Below is my column in the Hill on the murder of Charlie Kirk, the latest victim of our age of rage. The evidence of Antifa scribblings and indoctrination of the shooter came as no surprise. For months, some of us have been warning Democratic leaders about their dangerous rhetoric and how it would be received by the most radical elements in the Antifa movement.
Here is the column:
“Prove me wrong.”
For years, that tagline of Charlie Kirk and his group, Turning Point USA, enraged many on the left. In “an age of rage,” nothing is more triggering for the perpetually angry than an invitation to debate issues.
Indeed, someone has now killed him for it.
What is most chilling about the assassination is that it was not in the slightest degree surprising. This follows two attempted assassinations of President Trump and the killing of a pair of Minnesota politicians.
I heard of the assassination in Prague as I prepared to speak about the age of rage and the growing attacks on free speech. I was profoundly saddened by the news. I knew Charlie and respected his effort to challenge the orthodoxy on college campuses. We all have received regular death threats (and Charlie more than most), but there is still a hope that even the most deranged will leave these threats at the ideation rather than the action stage.This killer left Charlie’s wife, Erika, and her two young children as the latest victims of senseless violence against someone who refused to be silenced.
We do not have to know much about the shooter to recognize the rage. The person who killed Charlie did not view him as a father or even as a person. That is the transformative, enabling effect of rage.
In my book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I write about rage and the uncomfortable truth for many engaging in rage rhetoric: “What few today want to admit is that they like it. They like the freedom that it affords, the ability to hate and harass without a sense of responsibility. It is evident all around us as people engage in language and conduct that they repudiate in others. We have become a nation of rage addicts, flailing against anyone or anything that stands in opposition to our own truths. Like all addictions, there is not only a dependency on rage but an intolerance for opposing views. … Indeed, to voice free speech principles in a time of rage is to invite the rage of the mob.”
Charlie was brave, and he was brash. He refused to yield to the threats while encouraging others to speak out on our campuses.
He was particularly hated for holding a mirror to the face of higher education, exposing the hate and hypocrisy on our campuses. For decades, faculty have purged their ranks of conservatives and libertarians. Faced with the intolerance of most schools, polls show that a large percentage of students hide their values to avoid retaliation from faculty or their fellow students.
Charlie chose to change all that. TPUSA challenges people to engage and debate them. The response from some on the left has been to trash their tables and threaten the students. Recently, at UC Davis, police stood by and watched as a TPUSA tent was torn apart.
Charlie is only the latest such victim, and he is unlikely to be the last.
For months, some of us have warned about the rise in rage rhetoric. Some believe that they can ride a wave of rage back into power. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) has called for people to take to the streets to save democracy and posted a picture of himself brandishing a baseball bat.
Likewise, California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) declared, “I’m going to punch these sons of bitches in the mouth.”
Various radical groups welcome such rage rhetoric, particularly Antifa. The most violent anti-free speech group in the U.S., Antifa has long attacked journalists and others with opposing views. In his “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook,” Professor Mark Bray noted that “most Americans in Antifa have been anarchists or antiauthoritarian communists. … From that standpoint, ‘free speech’ as such is merely a bourgeois fantasy unworthy of consideration.”
Alleged shooter Tyler Robinson, 22, reportedly left telltale Antifa markings on evidence, including marking bullets inscribed with the lyrics: “Bella Ciao, Bella Ciao, Bella Ciao, Ciao, Ciao”(from an Italian anti-fascist anthem) and “Hey, fascist! Catch!”
I previously testified in Congress about the dangers of Antifa, and I discuss the group in my book. Despite such warnings, Democratic leaders have dismissed those dangers or actually embraced Antifa.
Former Democratic National Committee deputy chair Keith Ellison (D), now Minnesota’s attorney general, previously celebrated how Antifa would “strike fear in the heart” of Trump. Liberal sites sell Antifa items to celebrate the violent group, including onesies for “Antifa babies.”
Some politicians have privately expressed alarm at the rising violent speech in their ranks. One Democratic member told Axios, “Some of [our supporters] have suggested … what we really need to do is be willing to get shot.”
Protesters are burning cars and dealerships. Even lawyers and reporters on the left are throwing Molotov cocktails at police. Some on the left have rolled out guillotines and chanted, “We got the guillotine, you better run.”
Just before he was shot at Utah Valley University, Kirk rallied the group with its signature chant of “prove me wrong.” Someone responded by killing him.
Of course, the murder proved nothing except that senseless hate is sweeping over our country. Someone preferred to kill Kirk rather than engage with him or others who held opposing views.
It is precisely the lack of debate and dialogue that has triggered this type of violence. For those dwelling deep in the hardened silos of our news and social media, dissenting voices become increasingly intolerable.
Charlie is still exposing that hypocrisy. As I prepared to address Charlie’s murder in Prague, anti-free speech groups were already using his murder to justify even greater limits on free speech to combat hate and disinformation. This is the ultimate dishonoring of his life and his legacy. Charlie died in the fight for free speech, challenging speech codes and censorship.
Greater censorship will not make political violence less likely; it will only make the likelihood of another Charlie Kirk less likely. Europe shows that extremists flourish under speech controls. The neo-Nazis are having a banner year in portraying themselves as victims.
It is the rest of us that are deterred by speech codes. According to polling, only 18 percent of Germans feel free to express their opinions in public. Fifty-nine percent of Germans do not even feel free expressing themselves in private among friends. Only 17 percent feel free to express themselves on the internet.
Charlie was hated because he exposed the left’s intolerance of opposing views … all in the purported cause of achieving greater tolerance. By challenging others to debate, he triggered a generation of speech-phobics who are more interested in silencing others than speaking on their own account.
Charlie was hated for stripping away the pretense and self-delusion of those canceling, blacklisting, and attacking others for holding opposing views. He did so by standing in harm’s way.
The conservatives that Kirk coaxed out of the shadows can honor his memory by showing that they will not be silenced. They can step forward and renew his same challenge: “Prove me wrong.”
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of the best-selling “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
“For months, some of us have been warning Democratic leaders about their dangerous rhetoric and how it would be received by the most radical elements in the Antifa movement.”
And they didn’t listen.
And they won’t listen.
They are perfectly content with lighting fuses and walking away.
They don’t kill you because you are a Nazi. They call you a Nazi so they can kill you.
Ergo, democrats must be thrown in jail.
Well, duuuuuuh!
Everything they do is unconstitutional; the entire communist (liberal, progressive, socialist, democrat, RINO, AINO) American welfare state is unconstitutional.
“It’s the [Constitution], stupid,” James Carville, aka maximal freedom/minimal government.
What type of person goes to the funeral of a murder victim, where those who loved him are mourning, and loudly mocks the victim and spits in the face of the mourners? These are our trolls, people. These are the people who show up at vigils and desecrate them, as occurred in Phoenix and Pensacola. These are the people scrawling hateful comments about Charlie Kirk on sidewalks with chalk, and taking to social media with gleeful expressions of happiness over the murder of an innocent man. These are the soulless ghouls who now live in America in large numbers, an America I neither know or recognize anymore.
What kind of numbers? I hope this isn’t you aggrandizing the threat? I would guess that <10% of Americans were feeling positive and not-at-all-conflicted about the murder of Charlie Kirk.
Of course, those minority voices are the ones that are going to be elevated by social media algorithms and TV-press gatekeepers. What I'm asking is whether or not the vast majority of Americans (90%) are thumbs down toward political murders? My sense is they are, and you are speaking out of wild exaggeration, based on cherry-picked outrageous statements.
Who is interested in an accurate portrait of how Americans think? With actual numbers behind the picture?
^ Sea lioning. It’s been in the news for days that the Internet exploded with thousands of posts and tweets along these lines. Every time I look on a news site, I see more examples. We now see stories of many, many people being fired or disciplined at work for their gleeful reactions to murder. But I suppose that in your mind I can’t legitimately say any of that unless I’ve personally verified the exact numbers numbers and additionally verified every single social media post rather than relying on literally hundreds of media reports. Pffffft.
You’re like the guy at the funeral who denies that his compatriots are disrupting and mocking the victim, even as I watch them do it. “Don’t believe your lying eyes,” you say. Pfffft.
The “aggrandizing” of threat is coming form the left—imagine more clearly if you CAN, Charlie Kirk was killed for merely speaking, in the aggrandizement of words and ideas leftists”don’t like.” You’ve got the aggrandizement-SHOE on the wrong foot !!!
Why not just say: “Yeah, it is troubling that so many people are reacting that way. And to tell the truth I wish my fellow liberals would cut it out. It doesn’t do us or anyone else any good, and it just inflames tensions. I personally disapprove of when they react with glee to a killing.”
If you would say something like that, we could all respect that you’re liberal, or leftist, and we have some differences of opinion, but you’re a reasonable person who is worth talking to. Instead, you just take the tactic of deny, deny, deny. I have yet to see a single liberal or leftist in this comment section denounce the murder of Charlie Kirk, say it was a bad thing, the shooter shouldn’t have done it, or that the people reacting with elation over it should tone it down. I have not seen one single comment like that. WTF is wrong with you people?
Senator Fetterman has spoken.out, the only Democratic leader to to that. On the other hand Gov. Hotchul just supportef a communist for Mayor of New York City. T
Communism is unconstitutional.
Send a memo to the Supreme Court.
Every aspect and facet of Madmani’s communism is unconstitutional.
Start here: He can’t control private property, rent, wages, prices, trespass/access denial, service denial, free and independent enterprises and industries, free market grocery stores, intervention in free markets, etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJ7hs_epU3Y
Rabble:
For those that have co-workers, management, HR, anyone in their lines of work who are espousing escalation of the violence we saw last week. If they want more, are they really a safe person to be working around?
To be fair, that’s not the only reason that Charlie Kirk was hated. His views on race and gender were problematic and divisive, to say the least.
^ Paid CCP troll. Ignore. ^
Or laugh at him or evenore upsetting to.a troll tell them you will pray for their healing. But never get upset and argue with a troll, their only.goal is to upset.you. Understand trolls are sociopaths and psychopaths.
FAIR, has nothing to do with what you are up to.
It’s amazing how illiterate pea-brains that can only regurgitate mainstream news, pronounce to themselves on the high ground, never once realizing that you not only are hugely-divisive yourselves, bur you’re murderous too. Your fake-morality is disgusting.
Can you point to video clips that document your claims?
Wait. Are you saying the Constitution denies a person the freedom of thought and choice and the freedom to create and hold his own opinion on anything and everything? That sounds like a free American’s opinion is dictated to him by the government. Oh, my, Americans cannot have their own opinions on race and gender; Americans must accept and adopt the opinions of you communists, oh, and “democrats.” Thank you, Karl. We’ll get right to that “dictatorship of the proletariat (i.e. hired help)” thing of yours.
He dummy… It stops the government from denies free speech. Not a blog.
Go back to school loser
That was powerful doggone stupid there, Jethro!
How’s the holler out there in Deliverance?
He told the truth. Does that scare you???????????? I’m guessing yes
Please post those problematic views. You mean men are men and women are women? What is problematic about that, it has been the view since the beginning of mankind. Even the Minnesota shooter realizef he had been lied to, you can’t change your sex and he admitted he was tired of pretending.
If Tyler Robinson really is the killer, all we really know about his motive is that he didn’t like Charlie Kirk. Nor, for that matter, did some member of his family. In my opinion, his impact has been grossly overexaggerated. I somehow got on his Email list and I watched him a time or two on one of the right-wing channels but didn’t really know much about him. I thought he was a Liberty University product, but it turns out he had an affiliation with Jerry Falwell Jr that was severed after Falwell resigned in disgrace. As for his religion, although he’s referred to as an “evangelical” Christian, he was actually a Pentecostal/Charismatic and an advocate of Dominionism, the belief that Christians should dominate the state. Although he allegedly originally believed in separation of church and state, he had adopted a policy of more or less theocracy. He’s being hailed as a martyr but Charlie Kirk was no martyr. He was a political activist, that’s all he was.
For those of you too young to know, Jerry Falwell was not as politically active in his final years as the opening days of his “Moral Majority,” which began in the 1980’s; he passed away years before you were born or politically aware, and he has had NO contemporaneous influence as suggested here…
and Kirk was much too young to have had ANY affiliation with Falwell…
Falwell did not resign in disgrace…
and charlie Kirk did not attend Falwell’s Liberty College.
* The lies in this post are more than just malicious; they are a deliberate political dirty bombs, calculated to mislead and poison young innocent and open-minds.
And the poor, unsuspecting, stupid kids in school are spoon-fed this cult propaganda by communists (union teachers) on a daily basis.
For example, they’re taught that “capitalism,” the psychotic drunken invalid Karl Marx’s pejorative, is bad when it is nothing more than assets and money used to further a person’s free enterprise as an act of freedom or the constitutional freedom of investment per the 9th Amendment. Capitalism describes the dynamics of a prosperous, successful business.
This whole place is completely nuts—it needs to be straightened out by the literal words of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Anonymous at 4:42
Your claims that there was no association between Charlie Kirk and Jerry Falwell are absurd.
You may be correct that Kirk was not influenced by Jerry Falwell SENIOR, but he worked very closely with Jerry Falwell JUNIOR, who had much more extremist views than his father.
Falwell, Jr ran Liberty University after his father’s death but his extremism forced his resignation in 2020.
In November 2019, Kirk and Jerry Falwell Jr. co-founded the “Falkirk Center for Faith and Liberty”, a right-wing think tank funded, owned, and housed by Liberty University. “Falkirk” was a portmanteau of “Falwell” and “Kirk”. Fellows included Antonia Okafor, director of outreach for Gun Owners of America; Sebastian Gorka, former deputy assistant to Trump; and Jenna Ellis, a senior legal counselor for Trump.
So you see Kirk was very closely associated with, and influenced by, Falwell Jr,., who was far to the right of his father.
The only lies and misinformation are yours
Unfortunately this is standard operating procedure for the MAGA mob.
What’s a much more extremist view: saving the life of an unborn human being who has been alive since its initial 24 hours of fertilization, supporting heterosexuality that creates more Americans, opposing the insanity of chopping off body parts when in psychosis, praising the Lord, attempting to be good, sanity, freedom, etc.?
Yes indeed, Jerry Jr, was a veritable paragon of morality and Christian righteousness.
Do you know why he was forced to resign as President of Liberty University ????
Let me tell you.
For 7 years he paid a former pool attendant named Giancarlo Granda to have sex with his wife while he watched and masturbated.
Yes indeed nothing says watching Christian family values like watching your wife have sex with a male prostitute.
The initial post (from semcgowanjr) made no distincltion between Falwell SR and Falwell JR, so the misinformation was misleading.
AS to the downfall of the JR-Falwell, a man like that is never representing Christians’ family vlaues—a man like that is demonstrating his FALL into the secular world’s easy and glorified world of pornogprahy (sexual sin)—behavior like that is HIDDEN, and many of those arround him, family, friends, neighbors, and especially trusting followers will not know of the secret life! …. Much like Kirk’s alleged “shooter;” he came from a conservative family that did not teach or practice his trans-tifa lifestyle, but became the very anithesis of what they taught him.
Stop maliciously painting good people like Charlie Kirk (with a possible association to a Fallen-Falwell) as doing or promoting the same things. Huge leap! When unproven, your brand of poison is called defamation and slander, something the left perniciously practices and pays-for.
Signed,
Anonymous at 4:42
Anon, you do know you praise the lord every time you eat a pecan and say that is delicious or when you feel the beauty in a cool spring day, right?
Just checking…
How would someone pushing a Christian theocracy deal with competing religions? Mormon? Jewish? Muslim?
Most would agree that there can be no state-preferred religion in the US. The 1st Amendment rules it out.
He never pushed a Christian theocracy. Why do you lie? He said he was a Christian, so am I, and I would never push for a Christian theocracy.
Jake…
I too. A christian!
Obviously the troll doesn’t understand being a Christian or what being a theocracy involves.
Oh well
Although he allegedly originally believed in separation of church and state, he had adopted a policy of more or less theocracy.
Just count the number of “squishy” words you needed to make that comment sound reasonable. “allegedly”, “adopted”, “more or less”. Try restating that into a factual claim that you can support with evidence and see how that sounds. Here it is without them: Although he originally believed in separation of church and state, he had a policy of theocracy.
Now attempt to prove that. Good luck.
Keystone Kop Kash’s days are numbered.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!
Knives are out for embattled FBI Director Kash Patel, despite Trump support
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/knives-out-embattled-fbi-director-kash-patel-despite-trump-support
It’s from Fox, so it must be true.
“FBI Director Kash Patel’s leadership atop the nation’s premier law enforcement agency is under fire, according to 10 sources from multiple federal offices granted anonymity to speak freely.”
“The White House, Bondi, Blanche have no confidence in Kash,” one source with knowledge of ongoing personnel discussions said. “Pam in particular cannot stand him. Blanche either,” they said, referring to Attorney General Pam Bondi and her deputy, Todd Blanche.”
He has been running his mouth publicly announcing the evidence being gathered.
This is an absolute NO-NO, as any competent prosecutor will tell you.
The DOJ should never, ever, ever, ever comment on a case before trial.
It risks violating due process and the right to a fair trial. If anything he says is later shown to be wrong, then that creates a huge problem for the prosecution.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
What a dweeb.
^ Paid DNC troll. Ignore. ^
No website no proof. Try again loser
I posted the link to the story on Fox News.
If it is on Fox, it must be true, right???
Did you even bother to look??
Of course not.
You just reflexively demand proof, but I have NEVER, EVER, EVER seen you post proof of any of your absurd assertions.
Charlie Kirk gave an open mic to anyone who disagreed with him, so they could talk about it. He gave college students an opportunity to ask a conservative what he thought, why they disagreed, debate, and perhaps even vehemently disagree. This gave everyone watching an opportunity to examine different positions from all sides.
He was killed for talking.
The day he was murdered, the internet flooded with single sentences of phrases of Kirk, tightly edited to change context, according to the “very fine people” playbook. Each reaction video was based on that one sentence. Unless you already had it bookmarked, the rest of those statements that provide context are buried.
Kirk has been called a racist for saying there was a mistake in the Civil Rights Act. The rest of that sentence, however, went on to say that it created a bureaucracy that discriminated against whites, Asians, and Jews through DEI, AA, and other practices. There are myriad lawsuits in response to such discrimination, such as Students for Fair Admissions v Harvard, in which the Supreme Court found Harvard had acted in a way that was unconstitutional.
There is a claim circulating that Kirk called all black women “brainless.” Again, he was discussing Affirmative Action. Several prominent black women publicly stated that they owed their success to Affirmative Action. Kirk responded that they didn’t have the brains to get where they were without the bar being lowered, and that’s the entire complaint about AA. This was surely an uncivil remark, but not evidence of racism, as Kirk was a strong supporter of many black conservatives, including black women. He believed in meritocracy, and equal opportunity, not equal outcome.
As Ben Shapiro noted on the Ben Shapiro Show, Charlie Kirk was not assassinated for his position on low taxes. Opposing the transgender movement of putting children on puberty blockers, which can lead to permanent, severe side effects, sterilizing children, saying men can’t become women and shouldn’t be given access to women’s spaces or sports, is what engendered the most hate. The Left spread propaganda that Kirk wanted trans people to die, was a fascist, and that speech was violence. Violence against violence is justified, and it is one’s moral duty to fight Hitler…Thus an assault on the life of Charlie Kirk became inevitable.
His politics made him a marked man, but it was his faith that gave him the courage to face the slings of arrows, going into hostile crowds and debating people to try to change hearts and minds. Charlie Kirk was a deeply religious man, and his slaying went straight to the heart of the Christian community.
All he wanted to do was talk about our differences, and he was killed for it, while many on the Left danced on his grave.
Isn’t that what we are supposed to do when we disagree? Talk about it?
VERY well said, Karen S. It takes serious and sincere effort to put pernicious disinformation into its full and proper context. Everything the extreme-left purports Charlie to have said is deliberate error and slander by weak and circular reasoning: ad hominem and straw-man arguments, distorting his words and intentions.
However, let’s not say that Charlie Kirk’s Biblical, moral, and social views were merely “his politics,” but rather the politics of the good and the right. He spoke the truth, truth that we all should know, but don’t anymore because too much secular (social-justice) religion has infiltrated.
Was Charlie Kirk all for unconstitutional affirmative action, abortion, financial public assistance for “mothers,” a fertility rate in a “death spiral,” unconstitutional student loans, DEI, the emasculation of actual men, etc.?
Talk about a left-wing loon.. Jezzzzzzzzzz
Jonathan: For years you have tried to blame Antifa for almost every act of violence. You tried to blame Jan 6, 2021 on them. That didn’t work because all those convicted of serious crimes were followers of DJT’s MAGA crowd. On the same day that Charlie Kirk was assassinated a school shooting in Denver left 2 students seriously injured. The shooter was not Antifa but had posted neo-Nazi views online. Every recent mass shooting was carried out by white right-wing zealots, not by Antifa.
In this “age of rage”, as you call it, it is DJT and his MAGA followers who are stoking the rage. Instead of “healing” DJT is trying to blame “the radicals on the left are the problem, and they’re vicious and they’re horrible”. You are adding to the rage by falsely claiming Tyler Robinson was motivated by Antifa. That won’t work either!
^ Dennis McInliar is back.
Dennis McInliar and Gigenius were tasked to the Turley blog to pick up votes in the election.
They lost.
They were lost.
They remain lost.
In New Jersey, a medical doctor at a hospital celebrated the violent death of Charlie Kirk. A nurse found that troubling, particularly from a doctor who is supposed to be all about physical healing and preventing death. When she expressed her concerns to upper management, who do you think got the ax? The nurse of course – she is now on indefinite unpaid leave.
How dare she find it troubling that a medical doctor would celebrate a violent murder of an innocent man, a husband and father of two young children? How dare she take exception to that!
https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1967652132842283280
Thanks Jonathan! I just saw a good video from a Catholic source talking about Charlie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ88fEBMitM&t=492s
I’m wondering if there is a good source of books on violence from the Left.
Rabble:
there isn’t because they controlled the narrative for the past 30 years, since Clinton. The history books written in 30 years, however, I hope are different, and tell the truth about these decades
I have not commented here for a while because all the “Free Speech” stuff sort of reminded me of the old joke, “How many Surrealists does it take to change a light bulb?” Answer down at the bottom of this comment.
Free Speech does not motivate a person, like the assassin here, or the various perverted Tranny shooters, to put their guns away and start singing Kum Ba Yah. Nope. Quite the opposite. Speaking your mind has always been a dangerous proposition. See: John, the Baptist.
Free Speech, when it disagrees with one’s deeply held belief system, tends to generate Cognitive Dissonance, which, in turn, can lead to an attempt to reduce the dissonance. Violence is one way to reduce the dissonance, along with boozing it up, taking drugs, seeking revenge, and acting the fool, in various manners, etc.
The real impact of Free Speech, is providing Emotional Support for the Silent Majority of Craven Cowards in the country, An, “Oh Look! Other people think like me, too!” sort of thing. Free Speech “makes it okay” to maintain that these Trannies are mentally ill, sicko perverts, and that the Democrats who support them are no better.
To stop the violence, or reduce it, requires more than Free Speech. It requires more violence, not more Free Speech. Dr. Guillotine needs to be resurrected from the dead, for the worst offenders, and some of the others, like the shills here, need to be shipped to the Aleutian Isles, with food for a year, a bag of potato seeds, and axes to chop firewood and build simple log shelters. Oh, and some Brown Bears, to keep the rowdies on their toes.
Answer to the Old Joke, above: FISH.
“To stop the violence, or reduce it, requires more than Free Speech.”
You have identified the problem correctly: unfortunately, more “free speech” will not resolve the increasing disaffection and psychosis of the deluded trans-tifa-mindset. More “free-speech” only agitates and prods them further, which is good for flushing them out, but on the solution side of the problem, these young and immoral ferals, need a good dose of reality (punishment, prosecution and hard labor)—more than likely, the character-building guidance and controls most of them never received at home.
FLOYD?FLOYD! YOU’RE IN FOR A WHIPLASH! YOU LEFT WITHOUT A WORD MAKING PEOPLE WORRY YOU’D DIED!!!!
glad you’re well
Thank you for caring, but I was in little danger of croaking, any more than I ever am. I did have one trip to the ER, but it was nice to get out of the house. I have been trying to go thru my stuff and reduce my things, so there was that. The cats are fine. Snookums does well when she gets her pill each day. Boston looks like death warmed over, and if I can trap her, she is going to the vet, for a good thorough bath, if nothing else. She is one of the inside ferals, who has been here for 7 years.
I was just tired of reading the Free Speech stuff every day, every post it seemed like. Americans have always had the right to speak out, but most are simply too cowardly to speak their minds, in fear of The Powers That Seem To Be. Actually, TPTSTB, are like those gay kids swimwear at Target – something for show, that nobody bought – just empty suits.
Floyd,
Good to see you are still alive and kicking!
How are the cats?
I respectfully disagree with the violence thing. I feel that would escalate the situation into a real shooting civil war.
However, I acknowledge it is not outside the realm of possibility, watching the reactions from many people of Kirk’s death but their reactions since then.
I suggested a possible alternative of two societies, running in parallel, the two shall never meet. But as we have seen and know, our leftists friends would not be tolerant of such an idea. If you do not conform to their ideals, they will do everything they can to destroy you, to include real violence.
I knew the answer!!!
The cats are doing well! Bumper turned out to be a little boy cat so he got fixed after three litters of kittens. Turns out Memphis was a boy too, but he got fixed before sowing his wild oats.
As far as violence, I think that is the only thing to reverse the Left’s gains. Antifa is going to have to kiss asphalt, either thru getting shot, getting beaten up badly, or getting arrested. Simply look at the ICE raids, and the crazies there. We need a couple of Kent State situations, and a whole lot of of radicals getting tossed into prison. I imagine after two weeks of lockup, they will be applying for membership in the Aryan Brotherhood, for protection. It will be interesting to see, if when they get out of lockup, they remove the Swastika prison tats.
Europe has it even worse.
I replied to you, but I think the filter ate m comment???
Anyway, yes, the cats are fine!
Turley: The problem is those on the left being so radially anti-fascist, but not at all the fact that MAGAs really are fascists.
WRONG….
No, the problem is that those on the Left are in fact fascists, and MAGAs favor freedom of speech. On Earth, where we live (even if perhaps you don’t), leftists murder people who disagree with them; they also set up ministries of truth reminiscent of fascist governments, to propagate the government narrative and suppress dissent. As well, they set up government-social-media censorship complexes to silence conservative voices.
By contrast, those on the right such as President Trump dismantle the government-censorship complex, Elon Musk purchases Twitter to restore free speech – over the efforts of leftists to to block that purchase – and Charlie Kirk invites open debate of the issues as an alternative to violence.
Now that I’ve brought you back to reality, do you see why Professor Turley has correctly identified the problem?
How is John Hickenlooper a fascist?
If you can’t answer that question, maybe your framing that the “Left” is a “thing” is not a… a thing?
How is GOP Rep. Clay Higgins favoring freedom of speech by “demanding that big tech have zero tolerance for violent political hate content, the user to be banned from ALL PLATFORMS FOREVER. He is “also going after their business licenses and permitting, their businesses will be blacklisted aggressively, they should be kicked from every school, and their drivers licenses should be revoked. I’m basically going to cancel with extreme prejudice these evil, sick animals who celebrated Charlie Kirk’s assassination.” He wants to pressure social media to censor liberal speech, precisely the thing that Turley (and yourself) has called out Biden’s administration for doing on this blog.
https://x.com/RepClayHiggins/status/1966114479042593251
The point being — everything anyone uses gross generalizations to describe half of the country, they are making a fool of themselves.
Sometimes generalizations are accurate, even if one can find some isolated exceptions. This is one of those moments in history when they are valid.
When you see people doing any of the following in modern American life, you know they are on the left: murdering their ideological opponents, attempting to murder them at rallies, or attempting to murder them while they’re playing baseball, or attempting to murder them while they serve on the Supreme Court; rioting in the streets of cities for an entire summer, causing billions in property damage and leading to 25 deaths; attacking police vehicles, setting them on fire, and throwing bricks, rocks, and cement at them while burning American flags and waving the flag of a foreign nation; attacking and doxxing law enforcement officers in the line of duty carrying out lawful orders; setting up a federal ministry of truth reminiscent of Goebbels’ Ministry of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment, designed to propagate the government narrative and stifle dissent; debanking and deplatforming truckers who object to fascist tactics such as forcing people to inject an experimental cocktail of chemicals into their bodies; invoking the nation’s emergency act to deal with peaceful protests; rioting on campus, invading lecture halls while class is in progress or assaulting guards and terrorizing people in campus libraries; firebombing car dealerships and destroying the cars belonging to private individuals, and on and on.
These are all fascist tactics. These are all exclusive or virtually exclusive to the left in America and Canada. The modern-day left in America and Canada are the fascists in our midst. They then adopt misleading labels such as “anti-fascist” which of course is the exact opposite of what they are. Similarly, the new form of racism goes by the label “anti-racism.” The whole movement is not only aimed at destroying society, it aims to drain language of all meaning. It is demonic, quite literally.
Almost nothing that you said is true.
Is James Alex Fields a “Leftist?”
He deliberately drove his car into the crowd of peaceful protesters in Charlottesville, killing one and injuring 35.
How about Dylann Roof?
Patrick Crusius?
John Earnest, the El Paso Walmart shooter whose manifesto showed he was radicalized by the far right?
The Pittsburgh Synagogue shooting?
Come on, man!
Radicalization occurs on both sides of the political spectrum and is never justified, regardless of the political aisle of the perp.
More importantly, you should not write these far right extremists out of your history, as it leads to inaccurate conclusions, such as your argument that all political violence comes from the left.
Everything I said was true. You cannot tell my to disbelieve my lying eyes forever. Everyone can see what’s going on. You’re not fooling anyone.
There are hate crimes by all sorts of people. Those are irrelevant to a discussion of political violence used to silence viewpoints or accomplish political ends, and to a discussion of left-wing governmental actions that are fascistic in character, of which I gave examples and you gave no counter-examples. That’s where you go wrong. You cite White Supremacist killing of minorities as if it was political violence. It wasn’t. It was just hateful toward another race. You didn’t cite to any examples of conservative governance shutting down people’s free speech rights or protest rights the way liberal governments do in the USA and Canada. Your argument is therefore very weak.
Also, I admitted there are a few exceptions to the generalizations, but maintained that the generalizations were nonetheless valid. That’s possible, you know, that an overall generalization can be valid even though someone might be able to point to a few isolated cases that don’t fit it. You responded by pointing to either irrelevant occurrences, or one of the very few exceptions that I acknowledged exist. To use the Left’s favorite talking-point comparison, there may have been Jews in Europe who murdered people, some even for political purposes, but anyone who tried to use “both-sidesism” or claim there was an equivalence during the Nazis’ rise to power in the 1930s between Jewish and anti-Jewish political violence would be laughed out of the room. That is the type of argumentation you’re engaging in.
If ramming a peaceful protest with your car, murdering one and injuring dozens, is not political violence used to silence opposing viewpoints, I don’t know what is man.
You’re incredibly thick to the point of sea-linoning now. I said there were a few isolated exceptions, and that such do not negate the generalization’s validity. You’re response: look, there’s one isolated exception. GFY
Also, I don’t understand how racially motivated attack cannot also be a form of political violence. The Walmart shooter in El Paso’s stated reason for the attack was to fight the Great Replacement. Political violence in support of immigration policy is obviously political violence.
Why would racial animus be excluded from political violence? Was the assassination of MLK not political violence?
If indeed Robinson’s primary motivation related to LGBTQ issues, does that mean that it should similarly be excluded from your made up definition of political violence? If not, what is fundamentally different about violence resulting from hatred of one’s views on race vs violence resulting from hatred of one’s views on sexuality?
What an absolute nonsensical argument dude.
I don’t understand how racially motivated attack cannot also be a form of political violence.
Pretty simple really. It’s done based on racial hatred rather than to achieve a political end.
You can try and get around that by saying that all murder is somehow political, because it harms the body politic, or that all murder carried out based on hatred of another race is political. Then the term “political violence” loses all meaning, and more importantly, the argument becomes detached from the overarching discussion of fascism and what force in America and Canada is using fascist tactics to achieve governmental suppression of dissent.
No political violence as a term loses all meaning when MLK’s assassination is excluded. How can that possibly make sense?
MLK’s assassination was indeed political violence, as was JFK’s and RFK’s. Those were all more than 55 years ago. That’s not today. I’ve been talking about the US and Canada in the modern age. You people always have to reach so far back in time, it gets ridiculous (mommy, the Crusades! mommy, the Inquisition!).
I even mentioned those three assassinations earlier today to illustrate the absurdity of the trolls who are saying Kirk’s assassin was a right-winger. I’ll repeat it since DGS deflected with irrelevancies in response:
Today’s trolls: James Earl Ray was a civil rights activist who wanted equality of the races; Lee Harvey Oswald was a Kennedy voter who hoped JFK would serve two terms; Sirhan Sirhan was campaigning for RFK to get the nomination.
Why was MLK’s assassination political violence? Wasn’t it just race related? You said above that for some reason murdering a group of black people in a Church is not political violence because it’s race related. This, despite having a manifesto about his political beliefs and photos burning the US flag while holding the Confederate Flag. He explained his actions:”I have no choice. I am not in the position to, alone, go into the ghetto and fight. I chose Charleston because it is most historic city in my state, and at one time had the highest ratio of blacks to Whites in the country. We have no skinheads, no real KKK, no one doing anything but talking on the internet. Well someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I guess that has to be me.”
How is that not political violence? Intimidating a group of people to support your views about white supremacy is absolutely political violence.
Is it maybe that you don’t know what “political violence” means?
I urge you to read this…https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/09/12/charlie-kirk-political-violence-expert-analysis-00558638
Despite your claim that half of America applauds political violence, the truth is that fewer than 2 percent of Americans think politically motivated murder is acceptable.
You’re just so out of touch with reality that you make ridiculous claims which are neither backed by evidence of logic.
Both committed leftists and stalwart MAGAs are quite satisfied with a DOUBLE STANDARD of speech freedom: Maximum freedom for myself and those who think like me, and less for those in the opposition. Doesn’t that very much simplify what actually is a very complex issue?
I mean, if the objective were to define a single UNIFORM standard of speech freedom, applied equally to yourself and your worst adversaries (those who hate you and would gladly use their speech freedom to destroy your career, threaten your security and radicalize your children) — wouldn’t it be hard to define that uniform level of freedom? Wouldn’t there be counterbalancing speech responsibilities?
Critical thinkers who still believe in rule-of-law (crafting and enforcing the same rules for everyone) aren’t going to just agree to “maximum speech freedom for everyone”, because they understand doing so cedes tools of deception and intimidation to their enemies — and know those tools are certain to be used against their interests.
Talking to many Americans, I can say without hesitation that these abuses of public speech are thumbs-down:
• intentional deceptions
• impostering behind a false identity
• waging threats and other forms of intimidation (i.e., doxxing, professional cancellation, death threats)
• defying parental control over what my children are exposed to
• attempts to confuse, disorient and dispirit
Free speech without ANY limits is anarchy…a green light for nihilistic and fanatical infowarriors. No organization can function without trust and confidence, and this implies norms of authenticity and honesty.
Beware extravagant definitions of free speech that you’re comfortable applying to yourself — but likely never think of ceding to your mortal enemies. But, if we are to have a pluralistic, civil society — churning with competing interests — that is an honest statement-definition of the problem. It’s a very tall order.
What level of speech freedom (irresponsibility) are you willing to give to those who would use speech against you, your family, your livelihood, and your security?
Well it’s just stupid…ignorant
Explain why if you’re so smart.
Break it down by identity groups.
Interesting development… An internet posse: ‘Expose Charlie’s Murderers’ Website Receives Over 50,000 Submissions of Leftists Celebrating Murder of Charlie Kirk
The Rule Of Unintended Consequences: The Party Of Free Speech Doxxing is being greeted with grassroots national Free Speech Doxxing. They must be happy at the attention they’ve generated for themselves and thinking How sweet it is!>
Well, whatever parents, grandparents and other family members and friends think about your celebrations, that’s private and between them and you.
And hey! If you’re in compliance with your employer’s code of conduct – NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT. Unless… FAFO.
Don’t forget Bezmenov’s warning about the 4 Stages of “Ideological Subversion”.
1. Demoralization (Completed in the early 1980’s)- Demoralization is the first stage of ideological subversion, and it involves the systematic undermining of a society’s moral and ethical foundations. Bezmenov explained that this process typically takes 15–20 years, roughly the time needed to educate one generation. During this stage, foreign agents seek to infiltrate educational institutions, media, and cultural platforms to influence the minds of young people. The goal is to instill a sense of disillusionment, moral relativism, and a rejection of traditional values.
In the demoralization phase, individuals are conditioned to question their own cultural identity, history, and societal norms. The emphasis is on creating a sense of instability and disorientation within the target population. This sets the stage for the subsequent phases of ideological subversion.
2. Destabilization (Completed in the 1980’s) Once demoralization has taken root, the next stage is destabilization. This phase is characterized by the weakening of essential institutions and structures within the society. Bezmenov pointed out that this process can be expedited if foreign influence successfully manipulates the political, economic, and defense systems. Key sectors such as law enforcement, military, and intelligence are targeted to compromise the nation’s ability to respond to external and internal threats.
Destabilization aims to create a state of crisis, fostering a sense of insecurity and anxiety among the population. Economic instability, social unrest, and political polarization become prominent features of this stage, laying the groundwork for further manipulation.
3. Crisis (Not yet completed) It can happen quickly, in a matter of weeks. This phase has been tested with events like 9/11 and the 2008 financial collapse but it was unsuccessful at moving us to phase 4 Normalization. This phase has struggled to succeed because of of the many layers of “shock absorbers” built into our constitutional design. These last 10 years have outed who is pushing this phase and that is the radical Leftists moving the Democratic party. They are failing in spectacular fashion and their violence is evidence that they’ve lost the war of ideas.
4. Normalization (Not going to happen if we stay strong and united against this true enemy that exists within our borders) The final stage is normalization, where the previously subverted ideology becomes the new norm. Bezmenov emphasized that this phase is not about a return to stability but rather the establishment of a new societal order based on the foreign ideology. The once-targeted society is now reshaped according to the infiltrating force’s vision, erasing its original cultural identity and values.
Normalization solidifies the control of the foreign ideology, and the population may no longer resist as the altered reality becomes accepted and internalized. The society is transformed, and the process of ideological subversion is complete.
Bezmenov deserves study.
Agree with that. A study would also show that it is utterly fruitless to engage those demoralized with debate. He said specifically that direct, personal shock might move them. He said that only when such a person is kicked in the fat bottom by the soldier’s boot would they sometimes wake up. Logic, argument, or factual correction could not sway the deeply demoralized. What Charley Kirk was doing with TP is what was really working: early education in civic values, critical-thinking and national principles. And that’s precisely why the Leftists in this country had to assassinate him. What they have yet to realize however is this was has awakened millions around the world in support of TP, Charley Kirk and the principles of this movement. A true Turning Point in this war against western civilization.
…and to the subverson, let us add these factors from “The Naked Communist”
* Do away with all [American] loyalty oaths
* Infiltrate [and control] the press
* Eliminate ALL laws governing obscenity
* Break down cultural standards of morality
* Promote homosexuality
* Inflitrate churches and replace them with social-justice religion
* Discredit the American Constitiuon
* Represent the founders as selfish artistocrats
* Discredit the family and emphasize the need to raise children AWAY FROM parents
Absolutely. Every one of those points have worked structurally to one degree or another, but this great experiment still proves those founding principles are deeply embedded into the soul of the majority of our population.
@Olly
There is no question: at some point since Obama’s first term, the left decided to go all into this whole hog. Perhaps it was just keeping up appearances before that, but since? The DNC simply is no longer an American party and especially now, is no longer worthy of consideration for the actual (legal) voters in this country. This will only become more apparent. No one other than Bernie Sanders or AOC wants to live in the USSR circa the 1980s. Really, this is just getting stupid and tragic. And very nearly everyone can see it. It’s sad that the dem party will die this ignominious death, and it is their fault; but they seem to insist on it, double, triple, quadruple down. We are almost at the point where everyone else is sane and just pointing at them.
Excellent James! My thoughts were also about Obama’s we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America quote. They just failed to get that final nail in our coffin with the 2016 election. You know what is shockingly ironic, Turning Point USA was founded in 2012 in Obama’s Chicago. It’s almost a biblical response to the Left’s strategy.
Today’s trolls: James Earl Ray was a civil rights activist who wanted equality of the races; Lee Harvey Oswald was a Kennedy voter who hoped JFK would serve two terms; Sirhan Sirhan was campaigning for RFK to get the nomination.
In retrospect, it’s very Debatable if Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK.
*the magic bullet .. .
You kinda missed the point there.
Oh, I got your point. The ‘leftist fascist scum’ are responsible for the assassination Charlie Kirk.
Special note. I’m not, necessarily, disagreeing with you. .. the jury is still out.
*speaking of divisive rhetoric, didn’t Trump promise to get rid of these “vermin, fascist, leftist scum”?
You’re getting warmer, but not quite there. My point was that the leftist commenters are being nonsensical by suggesting that Kirk’s assassin was conservative or right-wing.
Maybe the young fresh-faced assassin was neither left-wing or right-wing .. . maybe he was ‘on a mission’.
Clearly, for a 21 year old, some level of planning, deception, evasion, resources and gunnery skills were successfully involved.
*the crazy Russians are saying deep state Ukraine fanatics and/or Mossad was involved!
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hq6QQXbn3RU
The people around him are saying he was leftwing, and getting more and more radically left. The Left doesn’t want this pinned on them, and their attempts at denial and deflection are pathetic. They’re not fooling anyone.
“Clearly, for a 21 year old, some level of planning, deception, evasion, resources and gunnery skills were successfully involved.
—> THIS IS the very definition of a “mission.”
While you continuously bang the “Israel is guilty” of EVERY G_D_Atrocity on earth drum, you ought to be more widely informed and logically prudent—parent’s don’t [EVER!] turn-in a child, assenting to a heinous accusations against that child, over mere rumors.
While your point (perhpas right) is that the President should tone down his rhetoric at this moment in time, you lack a certain pragmatic understanding of righteous anger at murderous hate, a tone-deaf rudenes, that when a heinous crime is perpetrated upon a beloved compatriot (doing nothing but talking), there is a natural revulsion that includes has always included accusatons from hurt, and the things said are not much diffeent from what you would say if your own were similarly eliminated, which they are not!
and one more bonus point for the good guys: this type of rehtroic is what our own side does all day long, from the Pelosi-harpie, to the Kasparian-witch, and without ANY serious or dangerous provocation….your insight is about as dull and weak as a plastic cutlery.
The O Bella Ciao meme has been used by the Nick Fuentes Groyper Army to mock Charlie Kirk.
Amusing: watching you pimp on behalf of Fuentes, who you hated just as much as you hate Trump, Kirk, etc. You suddenly have an intersectional love affair with Fuentes because he could be useful to you – it’s like looking at a Homos For Hamas protester.
How many times have the Democrats’ Tranny Army and Biden/Antifa “anti-fascist” Army supported Fuentes, versus demonizing him as they did Kirk? Too many times as Fuentes received death threats from the likes of you?
Were Fuentes and his followers also mocking Kirk because he was too conservative to join them in supporting the Democrat Tranny Revolution and the Obama/Biden/Antifa Free Hate Speech of “anti-fascists”?
Just come out like George/X, and claim Kirk was murdered by a person who you would consider to also be a far right extremist. All the “anti-fascist” messaging the murderer took the time to write on his cartridges was just a distraction.
Just like the Biden Bribery Laptop was just a Putin election misinformation deception…
Anonymouse, these bizarre rantings up and down the pages have your signature italic/bold/New Roman font. Why don’t you just use your old screen name? We all know who you are.
Why don’t you just use your old screen name? We all know who you are.
And who are you? We all don’t know who you are. Why aren’t you posting this under either your old or new screen names?
X/George continued deflecting Some called Kirk far-right. Some called him a racist, and some called him a bigot.
And every one of them was you or one of your fellow Democrat violent far left extremists and bigots steeped in hatred. Oh… and their cult followers: Cultural Marxist Useful Idiots like the murderer that wrote the Biden/Antifa “Trump and Kirk are fascists” on his ammunition.
Tyler Robinson frequented far-right forums and sites sharing the same ideals as Nick Fuentes. That’s where the radicalization for Robinson began.
You’re the only one claiming he frequented such forums George – give us a link to your sources. Do you spend your free time in those forums, hoping to find something useful?
So George: you claim the murderer picked up his “anti-fascist” hatred from Fuentes??? Not from you Democrats’ Biden/Antifa “anti-fascist” Free Hate Speech? The “anti-fascist” Free Hate Speech that came from Biden’s White House and in the streets and online from the Democrats black clad and masked violent storm-troopers in Antifa?
Tell us what leads you to try and convince us Fuentes endorsed the Obama/Biden Tranny Revolution. Tell us what you have that leads you to try and convince us Fuentes supported the Obama/Biden “Trump and Kirk and their followers are fascists!”
Tell us how Fuentes would embrace the mindset of a homosexual young man living with his lover – a male tranny in the middle of transitioning, a lover who held a hatred for anything conservative or Republican. You think in bed at night, they spoke to each other about… Fuentes?
You are such a pathetic and feeble liar that your hatred, lies, and bile almost qualify as sick humor.
George claims, “Tyler Robinson frequented far-right forums and sites sharing the same ideals as Nick Fuentes. That’s where the radicalization for Robinson began.”
You know, I doubt George is trying to fool us. I think he’s trying to keep his own base fooled. That’s public service for ya. The Blue Wall needs a new coat of lies.
Diogenes,
We know it has to be that bad when they have to resort to Blue Anon conspiracy theories. Their narrative is failing. Again.
Have you ever considered that (for “THEM”) the narrative doesn’t have to be correct, honest, or even credible? It just has to reinforce the illogical demand of the deranged for more and more AGITPROP. When you look at what sustains the dangerous threat of mass-formation, illogical conclusions, lies, hate, you can see that “failure” (is only in our eyes), and is not relevant to thier irrational mindset.
We are truly seeing the fruits of radicalization by mainstream institiuons. No wonder, Charlie KNEW where the battleground was!
Signed,
Another Kirk
The radical-left peddled the very same illogical falsehoods during the Hortman/politcian murders though public proof of Boelter’s longtime connection to Walz was very public and incontroverbitle.
The blue wall is so thickly coated with lies, that are not only brazenly OBVIOUS (as to the roots of their idologies), the lies beg this questtion: why do the “act-blues” refuse to see or accept the logical and obvious facts slapping their faces? Becasue they WANT the lies so badly as to create a wall of nullification of facts and truth: it is thier ideology that is intolerant, rioting/looting, assualting, and murdering.
We are living in a new-age of immature-emotional drool, worthelss self-deception, and oversimplificaton of complex issues that welcomes (and needs!) fraudluence to surivive and recruit. No wonder Charlie was where the stupididty was blooming—ON CAMPUS—. He identified the biggest head of the hydra: lack of inelligence anc critical thinking skills.
Signed,
Another Kirk!
It’s theft. Nothing else but theft.
Can anyone find a Fox News article which references the anti-gay shell casing?
Want to see if it is simply being left off of the network to justify the narrative that he is antifa, as it seems many on this blog (including, Turley himself) have no idea that it exists.
I can provide many Fox News sources that listed what was engraved on the bullets:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-guest-says-she-cant-find-motive-charlie-kirks-killing-bullet-casing-messages
The etchings included the phrases “Notices,” “bulges,” “OWO,” “what’s this?,” “Hey fascist! Catch!,” “Bella ciao bella ciao ciao,” “If you read this, you are gay LMAO” and a series of arrows, one pointing up, one pointing to the right and three pointing down.
Taken on its own, “If you read this, you are gay” may sound like a middle school insult.
However, this phrase is also used to express pro LGBT messaging, such as this journal, “If You Read This, You Are Gay, Too. Welcome!”
https://www.amazon.com/You-Are-Reading-This-Journal/dp/B09BT2B6C7
Tyler Robinson was in a romantic relationship with his trans roommate. Robinson’s family have alleged that the trans partner hated conservatives and Christians, and especially Charlie Kirk. They also said that Robinson became radicalized in college, and changed to become full of hate towards conservatives.
The pretzels that the Left have twisted themselves in to convince people that Tyler was a homophobic conservatives are ludicrous, except that unfortunately, that propaganda has found fertile ground.
Rabble:
As a gamer, I think the arrows should be understood. the arrows correlate to a command code from Helldivers, for dropping the biggest bomb the player can use. So, I can follow on that the psycho wanted his actions to be the 500kg bomb to nuke Charlie and his movement.
Too bad it did the opposite. All he did was make it stronger.
Still telling more lies george
What was the lie?
Sheriff Maddox said there’s been enough killing. He holstered his guns and was getting ready to ride out of town….Until he was called out.
“Over 100,000 anti-immigration demonstrators assemble in London for Tommy Robinson rally in London”
– Financial Express
______________________
“The Age of Rage Against Population Replacement in the Five Eyes, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States by Global Communists”
People want their countries back; no doubt the Supreme Court “interprets” that they can’t have them.
Now for some funny news.
_______________________
As a general rule of thumb, you should pick up prostitutes on your own time. You should also consider not using your government-issued vehicle to conduct this kind of business.
Assuming, of course, you’re worried about getting caught in the act, possibly on camera, and having it affect your employment status. That is a valid concern for some.
Caught on camera too.