers in public spaces. None of this stuff is included in the above list.

For example, the left wing activists hurling bricks and rocks at law enforcement vehicles driving to ICE raids are not considered a "left wing attack", because it's not a pre-planned plot! Stupid!

Additionally, some non-right-wing attacks are considered right wing. For example, any political attack related to a person believing they're a sovereign citizen is considered a "right wing attack", even if that person's ideology is obviously left. Also, attacks done by "incels" are considered right wing, even though being an incel has nothing to do with ideology, and incels span across the political spectrum.

The left loves to play with numbers until they get the results they want, and then these are published as "studies", which are then waived in the face of right wingers in order to gaslight them. Dirty.

[mickeycrimm]

Megyn Kelly and Rudy Giuliani have exposed that the Murdochs banned Kirk from appearing on FNC.

[BCR]

Here's a mess of an article being shared everywhere on social media:

'No evidence' found yet of ties between Charlie Kirk's shooting and left-wing groups, officials say


Lefties are screen shotting the headline and posting it as "proof" that Kirk wasn't left-wing.

Of course, this is absurd, because you don't need to be a member of a left-wing group in order to be left wing. For example, I am not part of any right-wing groups, but I think everyone here would agree I could accurately be classified as right-wing.

It turns out that the "group affiliation" thing is just a side investigation to see if a larger network supported the murder of Kirk, but there has never been any credible evidence that such a thing is true. It was worth investigating, of course, but not worthy of the big misleading headline.


The article also shared a second thing which I keep seeing on Facebook and X:

Right-wing ideologies have fueled more than 70% of all extremist attacks and domestic terror plots since 2002 in the U.S., according to the Anti-Defamation League.

Right wing (white supremacist) 385
Right wing (anti-government) 148
Islamist 135
Right wing (other) 64
Left wing 51
Other 5
Unknown 1

The problem?

This list is put together by the ADL and other left-wing groups, who clearly want to see an outcome presenting the right as a bigger threat.

The major flaw is that this list omits riots and street attacks by groups like BLM and Antifa, and instead just focuses upon planned violent plots, whether successfully carried out or not.

This does not accurately depict the left wing violence problem, as their attacks tend to be more of the variety of riots, spontaneous street attacks, and attacks/intimidation of opportunity of right wingers in public spaces. None of this stuff is included in the above list.

For example, the left wing activists hurling bricks and rocks at law enforcement vehicles driving to ICE raids are not considered a "left wing attack", because it's not a pre-planned plot! Stupid!

Additionally, some non-right-wing attacks are considered right wing. For example, any political attack related to a person believing they're a sovereign citizen is considered a "right wing attack", even if that person's ideology is obviously left. Also, attacks done by "incels" are considered right wing, even though being an incel has nothing to do with ideology, and incels span across the political spectrum.

The left loves to play with numbers until they get the results they want, and then these are published as "studies", which are then waived in the face of right wingers in order to gaslight them. Dirty.

You should be happy the left is trying to just blame the right or say he’s not political.

The right is blaming the Jews. It’s all I am not saying the Jews did it, but let me dedicate 55 out of a 57 minute podcast to tell how you how petrified Charlie was of the Jews and how the Jews would have did it, not that we are saying they did it, but look at this and it certainly seems to tie to Israel and did we tell you Charlie was petrified of the Jews, let’s bring on another guest to tell us how scared Charlie was of the Jews.

After the memorial and a few weeks they are just going to say it directly that the Jews did it.


I’ve just described every far right podcast.

[VaughnP]

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/TheBabylonBee/status/1969839065357746330

[Dan Druff]

Here's a mess of an article being shared everywhere on social media:

'No evidence' found yet of ties between Charlie Kirk's shooting and left-wing groups, officials say


Lefties are screen shotting the headline and posting it as "proof" that Kirk wasn't left-wing.

Of course, this is absurd, because you don't need to be a member of a left-wing group in order to be left wing. For example, I am not part of any right-wing groups, but I think everyone here would agree I could accurately be classified as right-wing.

It turns out that the "group affiliation" thing is just a side investigation to see if a larger network supported the murder of Kirk, but there has never been any credible evidence that such a thing is true. It was worth investigating, of course, but not worthy of the big misleading headline.


The article also shared a second thing which I keep seeing on Facebook and X:




The problem?

This list is put together by the ADL and other left-wing groups, who clearly want to see an outcome presenting the right as a bigger threat.

The major flaw is that this list omits riots and street attacks by groups like BLM and Antifa, and instead just focuses upon planned violent plots, whether successfully carried out or not.

This does not accurately depict the left wing violence problem, as their attacks tend to be more of the variety of riots, spontaneous street attacks, and attacks/intimidation of opportunity of right wingers in public spaces. None of this stuff is included in the above list.

For example, the left wing activists hurling bricks and rocks at law enforcement vehicles driving to ICE raids are not considered a "left wing attack", because it's not a pre-planned plot! Stupid!

Additionally, some non-right-wing attacks are considered right wing. For example, any political attack related to a person believing they're a sovereign citizen is considered a "right wing attack", even if that person's ideology is obviously left. Also, attacks done by "incels" are considered right wing, even though being an incel has nothing to do with ideology, and incels span across the political spectrum.

The left loves to play with numbers until they get the results they want, and then these are published as "studies", which are then waived in the face of right wingers in order to gaslight them. Dirty.

You should be happy the left is trying to just blame the right or say he’s not political.

The right is blaming the Jews. It’s all I am not saying the Jews did it, but let me dedicate 55 out of a 57 minute podcast to tell how you how petrified Charlie was of the Jews and how the Jews would have did it, not that we are saying they did it, but look at this and it certainly seems to tie to Israel and did we tell you Charlie was petrified of the Jews, let’s bring on another guest to tell us how scared Charlie was of the Jews.

After the memorial and a few weeks they are just going to say it directly that the Jews did it.


I’ve just described every far right podcast.

"Far right" is the operative term here, though.

It's been clear for a long time, but especially the last 2 years, that the far right hates Jews. Of course, so does the far left, except they like to disguise their Jew hatred as "concern for human rights" and "anti-genocide".

The mainstream right is not blaming Jews, but is instead trying to push back at the nonsense coming from the left about this kid being either right or apolitical.

The mainstream left is not accepting that the kid was left, hence the poll where 8% of Democrats believe the kid was left wing.

I've had debates with normally sane Democrats who insist that it's "unclear" what his ideology was, and that they "heard he was a groyper". When I point out the strong evidence that he had gone left -- the political arguments with his MAGA parents, the co-worker who verified he hated Trump and Kirk, the text messages calling Kirk "hateful" (a modern left wing term never used by people on the right), the fact that he's gay and was dating a trans furry, and the fact that he murdered a prominent right wing figure.... I get excuses.

I even ask them WHY he would have killed Kirk if he were right wing, and WHY he would have also disliked Trump.

They'll usually say, "He was probably in agreement with the left on the trans topic but right wing on everything else", but of course that falls apart regarding disliking Trump, as he has never made trans matters a big part of his governing or speeches.

At best I get, "Well it's still not clear either way, let's see what else comes out", as if we need any more information than the kid's own fucking mother saying it, on top of everything else.

There's a big reason the left won't admit he was one of them. They don't want to tone down their rhetoric. They need to keep inciting panic about Trump, Vance, and MAGA being an existential threat to our democracy. But if the person committing the most consequential US assassination in several decades is shown to be a kid who got radicalized by online leftist rhetoric, they're going to face mounting pressure to tone it down. However, if it was a MAGA-on-MAGA killing, then they can just give their token, "Political violence is wrong, mmmkay" speech, and then use the Trump administration's reaction to this as "proof" that this is being used to bring us into fascist rule. They can say, "One of MAGA's own killed Charlie, and the right is trying to lie about his political affiliation so they can persecute the opposition and silence critics!" In fact, they're already saying that.

It's not nearly as powerful to say, "Yeah, one of our own followers murdered a beloved conservative figure, but that doesn't excuse Trump exploiting this to bring on authoritarian rule!"

[VaughnP]

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/William_E_Wolfe/status/1969875654285136089