Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Completely normal grieving widow solo parenting small children behavior:

lol

You people are sick.
This is a woman with 2 very young children who has agreed to carry on the mission of her husband who was murdered in front of the world.
And you mock her.

It is totally unsurprising that your candidate for VA AG fantasized about murdering his political opponent. It seems to run in the blood of democrats.

According to this woman’s own Christian trad wife philosophy, she should be at home, minding her two very young children, not reinventing herself. She and her husband are worth millions of dollars. Why is she fundraising for more? Who is watching her kids when she’s “carrying on the mission of her husband”?

I agree.
I mean to be fair, when her husband was alive he bragged about how he, the man, was out working hard everyday while his wife was a mother and wife who was more than happy to stay home, raise their children while keeping the home fires continuously burning.

Then after he dies suddenly, she is seen on a podcast letting the world know that she will be taking the reins at her husband’s org, and she is discussing all the plans that she has in store to continue her husband’s work.

She is nothing like the weeping, sorrowful widow we all saw on display just the week prior.
She is even seen laughing with three guys w/out a tear in sight!!

All while her two traumatized children are being cared for by someone else.

I wonder what Charlie would think.

I understand that you all loathe Erika Kirk. I don't like her either, and I didn't like Charlie.

But statements like this are either entirely disingenuous or plain stupid.

Charlie's children are 1 and 3 years old. They are in the same home and care situation that they were before he was murdered. Their lives have not substantially changed with his death. Children don't form fixed memories until 2.5-4 years of age; both children are unlikely to have any independent memories of Charlie, but instead will learn about him from stories told to them by their mother and other adults.

Anybody who has had children or been involved in raising or caring for children and has any grasp of child development knows that Charlie's children are not traumatized by his murder at present. The most traumatizing thing they could experience at this stage of their lives would be if their mother fell apart entirely, mired herself in visible endless grief and failed to parent them or maintain their lives as they existed in August.

Please, criticize Erika all you want for her world view, her grifting, etc. - but don't talk this stupid BS about her neglecting her kids or them being traumatized by how she is handling their care following their father's murder. It's ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Keep at it liberals.

Keep trying to defame Charlie Kirk and insult his wife and family.

Nobody believes you. You people have lied about so many things and created so many insane presumptions that you just come across as bitter and crazy.

Meanwhile, the movement Charlie started is growing bigger and stronger.

The fed government is on shutdown, so you are a troll working for FREE!?!?! They really took advantage of you. lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Completely normal grieving widow solo parenting small children behavior:

lol

You people are sick.
This is a woman with 2 very young children who has agreed to carry on the mission of her husband who was murdered in front of the world.
And you mock her.

It is totally unsurprising that your candidate for VA AG fantasized about murdering his political opponent. It seems to run in the blood of democrats.

According to this woman’s own Christian trad wife philosophy, she should be at home, minding her two very young children, not reinventing herself. She and her husband are worth millions of dollars. Why is she fundraising for more? Who is watching her kids when she’s “carrying on the mission of her husband”?

I agree.
I mean to be fair, when her husband was alive he bragged about how he, the man, was out working hard everyday while his wife was a mother and wife who was more than happy to stay home, raise their children while keeping the home fires continuously burning.

Then after he dies suddenly, she is seen on a podcast letting the world know that she will be taking the reins at her husband’s org, and she is discussing all the plans that she has in store to continue her husband’s work.

She is nothing like the weeping, sorrowful widow we all saw on display just the week prior.
She is even seen laughing with three guys w/out a tear in sight!!

All while her two traumatized children are being cared for by someone else.

I wonder what Charlie would think.

I understand that you all loathe Erika Kirk. I don't like her either, and I didn't like Charlie.

But statements like this are either entirely disingenuous or plain stupid.

Charlie's children are 1 and 3 years old. They are in the same home and care situation that they were before he was murdered. Their lives have not substantially changed with his death. Children don't form fixed memories until 2.5-4 years of age; both children are unlikely to have any independent memories of Charlie, but instead will learn about him from stories told to them by their mother and other adults.

Anybody who has had children or been involved in raising or caring for children and has any grasp of child development knows that Charlie's children are not traumatized by his murder at present. The most traumatizing thing they could experience at this stage of their lives would be if their mother fell apart entirely, mired herself in visible endless grief and failed to parent them or maintain their lives as they existed in August.

Please, criticize Erika all you want for her world view, her grifting, etc. - but don't talk this stupid BS about her neglecting her kids or them being traumatized by how she is handling their care following their father's murder. It's ridiculous.

Just wanted to add, before anyone tries to argue with my assertions, that the record is clear that not only did Charlie travel away from home the majority of days of the year, he also spent some nights when he was local in a separate apartment in Scottsdale rather than return to the family home. To his very young children, he was a nice man who occasionally visited and played with them - he was not a present, hands on, daily part of their lives and in no way a primary caregiver. They undoubtedly have closer bonds to the babysitters/nannies who help Erika with their care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Completely normal grieving widow solo parenting small children behavior:

lol

You people are sick.
This is a woman with 2 very young children who has agreed to carry on the mission of her husband who was murdered in front of the world.
And you mock her.

It is totally unsurprising that your candidate for VA AG fantasized about murdering his political opponent. It seems to run in the blood of democrats.

According to this woman’s own Christian trad wife philosophy, she should be at home, minding her two very young children, not reinventing herself. She and her husband are worth millions of dollars. Why is she fundraising for more? Who is watching her kids when she’s “carrying on the mission of her husband”?

I agree.
I mean to be fair, when her husband was alive he bragged about how he, the man, was out working hard everyday while his wife was a mother and wife who was more than happy to stay home, raise their children while keeping the home fires continuously burning.

Then after he dies suddenly, she is seen on a podcast letting the world know that she will be taking the reins at her husband’s org, and she is discussing all the plans that she has in store to continue her husband’s work.

She is nothing like the weeping, sorrowful widow we all saw on display just the week prior.
She is even seen laughing with three guys w/out a tear in sight!!

All while her two traumatized children are being cared for by someone else.

I wonder what Charlie would think.

I understand that you all loathe Erika Kirk. I don't like her either, and I didn't like Charlie.

But statements like this are either entirely disingenuous or plain stupid.

Charlie's children are 1 and 3 years old. They are in the same home and care situation that they were before he was murdered. Their lives have not substantially changed with his death. Children don't form fixed memories until 2.5-4 years of age; both children are unlikely to have any independent memories of Charlie, but instead will learn about him from stories told to them by their mother and other adults.

Anybody who has had children or been involved in raising or caring for children and has any grasp of child development knows that Charlie's children are not traumatized by his murder at present. The most traumatizing thing they could experience at this stage of their lives would be if their mother fell apart entirely, mired herself in visible endless grief and failed to parent them or maintain their lives as they existed in August.

Please, criticize Erika all you want for her world view, her grifting, etc. - but don't talk this stupid BS about her neglecting her kids or them being traumatized by how she is handling their care following their father's murder. It's ridiculous.

Just wanted to add, before anyone tries to argue with my assertions, that the record is clear that not only did Charlie travel away from home the majority of days of the year, he also spent some nights when he was local in a separate apartment in Scottsdale rather than return to the family home. To his very young children, he was a nice man who occasionally visited and played with them - he was not a present, hands on, daily part of their lives and in no way a primary caregiver. They undoubtedly have closer bonds to the babysitters/nannies who help Erika with their care.

Given that both Kirk and his wife preached publicly about the primacy of the family unit and of the wife staying home to raise children rather than having a "career," the reality that they both put a lot of time and effort into career pursuits AWAY from home is even more surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even though he claimed he wasn’t a racist, his rhetoric had racist undertones no doubt.

Like when he stated emphatically that Black people disproportionately committed the majority of crimes.
And that most prisoners were Black.
How is that not a racist belief??
By pigeonholing Black people into negative stereotypical situations at best he was promoting racist propaganda.

He also claimed that he wasn’t transphobic, yet he said that trans people were confused and living in mental delusion.
He touted their behavior as a simple mental illness.

And he doesn’t believe that citizenship should be given to someone just because they were born here.
Yet in the same breath he also was very vocal against illegal immigration.
He believed that to be legal that you had to be “invited” to the U.S.
Whaaat?

Shortly after his tragic and untimely death anyone who said anything even remotely negative about Charlie Kirk was vilified.
Many even lost their jobs.

Yet now, weeks later I think people have had enough time to figure out what a homo/transphobic, racist this man was and how he never stood for America, Jesus, etc……he was not an accurate depiction of who us Westerners fundamentally ARE.

Dave Chapelle likely will not get cancelled over what he said about Charlie but had he said it a few wks ago he may have, who really knows??

Jesus said, “You will know them by their fruits.”

You might disagree with some of the beliefs Charlie Kirk had but he built a movement based on peace, love, and forgiveness.

When he was murdered, did his followers riot, destroy property, and attack others?

No. They prayed and held candlelight vigils. They mourned and lifted up one another.

I would much rather be a part of what TPUSA is offering as opposed to movements of the left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even though he claimed he wasn’t a racist, his rhetoric had racist undertones no doubt.

Like when he stated emphatically that Black people disproportionately committed the majority of crimes.
And that most prisoners were Black.
How is that not a racist belief??
By pigeonholing Black people into negative stereotypical situations at best he was promoting racist propaganda.

He also claimed that he wasn’t transphobic, yet he said that trans people were confused and living in mental delusion.
He touted their behavior as a simple mental illness.

And he doesn’t believe that citizenship should be given to someone just because they were born here.
Yet in the same breath he also was very vocal against illegal immigration.
He believed that to be legal that you had to be “invited” to the U.S.
Whaaat?

Shortly after his tragic and untimely death anyone who said anything even remotely negative about Charlie Kirk was vilified.
Many even lost their jobs.

Yet now, weeks later I think people have had enough time to figure out what a homo/transphobic, racist this man was and how he never stood for America, Jesus, etc……he was not an accurate depiction of who us Westerners fundamentally ARE.

Dave Chapelle likely will not get cancelled over what he said about Charlie but had he said it a few wks ago he may have, who really knows??

Jesus said, “You will know them by their fruits.”

You might disagree with some of the beliefs Charlie Kirk had but he built a movement based on peace, love, and forgiveness.

When he was murdered, did his followers riot, destroy property, and attack others?

No. They prayed and held candlelight vigils. They mourned and lifted up one another.

I would much rather be a part of what TPUSA is offering as opposed to movements of the left.

He’s built a small fortune from the gullible by farming TikTok with his act. *swipe up* like the media and everybody else

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even though he claimed he wasn’t a racist, his rhetoric had racist undertones no doubt.

Like when he stated emphatically that Black people disproportionately committed the majority of crimes.
And that most prisoners were Black.
How is that not a racist belief??
By pigeonholing Black people into negative stereotypical situations at best he was promoting racist propaganda.

He also claimed that he wasn’t transphobic, yet he said that trans people were confused and living in mental delusion.
He touted their behavior as a simple mental illness.

And he doesn’t believe that citizenship should be given to someone just because they were born here.
Yet in the same breath he also was very vocal against illegal immigration.
He believed that to be legal that you had to be “invited” to the U.S.
Whaaat?

Shortly after his tragic and untimely death anyone who said anything even remotely negative about Charlie Kirk was vilified.
Many even lost their jobs.

Yet now, weeks later I think people have had enough time to figure out what a homo/transphobic, racist this man was and how he never stood for America, Jesus, etc……he was not an accurate depiction of who us Westerners fundamentally ARE.

Dave Chapelle likely will not get cancelled over what he said about Charlie but had he said it a few wks ago he may have, who really knows??

Jesus said, “You will know them by their fruits.”

You might disagree with some of the beliefs Charlie Kirk had but he built a movement based on peace, love, and forgiveness.

When he was murdered, did his followers riot, destroy property, and attack others?

No. They prayed and held candlelight vigils. They mourned and lifted up one another.

I would much rather be a part of what TPUSA is offering as opposed to movements of the left.

He’s built a small fortune from the gullible by farming TikTok with his act. *swipe up* like the media and everybody else

I consider any movement that has encouraged millions to seek Christ to be a noble one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even though he claimed he wasn’t a racist, his rhetoric had racist undertones no doubt.

Like when he stated emphatically that Black people disproportionately committed the majority of crimes.
And that most prisoners were Black.
How is that not a racist belief??
By pigeonholing Black people into negative stereotypical situations at best he was promoting racist propaganda.

He also claimed that he wasn’t transphobic, yet he said that trans people were confused and living in mental delusion.
He touted their behavior as a simple mental illness.

And he doesn’t believe that citizenship should be given to someone just because they were born here.
Yet in the same breath he also was very vocal against illegal immigration.
He believed that to be legal that you had to be “invited” to the U.S.
Whaaat?

Shortly after his tragic and untimely death anyone who said anything even remotely negative about Charlie Kirk was vilified.
Many even lost their jobs.

Yet now, weeks later I think people have had enough time to figure out what a homo/transphobic, racist this man was and how he never stood for America, Jesus, etc……he was not an accurate depiction of who us Westerners fundamentally ARE.

Dave Chapelle likely will not get cancelled over what he said about Charlie but had he said it a few wks ago he may have, who really knows??

Jesus said, “You will know them by their fruits.”

You might disagree with some of the beliefs Charlie Kirk had but he built a movement based on peace, love, and forgiveness.

When he was murdered, did his followers riot, destroy property, and attack others?

No. They prayed and held candlelight vigils. They mourned and lifted up one another.

I would much rather be a part of what TPUSA is offering as opposed to movements of the left.

He’s built a small fortune from the gullible by farming TikTok with his act. *swipe up* like the media and everybody else

I consider any movement that has encouraged millions to seek Christ to be a noble one.

You're kidding, right? The words of Christ have been bastardized by MAGA beyond belief. There's nothing Christ taught in any of their hearts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even though he claimed he wasn’t a racist, his rhetoric had racist undertones no doubt.

Like when he stated emphatically that Black people disproportionately committed the majority of crimes.
And that most prisoners were Black.
How is that not a racist belief??
By pigeonholing Black people into negative stereotypical situations at best he was promoting racist propaganda.

He also claimed that he wasn’t transphobic, yet he said that trans people were confused and living in mental delusion.
He touted their behavior as a simple mental illness.

And he doesn’t believe that citizenship should be given to someone just because they were born here.
Yet in the same breath he also was very vocal against illegal immigration.
He believed that to be legal that you had to be “invited” to the U.S.
Whaaat?

Shortly after his tragic and untimely death anyone who said anything even remotely negative about Charlie Kirk was vilified.
Many even lost their jobs.

Yet now, weeks later I think people have had enough time to figure out what a homo/transphobic, racist this man was and how he never stood for America, Jesus, etc……he was not an accurate depiction of who us Westerners fundamentally ARE.

Dave Chapelle likely will not get cancelled over what he said about Charlie but had he said it a few wks ago he may have, who really knows??

Jesus said, “You will know them by their fruits.”

You might disagree with some of the beliefs Charlie Kirk had but he built a movement based on peace, love, and forgiveness.

When he was murdered, did his followers riot, destroy property, and attack others?

No. They prayed and held candlelight vigils. They mourned and lifted up one another.

I would much rather be a part of what TPUSA is offering as opposed to movements of the left.

He’s built a small fortune from the gullible by farming TikTok with his act. *swipe up* like the media and everybody else

I consider any movement that has encouraged millions to seek Christ to be a noble one.

You're kidding, right? The words of Christ have been bastardized by MAGA beyond belief. There's nothing Christ taught in any of their hearts.

So say you.

Meanwhile attendance at church has risen substantially since Kirk’s murder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even though he claimed he wasn’t a racist, his rhetoric had racist undertones no doubt.

Like when he stated emphatically that Black people disproportionately committed the majority of crimes.
And that most prisoners were Black.
How is that not a racist belief??
By pigeonholing Black people into negative stereotypical situations at best he was promoting racist propaganda.

He also claimed that he wasn’t transphobic, yet he said that trans people were confused and living in mental delusion.
He touted their behavior as a simple mental illness.

And he doesn’t believe that citizenship should be given to someone just because they were born here.
Yet in the same breath he also was very vocal against illegal immigration.
He believed that to be legal that you had to be “invited” to the U.S.
Whaaat?

Shortly after his tragic and untimely death anyone who said anything even remotely negative about Charlie Kirk was vilified.
Many even lost their jobs.

Yet now, weeks later I think people have had enough time to figure out what a homo/transphobic, racist this man was and how he never stood for America, Jesus, etc……he was not an accurate depiction of who us Westerners fundamentally ARE.

Dave Chapelle likely will not get cancelled over what he said about Charlie but had he said it a few wks ago he may have, who really knows??

Jesus said, “You will know them by their fruits.”

You might disagree with some of the beliefs Charlie Kirk had but he built a movement based on peace, love, and forgiveness.

When he was murdered, did his followers riot, destroy property, and attack others?

No. They prayed and held candlelight vigils. They mourned and lifted up one another.

I would much rather be a part of what TPUSA is offering as opposed to movements of the left.

He’s built a small fortune from the gullible by farming TikTok with his act. *swipe up* like the media and everybody else

I consider any movement that has encouraged millions to seek Christ to be a noble one.

You're kidding, right? The words of Christ have been bastardized by MAGA beyond belief. There's nothing Christ taught in any of their hearts.

Your a leftie. I can tell because you generalize.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even though he claimed he wasn’t a racist, his rhetoric had racist undertones no doubt.

Like when he stated emphatically that Black people disproportionately committed the majority of crimes.
And that most prisoners were Black.
How is that not a racist belief??.S.

It’s kind of true

There are also and historically have been many murderers who were or are not Black.

What about most recently Bryan K., the guy who just admitted to murdering those four college kids in Idaho.
Or what about that White guy that shot Kirk? Wasn’t he White??

And Dahmer, the BLK killer, Ted Bundy, etc.

What Charlie said about Black people proportionally committing the most crimes was just wrong.

And he falsely stated publicly that George Floyd died from an actual drug overdose!!?
When his autopsy & clear video shows he was killed by a police officer who stood on his neck.

He even called the aftermath of his murder “Floyd-a-Mania.”
If that doesn’t make him a lying racist then I don’t know what does.

How can anyone in their right mind align themself with someone who would portray such a violent + unjust killing by a cop as a “mania??” 😠
Wrestlemania had zero to do with the aftermath of Floyd’s murder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Completely normal grieving widow solo parenting small children behavior:

lol

You people are sick.
This is a woman with 2 very young children who has agreed to carry on the mission of her husband who was murdered in front of the world.
And you mock her.

It is totally unsurprising that your candidate for VA AG fantasized about murdering his political opponent. It seems to run in the blood of democrats.

According to this woman’s own Christian trad wife philosophy, she should be at home, minding her two very young children, not reinventing herself. She and her husband are worth millions of dollars. Why is she fundraising for more? Who is watching her kids when she’s “carrying on the mission of her husband”?

I agree.
I mean to be fair, when her husband was alive he bragged about how he, the man, was out working hard everyday while his wife was a mother and wife who was more than happy to stay home, raise their children while keeping the home fires continuously burning.

Then after he dies suddenly, she is seen on a podcast letting the world know that she will be taking the reins at her husband’s org, and she is discussing all the plans that she has in store to continue her husband’s work.

She is nothing like the weeping, sorrowful widow we all saw on display just the week prior.
She is even seen laughing with three guys w/out a tear in sight!!

All while her two traumatized children are being cared for by someone else.

I wonder what Charlie would think.

I understand that you all loathe Erika Kirk. I don't like her either, and I didn't like Charlie.

But statements like this are either entirely disingenuous or plain stupid.

Charlie's children are 1 and 3 years old. They are in the same home and care situation that they were before he was murdered. Their lives have not substantially changed with his death. Children don't form fixed memories until 2.5-4 years of age; both children are unlikely to have any independent memories of Charlie, but instead will learn about him from stories told to them by their mother and other adults.

Anybody who has had children or been involved in raising or caring for children and has any grasp of child development knows that Charlie's children are not traumatized by his murder at present. The most traumatizing thing they could experience at this stage of their lives would be if their mother fell apart entirely, mired herself in visible endless grief and failed to parent them or maintain their lives as they existed in August.

Please, criticize Erika all you want for her world view, her grifting, etc. - but don't talk this stupid BS about her neglecting her kids or them being traumatized by how she is handling their care following their father's murder. It's ridiculous.

Your assertion that his children may not be currently traumatized is only half true.

Sure the 1YO likely has no clue what is going on with his Dad no longer being around but a 3YO would most definitely be affected.
By that age kids have the ability to form memories and they also form significant emotional bonds with their parents.

Have you not seen the video where Charlie is on set of a talk show and behind the scenes his daughter sees him then runs into his arms?
She clearly is attached to her Father.

Duh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even though he claimed he wasn’t a racist, his rhetoric had racist undertones no doubt.

Like when he stated emphatically that Black people disproportionately committed the majority of crimes.
And that most prisoners were Black.
How is that not a racist belief??
By pigeonholing Black people into negative stereotypical situations at best he was promoting racist propaganda.

He also claimed that he wasn’t transphobic, yet he said that trans people were confused and living in mental delusion.
He touted their behavior as a simple mental illness.

And he doesn’t believe that citizenship should be given to someone just because they were born here.
Yet in the same breath he also was very vocal against illegal immigration.
He believed that to be legal that you had to be “invited” to the U.S.
Whaaat?

Shortly after his tragic and untimely death anyone who said anything even remotely negative about Charlie Kirk was vilified.
Many even lost their jobs.

Yet now, weeks later I think people have had enough time to figure out what a homo/transphobic, racist this man was and how he never stood for America, Jesus, etc……he was not an accurate depiction of who us Westerners fundamentally ARE.

Dave Chapelle likely will not get cancelled over what he said about Charlie but had he said it a few wks ago he may have, who really knows??

Jesus said, “You will know them by their fruits.”

You might disagree with some of the beliefs Charlie Kirk had but he built a movement based on peace, love, and forgiveness.

When he was murdered, did his followers riot, destroy property, and attack others?

No. They prayed and held candlelight vigils. They mourned and lifted up one another.

I would much rather be a part of what TPUSA is offering as opposed to movements of the left.

He’s built a small fortune from the gullible by farming TikTok with his act. *swipe up* like the media and everybody else

I consider any movement that has encouraged millions to seek Christ to be a noble one.

You're kidding, right? The words of Christ have been bastardized by MAGA beyond belief. There's nothing Christ taught in any of their hearts.

So say you.

Meanwhile attendance at church has risen substantially since Kirk’s murder.

It will go down again once they discover that Jesus advocated for turning the other cheek and condemned public executions. Kirk’s fans want Christian nationalism, not Christianity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even though he claimed he wasn’t a racist, his rhetoric had racist undertones no doubt.

Like when he stated emphatically that Black people disproportionately committed the majority of crimes.
And that most prisoners were Black.
How is that not a racist belief??
By pigeonholing Black people into negative stereotypical situations at best he was promoting racist propaganda.

He also claimed that he wasn’t transphobic, yet he said that trans people were confused and living in mental delusion.
He touted their behavior as a simple mental illness.

And he doesn’t believe that citizenship should be given to someone just because they were born here.
Yet in the same breath he also was very vocal against illegal immigration.
He believed that to be legal that you had to be “invited” to the U.S.
Whaaat?

Shortly after his tragic and untimely death anyone who said anything even remotely negative about Charlie Kirk was vilified.
Many even lost their jobs.

Yet now, weeks later I think people have had enough time to figure out what a homo/transphobic, racist this man was and how he never stood for America, Jesus, etc……he was not an accurate depiction of who us Westerners fundamentally ARE.

Dave Chapelle likely will not get cancelled over what he said about Charlie but had he said it a few wks ago he may have, who really knows??

Jesus said, “You will know them by their fruits.”

You might disagree with some of the beliefs Charlie Kirk had but he built a movement based on peace, love, and forgiveness.

When he was murdered, did his followers riot, destroy property, and attack others?

No. They prayed and held candlelight vigils. They mourned and lifted up one another.

I would much rather be a part of what TPUSA is offering as opposed to movements of the left.

He’s built a small fortune from the gullible by farming TikTok with his act. *swipe up* like the media and everybody else

I consider any movement that has encouraged millions to seek Christ to be a noble one.

You're kidding, right? The words of Christ have been bastardized by MAGA beyond belief. There's nothing Christ taught in any of their hearts.

Your a leftie. I can tell because you generalize.

I'm not the PP you're responding to, but I just want to add that I can tell you're a MAGA because you don't now the difference between "your" and "you're."

[Anonymous]

*know