Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laughing at all the conservatives here who assumed the shooter was a liberal furiously looking up the term "groyper"

He grew up in a conservative family and turned leftist online and during high school.

Mainly aimless teens do.

And you simply know that because of your critical thinking. "It cannot be a right winger because that would make me look bad, so it must be a leftist."

Well, it’s pretty safe to say he wasn’t of
ideological leaning and political affiliation of Kirk. After all, he was so moved to murder him. What random people from high school think about him or what grandma thinks she knows about his motive is irrelevant

I mean, neither is Laura Loomer, and she's certainly not left wing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laughing at all the conservatives here who assumed the shooter was a liberal furiously looking up the term "groyper"

He grew up in a conservative family and turned leftist online and during high school.

Mainly aimless teens do.

And you simply know that because of your critical thinking. "It cannot be a right winger because that would make me look bad, so it must be a leftist."

Well, it’s pretty safe to say he wasn’t of
ideological leaning and political affiliation of Kirk. After all, he was so moved to murder him. What random people from high school think about him or what grandma thinks she knows about his motive is irrelevant

Until we get detailed, in-depth information about his motive and the thought process behind it (which may not happen until he’s on trial or may never happen if he pleads guilty), I don’t think we can truly make sense of this kid. So far, the details coming out are inconclusive, perhaps even contradictory. Even if he explains his reasoning, it may not make sense to sane, rational, emotionally stable people.

You say it’s safe to say he isn’t of the same political affiliation as Kirk. I’m not sure it is safe to say that. He may have shared the same position as Kirk on many issues and only differed from Kirk’s views on a couple pet causes. He may have been to the left of Kirk. He may have been to the right of Kirk. He might not have had any kind of consistent, coherent ideology. He may have enjoyed playing Devil’s advocate and arguing viewpoints that he didn’t actually believe, which would explain why there’s seemingly contradictory information about his political leaning. He might throw around the word “fascist” without actually knowing what fascism is.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Dems, and their accomplices in the Intelligence Community, control news outlets, social media platforms, newspapers, magazines, radio, academia, Hollywood, music, and more.

They used control of these institutions to brainwash the masses to hate Trump and his supporters.

This is not an isolated incident. This is a widespread disease that has infected the minds of millions, and it was done so intentionally. This is by design.

We are dealing with people who have been literally brainwashed by everything they consume, to hate us and everything we stand for.

We are living in an Orwellian dystopia.

+1

While they chant in unison, Trump is a fascist.

While you chant in unison we will not be replaced!

Sorry- chanting is for the pu$$y hat crew.

Gotta give it to leftists, they are great chanters. They will take weeks and weeks of work off to march about, chanting various slogans.

Why, during the work week, in the middle of the day, leftists gather to engage in all manner of marching and chanting and singing.

While the evil republicans are at work supporting billionaires, democrats are supporting democracy by marching and chanting. Carrying all manner of signs and large papier mache heads of fascists.

Imagine the hours of work democrats spend paiper mache-ing fascist heads?

Stunning! And brave.

Yes, that's what people have been trying to tell you the difference is. That is exactly what the extreme left does. Why are you glorifying violence?

It's basically the difference in bullying between high school boys and girls. Both are bad but one style is more physical than the other. One style wants you to kill yourself while the other wants to kill you themselves. One style tries to exert physical control while the other tries to exert social control.

It's all toxic and it's all a circular response to each other's most extreme elements exacerbated by social media and algorithms to lock us in bubbles of groupthink while feeding us ragebait about the other.

There's nothing wrong with protest and free speech and political activism. There is something wrong with violence. BOTHSIDES are not toxic. The violent one who hates empathy is the one that's toxic.

You really can't make this stuff up.

Kirk once said, "I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that — it does a lot of damage."

That's an awful thing to say. And even worse to add into our political discourse.

lol, physician heal thyself. Empathy is a two way street.

You're doing the same thing that the people you're arguing with are doing. Try to practice a little empathy yourself and you might realize how hard it is to accept the reality that we are all to blame.

None of what I said takes anything away from what this kid rotted by the right wing internet did or excuses anything Trump has been doing to our country.

Where did you see that the shooter was right wing?

The constant call for ‘links’ is not in good faith, because it shifts the burden of the conversation onto the other person while letting you avoid offering any position of your own. Communication scholars often describe this tactic as a form of bad-faith framing or what’s popularly called sealioning—asking for endless citations not out of genuine curiosity but as a way to derail, exhaust, or control the exchange. It keeps the other person locked in a defensive posture rather than opening space for honest engagement.

If you had provided even one link, I could see your point. But you have not provided even a single link.

What you just wrote actually proves my point. You are not engaging with what I said, you are reducing the entire discussion to whether I will jump through hoops to provide links. Communication research on online debate shows exactly this dynamic: people who demand sources in this way are rarely interested in evaluating them, they use the request itself as a way to control the exchange and keep the other person on the defensive. That is why I said the demand is not in good faith. A conversation is about exchanging reasoning and perspectives, not setting up a passfail test where you pretend you cannot respond until a link is dropped.

Here's what we know about Tyler Robinson, the suspect in Charlie Kirk's murder


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2025/09/12/what-we-know-charlie-kirk-shooting-suspect/86091474007/

It’s not yet clear what changed in Robinson’s life leading up to the shooting, but family and friends said he had become more political and angry.

“One of Robinson’s high school classmates, Xander Luke, said he “was politically active and outspoken about people’s rights.” The accused shooter “thought both political sides were contributing to a country being in a worse place and not improving the world,” Luke said.”

Nothing about him being right wing.

Ok, we have Xander's thoughts

So who’s thoughts are that the shooter was right wing?

If that is something that you are curious about, check google.

New details are emerging about the man accused of killing Charlie Kirk. Right now, he is being held without bail in a Utah jail after a 33-hour manhunt.

Here’s a recap of what we learned in the last several hours:

Where things stand: The suspect, Tyler Robinson, is being held on several initial charges, including aggravated murder, felony discharge of a firearm and obstruction of justice but has not yet been formally charged. He is not talking to investigators, sources said.
What’s next: Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray plans to file charges on Tuesday, according to a statement. The office said it is currently reviewing evidence. Also on Tuesday, the suspect is expected to make his first court appearance.
How investigators caught him: Robinson’s father recognized the young man as his son when police released photos yesterday, a law enforcement official told CNN. After confessing to his father, the suspect said he would “rather kill myself than turn myself in,” a law enforcement official briefed on the investigation said. A family friend ultimately contacted authorities, Utah’s governor said.
New personal details: The suspect is a third-year student in the electrical apprenticeship program at Dixie Technical College, Utah Valley University, where Kirk was killed, said.
Discord: The group chat app said its investigation found no evidence the suspect promoted violence or planned the shooting on its platform. Earlier Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said the suspect’s roommate showed authorities messages on the app from the suspect.
Bullet casings: The phrases engraved on ammunition reference video games and an anti-fascist song from Italy, according to an expert. None of the inscriptions are statements or symbols related to transgender people, despite earlier reports they expressed transgender “ideology.”
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/charlie-kirk-shot-utah-death-09-12-25

Zero about any right wing affiliation or agenda inspiration.

Some of you are reporting misinformation. A family friend identified and called the FBI first NOT the dad. Hey fascist and catch fascist where on the bullets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laughing at all the conservatives here who assumed the shooter was a liberal furiously looking up the term "groyper"

He grew up in a conservative family and turned leftist online and during high school.

Mainly aimless teens do.

And you simply know that because of your critical thinking. "It cannot be a right winger because that would make me look bad, so it must be a leftist."

Well, it’s pretty safe to say he wasn’t of
ideological leaning and political affiliation of Kirk. After all, he was so moved to murder him. What random people from high school think about him or what grandma thinks she knows about his motive is irrelevant

Until we get detailed, in-depth information about his motive and the thought process behind it (which may not happen until he’s on trial or may never happen if he pleads guilty), I don’t think we can truly make sense of this kid. So far, the details coming out are inconclusive, perhaps even contradictory. Even if he explains his reasoning, it may not make sense to sane, rational, emotionally stable people.

You say it’s safe to say he isn’t of the same political affiliation as Kirk. I’m not sure it is safe to say that. He may have shared the same position as Kirk on many issues and only differed from Kirk’s views on a couple pet causes. He may have been to the left of Kirk. He may have been to the right of Kirk. He might not have had any kind of consistent, coherent ideology. He may have enjoyed playing Devil’s advocate and arguing viewpoints that he didn’t actually believe, which would explain why there’s seemingly contradictory information about his political leaning. He might throw around the word “fascist” without actually knowing what fascism is.

Kid?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Dems, and their accomplices in the Intelligence Community, control news outlets, social media platforms, newspapers, magazines, radio, academia, Hollywood, music, and more.

They used control of these institutions to brainwash the masses to hate Trump and his supporters.

This is not an isolated incident. This is a widespread disease that has infected the minds of millions, and it was done so intentionally. This is by design.

We are dealing with people who have been literally brainwashed by everything they consume, to hate us and everything we stand for.

We are living in an Orwellian dystopia.

+1

While they chant in unison, Trump is a fascist.

While you chant in unison we will not be replaced!

Sorry- chanting is for the pu$$y hat crew.

Gotta give it to leftists, they are great chanters. They will take weeks and weeks of work off to march about, chanting various slogans.

Why, during the work week, in the middle of the day, leftists gather to engage in all manner of marching and chanting and singing.

While the evil republicans are at work supporting billionaires, democrats are supporting democracy by marching and chanting. Carrying all manner of signs and large papier mache heads of fascists.

Imagine the hours of work democrats spend paiper mache-ing fascist heads?

Stunning! And brave.

Yes, that's what people have been trying to tell you the difference is. That is exactly what the extreme left does. Why are you glorifying violence?

It's basically the difference in bullying between high school boys and girls. Both are bad but one style is more physical than the other. One style wants you to kill yourself while the other wants to kill you themselves. One style tries to exert physical control while the other tries to exert social control.

It's all toxic and it's all a circular response to each other's most extreme elements exacerbated by social media and algorithms to lock us in bubbles of groupthink while feeding us ragebait about the other.

There's nothing wrong with protest and free speech and political activism. There is something wrong with violence. BOTHSIDES are not toxic. The violent one who hates empathy is the one that's toxic.

You really can't make this stuff up.

Kirk once said, "I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that — it does a lot of damage."

That's an awful thing to say. And even worse to add into our political discourse.

lol, physician heal thyself. Empathy is a two way street.

You're doing the same thing that the people you're arguing with are doing. Try to practice a little empathy yourself and you might realize how hard it is to accept the reality that we are all to blame.

None of what I said takes anything away from what this kid rotted by the right wing internet did or excuses anything Trump has been doing to our country.

Where did you see that the shooter was right wing?

The constant call for ‘links’ is not in good faith, because it shifts the burden of the conversation onto the other person while letting you avoid offering any position of your own. Communication scholars often describe this tactic as a form of bad-faith framing or what’s popularly called sealioning—asking for endless citations not out of genuine curiosity but as a way to derail, exhaust, or control the exchange. It keeps the other person locked in a defensive posture rather than opening space for honest engagement.

If you had provided even one link, I could see your point. But you have not provided even a single link.

What you just wrote actually proves my point. You are not engaging with what I said, you are reducing the entire discussion to whether I will jump through hoops to provide links. Communication research on online debate shows exactly this dynamic: people who demand sources in this way are rarely interested in evaluating them, they use the request itself as a way to control the exchange and keep the other person on the defensive. That is why I said the demand is not in good faith. A conversation is about exchanging reasoning and perspectives, not setting up a passfail test where you pretend you cannot respond until a link is dropped.

If you're not going to put a source, then your "facts" are not facts at all, they are opinions. It is standard in any sort of advocacy to provide a source. (NP)

NP. You both are correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Dems, and their accomplices in the Intelligence Community, control news outlets, social media platforms, newspapers, magazines, radio, academia, Hollywood, music, and more.

They used control of these institutions to brainwash the masses to hate Trump and his supporters.

This is not an isolated incident. This is a widespread disease that has infected the minds of millions, and it was done so intentionally. This is by design.

We are dealing with people who have been literally brainwashed by everything they consume, to hate us and everything we stand for.

We are living in an Orwellian dystopia.

+1

While they chant in unison, Trump is a fascist.

While you chant in unison we will not be replaced!

Sorry- chanting is for the pu$$y hat crew.

Gotta give it to leftists, they are great chanters. They will take weeks and weeks of work off to march about, chanting various slogans.

Why, during the work week, in the middle of the day, leftists gather to engage in all manner of marching and chanting and singing.

While the evil republicans are at work supporting billionaires, democrats are supporting democracy by marching and chanting. Carrying all manner of signs and large papier mache heads of fascists.

Imagine the hours of work democrats spend paiper mache-ing fascist heads?

Stunning! And brave.

Yes, that's what people have been trying to tell you the difference is. That is exactly what the extreme left does. Why are you glorifying violence?

It's basically the difference in bullying between high school boys and girls. Both are bad but one style is more physical than the other. One style wants you to kill yourself while the other wants to kill you themselves. One style tries to exert physical control while the other tries to exert social control.

It's all toxic and it's all a circular response to each other's most extreme elements exacerbated by social media and algorithms to lock us in bubbles of groupthink while feeding us ragebait about the other.

There's nothing wrong with protest and free speech and political activism. There is something wrong with violence. BOTHSIDES are not toxic. The violent one who hates empathy is the one that's toxic.

You really can't make this stuff up.

Kirk once said, "I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that — it does a lot of damage."

That's an awful thing to say. And even worse to add into our political discourse.

lol, physician heal thyself. Empathy is a two way street.

You're doing the same thing that the people you're arguing with are doing. Try to practice a little empathy yourself and you might realize how hard it is to accept the reality that we are all to blame.

None of what I said takes anything away from what this kid rotted by the right wing internet did or excuses anything Trump has been doing to our country.

Where did you see that the shooter was right wing?

It all over. Everywhere. Where do you people get your news? What websites do you read?

Bs he wrote fascists on the bullets. There is only one group who uses that term right now and its democrats.

And people who play Helldiver. Keep up.

You're failing to cover this fact that he was a democrat and uses all the popular buzz words. Smh.

Wishing won't make it so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laughing at all the conservatives here who assumed the shooter was a liberal furiously looking up the term "groyper"

He grew up in a conservative family and turned leftist online and during high school.

Mainly aimless teens do.

And you simply know that because of your critical thinking. "It cannot be a right winger because that would make me look bad, so it must be a leftist."

Well, it’s pretty safe to say he wasn’t of
ideological leaning and political affiliation of Kirk. After all, he was so moved to murder him. What random people from high school think about him or what grandma thinks she knows about his motive is irrelevant

Until we get detailed, in-depth information about his motive and the thought process behind it (which may not happen until he’s on trial or may never happen if he pleads guilty), I don’t think we can truly make sense of this kid. So far, the details coming out are inconclusive, perhaps even contradictory. Even if he explains his reasoning, it may not make sense to sane, rational, emotionally stable people.

You say it’s safe to say he isn’t of the same political affiliation as Kirk. I’m not sure it is safe to say that. He may have shared the same position as Kirk on many issues and only differed from Kirk’s views on a couple pet causes. He may have been to the left of Kirk. He may have been to the right of Kirk. He might not have had any kind of consistent, coherent ideology. He may have enjoyed playing Devil’s advocate and arguing viewpoints that he didn’t actually believe, which would explain why there’s seemingly contradictory information about his political leaning. He might throw around the word “fascist” without actually knowing what fascism is.

Kid?!

Relax, I’m not saying he’s a juvenile; I’m just old enough that he’s young to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Dems, and their accomplices in the Intelligence Community, control news outlets, social media platforms, newspapers, magazines, radio, academia, Hollywood, music, and more.

They used control of these institutions to brainwash the masses to hate Trump and his supporters.

This is not an isolated incident. This is a widespread disease that has infected the minds of millions, and it was done so intentionally. This is by design.

We are dealing with people who have been literally brainwashed by everything they consume, to hate us and everything we stand for.

We are living in an Orwellian dystopia.

+1

While they chant in unison, Trump is a fascist.

While you chant in unison we will not be replaced!

Sorry- chanting is for the pu$$y hat crew.

Gotta give it to leftists, they are great chanters. They will take weeks and weeks of work off to march about, chanting various slogans.

Why, during the work week, in the middle of the day, leftists gather to engage in all manner of marching and chanting and singing.

While the evil republicans are at work supporting billionaires, democrats are supporting democracy by marching and chanting. Carrying all manner of signs and large papier mache heads of fascists.

Imagine the hours of work democrats spend paiper mache-ing fascist heads?

Stunning! And brave.

Yes, that's what people have been trying to tell you the difference is. That is exactly what the extreme left does. Why are you glorifying violence?

It's basically the difference in bullying between high school boys and girls. Both are bad but one style is more physical than the other. One style wants you to kill yourself while the other wants to kill you themselves. One style tries to exert physical control while the other tries to exert social control.

It's all toxic and it's all a circular response to each other's most extreme elements exacerbated by social media and algorithms to lock us in bubbles of groupthink while feeding us ragebait about the other.

There's nothing wrong with protest and free speech and political activism. There is something wrong with violence. BOTHSIDES are not toxic. The violent one who hates empathy is the one that's toxic.

You really can't make this stuff up.

Kirk once said, "I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that — it does a lot of damage."

That's an awful thing to say. And even worse to add into our political discourse.

lol, physician heal thyself. Empathy is a two way street.

You're doing the same thing that the people you're arguing with are doing. Try to practice a little empathy yourself and you might realize how hard it is to accept the reality that we are all to blame.

None of what I said takes anything away from what this kid rotted by the right wing internet did or excuses anything Trump has been doing to our country.

Where did you see that the shooter was right wing?

The constant call for ‘links’ is not in good faith, because it shifts the burden of the conversation onto the other person while letting you avoid offering any position of your own. Communication scholars often describe this tactic as a form of bad-faith framing or what’s popularly called sealioning—asking for endless citations not out of genuine curiosity but as a way to derail, exhaust, or control the exchange. It keeps the other person locked in a defensive posture rather than opening space for honest engagement.

If you had provided even one link, I could see your point. But you have not provided even a single link.

What you just wrote actually proves my point. You are not engaging with what I said, you are reducing the entire discussion to whether I will jump through hoops to provide links. Communication research on online debate shows exactly this dynamic: people who demand sources in this way are rarely interested in evaluating them, they use the request itself as a way to control the exchange and keep the other person on the defensive. That is why I said the demand is not in good faith. A conversation is about exchanging reasoning and perspectives, not setting up a passfail test where you pretend you cannot respond until a link is dropped.

If you're not going to put a source, then your "facts" are not facts at all, they are opinions. It is standard in any sort of advocacy to provide a source. (NP)

No, that is not true. Citations do not make lies become truth or vice versa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laughing at all the conservatives here who assumed the shooter was a liberal furiously looking up the term "groyper"

He grew up in a conservative family and turned leftist online and during high school.

Mainly aimless teens do.

And you simply know that because of your critical thinking. "It cannot be a right winger because that would make me look bad, so it must be a leftist."

Well, it’s pretty safe to say he wasn’t of
ideological leaning and political affiliation of Kirk. After all, he was so moved to murder him. What random people from high school think about him or what grandma thinks she knows about his motive is irrelevant

I mean, neither is Laura Loomer, and she's certainly not left wing.

Nick Fuentes went to "war" with Charlie Kirk and he's definitely not left wing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Dems, and their accomplices in the Intelligence Community, control news outlets, social media platforms, newspapers, magazines, radio, academia, Hollywood, music, and more.

They used control of these institutions to brainwash the masses to hate Trump and his supporters.

This is not an isolated incident. This is a widespread disease that has infected the minds of millions, and it was done so intentionally. This is by design.

We are dealing with people who have been literally brainwashed by everything they consume, to hate us and everything we stand for.

We are living in an Orwellian dystopia.

+1

While they chant in unison, Trump is a fascist.

While you chant in unison we will not be replaced!

Sorry- chanting is for the pu$$y hat crew.

Gotta give it to leftists, they are great chanters. They will take weeks and weeks of work off to march about, chanting various slogans.

Why, during the work week, in the middle of the day, leftists gather to engage in all manner of marching and chanting and singing.

While the evil republicans are at work supporting billionaires, democrats are supporting democracy by marching and chanting. Carrying all manner of signs and large papier mache heads of fascists.

Imagine the hours of work democrats spend paiper mache-ing fascist heads?

Stunning! And brave.

Yes, that's what people have been trying to tell you the difference is. That is exactly what the extreme left does. Why are you glorifying violence?

It's basically the difference in bullying between high school boys and girls. Both are bad but one style is more physical than the other. One style wants you to kill yourself while the other wants to kill you themselves. One style tries to exert physical control while the other tries to exert social control.

It's all toxic and it's all a circular response to each other's most extreme elements exacerbated by social media and algorithms to lock us in bubbles of groupthink while feeding us ragebait about the other.

There's nothing wrong with protest and free speech and political activism. There is something wrong with violence. BOTHSIDES are not toxic. The violent one who hates empathy is the one that's toxic.

You really can't make this stuff up.

Kirk once said, "I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that — it does a lot of damage."

That's an awful thing to say. And even worse to add into our political discourse.

lol, physician heal thyself. Empathy is a two way street.

You're doing the same thing that the people you're arguing with are doing. Try to practice a little empathy yourself and you might realize how hard it is to accept the reality that we are all to blame.

None of what I said takes anything away from what this kid rotted by the right wing internet did or excuses anything Trump has been doing to our country.

Where did you see that the shooter was right wing?

It all over. Everywhere. Where do you people get your news? What websites do you read?

Bs he wrote fascists on the bullets. There is only one group who uses that term right now and its democrats.

And people who play Helldiver. Keep up.

So he was inspired to kill a man based upon his video game choices?

Is that from your perspective as his bff?

You clearly haven't been reading up on it. Next to that wording he scratched a cheat code from the game.

His other messages referenced 4Chan memes. 4chan isn't known for being liberal.

Ah yes, the "woke" bastion that is 4chan.

All of those cringiest cringe TikToks of MAGA working themselves into a lather with the screaming and the crying and the shuddering about "those liberals" and "now they are going to pay!" So -- are they going to go after the Groypers now, or was that just supposed to be performance art?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laughing at all the conservatives here who assumed the shooter was a liberal furiously looking up the term "groyper"

He grew up in a conservative family and turned leftist online and during high school.

Mainly aimless teens do.

And you simply know that because of your critical thinking. "It cannot be a right winger because that would make me look bad, so it must be a leftist."

Well, it’s pretty safe to say he wasn’t of
ideological leaning and political affiliation of Kirk. After all, he was so moved to murder him. What random people from high school think about him or what grandma thinks she knows about his motive is irrelevant

Until we get detailed, in-depth information about his motive and the thought process behind it (which may not happen until he’s on trial or may never happen if he pleads guilty), I don’t think we can truly make sense of this kid. So far, the details coming out are inconclusive, perhaps even contradictory. Even if he explains his reasoning, it may not make sense to sane, rational, emotionally stable people.

You say it’s safe to say he isn’t of the same political affiliation as Kirk. I’m not sure it is safe to say that. He may have shared the same position as Kirk on many issues and only differed from Kirk’s views on a couple pet causes. He may have been to the left of Kirk. He may have been to the right of Kirk. He might not have had any kind of consistent, coherent ideology. He may have enjoyed playing Devil’s advocate and arguing viewpoints that he didn’t actually believe, which would explain why there’s seemingly contradictory information about his political leaning. He might throw around the word “fascist” without actually knowing what fascism is.

Kid?!

Relax, I’m not saying he’s a juvenile; I’m just old enough that he’s young to me.

He is a grown man.

I am relaxed by the way. But if I wasn't, that is not your concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laughing at all the conservatives here who assumed the shooter was a liberal furiously looking up the term "groyper"

He grew up in a conservative family and turned leftist online and during high school.

Mainly aimless teens do.

And you simply know that because of your critical thinking. "It cannot be a right winger because that would make me look bad, so it must be a leftist."

Well, it’s pretty safe to say he wasn’t of
ideological leaning and political affiliation of Kirk. After all, he was so moved to murder him. What random people from high school think about him or what grandma thinks she knows about his motive is irrelevant

Until we get detailed, in-depth information about his motive and the thought process behind it (which may not happen until he’s on trial or may never happen if he pleads guilty), I don’t think we can truly make sense of this kid. So far, the details coming out are inconclusive, perhaps even contradictory. Even if he explains his reasoning, it may not make sense to sane, rational, emotionally stable people.

You say it’s safe to say he isn’t of the same political affiliation as Kirk. I’m not sure it is safe to say that. He may have shared the same position as Kirk on many issues and only differed from Kirk’s views on a couple pet causes. He may have been to the left of Kirk. He may have been to the right of Kirk. He might not have had any kind of consistent, coherent ideology. He may have enjoyed playing Devil’s advocate and arguing viewpoints that he didn’t actually believe, which would explain why there’s seemingly contradictory information about his political leaning. He might throw around the word “fascist” without actually knowing what fascism is.

Kid?!

Relax, I’m not saying he’s a juvenile; I’m just old enough that he’s young to me.

He is a grown man.

I am relaxed by the way. But if I wasn't, that is not your concern.

He's a grown mentally ill murderer who was poisoned by our current political climate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Dems, and their accomplices in the Intelligence Community, control news outlets, social media platforms, newspapers, magazines, radio, academia, Hollywood, music, and more.

They used control of these institutions to brainwash the masses to hate Trump and his supporters.

This is not an isolated incident. This is a widespread disease that has infected the minds of millions, and it was done so intentionally. This is by design.

We are dealing with people who have been literally brainwashed by everything they consume, to hate us and everything we stand for.

We are living in an Orwellian dystopia.

+1

While they chant in unison, Trump is a fascist.

While you chant in unison we will not be replaced!

Sorry- chanting is for the pu$$y hat crew.

Gotta give it to leftists, they are great chanters. They will take weeks and weeks of work off to march about, chanting various slogans.

Why, during the work week, in the middle of the day, leftists gather to engage in all manner of marching and chanting and singing.

While the evil republicans are at work supporting billionaires, democrats are supporting democracy by marching and chanting. Carrying all manner of signs and large papier mache heads of fascists.

Imagine the hours of work democrats spend paiper mache-ing fascist heads?

Stunning! And brave.

Yes, that's what people have been trying to tell you the difference is. That is exactly what the extreme left does. Why are you glorifying violence?

It's basically the difference in bullying between high school boys and girls. Both are bad but one style is more physical than the other. One style wants you to kill yourself while the other wants to kill you themselves. One style tries to exert physical control while the other tries to exert social control.

It's all toxic and it's all a circular response to each other's most extreme elements exacerbated by social media and algorithms to lock us in bubbles of groupthink while feeding us ragebait about the other.

There's nothing wrong with protest and free speech and political activism. There is something wrong with violence. BOTHSIDES are not toxic. The violent one who hates empathy is the one that's toxic.

You really can't make this stuff up.

Kirk once said, "I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that — it does a lot of damage."

That's an awful thing to say. And even worse to add into our political discourse.

lol, physician heal thyself. Empathy is a two way street.

You're doing the same thing that the people you're arguing with are doing. Try to practice a little empathy yourself and you might realize how hard it is to accept the reality that we are all to blame.

None of what I said takes anything away from what this kid rotted by the right wing internet did or excuses anything Trump has been doing to our country.

Where did you see that the shooter was right wing?

The constant call for ‘links’ is not in good faith, because it shifts the burden of the conversation onto the other person while letting you avoid offering any position of your own. Communication scholars often describe this tactic as a form of bad-faith framing or what’s popularly called sealioning—asking for endless citations not out of genuine curiosity but as a way to derail, exhaust, or control the exchange. It keeps the other person locked in a defensive posture rather than opening space for honest engagement.

If you had provided even one link, I could see your point. But you have not provided even a single link.

What you just wrote actually proves my point. You are not engaging with what I said, you are reducing the entire discussion to whether I will jump through hoops to provide links. Communication research on online debate shows exactly this dynamic: people who demand sources in this way are rarely interested in evaluating them, they use the request itself as a way to control the exchange and keep the other person on the defensive. That is why I said the demand is not in good faith. A conversation is about exchanging reasoning and perspectives, not setting up a passfail test where you pretend you cannot respond until a link is dropped.

My position is "I don't know" and I'm not going to be convinced by an anonymous forum troll's rantings.

Yes, you just proved the point: nothing presented here will convince you, even links, due to concept bolded above.

Haha, what citations have you provided? Zero.

You want everyone to believe your anonymous opinion. Hard pass.

You are still proving my point. The only move you are making is to demand links and then act as if nothing else matters. That is not real discussion. A constant call for citations is not about evidence, it is about setting up hoops for the other person to jump through so you can avoid engaging with the substance of what was said. That is why it is not a good faith tactic.

That's what people say when they can't provide "the science"

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are reporting misinformation. A family friend identified and called the FBI first NOT the dad. Hey fascist and catch fascist where on the bullets.

This is a combination of wrong and misleading. One bullet had the inscription "Hey Fascists! Catch!" followed by the up arrow symbol, the right arrow symbol, and three down arrows. You cannot divorce the words from the arrows. The arrows are a key code used Helldivers 2 to arm a large bomb. In the game, the player is a member of a militaristic regime (i.e. fascist government) who is battling aliens that the players call fascists. The phrase is a taunt of an enemy who is about get bombed with a large munition. The game is satirical and the irony in this is that the player is the fascist.

In context, "Hey fascist" does not indicate that Robinson is right-wing. It also does not indicate that he is left-wing. It simply means that he is deeply into Internet meme and gamer cultures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laughing at all the conservatives here who assumed the shooter was a liberal furiously looking up the term "groyper"

He grew up in a conservative family and turned leftist online and during high school.

Mainly aimless teens do.

And you simply know that because of your critical thinking. "It cannot be a right winger because that would make me look bad, so it must be a leftist."

Well, it’s pretty safe to say he wasn’t of
ideological leaning and political affiliation of Kirk. After all, he was so moved to murder him. What random people from high school think about him or what grandma thinks she knows about his motive is irrelevant

Until we get detailed, in-depth information about his motive and the thought process behind it (which may not happen until he’s on trial or may never happen if he pleads guilty), I don’t think we can truly make sense of this kid. So far, the details coming out are inconclusive, perhaps even contradictory. Even if he explains his reasoning, it may not make sense to sane, rational, emotionally stable people.

You say it’s safe to say he isn’t of the same political affiliation as Kirk. I’m not sure it is safe to say that. He may have shared the same position as Kirk on many issues and only differed from Kirk’s views on a couple pet causes. He may have been to the left of Kirk. He may have been to the right of Kirk. He might not have had any kind of consistent, coherent ideology. He may have enjoyed playing Devil’s advocate and arguing viewpoints that he didn’t actually believe, which would explain why there’s seemingly contradictory information about his political leaning. He might throw around the word “fascist” without actually knowing what fascism is.

Kid?!

Relax, I’m not saying he’s a juvenile; I’m just old enough that he’s young to me.

He is a grown man.

I am relaxed by the way. But if I wasn't, that is not your concern.

Great. Do you want to engage with any of the actual content of my post?