Starting a thread to compile a list of companies who are firing people for exercising their first amendment right to call Charlie Kirk a POS.
Name the names so real Americans know where to not spend their money. |
I’m a small business owner (x2). I’d terminate an employee who posted inflammatory content, whether that be celebrating the death of George Floyd or celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk. Why? 1. Bc I don’t want to work with a**holes. 2. Bc it shows terrible judgment. 3. Bc it might damage my livelihood. Would you behave differently if you owned a business? |
DP, but the problem is that anything that isn’t a glowing tribute to CK is being called “celebrating” political violence. If someone says something truly heinous then I get it. But why are we rounding up people who are just commenting that he had horrible racist and misogynistic views |
PP. Yup—agree with this. Reflects the fundamental problem with cancel culture. Nuance gets lost and people’s opinions are distorted. |
So if Trump or Don Jr said what they in fact said about Paul Pelosi or others, you’d fire them? |
PP. Of course! What about you? If you owned a business, what would you do? |
I understand what you're saying but you could say any of this about an employee driving a company car. All people are a$$holes from time to time and show terrible judgment. I think the problem lies in it's never consistent. |
Add the Washington Post to the list. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/15/washington-post-karen-attiah-kirk-00564027 |
There are lists on Threads, etc, but they are almost all places that you’d be better off not working anyway. |
Silence is violence was the dumbest policy ever.
Keep companies apolitical |
I hope that in making this statement you’re also making an effort to take an actual look at the statements that people are being fired for. Some have been fired for quoting things that Kirk himself previously said. Others made simple, factual statements — that were likely not intended to be inflammatory, and would not be viewed that way in most situations, at least IMO. People are being censured for quoting the Bible — something MAGA claims to espouse. |
PP. Of course. It’s obviously essential to understand exactly what someone has actually said. However, I’d note that it’s also important for the speaker to exercise judgment. Publicly posting about someone who’s just been shot is very likely to generate strong reactions. A prudent person would probably not comment critically at such a time. What good will come of it, and what reaction are you likely to receive? |
lmao - after years of far left extremists getting people doxed and fired for expressing their political views, turnabout is fair play and I'm here for it. |
Honestly, it just seems to me people shouldn't be fired for comments they made in the immediate aftermath of the event unless it was something extremely egregious and explicitly calling for more of the same. Emotions run high, and people on the right were immediately accusing everyone not in their camp of somehow being behind and part of the assassination.
Plus, TPUSA itself is geared and highly organized to monitor the speech of the opposition (as in the professor watchlist). There's nothing like that on the left that I can think of. Typically, when people get fired for, say, racist remarks or behavior, it seems to happen because someone posted it online and it spread from there. The very existence of a very well organized apparatus on the right to monitor and denounce the speech of others is certainly an intimidating factor, especially when it also has a direct line to an administration that is willing to steamroll any and all constitutional protections in its crusade to stamp out "leftist" ideology using its institutions. |
This overlaps with the Pam BOndi thread about prosecuting hate speech:
In addition to vowing to go after hate speech, Bondi also railed against people who “say horrible things” and claimed that their employers have an “obligation to get rid of people.” She weighed in on reports about a now-fired Office Depot worker who refused to print up images of Kirk for a funeral and suggested the Justice Department might drop charges. “Businesses cannot discriminate,” she told Fox News’ Sean Hannity Monday evening. “If you wanna go in and print posters with Charlie’s pictures on them for a vigil, you have to let them do that.” “We can prosecute you for that. I have Harmeet Dhillon right now in our civil rights unit looking at that immediately, that Office Depot had done that. We’re looking it up.” But you DON'T have to bake a cake. Noted. |