Let's have a conversation

I don't see anything that resembles a solid piece of steel when he lays the backpack or whatever on the gutter. Feel free to take a still that shows a solid barrel.

Especially as he whips and it hits the ground. It looks like cloth only.
Can you agree he has something wrapped in a dark cloth that he places in the gutter, then grabs it with his left hand, right before he drops to the ground?
 
Prior to the murder?



It appears as it you're not replying to what was actually posted. You're just lashing out.

I will honor the supposed intent of this thread and ignore you in it for the time being.

carry on
SHUP silly ***. They shot twice at Trump, they tortured J6 for 4 dreadful years "prior to the murder".

Trump was Not shot at twice
I believe there were eight shots?
you came in late.

go back

read what it is you're really responding
 
This ugly period really has opened up the very worst in us. Our worst impulses have been given a green light, from the very top.

I've said many times that it has shown me that America isn't what I thought it was. At the same time, we're seeing much of this globally. So your point is fair. Give humanity an opening, and it can get pretty dark.
Social media is a cancer ruining society.
 
This ugly period really has opened up the very worst in us. Our worst impulses have been given a green light, from the very top.

I've said many times that it has shown me that America isn't what I thought it was. At the same time, we're seeing much of this globally. So your point is fair. Give humanity an opening, and it can get pretty dark.
The young generation is not the type to sit around and wait.
 
His did quite poorly at his Cambridge debate.

But again, Kirk who is a professional with a decade of experience, is going after teenagers.

One would think he’d want to debate his peers.
Surprise, you can't post any support for your claim. Oh well.
 
For those on the left who insist on having a 'conversation' about hot-button issues--remember that's all Charlie Kirk wanted to do.

"Let's have a conversation."

Charlie Kirk wanted to 'have a conversation,' and he got shot dead for it. Is it a conversation you want, or something else? Say, maybe, total capitulation to your own views of the world?

Think about that for a minute. Please.
What one person did does not fairly represent how the majority feels. As such, an OP such as this (raising it to mean an ideology of a large amount of people) is ridiculous
 
He ended up hiring the former AG of California and a two term (I believe) US Senator. Pretty good qualifications for anyone male or female, black or white.

Would you not agree?

Except he stated that he was starting not with that, but with race and sex.

And at that point, he was not the basket case he was later. He was clear about what he was doing, and he did it, clearly, right in front of all of us.

That makes her DEI.


Now if he had hired someone like Candace Owens who never went to college much less graduated it or held elective office, you may have a point. In this case you don’t.

Would you not agree?

No, i would not. Because you are ignoring what DEI is really about, and you are ignoring what Biden did. As Biden clearly explained it.

Race adn gender first. Then we look at actual qualifications.
 
It’s performative. They’re not there to have a discussion but to find a way to belittle their opponent, to embarrass them, in order to generate views from the audience.

It’s an attention economy.
Social media is a cancer ruining society.
 
No one is forcing them but, a conversation with a kid is not all Kirk did to spread his message.
We've been hearing the trope for years about how Charlie "ambushed" college kids when every one of them had a choice. As for his podcasts et al, there have been liberal podcasters and commentators doing the exact same thing. What's the difference?
 
What one person did does not fairly represent how the majority feels. As such, an OP such as this (raising it to mean an ideology of a large amount of people) is ridiculous
Unless you condemn it, it's easy to assume you condone it.

Silence is golden.
 
What one person did does not fairly represent how the majority feels. As such, an OP such as this (raising it to mean an ideology of a large amount of people) is ridiculous

The dem candidate called Trump a nazis. That is a call to violence.

It is irresponsible of people to ignore that.
 
Ok, I watched your vid. Hope you checked out mine of the roof.

I'm staying with my initial finding. He was hit from the front. And I think it might help you see why, if you look at or remember when JFK was (1st shot) through his neck and how he reacted. Kirk's shot would have caused something close to the same, had it been from behind. Instead, in the video from straight on, his head and arms don't move until after his shirt rises all the way up.

Then too, if it were an exit wound with that much of a wound blowing out instead of going in (ricocheted and round was tumbling)- There would have been a massive amount on his shirt, instead of the tiny dark spot we can see.
I'm considering all aspects of this. I still believe JFK was shot from the fenced in parking lot next to the grassy knoll. I have a video with a gent in prison who I believe made that shot. Happy to share if you're interested.

I personally don't see how a shot from the roof would have hit the left neck where the wound is. Like I said earlier, I see something in the video I shared with something behind his ear right before he's hit and that something disappeared. However, seems like an odd shot from that side. I don't personally believe the kid shot him. I still believe the gentleman in the black shirt motions with his left arm half second before the shot. I don't know what to do with that, but it is very suspicious to me.

I've tried repeatedly to do a frame by frame of the dude coming off the roof and I don't see a rifle. The cloth in his flaps, if it were a rifle, it wouldn't flap.

The dude was indeed on the roof, the dude definitely ran after the shot, but I don't see a weapon in his hand and that's bugged me since day one.
 
15th post
We've been hearing the trope for years about how Charlie "ambushed" college kids when every one of them had a choice. As for his podcasts et al, there have been liberal podcasters and commentators doing the exact same thing. What's the difference?
No diff all I did was make a clean observation.
 
Except he stated that he was starting not with that, but with race and sex.
Well, so did Trump before he appointed ACB. Not exactly a novel approach to governance.
And at that point, he was not the basket case he was later. He was clear about what he was doing, and he did it, clearly, right in front of all of us.

That makes her DEI.
You’re ignoring her qualifications and filling it full of your own moronic takes.
No, i would not. Because you are ignoring what DEI is really about, and you are ignoring what Biden did. As Biden clearly explained it.

Race adn gender first. Then we look at actual qualifications.
Qualifications of which where Harris was extremely well qualified....

And--oh by the way--they won the election by 9M votes.
 
His did quite poorly at his Cambridge debate.

But again, Kirk who is a professional with a decade of experience, is going after teenagers.

One would think he’d want to debate his peers.
can a man become a woman. Let's set a standard now.
 
Back
Top Bottom