The charlie kirk shooter was not immigrant or trans or minority, just a WHITE

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033339]this is starting to seem like the more true scenario. apparently one of the carved messages on the casing is related to one of nick fuentes' groups that was anti-charlie kirk.

so again, not a liberal, not a minority. the attack came from within.[/QUOTE]

They're shitting their pants right now. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide, nowhere to look but in the mirror at themselves.

[QUOTE=beasted;15033395]They're shitting their pants right now. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide, nowhere to look but in the mirror at themselves.[/QUOTE]

that's the Achilles heel of the MAGA movement though, because just like donald, they are incapable of accountability and don't have the self-awareness to look within

[IMG]https://media1.tenor.com/m/LW40JVVI7uQAAAAC/stupid-berserk.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033394]this very well explained and accurate. MAGAs can debate this all they want, but Charlie's last words were just exactly this -



that was charlie kirk in a nutshell.[/QUOTE]

Correct. And the person speaking to him is immediately left with a WTF as the crowd laughs. And now they're uncomfortable and he's in control.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15033399]Correct. And the person speaking to him is immediately left with a WTF as the crowd laughs. And now they're uncomfortable and he's in control.[/QUOTE]

yep. it's disingenuous "debate" down to the core. admittedly, he was elite at that but like you said, it was by design and against teens who are already not very sure of themselves, certainly much less in public speaking environments. color me unimpressed.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15033389]I'll preface what I'm about to say with no, I do not believe CK deserved to be killed and I truly do lament for his family. This is never the way and is completely unacceptable. Just saying that for the stupid fvcks on here that will try to say I think he deserved to die.

To the bolded, I don't think this is entirely true and deserves a little context added.

CK was a very skilled unmoderated debater. He was sharp, very confident in a debate and speaking in crowds, and also had a following in said crowds to help him. I do not believe for a second that his intentions were to have honest debate. From my perspective, his purpose was solely to rig the game in his favor to make liberals look stupid and further both his movement and financial value. Very frequently in these "debates" (I say that in quotes because they were again, unmoderated) would cut people off, use strawmen to back people into a corner and shape the conversation in his favor, and then make jabs or use buzzwords to incite his supporters in the crowd.

Any person who isn't as prepared or well-versed in debate as he is is naturally going to be overwhelmed or flustered with these tactics. And why wouldn't they? They don't debate these topic all day every day. He had the natural advantage.

The issue I have is that he and his followers would take his simply winning an argument by overwhelming as a confirmation that liberals don't know shit. No. He was just engaging people who weren't professionals at articulating their points on these issues while adding in some dirty debate tactics. He didn't care about their points, he wanted to make them look stupid and gain followers. It's akin to an NFL team going all out against a D3 school, paying the refs to turn a blind eye to egregious penalties, and then claiming how awesome they are when they dominate.

In summation, he didn't always actually have good points (sometimes he did, particularly with his theological knowledge). He would just overwhelm teenage unskilled debaters. And a lot of the arguments he DID make did not need to be made.

Again..RIP he didn't deserve to die. I didn't appreciate him at all though.[/QUOTE]

Of course you didn't like him cause he made your side look stupid.

Do us both a favor and watch more of his videos. I think you all need it.

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033317]no, i just won't be pressured into feeling sorry for a man that spread hate. do you acknowledge the fact that this man essentially danced on the grave of george floyd, as did his viewers and supporters?

[B][SIZE=4]so why am i morally corrupt? [/SIZE][/B]what is the frame of reference for "spiritually strong"? bc ain't no white nationalist man going to sit out here rage baiting TEENAGERS telling them about fundamental christian values when his close friend is a PDF FILE (trump) and he does not condemn that.

let me guess, you're white? yeah i thought so. well i'm Hispanic and that type of hate speech affects us especially bc as you can so easily see, there are already MAGA mouthbreathers up in arms wanting to get violent against people they deem as the opposition. the racial tension has been building and unfortunately this death will only escalate that. but again, you and other melanin lacking individuals cannot fathom the reality of that.[/QUOTE]

Because your leaders said so you autistic fagg0t.

You're all alone now. Nobody in your party is endorsing your insane views. What happened to Kirk is a [B]tragedy[/B] and you will accept it whether you like or not. So it has been decreed.

Congratulations, you're a violent extremist.

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;15033401]Of course you didn't like him cause he made your side look stupid.

Do us both a favor and watch more of his videos. I think you all need it.[/QUOTE]

"He's just better at debating! They were unprepared!..." :oldlol:

Yea, turns out it's a lot harder to debate when your position is 1 + 1 = 3 :oldlol:

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033402]Because your leaders said so you autistic fagg0t.

You're all alone now. Nobody in your party is endorsing your insane views. What happened to Kirk is a [B]tragedy[/B] and you will accept it whether you like or not. So it has been decreed.

Congratulations, you're a violent extremist.[/QUOTE]

it is a unfortunate that it happened. i don't think violence is ever the appropriate response for disagreements. but just because he passed, does not mean i magically support his views. if a music artist whose music i don't listen to, passed, i would not suddenly start liking the music.

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033405[SIZE=4][b]it is a unfortunate that it happened[/B]. i don't think violence is ever the appropriate response for disagreements. but just because he passed, does not mean i magically support his views. if a music artist whose music i don't listen to, passed, i would not suddenly start liking the music.[/QUOTE]

You don't condone violence yet when the news first broke that Kirk was shot, you responded with a laughing emoji.

And why would Kirk's death be unfortunate? You said he was an evil white nationalist. You said he spread nothing but hatred. You called him a fascist and a nazi.

Why all of a sudden are you against killing nazis?

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033406]You don't condone violence yet when the news first broke that Kirk was shot, you responded with a laughing emoji.

And why would Kirk's death be unfortunate? You said he was an evil white nationalist. You said he spread nothing but hatred. You called him a fascist and a nazi.

Why all of a sudden are you against killing nazis?[/QUOTE]

when did i call him a nazi? i said he's a white nationalist. unless you are conflating the two and admitting he was a nazi?

i have never condoned violence against anyone. the closest is me offering to box fatrickchewing, but that would be a friendly sparring match and nothing more. you seem awfully excited over his passing, almost like you're using this tragedy as an opportunity to blame liberals even though they had nothing to do with this. you are a sick human being.

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033409]i have never condoned violence against anyone[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033317]no, i just won't be pressured into feeling sorry for a man that spread hate.[/QUOTE]

"I don't condone violence, but boy he sure did deserve it!..."

Also this is coming from a guy who said he would rather have violent criminals free to roam the streets than lock them all up in prison. Because only squares and racists are in favor of prisons.

Take that ukranian girl for instance. Clearly her death was her own fault. She should have learned self defense.

Your words, not mine.

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033413]"I don't condone violence, but boy he sure did deserve it!..."

Also this is coming from a guy who said he would rather have violent criminals free to roam the streets than lock them all up in prison. Because only squares and racists are in favor of prisons.

Take that ukranian girl for instance. Clearly her death was her own fault. She should have learned self defense.

Your words, not mine.[/QUOTE]

Nope those are your words.

You strawman way too much

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033413]"I don't condone violence, but boy he sure did deserve it!..."

Also this is coming from a guy who said he would rather have violent criminals free to roam the streets than lock them all up in prison. Because only squares and racists are in favor of prisons.

Take that ukranian girl for instance. Clearly her death was her own fault. She should have learned self defense.

Your words, not mine.[/QUOTE]

jeeze dude. get some help, seriously.

[QUOTE=Off the Court;15033414]Nope those are your words.

You strawman way too much[/QUOTE]

HIGHwhey is this correct? Did you not say these things? Did you not say that it's on every citizen to learn self defense because you would rather not have violent criminals kept in prison?

Would you like to correct the record for your friend here or should I find the post myself?

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033417]HIGHwhey is this correct? Did you not say these things? Did you not say that it's on every citizen to learn self defense because you would rather not have violent criminals kept in prison?

Would you like to correct the record for your friend here or should I find the post myself?[/QUOTE]

you're making yourself look like a fool trying to make up things i did not say. i said i support prison diversion programs for NON-VIOLENT individuals. i also said that any large city with have violence and crime and as such, you have to accept that and learn to not be a little b1tch about the world.


feel free to find the post where i said charlie kirk deserved it, i have never once said that and never will. you are a pathetic man and insincere in your attempt "defend" charlie kirk. anyone that sincerely cares about him would not make up stuff like that.

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033420]you're making yourself look like a fool trying to make up things i did not say. i said i support prison diversion programs for NON-VIOLENT individuals. i also said that any large city with have violence and crime and as such, you have to accept that and learn to not be a little b1tch about the world.


feel free to find the post where i said charlie kirk deserved it, i have never once said that and never will. you are a pathetic man and insincere in your attempt "defend" charlie kirk. anyone that sincerely cares about him would not make up stuff like that.[/QUOTE]

Sorry you're not fooling anyone. I saw you post a laughing emoji when he was shot and then you instantly edited the post once you saw the severity of it and saw he would die. I already told you I would gladly do a ban forever bet if the mods could prove it.

And yes the fact that you're just willing to "accept" crime means you condone it. There are plenty of neighborhoods throughout the U.S. that have very low crime. Obviously a larger city will have a higher volume of it due to the larger population, but that still wouldn't account for the insane ratio. The RATIO of crime is the concern.

The governor of Illinois was asked recently about Chicago, "Would you ask your friends to ride the train after midnight"... and he gave the exact same answer you just did. He said "look in a city you're going to have crime..."

[url]https://x.com/theblaze/status/1962931828584505408[/url]

^ As you can see, retards flock together.

The fact that the governor is admitting his own trains aren't safe, and not just admitting but ACCEPTING it, is a colossal failure of government. As if crime is just something we have to tolerate and can't do anything about.

A real leader would have answered "Absolutely, we take great pride in making sure our trains and our streets are safe." But that would mean actually doing something about it. It doesn't mean you're going to have a 0% crime rate, but it does mean you're putting in the effort. If the fukking governor is saying on record that even he doesn't feel safe in his own state, that is an admission of failure and he should resign immediately. As a citizen I definitely would not feel confident in his abilities or his leadership.

So please stop acting like you don't condone crime. Not only do you condone crime, you enable and tolerate crime. You mock and tease at the thought of everyday working people feeling unsafe. It's just an imaginary made up issue fueled by their own racism.


[B]tl:dr[/B]

HIGHwhey is a lying fagg0t who posted a laughing emoji when Kirk was shot and condones crime.

Anyway, the shooter was a fascist White Liberal. The biggest enemy of the human race. Besides the Muslims.

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;15033401]Of course you didn't like him cause he made your side look stupid.

[B]Do us both a favor and watch more of his videos[/B]. I think you all need it.[/QUOTE]

I've watched plenty and I don't think you comprehended most of what I said :lol

I explained the reason why he made them look stupid. It wasn't him actually being right or wrong. He was just good at what he did and had a massive home field advantage every time. He engineered it this way too and that's why I don't like it because rigging the game in this manner and having people too stupid (or to be nicer and say what I actually feel..too willfully ignorant) to see what he's actually doing has real-life effects.

His whole goal was to argue against people not equipped to argue with him. Throw him in a room with someone who knows all of these specific debate topics AND tactics? Shit goes down very differently. But he wasn't actually interested in that and that's why I didn't respect him. To his credit he would occasionally engage with those people, but he would cut or edit most of it and he certainly wouldn't make it a point to headline that about how he "OWNED THIS LIB", so most supporters of his don't even know it happened.

It's kind of like that Whatever podcast.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15033427]I've watched plenty and I don't think you comprehended most of what I said :lol

I explained the reason why he made them look stupid. It wasn't him actually being right or wrong. He was just good at what he did and had a massive home field advantage every time. He engineered it this way too and that's why I don't like it because rigging the game in this manner and having people too stupid (or to be nicer and say what I actually feel..too willfully ignorant) to see what he's actually doing has real-life effects.

His whole goal was to argue against people not equipped to argue with him. Throw him in a room with someone who knows all of these specific debate topics AND tactics? Shit goes down very differently. But he wasn't actually interested in that and that's why I didn't respect him.

It's kind of like that Whatever podcast.[/QUOTE]

I recommended you to watch more of his videos because most of his videos weren't about making young Liberals look stupid, they were about educating those on facts, whether it be current American law, or about biblical scripture, or about history. You say it would be a different outcome with a prepared Liberal and I would say it would be the same. Charlie would educate, or at least attempt to educate, whilst the Liberal would deny, deny, deny, and paint this evil narrative against Charlie and call him all these evil things which is what got him killed. Look at what is happening to Stephen King now. That Downs Syndrome-looking weirdo is doing an apology tour all over Twitter because he made an accusation about Charlie and it ended up that he was wrong. THIS IS WHAT LIBERALS DO. They do not play fair, so I have no idea how in the world you think it would go down "very differently" with a prepared Liberal. I'm curious what shit going down very differently actually looks like to you because you cannot make up alternative facts to go up against Charlie. And he encountered plenty of intelligent, well-spoken individuals on his tours.

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033424]Sorry you're not fooling anyone. I saw you post a laughing emoji when he was shot and then you instantly edited the post once you saw the severity of it and saw he would die. I already told you I would gladly do a ban forever bet if the mods could prove it.

And yes the fact that you're just willing to "accept" crime means you condone it. There are plenty of neighborhoods throughout the U.S. that have very low crime. Obviously a larger city will have a higher volume of it due to the larger population, but that still wouldn't account for the insane ratio. The RATIO of crime is the concern.

The governor of Illinois was asked recently about Chicago, "Would you ask your friends to ride the train after midnight"... and he gave the exact same answer you just did. He said "look in a city you're going to have crime..."

[url]https://x.com/theblaze/status/1962931828584505408[/url]

^ As you can see, retards flock together.

The fact that the governor is admitting his own trains aren't safe, and not just admitting but ACCEPTING it, is a colossal failure of government. As if crime is just something we have to tolerate and can't do anything about.

A real leader would have answered "Absolutely, we take great pride in making sure our trains and our streets are safe." But that would mean actually doing something about it. It doesn't mean you're going to have a 0% crime rate, but it does mean you're putting in the effort. If the fukking governor is saying on record that even he doesn't feel safe in his own state, that is an admission of failure and he should resign immediately. As a citizen I definitely would not feel confident in his abilities or his leadership.

So please stop acting like you don't condone crime. Not only do you condone crime, you enable and tolerate crime. You mock and tease at the thought of everyday working people feeling unsafe. It's just an imaginary made up issue fueled by their own racism.


[B]tl:dr[/B]

HIGHwhey is a lying fagg0t who posted a laughing emoji when Kirk was shot and condones crime.[/QUOTE]

[IMG]https://images.dailynewsegypt.com/2018/09/Psychiatrist.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;15033429]I recommended you to ---[/QUOTE]
don't you weigh [B][SIZE=7]400 POUNDS?[/SIZE][/B]



see that, i just pulled a charlie kirk on you

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;15033429]I recommended you to watch more of his videos because most of his videos weren't about making young Liberals look stupid, they were about educating those on facts, whether it be current American law, or about biblical scripture, or about history. You say it would be a different outcome with a prepared Liberal and I would say it would be the same. [B]Charlie would educate, or at least attempt to educate,[/B] whilst the Liberal would deny, deny, deny, and paint this evil narrative against Charlie and call him all these evil things which is what got him killed. Look at what is happening to Stephen King now. That Downs Syndrome-looking weirdo is doing an apology tour all over Twitter because he made an accusation about Charlie and it ended up that he was wrong. THIS IS WHAT LIBERALS DO. They do not play fair, so I have no idea how in the world you think it would go down "very differently" with a prepared Liberal. I'm curious what shit going down very differently actually looks like to you because you cannot make up alternative facts to go up against Charlie. And he encountered plenty of intelligent, well-spoken individuals on his tours.[/QUOTE]

There are certain areas where he was very knowledgeable. Again..most of it was related to theology. There were also plenty of things that he chose to talk about that he was putting his theological beliefs in a box where the didn't necessarily belong to those who oppose his viewpoints, and had points themselves.

He was not overly strong from a sociological standpoint and often ignored advances, or changes if you don't think it's advanced, that have occurred in that area. He wasn't well adept at science either and would generally strawman it and switch the subject when others got into the weeds there.

[QUOTE]And he encountered plenty of intelligent, well-spoken individuals on his tours.[/QUOTE]

Sure. And I'm not trying to say that everyone he spoke to was a dumbass. More so that it was usually on his turf in an environment that was beneficial to him to control as he wished. You said it was HIS tour, right? Most people, even well-spoken people are going to get a little shook in a heated debate with these things against them. Because they don't debate in front of crowds for a living.

And I'll end with: there are PLENTY of liberals that aren't what you, PatrickChewing, think of liberals as.

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033431][IMG]https://images.dailynewsegypt.com/2018/09/Psychiatrist.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

The truth hurts.

It's never too late to admit you were wrong. We're all human. We all make mistakes.

You're running out of cards to play.

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;15033425]Anyway, the shooter was a fascist White Liberal. The biggest enemy of the human race. Besides the Muslims.[/QUOTE]

:roll::roll::roll::roll:

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033434]The truth hurts.

It's never too late to admit you were wrong. We're all human. We all make mistakes.

You're running out of cards to play.[/QUOTE]

Another :roll::roll::roll::roll:

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033434]The truth hurts.

It's never too late to admit you were wrong. We're all human. We all make mistakes.

You're running out of cards to play.[/QUOTE]
admit what dude? i said it is a tragedy to hear about his passing, but i still maintain my opinion regarding his style of debate. i was not a fan of his before, so why pretend now? and stop trying to mix in other topics into this thread, you want a gotcha moment so badly you're willing to lie and deceive. that makes you disingenuous and you lose credibility.

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033437][B]admit what dude? [/B]i said it is a tragedy to hear about his passing, but i still maintain my opinion regarding his style of debate. i was not a fan of his before, so why pretend now? and stop trying to mix in other topics into this thread, you want a gotcha moment so badly you're willing to lie and deceive. that makes you disingenuous and you lose credibility.[/QUOTE]

Admit you got played. Admit you're on the wrong side. Admit your side is acting insane.

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033438]Admit you got played. Admit you're on the wrong side. Admit your side is acting insane.[/QUOTE]

i did not get played bc i don't take my cues from anyone but myself. and so far all centrist and leftist leaders have been classy. i don't have a side so i don't know what you're talking about, unfortunately. i'd say the only prominent leaders that have been classless are the alt-righ ones calling for retribution.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15033433]There are certain areas where he was very knowledgeable. Again..most of it was related to theology. There were also plenty of things that he chose to talk about that he was putting his theological beliefs in a box where the didn't necessarily belong to those who oppose his viewpoints, and had points themselves.

He was not overly strong from a sociological standpoint and often ignored advances, or changes if you don't think it's advanced, that have occurred in that area. He wasn't well adept at science either and would generally strawman it and switch the subject when others got into the weeds there.



Sure. And I'm not trying to say that everyone he spoke to was a dumbass. More so that it was usually on his turf in an environment that was beneficial to him to control as he wished. You said it was HIS tour, right? Most people, even well-spoken people are going to get a little shook in a heated debate with these things against them. Because they don't debate in front of crowds for a living.

And I'll end with: there are PLENTY of liberals that aren't what you, PatrickChewing, think of liberals as.[/QUOTE]

I don't see his tour having anything to do with anything. He was stepping into the Lion's Den of Liberal-infested campuses all across the nation. I think you're reading too much into that as being some sort of advantage when it was literally Charlie just giving an open mic to anyone to come up and debate him.

But I'm curious, what are some things you disagreed with Charlie about? I sure as hell hope it ain't the genders thing. :oldlol:

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033439]i did not get played bc i don't take my cues from anyone but myself. [B]and so far all centrist and leftist leaders have been classy[/B]. i don't have a side so i don't know what you're talking about, unfortunately. i'd say the only prominent leaders that have been classless are the alt-righ ones calling for retribution.[/QUOTE]

You're so full of shit.

Insidehoops should be renamed to inside fat beaners. This is what we have become.

Tbh it’s still mildy entertaining. Fat self loathing fat beaners are pretty funny.

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;15033443]I don't see his tour having anything to do with anything. He was stepping into the Lion's Den of Liberal-infested campuses all across the nation. I think you're reading too much into that as being some sort of advantage when it was literally Charlie just giving an open mic to anyone to come up and debate him.

But I'm curious, what are some things you disagreed with Charlie about? [B] I sure as hell hope it ain't the genders thing.[/B] :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

He talked about way more than that. Am I the one who has to ask YOU to watch more of his arguments? :lol

I now know that that's a huge point for you but that's such a miniscule part of the actual liberal conversation. And it being his own tour has [I]everything[/I] to do with it. That means he had fans to big him up to shut things down for the other person pretty quickly. As I've already explained, not being a pro debater and having a crowd razz you will have you fold. Almost everyone will unless they've had years of training in this shit, as CK did.

As for stepping into the Lions den. No he fvcking wasn't dude. He was stepping into a conglomerate or his own fans mixed with people who were going to be pissed off at what he has to say. A 30-year-old professional debater going to Arizona State University and arguing with teenagers who will emotionally step in is NOT stepping into the Lions den lol. That's a grown human stepping to a child.

I won't really go into each of his points over the years that I disagree with because I think that would be a complete waste of time here. But there are several and the gender thing isn't a part of it.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15033389]I'll preface what I'm about to say with no, I do not believe CK deserved to be killed and I truly do lament for his family. This is never the way and is completely unacceptable. Just saying that for the stupid fvcks on here that will try to say I think he deserved to die.

To the bolded, I don't think this is entirely true and deserves a little context added.

CK was a very skilled unmoderated debater. He was sharp, very confident in a debate and speaking in crowds, and also had a following in said crowds to help him. I do not believe for a second that his intentions were to have honest debate. From my perspective, his purpose was solely to rig the game in his favor to make liberals look stupid and further both his movement and financial value. Very frequently in these "debates" (I say that in quotes because they were again, unmoderated) would cut people off, use strawmen to back people into a corner and shape the conversation in his favor, and then make jabs or use buzzwords to incite his supporters in the crowd.

Any person who isn't as prepared or well-versed in debate as he is is naturally going to be overwhelmed or flustered with these tactics. And why wouldn't they? They don't debate these topic all day every day. He had the natural advantage.

The issue I have is that he and his followers would take his simply winning an argument by overwhelming as a confirmation that liberals don't know shit. No. He was just engaging people who weren't professionals at articulating their points on these issues while adding in some dirty debate tactics. He didn't care about their points, he wanted to make them look stupid and gain followers. It's akin to an NFL team going all out against a D3 school, paying the refs to turn a blind eye to egregious penalties, and then claiming how awesome they are when they dominate.

In summation, he didn't always actually have good points (sometimes he did, particularly with his theological knowledge). He would just overwhelm teenage unskilled debaters. And a lot of the arguments he DID make did not need to be made.

Again..RIP he didn't deserve to die. I didn't appreciate him at all though.[/QUOTE]

It's very natural to cut people off in longer debates like this when the person you're debating says something you simply don't believe to be real. He was also debating a lot of leftists who didn't want him at the campuses and would nothing better than to just be allowed their rant on his camera without being challenged on it. In the same way, Charlie was also cut off himself all the time. He allowed it both ways, which is why you don't see all of the videos of him debating ending in bickering about being cut off.

It's also clear that a lot of the radicals he debated were used to overwhelm others through verbal aggressiveness, so in terms of creating a movement, it's very good to have someone like Kirk out in campuses to show that these kids aren't the brightest and to make fun of them when they try to end a debate by claiming the other person to be racists/fascist.

Robinson was enrolled in an electrical apprenticeship through Dixie Technical College, and attended Utah State University for a single semester in 2021.
MAGA partisans are only using Kirk's death to continue their attack on higher education.

The lefties are in an extremely tough bind right now.

For years they carried on using the most extreme and insane rhetoric, but now they have no choice but to acknowledge that Charlie Kirk was [B]human[/B]. That their political enemies are [B]human[/B]. Problem is once you agree to those terms, you're basically conceding everything you said up until this point was extreme and unacceptable.

Here is Cenk from TYT having Dave Rubin read his own video titles back to him in wake of Kirk's death. Cenk looks like he is about to cry and emotionally lashes out.

[url]https://x.com/EYakoby/status/1966595091704799467[/url]

:oldlol:

I've been waiting for this moment a long time.

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033482]The lefties are in an extremely tough bind right now.

For years they carried on using the most extreme and insane rhetoric, but now they have no choice but to acknowledge that Charlie Kirk was [B]human[/B]. That their political enemies are [B]human[/B]. Problem is once you agree to those terms, you're basically conceding everything you said up until this point was extreme and unacceptable.

Here is Cenk from TYT having Dave Rubin read his own video titles back to him in wake of Kirk's death. Cenk looks like he is about to cry and emotionally lashes out.

[url]https://x.com/EYakoby/status/1966595091704799467[/url]

:oldlol:

[B]I've been waiting for this moment a long time[/B].[/QUOTE]

for charlie's death? you are a sick human being. i haven't seen anyone, not even the liberals you claim that are laughing, enjoying this tragedy as much as you are. you want to be right so badly you don't care that a human life was taken.

go seek help.

[QUOTE=highwhey;15033483]for charlie's death? you are a sick human being. i haven't seen anyone, not even the liberals you claim that are laughing, enjoying this tragedy as much as you are. you want to be right so badly you don't care that a human life was taken.

go seek help.[/QUOTE]

No doubt this is the avenue you are going to take out of pure desperation, but it won't work.

Sometimes it takes a tragedy to spur groups into action. This is exactly what Charlie would have wanted. He would not have wanted to die in vein. He would want his supporters to advance his agenda in his honor.

We owe it to him to make sure that happens.

[video=youtube;HYC-S5IsXa0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYC-S5IsXa0[/video]

:roll:

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;15033487][video=youtube;HYC-S5IsXa0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYC-S5IsXa0[/video]

:roll:[/QUOTE]

that was insane lmao

[QUOTE=Lakers Legend#32;15033306]So sorry MAGAS that whole Kirk was shot by black, trans liberal did not turn out the way you were all hoping for.

Tyler Robinson…
His parents are registered Republicans.
He’s dad is 20+ year veteran of the Sheriff’s Department.
Religious Family.
Introduced to guns by his dad at a young age.
Wore a Trump Costume for Halloween.
Not black.
Not brown.
Not an immigrant.
Not trans.
#CharlieKirk[/QUOTE]

This is really all yhat needs to be said. He also donated to the Trump campaign.