MSNBC Analist Matthew Dowd blames Charlie Kirk for his own assassination.

Anyway. As an aside, and along the lines of the guy's firing, I imagine the web scrapers are working overtime on web boards like these.

Relevant learning...



screen-shot-85-webp.1155744


People would do well to think things through a little better before just emotionally popping off unless one is perfectly comfortable saying the same thing in a court room that one says on a message board.

I thought people were smarter than that but judging by some of the direct and indirect openly threatening content tonight, I guess I was wrong.

Do you think for a second that this web site would risk its own livelihood and wouldn't give up your details if demanded/asked for them by authorities? Think again.

Fukin dipshits...
 
Last edited:
People might say we can't blame leftist leaders for this crime, but the fact is we can. Because they are directly responsible for the crimes their followers commit. And they think they can escape being held accountable for their words and their deeds.

 
Cowards shoot unarmed people because their ***** hurts when they disagree with their opinions.

A Coward killed Charlie and that coward is your HERO
Boelter was your hero.


Man charged with killing a top Minnesota House Democrat ...​

1757582379369.webp
CNN
https://www.cnn.com › 2025/08/07 › vance-boelter-mi...
Aug 7, 2025 — Vance Boelter, 58, of Green Isle, Minnesota, was indicted July 15 on six counts of murder, stalking and firearms violations.
 
That would be conservative Republican Matthew Dowd, veteran of the George W. Bush administration.

Remember him? You all had 'W - Still the President' bumper stickers on your shitty vehicles.
You mean old guard, has-been, business as usual, you scratch my back and I’ll sing like a canary on your far left tv network Dowd

He’s so unimportant that very few people even remember that he used to be a republican
 
People are reacting like this is an anomaly, something weird when actually it really is how things are done here and elsewhere. Killing people to suppress change and preserve the ones in power is hardly new. Abraham Lincoln, the Kennedys, James Forrestall, Martin Luther King, Ronald Reagan, Malcolm X, George Patton, Fidel Castro, the Diem brothers in Viet Nam, Che Guevera, Donald Trump, all the foreign leaders we have eliminated and are still planning on, you get the idea. Why is this so hard to digest? Do you think a few little news stories is going to illuminate anything? Out of chaos order.
 
Last edited:
Filthy swine.

Well, I've given this a lot of thought over the past 12 hours as I try to get over the sick feeling of seeing Kirk murdered and die violently and bleed out his life blood right in front of 5,000 people.

Ever who killed him didn't want to just slow Kirk down, disrupt his public speeches or even hurt him, the intent was to see him die. These people wanted Kirk dead.

Now why does anyone want to see a nice, friendly, gregarious christian guy dead just for going around trying to politely confront political bias, polarity and ignorance?

Charlie was a big supporter of Israel and a friend to Netanyahu. If they ever get the guy who murdered him and get a confession or reason, I think we will find out that the people behind his assassination were muslim supporters of Iran, Hamas and Gaza.

I just want to know how a person gains entry to a university, goes out on the roof of a building with a rifle at a time when the whole area is filled with people, murders a person and then gets clean away, with no one seeing anything, helping, and the weapon not being found? I expect answers fast.

I'm actually a bit angry at Kirk for not learning the obvious lessons of Trump: stay away from outdoor venues with a view from many adjoining buildings and stay behind a bulletproof shield when seated. Worse, where were the spotters watching these roofs and buildings? They didn't even have pat downs or metal detectors for people attending the event.

Nor do I think the location was an accident--- I believe it was chosen well in advance because handlers believed that Charlie would be "safe" at a red state college in Utah.

Lessons learned: in hindsight, they practically telegraphed a prime opportunity and Kirk's people took none of the precautions he should have (though I understand he was probably wearing a bulletproof vest).

Apparently, the shooter knew that as well.
 
Dowd is mistaken on at least two points. The first, while minor, is yet important enough given his position as authoritative speaker and writer. He mixes plurals (these) and singulars (sort). Not professional.
The serious error is this advancing of the false "hate speech" concept. It is an insult to human capacity for thought. It is an insult to verbiage. It, itself, tends to incite and justify over-reaction to discourse. We could say that the very term "hate speech" is itself hate speech.
 
Any time they feel skippy
Keyboard Warrior!

You are a pathetic coward. Just a few years ago you were taking about taking up arms to PROTECT the Constitution. Now, when your cult leader wants to ignore it you want to take up arms against those who protect the Constitution.

You're a little ***** boy.
 
You mean old guard, has-been, business as usual, you scratch my back and I’ll sing like a canary on your far left tv network Dowd

He’s so unimportant that very few people even remember that he used to be a republican
No, I mean conservative Republican Matthew Dowd. He's still an actual conservative. Not a drifting, con artist more interested in padding his wallet than putting America first.
 
15th post
Keyboard Warrior!

You are a pathetic coward. Just a few years ago you were taking about taking up arms to PROTECT the Constitution. Now, when your cult leader wants to ignore it you want to take up arms against those who protect the Constitution.

You're a little ***** boy.
And you?
 
Back
Top Bottom