https://instagr.am/p/DOn06fIDRuY

SmaptyWolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Why are we now attacking the guy who got assassinated? HE DIDNT DESERVE TO BE ASSASSINATED. who cares if he had some opinions that were provocative.

---

MAGA, and you for that matter, seem desperate to use Kirk's assassination as a referendum on "the left", when it's cartoonishly obvious that Trump and MAGA are like a volcano of divisive bile that erupted in this country. Pointing out that Kirk actually contributed to that divisive bile isn't saying anything about what he deserved.

Of course the way Trump talks gives you a chuckle, so sorry if it's hard to take you seriously on this topic.

---

Smapty, the guy got assassinated. This is not the time for whataboutism. The time is to decide if this is going to be acceptable or not going forward. For me, it's not acceptable, so I start with the current group that seems to have fanned the flames of this assassination. That house needs to be cleaned first. When that house is cleaned, we can look at the right side of the political spectrum.

Right or wrong, that's how I see things. And frankly, those of us who are not on the extreme left or right of the political spectrum also see it that way.

So, write your congressman, write your senator, and tell them to treat everyone like human beings and not avatars for evil. When that happens, it will change the perspective of the right as well.

Civilized said:

---

jkpackfan said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

jkpackfan said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

As in a lot of these IG posts, this is a video (click within the post to play).

They are using this RINO Governor to try to convince conservatives that this Robinson patsy is "the real assassin".

https://instagr.am/p/DOmIzpbE6Cz

---

Inflammatory my a$$, he said nothing worse than what democrat politicians say on a weekly basis.

---

Charlie Kirk spoke truth. The problem is, some people can't handle the truth. Now, he also gave every person an opportunity to express themself, which they did. Unfortunately, when truth hits you in the face, all one can do is an ad hominem attack.

---

Kirk touched on difficult topics. He did not bow to political correctness. He was a proponent of debate and discourse. He also sometimes said some inflammatory and insensitive and occasionally even gratuitously unkind *****

We're playing make-believe if we don't acknowledge all of those realities.

---

Absolute garbage.

How's the Nick Fuentes rabbit hole going? Think you got it figured out?

---

Wait you think Kirk didn't say gratuitously unkind things?

---

Kirk was just doing his duty. Sinners gotta be told they're sinners. Given their ultimate destination, it'd be unkind not to tell them.

hokiewolf said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Why are we now attacking the guy who got assassinated? HE DIDNT DESERVE TO BE ASSASSINATED. who cares if he had some opinions that were provocative.

---

MAGA, and you for that matter, seem desperate to use Kirk's assassination as a referendum on "the left", when it's cartoonishly obvious that Trump and MAGA are like a volcano of divisive bile that erupted in this country. Pointing out that Kirk actually contributed to that divisive bile isn't saying anything about what he deserved.

Of course the way Trump talks gives you a chuckle, so sorry if it's hard to take you seriously on this topic.

---

Smapty, the guy got assassinated. This is not the time for whataboutism. The time is to decide if this is going to be acceptable or not going forward. For me, it's not acceptable, so I start with the current group that seems to have fanned the flames of this assassination. That house needs to be cleaned first. When that house is cleaned, we can look at the right side of the political spectrum.

Right or wrong, that's how I see things. And frankly, those of us who are not on the extreme left or right of the political spectrum also see it that way.

So, write your congressman, write your senator, and tell them to treat everyone like human beings and not avatars for evil. When that happens, it will change the perspective of the right as well.

---

So a few months ago when the a Dem State Speaker of the House and her husband were assassinated, that wasn't the time to decide if this is going to be acceptable or not going forward? Funny how that works.

Anyway, thanks for the gaslighting. If you think it's "the other side's" job to stop being unhappy with MAGA for attempting an authoritarian takeover of the country, then I guess you better get used to disappointment. You made the weather, and now you're crying that it's raining. Sorry, man, cry me a river. But it's still not clear that had anything to do with Kirk's assassination, despite you playing along and "feeling" like its true.

For the record, you most certainly don't speak for "the middle" of this country. I'm sure you "feel" like you do, though. That's how propaganda works. And MAGA is definitely not going to let this incident go to waste.

SmaptyWolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Why are we now attacking the guy who got assassinated? HE DIDNT DESERVE TO BE ASSASSINATED. who cares if he had some opinions that were provocative.

---

MAGA, and you for that matter, seem desperate to use Kirk's assassination as a referendum on "the left", when it's cartoonishly obvious that Trump and MAGA are like a volcano of divisive bile that erupted in this country. Pointing out that Kirk actually contributed to that divisive bile isn't saying anything about what he deserved.

Of course the way Trump talks gives you a chuckle, so sorry if it's hard to take you seriously on this topic.

---

Smapty, the guy got assassinated. This is not the time for whataboutism. The time is to decide if this is going to be acceptable or not going forward. For me, it's not acceptable, so I start with the current group that seems to have fanned the flames of this assassination. That house needs to be cleaned first. When that house is cleaned, we can look at the right side of the political spectrum.

Right or wrong, that's how I see things. And frankly, those of us who are not on the extreme left or right of the political spectrum also see it that way.

So, write your congressman, write your senator, and tell them to treat everyone like human beings and not avatars for evil. When that happens, it will change the perspective of the right as well.

---

So a few months ago when the a Dem State Speaker of the House and her husband were assassinated, that wasn't the time to decide if this is going to be acceptable or not going forward? Funny how that works.

Anyway, thanks for the gaslighting. If you think it's "the other side's" job to stop being unhappy with MAGA for attempting an authoritarian takeover of the country, then I guess you better get used to disappointment. You made the weather, and now you're crying that it's raining. Sorry, man, cry me a river. But it's still not clear that had anything to do with Kirk's assassination, despite you playing along and "feeling" like its true.

For the record, you most certainly don't speak for "the middle" of this country. I'm sure you "feel" like you do, though. That's how propaganda works. And MAGA is definitely not going to let this incident go to waste.

---

Again, the time for whataboutism should end. It's up to all of us to change the discourse.

hokiewolf said:

---

Why are we now attacking the guy who got assassinated? HE DIDNT DESERVE TO BE ASSASSINATED. who cares if he had some opinions that were provocative.

---

Nobody is attacking anybody, don't be dramatic.

Nobody (that's not actual Hitler) deserves to be assassinated, that 100% goes without saying but I've also explicitly said it on here multiple times and I'll say it yet again to be clear.

Charlie Kirk obviously did not deserve to be assassinated.

We're evidently making-believe on here that he wasn't even provocative or sometimes insulting and that he "just spoke the truth," which was what I was responding to.

.

Nairo said:

---

https://www.vice.com/en/article/yep-one-third-of-the-internet-is-just-bots-now/

---

Literally every time you come to the WC you try to sow disbelief? Do you have anything to say on the CK assassination?

The left is so unhinged that when there actually is political violence against the left it's by another leftist.

Shapiro 's house got fire Bombed by another leftist because he was a Jew and didn't "support Palestine"… and yet the media and democrats lump this in while trying to gaslight the public .

Moderate conservatives have always rebuked any fringe far right groups … Moderate democrats however very rarely if ever rebuke their far left extremism because they are cowards . They fear the far left will cancel them and they need that far left crazy element to win primaries.

90% of the country in silent polling is against biological men competing in women's sports however very few democrats will state that position in public because they are scared to tell the truth . The far left owns the Democratic Party .

Civilized said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Why are we now attacking the guy who got assassinated? HE DIDNT DESERVE TO BE ASSASSINATED. who cares if he had some opinions that were provocative.

---

Nobody is attacking anybody, don't be dramatic.

Nobody (that's not actual Hitler) deserves to be assassinated, that 100% goes without saying but I've also explicitly said it on here multiple times and I'll say it yet again to be clear.

Charlie Kirk obviously did not deserve to be assassinated.

We're evidently making-believe on here that he wasn't even provocative or sometimes insulting and that he "just spoke the truth," which was what I was responding to.

---

Well thank you. At least you are now saying CK was assassinated.

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Nairo said:

---

https://www.vice.com/en/article/yep-one-third-of-the-internet-is-just-bots-now/

---

Literally every time you come to thecWC you try to sow disbelief? Do you have anything to say on the CK assassination?

---

What does trying to sow disbelief mean?

He's obviously pointing out that we shouldn't all become so involved and emotionally invested in. and reactive to, social media, especially at times like this.

It's not good for the conversation or for our mental health and frankly largely just isn't real life.

Bas2020 said:

---

The left is so unhinged that when there actually is political violence against the left it's by another leftist.

Shapiro 's house got fire Bombed by another leftist because he was a Jew and didn't "support Palestine"… and yet the media and democrats lump this in while trying to gaslight the public .

---

It's going to be interesting to watch the far left radicals go after the old school democrats.

18,000 New Chapters Apply Overnight After Erika Kirk's Speech
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2025/09/14/18000-new-chapters-apply-overnight-after-erika-kirks-speech-n2663310

Charlie Kirk had 1.7 million followers on IG before his death. As of now, he has over 11 million followers and counting.

They created an army of Charlie Kirk.

We are Charlie. pic.twitter.com/CHE854Nf2a

— Dr. Clown, PhD (@DrClownPhD) September 13, 2025

Bas2020 said:

---

The left is so unhinged that when there actually is political violence against the left it's by another leftist.

Shapiro 's house got fire Bombed by another leftist because he was a Jew and didn't "support Palestine"… and yet the media and democrats lump this in while trying to gaslight the public .

Moderate conservatives have always rebuked any fringe far right groups … Moderate democrats however very rarely if ever rebuke their far left extremism because they are cowards . They fear the far left will cancel them and they need that far left crazy element to win primaries.

90% of the country in silent polling is against biological men competing in women's sports however very few democrats will state that position in public because they are scared to tell the truth . The far left owns the Democratic Party .

---

Give us some examples of far left extremism that you wanted to see a rebuke for, but didn't get, from moderate democrats.

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Bas2020 said:

---

The left is so unhinged that when there actually is political violence against the left it's by another leftist.

Shapiro 's house got fire Bombed by another leftist because he was a Jew and didn't "support Palestine"… and yet the media and democrats lump this in while trying to gaslight the public .

---

It's going to be interesting to watch the far left radicals go after the old school democrats.

---

They won't. It's a symbiotic relationship where I really don't believe one likes or trusts the other but they also realize that if they go against each other it won't end well for either, so it all continues. That's why Dems do not condemn anything they do. Hell, Kamala was bailing them out of jail in 2020. The less radical Dems know they need the crazy part of their party to ever win a primary. The radicals realize if they attack the hand that feeds them and both moderate Dems and GOP goes after the radical left, they are cooked. It's a pretty gross state of politics.

That’s it. Now Clemson faculty is inciting violence against conservatives. It’s time for a special session to end this.

Defund Clemson
End Tenure at State colleges
The senate must pass H 3927 https://t.co/ZDPQrN5U7t

— Jordan Pace (@Jscottpace) September 12, 2025

BREAKING: Michael Rex, a queer theory professor at Cumberland University has been FIRED after he posted vile messages celebrating Charlie’s m*rder

FAFO https://t.co/S9TZRuV6OM pic.twitter.com/rnuX9rXuzw

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) September 12, 2025

This is who #Sieve and #Nappy are....and their side.

BREAKING 🚨 The Assistant Dean of Students at MTSU has been FIRED effective immediately after she celebrated Charlie Kirk passing away

THERE IS MORE TO COME

GOOD RIDDANCE pic.twitter.com/hftqdiosuB

— MAGA Voice (@MAGAVoice) September 11, 2025

🚨 BREAKING: The Carolina Panthers have FIRED their Communications Coordinator after he celebrated the assasslnation of Charlie Kirk on social media

The unemployment line is getting LONG today! 🔥 pic.twitter.com/LU8SeBQT2v

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) September 11, 2025

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Nairo said:

---

https://www.vice.com/en/article/yep-one-third-of-the-internet-is-just-bots-now/

---

Literally every time you come to thecWC you try to sow disbelief? Do you have anything to say on the CK assassination?

---

What does trying to sow disbelief mean?

---

From google: To sow disbelief means to intentionally cause doubt or an inability to believe in something

Civ, I would like to reposed to your assertions about Charlie being a divisive and inflammatory person. Perhaps you are saying some of his words are that, and he, personally, is not.

No, I do not think he and/or anything he has said is that. Now, if you would, please provide me an example, from "HIS" program (meaning, not a snippet from MSM) with several minutes prior and after, what you think is an inflammatory comment.

Hopefully, you and I can have a constructive conversation. Perhaps, we may even agree...

Cthepack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Nairo said:

---

https://www.vice.com/en/article/yep-one-third-of-the-internet-is-just-bots-now/

---

Literally every time you come to thecWC you try to sow disbelief? Do you have anything to say on the CK assassination?

---

What does trying to sow disbelief mean?

---

From google: To sow disbelief means to intentionally cause doubt or an inability to believe in something

---

Thanks man.

Yes.

I meant what exactly is he trying to sow disbelief in?

Civilized said:

---

Cthepack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Nairo said:

---

https://www.vice.com/en/article/yep-one-third-of-the-internet-is-just-bots-now/

---

Literally every time you come to thecWC you try to sow disbelief? Do you have anything to say on the CK assassination?

---

What does trying to sow disbelief mean?

---

From google: To sow disbelief means to intentionally cause doubt or an inability to believe in something

---

Thanks man.

Yes.

I meant what exactly is he trying to sow disbelief in?

---

Civ, from my perspective, that article has "some" merit. What results are all these bots causing, heck... I don't know...

FEMA execs cheered Charlie’s murder https://t.co/8cFC2iuZJh

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 14, 2025

Werewolf said:

---

🚨 BREAKING: The Carolina Panthers have FIRED their Communications Coordinator after he celebrated the assasslnation of Charlie Kirk on social media

The unemployment line is getting LONG today! 🔥 pic.twitter.com/LU8SeBQT2v

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) September 11, 2025

---

Lol, but is he wrong? After a bunch of kids were gunned down in a school, Kirk did say that it was worth it to have these gun deaths in order to have a 2nd Amendment, it's a "prudent deal". I guess maybe he meant not his death?

So now you want to fire everyone in the country that says things just as tasteless as Charlie Kirk did? After years of howling about demons like Alex Jones being kicked off of Facebook. Of course you do.

it's up to the employers.......i personally would fire them so i am happy to see your side silenced ....as i have been silenced in the past on Facebook and Twitter.

i actually oppose Trump's flag burning opinion. i view it as free expression.

by the way, where do you think all the podcasts that are presently on rumble.com coming from tell you where they're coming from; they're coming from being de-platformed by YouTube. What were they podcasting about on YouTube? You most likely won't ask. I'll tell you. They were podcasting about the pandemic virus being transmissible after any vaccination as a virus will mutate under pressure. They were podcasting about the bogus PCR test, they were broadcasting about the dangers of the Covid jabs. Seems like that might have helped You make a wiser decision, but it wasn't available to you.

I'll tell you what else is discussed on Rumble platforms; it's that stolen elections having occurred across the entire globe to the tune of 72 countries, including the United States. They podcast about human trafficking and particular child trafficking. And one of your Favs, J6, is another topic where real truth is freely discussed. Why have they been silenced by YouTube?

caryking said:

---

Civ, I would like to reposed to your assertions about Charlie being a divisive and inflammatory person. Perhaps you are saying some of his words are that, and he, personally, is not.

No, I do not think he and/or anything he has said is that. Now, if you would, please provide me an example, from "HIS" program (meaning, not a snippet from MSM) with several minutes prior and after, what you think is an inflammatory comment.

Hopefully, you and I can have a constructive conversation. Perhaps, we may even agree...

---

I encourage you to take the time to do what you're asking me to do. I already took time to pull these quotes from clips myself. If you think there's any way to contextualize them so they're not offensive, you're welcome to make that case.

Personally, I don't think there's any context you could put these quotes in that makes them inoffensive. And the irony is that you're doing something Kirk himself didn't even do. He wanted the shocking, rhetoric-laced viral clip, not a deeper conversation on policy.

Quote:

---

"prowling Blacks go around for fun to target white people."

"[Prominent black women] do not have the brain processing power to be taken really seriously...You had to go steal a steal a white person's slot to be taken somewhat seriously"

"The southern border is of course the great replacement. They're trying to replace us demographically. They're trying to make the country less white. It is an anti-white agenda."

"If I see a black pilot, I'm going to be like 'Boy, I hope he's qualified'"

"When blacks in America did not have the same rights as they have today, they were less murderous. There were less break-ins."

"We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the1960's."

"The Cowboys are so easy to hate. Why is every Cowboys fan like a 5 foot 6 Mexican with long jean shorts?"

---

Spencer Cox would not say these things. In any context. And that's not out of some misplaced sense of political correctness. It's because there's no context in which you could say these things this way, where they wouldn't be offensive and divisive.

If you want to have a serious conversation about poverty, crime in the black community, DEI, immigration, the Civil Rights Act, or anything else, there's a considerate way to do it. Kirk often chose the inconsiderate way and that's not on anybody else. That's on him. He wanted to be provocative to get that viral clip.

He had his reasons for doing it, but let's not act like it's not what he was doing.

I love how lying civ uses "prominent black women" instead of the specific women he was talking about. Typical lying civ. A propagandist. An "inconsiderate" person.

J. D. Vance hosted Charlie Kirk's radio show and podcast today. The last 14 minutes is a must listen. It starts at about 1:52.00 of the podcast and he shames the hard left for their stance and disgusting actions after the assassination. And yes he backs it up with facts.

God Bless Charlie Kirk for what he dared to talk about. He was murdered because he was a Christian and spoke the words of God.

https://rumble.com/v6yziuy-vice-president-jd-vance-remembers-charlie-kirk-miller-tucker-rfk-jr.-wiles-.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp_a

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civ, I would like to reposed to your assertions about Charlie being a divisive and inflammatory person. Perhaps you are saying some of his words are that, and he, personally, is not.

No, I do not think he and/or anything he has said is that. Now, if you would, please provide me an example, from "HIS" program (meaning, not a snippet from MSM) with several minutes prior and after, what you think is an inflammatory comment.

Hopefully, you and I can have a constructive conversation. Perhaps, we may even agree...

---

I encourage you to take the time to do what you're asking me to do. I already took time to pull these quotes from clips myself. If you think there's any way to contextualize them so they're not offensive, you're welcome to make that case.

Personally, I don't think there's any context you could put these quotes in that makes them inoffensive. And the irony is that you're doing something Kirk himself didn't even do. He wanted the shocking, rhetoric-laced viral clip, not a deeper conversation on policy.

Quote:

---

"prowling Blacks go around for fun to target white people."

"[Prominent black women] do not have the brain processing power to be taken really seriously...You had to go steal a steal a white person's slot to be taken somewhat seriously"

"The southern border is of course the great replacement. They're trying to replace us demographically. They're trying to make the country less white. It is an anti-white agenda."

"If I see a black pilot, I'm going to be like 'Boy, I hope he's qualified'"

"When blacks in America did not have the same rights as they have today, they were less murderous. There were less break-ins."

"We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the1960's."

"The Cowboys are so easy to hate. Why is every Cowboys fan like a 5 foot 6 Mexican with long jean shorts?"

---

Spencer Cox would not say these things. In any context. And that's not out of some misplaced sense of political correctness. It's because there's no context in which you could say these things this way, where they wouldn't be offensive and divisive.

If you want to have a serious conversation about poverty, crime in the black community, DEI, immigration, the Civil Rights Act, or anything else, there's a considerate way to do it. Kirk often chose the inconsiderate way and that's not on anybody else. That's on him. He wanted to be provocative to get that viral clip.

He had his reasons for doing it, but let's not act like it's not what he was doing.

---

Civ, those comments have "zero"context. Yes, everything has a context. Where did you get the quotes?

BTW, I have long been a person that didn't agree with the Civil Rights act. So, why? The following text, in the constitution has meaning; yet, no power:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

I've done an extensive amount of studying on this. This part, lays out the guidelines for the following enumerated powers, of Congress. If the "General Welfare" had power, then, we would have no need for any of the following enumerated powers, as this would be all inclusive,

General Welfare, in this preamble, essentially says: all laws passed by Congress shall be General in nature and not specific. That is why I don't support the Civil Rights Act. Now, I'm not saying that good intentions were trying to be thought out; rather, I'm saying that its. not constitutional.

#Sieve and #Nappy, does this offend you?

🔥🚨BREAKING: A Massive crowd of people were spotted ‘giving their life to Jesus’ in downtown San Diego. pic.twitter.com/YGOM1kBu1a

— Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives (@dom_lucre) September 15, 2025

pic.twitter.com/h3zX5GzZd5

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 15, 2025

pic.twitter.com/yNZrWfANyq

— The Clown Whisperer (@Whisper2Clowns) September 15, 2025

There have been hundreds of memorials across the country vandalized pertaining to Kirks death . The tolerant left strikes again .

I think the Free Expression tunnel was even one .

These folks are mentally sick . Why would anybody want to be associated as a Democrat moving forward ?

Bas2020 said:

---

There have been hundreds of memorials across the country vandalized pertaining to Kirks death . The tolerant left strikes again .

I think the Free Expression tunnel was even one .

These folks are mentally sick . Why would anybody want to be associated as a Democrat moving forward ?

---

Anyone sane and decent and yet who thinks themselves a Democrat, may not yet have come to the realization that the Party of Harry Truman and JFK is quite dead.