The other thought that springs to mind: "they that take the sword shall perish with the sword". Kirk lived in the realm of stochastic terrorism and deniable incitement of political violence.
Laura Loomer had been attacking him in recent months, and accusing him of stabbing Trump in the back.
Over what issues?
Primarily not hewing closely enough to the Administration's line on Trump's association with Epstein.
The other thought that springs to mind: "they that take the sword shall perish with the sword". Kirk lived in the realm of stochastic terrorism and deniable incitement of political violence.
Laura Loomer had been attacking him in recent months, and accusing him of stabbing Trump in the back.
Over what issues?
Primarily not hewing closely enough to the Administration's line on Trump's association with Epstein.
Thanks.
And just to clarify, you mean that on the issue of Epstein and Trump, Loomer is nothing-to-see-here-folks, and was criticizing Kirk for supposedly being closer to a release-the-files position?
Asking, because I've actually seen people in the last few hours describing Kirk's position as nothing-to-see-here, or at least perceived as such by full-disclosure Republicans.
The other thought that springs to mind: "they that take the sword shall perish with the sword". Kirk lived in the realm of stochastic terrorism and deniable incitement of political violence.
Laura Loomer had been attacking him in recent months, and accusing him of stabbing Trump in the back.
Over what issues?
Primarily not hewing closely enough to the Administration's line on Trump's association with Epstein.
Thanks.
And just to clarify, you mean that on the issue of Epstein and Trump, Loomer is nothing-to-see-here-folks, and was criticizing Kirk for supposedly being closer to a release-the-files position?
Yes, that's correct. It's true that in the last few days he had changed his position, saying that he now trusted the administration - which might have also upset a different set of people.
Yes, that's correct. It's true that in the last few days he had changed his position, saying that he now trusted the administration
Yeah, the one X post about Epstein I saw from Kirk was saying that the signature on the birthday letter was a forgery.
- which might have also upset a different set of people.
A QAnon type angry that Republicans are supposedly covering up Trump's complicity in Epstein's crimes would be my most likely right-wing suspect for the assassin. Not that I think the odds are particularly great for the killer being right-wing.
A QAnon type angry that Republicans are supposedly covering up Trump's complicity in Epstein's crimes would be my most likely right-wing suspect for the assassin. Not that I think the odds are particularly great for the killer being right-wing.
I think the odds are pretty high, the right wing tends to be fissiparous in its own way. They'll very probably be right wing, but with a set of other non-coherent beliefs, because those are the kinds of people who become lone wolf assassins (see the Trump shooter).
Seems like America has crossed over a line with political assassinations. There were the two Democratic legislatures in Minnesota, the attempts on Pelosi, and Governor Whitmer of Michigan. The shooting up of the CDC building. I had said the shooting of Kirk was an example of the rats eating their own. Well...
Seems like America has crossed over a line with political assassinations. There were the two Democratic legislatures in Minnesota, the attempts on Pelosi, and Governor Whitmer of Michigan. The shooting up of the CDC building. I had said the shooting of Kirk was an example of the rats eating their own. Well...
Have we crossed a line? Or is this the continuation of a regular cycle in our history?
Assassinations and assassination attempts are nothing new in American politics and society, aside from Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy. Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Huey Long, George Wallace, Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Robert F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, both Bill, and Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and Donald Trump are just some of the assassination targets in a very long list from American history.
I assume all presidents are assassination targets. We only hear about it if someone makes a public attempt, but I'd be willing to bet the Secret Service and the FBI prevent attempts we never hear about. And I'm sure more than one nation has plans thought out to one degree or another about how they'd kill the US president given the right circumstances.
I assume all presidents are assassination targets. We only hear about it if someone makes a public attempt, but I'd be willing to bet the Secret Service and the FBI prevent attempts we never hear about.
Definitely true from Nixon on, and likely true before then.
But there’s also a long history of assassinations and assassination attempts of lower-ranking public officials (I meant to include George Moscone and Harvey Milk in my list above) and public figures in the US, many if not most of which involved people who aren’t well remembered. That’s why I’m pushing back a bit on the “crossed a line” characterization.
That said, I think it’s quite appropriate to consider the role that the rhetoric of Trump and others on the right is playing in recent assassinations and assassination attempts.
Oh, I agree about the wrong-headedness of the "crossing a line" remarks. A country that jails roughly 1 out of every 180 people, a country with more guns than people, a country riddled with places with stand your ground laws and open carry laws, a country where the cops kill people with impunity, is fully okay with political violence.
Seems like America has crossed over a line with political assassinations. There were the two Democratic legislatures in Minnesota, the attempts on Pelosi, and Governor Whitmer of Michigan. The shooting up of the CDC building. I had said the shooting of Kirk was an example of the rats eating their own. Well...
Have we crossed a line? Or is this the continuation of a regular cycle in our history?
Assassinations and assassination attempts are nothing new in American politics and society, aside from Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy. Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Huey Long, George Wallace, Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Robert F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, both Bill, and Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and Donald Trump are just some of the assassination targets in a very long list from American history.
I may have noted this earlier, but assassination of American political leaders seems to have fallen off since the 1980s, about the same time shootings where someone goes to a public place to kill a lot of strangers started picking up in popularity. Maybe with the rise of cults of personality in American politics the more personalized form of public violence is also making a comeback.
Seems like America has crossed over a line with political assassinations. There were the two Democratic legislatures in Minnesota, the attempts on Pelosi, and Governor Whitmer of Michigan. The shooting up of the CDC building. I had said the shooting of Kirk was an example of the rats eating their own. Well...
Have we crossed a line? Or is this the continuation of a regular cycle in our history?
Assassinations and assassination attempts are nothing new in American politics and society, aside from Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy. Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Huey Long, George Wallace, Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Robert F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, both Bill, and Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and Donald Trump are just some of the assassination targets in a very long list from American history.
I may have noted this earlier, but assassination of American political leaders seems to have fallen off since the 1980s, about the same time shootings where someone goes to a public place to kill a lot of strangers started picking up in popularity. Maybe with the rise of cults of personality in American politics the more personalized form of public violence is also making a comeback.
If you did note it earlier, I either missed it or don’t remember it, so thanks for mentioning it again. Interesting thought.
If you did note it earlier, I either missed it or don’t remember it, so thanks for mentioning it again. Interesting thought.
It may have been on another thread. It comes from observing that prior to the mid-1980s mass shootings where someone wanted to kill a bunch of strangers in a public place were basically unheard of in the U.S. Aside from the University of Texas tower incident, mass shootings of this era were mostly directed at the shooter's family, co-workers, or other acquaintances. In other words, the typical criteria for most smaller-scale murders and attempted murders. Then for whatever reason, after John Hinckley shot Ronald Reagan political assassinations and attempted assassinations in the U.S. become a lot less common than they had been previously, while the aforementioned mass shootings of strangers start to happen a lot more frequently.
Isn’t that about when the National Rifle Association began to change from being a gun safety organisation towards the gun promotion body it seems to be today?
Well, the hard right got their martyr of the year. Vance takes the body back to Arizona on Air Force 2, the Vice President's plane. Trump is saying he will give Kirk the Presidential Freedom Award posthumously, the higuhest award a President can give a civilian.
I think Kirk would likely have given Vance a run for the money in the next round of presidential primaries. He had a very large following, that's for sure.
Won't be surprised if they name something after him.
Trump seems very selective in his reaction to people being shot. He is distraught re Kirk, but almost blase about 'unimportant' people who have been shot.
Trump seems very selective in his reaction to people being shot. He is distraught re Kirk, but almost blase about 'unimportant' people who have been shot.
I’ll cut him a little slack on that. He knew Kirk and, from all reports, considered him a friend. Not that he, or anyone, should ever be blasé about a shooting, much less an assassination, but I’d expect a more distraught reaction when it’s someone you know well.
Trump seems very selective in his reaction to people being shot. He is distraught re Kirk, but almost blase about 'unimportant' people who have been shot.
He moved on almost immediately and starting talking about the construction of the new White House ballroom mid interview.
Trump seems very selective in his reaction to people being shot. He is distraught re Kirk, but almost blase about 'unimportant' people who have been shot.
I’ll cut him a little slack on that. He knew Kirk and, from all reports, considered him a friend. Not that he, or anyone, should ever be blasé about a shooting, much less an assassination, but I’d expect a more distraught reaction when it’s someone you know well.
Almost the first action undertaken by Trump as President was to pardon a whole group of people who had engaged in coordinated political violence. Trump routinely uses dehumanizing language to describe more or less anyone that doesn't agree with him. He doesn't get any kind of pass from me. He and his ilk encourage and fertilize political violence.
By contrast, calling someone a fascist is not actually violent. It's not dehumanizing, in the way that much of the rhetoric produced by Trump and his gang of fellow travelers is - it's a characterization of his political positions and actions.
Let's look at some of the characteristics of fascism:
1. Dictatorial Leader.
2. Militarism
3. Nationalism
4. Authoritarianism
5. Belief in a natural social order and inherent differences in worth of different classes of people
1. Check. Personal loyalty to Trump is required of everyone in his administration.
2. Check. Department of War? Chipocalypse now? "I'm the commander in chief, I can do anything I want with the military"? His little Putin-esque birthday parade?
3. Check. "America first" rhetoric. "Immigrants are changing our way of life" rhetoric. "They hate America" rhetoric.
4. Check. Trump is not actually a supporter of small government - he's a supporter of Trump government.
5. Check. Rhetoric calling various classes of people "scum", "animals", "lunatics" and so on.
If it walks like a fascist and talks like a fascist, it's probably a fascist.
They have apparently caught the person who assassinated Kirk. He is 22 years old and seems to have had a visceral hatred for what Kirk stood for. Not sure how he turned himself in. I have heard a couple of scenarios. 1) He told a relative who relayed it to the Sheriff's office and the FBI. 2)His father convinced him to turn himself in.
Either way. I have to wonder if the hate Kirk was known to spew created an equal reaction by the shooter. Hare begets Hate.
Time to take a breath America, cool down a bit. Start showing empathy.
Trump seems very selective in his reaction to people being shot. He is distraught re Kirk, but almost blase about 'unimportant' people who have been shot.
I’ll cut him a little slack on that. He knew Kirk and, from all reports, considered him a friend. Not that he, or anyone, should ever be blasé about a shooting, much less an assassination, but I’d expect a more distraught reaction when it’s someone you know well.
Almost the first action undertaken by Trump as President was to pardon a whole group of people who had engaged in coordinated political violence. Trump routinely uses dehumanizing language to describe more or less anyone that doesn't agree with him. He doesn't get any kind of pass from me. He and his ilk encourage and fertilize political violence.
By contrast, calling someone a fascist is not actually violent. It's not dehumanizing, in the way that much of the rhetoric produced by Trump and his gang of fellow travelers is - it's a characterization of his political positions and actions.
Let's look at some of the characteristics of fascism:
1. Dictatorial Leader.
2. Militarism
3. Nationalism
4. Authoritarianism
5. Belief in a natural social order and inherent differences in worth of different classes of people
1. Check. Personal loyalty to Trump is required of everyone in his administration.
2. Check. Department of War? Chipocalypse now? "I'm the commander in chief, I can do anything I want with the military"? His little Putin-esque birthday parade?
3. Check. "America first" rhetoric. "Immigrants are changing our way of life" rhetoric. "They hate America" rhetoric.
4. Check. Trump is not actually a supporter of small government - he's a supporter of Trump government.
5. Check. Rhetoric calling various classes of people "scum", "animals", "lunatics" and so on.
If it walks like a fascist and talks like a fascist, it's probably a fascist.
I don’t disagree with any of that, except with regard to the bolded. And I did intentionally say “a little slack,” with the emphasis on “little.”
I fervently wish he would do better and be better. I think it is a basic human reaction to be more distraught when the victim of a killing like this is someone one knows well and is close to than when it is a stranger. And I’m not going to basically demonize and dehumanizes someone I vehemently disagree with, at least in part, because he demonizes and dehumanizes people he disagrees with.
They have apparently caught the person who assassinated Kirk.
Well, they have a person of interest in custody, would be the most legally accurate way of saying it.
He is 22 years old and seems to have had a visceral hatred for what Kirk stood for.
Hard to say. He posed for a photo as Pepe Frog(typically right-wing, but apparently now spread into apolitical circles), and included a homophobic taunt, albeit maybe more as a non-literal, generic insult, on the casings he allegedly used. There WAS the Italian anti-fascist slogan on the casings, but apparently he could have gotten that from a particular computer game that features the slogan.
According to people more familiar than I am with the relevant subcultures, the shooter's ideology seems to have been largely self-styled, and gleaned from various "terminally on-line" sources.
For some reason he preferred the term "sympathy." He wasn't stupid; I assume he knew the difference. So he was willing to feel bad for others' misfortune, at least some others, but not to share other people's feelings.
Someone inscribed “Hey facist”, “Catch !” “Bella Ciao, Bella ciao, Bella ciao”, and “If you read this you’d gay lmoa”on the bullet casings (there were also some symbol ones I don’t remember). Somehow the Daily Mail is still managing to report the shooter’s motive was unclear.
Presumably, the shooter feels assassinating Hitler before 1933 would have been ethical.
I more get the impression they'd have been there on the Night of the Long Knives holding one of the knives. Evidence is starting to point to a Trumpist who thought Kirk was too soft.
According to people more familiar than I am with the relevant subcultures, the shooter's ideology seems to have been largely self-styled, and gleaned from various "terminally on-line" sources.
Reports say that he was a good student at school, scored 34/36 on the ACT, but flunked out of university after his first term, and was living at home with his parents. That's consistent with the profile of someone who has latched on to various kinds of online conspiracy theories.
I fervently wish he would do better and be better. I think it is a basic human reaction to be more distraught when the victim of a killing like this is someone one knows well and is close to than when it is a stranger.
But that's the thing. Donald Trump isn't a basic human. He's the President of the United States of America. His job is to be a statesman, to be a leader, and to calm and unify the country in times like this. Joe Budweiser at the local bar is allowed to be driven by basic human reactions. The President does not have that luxury.
This is yet another example of the way that Mr. Trump is a complete failure at honorably discharging the office of President.
Someone inscribed “Hey facist”, “Catch !” “Bella Ciao, Bella ciao, Bella ciao”, and “If you read this you’d gay lmoa”on the bullet casings (there were also some symbol ones I don’t remember). Somehow the Daily Mail is still managing to report the shooter’s motive was unclear.
Well, in fairness to the Mail, anti- fascist slogans are almost always from the left(and definitely in the case of the Italian partisans), and in the year 2025, the left tends to be associated with pro-LGBQT opinions, IOW not the kind of people who would use "gay" as an insult.
So, yeah, there is a bit of ambiguity there. Though, as I said, I think it's likely explainable by the shooter having a self-styled, syncretic political ideology, picked up from all over the place.
I fervently wish he would do better and be better. I think it is a basic human reaction to be more distraught when the victim of a killing like this is someone one knows well and is close to than when it is a stranger.
But that's the thing. Donald Trump isn't a basic human.
I said “it’s a basic human reaction,” not “he’s a basic human,” whatever that might mean. “Ordinary person,” maybe? Last time I checked, all political leaders are still human and react in human ways. Yes, we expect them to rise above the personal, and Trump does a horrible, infantile job of that.
Queen Elizabeth was certainly someone who understood her role and her duty as a national leader. I think few would criticize her for being more distraught over Lord Mountbatten’s assassination than over other political killings. The difference was she knew how to not let her personal feelings get in the way of her public role.
I am not defending anything at all about Trump except to the extent reflected by the one very specific thing I said: It’s human nature to be more distraught over the killing of someone you know and are close to than of someone you aren’t. I’m going to cut him a little slack for being more personally distraught over this killing than over some other killings. That doesn’t mean I don’t think he completely fails to understand or care what his role requires of him.
There seems to have been a bit of context lost in reporting - references to/ from the game Helldiver 2 have been taken out of context and construed as antifascist but if I understand what players are saying it's a kind of Starship Troopers type dystopia where the people saying 'hey fascist' are the fascists.
There's a big intrafascist schism between Nick Fuentes followers - groypers - and Charlie Kirk's followers. The groypers thought Kirk wasn't extreme enough.
I think from what I've seen and learned about the meme/ game references this guy will turn out to be on the groyper end of things.
Going back to my comment about Rats eating their own.
Tyler Robinson, the alleged assassin of Charlie Kirk, is said to be a member of the Groyper movement lead by Nick Fuentas. Nick is a hard right nationalist. His group has constantly disrupted Charlie Kirk's rallies. They accused Kirk of being a gate keeper and had too moderate views about immigration and LBGTQ questions. See this story.
So much for the Radical Left causing Kirk's death, Mr Trump.
I doubt if Robinson will be able to undergo a fair trial when some in the community have already found him guilty and claim that he should be executed.
I doubt if Robinson will be able to undergo a fair trial when some in the community have already found him guilty and claim that he should be executed.
I don't think Mr Robinson's case is any different from anyone who is arrested for a high-profile crime. We manage to secure a fair trial for people who are accused of child abductions and murders, of Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and any number of people in a similar position. I don't see why Mr Robinson should be any different.
For every high-profile crime, there are always "some people in the community" ready to lynch anybody who is arrested for it.
FBI Director Kash Patel, in his closing remarks concerning the arrest of Tyler Robinson, addressing Charlie Kirk, said something to the effect: "We have the watch. See you in Valhalla."
Odd saying, considering Patel is Indian, not Viking.
Two possible explanations. 1) Sometimes used by Marines for a fallen comrade. Problem is, neither Kirk nor Patel were in the military. However, Kirk and Patel were close friends, each of them appearing on the other's blogs or broadcasts.
2) White nationalists have long used Norse Mythology in reference to themselves. Problem is Patel is not Northern European. Kirk, though, identifies as a Christian nationalist.
Maybe it was a combination of both lines of reasoning.
Either way, or not, it is still an odd saying at the end of a speech of a new conference in LDS country.
This meme is going around Facebook. Not sure of accuracy, though. However, I do know the soybean farmers across the US are feeling the pinch.
That's a pretty good summation of the ongoing economic debacle. Not sure I would frame the last point in terms of "Ford" suffering a loss in profits, since average Joe Yokel probably doesn't really care about the company, per se.
Though I guess if the layoffs haven't started yet, you gotta have something to use as an economic symbol indicating the damage to the auto sector.
Pictures going round of Trump at the 9/11 memorial looking like he has had a stroke. The right side of his mouth has obviously dropped. He is looking very ill. I would say an intervention is needed. He is supposed to be coming over here soon. I am not sure he will make it.
Pictures going round of Trump at the 9/11 memorial looking like he has had a stroke. The right side of his mouth has obviously dropped. He is looking very ill. I would say an intervention is needed. He is supposed to be coming over here soon. I am not sure he will make it.
It will be interesting to see if he does - and if he's seen in public.
Of course, those pictures could easily have been altered - as could any of him looking healthy - we no longer know what is real photograph wise.
The government will certainly hope that this week's royal schmooze-fest will make a positive impression on Trump, creating a feelgood factor for the UK.
It's an unusual and carefully crafted state visit. There's a crammed schedule squeezed into a day and a half, most of it dedicated to royal spectacles. Windsor is being used like a royal theme park.
Comments
Primarily not hewing closely enough to the Administration's line on Trump's association with Epstein.
It is my understanding the shooter is still at large, but one has to wonder if it is a matter of the rats eating their own.
When I first heard of the shooting, I had to wonder when Trump would be sending in the troops to revenge Kirk's demise.
AP reports the following exchange happened just before the shot:
Video shows Kirk had been taking questions from an audience member about mass shootings and gun violence.
“Do you know how many transgender Americans have been mass shooters over the last 10 years?” an audience member asked.
Kirk responded, “Too many.”
The questioner followed up: “Do you know how many mass shooters there have been in America over the last 10 years?”
“Counting or not counting gang violence?” Kirk asked.
Then a single shot rang out.
Thanks.
And just to clarify, you mean that on the issue of Epstein and Trump, Loomer is nothing-to-see-here-folks, and was criticizing Kirk for supposedly being closer to a release-the-files position?
Asking, because I've actually seen people in the last few hours describing Kirk's position as nothing-to-see-here, or at least perceived as such by full-disclosure Republicans.
Yes, that's correct. It's true that in the last few days he had changed his position, saying that he now trusted the administration - which might have also upset a different set of people.
Yeah, the one X post about Epstein I saw from Kirk was saying that the signature on the birthday letter was a forgery.
A QAnon type angry that Republicans are supposedly covering up Trump's complicity in Epstein's crimes would be my most likely right-wing suspect for the assassin. Not that I think the odds are particularly great for the killer being right-wing.
I think the odds are pretty high, the right wing tends to be fissiparous in its own way. They'll very probably be right wing, but with a set of other non-coherent beliefs, because those are the kinds of people who become lone wolf assassins (see the Trump shooter).
Assassinations and assassination attempts are nothing new in American politics and society, aside from Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy. Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Huey Long, George Wallace, Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Robert F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, both Bill, and Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and Donald Trump are just some of the assassination targets in a very long list from American history.
But there’s also a long history of assassinations and assassination attempts of lower-ranking public officials (I meant to include George Moscone and Harvey Milk in my list above) and public figures in the US, many if not most of which involved people who aren’t well remembered. That’s why I’m pushing back a bit on the “crossed a line” characterization.
That said, I think it’s quite appropriate to consider the role that the rhetoric of Trump and others on the right is playing in recent assassinations and assassination attempts.
More like Horst Wessel.
I may have noted this earlier, but assassination of American political leaders seems to have fallen off since the 1980s, about the same time shootings where someone goes to a public place to kill a lot of strangers started picking up in popularity. Maybe with the rise of cults of personality in American politics the more personalized form of public violence is also making a comeback.
It may have been on another thread. It comes from observing that prior to the mid-1980s mass shootings where someone wanted to kill a bunch of strangers in a public place were basically unheard of in the U.S. Aside from the University of Texas tower incident, mass shootings of this era were mostly directed at the shooter's family, co-workers, or other acquaintances. In other words, the typical criteria for most smaller-scale murders and attempted murders. Then for whatever reason, after John Hinckley shot Ronald Reagan political assassinations and attempted assassinations in the U.S. become a lot less common than they had been previously, while the aforementioned mass shootings of strangers start to happen a lot more frequently.
I think Kirk would likely have given Vance a run for the money in the next round of presidential primaries. He had a very large following, that's for sure.
Won't be surprised if they name something after him.
How soon before he stops being seen in public?
He moved on almost immediately and starting talking about the construction of the new White House ballroom mid interview.
Almost the first action undertaken by Trump as President was to pardon a whole group of people who had engaged in coordinated political violence. Trump routinely uses dehumanizing language to describe more or less anyone that doesn't agree with him. He doesn't get any kind of pass from me. He and his ilk encourage and fertilize political violence.
By contrast, calling someone a fascist is not actually violent. It's not dehumanizing, in the way that much of the rhetoric produced by Trump and his gang of fellow travelers is - it's a characterization of his political positions and actions.
Let's look at some of the characteristics of fascism:
1. Dictatorial Leader.
2. Militarism
3. Nationalism
4. Authoritarianism
5. Belief in a natural social order and inherent differences in worth of different classes of people
1. Check. Personal loyalty to Trump is required of everyone in his administration.
2. Check. Department of War? Chipocalypse now? "I'm the commander in chief, I can do anything I want with the military"? His little Putin-esque birthday parade?
3. Check. "America first" rhetoric. "Immigrants are changing our way of life" rhetoric. "They hate America" rhetoric.
4. Check. Trump is not actually a supporter of small government - he's a supporter of Trump government.
5. Check. Rhetoric calling various classes of people "scum", "animals", "lunatics" and so on.
If it walks like a fascist and talks like a fascist, it's probably a fascist.
Either way. I have to wonder if the hate Kirk was known to spew created an equal reaction by the shooter. Hare begets Hate.
Time to take a breath America, cool down a bit. Start showing empathy.
I fervently wish he would do better and be better. I think it is a basic human reaction to be more distraught when the victim of a killing like this is someone one knows well and is close to than when it is a stranger. And I’m not going to basically demonize and dehumanizes someone I vehemently disagree with, at least in part, because he demonizes and dehumanizes people he disagrees with.
Well, they have a person of interest in custody, would be the most legally accurate way of saying it.
Hard to say. He posed for a photo as Pepe Frog(typically right-wing, but apparently now spread into apolitical circles), and included a homophobic taunt, albeit maybe more as a non-literal, generic insult, on the casings he allegedly used. There WAS the Italian anti-fascist slogan on the casings, but apparently he could have gotten that from a particular computer game that features the slogan.
According to people more familiar than I am with the relevant subcultures, the shooter's ideology seems to have been largely self-styled, and gleaned from various "terminally on-line" sources.
Something Charlie Kirk didn't believe in.
For some reason he preferred the term "sympathy." He wasn't stupid; I assume he knew the difference. So he was willing to feel bad for others' misfortune, at least some others, but not to share other people's feelings.
I more get the impression they'd have been there on the Night of the Long Knives holding one of the knives. Evidence is starting to point to a Trumpist who thought Kirk was too soft.
Reports say that he was a good student at school, scored 34/36 on the ACT, but flunked out of university after his first term, and was living at home with his parents. That's consistent with the profile of someone who has latched on to various kinds of online conspiracy theories.
But that's the thing. Donald Trump isn't a basic human. He's the President of the United States of America. His job is to be a statesman, to be a leader, and to calm and unify the country in times like this. Joe Budweiser at the local bar is allowed to be driven by basic human reactions. The President does not have that luxury.
This is yet another example of the way that Mr. Trump is a complete failure at honorably discharging the office of President.
Well, in fairness to the Mail, anti- fascist slogans are almost always from the left(and definitely in the case of the Italian partisans), and in the year 2025, the left tends to be associated with pro-LGBQT opinions, IOW not the kind of people who would use "gay" as an insult.
So, yeah, there is a bit of ambiguity there. Though, as I said, I think it's likely explainable by the shooter having a self-styled, syncretic political ideology, picked up from all over the place.
Queen Elizabeth was certainly someone who understood her role and her duty as a national leader. I think few would criticize her for being more distraught over Lord Mountbatten’s assassination than over other political killings. The difference was she knew how to not let her personal feelings get in the way of her public role.
I am not defending anything at all about Trump except to the extent reflected by the one very specific thing I said: It’s human nature to be more distraught over the killing of someone you know and are close to than of someone you aren’t. I’m going to cut him a little slack for being more personally distraught over this killing than over some other killings. That doesn’t mean I don’t think he completely fails to understand or care what his role requires of him.
There's a big intrafascist schism between Nick Fuentes followers - groypers - and Charlie Kirk's followers. The groypers thought Kirk wasn't extreme enough.
I think from what I've seen and learned about the meme/ game references this guy will turn out to be on the groyper end of things.
And possible references to Far Cry (ref: https://farcry.fandom.com/wiki/Bella_Ciao_de_Libertad -which again is a dystopia). I agree that it's very likely it'll turn out to be a groyper.
Tyler Robinson, the alleged assassin of Charlie Kirk, is said to be a member of the Groyper movement lead by Nick Fuentas. Nick is a hard right nationalist. His group has constantly disrupted Charlie Kirk's rallies. They accused Kirk of being a gate keeper and had too moderate views about immigration and LBGTQ questions. See this story.
So much for the Radical Left causing Kirk's death, Mr Trump.
I don't think Mr Robinson's case is any different from anyone who is arrested for a high-profile crime. We manage to secure a fair trial for people who are accused of child abductions and murders, of Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and any number of people in a similar position. I don't see why Mr Robinson should be any different.
For every high-profile crime, there are always "some people in the community" ready to lynch anybody who is arrested for it.
Odd saying, considering Patel is Indian, not Viking.
Two possible explanations. 1) Sometimes used by Marines for a fallen comrade. Problem is, neither Kirk nor Patel were in the military. However, Kirk and Patel were close friends, each of them appearing on the other's blogs or broadcasts.
2) White nationalists have long used Norse Mythology in reference to themselves. Problem is Patel is not Northern European. Kirk, though, identifies as a Christian nationalist.
Maybe it was a combination of both lines of reasoning.
Either way, or not, it is still an odd saying at the end of a speech of a new conference in LDS country.
Impeachment and conviction sound good.
That's a pretty good summation of the ongoing economic debacle. Not sure I would frame the last point in terms of "Ford" suffering a loss in profits, since average Joe Yokel probably doesn't really care about the company, per se.
Though I guess if the layoffs haven't started yet, you gotta have something to use as an economic symbol indicating the damage to the auto sector.
It will be interesting to see if he does - and if he's seen in public.
Of course, those pictures could easily have been altered - as could any of him looking healthy - we no longer know what is real photograph wise.
BBC