Hooligans Sportsbook

Charlie Kirk Assassination

  • Start date
  • Replies
    266 Replies •
  • Views 2,973 Views
I don't claim to know. Every president hires an FCC person. Yeah, I'm aware of his remarks.

But I am more scared of the slippery slope Dave. Just imagine if Democrats banned Trump from social media, tried to throw him in jail, and used the FBI to target and censor conservatives.

It's gonna be whataboutism for eternity now that the right side doing all the same shit the left has been doing. As previously stated, principals are off the table.
 
RIP Charlie. If it had to be someone, wish it was Nick. I have spent the last few days watching endless clips of Charlie. I, (like most) didn’t agree with everything he said, but have seen so many quotes and clips posted out of context. (The one that stands out the most is the accusation he called some one a “chink,” )


I agree with the poster who said Kimmel bit was focused on Trump, not Charlie. He got the facts at the beginning incorrect (claiming shooter was MAGA,) but that was likely to early reports of him coming from a hardcore MAGA family. I was offended by nothing in that monalogue.

Final thought…a good reminder.

 
And why TF DID that kid leave the assembled rifle? If he’s a smart as thy say he is, makes no sense, Many things in this story don’t. Kirk was a hell of debater though…sometimes he got a tad condescending, but if that was an excuse for death, half of forumville would be gone.

Right in front of his children too. Sick.
 
IAG
And why TF DID that kid leave the assembled rifle? If he’s a smart as thy say he is, makes no sense, Many things in this story don’t. Kirk was a hell of debater though…sometimes he got a tad condescending, but if that was an excuse for death, half of forumville would be gone.

Right in front of his children too. Sick.
100%

Kid is a loser, and soon he'll be dead.

Not exactly a 1-1 trade unfortunately.

The rifle was too big for him to carry around.
 
this might be trial of the month, if not year

tyler confesses
 
You are probably too busy reading the latest scientific studies to do a simple Google search, so I'll help:

H.Res.519 - Condemning the attacks on Minnesota lawmakers in Brooklyn Park and Champlin, Minnesota, and calling for unity and the rejection of political violence in Minnesota and across the United States

H.Res.719 - Honoring the life and legacy of Charles "Charlie" James Kirk.

So one condemns a violent attack of a government official and rejects political violence.

The other celebrates the life and legacy of a divisive partisan podcaster, with the resolution itself waxing poetic on how amazing he was.

This is not the same thing, at all. I'm sure there would have been nay votes to a "let's celebrate how amazing Melissa Hortman was", and that it would have been unanimous if it was simply "violence is bad" this time around.