A significant aspect of this tragedy is how many people are outing themselves as extremists. From all walks. Just throwing out into the ether deranged thoughts that any grounded person wouldn't touch (nor think). In the end, this is a positive decoupling of crazy people from the rest of us. Such an awful shame this is how we got there.
Well they ought to stop saying things engraved on bullets.
Isnt it funny that the D's were adamantly denying that Robinson could be a progressive, when at the same time progressives have been cheering on the assassination?!
The deranged rant from a vet at The Gentle Care Animal Hospital in Edmond Oklahoma (not Nixa, Missouri) takes the cake. A concerned citizen had the comments made into a sign, which he put up in a vacant lot next to the hospital. The Oklahoma Veterinary Board is now looking into it.
What shocked me was many of those making unhinged comments were teachers. Were they this hateful in the classroom? I don't think these people belong anywhere near children.
Umm...she also "quoted" Charlie Kirk with a completely made-up-by-her quote. She attributed a quote to him that does not exist. Why did you not cover this?
The offending misquote was: "Black women do not have the brain processing power to be taken seriously. You have to go steal a white person's slot."
Kirk never said this. If you purport to be a journalist, this is a fireable offense, to not have made any effort to discover if this quote was fake or real. It's fake. Kirk never said this. The NY Times ignores this as well in their attempt to take Attiah's side.
Unfortunately, after someone dies, there is no cause of action for defamatory statements made against or about the deceased in most jurisdictions in the US.
And King apologized and corrected himself which sounds like something Mrs. Kirk might grant some grace on given all I have learned. No matter how much I disdain King, I think given the public discourse we have had lately, his response was above average and creditable.
I disagree. In the hours after Kirk was assassinated, if your first impulse is to defame him spectacularly to your millions of online followers, no simple "oopsy, I guess I was wrong about his wanting to throw gay people off of buildings," is worthy of anything but derision. It doesn't matter that he took it down and apologized; far more people saw his original post than did his apology. Disgusting.
Correct. But maybe Alex didn't see her comment there -- I hadn't read it until after she was fired. She clearly lives in her own reality and ignores the truth.
Guess what, though? Even were it so, you're not actually allowed to kill people for saying or thinking that. And watching Hannah-Jones, Attiah, or Jasmine Crockett, you could certainly be forgiven for struggling with your own graciousness in considering the idea... Wonder where that "quote" came from.
This quote was brought up by J D Vance who sat in as a replacement for Charlie Kirk’s podcast. He was quoting from The Nation magazine (as other UT reader correctly mentioned.)
I can't believe anyone actually uses Snopes. I stopped when I realized that the New York Times and The Washington Post was a source for their determination.
I can only imagine the effort it takes to manipulate words trying to achieve a desired outcome. Snopes isn't fact checking the actual quote that Kirk was falsely accused of making. Instead they slip the word "prominent" in front of black women. Kirk never said "black women" but he did say "you" and he was referring to a prominent black woman. So sure Snopes can say their made up quote is true but what that has to do with the actual quote he's falsely accused of saying is beyond me.
he called out a particularly stupid black woman and correctly called her stupid because she is stupid and stupidly told everyone she was helped along by affirmative action and took the opportunity from a more qualified person
That is the way of the modern fact-checker - they are more like partisan staff spinning the position of their side. They twist and/or nitpick. I always use the example if Trump said "that witch, Hillary Clinton, cooked up the Steele Dossier to cover for her own illicit dealings through her foundation" the fact checker would say "False: there is no evidence Hillary Clinton practices witchcraft."
If you're right, it's bad, fire-able, "journalism" on the part of the author in The Nation, but also for Attiah, who repeated that quote without vetting it. Doesn't look like Attiah attributed the quote to The Nation.
As conservatives, we have to be very careful whenever we address first amendment issues (i.e. Pam Bondi and so-called "hate speech.) But yes I agree, a private business can set its own standards and rules and I have no problem with this woman being fired because she violated those rules. I don't want to go down the slippery-slope of "cancel culture" that we as conservatives have been deriding for years (i.e. getting people fired because of an off-color joke or bad take from years ago), but I'm also reminded of all the people in 2020 and 2021 who said Facebook and Twitter can ban anyone over speech they want because they are a private business. (This was specifically re: COVID policies.)
For me, I simply blocked people who were either celebrating Charlie's murder or who intentionally misrepresented him. I don't have the bandwidth right now to engage in debate, and I don't want to see this evil on my timeline. It makes me sad, because I have always prided myself on not blocking people who disagreed with me, but the evil comments are too much. My youngest daughter was a member of Turning Point in college, and she had met Charlie many times. We're all sad and heartbroken, and I don't think it's going to feel different anytime soon.
There is a significant difference between celebrating a murder/mocking a murder victim and, for instance, misgendering. Disagree always; celebrate murder never.
When you put it that way ... yes. Still, when I read Jonathan Turley's article about free speech it hit home. Of course, there are some people I will never respect again after what they posted, and I blocked one of my longest friends and my no-longer-favorite cousin after last week.
But I think what you are missing is these comments tacitly if not actively support murdering those who make statements they disagree with. The people making these statements are teachers, medical professionals, law enforcement officials, local government officials. Do you want someone who thinks it is OK to kill another human over words they don't like teaching your children, treating your illness, arresting you, or handling your problem with local government? How can they be trusted to act fairly? This has nothing to do with free speech. Employers can make these decisions for reputational and safety reasons, etc. Should the government intervene to stop anyone's legal speech, it is then a First Amendment issue.
Yes, I agree. I didn't explain well. My problem is when Pam Bondi suggested prosecuting Office Depot for not printing the Charlie Kirk poster. Office Depot fired their employee. The federal government has no case here. This was the entire reasoning behind the cake case in Colorado -- compelled speech. Can the government force a business to create something they morally disagree with? It's absolutely horrific that there are individuals in positions of authority who are suggesting that it's OK to murder ANYONE, let alone someone for their beliefs or speech.
Also, I think most conservatives would never condone the murder of someone who disagrees with them. We might not want to socialize with them, we might publicly condemn them, but we'd never say we want them dead. The left doesn't have the same moral roadblocks (I say this generally, not specifically, because there are obviously moral liberals who would never condone murder.)
Pam has made statements that are completely incorrect several times since Charlie's murder. I have called her out, and honestly questioned her ability to be AG. I agree wholeheartedly with what you said in this reply to me.
I don't know if I would have her resign -- she's been good on a lot of things -- but sometimes she says things that are just flat out wrong, not only constitutionally, but as a conservative. Argh! .... And thank you for the civil discourse! This is what we all should be doing, having good conversations about important issues.
TDS is a legit psychosis...was evident for years and years and years now. Probably the single greatest psyop ever DONE in America. How Pharma has not capitalized on marketing a new DRUG to treat it suprising. Would enjoy seeing a SNL skit on the new wonder drug for TDS called Trumpapine or similar :)
Karen is already on substack with the other fired msm hacks. The biggest Karen, Heather cox Richardson, told her 2 million readers that Charlie’s assassin is a maga conservative. Trump derangement Substack is a human centipede of slop and lies even worse than msm: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/trump-derangement-substack-correspondents-dinner
And now of course, we have the Utah prosecutor's press conference where we learned that his mother stated to them that his politics had veered to the left in a big way in the last year. So there's that.
I think Heather Cox Richardson has more impact than CNN and MSNBC at this point. I unfortunately know a lot of folks who follow her, share her posts, and dote on her every word. This includes several former Republican "Never Trumpers" who are now practically Social Justice Warriors at this point. I've read her stuff before and don't find it compelling at all, but something about the fact that she is a "historian" gives her clout with these people. SMH
The fact she spews lies and has followers shows how facts don’t matter anymore. The line that white people kill black people is beyond misguided but patently wrong. The facts are the other way around and by larger numbers than you would believe. The bigger numbers are black on black which shows how delirious she is. She is just racist herself and her firing should make her take a long look into a mirror but I wouldn’t hold my breath as her followers mean that much to her and give her validation.
After watching various "churches" yesterday on Hannity's show, my goodness. How can we stop pretending certain factions of certain races don't want to be at war with others of another race?
I wonder if they would like the outcome of a race war considering they are a minority not only to whites but also Hispanics? I have been around Hispanics my entire life and at least the ones I consider to friends don’t necessarily like blacks.
Yes. She had been warned before and decided to keep it up, seems like she was daring them or just too blinded to take the warning seriously. I like how she disparaged Jews and Christians with the rending garments and ashes "smeared" on faces comment. And Alex, kudos for not using the initial cap on black!
Are we supposed to believe that all these democrats espousing joy over Charlie’s shooting, were actually following his podcasts and attended his rallies? Of course not. They heard it from a friend who, heard it from a friend who…
I’m at the point of offering a reward to anyone who can provide a video clip of Kirk espousing hate or making divisive comments. The truth is, every democrat has made far worse comments than Charlie ever did.
BTW- Chauvin was found guilty of murder, but Floyd did die of a heart attack as a result of a drug overdose. So says the coroner. Even if he were left alone in the back of the police car, he would’ve been dead before he got to the hospital.
An autopsy takes 4 to 6 weeks to find the cause of death. In the case of Prince it was 6 weeks. For Matthew Perry it was 7 weeks. Michael Jackson was 8 weeks. Now George Floyd only took 6 DAYS, not weeks. This is the original sin.
Correct. Forensic analysis can rely on a few dozen samples from the body. If you want to be highly confident in the result, you send the samples to multiple labs for testing. In the George Floyd case, they relied on only 2 samples, hospital drawn blood and urine. They used only one lab. They got the quickest, easiest and least conclusive result possible.
Thankfully I have a second home up north and in the mountains (that Newsom's policies burned up a couple of years ago), and get to escape the progressive crazies.
What struck me beyond Alex's excellent discussion of this firing was his cavalier dismissal of Cotton's call for a show of force during the George Floyd riots. Said "show of force" might have prevented billions of dollars in damage in largely black neighborhoods. It might have further prevented dozens of deaths and injuries.
You can take the boy out of the NYT but you can't take the NYT out of the boy.
Agree, have wished DJT “called out the troops” and stopped the horrendous G. Floyd aftermath riots immediately. So much damage, loss, and heartache could have been stopped. Tragic! T. Cotton was right. 🔥
People need to stop avoiding calling out bigotry when it is directed at white males. The left is too quick to call everyone a racist, but when this reporter or Joy Reid goes on a racist rant against white men, you get total silence and the media says nothing???
How many years did Reid give her nightly racist rant filled with hatred? MSNBC had no problem with her until the tide changed. When Democrats were no longer in charge of the country and cheering her on, her ratings plummeted. MSNBC made a business decision to cut her loose.
"Cotton’s call for “an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers” proved misguided and ultimately unnecessary."
Nope! I totally disagree with you on this, Alex. The BLM riots after George Floyd's death caused billions of dollars in damage and cost about 12 people their lives. I would have been fine with Cotton's solution and been happy if they had shot the rioters dead. The democrats instigated and funded those riots and the murders they caused. The democrats have used domestic terrorism as a weapon for over 100 years. First it was the KKK, today they have that, Antifa, BLM and countless other terror supporting NGOs we funded through their government grift. Democrats are a proven domestic enemy and should be treated like one.
"At will" means exactly that; you're at will to be moron.
Being a moron in a business has consequences.
They call Charlie's speech hateful speech because they hate what he says.
When one views another's speech as "violence", doesn't it stand to reason that violence will become those very same people's "speech"?...just sayin'
A significant aspect of this tragedy is how many people are outing themselves as extremists. From all walks. Just throwing out into the ether deranged thoughts that any grounded person wouldn't touch (nor think). In the end, this is a positive decoupling of crazy people from the rest of us. Such an awful shame this is how we got there.
Well they ought to stop saying things engraved on bullets.
Isnt it funny that the D's were adamantly denying that Robinson could be a progressive, when at the same time progressives have been cheering on the assassination?!
The deranged rant from a vet at The Gentle Care Animal Hospital in Edmond Oklahoma (not Nixa, Missouri) takes the cake. A concerned citizen had the comments made into a sign, which he put up in a vacant lot next to the hospital. The Oklahoma Veterinary Board is now looking into it.
Disturbing story. The use of the slob neologism "un alived" is a weird indicator of this person's tribalism.
What comments, please elaborate, thanks
It is an epidemic of incontinence.
This has also blown my mind. Its virtue signaling on steroids. As if your settings kicked in and you just HAD to post some garbage.
What shocked me was many of those making unhinged comments were teachers. Were they this hateful in the classroom? I don't think these people belong anywhere near children.
I think her status as “free lance writer” is likely to be permanent.
Umm...she also "quoted" Charlie Kirk with a completely made-up-by-her quote. She attributed a quote to him that does not exist. Why did you not cover this?
The offending misquote was: "Black women do not have the brain processing power to be taken seriously. You have to go steal a white person's slot."
Kirk never said this. If you purport to be a journalist, this is a fireable offense, to not have made any effort to discover if this quote was fake or real. It's fake. Kirk never said this. The NY Times ignores this as well in their attempt to take Attiah's side.
I hope Erika Kirk sues her for that.
Mrs Kiek has a long list of people she can sue for defamation. I for one hope Stephen King is on that list.
Unfortunately, after someone dies, there is no cause of action for defamatory statements made against or about the deceased in most jurisdictions in the US.
And King apologized and corrected himself which sounds like something Mrs. Kirk might grant some grace on given all I have learned. No matter how much I disdain King, I think given the public discourse we have had lately, his response was above average and creditable.
I disagree. In the hours after Kirk was assassinated, if your first impulse is to defame him spectacularly to your millions of online followers, no simple "oopsy, I guess I was wrong about his wanting to throw gay people off of buildings," is worthy of anything but derision. It doesn't matter that he took it down and apologized; far more people saw his original post than did his apology. Disgusting.
…and surprising
Steve K has been in the alone in the Maine woods for too long
Would be nice to see these people hit where they actually hurt... Their wallets. Race grifters.
Correct. But maybe Alex didn't see her comment there -- I hadn't read it until after she was fired. She clearly lives in her own reality and ignores the truth.
Guess what, though? Even were it so, you're not actually allowed to kill people for saying or thinking that. And watching Hannah-Jones, Attiah, or Jasmine Crockett, you could certainly be forgiven for struggling with your own graciousness in considering the idea... Wonder where that "quote" came from.
This quote was brought up by J D Vance who sat in as a replacement for Charlie Kirk’s podcast. He was quoting from The Nation magazine (as other UT reader correctly mentioned.)
Snopes has its own take: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/charlie-kirk-black-women/
Snopes has become such a joke
I can't believe anyone actually uses Snopes. I stopped when I realized that the New York Times and The Washington Post was a source for their determination.
I can only imagine the effort it takes to manipulate words trying to achieve a desired outcome. Snopes isn't fact checking the actual quote that Kirk was falsely accused of making. Instead they slip the word "prominent" in front of black women. Kirk never said "black women" but he did say "you" and he was referring to a prominent black woman. So sure Snopes can say their made up quote is true but what that has to do with the actual quote he's falsely accused of saying is beyond me.
he called out a particularly stupid black woman and correctly called her stupid because she is stupid and stupidly told everyone she was helped along by affirmative action and took the opportunity from a more qualified person
That is the way of the modern fact-checker - they are more like partisan staff spinning the position of their side. They twist and/or nitpick. I always use the example if Trump said "that witch, Hillary Clinton, cooked up the Steele Dossier to cover for her own illicit dealings through her foundation" the fact checker would say "False: there is no evidence Hillary Clinton practices witchcraft."
off topic, but, Wikipedia is equally as inaccurate and unreliable
@Jack? I don't think that was her. I believe that was someone who wrote (writes still?) for The Nation.
If you're right, it's bad, fire-able, "journalism" on the part of the author in The Nation, but also for Attiah, who repeated that quote without vetting it. Doesn't look like Attiah attributed the quote to The Nation.
yup
Yes. Who wants to be associated with people celebrating murder?
Not to mention an overt racist and sexist like she is.
the only thing that genuinely surprised me is that there was a user on bluesky with enough humanity to suggest that murder is wrong
DT you never let me down with your insights
Good piece. But this one line was pretty funny, in an otherwise somber missive.
“Washington Post is neither part of the government”
LMAO. While this is legally correct, operationally they are as much a part of ‘part’ of the government as the WH press secretary.
Without the Post and the Times, where would the CIA and FBI go to leak the things they need leaked.
As conservatives, we have to be very careful whenever we address first amendment issues (i.e. Pam Bondi and so-called "hate speech.) But yes I agree, a private business can set its own standards and rules and I have no problem with this woman being fired because she violated those rules. I don't want to go down the slippery-slope of "cancel culture" that we as conservatives have been deriding for years (i.e. getting people fired because of an off-color joke or bad take from years ago), but I'm also reminded of all the people in 2020 and 2021 who said Facebook and Twitter can ban anyone over speech they want because they are a private business. (This was specifically re: COVID policies.)
For me, I simply blocked people who were either celebrating Charlie's murder or who intentionally misrepresented him. I don't have the bandwidth right now to engage in debate, and I don't want to see this evil on my timeline. It makes me sad, because I have always prided myself on not blocking people who disagreed with me, but the evil comments are too much. My youngest daughter was a member of Turning Point in college, and she had met Charlie many times. We're all sad and heartbroken, and I don't think it's going to feel different anytime soon.
There is a significant difference between celebrating a murder/mocking a murder victim and, for instance, misgendering. Disagree always; celebrate murder never.
When you put it that way ... yes. Still, when I read Jonathan Turley's article about free speech it hit home. Of course, there are some people I will never respect again after what they posted, and I blocked one of my longest friends and my no-longer-favorite cousin after last week.
But I think what you are missing is these comments tacitly if not actively support murdering those who make statements they disagree with. The people making these statements are teachers, medical professionals, law enforcement officials, local government officials. Do you want someone who thinks it is OK to kill another human over words they don't like teaching your children, treating your illness, arresting you, or handling your problem with local government? How can they be trusted to act fairly? This has nothing to do with free speech. Employers can make these decisions for reputational and safety reasons, etc. Should the government intervene to stop anyone's legal speech, it is then a First Amendment issue.
Yes, I agree. I didn't explain well. My problem is when Pam Bondi suggested prosecuting Office Depot for not printing the Charlie Kirk poster. Office Depot fired their employee. The federal government has no case here. This was the entire reasoning behind the cake case in Colorado -- compelled speech. Can the government force a business to create something they morally disagree with? It's absolutely horrific that there are individuals in positions of authority who are suggesting that it's OK to murder ANYONE, let alone someone for their beliefs or speech.
Also, I think most conservatives would never condone the murder of someone who disagrees with them. We might not want to socialize with them, we might publicly condemn them, but we'd never say we want them dead. The left doesn't have the same moral roadblocks (I say this generally, not specifically, because there are obviously moral liberals who would never condone murder.)
Pam has made statements that are completely incorrect several times since Charlie's murder. I have called her out, and honestly questioned her ability to be AG. I agree wholeheartedly with what you said in this reply to me.
I don't know if I would have her resign -- she's been good on a lot of things -- but sometimes she says things that are just flat out wrong, not only constitutionally, but as a conservative. Argh! .... And thank you for the civil discourse! This is what we all should be doing, having good conversations about important issues.
I agree with you. I expected Pam to be better than that.
I truly never thought Trump hate could be taken so much higher and beyond him… but oh it has
I think the hate for Charlie comes from the left's fear that in 12 or 16 years, Charlie could have been President.
TDS is a legit psychosis...was evident for years and years and years now. Probably the single greatest psyop ever DONE in America. How Pharma has not capitalized on marketing a new DRUG to treat it suprising. Would enjoy seeing a SNL skit on the new wonder drug for TDS called Trumpapine or similar :)
Karen is already on substack with the other fired msm hacks. The biggest Karen, Heather cox Richardson, told her 2 million readers that Charlie’s assassin is a maga conservative. Trump derangement Substack is a human centipede of slop and lies even worse than msm: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/trump-derangement-substack-correspondents-dinner
And now of course, we have the Utah prosecutor's press conference where we learned that his mother stated to them that his politics had veered to the left in a big way in the last year. So there's that.
I subscribe to light her coastal progressive, blue haired, cat-petting followers on fire.
I used to enjoy trolling Washington Post readers, but their low IQ takes were so low I couldn’t take it anymore and quit.
I think Heather Cox Richardson has more impact than CNN and MSNBC at this point. I unfortunately know a lot of folks who follow her, share her posts, and dote on her every word. This includes several former Republican "Never Trumpers" who are now practically Social Justice Warriors at this point. I've read her stuff before and don't find it compelling at all, but something about the fact that she is a "historian" gives her clout with these people. SMH
The fact she spews lies and has followers shows how facts don’t matter anymore. The line that white people kill black people is beyond misguided but patently wrong. The facts are the other way around and by larger numbers than you would believe. The bigger numbers are black on black which shows how delirious she is. She is just racist herself and her firing should make her take a long look into a mirror but I wouldn’t hold my breath as her followers mean that much to her and give her validation.
After watching various "churches" yesterday on Hannity's show, my goodness. How can we stop pretending certain factions of certain races don't want to be at war with others of another race?
I wonder if they would like the outcome of a race war considering they are a minority not only to whites but also Hispanics? I have been around Hispanics my entire life and at least the ones I consider to friends don’t necessarily like blacks.
Yes. She had been warned before and decided to keep it up, seems like she was daring them or just too blinded to take the warning seriously. I like how she disparaged Jews and Christians with the rending garments and ashes "smeared" on faces comment. And Alex, kudos for not using the initial cap on black!
Are we supposed to believe that all these democrats espousing joy over Charlie’s shooting, were actually following his podcasts and attended his rallies? Of course not. They heard it from a friend who, heard it from a friend who…
I’m at the point of offering a reward to anyone who can provide a video clip of Kirk espousing hate or making divisive comments. The truth is, every democrat has made far worse comments than Charlie ever did.
BTW- Chauvin was found guilty of murder, but Floyd did die of a heart attack as a result of a drug overdose. So says the coroner. Even if he were left alone in the back of the police car, he would’ve been dead before he got to the hospital.
An autopsy takes 4 to 6 weeks to find the cause of death. In the case of Prince it was 6 weeks. For Matthew Perry it was 7 weeks. Michael Jackson was 8 weeks. Now George Floyd only took 6 DAYS, not weeks. This is the original sin.
That report was written before the toxicology report ever came back...
Correct. Forensic analysis can rely on a few dozen samples from the body. If you want to be highly confident in the result, you send the samples to multiple labs for testing. In the George Floyd case, they relied on only 2 samples, hospital drawn blood and urine. They used only one lab. They got the quickest, easiest and least conclusive result possible.
The result fit the narrative of AG Elison so there was no need for him to wait for other test results to come in.
Agree completely, and you are awarded extra points for referencing an '80s standard.
Cancel Culture has been canceled.
It is being replaced with Consequence Culture.
Well said
I am down the street from you in the people's republic of Davis.
Oh goodness, that is almost as bad as SF. I moved to Los Gatos two years ago, much better than SF.
Thankfully I have a second home up north and in the mountains (that Newsom's policies burned up a couple of years ago), and get to escape the progressive crazies.
What struck me beyond Alex's excellent discussion of this firing was his cavalier dismissal of Cotton's call for a show of force during the George Floyd riots. Said "show of force" might have prevented billions of dollars in damage in largely black neighborhoods. It might have further prevented dozens of deaths and injuries.
You can take the boy out of the NYT but you can't take the NYT out of the boy.
Agree, have wished DJT “called out the troops” and stopped the horrendous G. Floyd aftermath riots immediately. So much damage, loss, and heartache could have been stopped. Tragic! T. Cotton was right. 🔥
People need to stop avoiding calling out bigotry when it is directed at white males. The left is too quick to call everyone a racist, but when this reporter or Joy Reid goes on a racist rant against white men, you get total silence and the media says nothing???
How many years did Reid give her nightly racist rant filled with hatred? MSNBC had no problem with her until the tide changed. When Democrats were no longer in charge of the country and cheering her on, her ratings plummeted. MSNBC made a business decision to cut her loose.
She lied about things Charlie has said. That is why she should have been fired. Along with violating the Post's own rules.
"Cotton’s call for “an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers” proved misguided and ultimately unnecessary."
Nope! I totally disagree with you on this, Alex. The BLM riots after George Floyd's death caused billions of dollars in damage and cost about 12 people their lives. I would have been fine with Cotton's solution and been happy if they had shot the rioters dead. The democrats instigated and funded those riots and the murders they caused. The democrats have used domestic terrorism as a weapon for over 100 years. First it was the KKK, today they have that, Antifa, BLM and countless other terror supporting NGOs we funded through their government grift. Democrats are a proven domestic enemy and should be treated like one.