jakee

Choose what wisely? Why? Be more specific.

You are ignoring reality to suit your narrative. And again, no ill was spoken of Charlie Kirk by Kimmel in the comments that the government decided were unnacceptable. None whatsoever. You really should put quotation marks or something around the passages you copy and paste instead of trying to make it look like you're capable of writing them. You wouldn't want to be accused of plagiarism, would you?

That is exactly it. Whatever anyone thinks about whether Kirk should be criticised right now - Kimmel didn’t criticise him. At all. The only things he said regarding Kirk were to criticise JD Vance for spouting evidence free conjecture about the shooter, and to criticise the Republicans in general for politicising the situation. that’s what they couldn’t stand, and that’s what you’re going to get in Donald Trump’s free speech utopia - the chair of the FCC threatening to take your station off the air if you criticise the Republican Party.

Again - you brought it up. No one else mentioned it.you are the only person in this thread who has been trying to use her ideas. I can only imagine as a distraction from a discussion that wasn’t going your way.

He was never apolitical in a personal capacity, he was a registered Republican - and that’s while he was director of the FBI. Now you’re disappointed that he’s expressing a political opinion while purely a private citizen? Lighten up, Francis! As for Brown - whatever his history, according to your source he was currently on bail for a non-violent offence. Why should he have been denied bail in this instance? That’s like saying Trump should have been denied bail in the documents case because he might have raped someone while he was free and awaiting trial.

Like JFK. Everyone knew exactly what happened and why, no messing around whatsoever. Ah, the good old days.

I guess he’s making the point that right wing criminals are more likely to be hopeless recidivists while left wing criminals are more open to rehabilitation? Not quite sure why though.

It worked, didn’t it? Shameless sycophancy as trade for power doesn’t make them clowns. That’s just a coincidence

That's not a link to a post on this site. So when did people here use guilt in the debate? Certainly this time around you brought it up outta nowhere.

Bail is the release of suspected criminals back onto the street in advance of trial. That's what bail means. That's what it has always been.

So when you were bitching and moaning and crying about that you really just needed to lighten up?

So when you were bitching and moaning and crying about that you really just needed to lighten up?

When did you do that? You have in fact refused to retract everything from your OP, leaving it unclear what you have or haven't retracted. But no-one here has pretended it is just the right. Again, you are the only person in this thread who has pretended it's all from one side, when you started this thread specifically in order to pretend it's all from the left. So why did you want to excuse the right's wrongdoing when you started this thread? And what were you afraid to say about George Floyd?

My post was very simple - I don’t get how you’ve failed to read it properly. The report said no one set of beliefs dominates extremist killings. You are the only person in this thread who has argued that one set of beliefs does dominate extremist killings. So again, just to be absolutely sure, you do retract the entire premise of your OP, which was that the left are ‘the ones’ responsible for political violence?

The report said it wasn’t the case. You are the only person in this thread who said it was the case. You started this thread specifically to say it was the case. Despite much prompting you have not yet retracted those claims.