Jimmy "The asshole" Kimmel tossed off thd air.

[dmallord]

FCC Brandon did not add his two cents comment 'easy way or hard way,' until he was interviewed on network opinion news. He was describing what the FCC perceived the broadcaster did. The government is allowed an opinion.

Whether it was before, after, or during is not what is of importance here. Consider the consequences of that right-wing podcast interview and the ramifications it could lead to.

The idea that the government is simply “allowed an opinion” is an oversimplification. Yes, individual officials can voice their personal views—but it is flatly illegal for them to use the power of their office to threaten or coerce private companies into censoring speech they don’t like.

The Supreme Court made that crystal clear in the unanimous 2024 decision NRA v. Vullo, holding that government officials cannot pressure or coerce private parties into punishing disfavored views. Carr’s remarks—“we can do this the easy way or the hard way”—fit the very pattern the Court warned against. Legal experts have already noted the similarity, and even Senator Ted Cruz, hardly a liberal defender of the press, called Carr’s actions “unbelievably dangerous.”

That’s why members of Congress have called for an Inspector General investigation. When the FCC chair echoes the president’s desire to punish networks for unfavorable coverage, it isn’t regulation—it’s jawboning. And when regulatory threats start to mirror the tactics of leaders like Viktor Orbán, it should set off alarm bells for anyone who values a free press in a functioning democracy. If we accept this as normal, we’ve already lowered the bar for government censorship.

This 'opinion' by the FCC chair was not a personal opinion; it was a veiled threat, directed and implying that retaliation would follow if Kimmel were not fired, ipso facto, in legal parlance.

 

[dmallord]

File a suit or shut the fuck up.

1A. Amirite?

 

[Lazaran]

How is what Trump said a violation. He is allowed his opinion as well. He is correct anyway. Kimmel knew what he was saying was completely untrue, inflammatory and offensive. While it is not a 1A issue it is an issue for initially the broadcaster and shortly after for Disney when they took action.

Jimmy Kimmel NEVER said that the shooter was definitively a MAGAt.

Jimmy Kimmel ACTUALLY said:

In his monologue on Monday, Kimmel said the "Maga gang" was "desperately trying to characterise this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them" and of trying to "score political points from it".



Reading for comprehension is NOT a strong point of the MAGAts.



Bottom line:

The MAGA(t) Gang WAS “desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk AS ANYTHING OTHER THAN ONE OF THEM” (AND trying to score political points).

Jimmy Kimmel was / IS right.





We. Told. Them. So.

 

[jomar]

Whether it was before, after, or during is not what is of importance here. Consider the consequences of that right-wing podcast interview and the ramifications it could lead to.

The idea that the government is simply “allowed an opinion” is an oversimplification. Yes, individual officials can voice their personal views—but it is flatly illegal for them to use the power of their office to threaten or coerce private companies into censoring speech they don’t like.

The Supreme Court made that crystal clear in the unanimous 2024 decision NRA v. Vullo, holding that government officials cannot pressure or coerce private parties into punishing disfavored views. Carr’s remarks—“we can do this the easy way or the hard way”—fit the very pattern the Court warned against. Legal experts have already noted the similarity, and even Senator Ted Cruz, hardly a liberal defender of the press, called Carr’s actions “unbelievably dangerous.”

That’s why members of Congress have called for an Inspector General investigation. When the FCC chair echoes the president’s desire to punish networks for unfavorable coverage, it isn’t regulation—it’s jawboning. And when regulatory threats start to mirror the tactics of leaders like Viktor Orbán, it should set off alarm bells for anyone who values a free press in a functioning democracy. If we accept this as normal, we’ve already lowered the bar for government censorship.

This 'opinion' by the FCC chair was not a personal opinion; it was a veiled threat, directed and implying that retaliation would follow if Kimmel were not fired, ipso facto, in legal parlance.

Well, members of congress can call for Inspector General investigations all they want. But one of trump’s acts was to fire them. Oops, no oversight anymore.

 

[PersonalFavors]

^^^You are in denial about the current state of affairs

The majority of Americans believe you are.

 

[PersonalFavors]

Shut up Ducky wannabe.
Jomar, keep on. You are helping your kind immensely.

 

[Rebel5soul]

You're ok with government coercing people as long as no lawsuits are filed.

You and your Communist partners in crime project your asses off, don't you?

 

[dmallord]

Shut up Ducky wannabe.
Jomar, keep on. You are helping your kind immensely.

Post #561 for future reference.

 

[LeeKee]

Still f'in creepy to me his preference to debate were young adults in college.

Are you ok with teachers talking to grade schoolers about sex or sex changes?

 

[Stopokochac]

I can't tell you how much joy it brings me to see him become a victim of the very cancel culture morons like him created.

 

[CuriousJInLA]

I can't tell you how much joy it brings me to see him become a victim of the very cancel culture morons like him created.

Please elaborate because no one knows what you’re talking about

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I can't tell you how much joy it brings me to see him become a victim of the very cancel culture morons like him created.

It’s not cancel culture when the government has you removed because you made fun of POTUS.

 

[YDB95]

Are you ok with teachers talking to grade schoolers about sex or sex changes?

If it's age appropriate, yes.

 

[LeeKee]

If it's age appropriate, yes.

"Age appropriate" with a grade schoolers? And not their parents? So you are the judge of age appropriate conversions with other peoples grade schooler? Sick.
But Charlie talking to college age kids (age of majority) is weird. Got it.

So basically you are self identifying as a predator/groomer. Got it.

Gotta explain that one away. But doubtful.

 

[ll74]

You and your Communist partners in crime project your asses off, don't you?

I'm discussing the current administration.

 

[jomar]

^^^You are in denial about the current state of affairs

The majority of Americans believe you are.

10:12pm

Shut up Ducky wannabe.
Jomar, keep on. You are helping your kind immensely.

10:14pm

Looks like the alcohol is fogging your posts. Good!

 

[Rebel5soul]

"Age appropriate" with a grade schoolers? And not their parents? So you are the judge of age appropriate conversions with other peoples grade schooler? Sick.
But Charlie talking to college age kids (age of majority) is weird. Got it.

So basically you are self identifying as a predator/groomer. Got it.

Gotta explain that one away. But doubtful.

Good catch.

 

[YDB95]

"Age appropriate" with a grade schoolers? And not their parents?

Yes, age appropriate. And let's get real here: what you mean by "and not their parents?" is, you're afraid children with transphobic and homophobic parents might learn GLBT people are not sick monsters. I sure hope they do!

So you are the judge of age appropriate conversions with other peoples grade schooler?

Nope. Didn't say that.

But Charlie talking to college age kids (age of majority) is weird.

Didn't say that either. It's not "weird" so much as it was punching down. He stuck to debating college students because they were less likely to be seasoned debaters who would see through his nonsense and defeat his arguments (although some still did).

So basically you are self identifying as a predator/groomer. Got it.

That says nothing about me, plenty about you.

 

[LeeKee]

Yes, age appropriate. And let's get real here: what you mean by "and not their parents?" is, you're afraid children with transphobic and homophobic parents might learn GLBT people are not sick monsters. I sure hope they do!


Nope. Didn't say that.

Didn't say that either. It's not "weird" so much as it was punching down. He stuck to debating college students because they were less likely to be seasoned debaters who would see through his nonsense and defeat his arguments (although some still did).

That says nothing about me, plenty about you.

Like it was stated. Talking to kids, grade school, not your kids, without the parents (as in during school)

What's so elusive? You are OK with that but Charlie was weird. Dude. Really?

Go ahead. Break my argument. You cant.

 

[YDB95]

Like it was stated. Talking to kids, grade school, not your kids, without the parents (as in during school)

Yes, having trained educators who know the facts provide children with age-appropriate, factually correct information.

What's so elusive? You are OK with that but Charlie was weird. Dude. Really?

Nope. YOU are the only one who used the word "weird" here. That's not my problem with Kirk. My problem with him was that he was a hatemonger who spread disinformation under the guise of "debating". That calls many adjectives to mind, but "weird" is not among them. (Honestly, I wish it were...but it's kind of what the right is all about these days.)

Go ahead. Break my argument. You cant.

If that were true, you wouldn't be putting words in my mouth.

 

[LeeKee]

Strangers talking to kids about sex has always been a no-go.
Trained educators...pssshaw...pesos with an agenda is more like it.

So, we disagree. You side with grooming other people's kids. I stand against it. And im sooooo terrible. So, what should become of my wicked ways? You wanna shoot me too? Gotta ask, cuz maybe I should type here with groomers defending their hunting grounds. Id be in some danger. Vuz ya know, anti pedophile folks are horrible. And have warped sense of boundaries and what not.
Got it.

 

[YDB95]

Strangers talking to kids about sex has always been a no-go.

Hence my "age appropriate" qualifier. Are you saying sex education is never acceptable?

Trained educators...pssshaw...pesos with an agenda is more like it.

So now teachers are Mexican currency with nefarious plans? Okay...

So, we disagree. You side with grooming other people's kids. I stand against it. And im sooooo terrible.

If you read my argument and interpret it as "siding with grooming other people's kids", then yeah, you are pretty terrible. Or at least none too smart.

So, what should become of my wicked ways? You wanna shoot me too?

I'll leave that up to your side, which has been the source of the great majority of the violence lately. Including against Kirk.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

Disney has lost almost 4 billion dollars after firing Kimmel. Lol

 

[LeeKee]

Dude, here the easy break down

A dude talks, unsolicited, about sex to someone elses wife is about to get dealt with. Most can agree. Would constitute as harassment.

But to a grade schooler, same scenario, unsolicited (dont know why it would be but anyways) someone else's kids and youre ok.

But nit ok with college students talking openly with Kirk.

WTactualF.

Whatever.
Sounds absolutely absurd.
Drawing lines of a side, the only side is tated is talking to kids like that or not.

Bring receipts for violence claim. Nit just repeated

Hence my "age appropriate" qualifier. Are you saying sex education is never acceptable?


So now teachers are Mexican currency with nefarious plans? Okay...


If you read my argument and interpret it as "siding with grooming

Dude, here the easy break down

A dude talks, unsolicited, about sex to someone elses wife is about to get dealt with. Most can agree. Would constitute as harassment.

But to a grade schooler, same scenario, unsolicited (dont know why it would be but anyways) someone else's kids and youre ok. Know your role, jabronie.

But are not ok with college students talking openly with Kirk.

Absurd.

Whatever.
Sounds absolutely absurd.
Drawing lines of a side, the only side im taking is talking to kids like that or not. I say not. You say yes. Seems pretty ridiculous.

Bring receipts for violence claim. Not buying that. Riots, blocking roads and beating people trying to get to work...lot more
going down at the hands of leftists. By a large percent.
Anyhow. Been fun. Ill monitor this later. But its a hard sell WHY its a great idea to talk to gradeschoolers about gay sex and sex changes and whatnot then try and hide it from the parents. Why not just creep in at night and be the creep youre trying to make into some justified practice. Same sneaky underhanded coward crap you are defending. Child molesters, dont they do the same crap?

But I guess you really find it wholesome and necessary. Whatever.

 

[YDB95]

Dude, here the easy break down

A dude talks, unsolicited, about sex to someone elses wife is about to get dealt with. Most can agree. Would constitute as harassment.

But to a grade schooler, same scenario, unsolicited (dont know why it would be but anyways) someone else's kids and youre ok.

Nope. Sex education is in no way the same as sexual harassment.

But nit ok with college students talking openly with Kirk.

WTactualF.

Whatever.
Sounds absolutely absurd.

Which is why it's got nothing to do with anything anyone here said.

Drawing lines of a side, the only side is tated is talking to kids like that or not.

Talking to kids like what, exactly? Are you saying you believe sex education consists of the way some creep in a bar comes on to women? That would explain a lot, I suppose...

But its a hard sell WHY its a great idea to talk to gradeschoolers about gay sex and sex changes and whatnot then try and hide it from the parents.

Teaching grade schoolers that homosexuality is not a disease or a perversion is not "talking about gay sex". As for "hiding it from the parents", I never said I supported that.

Why not just creep in at night and be the creep youre trying to make into some justified practice.

That's not even articulate.

Same sneaky underhanded coward crap you are defending. Child molesters, dont they do the same crap?

No, not even close.