When Kirk said those things they were divorced from the context of his assassination. Had he been referring to his murder then he might have said things differently or the same but ultimately he would rather his words benefit the right and Trump over the left.
Adventurous_Test_296 on
The context of nearly everything here, if it has to do with the Constitution and how government handles it, will change by tomorrow. This is part of their power. They need to be fought back on every detail, and held to account.
xnihil0zer0 on
This article wouldn’t have been completely pointless if she had actually been questioned about Charlie Kirk’s words, in person, or some other format where she was forced to respond.
Almost all the stupid shit put out by the Trump Administration is refuted by vast multitudes of people, all over the internet. Who cares, when they can just keep pretending that they didn’t read it?
Alternative-Finish53 on
politics are fucked in the nation now
MckittenMan on
Kirk was objectively correct. The modern perception of “hate speech” in the U.S. doesn’t exist legally.
What’s the difference between free speech and hate speech?
Nothing.
The modern belief of „hate speech“ still falls within free speech.
Hate speech doesn’t exist. But threatening speech does.
In a nutshell:
* Free speech is “I wish you would die.” Offensive or hateful language is protected as long as it’s not a direct threat.
* Illegal / threatening speech is “I am going to kill you.” Direct threats or which is not legally protected.
Saying “someone should die” in general is still protected by free speech, even if it’s disgusting. You only cross the line when you directly threaten someone “I am going to kill you.”
That is what people often confuse “hate speech” as. Saying some nasty crap, even though its still protected by law.
You can legally say whatever the F you want. But once your words directly threaten someone or incite immediate illegal action, that becomes illegal.
Examples of punishable speech:
* True threat: directly targeting someone with imminent harm.
* Incitement to imminent lawless action: urging people to commit illegal acts immediately.
* Harassment or stalking: repeated, targeted conduct that causes real harm.
There are no U.S. laws against what the people currently call “hate speech . The law only intervenes when speech crosses into threats, incitement, or harassment.
Comparisons:
* “This certain race needs to die” → protected speech (offensive, disgusting, but not illegal).
* “I am going to kill this race” → illegal as a true threat, and potentially a hate crime if motivated by bias.
Hate speech doesn’t exist legally in the U.S. There is free speech and there is illegal threatening speech (no hate speech). You can hate people and say it out loud — that’s protected. It only becomes illegal when you start issuing direct threats or calling for harm.
AcanthisittaNo6653 on
If politics didn’t create haters, there wouldn’t be hate speech in politics.
CluelessSage on
Hmm I wonder what it would look like if you turned tables…
138Chris138 on
So will twatwaffle Bondi be going after the neckbeards on tick tock or other social media platforms? They’re calling for civil war and killing people who think with more than two brain cells?
VanceKelley on
Kirk’s X post:
>“Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment. Keep America free.“
Bondi contradicts Kirk while claiming to be fighting for him:
>“There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech, and there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society.“
>“We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech.“
Yeahhhhbut on
Can we send her a list of people who have practiced hate speech? That, and a mirror?
tbisahw on
“Black women do not have the brain processing power to be taken seriously.”
-Charlie Kirk
Got banned from r/walkaway for quoting their hero.
melodicmelody3647 on
I’m sure everyone was wondering what Rob Schneider had to say about all this. Glad we got a quote from him.
Beetlejuice_hero on
Bondi sucks. She is pathetic, even by modern AG standards.
Everything, *everything* she says/does is with an eye on sucking up to her needy, equally pathetic boss.
She has been utterly horrendous surrounding the Epstein cover up. Just a pure liar who was all about posturing with the ridiculous binders when she thought it could be used as an electoral advantage („We’ll throw red meat to our conspiracy loving base“) and now is flailing since Trump is clearly a star of the degenerate show.
A useless government official. A lying, bullshitting fraud. We thought Barr and Ashcroft were bad. Bondi tops em all.
squash_spirit on
Such little snowflakes.
fermat12 on
You would think that Republicans want Charlie Kirk’s message to be spread far and wide, but for some reason, every time someone tries that, they are called out as being hateful.
VCR_Samurai on
Perhaps it’s just the unflattering lighting in this photo but Bondi looks absolutely haggard compared to six months ago.
merlin2181 on
“You cannot dox a conservative family and think it will be brushed off as ‚free speech.’”
– Pam Bondi
„When you see someone celebrating Charlie’s murder, call them out. And hell, call their employer.“
– JD Vance
Is she going to investigate JD Vance???
36bhm on
I declare hypocrisy!
Remote_Clue_4272 on
Well… it’s a wrap boys… she’ll be arresting Trump any day now. Thank God someone is stepping up!
Solcannon on
The groundwork for Trump’s dictatorship was laid when (a well known influence) was assassinated in February 1933. Baselessly blaming Democrats (the radical left) for the arson, Hitler convinced Mike Johnson to pass the Reichstag Fire Decree, which severely curtailed the liberties and rights of Amerivan citizens as Trump began eliminating his political opponents. Following its passage, he began arguing for more drastic means to curtail political opposition, and proposed the Enabling Act of 2026. This law gave the American government the power to override individual rights prescribed by the constitution, and vested the Chancellor (Trump) with emergency powers to pass and enforce laws without parliamentary oversight.
MindfulTimeWaste on
Rob Schneider said…
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
24 Kommentare
Hypocrisy running rampant, classic conservatives
„Oh, the irony!“
They should cancel this Kirk guy.
When Kirk said those things they were divorced from the context of his assassination. Had he been referring to his murder then he might have said things differently or the same but ultimately he would rather his words benefit the right and Trump over the left.
The context of nearly everything here, if it has to do with the Constitution and how government handles it, will change by tomorrow. This is part of their power. They need to be fought back on every detail, and held to account.
This article wouldn’t have been completely pointless if she had actually been questioned about Charlie Kirk’s words, in person, or some other format where she was forced to respond.
Almost all the stupid shit put out by the Trump Administration is refuted by vast multitudes of people, all over the internet. Who cares, when they can just keep pretending that they didn’t read it?
politics are fucked in the nation now
Kirk was objectively correct. The modern perception of “hate speech” in the U.S. doesn’t exist legally.
What’s the difference between free speech and hate speech?
Nothing.
The modern belief of „hate speech“ still falls within free speech.
Hate speech doesn’t exist. But threatening speech does.
In a nutshell:
* Free speech is “I wish you would die.” Offensive or hateful language is protected as long as it’s not a direct threat.
* Illegal / threatening speech is “I am going to kill you.” Direct threats or which is not legally protected.
Saying “someone should die” in general is still protected by free speech, even if it’s disgusting. You only cross the line when you directly threaten someone “I am going to kill you.”
That is what people often confuse “hate speech” as. Saying some nasty crap, even though its still protected by law.
You can legally say whatever the F you want. But once your words directly threaten someone or incite immediate illegal action, that becomes illegal.
Examples of punishable speech:
* True threat: directly targeting someone with imminent harm.
* Incitement to imminent lawless action: urging people to commit illegal acts immediately.
* Harassment or stalking: repeated, targeted conduct that causes real harm.
There are no U.S. laws against what the people currently call “hate speech . The law only intervenes when speech crosses into threats, incitement, or harassment.
Comparisons:
* “This certain race needs to die” → protected speech (offensive, disgusting, but not illegal).
* “I am going to kill this race” → illegal as a true threat, and potentially a hate crime if motivated by bias.
Hate speech doesn’t exist legally in the U.S. There is free speech and there is illegal threatening speech (no hate speech). You can hate people and say it out loud — that’s protected. It only becomes illegal when you start issuing direct threats or calling for harm.
If politics didn’t create haters, there wouldn’t be hate speech in politics.
Hmm I wonder what it would look like if you turned tables…
So will twatwaffle Bondi be going after the neckbeards on tick tock or other social media platforms? They’re calling for civil war and killing people who think with more than two brain cells?
Kirk’s X post:
>“Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment. Keep America free.“
Bondi contradicts Kirk while claiming to be fighting for him:
>“There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech, and there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society.“
>“We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech.“
Can we send her a list of people who have practiced hate speech? That, and a mirror?
“Black women do not have the brain processing power to be taken seriously.”
-Charlie Kirk
Got banned from r/walkaway for quoting their hero.
I’m sure everyone was wondering what Rob Schneider had to say about all this. Glad we got a quote from him.
Bondi sucks. She is pathetic, even by modern AG standards.
Everything, *everything* she says/does is with an eye on sucking up to her needy, equally pathetic boss.
She has been utterly horrendous surrounding the Epstein cover up. Just a pure liar who was all about posturing with the ridiculous binders when she thought it could be used as an electoral advantage („We’ll throw red meat to our conspiracy loving base“) and now is flailing since Trump is clearly a star of the degenerate show.
A useless government official. A lying, bullshitting fraud. We thought Barr and Ashcroft were bad. Bondi tops em all.
Such little snowflakes.
You would think that Republicans want Charlie Kirk’s message to be spread far and wide, but for some reason, every time someone tries that, they are called out as being hateful.
Perhaps it’s just the unflattering lighting in this photo but Bondi looks absolutely haggard compared to six months ago.
“You cannot dox a conservative family and think it will be brushed off as ‚free speech.’”
– Pam Bondi
„When you see someone celebrating Charlie’s murder, call them out. And hell, call their employer.“
– JD Vance
Is she going to investigate JD Vance???
I declare hypocrisy!
Well… it’s a wrap boys… she’ll be arresting Trump any day now. Thank God someone is stepping up!
The groundwork for Trump’s dictatorship was laid when (a well known influence) was assassinated in February 1933. Baselessly blaming Democrats (the radical left) for the arson, Hitler convinced Mike Johnson to pass the Reichstag Fire Decree, which severely curtailed the liberties and rights of Amerivan citizens as Trump began eliminating his political opponents. Following its passage, he began arguing for more drastic means to curtail political opposition, and proposed the Enabling Act of 2026. This law gave the American government the power to override individual rights prescribed by the constitution, and vested the Chancellor (Trump) with emergency powers to pass and enforce laws without parliamentary oversight.
Rob Schneider said…