Be mindful of what you post — Employer could be watching

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fema-employee-placed-leave-saying-flags-shouldnt-half-staff-racist-homophobe-charlie-kirk

I’m a little curious if his boss was a Instagram friend? Did it go viral? How did it get to the attention of decision makers.

But be careful and thoughtful of what you post. I was not a fan of Kirk, but those are harsh words for a murdered young father.

Kirk was a father of young children when he was condoning Biblical punishment of stoning for Gays, wasn't he? Whoever posted about the flags was correct. Nor should Air Force 2 have been Valkyries returning him to Odin!

Trump will do anything to keep Epstein off the front page.

When did Kirk condone stoning of gays? Please cite your source?

Contrary to what you believe ignorance is not bliss. Do your own research as I did.

You are the ignorant one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is some website that is aggregating all posts from people who are ‘celebrating’ his death and posting their names and employers.

celebrating Charlie Kirk's death, even in mild ways, is another of those 80/20 issues where Democrats seem to be landing on the wrong side.

Spread hate, get hate. It's really not that hard to understand. And like with Kirk, saying hateful things is not a crime.

Your ilk lowered the standard of discourse to this level and now the chickens are coming home to roost. Maybe empathy and a little "woke" isn't so bad, huh? I certainly wish we could go back to a basic standard of kindness and tolerance toward each other, where hateful words aren't tolerated in polite society.

You clearly are a solid part of 20%. But 80% of Americans would say what happened to Charlie Kirk was despicable, period, full stop.

Point out where I said anything affirming his murder. I'll wait. We can't have a nuanced conversation if you're going to be a reactionary moron with a lack of reading comprehension.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fema-employee-placed-leave-saying-flags-shouldnt-half-staff-racist-homophobe-charlie-kirk

I’m a little curious if his boss was a Instagram friend? Did it go viral? How did it get to the attention of decision makers.

But be careful and thoughtful of what you post. I was not a fan of Kirk, but those are harsh words for a murdered young father.

Kirk was a father of young children when he was condoning Biblical punishment of stoning for Gays, wasn't he? Whoever posted about the flags was correct. Nor should Air Force 2 have been Valkyries returning him to Odin!

Trump will do anything to keep Epstein off the front page.

When did Kirk condone stoning of gays? Please cite your source?

Contrary to what you believe ignorance is not bliss. Do your own research as I did.

You are the ignorant one.

You lose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is some website that is aggregating all posts from people who are ‘celebrating’ his death and posting their names and employers.

Good.

Why is this good?

It’s fine, and justifies sites like the ICE list, but why do you think that it’s good?

Would you also think it’s good if we start aggregating the people that ramble on about leftists, like a maga-watch site? For example, to make sure that they aren’t teaching children?

You have lost your moral compass if you are celebrating anyone’s death. Where is your humanity?

You can disagree with someone’s politics and not celebrate a violent murder?
You’ve lost the plot line.
If you are that far gone, no one can help.

I’m the person who posted earlier being left partyless. I cannot condone anyone who is celebrating this. I didn’t even know who this guy was beforehand. I don’t follow him. I don’t agree with what I have now seen that he’s said.

But I absolutely would never support or applaud anyone who was celebrating his death in such a violent manner. Their consequences to all actions. You should be held accountable. For your speech too.

Your lack of moral consistency is stunning. Charlie Kirk was despicable and peddled in hate. Most people aren't celebrating his death, they are merely pointing out the sad irony that a despicable person died as a result of the environment he helped create. But even if they are celebrating, that's not a crime, and Charlie Kirk advocated for the right to say despicable things.

So why all the pearl clutching? You can not like it. I didn't like most of what Charlie Kirk had to say. But it wasn't a crime when he did it, and it's not a crime for people to see whatever they want to in his death. You can't mandate people's feelings.

It’s morally wrong. You’ve crossed the line. It’s emblematic of the direction our party is taking.
How we can defend this and say we are honorable people I don’t know?

"our party"

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:You have to be careful here, too.

Your IP address is attached to every post you write here. Jeff has said he saves this info. If he received a subpoena, he will have to give that up. Then, poof, a lawyer or whoever has all your info.

This is not quite correct. A lawyer can subpoena the IP address of a specific post. That does not provide "all your info". It provides an IP address which doesn't really reveal anything. The lawyer would have to get another subpoena for whatever entity provided the IP address (telecom, ISP, company, etc.) and get them to reveal who was using the IP address at that the specific time of the post. In most cases, whatever entity that is will notify you, at least if you are their customer, about the subpoena and you will have the right to contest it. If the subpoena is overly broad, you can easily quash it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to be careful here, too.

Your IP address is attached to every post you write here. Jeff has said he saves this info. If he received a subpoena, he will have to give that up. Then, poof, a lawyer or whoever has all your info

so we are officially at this point where we are only allowed to agree with this administration. Freedom of speech is done?

How does the overly simplistic woke chant go again?

Oh that’s right.

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences.

So NOW you love cancel culture?

No, but I do enjoy calling out hypocrisy and watching people attempt to justify their cognitive dissonance.

I oppose cancel culture, unless there is a clear threat or risk (example: a clinician says that all Republicans/Democrats are fascists and deserve to die.)

[Anonymous]

Charlie Kirk advocated for the right say despicable things.

Actually no, the start of his activist career involved muzzling college professors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to be careful here, too.

Your IP address is attached to every post you write here. Jeff has said he saves this info. If he received a subpoena, he will have to give that up. Then, poof, a lawyer or whoever has all your info

so we are officially at this point where we are only allowed to agree with this administration. Freedom of speech is done?

How does the overly simplistic woke chant go again?

Oh that’s right.

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences.

So NOW you love cancel culture?

No, but I do enjoy calling out hypocrisy and watching people attempt to justify their cognitive dissonance.

I oppose cancel culture, unless there is a clear threat or risk (example: a clinician says that all Republicans/Democrats are fascists and deserve to die.)

Oh, ok. You’ve convince yourself that you are some speaker of truth.

Let me guess, are you a libertarian? Maybe even a Libertarian?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to be careful here, too.

Your IP address is attached to every post you write here. Jeff has said he saves this info. If he received a subpoena, he will have to give that up. Then, poof, a lawyer or whoever has all your info

so we are officially at this point where we are only allowed to agree with this administration. Freedom of speech is done?

How does the overly simplistic woke chant go again?

Oh that’s right.

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences.

So NOW you love cancel culture?

No, but I do enjoy calling out hypocrisy and watching people attempt to justify their cognitive dissonance.

I oppose cancel culture, unless there is a clear threat or risk (example: a clinician says that all Republicans/Democrats are fascists and deserve to die.)

Oh, ok. You’ve convince yourself that you are some speaker of truth.

Let me guess, are you a libertarian? Maybe even a Libertarian?

No a libertarian would not support Trump or maga. This poster is far down in the weeds. He has not been off this site for five days.

[Anonymous]

The unemployment rate is going to rise.

https://apnews.com/article/dowd-msnbc-kirk-comments-e08f349022c9d69171cd575664141075

[Anonymous]

Your 1A right is protected, but your job isn’t.

https://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/2025/09/12/carolina-panthers-charlie-rock-charlie-kirk-post-what-it-said/86112231007/

[Anonymous]

Another victim of stupidity.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/2025/09/12/charlie-kirk-nashville-emergency-communications-employee-suspended/86109548007/

[Anonymous]

Once you post it, you lose control over it.

https://www.kvue.com/article/news/local/marble-falls-staff-firing-social-media-charlie-kirk/269-013eec07-d61c-4159-a40b-fdd210996bf8

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to be careful here, too.

Your IP address is attached to every post you write here. Jeff has said he saves this info. If he received a subpoena, he will have to give that up. Then, poof, a lawyer or whoever has all your info.

This is not quite correct. A lawyer can subpoena the IP address of a specific post. That does not provide "all your info". It provides an IP address which doesn't really reveal anything. The lawyer would have to get another subpoena for whatever entity provided the IP address (telecom, ISP, company, etc.) and get them to reveal who was using the IP address at that the specific time of the post. In most cases, whatever entity that is will notify you, at least if you are their customer, about the subpoena and you will have the right to contest it. If the subpoena is overly broad, you can easily quash it.

To get the subpoena in the first place wouldn’t they need to suspect you of a crime?

Lacking empathy or compassion is not a crime.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to be careful here, too.

Your IP address is attached to every post you write here. Jeff has said he saves this info. If he received a subpoena, he will have to give that up. Then, poof, a lawyer or whoever has all your info.

This is not quite correct. A lawyer can subpoena the IP address of a specific post. That does not provide "all your info". It provides an IP address which doesn't really reveal anything. The lawyer would have to get another subpoena for whatever entity provided the IP address (telecom, ISP, company, etc.) and get them to reveal who was using the IP address at that the specific time of the post. In most cases, whatever entity that is will notify you, at least if you are their customer, about the subpoena and you will have the right to contest it. If the subpoena is overly broad, you can easily quash it.

To get the subpoena in the first place wouldn’t they need to suspect you of a crime?

Lacking empathy or compassion is not a crime.

They need to convince a judge. Being rude about Charlie Kirk is probably not enough.