In an age of rage, the loudest lunatic reigns supreme. The sudden rise of Jennifer Welch vividly proves that regrettable fact. Welch is the face of rage, spewing hate-filled attacks to feed a rage addiction on the left. She is also an example of how many on the left call for censorship to combat disinformation, but constitute some of the greatest sources of such false and misleading stories. This week offers another such example. After attacking Charlie Kirk’s widow as a “grifter,” Welch declared that Kirk “justified” his own killing. The basis for that disgraceful claim is a false viral claim that Kirk shrugged off the killing of school kids from gun violence. Despite being repeatedly debunked, liberals like Welch continue to spread the claim.
Welch told former CNN host Don Lemon:
“The person that I heard that justified his death was him. He’s the one that said on tape that if school kids die, but it means he gets to have a Second Amendment, then that’s what it’s going to be. He’s the one that justified it.
And I believe at the time of shooting, he was talking about gun violence at the time. That’s wild to me, number one. And then for her — I want to get your opinion on this as a Black man — for her to say that people are dehumanizing Charlie Kirk.”
Kirk’s assassination presented a dual inconvenience for many: having to express sorrow for the death of someone with opposing views while acknowledging only the latest example of political violence by the left.
The solution was to shrug off the murder as another example of “asking for it.” I have heard such views on my own campus. To justify such a despicable, amoral position, many latched onto a series of false claims from Kirk, calling Asians a vile term, to this ridiculous claim.
The key to feeding a rage addiction is also to assure your customers that it is not their fault and that their hate is justified. The false story about Kirk dismissing the killing of children offers precisely that license to get your hate on with Jennifer Welch.
Obviously, such rage rhetoric occurs on both sides. Indeed, President Donald Trump responded to the murder of critic Rob Reiner by suggesting that his “Trump Derangement Syndrome” was somehow connected to his death. (Reiner’s son has been arrested). The Truth Social posting was a callous posting and should be deleted.
Kirk was responding to a question about defending the Second Amendment. He pointed out that this constitutional right is “is there, God forbid, so that you can defend yourself against a tyrannical government.” However, he acknowledged that “having an armed citizenry comes with a price, and that is part of liberty.” He then responded to the claim that this right is killing people and that it is not worth a single life. Kirk argued that there will clearly always be examples of gun violence and that it is ridiculous to treat the right as invalid if such deaths occur:
“You will never live in a society when you have an armed citizenry and you won’t have a single gun death. That is nonsense. It’s drivel. But I am — I think it’s worth it. I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational. Nobody talks like this. They live in a complete alternate universe.”
Kirk, who was deeply religious and had children of his own, never dismissed the deaths of school children. He was saying that, despite tragic deaths, the right was still essential in our constitutional system. Anyone who favors the right inherently holds the same view that abuses of such rights can occur, but that does not mean that the right itself is illegitimate.
It is the type of low-grade argument made against the right of free speech. In debates, I am often confronted with those citing hate speech or disinformation to support censorship. Critics will cite how the Nazis use free speech, even repeating the false claim that free speech was somehow responsible for bringing Hitler to power. CBS anchor Margaret Brennan even suggested that free speech contributed to the holocaust.
The point is that people will abuse free speech as they will abuse gun rights. They will also abuse religious rights and associational rights in committing crimes. The point is that these rights are greater than such abuses. That was the point that Kirk was making.
None of this matters, of course. Welch has found her niche on the hate spectrum. The New York Times even did a largely favorable profile because she has the right type of hate.
She and others will continue not only to inject it directly into the veins of her listeners but also to fan the rage by assuring them that they are not at fault. They are not hateful in engaging in such hateful rhetoric. It is not your problem, it is their problem.
That is the whole point of a podcast called “I’ve had it.” Many have had it with civility, decency, and accuracy. What remains is sheer mendacity and madness.
Not to overstate the obvious – but Turley just called for the censorship of the President in asking for his post on Rob Reiner to be deleted. So much for protecting Freedom of Speech.
Not exactly. There’s a difference between saying what someone “should” do themselves and what someone should be forced to do – or have done for them, especially by the government.
Turley isn’t simply giving an offsetting opinion. He is saying that Trump’s opinion should not be allowed to stay.
Turley has long claimed that the real crime in speech is to tell someone else to shut up. And here he is, doing just that. Because the people who matter, the oligarchs who control vast amounts of America, think this might make them look bad.
He never implied the post should not be “allowed” to stay. That is your personal interpretation.
It might be bad timing to state the truth about someone on the occasion of their death but reiner made up a lot of stuff about Trump, just like you do.
Trump speaking the truth has always bothered you and there will never be a good time by you.
You put words in the professor’s mouth to support your insane narrative and you are terrible at it.
The crime in speech is the government MAKING you shut up. I can say it to you and it doesn’t hurt your rights, Now shut up, idiot. See how that works?
That’s not what he said. Calling on a person to reconsider a posting is not censorship.
No, but more importantly, Trump’s post was fine. His post was not to a person who simply had different political views. It was to a person who had frequently, personally, attacked him.
If a man sleeps with your wife (personal), do you say “how sad,” when he dies? I think not. So too, if a man constantly malignes your character and behaviors to turn others against you (personal), you don’t say “how sad,” when he dies.
Grow up!
Here we go again.
Trump is always right—to a fault—with the cold, hard truth.
“YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!”
The professor defends Kirk against scurrilous and bad-faith attacks. I sense he is getting exhausted, just as defending against the absurdities of today’s cultural Marxism, DEI, and wokeness can be exhausting, just as defending the reality of biological sex can be exhausting, just as defending many other facets of reality that in a sane age would not be controversial can be exhausting.
All of which brings to mind Giorgia Meloni’s quoting of G.K. Chesterton in her final campaign speech, when she said that in an age that has rejected the very concept objective truth, “fires will be kindled to testify that two and two make four, swords will be drawn to prove that leaves are green in summer.” For more on the background of that quote:
https://www.chesterton.org/chesterton-gets-standing-ovation/
“The solution was to shrug off the murder as another example of “asking for it.”
It seems the left is “asking for it.” People only put up with so much. Fortunately, people on the right seem to be amazingly patient with all of the vitriol from the left. Please, keep it up.
I always thought the “new civil war” talk was foolish. Now, I am becoming more and more worried.
The good thing about Charlie Kirk’s followers is that they seem to have a moral compass. One of these days, the left is going to kill someone whose followers don’t believe in much of anything, except for an eye for an eye.
Recent polls show many on the left are OK with political assassination. If the left thinks it’s OK, soon so will the right. Then it will just be a matter of time.
We need leadership, please.
The good thing about Charlie Kirk’s followers is that they are spineless. If they weren’t they would realize that Kirk played them for fools in recruiting them into the cult.
When Clinton was President polls showed those on the right were OK with political assassination. It flops back and forth depending on who has control and means little.
When Clinton was President polls showed those on the right were OK with political assassination.
Where in the ever living F–k did you get that doozy from? It’s not only false, but stupid.
Cooking sherry time…
“Recent polls show many on the left are OK with political assassination. If the left thinks it’s OK, soon so will the right. ”
In the absence of effective political and societal protection, that change in attitude would not constitute any moral lapse, merely an abiding belief in the right to self defense…
oldmanfromkansas,
Biological sex isn’t under attack. No one is saying that a spermatozoa and an egg don’t merge chromosome components. The attacks are by those who are so simpleminded that they don’t understand that evaluation of self isn’t tied in robotic fashion to the sort of gonads a person has. I’d bet you think that gonads always equals testis and I would win that bet.
Not everyone had their intellectual development stunted in 3rd grade. Grow up, if you can.
It must be exhausting telling people to believe in an actual Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and that it’s OK for the President to brag about sexual harassment.
That is the stupidest, most non-substantive reply to any of my comments that I have ever seen. You make up stuff about gonads not being the same as testes (which I already knew from high school and college-level biology), Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and sexual harassment . . . all of which had EXACTLY NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING IN MY COMMENT. GFY, low-IQ loser.
P.S. When I get exhausted from defending reality from idiots like you, you pipe up with a pile of excrement to wake me up through the sheer stink, so thanks for that at least.
I made nothing up. I said that you wouldn’t know the difference and clearly you don’t. Gonads are cover both testis (the singular) and ovary. Is an ovary a testis? Are they the same? I think you didn’t know they are both gonads.
If you are going to make all these angry posts at least do the world a favor and understand the facts of how the world functions instead of making straw men.
No one is attacking biological sex. You are attacking people for what they think about themselves when that doesn’t affect you in any way. You seem to be so insecure about your sexuality that you should probably find someone professional to help you with that.
The adverse side effect of free speech that we must put up with is imbeciles like Welch.
Rabble:
Before Social media and the need for 24/7 interconnection with the world, the village fool was kept around because he was funny and useful in a pinch, not for his breathtaking views on society.
We should really stop platforming and suffering fools like Welch. First Amendment and all that, but we don’t have to hear her First Amendment whenever she opens her gob if we don’t want to.
And who is Jennifer Welch? I have never heard her, and I don’t care to.
Yes, Charlie Kirk presented gun rights as a rational tradeoff. The quote in JT’s piece is verbatim, accurate. The tradeoff seems rational on the surface — but that’s for the person who is subconsciously saying “that won’t happen to me” (gun murder) based on low probability. But run the opposite thought experiment: An oracle who can see the future tells you it will be YOUR child who will be murdered at school. Your interest shifts 180º to preventing this. You suddenly want to proactively keep guns out of the wrong hands.
The problem I have with Charlie Kirk’s “a certain number of gun murders are worth it” (“it” being freedom from a tyrannical police state), is the same problem I have with the left’s reflexive preference for govt. bureaucrats deciding who shall own guns. Both positions fall into a dichotomization trap…..it either has to be A or B and nothing in between.
A reasoned stance abhors BOTH school children being murdered at school, AND society remaining free from tyrannical government with self-interested, paranoid control over ownership of firearms. What kind of morality is one that says “I’m OK with random shootings by crazy individuals so long as my friends and family are spared”???
Answer: It is the shallow morality of the solipsist, one whose empathy kitchen-cabinet is empty.
There are good proposals that could radically lower mass shootings while maintaining the 2nd Amendment’s intended effect. What does it look like? It’s about attaching greater responsibilities to gun ownership, but in a manner highly decentralized. Call it grass-roots gun responsibility, where govt. bureaucrats are not the ones deciding what is safe, but rather citizens who are mature, of sound mental health, and factually-knowledgeable about firearms and public safety.
Most random gun murders are committed by young, irresponsible men. What if a young person needed an older adult to sponsor and mentor their introduction into firearms ownership? The sponsor would co-sign for the weapon acquisition, and legally be accountable for any illegal use of the weapon — both civil and criminal. If at any point, the sponsor had reason to reconsider the risk, s/he could back out of the sponsorship. The young gun owner would then have to put the weapon(s) into escrow until a new sponsor was arranged.
This proposal disperses responsibility for safe gun culture broadly throughout society. It doesn’t stupidly concentrate that power in government hands. Nor does to make the tragic mistake of stripping a freedom (gun ownership) of mature responsibility — that is why we have repeated, predictable mass school shootings.
We’re not demanding a responsible inculcation of youth into gun culture. There was such much more adult supervision of gun usage (by militia captains) at the time of ratifying the 2nd Amendment. The mistake has been driven by gun zealots who are unwilling to balance freedom with responsibility. That zealotry is met with counter-zealotry that calls for foolishly over-centralized gun control. The sweet spot is somewhere in between, more responsibility-taking for gun supervision, but completely decentralized. We can do this — we just need to reject the forced choice of A or B, both of which are morally distasteful.
Sorry, this issue is simple. the guns are a right. full stop. Now, there are murderous crazy people out there.
I think we should help those people and make sure they are not able to harm others. They are crazy.
no one wants to help seperate the crazies. that’s the solution and we stopped doing it because government is bad at everything it does, including locking up crazys. protection is necessary, a right. We have settled for ineffective government that cannot keep our civilization civilized anymore.
If guns are a right, why are there laws controlling the guns I can buy? Why can’t I get a full up minigun with each barrel having a suppressor? Or make and sell tommyguns at the local craft fair? The words “shall not be infringed” seem to already not apply.
I’ve heard that the second amendment is for when the government is bad at things and the citizens go and fix that.
This country is so uncivilized I can order an item and have it delivered in a couple of days for less than the gasoline I would burn to go to the nearest store that might have it. Civilization is collapsing all around.
Civilization collapse begins in the mind of Americans who just give up, rather than press on to solve complex national problems. Americanonymous is wrong: gun ownership is regulated by The People in the interest of balancing public safety and freedom from government tyranny. Both are essential — there is no civilization left if one is surrendered to achieve the other.
Pbinca tried this: But run the opposite thought experiment: An oracle who can see the future tells you it will be YOUR child who will be murdered at school. Your interest shifts 180º to preventing this. You suddenly want to proactively keep guns out of the wrong hands.
Let’s try this thought experiment on Kalifornia’s Second Amendment hating Pbinca: Your daughter is attempting to get a carry permit because her former lover is stalking her and telling her he is going to rape her and then strangle her then her two young daughters – your granddaugherts – with her blood soaked panties. The daughter tells you the police refuse to give her a carry permit to protect herself, and that they can’t provide her with police protecting her safety, but they will help her get a restraining order.
You wake up to a knock on the door where a police officer is standing there, telling you your daughter was violently raped by the stalker, and then strangled with her blood soaked panties. As were your two granddaughters as well – and one was raped. Oh, and they’re sorry the restraining order did not protect your dead daughter.
Does Pbinca’s thoughts immediately shift from her raped and murdered daughter and granddaughters 180º back to her first thoughts being “More gun control would have protected my daughter and granddaughters from this happening”?
Or does Pbinca instead grudgingly remember that, each year, somewhere between two and three MILLION Americans use lawfully owned firearms to protect themselves and their lives from violent criminals? And over half of those are women?
pbinca’s views on People Control through violating the Second Amendment is actually about providing safer working conditions for her Democrat politicians’ Identity Politics group of violent and vicious criminals preying on women and other people unable to physically defend themselves with empty hands. Ranks right up there with pbinca’s other Kalifornia favorite: “defund the police”.
Pbina says What kind of morality is one that says “I’m OK with random shootings by crazy individuals so long as my friends and family are spared”???
What kind of police state fascist Democrat who hates the Second Amendment thinks they’re moral in building that Democrat deceitful strawman that says Republicans and constitutionalists think that way?
What kind of morality is one that says “I’m okay if the one million women who save themselves each year with a legally carried firearm are instead raped and maybe murdered – as long as I feel safe because I naively believe that once American women are prohibited from carrying a gun, that means no violent criminal will have a gun if he attacks me”.
Answer: It is the amoral base sole interest in demanding other people surrender their civil rights to make her feel better – a dishonest and corrupt Democrat fascist whose empathy kitchen-cabinet is empty.
For pbinca, her morals and values are such that, better a woman be found dead, raped and then strangled with her bra, than her would be rapist and murderer be found bleeding at her feet and her with a legally owned pistol in her hands.
This is the thinking of “reasonable” gun control fascist Democrats like pbinca.
Which is why she will once again duck back into the sewer she crawled out of to hide. Just like she does every other time she posts a demand for Democrat police state fascism being used to make the Second Amendment a dead letter.
He totally did that. He died for what he believed in….violence.
You read the article with no understanding.
Still no one has been able to answer my question below. There is no daylight between Turley and Welch. Both – gun rights are worth the potential for collateral damage.
(And I agree!) But as this is the case, this article is pretty dumb.
What if the collateral damage is visited on your family in order to keep America free? Are you willing to make that sacrifice? That’s the moral question. Saying you’re willing for others (you don’t know or care about) to get murdered to protect your freedoms?….that’s the position of a self-centered morality…not honorable in the slightest. Un-American in its abject lack of empathy for others.
What if the collateral damage is visited on your family in order to keep America free? Are you willing to make that sacrifice?
The moral question is why you would go high school drama. Rather than recognizing that, each year, depending on which federal government administration compiled the statistics, between 2 and 3 MILLION Americans defend their lives with a legally owned firearm – usually a handgun.
Are you willing to say you think it’s worth the collateral damage of another 2 – 3 million victims of violent criminals each year – just so you can think once the Second Amendment is eliminated you will be as safe from armed criminals as you would be in gun control utopias like Chicago and Washington DC which have already made the Second Amendment a dead letter?
That’s what self centered morality – built on a foundation of lies and moral equivalency while staring gun control failure in the face – looks like.
What is it going to take for the stalwart on the left to say, ‘Enough’? This is all absurd, and it is coming exclusively from one side.
Which side is that?
Ms Welch is a stupid person with little gravitas .. . Trump, otoh, is the Unitary Executive Authority!
“In an age of rage, the loudest lunatic reigns supreme.” ~ story
The policy of ignoring mental illness in all it’s forms and leaving those suffering without help has to stop.
Anyone willing to select targeted or worse random victims for their egotistical ‘wrath’ is inherently mentally ill.
It is not a healthy behavior.
Anger, especially rage, is an emotional denial of reality, It says “this shouldn’t be happening because I disagree with it!”
To move from an emotional state to a rational state, you must first accept reality; “This IS happening, can I fix, it or must I withstand it?”
Professor Turley, I welcome what to me appears a new willingness to point out that that right (Trump) also says horrible things. Maybe I was missing it before, but I don’t think so. We must hold ourselves to the same standards as those we want to criticize.
I am sure you also criticized the extrajudicial killings of accused drug smugglers, especially after they no longer pose any threat. (I just don’t remember exactly, but I am sure you did.)
Now I will ask the question: Is killing Kirk morally worse than killing these accused – but unconvicted, and therefore innocent, criminals? I say not. Drugs endanger people, but the endangerment is voluntary. It makes no sense to argue the follow-on results of drug use unless we want to argue the follow-on results of gun ownership, and count thousands and thousands of bodies for each.
I watched enough of the videos that the right praises involving Kirk to have seen the video where Kirk suggests airline passengers should be terrified if they see a black flight crew. Such logic places every black person who wants to rise in life in a cage, and is arguably an assault and robbery against each and every one.
In a country which kills unconvicted people who aren’t even accused of a capital crime, aren’t we promulgating the standard that leads to deaths like Kirk’s? If we can kill people simply for being an apparent threat there is no end to the killing.
Your argument is ridiculous as Charlie Kirk hurt no one, Charlie Kirk used open debate platforms to make his argument point. The argument Charlie made was NOT about race, it was about DEI practices of wallowing unqualified people into highly skilled jobs, BASED ON RACIAL PROFILING.
The people being killed HAVE been judged by their choices, drug smuggling. They are designated Narco terrorists. Narco terrorists importing illegal drugs that kill thousands of Americans annually, destroy families and communities they are by participating, Narco terrorists. We can ask Rob Reiner if he thinks the poison being imported justifies a shoot on sight response, oh wait….
How can anyone be as fking stupid as you are is beyond comprehension.
The DEI program in the FAA was about hiring people to do computer tasks or filing tasks or other office work.
There has never been a relaxation of flight crew or air traffic control training standards. There have been some efforts to recruit among minorities because there is a shortage of pilots and of air traffic controllers. It may stun you to know that many minorities have had made clear to them that no help is coming to them and so won’t consider the notion that they can move into such positions. For all their lives, many looking up to a brighter future are rewarded with a boot stamping them in the face.
Tens of thousands of Americans choose to die using fentanyl for the similar amounts of hopelessness. Drug dealers aren’t chasing people down and shoving drugs into their mouths or injecting them into their veins. If one is near the bottom of the economic pyramid the cost of drugs is smaller than most any other thing such as housing or a car. Many are there because the DEA told doctors to cut people off from opioids that were used to manage long term pain from on-the-job injuries, but the pain didn’t stop.
“The DEI program in the FAA was about hiring people to do computer tasks or filing tasks or other office work.
There has never been a relaxation of flight crew or air traffic control training standards.”
That is a completely false dichotomy. Those hired by the FAA to do “computer tasks”, as you so dismissively put it, are fully as responsible for the safety of the public using commercial air travel as any member of a flight crew or ATC team.
These people are dragging the nation down the road to war. It’s coming. It’s coming because they have pushed and threatened and insulted rank and file Americans to the point of rage. Their wanton disregard for our concerns, wishes and aspirations has led millions to feel threatened and alone, without voice or defense. Those millions are becoming radicalized, having learned that only the most violent seem to garner attention and concession from an apathetic citizenry. This seemingly disenfranchised majority has watched cities burn in the name of radical causes, and watched the establishment acquiesce to their demands, adding additional fuel to their building rage. It won’t take much to generate the spark that kindles societal disaster. Once begun it will be beyond control. Nothing will stop it.
Cities have burned in the way a business burns when there is a dumpster fire that gets put out quickly.
Just because Fox News shoots the same burning dumpster from 100 different angles and paints it as if 20,000 buildings are burning doesn’t make it so. Many people reported the agony of having to go one block over to avoid the protests.
DEar Prof Turdley,
I read with interest recently you regard the ‘evidence’ against Kirk’s assassin was almost ‘open and shut’. That you could cut 90% of it and get a conviction.
Briefly, the ‘evidence’ thus far against Kirk’s assassin is absurd. Almost all of it. .. a good lawyer would have it thrown out with the chamber pot.
*also, Ms Welch is a stupid person .. . it appears Charlie Kirk, at least, was a Stand Up guy!
DG laughable
He admitted to it and confessed idiot. Wait till they call his fuzzy wizzy boyfriend to testify, or is it teste fy.
dgsnowden says: Briefly, the ‘evidence’ thus far against Kirk’s assassin is absurd. Almost all of it.
Far more briefly: He confessed, you IDIOT.
*also, this is what day drinking with cooking sherry has done to one of the two brain cells that he had left.
I agree about President Trump’s comments. Lord, I wish he would learn to keep his mouth shut! He is his own worst enemy, and it’s why PEOPLE DON’T LIKE HIM. I am a Republican, and I fear that he will lose us the mid-terms and beyond. How old is he? Good grief, his comments are often so juvenile I just want to scream!
Nora
People don’t have to like HIM, they have to like his policies and his leadership away from Socialist Democrats push towards totalitarianism. You remember, away from things like what kind of lite bulbs, what kind of cars, mandated vaccines, lockdowns, property rights, taxation, free speech, gun ownership, what a woman is and other trivial matters.
People don’t have to like HIM, they have to like his policies and his leadership away from Socialist Democrats push towards totalitarianism.
If you believe that emotionalism can’t possibly push rational self-interest to the side when somebody is in a voting booth, you haven’t been been paying attention to the last few elections.
The votes of the MAGA crowd can already be counted – except of course Trump’s name won’t be on the choices listed for the midterm elections. There’s a clue there – midterm elections overwhelmingly do not go in favor of the president in office. One reason for that is so many who voted in the presidential election feel no reason to show up for the midterm where he isn’t on the ballot.
Now why would that happen if people sat there, rationally evaluated who they voted for two years earlier, and then voted accordingly to ensure the continuance of the platform they earlier voted for..
It isn’t the MAGA hat wearing crowd that will decide the upcoming midterms, but the undecided and independent voters who either vote for more Republicans to support Trump – or decide that, in the moment, he pisses them off so they’ll elect a few Democrats to keep him in check.
Holding a random podcaster to a higher standard than the President of the United States? Lmao this is why people say you are in a cult. You go out of your way to excuse Trump, you are a horrible person. I hope you read these comments and see this one, because you are a truly horrible sad little human.
Not a good argument for you anonymous. Post by you real name or you are a gutless troll.
You always do that. justify a horrible behavior by pointing to some supposed identical example behavior by someone you hate that never happened, with no context.
Please, directly address the morality of justifying this assasination since you seem to be on the ‘pro’ side.
Changing the subject by pointing out your brother’s bad behavior might have worked with your adoptive parents but you’re not 8 anymore.
When you learn to read, Anonymous, come back and read his entire essay. You will see he called Trump’s comment “callous” and said it should be deleted. I think many if not most Trump supporters would say the same.
Liberals can’t help but lie because the truth shows their depravity. They gave nothing but lies.
Outrageous comments by Welch generate hits, hits =$. The problem are her followers who believe her comments and act in outrage. As for President Trump’s comments, unwarranted. I guess if you’re hit constantly with lies and innuendo you grow callous to anything that happens to your opposition. Reiner was a talented producer, director and actor, may he rest in peace.
Same logic for Trump, no?
georgie ^^^^afraid to sign in after being knocked down this morning.
Rage can easily be taken as psychotic insanity!
What kind of sick person writes this disgusting stuff about someone that was just murdered?
“Rob Reiner, a tortured and struggling, but once very talented movie director and comedy star, has passed away, together with his wife, Michele, reportedly due to the anger he caused others through his massive, unyielding, and incurable affliction with a mind crippling disease known as TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME, sometimes referred to as TDS.”
The one and only self proclaimed orange god of pedophiles DJT.
Rob got in a fight with his son
you fool. For what reason, we don’t know.
Rob did not suffer from TDS.
His TDS display was acting, part of that machine. intended to pull in those who could experience real TDS and act and vote accordingly in the name of, somehow, ‘progress’, but really just plain ole communism in disguise. It was all just politicization through polarization.
TDS is when people support Trump without question. They just let Trump do it. Trump says something and they are deranged with an overwhelming need to agree with him. They literally cannot help themselves. I saw a guy asking a guy with a Trump hat to name the wars that Trump has stopped. They guy had no clue. One of them he guessed was “Africa.” Most of them have already boiled over again, the way they have done a multitude of times as they jockey for position.
TDS is when people support Trump without question. They just let Trump do it.
TDS is when lying Democrats post lies that Republican voters support Trump without question – on a blog where many (including me) have already posted was yet another stupid act of stepping on his dick. Numerous posters here have said that was the wrong time, no matter the provocation from somebody now dead; they think Trump should learn sufficient control to manage his mouth.
If for no other reason than the times he allows stupid shyte to pour out of his mouth provides the ammunition the Democrats and media need when they have nothing else.
And the excuse for the lying Democrats who claim Trump gets no criticism from those who voted for him?
Reiner was a looney tunes Hollyweird lib. He ran his yapper at Trump at every opportunity. I can understand why Trump could give two chits what happened to him, why would he care about his enemies that besmirched him at every opportunity and wanted to put him in prison for life?
The one and only self proclaimed orange god of pedophiles DJT.
Political pedophiles? Is that you President Daddy-Daughter Inappropriate White House Incest Showers? How old was your daughter when you were balling her in the showers? 14? Maybe 15?
What kind of sick perverts would have made the name “Biden” their choice at the voting booth for White House Pedophile after that?
More people are killed and injured in car accidents. Does Ms. Welch advocate banning cars?
Do you use your gun to get you to the grocery store? to your place of employment?
Yes.
“Do you use your gun to get you to the grocery store? to your place of employment?”
No.
But to get home alive — Yes.
This raises an interesting point. Liberals say Charlie Kirk was a bad guy for simply recognizing that wide-spread ownership of guns will lead to some deaths that otherwise would not occur. But liberals push environmental regulations that cause deaths. For example, the CAFE standards for cars have been determined to add at least 2000 deaths to the total of traffic-related deaths per year. Have you heard even one Democrat saying that those regulations should be scrapped?
Liberals pushed for uniform CAFE standards that apply to all vehicles. Conservatives pushed for regulations that favor large and heavy trucks for non-commercial purposes because trucks have a disproportionate profit versus their weight. Double the weight and the profit margin goes up 400%.
If the liberal standard was held to, that all vehicles for non-commercial purposes needed to get at least 30 MPG, then the number of those bro-trucks and giant SUVs would be reduced and, with that reduction, the number of people in passenger cars getting killed by them would be reduced.
But conservatives demand to be literally above others even if it takes the lives of those others.
I don’t fol;low the logic of your reply, but I will ask: why do we care what kind of car other people drive?
” But liberals push environmental regulations that cause deaths. For example, the CAFE standards for cars have been determined to add at least 2000 deaths…”
2,000 is a drop in the bucket. How many excess deaths did the COVID lock-downs and mandatory vaccinations cause?
edwardmahl wrote:
” But liberals push environmental regulations that cause deaths. For example, the CAFE standards for cars have been determined to add at least 2000 deaths…”
2,000 is a drop in the bucket. How many excess deaths did the COVID lock-downs and mandatory vaccinations cause?
I voted Trump 3x but he doesn’t know when to shut up. Sometimes you keep comments to yourself.
How do you feel about people in the immigration court waiting area, scheduled to take the oath of citizenship in a few minutes, being rounded up and deported after having completed ever step required of them to get there? They go through all the hoops, pass all the tests and, when all that remains is to appear before an immigration judge, the ICE takes all their work away and tosses them out.
You voted for that.
How do you feel about people in the immigration court waiting area, scheduled to take the oath of citizenship in a few minutes, being rounded up and deported after having completed ever step required of them to get there?
How about we start with your lie that they were deported? When what actually happened is that the citizenship ceremonies were cancelled.
Your shyte is so desperately weak that the only recourse you have is to revert/pervert to Lyin’ Like Joe Biden?
President Trump had a chance to rise to the occasion after the Reiners’ deaths. He had a chance to prove he was better than many of his enemies. He punted.
I strongly disagreed with Mr. Reiner’s politics, but he was very gracious in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s death. He bravely showed sympathy for Charlie and his family, even drawing criticism from his own side for doing so.
It would have been so perfect if President Trump had taken Rob’s death as an opportunity to reciprocate the kindness. Erika Kirk forgave Charlie’s killer. Can we at least take a page from her book?
Unforced errors are the most embarrassing. I support President Trump, but he needs to apologize for his comments about Rob’s death. I bet Scott Adams would agree.
I read a post that helps explain the MRI and hand bruising, as well as the signs of mental deterioration displayed by Trump that are obvious to everyone outside of MAGAverse–he has started Lequembi therapy–a drug used to treat early signs of Alzheimer’s. Trump’s father had Alzheimer’s, so he has a strong family history. A patient starting this therapy has to have a baseline MRI, and then repeat MRIs on a regular basis. The bruise on the hand may well be due to an infiltrated IV because the drug can only be administered intravenously. Also, Trump has had–how many “physicals” so far this year? Several. He couldn’t explain why he had an MRI, or even what part of his anatomy was evaluated. Yeah, it all adds up.
But, even if he didn’t have early Alzheimer’s, the narcissism symptoms will always be there–the lack of empathy, his view of life that everything is about Trump–even Rob Reiner’s killing. It’s indefensible. He needs to go away.
GIGI: THanks for joining the ranks of the discredited commenters on this blog. More chum from the susceptible gulper.
Fact Check: False, no credible evidence to back the claim
“The claims made in the online rumors are false, as there is no credible medical, official, or verifiable evidence that Donald Trump is taking the Alzheimer’s drug Leqembi.
The rumor appears to stem from social media users’ speculation, linking recent reports about Trump’s health, including bruising on his hand, an MRI scan, and moments of fatigue, to potential side effects of Leqembi. However, none of these claims are supported by facts.
“Official statements from the president’s physician and the White House deny that Trump is undergoing any such treatment or experiencing cognitive impairment. They described his recent MRI as “preventive” and “perfectly normal.”
“The bruising on his hand has been attributed to aspirin use and frequent handshakes, along with a diagnosis of chronic venous insufficiency. The wording of the claim first appeared on X in early December as a satirical or partisan jab and has since been reposted without sources.
From “Fact Check: Is Trump taking Alzheimer’s medicine Leqembi?” (gigi couldn’t even spell it right.)
https://news.meaww.com/fact-check-is-trump-taking-alzheimers-medicine-leqembi
If the bruising was from handshaking it would wrap around to the other side of his hand where a heavy grip would also do damage. Note too that the bruising extends far beyond the knuckles, indicating a major leakage centered exactly where a vein would be found. He’s so obese that finding a vein anywhere else must be like an Oak Island treasure hunt.
“The claims made in the online rumors are false” is not correct. They may be entirely true, and the preponderance of the evidence suggests it is. Just because Trump has neither confirmed or denied it, and his Press Secretary has come up with alternate facts blaming handshakes – come on, who drives a thumb that hard into the hand of an elderly man much less the President of the US? He would have bruises on his other hand from bumping into things in a way that normal people don’t bruise from.
“chronic venous insufficiency” doesn’t cause bruising in the hands.
Kindness towards his critics is not in Trump’s DNA.
Vin
What kindness has the left show towards Prez Trump.
Try zero.
Agree. That has to be admitted, too.
Trump promised he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose any votes.
Why would anyone show kindness to a person making that claim as part of a political campaign except those who are also unkind to others.
Trump promised he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose any votes.
If communist Democrats couldn’t take every single word Trump said literally, about all they would have left is their fellow Democrat liars who repeatedly say Trump is actually Hitler.
What kindness has the left show towards Prez Trump.
Kindness? Is it politically smart or moronic, with the midterm elections eleven months away, to shoot yourself in the foot in order to scratch a Queens ego itch?
You can be politically smart enough to be polite and praise communist murderous dictators – but not politically smart enough to at least shut his cakehole and refrain from slagging a recently murdered man and his wife?
Trump and those wanting him able to continue his platform don’t have to worry about the MAGA voters; their votes can be counted right now.
The independents and undecideds are what he and we will need to maintain a majority in the House.
You believe this “I gotcha’!” leveled at a dead man and his wife before their bodies are cold is going to make him look better or worse in the eyes of those non-Republicans his political future is dependent on?
It isn’t playing well with people here who are loyal supporters – not merely independents or undecideds.
It might play well with some/many in the MAGA hat wearing crowd. For many who would still vote for him yet again, it is the remarks one would expect from a cull.
Self announced enemies are not critics…
Wasn’t it Mark Twain that said something like ,”Although I don’t celebrate death, I may take great interest in reading one’s obituary over another”, something like that?
Those are not merely innocuous “critics.”
Those are direct and mortal enemies of the American thesis of freedom and self-reliance, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, actual Americans, and America.
Hold your breath Diogenese. Reiner was a Hollywood Trump enemy second only to the fat pig Rosie.
Erika Kirk twisted her mouth in disgust when she claimed to forgive the killer. She is unable to forgive any critic because they are telling the truth about Charlie and she can’t keep the billionaires money stream to support her lifestyle if the college marks fade away. Her “forgiveness” will not translate to showing up at the sentencing hearing and weeping for whoever is convicted that they be set free.
You remind me of what evil smells like.