The wife of Charlie Kirk needs to sue the entire DNC and Legacy media

[teddyearp]

You are so stupid. Typical Trumpy. Maybe the relatives of the Minnesota state legislator who was killed by a Republican should sue the RNC. Judges who rule against Trump are receiving death threats. Kirk was a merchant of hate and he ended up being consumed by the monster that he created.

You lie. Vance Boelter is a Democrat. Hell his writings infer that Governor Walz had something to do with it.

 

[berg80]

They should sue? How did Trump and the GOP defame the said Minnesota state legislature and incite their assassination?

By referring to Dem's as baby killers, Marxists, libtards, communists, radical scum, horrible people, etc.

 

[teddyearp]

There is no place in America for you Nazis. You Nazis think everyone should be able to own a gun. You have opposed even background checks. You people are responsible for this mess.

Get fucked. You fuckers are the ones silencing speech. By assassination. THAT is a NAZI muther ******.

 

[berg80]

You lie. Vance Boelter is a Democrat. Hell his writings infer that Governor Walz had something to do with it.

Voters do not declare political affiliation when they register in Minnesota, and a state report connected to the work force board listed Mr. Boelter’s affiliation as “none or other” in 2016. A similar report in 2020 listed him as having “no party preference.”

But David Carlson, a roommate and close friend of Mr. Boelter’s, said Mr. Boelter voted for Donald J. Trump last year and was particularly passionate about opposing abortion.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/14/us/politics/minnesota-shootings-gunman-suspect.html

 

[Votto]

By referring to Dem's as baby killers, Marxists, libtards, communists, radical scum, horrible people, etc.

Is abortion killing a baby? Yes, a baby not yet born.

Is calling democrats like BLM Marxist hateful? The leaders of BLM declared themselves Marxists and Left wingers routinely walk around with such things as Che T shirts, a Marxist who proudly assassinated political opponents to attain power.

Are they retarded for being Marxists? Marxism murdered hundreds of millions more people last century than Nazism, so I say yes it is retarded and flat out evil, not to mention the never-ending oppression for the poor bastards that somehow survived their tyranny.

Is this horrible behavior? Yes, I think so, much like espousing Nazism is horrible behavior.

So, is this hate speech or simply calling the kettle black?

But to call your political adversaries Nazis, which incidentally means National Socialist, when these said people have never openly embraced Nazism or Socialism or suggested we round up Jews in mass to murder them or try to take over the world militarily, is defamation and just plain wrong.

Was it hateful calling Nazis Jew killers?

No, but it is hateful watching Left wing universities allow students to bully Jewish students as they sit around singing "Gas the Jews", yet not a word from the Left in outrage of this.

Why?

 

[teddyearp]

You are right, they are very unpopular, but will that cause them to be defeated in elections?

Unfortunately, no.

Voter's sentiments no longer seem to matter.

It could be an interesting study to see which states have a democratic Secretary of State, and how the (s)election go in them for Senate and governor's seats. We had one here in AZ for the last midterms and it was funny to see that it took two-three weeks to count all the votes and we could watch the huge Republican leads in many top seats slowly dwindle away as more 'votes' were counted as the days wore on. The SoS? Cartel Katie Hobbs-D who (s)elected herself as governor and made sure a weak feckless ex-astronaut got (s)elected as senator over a strong Republican.

 

[teddyearp]

IM2 lives for moments like this when he can generate more negative reaction scores to keep him at number one on the scoreboard. Yes, he really is that depraved.

Sometimes it may be best to just put them on ignore, therefore refusing them any bandwidth or attention at all.

 

[Edgetho]

 

[teddyearp]

uh. . . . well, the "appearance," of hand signals is simply an interpretation. What you saw was real.

There are varying explanations, so everyone can latch onto what ever fits their cognitive bias the most.

What Charlie Kirk's guards' 'mystery hand signals' looked like, according to veteran cop

Two men standing behind Charlie Kirk shortly before he was struck by the single bullet, seemed to be making hand gestures.

www.ladbible.com

Business News Live, Share Market News - Read Latest Finance News, IPO, Mutual Funds News - The Economic Times

Business news today: Read India Business News Live. Latest Business news and updates on Finance, share market, IPO, and economy. Discover Business News Headlines, Top Financial News, and more on The Economic Times.

economictimes.indiatimes.com

Man accused of giving 'hand signals' behind Charlie Kirk before shooting reveals the truth

He has responded to the 'viral accusations'

thetab.com

Truth behind person 'making hand signals' behind Charlie Kirk

Here's the truth about a member of Charlie Kirk's security team as he looks similar to Trump's Secret Service agent.

www.unilad.com

View attachment 1161416

I suggest you take a look at many or most of Charlie's videos. You will find that guy standing behind Charlie on one side or another in just about all of them. Unless he works for the Secret Service and Turning Point at the same time, you are wrong.

 

[teddyearp]

I used to but then you reelected Trump so now there is no such thing as having responsibility.

BAM! The truth comes out. The left feels that it has the right, the RIGHT, to burn, loot, and murder all who get in their way. Anyone see how close they are to the Palestinians?

 

[teddyearp]

Baby Jesus loves the left because the left rejects violence. Baby Jesus is going to personally cast every Trump cultist down into hell because they're such awful people. That's the best thing about being liberal, knowing you'll be up in heaven watching the Trump cultists roasting for eternity.

May God have mercy on your soul for all those lies.

But as Victor Davis Hanson says, this is the left. They are really brainwashed into thinking that they're on some sort of crusade to "save" America by fundamentally changing it from a Republic to a Socialist state.

I think there really was something a little extra in those masks and jabs.

 

[Death-Ninja]

For what? You really want to get into lawsuits over words? Be careful, because a lot of people will be suing the president. He's one of the worst examples of adult behavior.

See above, what he seeks to (lawsuit over words) minimize, is demonstrably erroneous, defamation & slander are not just words, inciting the fascist democrat base to direct violent, murderous action via deliberate, demonstrable lies and politically orientated disinformation, is not just words, its defamation, slander, and suborning treason & sedition!

Every nation on earth, including the United States, possess strong statute law in place for dealing with such, one can only wonder what above quoted was posting about lawsuits over "words" as a corrupt federal court was engineering, and then levying a billion dollar judgement against Alex Jones? I would speculate he is of course a total hypocrite!

 

[Votto]

Is Kirk’s wife expecting empathy for herself and children?

A word her husband said didn’t exist

Again, his words are being distorted, which is all the Left is capable of doing

Here is what he had to say about empathy

Should Christians Be Concerned about 'Toxic Empathy'?

I keep hearing the phrase “toxic empathy” as a way to describe people or situations where compassion seems to do more harm than good. But is there such a thing as toxic empathy? Isn’t empathy something all Christians should have?

thecharliekirkshow.com

Godwin’s Law is the rather comical idea that, eventually, someone is going to bring up Hitler in an online discussion. You can be talking about politics, sports, or pineapple on pizza—eventually, someone will bring Hitler into it. When that happens, the conversation is over. No one is listening anymore or debating in good faith. The word just shuts everything down.

There are quite a few words these days that can do just that. The words “woke” or “privilege,” to name a couple. I think toxic empathy does the same thing. It is either dismissed as an abusive concept or heralded as an uncomfortable truth that bleeding hearts want to deny. It’s become a lightning rod, which means it’s not a phrase you use to signal that you want a conversation.

And I think that’s unfortunate. It’s unfortunate because I think there is actually a good point being made here—but it’s slightly misplaced. If we can defang the concept for a moment, I think there is a decent argument being made; namely, that excessive or misplaced empathy can undermine both the person offering it and the person receiving it. It does this by distorting reality, preventing growth, and enabling dysfunction.

We might say that empathy is toxic if it absorbs emotions to the point of burnout or that it cripples you from calling out the self-destructive behavior in another person. Imagine a young woman in emotional distress. She feels lost, confused about her identity, and struggles with self-worth. She abuses alcohol and drugs to numb her emotions, seeks unhealthy relationships for validation, and adopts an identity entirely based on her emotions.

A “toxic empathy” would tell her something like, “You have to do what feels right for you, and if people don’t affirm your choices, they don’t really love you.” Instead of encouraging her to seek help or trying to anchor her in God’s truth, toxic empathy validates every destructive decision she makes. It prioritizes feelings over truth, and as we can see, it reinforces victimhood instead of calling to action. The biggest issue is that in the name of “empathy,” we are excusing or enabling sin.

If that is all that is meant by toxic empathy, I think there are some valid points of critique there. But the phrase has plenty of baggage connected to it. It’s often used as a lazy way to reject emotional engagement, and I’ve seen it used to shame people who care. It can easily become a weapon against kindness. In some spaces, it is used to dismiss real mental health concerns and has become a buzzword for culture war rhetoric (on either side of the aisle).

One of the biggest problems is that it’s lost any kind of meaningful definition. Some use “toxic empathy” to mean enabling bad behavior, others use it to mean absorbing too much emotional pain, and still others use it as a catch-all for being “too soft.” Without a clear definition, it’s easy to weaponize, making it difficult to discuss its concepts constructively. For that reason, I don’t think it’s a helpful phrase. It misses the mark, in my opinion.

How Toxic Empathy Misses the Mark​

The problem isn’t empathy, but misapplied empathy. Most of the problems we identify with toxic empathy—like enabling sin, reinforcing victimhood, or excusing dysfunction—aren’t caused by feeling too much for others. They’re caused by lacking wisdom in how to act upon those feelings.

Consider the person who avoids hard truths because they don’t want to hurt the other person’s feelings, that’s not empathy’s fault. It is, instead, a lack of courage to combine truth and love. It is good and right to be concerned with how the truth you need to share will be received and how it might impact the other person. Bearing one another’s burdens means that we don’t have the license to throw a truth bomb and then walk away and let the other person pick up the shrapnel. But there are some “grenades” that need to be lobbed—we just don’t have the right to walk away afterward.

The solution isn’t to have less empathy, it is to have wiser empathy. It’s not less engagement but more engagement. The Bible never warns against having too much compassion. But it does warn against compassion divorced from truth. In the same passage where Paul called believers to bear one another’s burdens (Galatians 6:2), he also says to carry their own load (Galatians 6:5). There is a biblical balance here.

Real empathy doesn’t avoid discomfort. It is willing to walk with people in their pain and not leave them there. Real empathy is meant to be transformative.

We can be tempted to disengage on both ends of the equation. Some might settle for faux-empathy (and empathy that doesn’t call for transformation) because walking with someone through life change is too messy. It’s much easier to sit with someone for a while, affirm their feelings, never call them to change, and “be there for them.” Pursuing change with them is far more difficult.

Likewise, some might throw out the phrase toxic empathy because they don’t want to sit with uncomfortable feelings. They are fine with calling people out and throwing those truth grenades, but they don’t want to stick around to clean up their mess. And when someone is hurting and struggling and not getting it like we think they ought, it’s easier to play the tough guy role and disengage from them.

Neither of these are biblical empathy.

 

[teddyearp]

Hate to break it to you, but almost no liberals knew who he was.

"Almost no liberals knew who he was" From the guy who claims that liberals do not lie.

Another ******* lie. How much are you getting paid. There are literally thousands of liberal folks on bluesky, X, TicTok, etc. celebrating Charlie Kirk's assassination.

 

[westwall]

Hate to break it to you, but almost no liberals knew who he was.

Get over yourselves, snowflakes. Step outside of your propaganda bubble occasionally. Yes, your masters may kept telling you how special you are, which is one way they control you. But that's not the case. No one else pays you any attention.

I hate to break it to you, gutter trash, you killed one man. Now you're going to be dealing with THOUSANDS!

Y'all done fucked up.

 

[teddyearp]

When conservatives shoot liberals ... as happens so often ... liberals do not call for more violence.

When? Links or again you are a bald faced paid liar!

 

[Carl in Michigan]

I defined trolling.

You’re not responding to what I’m writing, you’re just trying to be inflammatoryn

That means you’re trolling. There’s no discussion.

So if you call me FASCIST, NAZI or RACIST, you shouldn't be surprised if you get the Charlie Kirk treatment. Got it!

 

[teddyearp]

You're claiming Trump doesn't constantly call for violence?

Prove it.

 

[westwall]

When? Links or again you are a bald faced paid liar!

They keep pointing to leftists who murdered less lefty politicians and claim the TIM WALZ APPOINTED LEFTOID was a rightwinger.

They are imbeciles.

 

[teddyearp]

You're claiming Trump doesn't constantly call for violence?

You've squealed out pathetic lies before, but you're taking lying badly to new heights.

But go on. If you've got the guts, double down on the lie. Tell everyone that Trump never calls for violence. Let's see how craven and dishonest you're willing to get in the name of pushing violence against liberals.

Hey. What do you call all this?