Charlie Kirk Assassinated

109,418 Views | 1584 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by Harrison Bergeron
Assassin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Osodecentx • 9:13a, 9/19/25
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."

Facebook Groups at; Memories of Dallas, Mem of Texas, Mem of Football in Texas, Mem Texas Music and Through a Texas Lens. Come visit! Over 100,000 members and 100,000 regular visitors
Reply Quote
Mothra
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Osodecentx • 9:14a, 9/19/25
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."

Yes, and therein lies the danger, and why the FCC chair's comments were so stupid.
Reply Quote
Mothra
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 9:15a, 9/19/25
Sam Lowry said:
Jack Bauer said:
Doc Holliday said:
The FCC violation angle was always a lie.

Kimmel was fired for suggesting that Charlie Kirk was murdered by his own kind/rhetoric and he refused to apologize for it.



you are going to hear this talking point for the next week - " Donald Trump is BANNING comedians."

He's doing exactly that.

LOL. You live in an alternate reality.
Reply Quote
Sam Lowry
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Mothra • 9:19a, 9/19/25
Mothra said:
Sam Lowry said:
Jack Bauer said:
Doc Holliday said:
The FCC violation angle was always a lie.

Kimmel was fired for suggesting that Charlie Kirk was murdered by his own kind/rhetoric and he refused to apologize for it.



you are going to hear this talking point for the next week - " Donald Trump is BANNING comedians."

He's doing exactly that.

LOL. You live in an alternate reality.

We all do at this point.
Reply Quote
Osodecentx
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Assassin • 9:21a, 9/19/25
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."




We'll never know, because Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, pre-empted the program. In a Wednesday podcast, he said: "What people don't understand is that the broadcasters . . . have a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest. When we see stuff like this, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way." He went on to say that it was "past time" for licensed broadcast stations that run network content to "push back" and say "we're not going to run Kimmel anymore until you straighten this out, because we licensed broadcasters are running the possibility of fines or license revocation from the FCC."
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/back-to-censor-culture-f6bd4637?mod=opinion_lead_pos7
Reply Quote
1 edit
Mothra
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sam Lowry • 9:23a, 9/19/25
Sam Lowry said:
Mothra said:
Sam Lowry said:
Jack Bauer said:
Doc Holliday said:
The FCC violation angle was always a lie.

Kimmel was fired for suggesting that Charlie Kirk was murdered by his own kind/rhetoric and he refused to apologize for it.



you are going to hear this talking point for the next week - " Donald Trump is BANNING comedians."

He's doing exactly that.

LOL. You live in an alternate reality.

We all do at this point.

You have for years.
Reply Quote
Forest Bueller_bf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DAC • 9:47a, 9/19/25
DAC said:
Jack Bauer said:
    I want to be open to Kimmel's speech but **** like this makes me glad he's gone..
They are fighting 10x as hard about Kimmel being fired for his words than Charlie Kirk actually being k1lled for his words.

Man when u think about it like that , that's so true and so sick

The lefts reaction in a nutshell. Grieving over Jimmy Kimmell who was going to be axed anyway, he is costing his employer $$ with his small audience. Really who cares he will be fine, he wasn't hurt, he has spewed his hate for years and got away with. It is long past the time he should have been fired.

But, as far as Kirk, the far lefts reaction, "he hurt folks feeling so he reaped what he sowed".

The far left are truely mentally disturbed, if not mentally ill at this point. The numbers 46% for them 2% for far right, thinking assasination may be acceptable, they are ill.
Reply Quote
Wangchung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:49a, 9/19/25
"Uh oh Republicans! Better not use your power to address problems created by democrats or the democrats are going to get in power and use it against YOU!"
"But that's exactly what republicans are doing now; getting back at democrats who abused their power when they possessed it."
"ORANGE MAN BAD! ASSASSINATION GOOD! You're all bigots and racists and homophobes and xenophobes and you hate women!"
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?

Reply Quote
1 edit
Robert Wilson
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Mothra • 9:49a, 9/19/25
Mothra said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."

Yes, and therein lies the danger, and why the FCC chair's comments were so stupid.


All they had to do was sit back, shut up, and watch.

This kind of overactive mistake of commission comes out of this administration way too often, generally driven by Trump's fragile ego and the people around him acting it out.

I mean, just sit there and let the other side screw up. Then let nature take its course.
Reply Quote
Forest Bueller_bf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Method Man • 9:52a, 9/19/25
Method Man said:
Jack Bauer said:
Oh boy...


We are living in Trump's America.
These are dark times that we are in.
Someone has to get a handle on this white on white crime.

RIP to Charles Kirk.

Trumps America?

Hell this is leftist insanity, we are living in AOC and little Timmy's America.
Nuts taking the forefront with their hate are becoming the norm.
Reply Quote
Forest Bueller_bf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Doc Holliday • 9:57a, 9/19/25
Doc Holliday said:
The FCC violation angle was always a lie.

Kimmel was fired for suggesting that Charlie Kirk was murdered by his own kind/rhetoric and he refused to apologize for it.


His employer finally had an excuse to dump a guy costing them many millions of $$ a year.

If I cost my employer $$ I would be gone tomorrow.

This was simply the market place at work and loons are making it about Trump.


It was 100% about Kimmell.

Me personally I didn't want him to be fired. When the parent company is far left and losing millions because of one of their substandard hateful employees, I'm good with it.
Reply Quote
Robert Wilson
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Forest Bueller_bf • 9:59a, 9/19/25
Forest Bueller_bf said:
Doc Holliday said:
The FCC violation angle was always a lie.

Kimmel was fired for suggesting that Charlie Kirk was murdered by his own kind/rhetoric and he refused to apologize for it.


His employer finally had an excuse to dump a guy costing them many millions of $$ a year.

If I cost my employer $$ I would be gone tomorrow.

This was simply the market place at work and loons are making it about Trump.


It was 100% about Kimmell.

Me personally I didn't want him to be fired. When the parent company is far left and losing millions because of one of their substandard hateful employees, I'm good with it.


Yeah, this is pretty simple. They wanted to get rid of him, and he gave them good cover to do it.

That's also why I think it was silly for the FCC chair to stick his nose in at all.
Reply Quote
Forest Bueller_bf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Jacques Strap • 10:03a, 9/19/25
Jacques Strap said:
Forest Bueller said:
Waco1947 said:
Forest Bueller_bf said:
Waco1947 said:
Forest Bueller_bf said:
Waco1947 said:
During that interview, Trump told host Maria Bartiromo that California Rep. Adam Schiff and other Democrats were "lunatics" and a bigger threat to the U.S. than foreign adversaries like Russia or China.
"I always say, we have two enemies," Trump said, adding: "We have the outside enemy, and then we have the enemy from within, and the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous than China, Russia and all these countries."

I don't like Trumps rhetoric most of the time, he talks too much and goes on too much,
Trump is more than rhetoric because words have consequences. He foments hates and lifts up a new target every 10 minutes. He keeps his base stirred up with lies.


Really this is not the time for the left to be pointing fingers. Trump has had multiple assasination attempts on him and Charlie was just now assasinated.

It is very tone death to point fingers right now.

The left foments hatred and anger continually and they have crazy followers to act on it.

In a recent survey the most conservative group of people only had 2% say political assassination could be somewhat justified.

On the far progressive left that number was 26% of people.

and it is not tone, deaf for you to blame radical left?


Sorry I was so off. Actually 46 percent of far left thought assassination was acceptable. 2 percent of far right.

I'll work on being more accurate next time.


Here is one recent example...

Ken White, also known by his online pseudonym Popehat, is a prominent First Amendment litigator, criminal defense attorney, and writer based in Los Angeles. A former federal prosecutor, White is best known for his legal commentary and advocacy for free speech, particularly online.




What shocked me is I had multiple Facebook "friends" dance on the grave of Kirk, ONLINE. They fomented their hatred online, much less behind closed doors. And dozens of their "friends" went online to chime in rejoicing with them.

This is a spiritual illness and I'm not sure what we can do about. When such a large % of a specific group thinks murder over speech is acceptable, I'm not sure how to correct it outside of revival.

Some one called it Trumps America......hardly.

This is the Antifacation of America.
Reply Quote
Forest Bueller_bf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Robert Wilson • 10:05a, 9/19/25
Robert Wilson said:
Mothra said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."

Yes, and therein lies the danger, and why the FCC chair's comments were so stupid.


All they had to do was sit back, shut up, and watch.

This kind of overactive mistake of commission comes out of this administration way too often, generally driven by Trump's fragile ego and the people around him acting it out.

I mean, just sit there and let the other side screw up. Then let nature take its course.

100%. Kimmell was gone anyway.
Reply Quote
Osodecentx
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Robert Wilson • 10:43a, 9/19/25
Robert Wilson said:
Mothra said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."

Yes, and therein lies the danger, and why the FCC chair's comments were so stupid.


All they had to do was sit back, shut up, and watch.

This kind of overactive mistake of commission comes out of this administration way too often, generally driven by Trump's fragile ego and the people around him acting it out.

I mean, just sit there and let the other side screw up. Then let nature take its course.

Yep
Reply Quote
FLBear5630
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ShooterTX • 11:36a, 9/19/25
ShooterTX said:
FLBear5630 said:
boognish_bear said:

funny, before he was killed I never heard of Charlie Kirk. Now he is the 13th Apostle?


You never heard of Charlie Kirk?
You really need to question your sources of information. The left wing demoncrat media has you right where they want you.... isolated away from the truth and only hearing their propaganda.


Huh? I don't hang out on college campuses nor am I in the demographic he targeted. Shooter, you cruising the college scenes? : )

Before his killing I can't remember the last time Charlie Kirk was in the Business, international or sports news that I typically would listen to.
Reply Quote
Doc Holliday
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:39a, 9/19/25
Reply Quote
BearlySpeaking
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FLBear5630 • 11:42a, 9/19/25
FLBear5630 said:
ShooterTX said:
FLBear5630 said:
boognish_bear said:

funny, before he was killed I never heard of Charlie Kirk. Now he is the 13th Apostle?


You never heard of Charlie Kirk?
You really need to question your sources of information. The left wing demoncrat media has you right where they want you.... isolated away from the truth and only hearing their propaganda.


Huh? I don't hang out on college campuses nor am I in the demographic he targeted. Shooter, you cruising the college scenes? : )

Before his killing I can't remember the last time Charlie Kirk was in the Business, international or sports news that I typically would listen to.

He is credited for Trump winning the majority of the Gen Z vote in the last election. I had YouTube shorts of his campus debates during the election season recommended to me without looking for him.
Reply Quote
KaiBear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Forest Bueller_bf • 11:43a, 9/19/25
Forest Bueller_bf said:
Jacques Strap said:
Forest Bueller said:
Waco1947 said:
Forest Bueller_bf said:
Waco1947 said:
Forest Bueller_bf said:
Waco1947 said:
During that interview, Trump told host Maria Bartiromo that California Rep. Adam Schiff and other Democrats were "lunatics" and a bigger threat to the U.S. than foreign adversaries like Russia or China.
"I always say, we have two enemies," Trump said, adding: "We have the outside enemy, and then we have the enemy from within, and the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous than China, Russia and all these countries."

I don't like Trumps rhetoric most of the time, he talks too much and goes on too much,
Trump is more than rhetoric because words have consequences. He foments hates and lifts up a new target every 10 minutes. He keeps his base stirred up with lies.


Really this is not the time for the left to be pointing fingers. Trump has had multiple assasination attempts on him and Charlie was just now assasinated.

It is very tone death to point fingers right now.

The left foments hatred and anger continually and they have crazy followers to act on it.

In a recent survey the most conservative group of people only had 2% say political assassination could be somewhat justified.

On the far progressive left that number was 26% of people.

and it is not tone, deaf for you to blame radical left?


Sorry I was so off. Actually 46 percent of far left thought assassination was acceptable. 2 percent of far right.

I'll work on being more accurate next time.


Here is one recent example...

Ken White, also known by his online pseudonym Popehat, is a prominent First Amendment litigator, criminal defense attorney, and writer based in Los Angeles. A former federal prosecutor, White is best known for his legal commentary and advocacy for free speech, particularly online.




What shocked me is I had multiple Facebook "friends" dance on the grave of Kirk, ONLINE. They fomented their hatred online, much less behind closed doors. And dozens of their "friends" went online to chime in rejoicing with them.

This is a spiritual illness and I'm not sure what we can do about. When such a large % of a specific group thinks murder over speech is acceptable, I'm not sure how to correct it outside of revival.

Some one called it Trumps America......hardly.

This is the Antifacation of America.

Have not witnessed anyone celebrating this murder first hand. Possibly because I removed such individuals from my life several years ago.

Very pleased with the results.


Reply Quote
1 edit
TechDawgMc
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Robert Wilson • 12:29p, 9/19/25
Robert Wilson said:
Mothra said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."

Yes, and therein lies the danger, and why the FCC chair's comments were so stupid.


All they had to do was sit back, shut up, and watch.

This kind of overactive mistake of commission comes out of this administration way too often, generally driven by Trump's fragile ego and the people around him acting it out.

I mean, just sit there and let the other side screw up. Then let nature take its course.

That's dead on target. Kimmel's comments are stupid. However, keeping people from being stupid is not the mission of the FCC. Threatening people because of political views--even utterly wrong ones--is not the place of the FCC (in fact, it's mostly outside the government's purview).
Reply Quote
Assassin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Wangchung • 12:36p, 9/19/25
Wangchung said:
"Uh oh Republicans! Better not use your power to address problems created by democrats or the democrats are going to get in power and use it against YOU!"
"But that's exactly what republicans are doing now; getting back at democrats who abused their power when they possessed it."
"ORANGE MAN BAD! ASSASSINATION GOOD! You're all bigots and racists and homophobes and xenophobes and you hate women!"

In a nutshell!
Facebook Groups at; Memories of Dallas, Mem of Texas, Mem of Football in Texas, Mem Texas Music and Through a Texas Lens. Come visit! Over 100,000 members and 100,000 regular visitors
Reply Quote
Assassin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:40p, 9/19/25
With all the screwups by the liberals, I cannot imagine many of them doing well in the midterms as long as the right shows those screwups to the public. Main Stream Media will do anything to get the liberal loonies back under their thumbs
Facebook Groups at; Memories of Dallas, Mem of Texas, Mem of Football in Texas, Mem Texas Music and Through a Texas Lens. Come visit! Over 100,000 members and 100,000 regular visitors
Reply Quote
whiterock
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Osodecentx • 12:46p, 9/19/25
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."




We'll never know, because Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, pre-empted the program. In a Wednesday podcast, he said: "What people don't understand is that the broadcasters . . . have a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest. When we see stuff like this, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way." He went on to say that it was "past time" for licensed broadcast stations that run network content to "push back" and say "we're not going to run Kimmel anymore until you straighten this out, because we licensed broadcasters are running the possibility of fines or license revocation from the FCC."
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/back-to-censor-culture-f6bd4637?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

Note the quote, Herr Spinmeister. He commented generically the way regulation often works. He did not say he threatened ABC. He in fact noted the facts, that in this case it was affiliates (not FCC) who pushed back and forced ABC to act.

Reply Quote
whiterock
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Forest Bueller_bf • 12:47p, 9/19/25
Forest Bueller_bf said:
Doc Holliday said:
The FCC violation angle was always a lie.

Kimmel was fired for suggesting that Charlie Kirk was murdered by his own kind/rhetoric and he refused to apologize for it.


His employer finally had an excuse to dump a guy costing them many millions of $$ a year.

If I cost my employer $$ I would be gone tomorrow.

This was simply the market place at work and loons are making it about Trump.


It was 100% about Kimmell.

Me personally I didn't want him to be fired. When the parent company is far left and losing millions because of one of their substandard hateful employees, I'm good with it.

Exactly.

Here's what the left actually did.

Reply Quote
Assassin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to whiterock • 1:02p, 9/19/25
whiterock said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."




We'll never know, because Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, pre-empted the program. In a Wednesday podcast, he said: "What people don't understand is that the broadcasters . . . have a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest. When we see stuff like this, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way." He went on to say that it was "past time" for licensed broadcast stations that run network content to "push back" and say "we're not going to run Kimmel anymore until you straighten this out, because we licensed broadcasters are running the possibility of fines or license revocation from the FCC."
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/back-to-censor-culture-f6bd4637?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

Note the quote, Herr Spinmeister. He commented generically the way regulation often works. He did not say he threatened ABC. He in fact noted the facts, that in this case it was affiliates (not FCC) who pushed back and forced ABC to act.

He is a pretty regular Spinmeister.
Facebook Groups at; Memories of Dallas, Mem of Texas, Mem of Football in Texas, Mem Texas Music and Through a Texas Lens. Come visit! Over 100,000 members and 100,000 regular visitors
Reply Quote
Assassin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:04p, 9/19/25
Facebook Groups at; Memories of Dallas, Mem of Texas, Mem of Football in Texas, Mem Texas Music and Through a Texas Lens. Come visit! Over 100,000 members and 100,000 regular visitors
Reply Quote
whiterock
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:05p, 9/19/25
Cuomo has his eye on the ball here.

Reply Quote
Osodecentx
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to whiterock • 1:14p, 9/19/25
whiterock said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."




We'll never know, because Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, pre-empted the program. In a Wednesday podcast, he said: "What people don't understand is that the broadcasters . . . have a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest. When we see stuff like this, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way." He went on to say that it was "past time" for licensed broadcast stations that run network content to "push back" and say "we're not going to run Kimmel anymore until you straighten this out, because we licensed broadcasters are running the possibility of fines or license revocation from the FCC."
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/back-to-censor-culture-f6bd4637?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

Note the quote, Herr Spinmeister. He commented generically the way regulation often works. He did not say he threatened ABC. He in fact noted the facts, that in this case it was affiliates (not FCC) who pushed back and forced ABC to act.


WSJ's take on FCC, & I certainly agree with it, but it's hardly spin

WASHINGTON U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz says FCC chairman Brendan Carr sounded more like an organized crime boss than a federal regulator when he threatened to revoke ABC's licenses over comments by late night host Jimmy Kimmel.

The Texas Republican emphasized how much he hates what Kimmel said about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk and how much he likes and works closely with Carr.
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2025/09/19/ted-cruz-says-fcc-chair-sounded-like-a-mafia-boss-in-threats-against-abc-over-jimmy-kimmel/
Reply Quote
1 edit
whiterock
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:14p, 9/19/25
Reply Quote
Assassin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to whiterock • 1:17p, 9/19/25
whiterock said:

Disney said "We can't have him go on the air tonight" and they YANKED him from the AIR

Little Jimmy thought he was bigger than MICKEY MOUSE … but really he's just BAD for BUSINESS
Facebook Groups at; Memories of Dallas, Mem of Texas, Mem of Football in Texas, Mem Texas Music and Through a Texas Lens. Come visit! Over 100,000 members and 100,000 regular visitors
Reply Quote
whiterock
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Osodecentx • 1:56p, 9/19/25
Osodecentx said:
whiterock said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."




We'll never know, because Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, pre-empted the program. In a Wednesday podcast, he said: "What people don't understand is that the broadcasters . . . have a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest. When we see stuff like this, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way." He went on to say that it was "past time" for licensed broadcast stations that run network content to "push back" and say "we're not going to run Kimmel anymore until you straighten this out, because we licensed broadcasters are running the possibility of fines or license revocation from the FCC."
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/back-to-censor-culture-f6bd4637?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

Note the quote, Herr Spinmeister. He commented generically the way regulation often works. He did not say he threatened ABC. He in fact noted the facts, that in this case it was affiliates (not FCC) who pushed back and forced ABC to act.


WSJ's take on FCC, & I certainly agree with it, but it's hardly spin

WASHINGTON U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz says FCC chairman Brendan Carr sounded more like an organized crime boss than a federal regulator when he threatened to revoke ABC's licenses over comments by late night host Jimmy Kimmel.

The Texas Republican emphasized how much he hates what Kimmel said about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk and how much he likes and works closely with Carr.
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2025/09/19/ted-cruz-says-fcc-chair-sounded-like-a-mafia-boss-in-threats-against-abc-over-jimmy-kimmel/

LOL spinning on top of spin

The quoted portion did not say what your post alleges.


Reply Quote
1 edit
whiterock
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:58p, 9/19/25
Reply Quote
whiterock
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:08p, 9/19/25
Wise words for the neverTrumpers.

Reply Quote
2 edits
Osodecentx
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to whiterock • 2:18p, 9/19/25
whiterock said:
Osodecentx said:
whiterock said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
Osodecentx said:
Assassin said:
TuWe can hope



From WSJ:

Minutes ago, the right was slamming the Biden administration for its coercive censorship under the guise of stopping "misinformation and disinformation." Turns out the right can play such word games too. The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest." Especially as a driving Democratic ambition is to expand the FCC's powers to allow it to police cable news. Just imagine how the progressive "public interest" will treat Fox News, One America News, or Newsmax.

The WSJ forgets that the left has been doing this for decades; the right is FINALLY fighting back.

The next Democratic head of the FCC will adore imposing his definition of the "public interest."




We'll never know, because Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, pre-empted the program. In a Wednesday podcast, he said: "What people don't understand is that the broadcasters . . . have a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest. When we see stuff like this, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way." He went on to say that it was "past time" for licensed broadcast stations that run network content to "push back" and say "we're not going to run Kimmel anymore until you straighten this out, because we licensed broadcasters are running the possibility of fines or license revocation from the FCC."
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/back-to-censor-culture-f6bd4637?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

Note the quote, Herr Spinmeister. He commented generically the way regulation often works. He did not say he threatened ABC. He in fact noted the facts, that in this case it was affiliates (not FCC) who pushed back and forced ABC to act.


WSJ's take on FCC, & I certainly agree with it, but it's hardly spin

WASHINGTON U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz says FCC chairman Brendan Carr sounded more like an organized crime boss than a federal regulator when he threatened to revoke ABC's licenses over comments by late night host Jimmy Kimmel.

The Texas Republican emphasized how much he hates what Kimmel said about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk and how much he likes and works closely with Carr.
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2025/09/19/ted-cruz-says-fcc-chair-sounded-like-a-mafia-boss-in-threats-against-abc-over-jimmy-kimmel/

LOL spinning on top of spin

The quoted portion did not say what your post alleges.




Now you're spinning. I quoted Cruz directly and didn't edit him or the WSJ editorial
Reply Quote
BUDOS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:35p, 9/19/25
According to our founding fathers, is the first amendment supposed to exist for all Americans or just the ones the left agrees with? The right? Average Americans? Moderate Americans? You?
Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.