Disney's ABC pulls 'Jimmy Kimmel Live!' after FCC chair criticizes the host's Charlie Kirk comments
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Disney's ABC said "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" "will be will be pre-empted indefinitely," a spokesperson confirmed to NBC News, after the late night host's Monday monologue about conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
Kirk, co-founder of Turning Point USA, was giving a presentation at Utah Valley University when he was fatally shot last week.
During his monologue Monday, Kimmel raised the possibility that the alleged assassin Tyler Robinson might have been a pro-Trump Republican.
“The MAGA Gang (is) desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said.
On Wednesday, Federal Communications Commission chair Brendan Carr threatened to “take action” against Disney and ABC over the comments.
Nextstar Media Group, Inc. announced that the company’s ABC affiliates will preempt “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” for the foreseeable future beginning with tonight’s show.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Tags
Who is online
90 visitors
Kimmel blatantly lied and finally got what he deserved.
Robinson was hardly anyone from the right. He murdered Kirk because he openly stated that he hated Kirk's ideology and the things he accomplished.
Robinson regardless of political ideology waited 31 minutes until Kirk went on the "mass shooters/transgenders" conspiracy theory and stupid answers with a student.
That apparently "triggered" Robinson. Thankfully, Robinson had no intention of being one of those trannie loving "mass shooters", Kirk opined about.
Kimmel expressed his opinions. is he fired? Is that what we have come to already? RT?
Kirk's assassination was wrong, there is no excuse, but it did not affect democracy.
Kimmel's net worth of $50 million is just as unjustifiable as Kirk's $12million. Neither has accomplished anything that I can see.
You mean Robinson could hear what was being said from where he was? You mean he brought a rifle to the roof but was still unsure of what he was going to do?
Kimmel expressed his opinions. is he fired? Is that what we have come to already?
Kimmel had every right to speak, and his employers had every right to fire him.
Neither has accomplished anything that I can see.
Then you don't see.
For cause, so what is this cause? What he said was nothing out of the ordinary and was indeed factual.
They would best be able to answer that. Most likely it would be the company reputation.
What he said was nothing out of the ordinary and was indeed factual.
It was an absolute lie. Since you took it on, I challenge you to show how Robinson is coming from the right.
He irked the Trump administration. Just gives Colbert another friend.
I hear a pundit last night say: They had a choice to follow one of the Johns, either Carson or Stewart, and they chose Stewart.
That is not what Kimmel stated. Read your seed:
He said that the MAGA gang is doing what they can to ensure the assassin is not perceived as one of theirs and is simultaneously using Kirk's assassination to damage their political/ideological opponents.
Factually, demonstrably correct. Obviously correct. Blatantly even.
He did not say, in any way, that the assassin was part of 'the right'. And even if he had said that ... explicitly even ... that is not abnormal or extreme in any way for televised comedians.
Objectively, the likelihood that Trump pressured/threatened ABC to use this as an excuse to stifle (censor) Kimmel is quite high. Do you believe this is how a PotUS should be using his powers?
"One of them" is fairly standard English.
How can you wiggle out of that?
No need to wiggle, he used "one of them" in exactly the way it is meant: "one of the MAGA gang". So what does "as anything other than one of them" mean to you? It means NOT a member of the MAGA gang. Now, Vic, read the other words to get the meaning of the sentence.
Oh, he was defending the obvious! And that got him fired.
Even a debating team in law school wouldn't try to push that one.
Your tactic of ignoring the specifics and simply retorting 'nuh-uh' language illustrates that you know you have no argument here.
Truth is Fiction, don't cha'know.
Statements of fact are libel.
Don't talk about the free speech MAGA movement like we don't like or you will be canceled
Kimmel's words are clear:
How else can anyone interpret that?
The MAGA gang is desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than them.
IE : The MAGA gang is claiming he is not MAGA.
Of course he wasn't !!!!!
IE: Kimmel's implication: He was MAGA.
Well you are showing how someone can read words and totally misrepresent the meaning.
Correct! The MAGA gang is indeed claiming he was part of the "radical Left".
Where did you get this fabricated quote? I do not hear this in his monologue (start at 2:00).
The head of the FCC was a chief author of "Project 2025, and one of the core principles is
Project 2025's agenda for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) includes eliminating net neutrality regulations, reinterpreting Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to curb content moderation by tech companies, and shifting away from current broadband spending policies . The proposals are based on the controversial unitary executive theory, which would reduce the independence of the FCC and other federal agencies by placing them under greater presidential control.
I'm sorry, but the very freedom of speech that Kirk was supposed to be representing is now under threat from corporations, either by blocking mergers or other business practices. This was part of the master plan of "2025" and it is a threat to freedom of speech.
And for the record, even though I don't watch Jimmy Kimmel's show, I do support his right to say what he wants to say within the limits of the law. What he said, was not offensive to Kirk's family in any way, and didn't warrant this kind of response.
So, this would be an accurate statement.
Democrats are desperately trying to characterize the people that attacked the Capital as anything other than one of them.
Let’s use a far better example. The Ds and the Rs are both trying to distance themselves from this assassin.
Why do the Republicans need to do anything?
Remember "Democrats are desperately trying to characterize the people that attacked the Capital as anything other than one of them."
Imagine the heads exploding if someone like Tucker Carlson accused the Democrats of trying to score political points by doing that.
What a way a factually correct way to describe Jan 6th...
Why are you asking me such an obvious question?
Of course, neither party wants to be associated with this assassin.
And since you really, really want to go back to Jan 6th, those who broke and entered the Capitol were Trump supporters. Nobody (to my knowledge) even attempted to claim these were Ds. So what point are you (poorly) trying to make by going back to Jan 6th?
I think corporations have a right to decide what is good for their brand and who gets to work for them. They may have received a warning from the FCC, but they simply decided that Kimmel didn't make sense anymore. He wasn't funny and become no more than a political pundit hosting a show that was no longer entertaining.
And for the record, even though I don't watch Jimmy Kimmel's show, I do support his right to say what he wants to say within the limits of the law.
That is fair enough, but Kimmel was free to speak his mind. The network has rights as well.
Perrie, I believe there are far greater issues involved here.
The first one people on the left should have taken head of: "De mortuis nil nisi bonum."
The other is what the assassination has ignited worldwide. Have you noticed what is happening?
We saw a glimmer of it on Fox the other night:
Guttfield spoke for millions that night.
Because they're desperate to tie this to Democrats even though there is ZERO evidence this kid was a Democrat.
I don't remember that happening even though I was watching the news 24/7 at that time, probably because THERE WERE NO FUCKING DEMOCRATS ATTACKING THE CAPITAL ON JANUARY 6TH.
It's pretty fucking simple and likely didn't even need caps because it's so fucking obvious. Perhaps there were many former Southern Democrats who attacked the Capital that day, but they hadn't considered themselves 'Democrats' for decades. We know what party the old Southern conservatives who fought against the civil rights act and voting rights act belong to now, and it certainly isn't the party that authored those two laws, had a majority vote for and then had their parties President sign them into law. But those are all inconvenient truths for bigoted white Republicans to accept, and in their MAGAverse they've rewritten reality so it's always fun to find out what new deluded contorted excuse they'll use to defend their abject blatant bigotry next.
And from corporations who are spineless in the face of government censorship by a wannabe dictator and his minions.
a wannabe dictator and his minions.
hmm....
Absolutely but you talk to say a “union influenced goon” they will fight that most basic business tenent to the death.
He’s been hemorrhaging viewers for years. Less viewers, less advertising, fewer affiliates, less interest in keeping the show. I’m shocked ABC hung on as long as they did. It’s only rocket science to the triggered.
The point is the same as the bullshit Kimmel spewed, he knew he was framing a statement that was 100% wrong but, he still did it!
Have no idea if he's a Democrat but, he is not a Republican or Conservative..
Sucks to see a statement that is 100% false but, in context is true. Kinda like "do you still beat your wife".
What, specifically, was factually wrong in his statement? Point it out with direct quotes.
The only way Kimmel's statement makes sense is if you think MAGA killed Kirk.
A competent, honest reader operating in good faith cannot read that sentence as a whole and take any other meaning from it. It's simply impossible to believe Kimmel thinks MAGA pushing back against a fake narrative from the left is worse than pushing the fake narrative itself which is what his defenders have to pretend he meant. Only a complete idiot would claim that and Kimmel simply isn't that dumb. It's laughably dishonest and anyone who is hiding behind that fictive meaning is embarrassing themselves.
As the left wing pundit Nate Silver wrote, Kimmel is a victim of the left wing misinformation bubble
Kimmel makes me laugh and that ain't nuthin.
Please provide the links that show any "Desperation". Now tell me what was factually wrong with mine.
Do better than simply demanding people deliver links for you. Make an argument, provide some thoughtful analysis. Something of even slight value.
It is obvious that the Trump talking heads have been in full force denying that the assassin was affiliated with them in any way. Do your own research, it is real easy with Google and AI nowadays.
And, by the way, the assassin does not seem to be driven by partisan views or ideology. He appears to be driven by Kirk's views on homosexuality. But of course, both the Ds and Rs will continue to try to distance themselves from this murderer. Does that surprise you?
And yet, Trump was not suspended due to Harris's comment, was he? Nor did she attempt to use government to bring that about. So that's a false equivalence.
Twitter has rules about user conduct, and Trump repeatedly violated them.
Does Disney have rules against accurately describing conservatives' actions following Kirk's murder?
Well, ya gotta remember that Harris was only the VP whereas the Don woulda been her boss, eh?
Bosses have more power than their "minions".
Just sayin'
Is that supposed to be relevant at all?
Opinions are not of much value here.
Do you have a refutation, or are you just engaging in your usual trolling?
[deleted][✘]
Depends on who's reading it.
Really.......name some Democrats that have the same views as Kirk, then tell me again it wasn't partisan.
You do not see how an individual can be opposed to another person without it being partisan?? Do you truly believe that the only way for people to disagree is on partisan lines?
Good grief man, reality is far too complex and nuanced to base all decisions on whether someone has a D or an R on their sleeve.
My hypothesis is that the assassin was incensed by Kirk's stance on homosexuality and gender identity. That is a fine example of a specific dimension of disagreement that does not require the assassin or Kirk to be affiliated with any party.
What lie did he tell? MAGA has been trying to characterize the shooter as not being one of their own. That is factually accurate. They have been doing that since before the shooter was even arrested.
Also, what happened to free speech? The very thing that Kirk and his admirers claim to support.
They kinda did.
A threat is something.
But was any action done? If not then it's not a First Amendment violation. Carr could ask and threaten but it was Disney and ABC that pulled the plug. You're reaching here.
I didn't mention the First Amendment. I just said "free speech." However, I think you could possibly make a First Amendment argument under the Chilling Effect doctrine. In Baggett v Bullitt (1964), the Court opined, “the threat of sanctions may deter … almost as potently as the actual application of sanctions.” Clearly, here, the threat to "take action" motivated ABC to take the show off the air.
And that's the important point. The Right has railed against cancel culture, and claimed that their rights to express themselves religiously or politically are infringed by government rules or threats of legal action. Here, someone in government was offended by a line in Kimmel's monologue, and the government threatens legal action for it. Exactly zero people should support that threat, especially self-proclaimed conservatives.
He implied the killer was from the right and it is obvious that Robinson was of the left.
Also, what happened to free speech?
It is alive and well. Government didn't stop Kimmel. Kimmel's employer decided they had enough.
Lets ask Charilie Kirk...oh wait.
I'm not sure but I think you may have the wrong SCOTUS case for this. The case you mention deals with two Washington State laws which mandated loyalty oaths for teachers and all other state employees where the oath was vague and could interfere with their First Amendment rights.
Also...
I'm not sure how this ties into Jimmy Kimmel here as in the case you state, it was government employees who were being forced to take an oath by the state government. And the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting Free Speech. While one can argue that the FCC threatened, it was Disney that pulled the plug. In all the links on this SCOTUS case I searched I could not find any reference to that line of 'the threat of sanctions may defer'. I would love for you to post your source as I did not find it.
I'm all for free speech but as we both know, it is not an unlimited right. People bring up shouting fire in a theater all the time when talking about free speech. What most tend to miss is that you absolutely have the right to shout 'fire' in a crowded theater. If there is a fire you are performing a public service, if there is not a fire you will have to deal with the consequences of your act. In this case, Kimmel was spouting a lie that has been proven false several times. I think in this case it was more than just offended by a line, it was pushback against a lie that has the potential to further the partisan divide and potentially cause more violence.
The Democrat party (is) desperately trying to characterize the people who stormed the capital on Jan 6th as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it. So this would be accurate, and this is the way we should describe Jan 6th from here on out?
Why? Because he might be gay? Do you know that many gays voted for Trump? What other proof has there been?
And how quickly did the right try to tarnish Pelosi after his attack without proof. (That was a rhetorical question).
It is all over the place. Here's a small sample..
So the father was MAGA but evidence shows that Tyler was not right leaning. Another source..
While we don't have a clear motive yet (and probably won't ever get one) it does start to clear up that he was left-leaning in politics and hated Kirk because of his relationship with his transitioning girlfriend.
But he was definitely not rightwing in politics.
Even the Atlantic calls the idea that he was a right winger an outlandish conspiracy theory at this point. Which is ironic, since their own employee, Jemele Hill, helped spread it.
Unfortunately, the damage has been done and the widespread disinformation campaign by the left in the aftermath of the murder has left a significant number of people believing Robinson was a right winger, or that "there's conflicting evidence"
LMAO and you want to cry about lies.
Do I? Where?
So, are you suggesting MAGA wasn’t trying to characterize him as not being one of their own?
Actually, his mother confirmed that he had become radical:
"Tyler Robinson’s mother told investigators she had watched her son change dramatically in the year leading up to the Utah college shooting of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk.
Once a college scholarship recipient with a promising future, Robinson had "become more political," leaning left and supporting "pro-gay and trans rights," his mother said, according to court documents."
Mom of Charlie Kirk's alleged assassin describes radical shift in last year: 'More pro-gay and trans rights' | FOX 13 Tampa Bay
Vic,
Maybe to them, being "radical" is just being gay. I know of some families that would do it.
We actually don't know much about why he did what he did.
And it really doesn't matter. Freedom of speech does not prohibit lying, and I'm not saying that Kimmel is lying or not. It's just the idea that he can be silenced for talking.
And ironically, that was what Kirk supposedly stood against. Is it for me and not for thee?
Did Kimmel get arrested or hit with a gag order by an overzealous judge? Or did his employer simply decide the problems he caused were not justified by his audience size? Does he have some sort of right to have a corporation give him a national platform that I'm unaware of?
I fully support Kimmel's ability to lie and I'm sure he'll have a podcast where he can go full Olbermann to a few thousand dedicated fans soon enough.
This coming from a person who considers anyone to the left of him a "Leftist Radical"
Actually they have over 20 million subscribers to their you tube channel.
Sorry, but no. That is a false equivalency. His employer didn't say they did this for any other reason other than they were bullied, and worse is that the bully is the head of the FCC, who says they are not done yet.
This echoes what McCarthy did.
And Kirk is the one who can no longer speak. Kimmel on the other hand is still free to speak and may join the likes of Tucker Carlson and Bill O'Reilly.
As far as the motivation of Robinson goes, you may be right in that it no longer matters. Robinson ignited something worldwide. Thousands of people are mourning the death of Charlie Kirk and for the first time I'm sensing a lack of tolerance for the left's nasty rhetoric. I've been reading about demonstrations all over Europe. The government in France is falling, and it seems that western civilization has had it with the left. Your point is well taken. It isn't really necessary to define Robinson's motivation.
Can we ever leave me out of it?
1.2
You know that when they don't have an argument, they pathetically try to make it personal.
Not when your point of view is pertinent to the topic at hand.
In that comment, I didn’t “cry about lies,” as you put it. I asked what lie Kimmel told. I still haven’t seen an answer from anyone.
employer didn't say they did this for any other reason other than they were bullied
link please?
Ive provided sourcing to back my claims.
Which tells me you didn't read the article and are crying.
You don’t have an answer either.
Oh FFS. It's right there at the top of the page:
Which part of that was a lie? I saw lots of people on the Right, including the president, blaming this on the Left two days before the shooter was even identified. What Kimmel said was true.
ABSOLUTELY
Everything between the first "T" and the last "T"
I'll definitely need a link for that.
Colbert set a precedent with his "opinions", and they didn't sit well with advertisers, so he got the hook. After Kimmel's "empathy" exhibition, they were heading in the same direction, and we all know that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. They shut him off because THE AFFILIATES demanded it. NOT due to the FCC "bullying" bullshit that the left wants to inject into the discussion. He, and his show, got suspended. In fact, many ABC affiliates are going to use his slot for a memorial to Kirk today.
Kimmels steady viewership decline tells the whole story regardless of what anyone has or hasn’t said. It’s pretty basic stuff really.
Just repeating that you think there is a lie in there somewhere is not a logically persuasive argument.
Both parts are demonstrably true.
Can anyone on the right actually refute that statement?
The evidence supporting it? Don't have to look far...
Seems clear that Republicans have in fact been desperate to characterize this kid as not one of them.
I suppose the definition of "scoring political points" is more of an opinion, but its still an accurate description of how Republicans have acted since the shooting. It's clear they didn't want to learn the truth before leaping to the conclusion that this must be a "leftist" and that people should use this tragedy to try and convince voters to vote for Republicans. I saw several posts from Vic making that exact claim, that this should somehow prove voters should vote a straight Republican ticket in the midterms and if that's not an attempt to "score political points" I don't know what is.
Focus on the prefatory part of the sentence
"We hit some new lows over the weekend "
A competent, honest reader operating in good faith cannot read that sentence as a whole and take any meaning other than Kirk was killed by MAGA. It's simply impossible to believe Kimmel thinks MAGA pushing back against a fake narrative from the left is worse than pushing the fake narrative itself which is what his defenders have to pretend he meant. Only a complete idiot would claim that and Kimmel simply isn't that dumb. It's laughably dishonest and anyone who is hiding behind that fictive meaning is embarrassing themselves.
Once you accept that the shooter was not MAGA, the sentence makes no sense under the retrofitted meaning the left wing partisans are now desperately pushing
As the left wing pundit Nate Silver wrote, Kimmel is a victim of the left wing misinformation bubble that pushed the lie that the shooter was MAGA.
Oh, I see the problem. I'm talking in fact. You're not.
Funny what love can do to you.
The heart wants what the heart wants.
The Kirk killing wasn't political, it was personal.
Robinson was sick and tired of Kirk talking shit about his boyfriend /girlfriend.
At least it wasn't political until Trump and far right wing fascists made it so.
The level of parsing in pursuit of defending Trump is ridiculous.
Not only does Kimmel's statement NOT claim that the assassin is part of MAGA, but even if he had suggested that, this is nowhere near a level where a show would be suspended ... except in Trumpian times where we get to see that we are not as immune from authoritarian rule as we once thought we were. It is now quite obvious how easy it is —even in the USA— to surround oneself with spineless (incompetent) sycophants who will willingly cast principles and ethics aside to earn or keep favor with a wanna-be King.
This is a blatant use of government power to censor free speech. Amazing how (seemingly most) Trump supporters suddenly do not care about the 1st amendment.
What did Kirk say to Robinson's boyfriend to personalize it? I've not seen any reports they knew each other or interacted in any way.
It's called reading for meaning and it's not about Trump. It's about these blatantly dishonest attempts from the fringe left to alter the meaning of what Kimmel said to defend him.
ot only does Kimmel's statement NOT claim that the assassin is part of MAG
It's impossible to honestly make that claim, assuming the ability to read at a high school level.
Easy question TIG. Which is worse, creating a fact free conspiracy to falsely blame a political movement for murder, or pushing back against the conspiracy with the truth?
This is a blatant use of government power to censor free speech.
All Kimmel had to was promise to go on air and apologize, per his boss. Since he wouldn't, his bosses, not the government, decided to pull him from the air to prevent making the situation worse.
The government didn't actually do anything.
Trump supporters suddenly do not care about the 1st amendment.
Please. The same people who supported a Senator for President who was writing letters to twitter to get Trump banned now want to pretend to be first amendment supporters? Sure.
I'm more than happy to support legislation that removes any power from the FCC to regulate speech. Given their history Democrats definitely will not.
Just pathetic projection given you are here with pretzel logic trying on each post to misrepresent what Kimmel said.
wtf are you talking about...?
That is bazaar. Your line of thinking. I hope like me, U B DRINKIN
It's called reading the entire sentence and giving each part meaning. You pretend he didn't say "We hit some new lows over the weekend" referring to MAGA correctly denying the shooter wasn't MAGA.
If Kimmel's statement is factual, explain why MAGA truthfully denying a left wing conspiracy is worse than the left spreading a conspiracy?
The only way Kimmel's statement is coherent is if you accept the premise, namely the lie that the shooter was MAGA.
The pretending is all from you, Sean. You are connecting dots to meet your partisan desires.
That is a non-sequitur. Kimmel's statement is factual but your implication is silly. How about, if Trump is a liar, explain why the Ukraine war continues. Non-sequitur. Stupid tactic.
I'm simply connecting the words the far left zealot you are going to the mat for used.
No, it not and I hope you know it.
Here are facts:
1. The shooter was not MAGA
2. Democrats and left wing media falsely claimed he was.
Knowing those facts, explain how Republicans denying the shooter was MAGA constituted a new low.
Why do you state what I have already stated several times now? You have no argument.
And Rs and right-wing sources claimed he was associated with / represented 'leftists'.
Big surprise!!
This partisan ploy of taking political advantage of an assassination is sickening.
Please quote the exact words where Kimmel says Kirk was killed by MAGA.
You have not produced or referenced a single fact.
Now you've destroyed your only grounds to stand on. So you admit Kimmel was not arguing in good faith.
And Rs and right-wing source claimed he was associated with 'leftists'.
Nice deflection. Stick to what Kimmel said. He said the new low was republicans denying the shooter was MAGA. You've admitted he was not MAGA. Therefore Republicans were "desperately" spreading the truth by your own admission.
So now justify how denying what you agree is a meritless, made up conspiracy constitutes a "new low."
1. The shooter was not MAGA
2. Democrats and left wing media falsely claimed he was.
Knowing those facts, explain how Republicans factually denying the shooter was MAGA constituted a new low, which is what Kimmel claimed. .
I would ask where you came up with this crap, but I know. More fantasy from you.
Kimmel correctly stated that you in the MAGA group are desperately trying to ensure this assassin is not associated with MAGA. An obvious correct fact and an obvious lowlife, partisan move given a man was just assassinated.
Look at how you just keep on and on trying desperately to change the meaning of Kimmel's words and deflect from the fact that the PotUS you continue to defend is blatantly violating the 1st amendment ... and that is just one more in a long series of Trump violating the CotUS and the law.
I never said he was, and neither did Kimmel. All Kimmel said was that MAGA was putting a lot of effort into convincing people of that. He never said they were wrong.
My personal opinion is that we still don’t have the full picture of this guy and what motivated him. I am waiting for a trial with actual evidence.
I would say that there were - and remain - people across the political spectrum who have opinions about the shooter. Some of it is idle speculation, and some of it is an effort to shape public opinion for political purposes.
What I share with Kimmel is the feeling that the energy put into this effort - especially in the first days following the shooting - is a sad thing. Too many people care more about the political profit to be found in blame than in reflecting on the murder itself.
That is all Kimmel said. He made no declaration that the shooter was, in fact, MAGA or not.
Reading your comments here I regularly wonder if you’re trying to convince others or yourself.
Regardless, Kimmel got the hook because his ratings and viewership suck and has been getting worse over time. Unless of course all management at ABC is retarded. Which admittedly is a possibility.
Cool. I just wanted you to admit that speaking the truth when leftists are spreading conspiracy theories constitutes a "low life partisan move" in your world.
That's all I wanted you to admit. Because a non partisan would, undoubtedly, say that spreading lies to falsely blame a movement for an assassination is actually the "low life partisan move" not rebutting those lies.
Now we are clear where you and Kimmel stand.
Why are you repeating something that does not appear outside of right wing media? Its ridiculous. If Trump didnt want Kimmel off he would still be on, period.
Isn't is amazing how when Tucker Carlson and Roseann Barr were fired for words, and the vast majority of the left thought it was A-OK, and free speech only mattered to what was said.
Fast forward to today. All of a sudden Kimmel getting fired is a "threat to free speech".
Besides the threat of violence from many of them, I don't think anyone takes these leftists seriously.
Bullshit.
His ratings suck long time, no end in sight. He was hemorrhaging viewers every year, for years. Those are the facts.
Perhaps my friends on the left can tell us when the best time to drop a network show is. Zero viewers?
Details, details ….
You flapping your lips is not a credible argument. I can show you stories and information that dont mention ratings AT ALL for the firing. But we should believe you . Sorry.
What a slimy tactic ... pretending that I admitted to something that I have not been stating all along. Just slimy as hell.
What bullshit. Now you pretend that MAGA did not go on the offensive and claim that this assassin did not represent them and that he was representing 'the Left'. All you had to do was listen to Trump.
The low-life move was initiated by the asshole you constantly defend who right off the bat used this assassination to score political points against 'the Left'.
But that's the only way his statement makes any sense. The underlying premise is the assassin was MAGA. Because then it would be a "new low" for the "MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them." That is a defensible statement, if the underlying premise is true.
But he wasn't part of the MAGA gang. And Kimmel knows that. And some left-wingers were in fact falsely claiming he was. Since the assassin was indisputably not part of the "Maga gang", it's makes no sense to claim that denying a false accusation constitutes a "new low." It's completely incoherent. Take the names and partisan ids out of the equation and I'm extremely confident no honest person would claim people truthfully denying that an assassin is part of their movement is worse than lying about an assassin being part of the opposition movement.
There's plenty of criticisms to be made about what happened in the wake of the shooting. But to signal out people for speaking the truth when being defamed with lies as the "low point" is simply indefensible and an assault on reason.
[deleted][✘]
So, you’re just going to ignore everything I wrote as not making sense because it doesn’t lead to the conclusion you want?
I’m sorry, but the facts are that Kimmel’s statement was facially neutral as to the shooter. The only fault I find with his observation is that he didn’t also condemn people on the Left for doing the same thing.
However, his failure to do so is not a statement that the shooter was MAGA.
Why are you trying to reject empirically verifiable facts?
Stranger still, why are you stating that empirically verifiable facts are solely to be found in "right wing media"?
Late night talk show ratings have been falling for years. Even worse, only about 10% of the people watching are in the 18-49 demographic.
Made my day John - thanks
No, my conclusion is the only one that makes sense unless you believe Kimmel is a sociopath. I don't.
ut the facts are that Kimmel’s statement was facially neutral as to the shooter.
He said MAGA telling people the shooter was not MAGA was a "new low"
So the issue is why was that a new low? Either the assassin was MAGA and the new low was MAGA lying by claiming the shooter was not MAGA, or shooter was not MAGA and the new low was MAGA telling people the truth, that the shooter was not MAGA and that telling the truth is worse than spreading false conspiracies about the shooter. Those are the only two interpretations consistent with Kimmel characterizing MAGA's "desperation" to avoid having the shooter called part of their MAGA gang a "new low".
If you accept the false premise that the shooter is MAGA, his claim actually makes logical sense. Maga lying about the shooter not being a MAGA when he was in fact MAGA would be a vile thing to do. Of course, the shooter wasn't MAGA and there was no evidence he was. So that interpretation is premised on a lie.
Since the shooter wasn't MAGA, the statement can only otherwise mean that Kimmel believes telling the truth about the shooters identity (not MAGA) is worse than making up lies about the shooters identity as MAGA (which is sociopathic and indefensible) which many on the left were pushing. Otherwise, the "new low" language makes no sense and it's the duty of the reader to give meaning to the entire sentence, not pick and choose phrases.
You've chosen your side. Which is all I wanted to show people. So thanks.
And then you went and lied about my position, so you know where you can shove your thanks.
I didnt flag you, lets skip the self pity.
You made your position clear. You can't admit the only way Kimmel's statement makes any sense is if it's premised on the lie that the shooter was MAGA. Don't whine about it.
More lies.
And forming insulting comments is a great indicator of a lost argument
Are you shocked that the liberal mass media doesn’t report such facts? You shouldn’t be and should dig further if you want to report the truth.
No need to be sorry. Just get your facts straight.
His mother said the whole family was MAGA.
You’ve been bamboozled by left wing media. His grandmother said the family was, but that she had no idea what the shooters politics were.
Just sickening watching Trump (almost certainly) engage in corruption while his supporters cheer him on. Almost certainly this is a PotUS using the power of his office (via threats) to take out comedians who make fun of his stupid moves. Blatant censorship.
Please provide the link showing the network cancelled Kimmel because of the Trump Administration. .
Do you have another theory? Let's hear it.
Do you actually believe there is a link to an executive admitting that they suspended Kimmel to placate the FCC?
I find it hilarious that these leftists here and on other sites are poutraged over Kimmel, but openly celebrated the firings of Carlson and Roseann Barr..
Most sane Americans have learned to not take these people seriously......until they throw threats.
Then you aren't waiting for the facts to come in.
Non sequitur. Read my question — you even quoted it. Your response makes no sense.
The program where the FCC Chair makes the explicit threat then the distributors doing just what he told them to should be enough.
Steady loss of viewership.
Next.
Nope. FCC boss in Trumps pocket. Obviously.
Will be boycotting Disney and ABC.
[deleted]
Join the crowd, even if you’re late to the party. I’ve been boycotting them for years
MAGAites dream is to have any dissenting voices canceled so they can wallow in their favorite fake news channel, the Fascist Obese Xenophobes News channel, aka FOX News.
Money! When you offend half the country for no reason whatsoever, people tend to take their business elsewhere, look at Budweiser.
No, but I also think companies don't like unforced errors, which is exactly what he created. In today's climate they are more concerned about making money then Kimmel's underperforming show. Look at the amount of free press they received from cancelling his sorry ass.
Mid-season, abrupt suspension; acquisition on the line; FCC chairman (for Trump) threatened them. If a show is doing badly, they do not renew.
Further, this quote is nothing. It is par for the course. Talk shows have been making fun of presidents and politics for as long as they have been on the air. This is an excuse that the Trump administration is using to coerce media companies to get Kimmel off the air. It is a sick abuse of power and here you are making excuses for Trump.
Kimmel isn't a far-right wing fascist hate mongering liar like Tucker is and Kirk was.
... but say that about kirk and look what happens.
Morning...you really are a strange mob over there at times..
When anything happens it always seems to come down to these questions straight off.. almost like people are trying to justify or make themselves feel better when it hits the fan...
Are they white or are they black?
Are they a Trump supporter or are they not?
Are they a Republican or are they a Democrat?
Are they Left or are they Right?
Are they an illegal or are they a citizen?
Are they sane or are they insane?
Are the weapons obtained illegally or are e they not?
Instead of trying to categorize everything and it must get very tiring wading through this all the time...it really does come down to one thing..
A human shot a fellow human..
Don't know about you mob but after awhile it tends to do your head in..but there again maybe it is just me...🥺
Great observation. Yes, it is a finger pointing game here, and we are losing said game, one human at a time...
The person who needs his Mic dropped and taken away is the person taking away others who speak, by far, more truth than the LIAR in Chief. Could you imagine if Obama threatened Rush Limbaugh or any on the 'Right', there would be K asz, as there should be. WHere does this end ?
Trump, the main instigator, Constitution and Democracy hater, attempts to silence any and all that might criticize the one with the peni so small.
I might not agree with many, yet never tried to silence any.
That's where the left an right seem to differ, and I think this is a serious problem for US, silencing free speech is another step in an authoritarian process, but go head and tell US All again, it's no big deal snowflake, youre overeacting, you can't take Trump at his word. Well the pedophiles wingman should Patel his story like he promised, but the spineless pussy trump did grab, can't and won't even take a wild stab, at cutting through the bullship, as long as Capn Trump decides when it becomes Capn Crunch Time, an din the mean time, don't make fun of maga and Trump, unless you have your own network to pay as you pump out the truth, thast to Repblicans will remain aloof, as gthey allow this fckn goof to silence the truth,and that is the.
But it is very scientific. The event must have a cause; that's what science teaches. And since we have removed God from society, we cannot blame the devil.
A secular, atheist society can only blame demons and witches for the cause of evil. That's why we have become more reliant on witch hunts to find the cause for an event. The scientific logic is undeniable.
atheists don't believe in demons and witches...they don't believe in the supernatural. Period.
Atheists do not believe in a deity. That's the one and only defining qualification for atheism. Atheists can still believe in ghosts, goblins, fairies, witches, and demons. Atheists can believe in animism where everything in nature can possess a spiritual essence. An atheist could be a Druid. But an atheist cannot be a Freemason.
Materialists do not believe in spirits, witches, and demons. Materialists only believe in the existence of matter and energy. Some materialists still believe in a supernatural state of transcendence.
I don't know of any atheists that believe in the supernatural. If you do, then those people are not atheists
And the answers to those questions dictate how the media will run with it.
Victim black and offender white - complete outrage even if it has to be fabricated.
Victim white and offender black - silence
The accusations will always be "she / he was a trump supporter" despite any evidence showing otherwise.
Illegal
Citizen
Doesn't matter for many. The fact a gun was used will set them off on some rant crying over an inanimate object.
I've know people who practiced Wicca who were atheists. I've known Buddhists who were atheists. Some of the pantheist religious beliefs of Native Americans are atheist. (There are pantheist beliefs that divinity originates in nature rather than from gods.) I've known Native Americans who held such pantheist beliefs. I've known people that practiced mystical pseudoscience, such as astrology, who were atheists. I've known atheists who practiced yoga and meditation to achieve a transcendent supernatural state.
Timothy Leary, notable figure of the 1960s counterculture, advocated use of hallucinogenic drugs to experience a supernatural state. Psychedelic eugenics has been practiced by a number of native societies as part of religious and spiritual rituals. Leary may or may not have been atheist be he definitely was not evangelical.
In theoretical physics, the speculation for a multiverse has resulted in atheist and non-religious spiritual beliefs that the multiverse is a supernatural extension of reality.
A great number of American "cultural Christians" personally do not believe in Biblical magic yet they celebrate all the religious traditions and holidays to fit in with family and friends. Like telling kids to believe in Santa and the Easter Bunny. For a lot of people it is way more about family and raising kids than true belief.
That's quite true. At times it seems atheists are more conversant with the Bible than Christians.
But the main point is that our society has adopted a type of scientific logic to understand and respond to events like the Kirk assassination. Such events must have a cause. Since we cannot blame the Devil then we must blame ourselves, in one way or other. That requires an inquisition to find the cause among us.
Pointing out that a human killed another human only states the obvious. What was the cause? We can't blame the devil and agree to renew our piety and think good thoughts. Thoughts & prayers won't satisfy the demands of scientific logic.
It's not just you.
False dichotomy, not to mention science doesn't believe in whiches....
Yep. We play 20 questions on a daily basis.
Kimmel got assassinated by a triggered conservative?
no, that was kirk ...
Trump lies an average of 8 time per day, when will you be calling him out for lying?
I'm sure Robinson believed that.
You don't??
Trump is corrupt and is a pathological liar:
Failure to recognize Trump's outrageous level of lying is a dangerous disconnect from hard, cold reality. How is it that anyone believes anything that comes out of his mouth without first corroborating it with credible sources?
I believe he exaggerates. Most of what the leftwing media calls lies are interpretations. What Kimmel said was a lie. Saying that MAGA might have been responsible for Kirk's assassination is a blatant lie.
Now that is quite the understatement. Yeah, Vic, Trump exaggerates. Just a normal politician exaggerating. Nothing to see here, folks, Trump is not a pathological liar ... no, he just exaggerates. And worse, the 'leftwing media' are the real liars because they misrepresent what he said. Poor Trump; treated so unfairly.
A perfect example of you totally misrepresenting what Kimmel said. Just amazing ...
When Trump said the United States is the only country in the world that uses mail in voting, was he lying or just an idiot? There are at least 10 other countries that allow full mail in voting and another 25 or 30 that partially allow mail in voting.
This is one example out of more than we can count.
He gets away with it because the media never questions his ridiculous statements like this.
You'd better read your seed again. Kimmel didn't say that MAGA was responsible. This is what he said:
Now where in that 30 word sentence did Kimmel say MAGA is repsonsible for CK's murder.?
They get to print what he said. The people get to decide.
When the New York Times in its news stories quotes the President and follows the words with "which is not true," they are doing a far greater disservice to anything the President exaggerates, embellishes or even lies about. I'm sure the left taking over the media pertains to another conversation I'm having here, but it all ties together.
I can't improve on the English language. Kimmel is saying it was one of them.
Always provide the link.
What Trump was trying to say, erroneously of course was this:
"Despite this abrupt pivot in how the 2020 election was conducted, we have been told time and again that the 2020 election was the most safe and secure in history. If this is true—that mass mail-in voting is as safe and secure as traditional in-person voting—then why have the vast majority of developed countries outlawed this practice?
The answer to that question is simple and straightforward. Most First World nations know for a fact that mass mail-in voting is not safe nor secure and almost certainly results in a deluge of illegal ballots being cast and counted.
Take Europe for example, which has basically banned mass mail-in voting across the continent for decades. There are 27 countries in the European Union (EU), of which 17 have banned mail-in voting unless the citizen lives overseas. In six of those nations, voters are required to present photo identification to receive a mail-in ballot. In six others, mail-in voting has been basically outlawed. Among the 16 non-EU nations in Europe, every single one has banned mail-in voting for those citizens who do not live abroad, and every single one also requires photo identification to obtain a mail-in ballot.
A very similar trend exists among OECD countries. Not including the United States, nearly half of the member states in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have banned mail-in voting unless the citizen lives abroad. Moreover, 30 percent of these countries require photo ID to attain a mail-in ballot and more than a few have outright outlawed mail-in voting.
A few OECD nations do allow limited mail-in voting, such as Japan and Poland. However, in order to vote by mail in these countries, one must be disabled and acquire documentation to confirm their inability to vote in-person.
Brazil, which is not a member state of the OECD but has a working relationship with the OECD bloc, has also completely outlawed mail-in voting.
There are several reasons why these countries have decided to severely restrict mail-in voting, foremost being that they have had direct experience with the trials and tribulations that are inherent to this lackadaisical method of casting ballots.
In 1975, France banned mail-in voting after a series of scandals demonstrated the vulnerability of sending ballots by mail. More recently, in 2005, the United Kingdom was rocked by allegations of widespread illegal mail-in voting after six councilors in Birmingham were convicted of organizing a “massive, systematic and organized” postal voting fraud campaign.
Closer to home, Mexico banned mail-in voting in 1991 after an abundance of evidence emerged that the long-ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party had relied on illegal mail-in voting to remain in power for decades.
The 2020 presidential election was undoubtedly tainted by widespread illegal mail-in voting. We know this because history shows that mail-in voting is rife with illegality but also because the voters have admitted to illegally (either wittingly or unwittingly) casting mail-in ballots in the 2020 election at a clip that almost certainly impacted the outcome.
For more details on how prevalent illegal mail-in voting was in the 2020 election, simply read The Heartland Institute’s latest policy study, “Who Really Won the 2020 Election? Measuring the Effect of Mail-in Voter Fraud in the Trump-Biden Race for the White House.”
So, why does this matter? Why should Americans care about mail-in voting? Because free and fair elections are the lynchpin of a flourishing nation. Because we cannot have domestic tranquility if half of the citizenry does not have confidence that elections are being run honestly. Because we probably cannot survive another highly disputed and controversial election, like we experienced in 2020.
Fortunately, there are several solutions that have been proven to prevent mass illegal mail-in voting both around the world and here at home.
First, state legislatures must reaffirm their constitutional duty of overseeing how elections are conducted. Second, states must encourage in-person voting with a photo ID, ideally as close to Election Day as possible. Third, states must impose prerequisites for mail-in voting, such as being disabled, living overseas, or serving abroad in the military. Fourth, states should enact guardrails to reduce illegal mail-in voting from occurring, including signature verification, or a witness or notary signature. Fifth, states must outlaw ballot harvesting and unattended ballot drop boxes while cleaning their voting rolls on an annual basis and removing deceased persons and those who no longer reside at the address listed. And, sixth, those who engage in illegal voting schemes must be held to account."
Most Developed Countries Have Banned Mass Mail-in Voting. The United States Must Do the Same - The Heartland Institute
[deleted][✘]
Does that fucking sound like "none" to you? Trump said the United States is the only country that allows mail in voting.
I don't have to. Kimmel's comment is there for all to see. He basically said two things:
First, he's claiming the right tried to blame the left and second that it couldn't be anything other than one of their own.
No, it doesn't, but the fact remains that most countries have either moved away from it or want to avoid it.
Should Trump have said it that way? Of course!
Did he mean to say it that way? I'm sure of it.
Does it mean anything to me? Absolutely not! The fact is that democrats during the time of Jimmy Carter took a good hard look at universal mail in balloting and found that it was prone to fraud:
Heed Jimmy Carter on the Danger of Mail-In Voting - WSJ
I dont know, is he too stupid to say "some' , or did he just think it would be better to lie and make the gullible believe the US is the only one so it would make the process look worse?
He speaks more with feelings that with caution. There is no doubt about that.
Vic, Trump is a pathological liar. He is by far the most prolific, outrageous liar of any PotUS of our lifetimes (and likely our history).
He is not being misrepresented; this is all his doing. Your 'defense' of Trump/ABC here is ludicrous.
Just like every other politician. But let's ignore that reality to support the lefts tantrums.
Only if you ignore everybody else.
This is so pathetic. You focus on three words and then fabricate a meaning of your choosing instead of looking at the entire statement made by Kimmel.
Sure, join in on trying to make Trump appear to be normal. You cannot defend him so you try (laughably) to claim that everyone else lies like he does.
What a pathetic attempt to defend the most prolific liar of any PotUS in our lifetimes (and likely our history).
Or cognitive thought. Yet the left promotes him as some kind of icon ignoring shit like this -
Yes, he is claiming that the MAGA gang is trying to blame 'the left'. Absolutely correct!
But he did not claim that the assassin was part of the MAGA group. That is your intentional misrepresentation of a very clear statement by Kimmel.
False equivalence.
Prove that other all politicians lie with as much frequency, volume, and persistence as Trump.
You can't. Because they don't.
Yes, he makes the claim. The evidence is that Robinson was of "the left."
And by making that claim Kimmel is implying that Robinson was MAGA, which is ridiculous.
[deleted] [✘] I chose to remain in reality and look at ALL of them.
Disagreeing with you isn't "defending" anybody. [deleted][✘]
I have a feeling this is just the beginning. Trump wants to be a dictator and he will do anything and everything he is allowed to get away with.
That's your opinion. You are entitled to it just like you are intitled to ignore the reality of my statement.
Easy. You ever hear Adam Schiff talk? How about Nancy Pelosi? Joe Biden (on the rare times he strings together a comprehendible sentence)? Kamala Harris? How about Gavin Newsome? I know, Hillary Clinton. Every listen to HER bullshit?
And you want to claim you don't live in a fantasy world.
Not even close on either count.
No politician in living memory has come close to the frequency and breadth of lying as Trump. So your feeble attempt at rebuttal is noted and dismissed as irrelevant.
Trump and MAGA are just pissed because he showed the true depth of feeling that the President has towards Charlie Kirk.
It seems that MAGA is so focused on the killer not being one of them that they cannot even see that was just part of the setup to showing that Trump doesn't care about Charlie Kirk’s death but rather would like to brag about trucks and ballrooms.
Trump has wanted to get Kimmel off from long before Kirk was killed. This was just the mechanism.
You ever hear Adam Schiff talk? How about Nancy Pelosi? Joe Biden (on the rare times he strings together a comprehendible sentence)? Kamala Harris? How about Gavin Newsome? I know, Hillary Clinton. Every listen to HER bullshit?
LMAO. You actually thing Trump had something to do with this? Despite the crying, whining, foot stomping and shouting at the sky you all do, Kimmell did this to HIMSELF. He thought he'd be protected. Instead he's paying the consequences for HIS OWN ACTIONS.
No he wasn't. He was decrying the woeful lack of empathy Trump had for Charlie Kirk and the depths to which people will go to score political points.
That's a unique comment.
And that's a pathetic dodge to the question.
He was decrying the woeful lack of empathy Trump had for Charlie Kirk an
That’s the most ridiculous claim yet.
Seems you failed to get the sexual/gender satire imbedded in The Man Show whose content was aimed at the 15 year old American male. Curse you Benny Hill!
What failed is you seeing the hypocrisy of Kimmell.
What you meant to say was left wing "fact checkers" seemed to do away with their jobs when a D is in office. I believe the WaPo guy admitted to such when Biden was elected.
Kimmels best work was on the Man Show. And it’s not even close
It is in the video.
The statement at issue is not relevant to it.
but at least we've all learned a new way to describe the worst thing about Jan 6th.
That's how honest people describe what happened. The progressive response was the low point.
The actual evidence is that Robinson came from a Republican family and was largely apolitical until a few years ago. The evidence suggests that his sexual relationship with his transitioning roommate put him at odds with Kirk's view of homosexuals.
Hard to say what his ideology was, but it is easy to speculate that his hatred of Kirk was based on Kirk's homosexual views. I see no evidence (currently) that this assassin was representing a party or an ideology but rather a limited but highly emotional disagreement with Kirk's homosexual views.
Kimmel did not imply that Robinson was MAGA in that clip. You are trying desperately to read that into it. And beyond that, nothing Kimmel said even comes close to out of the norm for televised comedians and certainly is no justification for an abrupt suspension.
You are supporting an overt move against the 1st amendment. Amazing how core principles seem to change based on partisanship.
Do you think it is proper for the government to coerce businesses to censor opposition voices?
That's what happened under the last administration and I spoke up then while the left sat.
Lol. That's the only evidence you've managed to find?
What I have found lately was that there is anything in a report that mentions Republicans, then that is enough to say the person of discussion was a far right wing fascist.
That is a summary relevant to the reply. Do you have something thoughtful to add or are you just (yet again) making a "LOL" snarky and meaningless post?
Yep. That's it. If he carpooled to school with a kid who registered Republican, it would mean he was Republican.
I'm trying to imagine a world where someone murders a democrat over abortion and makes it clear the Democrat's stance on abortion motivated him. And on top of what he made clear in by own words, the shooter's family and co-workers said he had become increasingly right wing the last few years.
Is anyone going to claim with a straight face that these Sherlock Holmes in the media who are so perplexed by Robinson's motives are going to say "we have no idea if the shooter was right wing, it's impossible to tell! Maybe he's far left? His parents are Democrats after all. There's just too much evidence supporting either side, " in that situation?
It's such high grade partisan cope to pretend that his politics are some big mystery.
Sure. If you believe the "actual evidence" consists only of such scraps of evidence that democratic partisans have clung to in order to push their conspiracy that the shooter was right wing while ignoring the existence of all the evidence that demonstrates otherwise counts as "relevant"
Given the context, you are implying that is what I have done.
My position was stated clearly @1.5.43:
You should read what I wrote instead of inventing yet another strawman.
I have not argued that this assassin was a member of the GoP or MAGA.
Pay attention.
No, and you've managed to avoid criticizing all the left wingers who've spread that baseless conspiracy and instead focused on your inability to understand just how to characterize an trans right obsessed, anti-fa citing shooter who was described as left wing by the authorities. When listing evidence, you cite his parents' political beliefs as "actual evidence" but not evidence of the shooter's own. Do you think the investigating authorities statements about him becoming politicized and left wing might be more relevant than his parent's voting habits? Maybe?
His labeling of a bullet case with a the famous anti-fascist song referenced by other anti-fa terrorists in their manifestos might be more relevant than his lack of expressed beliefs years prior?
Again, lets be honest. If the shooter with similar evidence of motive killed a democrat over abortion, I'm going to got out on a limb and say you and all the partisans who can't seem to figure out what drove this particular assassin would have zero problem immediately characterizing that shooter as right wing. The partisan double standard is obvious.
And I came from a democrat family as did Andrew Breitbart. It is meaningless.
He became a far left radical according to his mother:
Mom of Charlie Kirk's alleged assassin describes radical shift in last year: 'More pro-gay and trans rights' | FOX 13 Tampa Bay
January 6 was an attempt to change the will of the people by violent mob action. The President should be in jail for the massive part that he played in fomenting the lies and schemes that lead up to that day, just like his buddy Bolsonaro.
No, the new and improved "Kimmel" way to describe Jan 6th is to say "the low point of Jan 6th was actually the democrats response when they desperately tried to blame others for rioting and used it to score political points. "
Just a completely true and not at all intentionally misleading to describe what happened. Damn Democrats desperately blaming others for Jan 6th, that was the real problem.
I am not criticizing anyone for claiming the assassin is a member of 'other side'. That is not the point here. Pay attention rather than make shit up.
Looks like all you want to do is try to argue that the assassin is a left wing lunatic. This seed is about Kimmel's comments and Trump's use of the FCC and the pending Nexstar-Tegna as leverage to push Kimmel off the air.
If you want to argue who owns this nutjob, you need to argue with someone claiming that. And probably do so on a seed that deals with that topic.
Look at you quoting one portion of a sentence and ignoring the point of the paragraph and my post. You misrepresent what I wrote trying to make it look as though I am arguing this assassin is a Republican.
Blatant fucking dishonesty yet again.
Here is what I wrote:
TiG@1.5.43 ☞
Arvo John...and voting is compulsory here..you don't vote expect the Sheriff thumping on your door to explain why not..
Going on holidays, out of the country, working etc etc is no excuse..postal votes are available 3 weeks before the election date..
Ballot papers are flown all over the country from the Outback to Antarctica for people to do a postal vote...and yes you can vote while living overseas in any country that has an Australian embassy...
Here we look upon voting as an honour and privilege and it is something we cherish in my country...🦘
Doesn't seem to be a lunatic. He worked out an escape plan and his post murder texts to his boyfriend were well received by ABC news. Almost rapturously , in fact.
T his seed is about Kimmel's comments and Trump's use of the FCC and the pending Nexstar-Tegna as leverage to push Kimmel off the air.
I'm directly addressing Kimmel's comments by pointing out how incredibly disingenuous they were. You chose to defend the indefensible.
And Iger chose to "push him off the air" because he was going to double down on his dishonesty and make an untenable situation with affiliates and advertisers even worse.
Here's "Actual evidence" not hopes and partisan dreams:
Who cares what labels are assigned. The guy committed an unforgivable act.
You are doing a terrible job at that.
Kimmel stated facts in this quote. So where does this article contradict anything I have written? You asked about this in another seed and I delivered this:
[deleted][✘]
"paying the consequences for HIS OWN ACTIONS". Not unlike Kirk, don't you think?
Why do you suppose he inscribed one of the bullets with the term "Fascist?"
You are not reading my posts. If you are not going to bother to understand what I wrote, you should not reply.
I have never made the argument that this assassin was affiliated with a party or an ideology. My hypothesis is that his motive was Kirk's anti-gay beliefs.
Why would any good person have empathy for Kirk, Trump or any far-right wing fascist. All these soulless POS Assholes offer is hate of the other.
Examples?
“The MAGA Gang (is) desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said.
Having beat the 1st portion of this statement well into the ground, I'm curious of your (and others) thoughts of the 2nd portion, that the "MAGA Gang" is doing everything to score political points. True, exaggerated or down-right lying?
Pushing back against a conspiracy theory is not "scoring political points," nor could it possibly considered a "new low" as Kimmel described it.
I think murdering a speaker in front of his kids was actually the "new low".
I think MAGA people are at the eye of a hurricane right now. People around the world are turning against the left over this assassination.
You didn't answer the question.
I will. Yes, they are. Just look at this seed and all of the fake outrage displayed here. Look at the President's reaction on the day it happened vs. A few mornings later when the reporter tossed him the softball question. He is more than willing to rant and demand vengeance on the left until he is outside where he can play with his ballroom.
What's more is look how a few leftists saying that they didn't like Charlie Kirk’s message has turned into a conspiracy theory, and a feeble attempt to connect it with the shooting being in public as a "new low".
Spineless. Absolutely spineless. ABC should be ashamed, but the executives are probably too scared of Trump.
Yep, been that way for awhile now. Are you just now noticing?
No, but it's the only story about it today, so here I am.
Trump doesn't have a fucking thing to do with this. FFS, give it a rest.
Uh huh. Time for you to get informed. Go read about the Nexstar deal pending before the FCC . The chair of the FCC is mad at Kimmel for being mean to Trump (so is Trump, for that matter). The FCC chair was on a podcast yesterday whining about Kimmel.
Meanwhile Nexstar wants to buy its rival, but needs the FCC to bend the rules for the deal to happen. So to keep the FCC chair happy, Nexstar is encouraging its TV stations to preempt Kimmel’s show.
That’s the real reason this is happening. The government is weaponizing the FCC to force media companies into broadcasting pro-Trump messaging, and the media giants are willing to do it so they can grow into monopolies and make more money.
So Nextar values money over their integrity and employees? They don't have any attorneys in their entire organization who could defend them? or did they make a business decision that Kimmel wasn't worth the cost? If he has any talent, I understand there will be an opening on the late show in May.
Late night shows, generally don’t make nearly as much as they used to, so probably no individual host is “worth it” anymore. I think this is almost certainly true when set against the prospect of controlling such a huge percentage of TVs across the country.
The FCC chair has already indicated that he is open to ignoring the existing law, and if Nexstar has to bury their dignity and kiss a little ass, they’re prepared to do it.
Occam's Razor being what it is, this by itself is probably enough to push the decision.
The format is dying. It can't compete with other forms of entertainment. In total, Kimmel, Colbert and Fallon averaged between 5-6 million viewers in Q2 of 2025. Not bad. But only about 10% of those were between 18-49 yrs old. The future is bleak for "guy sitting behind a desk interviewing celebrities" type of television.
These numbers have been falling steadily for years. In all probability, it has far less to do with who's hosting than it does with what they now have to compete with.
Perhaps they are more fond of not losing money. Kimmel has been hemorrhaging viewers and affiliates for years
All of the programming on network TV has been on the decline since streaming, and especially the pandemic, which really boosted streaming services.
Doesn’t explain why Kimmels viewership has been steadily declining while at least one other (Gutfeld) has been steadily increasing. To make matters even worse that’s network TV vs Cable.
Nah, there is much more at work here than just streaming services.
It was a company which owned a good deal of the ABC affiliates that forced the issue.
Based on the pressure from Carr. And of course, Trump had absolutely nothing to do with this.
I say it was Nexstar dumping affiliates but let us assume you are right, and it was Carr's warning. The FCC doesn't have to be perfect to be right. Those who may have influence people like Robinson have just been limited. They'll have to find another platform to do it in.
This will enrage the vast majority of the left far more than the murder of a pundit for his views, that's for sure.
Of course, Kimmel is still free to parrot DNC talking points for claughter and no doubt will be doing it for money again very soon.
Just crossed my feed that weds episode of south Park has been pulled , at least thats the headline i saw on MSN.
are you surprised?
Not surprised at all , from reading the article , they ran into a time constraint / limitation and didnt have enough time for usual and required clean up that they felt is part of their process, and considering the current volatile atmosphere, of a political bend , it shows prudent restraint on the producers part .
just MHO.
they have been hammering the administration this season. It has to be the network pulling back because I don't think the creators give a shit about any controversy they stir up
I agree for the most part, they have been hammering the admin pretty good and in a humorous way in my view,
they may not care about controversy, they may care about quality and shelf life though, can't say because I'm not them. most people care about the quality more than the controversy of what they create and make though, especially if its their money maker. JMO.
Which leads me back to Kimmel, and something strictly my own opinion.
I think if he had done his Mondays monologue on the Fri before, it would have slid by, but because of things that came out in between that had become known, it aged like a carton of milk, left out too long and used too late.
But these lies are AOK!
Fact check: 10 debunked lies Donald Trump has repeated in the last week alone (week of August 29, 2025)
Imaginary sub-$2 gasoline
Trump, talking about gas prices, said at a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, “There’s some places it’s $2. It’s even – it broke $2 in a couple of locations in the South.”
Not true, just as Trump’s numerous previous claims of $2-or-less gas haven’t been true.
There was no state whose average price for regular gas on Tuesday was below Mississippi’s $2.69 per gallon, according to data published by AAA, and the firm GasBuddy said it did not see a single station, out of the tens of thousands it tracks across the country, that was selling a gallon for $2 or less at the time Trump spoke. (Some drivers get special discounts.) The AAA national average on Tuesday was $3.19 per gallon.
An impossible “1,500%” reduction in prescription drug prices
Trump claimed in early August: “You know, we’ve cut drug prices by 1,200, 1,300, 1,400, 1,500%. I don’t mean 50%. I mean 14-, 1,500%.” CNN and others pointed out that this is not only inaccurate but does not make mathematical sense, since a 100% price cut would make the drugs free and a cut of 1,200% or more would presumably mean Americans would be getting paid to buy medications.
He promised Monday that “I’m going to be reducing drug prices by 1,400 to 1,500%,” then Tuesday that “we’re not talking about a 25% cut or a 50 – we’re talking about a 1,500% cut.”
“No inflation” amid continued inflation
There is inflation in the United States. Prices were 2.7% higher in July than they were a year prior and 0.2% higher than they were in June. One can debate how good or bad those figures are. But Trump said Tuesday , as he has repeatedly this summer, that “there’s no inflation.”
Trump briefly used softer rhetoric in mid-August, declaring that “our inflation is down to a perfect number, a beautiful number, hardly any at all.” This subjective language didn’t hold. The very next day, Trump returned to his regular assertion that “we don’t have inflation.”
The (non-)uniqueness of US mail-in voting
To support his proposal to eliminate the use of mail-in ballots, Trump last Monday revived his false claim that the US is the world’s only country where mail-in voting exists. The claim was promptly debunked, again, by CNN and others ; dozens of countries use mail-in ballots, including Canada , the United Kingdom , Germany , Australia and Switzerland .
Trump then repeated the claim in an interview with a supportive radio host three days later. “We’re the only one in the whole world that uses them,” he said.
The water Trump says he sent to Los Angeles (he didn’t) by turning a “valve” (that doesn’t exist)
On Tuesday, Trump told his usual story about how “now they have water” in Los Angeles because he “turned the valve” to send the city water instead of having that “valve” direct the water to the Pacific Ocean.
The story is nonsense – as experts in California water policy have pointed out for months .
First, there is no single “valve” that controls California water flows. Second, what Trump actually did in late January and early February was send billions of gallons pointlessly released from two dams in one part of the state’s Central Valley to another part of that valley , more than 100 miles north of Los Angeles. The water did not go to Los Angeles, which has no automatic connection to the dams .
The 2020 election, again
Approaching five years after he legitimately lost the legitimate 2020 election, Trump continues to lie about it. He referred Monday to former President Joe Biden as “a guy that got in there with a fraudulent election,” and said Thursday that “I knew the election was rigged and now we found that out definitively, as you can see.”
Nobody has found that out because it is definitively false.
That nonexistent monument law
Trump also repeated another lie he has been telling since 2020 – his assertion that he signed a “ law ” or “ statute ” that year that imposed an automatic sentence of “10 years in prison” to people who damaged monuments.
CNN and others have been reporting since 2020 that this is not what happened. Trump actually issued an executive order that directed the attorney general to prioritize investigations and prosecutions of people who damaged government-owned monuments and to prosecute offenders “to the fullest extent” allowed under existing federal law, which allowed judges to impose a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison.
Trump has kept telling the false story anyway. Upon signing an executive order Monday telling the attorney general to try to find a way, without violating the First Amendment , to crack down on people who have burned the American flag, the president claimed without any apparent basis that offenders would now “get one year in jail” – and he repeated his old fiction about signing harsh monument legislation. “Just like when I signed the statute and monument act,” he said. “Ten years in jail if you hurt any of our beautiful monuments.”
A phony Ukraine aid total
For months , Trump has claimed the US has given “$350 billion” in wartime aid to Ukraine even though numerous fact checks noted that this is a wild exaggeration. Trump made the “$350 billion” claim five times at a single event on Monday.
A German think tank that has closely tracked wartime aid to Ukraine says the US allocated about $133 billion to Ukraine (and had committed about $5 billion more) from late January 2022 through June 2025. The website of the US government inspector general overseeing the federal Ukraine response says the US had disbursed about $90 billion for the response through March 2025 (and had appropriated about $95 billion more), including money that was spent in the US and in broader Europe rather than Ukraine itself.
When CNN asked the White House earlier this month about Trump’s claims that the US had provided Ukraine itself with “$350 billion,” an official tried to justify the figure by adding in a bunch of things that are not actually aid to Ukraine – including, absurdly, the cost of US inflation to American households after the Russian invasion.
A fictional story about Biden and South Korea
Trump repeated his long-debunked “$350 billion” Ukraine-aid figure while sitting beside Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky last week. Then, this Monday, he repeated his long-debunked story about US relations with South Korea while sitting beside South Korean President Lee Jae-myung.
Speaking of the presence of more than 26,000 American military personnel in South Korea, Trump said , “As you know, South Korea agreed to pay for that during my last term. And then when Biden came in, they complained to Biden that I wasn’t a nice person and he agreed not to pay. He gave up billions of dollars. We were getting paid billions of dollars, but then Biden ended that for whatever reason. It’s unbelievable that he did.”
This is a reversal of reality.
Biden didn’t agree to let South Korea stop sharing the cost of the US military force in the country. Rather, under Biden, South Korea signed two cost-sharing agreements with the US, one in 2021 and one in 2024 , that both included substantial South Korean payment increases .
A disproven tale Trump claimed had been proven
Trump told a story on Monday in which he claimed a Democratic governor with whom he has been trading public barbs this month, Gov. Wes Moore of Maryland, told him during a behind-the-scenes conversation last year, “‘Sir, you’re the greatest president of my lifetime.’” The story was disproven by Trump-friendly Fox News the very same day: it turned out that a Fox documentary show had recorded the conversation , in which Moore didn’t say anything close to what Trump claimed.
Trump was undeterred by the footage. He told a similar story on Tuesday, this time falsely saying Moore had told him, “Sir, you’re the greatest president” – and adding, “They caught him on camera.” In reality, it was Trump who the camera had caught in a lie.
The idea that Robinson is right wing has been thoroughly debunked, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE, which is easily accessible to anyone who cares enough to know the truth and is not in total denial. The voters are really going to go after the hateful and violent lefties during the midterms
There's nothing in this story that indicates Kimmel said he was right wing.
Indeed, what Kimmel claimed is exemplified by @6.
Here is what Kimmel claimed (for those who do not pay attention):
In short, he said the MAGA gang is doing whatever they can to get the public to NOT perceive the assassin as one of them.
Which is clearly true. Everyone is trying to distance themselves from this killer.
Yes, and what happened is the left spent the aftermath literally making up claims that he was MAGA and we saw the fruits of that disinformation campaign all over social media, including on this site. But since "the MAGA gang" fought back with the truth, Kimmel made his "joke" about them. In the world of broken brained left wing partisans like Kimmel, MAGA is just supposed to sit back and let scumbags like him blame it on Maga and score political points.
Kimmel did not claim the assassin was part of the MAGA gang. He claimed the MAGA gang is doing whatever they can to get the public to NOT perceive the assassin as one of them.
Which is clearly true. Everyone is trying to distance themselves from this killer.
Your post is based on a lie.
And your rebuttal is "Kimmel did not claim the assassin was part of the MAGA gang" which is a total strawman and not based on anything I wrote.
Let's look at his "joke" “We hit some new lows over the weekend"
Hmm.. What happened the weekend after a man was executed in front of his kids?
The left fabricated quotes about him to smear the victim
The left falsely claimed the murderer was MAGA
The left continued to celebrate and rationalize the murder
The left, like Westboro Baptist members on steroids, attacked people at memorials and vandalized them.
and oh yeah, "MAGA" accurately pointed out the murderer was not MAGA.
Which of these things did Kimmel call a "new low"?
MAGA accurately pointing out that the murderer was not MAGA. That's the problem in Kimmel's world that he highlighted.
That's the "joke" he feeds the ignorant partisan fools who make up his audience. The only way the "joke" makes any sense is if his audience is made up of blue anon members who actually think the shooter was MAGA.
His "joke" wasn't a joke. There was nothing funny about that line. It was simply true. The Right was declaring war on the Left before Kirk's body was even cold. They were constantly talking about how this was an attack from the Left generally - not even just a lone wackjob who happened to be leftist. Everyone on the Left was to blame. To many observers, it looked like these people on the Right cared more about scoring political points than they cared about the actual murder itself. And I think there were plenty of people on the Left doing the same thing.
He didn't even do that. All he said was that MAGA was trying hard to convince people that the shooter was not one of their own. That is 100% true, but it does not blame anyone for the murder.
Even when you had no evidence about who killed him or why. That's not something to be proud of. And that's all Kimmel was pointing out.
Lol. Left wing media lies about the shooter being MAGA and the partisan's left response is to be mad MAGA pointed out the truth. Perfect.
e didn't even do that
I didn't say he did. He called it a new low that MAGA denied the shooter was one of them. That is 100% true, so the only way it could be a "new low" is if he's talking to an audience of brainwashed fools who think the shooter was MAGA. .
My rebuttal repeats the point I originally made in the post you replied to.
So, Sean, you created a strawman and when I pushed you back on track you dishonestly claim I created a strawman.
Pathetic level of intellectual dishonesty in your posts.
At least be honest about what was public over the weekend. The killer was known. The bullet markings, his family's statement's police, the governor's statements about what the police found were all public.
All of this was known. Maybe not in the left wing fever swamps that were busy lying about the shooter being MAGA, but among the rest of us.
That's not something to be proud of. And that's all Kimmel was pointing out
The left spent the whole weekend lying about the shooter being not being one of theirs despite the evidence yet that doesn't bother you. Or Kimmel.
How do you know thisto be true ?
Trump, before the shooter was even turned in by his family, had blamed the left, without any evidence at all.
You really need to look in the mirror. My rebuttal pointed out why MAGA had to make it clear the shooter was not MAGA. The left was lying about the shooter being MAGA. Why that never bothered Kimmel, his audience or his partisan defenders is obviously something you don't want to discuss.
Imagine thinking the "low point of the weekend" was MAGA stating the truth. Not widespread lies and desecrating memorials. A literal fact was the "low point" to the Kimmel crowd. It demonstrates just how deranged and anti-truth wide swaths of the left are.
Because I follow the evidence.
Why reply to my post if you are going to argue a point I did not make?
The point I made was that what Kimmel said was factual (and you just tacitly admitted this) and in no way justifies this kind of action (or, really, any action).\
You want to talk about partisan blame games. Go talk about that with someone interested in such obvious, boring matters.
When Trump declared war on the left, there was two wrong suspects known of, and the killer had yet to be apprehended. How did Trump know ? He didn't. He assumed. ANd to date i've yet to hear any evidence saying 100% the guy was full left extreme.
He was raised by Republican Trumpers, and had a transitioning partner. WHich doesn't PROVE anything, yet Trump declared war on the left yet couldn't make it to his ceremony, as he had golf reservations....what a friend.
Even if what you said was true, the "joke" is referencing what happened over the weekend, after it was clear the shooter was left wing.
Sorry, if interrupted your preferred defense of an extremely partisan comic who claimed the worst thing that happened in a weekend full of left wing disinformation campaigns and assaults on memorials to a person who was recently murdered was MAGA telling the truth about the shooter's politics.
Because that's just routine day ending in Y in left wing land, I guess.
But you will notice that Jimmy Kimmel just made a true statement about MAGA.
Free speech is a right, is it not? The threats from the government and the feckless distributor are in direct opposition to Free speech.
Fuck Donald Trump and all of his stupid little authoritarian helpers.
Most of all, fuck the guy who shot Charlie Kirk for being the impetus that the authoritarian administration was waiting for. It was going to get a chance sooner or later, but this just served it up on a silver platter.
Write something thoughtful.
No, he did not. There is no way to spin the "low point of the weekend" was MAGA telling the truth that the shooter wasn't one of them as being a true statement. It's like saying the worst part of WWII was the Germans losing.
Sure. Is he going to jail? Has he been arrested?
e feckless distributor are in direct opposition to Free speech.
Not at all. Progressives don't have a right to force the affiliates to carry speakers they find offensive and who cost them money.
etus that the authoritarian administration was waiting fo
ABC is not an "authoritarian administration" but yes, I agree they've probably been looking to fire Kimmel for months because of his ratings and the cost of the show, much like Colbert. Even left wing corporations can only donate so much money to the party before reality sets in. Kimmel was fired because he's a financial liability.
If he was popular and generating money, ABC wouldn't care how dishonest and hacky he was.
Yes he did. Watch the video.
All of your words to justify the present autocratic administration are untrue. They try to justify the unjustifiable.
Basically the head of the FCC threatened the network and broadcasters that he would fuck with them if they did not do what he wanted. That is government suppression of speech. You're, as usual, out in left field yelling at dandelions. They don't give a fuck about your twisting of fact to try and meet the surrealist visions in your head. And neither do I.
You are just plain wrong. This is most definitely government suppression of speech.
Kirk was shot last Wednesday. That very night, the president publicly blamed “the radical left” for his murder, despite a total lack of evidence. Also, that same day, the governor of Utah called it a political assassination. Other Republicans followed suit. The guy who shot Kirk wasn’t even arrested until Friday morning. Meanwhile, several leaders on the Left publicly condemned the attack or expressed their sadness.
Even when he was arrested, there was a lot of information and misinformation being released. But the rush to assign blame - without evidence - was ongoing from Day 1, and it’s still the aspect of this that is of highest priority to a lot of politically partisan people.
and a wee bit respectful
where'd you pull that from? It's not in the seeded article
This is what Kimmel was referring to, hence, the comment about hitting a new low.
lol ….. your definition of “thoughtful” tends to be near a polar opposite for more than a few here.
Count me in that group.
That knife cuts both ways. Big time.
N extstar Media Group, Inc. announced that the company’s ABC affiliates will preempt “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” for the foreseeable future beginning with tonight’s show.
This led to the cancellation. ABC's market rebelled and I'm sure it's not worth ABC's time and effort to deal with the constant fallout of from a partisan hack who probably makes the network very little money. And if it's affiliates stopped carrying the show, the losses would grow even more sizable.
If you are going to be an asshole whose act consists solely of antagonizing half the country, better be an asshole who dominates the market and makes bank for your employer...
Jimmy Kimmel makes Trump look like the clown he is. Trumps paper thin ego cant stand it. The Kirk thing is just the fig leaf.
Really? You can begin right there?....
Hilarious
It's not hilarious. It's sad that Americans - especially our leadership - think it's cool to make proclamations about a crime without evidence.
[deleted][✘]
Funny thing about your meme. Trump was right once again. It hurts. I know.
All the deflections to trump show exactly everything you need to know about the left’s guilt in creating this monster.
All the deflections for trump show exactly everything you need to know about the right’s guilt in creating this monster.
Meanwhile in reality, it shows that the tantrums by the left continue.
Most MAGAites wouldn't know reality if it crash landed like a meteor in their back yards and stamped its name on their foreheads. They are so deeply entrenched in the MAGAverse they actually believe most of the shit they're saying which, frankly, is fucking insane. Logic completely dismantles the idea of a coordinated "deep state" in about 10 seconds if one has an above room tempt IQ. Same with the conspiracy theories about Obama birthers, mind controlling fluoride, stolen 2020 election, airplane chem trails, pizza parlor sex rings, claiming Sandy Hook, Parkland, the Boston Marathon bombing, the Las Vegas shooting and even January 6th were 'false flags', or Soros, that apparently horrible Jew if you listen to most conservatives, trying to take over America.
Clearly, the MAGAverse is completely devoid of reality. Reality is anathema to the MAGAverse and they know it. But currently, they're desperately trying to claim the fantasy they made up in their clearly empty skulls is "reality", the ultimate rebranding, which should be adopted by the world and they should be treated as the superior white Christian humans who have always know what's best for mankind as they've always known themselves to be! Reality be damned if it doesn't blow sunshine up a white Christian conservatives' ass! /s
Thanks for the example.
You're welcome. You claimed a false reality, and I gave you numerous examples of just how out of touch Trump and his sycophants, succinctly defined as MAGAites and the MAGAverse, are from reality. I'm glad you could recognize and appreciate the clarity I provided.
Sorry, I misphrased it. Thaks for BEING the example.
I enjoy his podcasts and guests. Very informative.
This gets more serious by the day, irregardless of what those on the 'right' say.
Trump is a tyrant.
Most Americans are too soft and spoiled to truly understand what a real tyrant is.
Sometimes I wonder if many conservatives have seen V for Vendetta. In todays political climate, I would have a hard time believing that, if they saw it for the first time, they wouldn't be rooting for the High Chancellor and condemning the activists who dared to challenge his control of the populace through propaganda and imprisoning or executing those deemed undesirable like immigrants, homosexuals, and people rejecting the established government religion.
If you see Biden as the High Chancellor I suggest watching the film. If you are claiming to have seen the film, then trying it again with the sound on and your eyes open.
I'm not a fan of Biden, but to portray him as some authoritarian leader is simply hilarious.
This is a far more accurate depiction, though of course it's also an exaggeration...
The only political figure in America who even comes close to the High Chancelor is of course conservatives Dear Leader...
"I am the only thing standing between the American dream and total anarchy" - Donald J Trump
"They want to destroy you and they want to destroy our country" - Donald J Trump
"Our country is being destroyed before our very own eyes". Donald J Trump
"I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within, not even the people that have come in and destroying our country" - Donald J Trump
"Either the deep state destroys America, or we destroy the deep state". - Donald J Trump
He could still read what others prepare for him:
"Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic".
You mean a movie about a political party using fear of a virus to take away freedom, suppress "misinformation", and enact edicts dictated by a leader who was intentionally hidden away from the public?
I never saw trump intentionally hidden away from the public although I can think of quite a few who wanted to hide Trump after his injecting bleach or UV lights into the blood steam to scrub the virus out, when horse dewormer doesn't work.
Too much entertainment, not enough time, now we will only have Gutman and Levin like shows that never criticize or make fun od Dear Leader Trump, no mor press Club dinners for a few years, no point.
Nice attempt to reframe it, but if you've actually seen the movie you know it looks nothing like Fauci asking Americans to wear masks or social distancing. Here is the actual plot:
There is some mention of an avian flu pandemic, though it's certainly not central to the plot, but clearly what is depicted is how a rightwing ultranationalist party would handle such outbreaks which was lying to the populace just like Trump did when Covid hit.
Multiple times.
Correct.
It looks like requiring masks, prohibiting access to public places without vaccination, directing social media platforms to engage in aggressive censorship, telling people to report US citizens for things they said, suppressing any questioning of the prescribed government approved statements, and several other fairly serious forms of overreach.
You're really quoting Wikipedia as a source?
You've obviously not seen the movie. The whole plot is that the people currently in government in the UK got there by releasing a virus at a school to induce panic and scare people into embracing government oppression.
They used the people they arrested (gays, Muslims, criminals, etc) as test subjects for the cure to said virus. The protagonist "V" (Hugo Weaving) gets his name from the roman numeral above his cell. Evey Hammond (Natalie Portman) is the sister of one of the initial victims of the virus.
V goes on an assassination spree, killing most of the conspirators, who are all fabulously wealthy from their investments in the pharmaceutical company that developed the cure.
You've completely missed the fact that many of the terrible things the RW fascist govt did in that movie were, in fact, done to some degree by the Biden Administration.
“It looks like requiring masks, prohibiting access to public places without vaccination, directing social media platforms to engage in aggressive censorship, telling people to report US citizens for things they said, suppressing any questioning of the prescribed government approved statements, and several other fairly serious forms of overreach.”
Hey! I saw that movie,,,,,,,,,,,,wait, that wasn’t a movie.
I didn't miss it, it's simply a bullshit characterization of American Covid policy. I've seen the film many times, it's one of my favorites, Stephen Fry has been one of my favorite actors since Black Adder. The actions taken in regards to the supposed bird flu pandemic look nothing like those taken by the Biden administration. It's not just a stretch to try and connect the two, it's a continental divide you're trying to cover with flimsy nonsense. You're basically saying "Well they had masks on in the movie and we had to wear masks during Covid so that means the Biden administration is a far-right ultranationalist fascist administration!" After living through the Covid years and watching the movie recently, I see no correlation between what Norsefire was doing to manipulate the population in the film and what the Biden administration did which was take over an existing pandemic and push for a vaccine and then when one was available got it to as many Americans as possible. How anyone can bitch about that is beyond me.
But of course, this is all just a distraction from my original point and why I pointed out this film which is the arrest of a media personality in the film (Stephen Fry) for daring to speak truth or even parody the Dear Leader High Chancellor Adam Sutler which is EXACTLY how Trump reacts when faced with any criticism. If Trump could arrest and send any journalists to Guantanamo who dared to point out his lies, I have no doubt there would be dozens there already being tortured daily. Trump personifies the High Chancellor; he is the living embodiment of that rightwing fascist piece of shit. All this deflection to Biden is just laughable horse shit.
So you say. And yet you get basic aspects of it completely wrong.
I don't care if he's been rogering the Duke of York with a prize-winning leek. He shot my pigeon.
It was never a bird flu. It was a biological weapon released at a school in a terrorist attack. Are you sure you've seen this?
I'm not surprised you think so.
You appear to understand my posts even less well than you understand this movie.
It's clear you don't understand what happened in either instance. Let me help you.
In both cases, fear of the virus was used to justify removal of individual rights and to advance the political agenda of the group in power. Have you already forgotten "vaccine passports"? Did you really fail to notice how Biden used the pandemic to suspend student loan payments for years? Did you forget that liberal protests were permitted, bars and businesses were open, but churches were not allowed to meet? Did you miss the govt enforced censorship of social media and the encouragement for you to turn in violators?
Does all that just go into ocean of denial with anything else any liberal has ever done wrong?
Who has been arrested for making fun of Trump? Let's get a list going here.
Well when all else fails, let's leave reality altogether. I joke about people acting like Trump is Darth Vader or Voldemort, thinking it's an obvious exaggeration and people will get the point. But here you are, unironically invoking your own fictional villain. It's hilarious.
This is for all the little bitches in the media whining about Kimmel and other leftist fucktards losing their jobs for what they said. It could be a lot worse, just ask Charlie Kirk……
Kirk would absolutely not want this, if he was a man of his word and I have no reason to say he wasn't. I will however say that Trump and many others are doing the opposite of what the man preached. And everybody knows how loyal Trump is. He'd never not do something for political gains, say, over moral, ethical, or respect for a supposed 'friend', now would he...?
Disney made a business decision, I know many can’t make a point without deflecting to trump anymore, but this isn’t about Trump, it’s about Kimmel being bad for business, the same with Colbert, when you allow ideology (Waves to bud lite) destroy your brand and market share you have to cut the cancer out.
a business decision was made after a threat by the FCC was made. The FCC answers to Trump. Trump is on record saying after Colbert was cancelled, Kimmel was next.
We may rarely agree, yet I would not want your voice silenced. That is where this is leading, down a slippery slope, as my voice could be silenced as well, in fact in todays current events, it is certainly a possibility. IMHO the reason is Trump. Trump threatens shutting down ANY one who criticizes him or calls him out. He is dangerous to US, and our rights, as he continues to demonstrate.
So the company made a business decision, they valued their integrity less than Kimmel. they could easily have stuck with Kimmel and let the lawyers loose, it's Disney, they have been at war with Trump and DeSantis for years but now they wuss out?
Exactly but you can’t concern yourself with such details when triggered.
I think that depends on how you see "this". I agree I don't think there is a lot of evidence to suggest Charlie Kirk would have wanted the mechanics of the free market undermined for political purposes.
If you believe the only reason Kimmel is being fired is because of political persecution from the Trump Administration, then no, Charlie Kirk would not have wanted that.
If you believe that ABC was probably looking for an excuse to move on to some type of programming with increasing ratings instead of declining, and that Kimmel will undoubtedly land somewhere else, I don't think Charlie Kirk would have opposed it.
Who knows, maybe Kimmel can make a living with a social media channel where he goes around to Christian colleges with a "prove me wrong" tent.
The enormous irony here being that Kimmel openly celebrated Tucker Carlson getting fired.
Nobody could make a fool out of Trump as well as Kimmel does. He mocks Trumps intelligence ruthlessly .
Every day on Fox News The Five they say things way worse than Kimmel does. But they're not about Trump so they are good to go. Jesse Waters is mean , but doesnt have Kimmels ability to be funny.
Its a sad time in America right now.
Opinions do vary.
Kimmel, funny?
The rest of this thread was removed for no value and taunting.
A LOT of "but Trruuummmmppppp!" whining and crying coming from the usual people.
When is Fox going to fire Greg Gutfeld and /or Jesse Watters? They regularly say things more offensive than Kimmel does.
If people are offended by it they shouldn't watch it. That includes Kimmel, gutfeld and waters. But each company has a right to fire who they want.
If Trump is so offended about what comedians say he should be calling for Gutfeld and Watters to be fired. Of course he only cares about what comedians say about him. so
Wow. He doesn't like being made fun of. How unique.
Plus Gutfeld kicks all their late night butts in ratings. Advertisers are knock down their door.
Then what are they going to be offended by?
And some people just get offended to be offended.
Again. Doesn't have a fucking thing to do with it. Low ratings, declining ad revenue, bias political bullshit. It was bound to happen.
Nope. I seeded an article this morning that shows that was not the reason.
You seeded the opinion of a biased idiot.
When their ratings start declining.
Offensive to you, you mean.
Soon
Never happen, Mickey D's turns a profit.
Not to mention having to wonder if they spit in your food....
But customer service is at that level.
This administration is determined to make Greg Gutfeld the funniest thing on tv, and Gutfeld is about as funny as a sack of drowned kittens.
He already is the funniest thing on TV
I guess they are going to have to update the cover
Greg Gutfeld is to comedy like Lindsey Graham is to masculinity.
His ratings say otherwise
You think Kimmel was funny?
Yes. I’ve been in his live audience before. I feel sorry for you that you were born without a sense of humor.
Bad comedians say things to make people clap, not laugh." — Norm Macdonald
The claim he isnt funny is because he regularly humiliates Trump.
He has hosted both the Oscars and the Emmys numerous times. Someone who the industry thinks is not funny doesnt get those spots.
One has to be devoid of a sense of humor to not see Kimmel's satire on Trump's immediate deflection from how he is holding up after the assassination to the construction on his new ballroom as funny: Trump distraught .
Thankfully, IMO, we are seeing a trend reversing overt political bias in places where it should never have existed to begin with.
It's very possible that Kimmel's removal is simply the next step in this process.
I seriously doubt Kimmel won't be back on the air.
I think the question is "where"?
This is undoubtedly somewhat of a financial decision, like canceling Colbert. The ratings have been falling. It just looks like America is getting tired of the whole "liberal white guy behind a desk" formula.
There is probably a market for him on an MSNBC style network, where people tune in specifically looking for confirmation bias.
Blogger organizations do seem like a good fit for him.
iHeartRadio maybe?
It's funny that the people who are crying about Kimmel being pulled for saying certain things are the very people who demanded that others be receive the same treatment for not using "proper pronouns".
Somebody flagged Kimmel. The moderators censored Kimmel and gave him a ticket. Now everybody has gone full-bore meta.
On NT, all the meta comments questioning the moderators would be ticketed, too. You'd think SINNERS & ButtHeads had been invaded.
Ironic that progressives get apoplectic when "cancel culture " turns around and bites them in the ass....
And now we know Disney cancelled the show because their affiliates were freaking out and Kimmel refused to back down and planned to go on air and attack MAGA..
Zealots are going to zealot.
I wonder how those cheering Kimmel's firing now will feel when the next populist Progressive Admin pressures Fox News off the air? I mean, now that the precedence is set who's to stop it?
Did you miss 2021-2025?
plenty of examples like this, including threatening Fox affiliates, pushing for trump to be banned from social media, pushing for banning of topics and posted from social media etc…
It didn't work then, but it will the next time.Maybe those fighting back on social media, saying how unfair it is, will get fired from their jobs too.
Very possibly. And they'll do their best to turn the US into the UK where a thousand people a month are arrested for speech violations using two standards of enforcement.
That's why the outrage from the left over Kimmel is so performative. We know what happened in under Biden.
If they cared about this, they'd be pushing laws to remove FCC removal over content etc... But they'd never do that because they want that power for themselves to use. Anyone who supported Citizens United and giving the government the power to arrest people for criticizing a politician before an election has no standing to complain about free speech abuses, ever.
Just like MAGA is doing their best to turn the US into Russia now?
Is pointing out the hypocrisy of MAGAs who bitched for years about cancel culture and safe spaces performative? Perhaps you are correct... I did accuse MAGA of being performative about their outrage so maybe it does apply.
My whole point is why don't those on the right care about this now? I've been pointing out the erosion of rights long before...
Just sayin -
What? You think Kimmel is an Aryan?...
No, he is pointing out that Jimmy Kimmel being censored is an example of fascist tyranny. Something Goebels would do. It is the act of and a typical tactic of rank dictatorships...
Kimmel is negotiating his return with the employer who suspended him. Is that what goebels did?
Isn't that something that Biden did?
Phrases like that help elect the guy you are calling a fascist.
Keep it up. Please.
Gee. I think he was asking for it.........................
And..... Kimmel's back! Barr? Not so much...
Jimmy Kimmel's show returning on Tuesday, ABC announces
Jimmy Kimmel's show returning on Tuesday, ABC announces
Looks to me like they are taking Lenos advice of letting the people decide if he is on or not .
All he has to do is not lose viewers , or money for the company or advertisers .