Punishing people who trivialize or downplay Charlie Kirk's death

[Lord of Planar]

That false accusation has nothing to do with why tRump demanded that ABC fire him. Stop making shit up.

Did the president demand it? What I read in I think an Esquire article, they choose to do that themselves before any retribution, due to pending lawsuits of other corporations that the president has filed.

What Kimbell did was in poor taste following an assassination. ABC probably was not happy and may have 100% pulled him on their own.

 

[Phys251]

Did the president demand it? What I read in I think an Esquire article, they choose to do that themselves before any retribution, due to pending lawsuits of other corporations that the president has filed.

What Kimbell did was in poor taste following an assassination. ABC probably was not happy and may have 100% pulled him on their own.

Wrong. Again. The FCC lead pressured ABC. This was a politically-motivated firing--a flagrant violation of Kimmel's First Amendment rights.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Wrong. Again. The FCC lead pressured ABC. This was a politically-motivated firing--a flagrant violation of Kimmel's First Amendment rights.

Pressure is not demanding. We really do not have a front row seat here. I doubt it took much pressure considering what Kimmal did. If you think what he did was OK, then you are part of this nations problem.

 

[Gardener]

ttwtt78640 said:
Yes - people who celebrate or condone the assassination of anyone should expect consequences.


Post #101


Good catch. It will be interesting to see how (or whether) @ttwtt78640 answers this question.

Not a good catch - a false equivalency.

She conflates words with actions because she considers murdering people over their words to be justified.

 

[Phys251]

Pressure is not demanding. We really do not have a front row seat here.

The evidence is clear. Your "la la can't hear you" game is not working.

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/09/18/media/brendan-carr-jimmy-kimmel-fcc-first-amendment

I doubt it took much pressure considering what Kimmal did. If you think what he did was OK, then you are part of this nations problem.

That's rich coming from someone who condones fascism!

 

[Lord of Planar]

OK, it was more forceful than I though. If what I read is to be believed:

​

Chairman Carr confirms the agency has a “strong case” to hold Kimmel, ABC, and Disney accountable for spreading dangerous, politically motivated misinformation.​

​

"This is a very, very serious issue right now for Disney. We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to take action on Kimmel or there is going to be additional work for the FCC ahead." ​

​

"They have a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest."​

​

"There are calls for Kimmel to be fired. I think you could certainly see a path forward for suspension over this."​

​

"The FCC could make a strong argument that this is sort of an intentional effort to mislead the American people about a very core fundamental fact, a very important matter."​

​

"Disney needs to see some change here, but the individual licensed stations that are taking their content, it's time for them to step up and say this, you know, garbage to the extent that that's what comes down the pipe in the future isn't something that we think serves the needs of our local communities. But, but this sort of status quo is obviously not, not acceptable where we are."​

I can agree with this position. The big three do fall under broadcast laws.

That was on X, so I cannot vouch for its accuracy.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Why do you libtards defend lying so much?

 

[Phys251]

OK, it was more forceful than I though. If what I read is to be believed:

​

Chairman Carr confirms the agency has a “strong case” to hold Kimmel, ABC, and Disney accountable for spreading dangerous, politically motivated misinformation.​

​

"This is a very, very serious issue right now for Disney. We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to take action on Kimmel or there is going to be additional work for the FCC ahead." ​

​

"They have a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest."​

​

"There are calls for Kimmel to be fired. I think you could certainly see a path forward for suspension over this."​

​

"The FCC could make a strong argument that this is sort of an intentional effort to mislead the American people about a very core fundamental fact, a very important matter."​

​

"Disney needs to see some change here, but the individual licensed stations that are taking their content, it's time for them to step up and say this, you know, garbage to the extent that that's what comes down the pipe in the future isn't something that we think serves the needs of our local communities. But, but this sort of status quo is obviously not, not acceptable where we are."​

I can agree with this position. The big three do fall under broadcast laws.

That was on X, so I cannot vouch for its accuracy.

Your response is not clear. Are you supporting what ABC did despite what the FCC chair said?

Why do you libtards defend lying so much?

Which "libtards"? Name them.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Your response is not clear. Are you supporting what ABC did despite what the FCC chair said?



Which "libtards"? Name them.

Kimbell used edited video. Granted, it was meant as a joke, but technology makes these things look real.

regardless. Call it what you will. ABC folded, effectively acknowledging that are part of the fake media.

Our president is not playing any games. Her is correctly calling out the media for deceit.

Do you support deceit and deception?

 

[Phys251]

Kimbell used edited video. Granted, it was meant as a joke, but technology makes these things look real.

regardless. Call it what you will. ABC folded, effectively acknowledging that are part of the fake media.

Our president is not playing any games. Her is correctly calling out the media for deceit.

So you admit that tRump pressured Kimmel to be fired. That's quite a shift from earlier.

Do you support deceit and deception?

"When will you stop beating your wife?"

 

[Lord of Planar]

So you admit that tRump pressured Kimmel to be fired. That's quite a shift from earlier.

The term I read being used was "hiatus." I suspect he is only on hold until some acceptable ground rules are established. he is popular. You will likely see him again.

"When will you stop beating your wife?"

When will you stop talking into the mirror?

 

[Phys251]

The term I read being used was "hiatus." I suspect he is only on hold until some acceptable ground rules are established. he is popular. You will likely see him again.

Backing down and hedging your bets, I see.

When will you stop talking into the mirror?

Another stupid question by you. Keep 'em coming.

 

[roguenuke]

Kimbell used edited video. Granted, it was meant as a joke, but technology makes these things look real.

regardless. Call it what you will. ABC folded, effectively acknowledging that are part of the fake media.

Our president is not playing any games. Her is correctly calling out the media for deceit.

Do you support deceit and deception?

What are you talking about? What videos had anything whatsoever to do with what Kimmel said in relation to what happened to Kirk?

 

[Lord of Planar]

What are you talking about? What videos had anything whatsoever to do with what Kimmel said in relation to what happened to Kirk?

Did you watch what was aired? He slandered the president also in the process. Video was edited to do the slandering.

 

[roguenuke]

Did you watch what was aired? He slandered the president also in the process. Video was edited to do the slandering.

Yes, I watched it and he at no time slandered anyone. You are repeating nonsense.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Yes, I watched it and he at no time slandered anyone. You are repeating nonsense.

The video asking the president was faked.

 

[roguenuke]

The video asking the president was faked.

If it was, it wasn't faked by Kimmel. But I will ask you to prove it. I've seen several places show that video.

Doesn't look fake to me.



Several sources show same video.

Trump, 79, Ignores Charlie Kirk Question to Brag About WH Ballroom

Donald Trump seemed to have something else on his mind when a reporter asked him how he was “holding up” after the shooting death of his friend Charlie Kirk. The president was asked about how his “last three and a half days” have been on a personal level in the aftermath of Kirk’s death, as the...

www.yahoo.com

So where do I find info about it being fake? I'm seriously asking because I can't even find that on Fox or other pro-MAGA networks.

 

[Mulefoot]

Via government regulation if necessary. Unless the speech is anti employer (i.e. I work at ABC and they suck kinds of things) or the employee is a very high profile person - CEO, celebrity etc - virtually no one gives a shit what j random cog says. My pointing out on social media that in my view President Trump is a traitor and a felon, or that former President Biden is a senile old man who doesn't belong anywhere near the nuclear codes does not affect my employer in any way, shape or form. Neither would my saying the world is better off with Charlie Kirk. All this is is an exercise in screwing over people you (not you specifically - generally) don't agree with. It's disgusting and anti free speech.

Government and government agencies forcing employers to tolerate online folks that could very possibly come back to image problems is a no for me. For large corporation where renegade employees are relatively detached business operations maybe. But over 99% of business are considered small, and most in small towns where all of this political crap divides viewers minds and harms not only the creator of the social media post, but often his family and employer as well.

The ability to hire/fire helps encourages civility, where today's politics encourages nothing but division.

 

[Best_Grampy]

Let's talk real world here. Unless the person is the CEO or a celebrity spokesperson nothing anyone says on social media is going to cause a company to lose customers.

That's not true. Look up Justine Sacco and how one of her tweets went viral and her company IAC (InterActiveCorp) suffered for it. Look up GoDaddy and the employee email that cost them business. A more recent episode involves an Office Depot employee who refused to print a Charlie Kirk vigil poster, calling it "propaganda." (And, yes, this happened on social media because, he was on video).

It happens more than you know.

 

[Lord of Planar]

If it was, it wasn't faked by Kimmel. But I will ask you to prove it. I've seen several places show that video.

Doesn't look fake to me.



Several sources show same video.

Trump, 79, Ignores Charlie Kirk Question to Brag About WH Ballroom

Donald Trump seemed to have something else on his mind when a reporter asked him how he was “holding up” after the shooting death of his friend Charlie Kirk. The president was asked about how his “last three and a half days” have been on a personal level in the aftermath of Kirk’s death, as the...

www.yahoo.com

So where do I find info about it being fake? I'm seriously asking because I can't even find that on Fox or other pro-MAGA networks.

That is a real video, but Kimmel puts an question in front of it, that was not part of the dialog with the president. They made it look like he gave that answer to a different question.

It is technically editing.

 

[Phys251]

That is a real video, but Kimmel puts an question in front of it, that was not part of the dialog with the president. They made it look like he gave that answer to a different question.

It is technically editing.

Editing is not faking, as you insinuated, and Kimmel sure as hell didn't slander the president. That's fascist talk.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Editing is not faking, as you insinuated, and Kimmel sure as hell didn't slander the president. That's fascist talk.

It creates a fake impression when you spice two different conversations together.

 

[Phys251]

It creates a fake impression when you spice two different conversations together.

You didn't disprove the "slander." And show that there was editing done.

 

[Lord of Planar]

You didn't disprove the "slander." And show that there was editing done.

Deny it all you want.

 

[Phys251]

Deny it all you want.

Where's your proof that there was editing done? Let's see it?