Media Follies
By DB
@dgobucks226 (36975)
September 18, 2025 8:09pm CST
Here are some of the latest news reporting from "legacy media." The ridiculous rationalizations and coverage are enough to make you shake your head.
1. A correspondent on one of the "Three Stooges" networks ABC, NBC, CBS, this time it was ABC, praised Charlie Kirk's murderer Tyler Robinson's touching, incriminating, "I did it letter" to his roommate "boyfriend."
*The reporter after praising Robinson's grade point average, also quoted the letter saying he did it to protect his "male lover." I doubt if those comments soothe over and justifies the assassination of a husband and father to anyone with a brain. Try rationalizing that to his wife and 2 little children.
2. CNN's Kaitlan Collins no fan of the Trump Administration "stated erroneously" there were "no known motives" to the Charlie Kirk murder when interviewing Ted Cruz on Tuesday night. She went on to falsely argue with Cruz over the specifics of what was found by the FBI, which was that Robinson had been "indoctrinated by social media leftist ideology." This was confirmed by the "killer's parents" who admitted his behavior change.
*When Cruz pushed back on Collins misinformation, she tried to walk back her comment saying, "there was no direct motives." Nice try, but that's not what you said. Of course, it makes sense a news organization who routinely covers up for the Democrats would rather hide the fact from viewers that Robinson hated Kirk's conservative ideology, especially his comments about trans ideology. Many liberal stations and Democrat viewers are supportive of the trans community ideals including "mutilation of minors bodies."
3. MSNBC's Rachel Maddow after stating Charlie Kirk's murder was horrific pivoted to "how the Trump Administration will use the killing for broader crackdowns on violence." Just a guess, but perhaps one administration target might be the cities with the highest murder rates in the Nation. Dollars to donuts Maddow would be opposed to that. Or perhaps a "liberal enemies list" which she insinuated with "no proof" referencing an article in the NYT.
*Nice of this pathic MSNBC anchor to devote a whole 22 seconds to Kirk's assassination considering she did a whole segment on him last year calling him a "racist."
Photo- Salem Media
4 people like this
4 responses
@crossbones27 (51246)
• Mojave, California
19 Sep
Whats your point, show the good he did? Other than get both sides talking I I see no good he did. Just because they talked does not mean they did good. 94 percent of college students said they knew who he was but 30 percents said they believe in anything he stood for. They were just happy someone took the time to listen to them, which is the greatest thing he did.
Instead of glorifying, remember he was just a man and maybe just take the good parts from the bad parts like my ancestors have always taught me. Life is hard but when you do this, it becomes so much harder.
2 people like this
@porwest (108259)
• United States
19 Sep
He gave opposing viewpoints a microphone to speak alongside him and share their ideas and state their argument. He was shot for allowing someone to debate him and have their say in an open forum with him.
Imagine if the shoe was on the other foot, say, back when the KKK was doing what they were doing. Did they allow a black man to come into their meetings and argue against the words of the KKK? No, they'd have hung opposers from trees, and opposing viewpoints would never be allowed.
3 people like this
@dgobucks226 (36975)
•
20 Sep
@porwest Well said. What those don't understand try to cherry pick and criticize. Charlie said controversial things in the past. So, what! It is a free society with the right to express your opinion. But he "never advocated violence."
Telling the truth is no longer safe it puts your life in danger, only those telling lies are rewarded. Charlie corrected error with truth.
The left (news media) are masters of using "deflection" as tactics from what really happened.
"Strong men" like Charlie "were offended" by lies and misinformation, but the groups and people he debated were "offended" by hearing the truth, and therefore, showed how weak they were by using character assassination, calling him a "Nazi or Fascist."
2 people like this
@dgobucks226 (36975)
•
20 Sep
Since your unable to grasp the points, I'll provide some more insight, although I doubt if it will resonate with you.
The point is the left's media coverage of Kirk's assassination and how they use deflection tactics from what really happened (something you're also doing with your response).
The media is a big enabler of evil too. Those who listen to their violent rhetoric and believe it are either ignorant, uninformed, or don't care. And if you continue to watch these news outlets your culpable to the violence happening against Conservative podcasters, Republicans, ICE, and the Jewish community, some of their targets. And finally, the media teed it up for someone who became radicalized by their rhetoric to take out Charlie Kirk.
Another point is leftist social media has a responsibility to the public to provide facts not dis misinformation and outright lies as I mentioned in a few examples in my post.
The liberal left has become more violent since 2020 and, in my view, Democrats and social media have played a significant role in radicalizing them with their telecasts every day.
Social and mainstream media (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC) and Progressive Democrats helped put the "bullet" in the rifle used to assassinate Charlie Kirk. Their vindictive opinions and constant advocating for and making excuses for violent acts against Conservatives who disagree with their ideology, reinforces to their viewers or constituents that violence is acceptable to those who think differently than you.
That's the point! You should rethink your view...
"They were just happy someone took the time to listen to them, which is the greatest thing he did." -the only common-sense statement in your response!
1 person likes this
@porwest (108259)
• United States
19 Sep
To me, while not all of it is direct, there has been way too much acceptance of this killing by the left. Like I said, it's not necessarily directly stated. But the innuendos are clear and obvious. As I have said time and again, free speech is exactly what it is. Free speech. People MUST have the ability to speak their minds and share their ideas. Public opinion is what will determine if the message resonates with the masses or only a few. But no one should die over what they say, or what they believe. Ever.
But see, this is the problem the left so often faces. They literally hate. And that hate becomes like a disease. It rots rational thinking. It eats away at critical thought processes. It erodes emotion except for hate, which consumes all other emotions like a cancer.
Granted, we can also classify these commentators' speech as free speech. It's not even what they are saying necessarily that bothers me. It's their lack of compassion which underlines it. It's not coming from the heart, the things they are saying. It comes from a much darker place.
The good part of all of this is, I think the masses get it. They are watching and listening and paying attention, and I think the tides have turned a bit more than they were turning in the recent past. Hatred is not how we solve our differences, and it clouds critical judgements in finding real solutions to at least find common ground and accomplish what we want as a collective.
1 person likes this
@mytunemagic (20)
•
26 Sep
He was a father, a husband and a human being with a lot of knowledge. This was not done. He didn't deserve to die like that.
1 person likes this
@dgobucks226 (36975)
•
27 Sep
@mytunemagic Yes, insecure people looking for attention may resort to extreme measures. Media spewing hatred only causes those who do not have the intelligence to believe violence is the best way to win arguments and silence the opposition.
1 person likes this
@mytunemagic (20)
•
28 Sep
@dgobucks226 Unfortunately people continue to believe everything that media shows irrespective of truth or faked untruth. In order to stabilize a mentality such as that, media continues to repeat and re-repeat remarks and reels. Are we sleeping?
@mytunemagic (20)
•
27 Sep
@dgobucks226 that's the danger of lacking knowledge. People having stunted intellectual growth project their insecurities through threats. What was devastating is, his family was there when it happened.
1 person likes this
