Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

BREAKING: 6 sources confirm to Axios that Tyler Robinson's roommate is transgender and they all believe that the two were in a "romantic relationship"

Investigators believe that this could be the "key to establishing motive" in the case

Officials confirmed earlier that the alleged Charlie Kirk assassin was "deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology"

This may or may not be true. If true, what is there to be done except for put killer in jail, and implement stricter gun control? Nothing else.

I'm leaning towards not true. The suspect has a transgender roommate that he was allegedly in a romantic relationship with and we are just now hearing about it? Yeah, I don't think so.

And who are we hearing about it from? "Six sources close to the investigation" - oh you mean the FBI under the control of the President who started blaming "the left" like three seconds after Kirk was shot.

I call BS.

+1000000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Americans need serious medication / treatment for the severe mental illness. The level of hate and vileness is unreal. God needs to do more than bless America. He needs to comeback asap and take us all out. This is crazy.

The is what mass delusion and brainwashing looks like.

On all sides

It made me delete the apps this week. The online performances made me feel like I was in crazy town. Everyone doesn’t have to make a post, I didn’t because I knew immediately that people were going to get intense. I saw the right wingers in my life who never talk about religion online come and try to out Christian everyone else, and the left wingers trying to come up with their best gotcha talking point or joke. Nobody cares what you think about the situation, seriously you are not that important that you have to make a statement on everything. The performing is ridiculous.

Social media has turned us all into main characters. We’re a bunch of ill informed, ignorant, self absorbed, arrogant aholes now.

Wannabes main characters. So self inflated yet ill informed and ignorant. Both sides, in similar and different ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yikes

Good due diligence though

And these are the guys that Dems want in girls bathrooms? Yikes

Do you see many guys in ladies’ restrooms? I have never seen one yet.

Come to Atlanta

[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:

A Virginia anesthesiologist was fired after making "highly inappropriate comments supporting violence" against Charlie Kirk following his assassination, according to Riverside Walter Reed Hospital. The employee's contract was terminated by North American Partners in Anesthesia.

Hmmm another one of these articles that doesn’t actually include the post in question.

The employer in that article didn’t release the anesthesiologist’s name.

But here’s a different anesthesiologist who said she is glad Charlie Kirk got himself shot. She is not a bot.

When Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, some conservatives openly celebrated her passing. A right-wing commentator called her a “mass murdering hag” who had “ruined more lives than Hitler, Mao & Stalin combined.” Another conservative pastor framed her death as “celestially ordained” and proclaimed, “This belongs to God.” Gordon Klingenschmitt, an evangelical activist and former Republican lawmaker, said he mourned only that she “apparently did not know Christ,” making clear he saw her death as spiritually justified. Even within Republican circles, Trump aides were quoted privately saying her death was “super” in terms of political impact, treating her passing less as a tragedy and more as an opportunity.

Unclear if the above examples are public figures with large followers base, a show, income from it, etc. Or just a little jerk from podunk online.

As you know, with the internet, everyone and anyone can post whatever. And opinions are like a-holes, everyone’s got one.

So what's your point, not following.

Your claim: a pastor somewhere said this, some commentator said that.

Other person: unclear if your commentators are big names or podunk people. Everyone has an opinion, whose do you follow?

And RBG she lived an awesome life so lots to celebrate.
Unf Obama didn’t replace her in a timely manner….

I am still lost because why does if they are big names or not matter, I still don't get the point.

Lol. You don’t have a point now nor when you quote a bunch of randos.

You were the one claiming random people and notable people were celebrating C.K.'s death. Random people and notable people celebrated R.B.G. death. So that is why I am confused by your follow up to mine 100%. Why does it matter that they are random (and they are not actually, but again, accordingly to you originally, it doesn't matter). If people can celebrate one, why not the other?

Ruth bader Ginsburg wasn’t shot to death at work. She was in her mid 80s and got ill. Wtf

Both Charlie and ruth had many accomplishments to celebrate. But one was 31 with young kids and shot to death on stage, and the other was old with great grandchildren and refused to retire.

So you're saying that Trump will fit into RBG's fact pattern and celebrations should be handled accordingly (i.e., ignored)?

Anyone who is upset about people celebrating Charlie Kirk’s death had better hold onto their MAGA hats when Trump passes (hopefully of natural causes with no foul play involved) because there will be widespread celebration. People already post on social media about the day when “it” happens. I’m actually concerned that even if he dies peacefully in his sleep at 90+, there will be people who will insist he was killed by radical leftists or the deep state.

But the right is prepping now to censor us from celebrating that when it happens. This stuff they are doing with C.K. is a test run.

I had the discernment to keep my mouth shut about this. A lot of people say they are going to celebrate when “it” happens. I’m going to treat it like a national emergency and stay in the house. People are going to lose their minds.

[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:It’s so weird but also so predictable that I. Two pages, DCUM goes from “there is no shred of evidence he was trans” to “who cares?”

The FBI has confirmed the partner of the killer is a male to female and they lived together romantically. The partner is cooperating with the FBI and has confirmed this herself.

It certainly explains motive and settles the “actually he was a far right Nazi” question. Can we move on now and accept he was radicalized to the left?

Not touching the furry thing other than that it explains the engravings somewhat. Beyond that, I don’t think it is relevant.

Having a transgender partner doesn’t explain motive. All it establishes is a personal detail about the killer’s life, not why the attack happened. A motive requires evidence that the act was driven by a specific belief system, grievance, or goal. Saying “he dated a trans woman, therefore he was radicalized to the left” is a logical leap — it’s like saying someone who dates a Christian must be motivated by Christianity. Until there’s actual proof, like writings, statements, or affiliations tying the violence to left-wing ideology, the partner’s gender identity doesn’t settle anything about motive.

Missing the forest for the trees…we need gun control, mental health resources, empathy.

Charlie Kirk didn’t think highly of empathy.

Well Charlie would still be alive today playing with his babies if we focused more on the above.

+1
You reap what you sow. And the "reaping" isn't always accompanied by good people or a socially palatable method. Reaping doesn't mean deserving, it means natural, unsurprising consequence, note the distinction.

Not sure what country or time period you live in but in NO ONE’s law book, govt, or faith is it “natural and unsurprising” to unilaterally decide shoot someone down for what they have said in public forums. Or private ones.

That’s anarchy, lawlessness, chaos, not to mention unethical, illegal and immoral in most religions and societies.

— Note the distinction of your illogic and falsities. And zero understanding of due process.

You are missing the point. I was not saying violence is legal, moral, or justified. I was saying it can be a predictable consequence. “Reaping what you sow” in that context means unsurprising outcome, not rightful punishment. Condemning the act as illegal or immoral is valid, but it does not address the claim of inevitability.

Nope. Shooting down a politician or activist is not a “predictable consequence” nor “unsurprising outcome” nor “inevitability” of them being a vocal politician or activist.

Get professional help Pp.

In a country where uncivilized politicians enact wil wild West style gun laws, shooting down a politician is a predictable consequence , indeed. Facts don't care about your fragile and hypocritical feelings .

Speaking of facts, what you cited - shooting down a politician - is indeed extremely rare in America and most countries.

Plus Charlie Kirk was quite civilized when he spoke. That was his model- or else it wouldn’t work, watch the shows.

Thanks for playing, better luck next time!

In one episode of his podcast, Kirk suggested that children should be forced to watch Trump’s political opponents beheaded live on television. With sponsorship by Coca-Cola.

That doesn’t sound very civilized.

Context and link?

Look it up yourself. If you don't find the poster credible in context that is your problem.

Dude, who would? You just wrote 25-30 words.

How dumb do you think people are?

Information has been provided. Up to you what you do with it.

Correct, after multiple posters called out your petty nonresponses, you finally posted a transcript link.

We’ll watch it full in due course and revert back with our thoughts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yikes

Good due diligence though

And these are the guys that Dems want in girls bathrooms? Yikes

Do you see many guys in ladies’ restrooms? I have never seen one yet.

Come to Atlanta

Stop taking about bathroom or transgender the whole stupidity of the maga cukt of fear and the pedi party maga crowd should be worried about their own child porn and sexual abuse of kids maga owns that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

BREAKING: 6 sources confirm to Axios that Tyler Robinson's roommate is transgender and they all believe that the two were in a "romantic relationship"

Investigators believe that this could be the "key to establishing motive" in the case

Officials confirmed earlier that the alleged Charlie Kirk assassin was "deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology"

This may or may not be true. If true, what is there to be done except for put killer in jail, and implement stricter gun control? Nothing else.

I'm leaning towards not true. The suspect has a transgender roommate that he was allegedly in a romantic relationship with and we are just now hearing about it? Yeah, I don't think so.

And who are we hearing about it from? "Six sources close to the investigation" - oh you mean the FBI under the control of the President who started blaming "the left" like three seconds after Kirk was shot.

I call BS.

So what if it’s true. 99% of mass shooters are nontrans, straight men. Why are we even entertaining this?

[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:It's disgusting how all of these people professing to be so angered and distraught over the shooting of Charlie Kirk have

JACK SHIT

to say about any of the other violent, ideologically motivated shootings going on, like the one in Colorado.

https://coloradosun.com/2025/09/12/evergreen-high-school-shooting-suspect-social-media/

You people are dishonest, disingenuous and full of crap.

Did any victims die? No

Did anyone famous in a natl scale die? No.

How many people get shot and killed daily in America? With or without gang on gang shootings?

CO boy was a social media influenced shooter who injured two and then killed himself.

Do you want him to get more attention so other troubled young men do the same? Or what do you want?

We want gun control for starters.

Just remember Charlie could be here tonight reading Goodnight Moon to his kids.

Trans or not, he probably still would be if Robinson wasn't raised in a gun-obsessed family.

Yes trans is irrelevant.

Trans is relevent because it changes the meaning of two of his meme engravings. Making him someone who was torn between his internet reality and his life reality and very cliche.

His meme engravings don't matter either actually. What only matters is that this particular individual decided to murder someone. That's it.

What the internet and our society have become matters. If this is true then he's a smart incel groyper gamer raised in a loving 3%er LEO Utah Mormon MAGA home that dropped out of college during Covid then got laid with a pre-op male to female transgender gamer from Utah and his mind couldn't handle all the contradictions.

The layers of crap all converge. He's a poster child for everything about these last few horrible years. He's a walking rorsach test.

Ok so what should we, as a society do? Provide more guns? Continue to ostracize these people? Condemn them for being different?

No. It's not even about them. This is about everything we as a society have become since Covid. Right wing and left wing internet crazies coming together to screw up this kid's mind.

It's not about guns. It's not about trans. It's not about the alt-right. It's not about internet grifting. It's not about the politicization of everything. It's not about calls for retribution. It's not about mocking a victim. It's about all of it coming together in some sick concoction.

We need a cure for everything. And in all seriousness that cure is the Epstein files. It's the one thing we all agree should be released in full and let the chips fall where they lay.

If we all agree on it then why do the sleazy Republicans keep voting to block it?

We need single issue bills put FW.

Not 800 pages of horse trading ones.

Can you cite the extraneous garbage in the Epstein bill? Or are you just dodging and deflecting with nonsense as usual?

Lol

Must be indefinite amateur hour on DCUM today.

Can you provide even one example of a single item bill the last ten years that went to a vote in the senate or Congress that wasn’t war related?

[Anonymous]

The race to claim pieces of Kirk's mantle and TPUSA's revenue stream is on and it's as gory as you might imagine.

Con men are fighting Ben Shapiro looking for his new scam

Maga cult of stupids

[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:It’s so weird but also so predictable that I. Two pages, DCUM goes from “there is no shred of evidence he was trans” to “who cares?”

The FBI has confirmed the partner of the killer is a male to female and they lived together romantically. The partner is cooperating with the FBI and has confirmed this herself.

It certainly explains motive and settles the “actually he was a far right Nazi” question. Can we move on now and accept he was radicalized to the left?

Not touching the furry thing other than that it explains the engravings somewhat. Beyond that, I don’t think it is relevant.

Having a transgender partner doesn’t explain motive. All it establishes is a personal detail about the killer’s life, not why the attack happened. A motive requires evidence that the act was driven by a specific belief system, grievance, or goal. Saying “he dated a trans woman, therefore he was radicalized to the left” is a logical leap — it’s like saying someone who dates a Christian must be motivated by Christianity. Until there’s actual proof, like writings, statements, or affiliations tying the violence to left-wing ideology, the partner’s gender identity doesn’t settle anything about motive.

Missing the forest for the trees…we need gun control, mental health resources, empathy.

Charlie Kirk didn’t think highly of empathy.

Well Charlie would still be alive today playing with his babies if we focused more on the above.

+1
You reap what you sow. And the "reaping" isn't always accompanied by good people or a socially palatable method. Reaping doesn't mean deserving, it means natural, unsurprising consequence, note the distinction.

Not sure what country or time period you live in but in NO ONE’s law book, govt, or faith is it “natural and unsurprising” to unilaterally decide shoot someone down for what they have said in public forums. Or private ones.

That’s anarchy, lawlessness, chaos, not to mention unethical, illegal and immoral in most religions and societies.

— Note the distinction of your illogic and falsities. And zero understanding of due process.

You are missing the point. I was not saying violence is legal, moral, or justified. I was saying it can be a predictable consequence. “Reaping what you sow” in that context means unsurprising outcome, not rightful punishment. Condemning the act as illegal or immoral is valid, but it does not address the claim of inevitability.

Nope. Shooting down a politician or activist is not a “predictable consequence” nor “unsurprising outcome” nor “inevitability” of them being a vocal politician or activist.

Get professional help Pp.

In a country where uncivilized politicians enact wil wild West style gun laws, shooting down a politician is a predictable consequence , indeed. Facts don't care about your fragile and hypocritical feelings .

Speaking of facts, what you cited - shooting down a politician - is indeed extremely rare in America and most countries.

Plus Charlie Kirk was quite civilized when he spoke. That was his model- or else it wouldn’t work, watch the shows.

Thanks for playing, better luck next time!

In one episode of his podcast, Kirk suggested that children should be forced to watch Trump’s political opponents beheaded live on television. With sponsorship by Coca-Cola.

That doesn’t sound very civilized.

Context and link?

It was a podcast. The Charlie Kirk Show


In February last year while discussing capital punishment he said children should watch people being killed using the death penalty and that executions should be public. "Death penalties should be public, should be quick, it should be televised. I think at a certain age, it's an initiation..." he said before adding that the crime rate would go down if kids had witnessed an execution.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/charlie-kirks-five-most-controversial-135519014.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAIgEAzSe5QNlklQ_Iw3VhuTTcOAXe4xAlenKIOS2rN9btogcQjFyHHeb3-b3f0olwEC5oGrKvR2eal2A41XWRuSHPNfX1DGFGJpBl_d7FDgGLPHz4dOi4PkHyobK6V5EV2jwSDk8JbmstiufJJ4e-2kfOR2a8F-Bo7-2tB2q8kI


The part about executing Trump opponents was said on ThoughtCrime a TV show in 2024

[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:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so weird but also so predictable that I. Two pages, DCUM goes from “there is no shred of evidence he was trans” to “who cares?”

The FBI has confirmed the partner of the killer is a male to female and they lived together romantically. The partner is cooperating with the FBI and has confirmed this herself.

It certainly explains motive and settles the “actually he was a far right Nazi” question. Can we move on now and accept he was radicalized to the left?

Not touching the furry thing other than that it explains the engravings somewhat. Beyond that, I don’t think it is relevant.

Having a transgender partner doesn’t explain motive. All it establishes is a personal detail about the killer’s life, not why the attack happened. A motive requires evidence that the act was driven by a specific belief system, grievance, or goal. Saying “he dated a trans woman, therefore he was radicalized to the left” is a logical leap — it’s like saying someone who dates a Christian must be motivated by Christianity. Until there’s actual proof, like writings, statements, or affiliations tying the violence to left-wing ideology, the partner’s gender identity doesn’t settle anything about motive.

Missing the forest for the trees…we need gun control, mental health resources, empathy.

Charlie Kirk didn’t think highly of empathy.

Well Charlie would still be alive today playing with his babies if we focused more on the above.

+1
You reap what you sow. And the "reaping" isn't always accompanied by good people or a socially palatable method. Reaping doesn't mean deserving, it means natural, unsurprising consequence, note the distinction.

Not sure what country or time period you live in but in NO ONE’s law book, govt, or faith is it “natural and unsurprising” to unilaterally decide shoot someone down for what they have said in public forums. Or private ones.

That’s anarchy, lawlessness, chaos, not to mention unethical, illegal and immoral in most religions and societies.

— Note the distinction of your illogic and falsities. And zero understanding of due process.

You are missing the point. I was not saying violence is legal, moral, or justified. I was saying it can be a predictable consequence. “Reaping what you sow” in that context means unsurprising outcome, not rightful punishment. Condemning the act as illegal or immoral is valid, but it does not address the claim of inevitability.

Nope. Shooting down a politician or activist is not a “predictable consequence” nor “unsurprising outcome” nor “inevitability” of them being a vocal politician or activist.

Get professional help Pp.

In a country where uncivilized politicians enact wil wild West style gun laws, shooting down a politician is a predictable consequence , indeed. Facts don't care about your fragile and hypocritical feelings .

Speaking of facts, what you cited - shooting down a politician - is indeed extremely rare in America and most countries.

Plus Charlie Kirk was quite civilized when he spoke. That was his model- or else it wouldn’t work, watch the shows.

Thanks for playing, better luck next time!

In one episode of his podcast, Kirk suggested that children should be forced to watch Trump’s political opponents beheaded live on television. With sponsorship by Coca-Cola.

That doesn’t sound very civilized.

Context and link?

Look it up yourself. If you don't find the poster credible in context that is your problem.

Dude, who would? You just wrote 25-30 words.

How dumb do you think people are?

Information has been provided. Up to you what you do with it.

Correct, after multiple posters called out your petty nonresponses, you finally posted a transcript link.

We’ll watch it full in due course and revert back with our thoughts.

No, the request for sources is a petty rhetorical technique to dismiss the poster. And no, you are not going to watch the video because that was never the point. What you might do is find an excuse to dismiss it outright, to further dismiss the credibility of the poster.

[Anonymous]

A Black police officer, David Rose, was shot and killed defending a fe government building last month, and he didn't get a presidential me congressional moment of silence, or a lowered flag at the White Hou A white civilian, Charlie Kirk, is shot and killed on a college campus, gets all those things and a promise of presidential attendance at his funeral.
Don't tell me that all lives matter in America. They don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

BREAKING: 6 sources confirm to Axios that Tyler Robinson's roommate is transgender and they all believe that the two were in a "romantic relationship"

Investigators believe that this could be the "key to establishing motive" in the case

Officials confirmed earlier that the alleged Charlie Kirk assassin was "deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology"

This may or may not be true. If true, what is there to be done except for put killer in jail, and implement stricter gun control? Nothing else.

I'm leaning towards not true. The suspect has a transgender roommate that he was allegedly in a romantic relationship with and we are just now hearing about it? Yeah, I don't think so.

And who are we hearing about it from? "Six sources close to the investigation" - oh you mean the FBI under the control of the President who started blaming "the left" like three seconds after Kirk was shot.

I call BS.

So what if it’s true. 99% of mass shooters are nontrans, straight men. Why are we even entertaining this?

We also know that the man who allegedly killed Charlie Kirk is not trans

[Anonymous]

Does anybody really believe this trans romance is true? What are the chances?

Also even if this were the situation, what would be the killer’s motivation?

Wild, you type out your response, look at the words you’re writing and ask yourself - does this really sound plausible?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yikes

Good due diligence though

And these are the guys that Dems want in girls bathrooms? Yikes

Do you see many guys in ladies’ restrooms? I have never seen one yet.

Come to Atlanta

Oh really, lots of trans folk down in Atlanta? I haven’t been terrorized by any trans people as of yet. As a matter of fact, I can probably count the number of trans people I have seen on one hand, and I live in a large metropolitan area.