The murder of Charlie Kirk

I don't think this is correct. I am not an employment lawyer, but I'm fairly certain that your local independent hardware store can fire an employee at will for any reason at all that is unrelated to the person being a member of a protected class.

For example, the store could fire you simply because they thought someone else would do a better job.

Where did he imply it should. Please quote that part of the statement.

He is saying people are finding it hard to be empathetic because that’s the political culture Republicans have set up. Any good faith reading of the statement makes that obvious.

And he just got a 'like' from me too!

One of them there 'a broken clock is right twice a day' scenarios.

But why do you find even find it "weird?"

Those aren't examples racism. You are randomly throwing out topics you believe are racist to challenge that Charlie had open debates about.

That's the problem. It shouldn't be a normal political opinion that the other side is racist. Charlie Kirk argued many times race doesn't matter. Not something a racist would do. Whether you agree or not, arguing that someone should be hired based on merit not race isn't racist.

Charlie preached the gospel of Jesus Christ, which makes him a "love monger!"

And many unhinged leftists will condemn Cenk for for appearing on Tucker's program.

(I'm guessing SRM would be one of those folks, but I could be wrong.)

I don’t condemn him for going on Tucker’s program, but I think it’s funny to use him as an example of a lefty working with Tucker because that’s what TYT does nowadays. They are still on their year long right-wing fellatio tour.

Yes and he said replace it with a one page document as folks are using the act not how it was intended . The black women are inferior again taking it out of context. The third statement I am not sure of

Its like Stephen King Charlie said we should stone gay people. No he didn't

True. And we don't have much of a timeline on Robinson after the shooting. Safe to say he wasn't at his parents' home until near the time he turned himself in do to him telling his mom he was home sick. So he could have gone back to his apartment and destroyed evidence. Apparently he did admit to someone to destroying the black clothes.

The text exchange indisputably was weird, but the people claiming it was fabricated having offered a plausible explanation for who faked it and why? Was it an attempt to frame an innocent person? If so, why? And how were the people around this guy (including his father) convinced to go along with the plan to frame him? Was it an attempt to frame a guilty person? If so, why take the risk? The only way I can imagine this guy getting acquitted would be for the government to get caught fabricating evidence. And needless to say, testing the authenticity of that text exchange would be a main focus of defense counsel at trial if they had reason to believe that the text exchange was fabricated.

If I say “I don’t see race, it means nothing to me “

But also say “this dumb black bitch stole a smarter white persons spot” in a general sense

Well that’s called hypocrisy

When someone readily contradicts themselves then you have to take that into account. Something right wingers seem fully incapable of doing

Edit: even saying something like “if the pilot is black I’m going to question their skills” is blatantly racist af

You guys gotta back this **** up with actual citations or I'll just assume you're bullshitting.

What’s your opinion on trump calling for the death penalty and kash saying all sorts of dumb **** about the ongoing investigation tainting the ability to find an impartial jury

For the same reason I'd find it weird if someone called their partner "snookie-yum-yums" or "honey-lambkins".

I think their behavior will make it more time-consuming and difficult to empanel a jury.

I'm arguing that the "normal criticism" of Charlie Kirk from the left is not true.

Yes, even if Charlie Kirk was racist (he's wasn't) a police officer should not be publicly posting he doesn't feel sympathy towards a murder victim. I'm not sure why you think that's ok?

He didn't say that though....

Do you know several people who snipe public figures and if so are they weird or unusual?

Fabricating a letter to use words that *checks notes* makes people less convinced that it was the shooter doesnt seem super strong to me - despite all other risks associated with that.

Last I knew (it's been a while since I dealt with this stuff) all states except Montana are "at will" states. In Montana, after a probationary period, you need a reason to fire someone. I have no idea how strict the requirements for the reason are. Maybe all you need to say is "he didn't fit in".

They found more cartridges with engravings in his apartment.

That is not the case. The young Turks recognized the danger and unpopularity of cancer culture/wokeism. They are now warning Democrats to not go down that route again. To return to supporting working class policies like universal healthcare, addressing college debt. Enough of the culture wars. There’s nothing wrong with left-wing and right wingers coming together on numerous issues. It happens so many times in the past think of Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neal. Think of Franklin Roosevelt and Republicans during World War II. That type of unity is needed today in a day and age where there’s a lot of polarization.

And again Tucker Carlson reportedly is worth 100 million. Candace Owens husband is worth 300 million. Whatever business opportunity you think they stand to gain on a YouTube platform is minuscule compared to what they already have in terms of wealth. And also they’re following was gigantic before the whole Charlie Kirk thing. So that’s a nothing burger.

You’re aware that Owens and Carlson have not said Israel is responsible for Kirk’s assassination? They’re calling out Netanyahu for Mischaracterizing Kirk’s life and taking advantage of his death for political reasons. Propagandists are the ones trying to take advantage of the situation with one liners and gifs attempting to characterize Owens and Carlson as “antisemites and wild conspiracy theorists”. It’s a bad tactic and most people don’t buy it

Owens has also talked about watching out for who takes over the lead at turning point. Frankly that’s a common sense thing. It’s not just Owen’s many people have that thought. Is it going to be some kind of a pro Israel person like Ben Shapiro? . By the way tons of young conservatives don’t want that to happen. They don’t want Shapiro anywhere near Turning point.

I never said he said black women are inferior. If you’re going to nuance bro me on a topic at least make sure you read what I said correctly.

I know dumb people oftentimes have trouble understanding what people say, but if you’re going to hyper nuance bro Charlie’s intentionally inflammatory statements, at least try to make an effort in understanding the other side. You have the intellectual rigor here of the people that think supporting Rittenhouse getting acquitted makes you a white supremacist.

He said that he understands why people are failing to have empathy here. In that same statement he said what happened to Kirk is horrible. “This act was horrific” < direct quote. He said Charlie Kirk and Republicans aren’t winning in empathy and cited several instances of them doing so.

Maybe you believe cops should just stay out of politics entirely. If that’s the case you’re going to see a lot of blue lives matter cops getting fired for clear and direct expressions of speech. I think you’ll find a lot more right wingers losing their jobs if we go back to cancel culture wars.

Oh or maybe you’re one of those “when you’re in power I ask for free speech because it’s good for me. When I’m not in power I oppose your free speech because it’s good for me” types. Perfectly consistent in being a disingenuous scumbag.