AOC Ran Her Lying Mouth About Charlie Kirk in Congress, and Voted Against Bipartisan Condemnation of Kirk's Assassination and Honouring Him.

[WestCanMan]

From her own mouth:

• “We should be clear about who Charlie Kirk was — a man who believed that the Civil Rights Act that granted black Americans the right to vote was a mistake; who, after the violent attack on Paul Pelosi, claimed that ‘some amazing patriot’ should bail out his brutal assailant; and accused Jews of controlling ‘not just the colleges. It’s the nonprofits, it’s the movies, it’s Hollywood, it’s all of it,’” Ocasio-Cortez said. She added that Kirk’s “rhetoric and beliefs were ignorant and sought to disenfranchise millions of Americans — far from ‘working tirelessly to promote unity’ as asserted by the majority in this resolution.”

That pig tried to pretend that "Kirk called Pelosi's attacker a hero", but what he did was hoist Dems on their own petard for taking the attack on Pelosi so seriously after making it their policy to release violent offenders - whose only crime was attacking random, worthless civilians - back onto the streets.

Dem policy: "If you assault some random broad on the street, you're ok to go free, but don't attack someone that we care about, because that's different. We are important, so we are protected, and you people are not."

Once again: Dems support violence against their political opponents, 100%. The guy who shot Kirk feels like he is a hero in the eyes of at least one congressthem.

[robosmith]

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

From her own mouth:

• “We should be clear about who Charlie Kirk was — a man who believed that the Civil Rights Act that granted black Americans the right to vote was a mistake; who, after the violent attack on Paul Pelosi, claimed that ‘some amazing patriot’ should bail out his brutal assailant; and accused Jews of controlling ‘not just the colleges. It’s the nonprofits, it’s the movies, it’s Hollywood, it’s all of it,’” Ocasio-Cortez said. She added that Kirk’s “rhetoric and beliefs were ignorant and sought to disenfranchise millions of Americans — far from ‘working tirelessly to promote unity’ as asserted by the majority in this resolution.”

That pig tried to pretend that "Kirk called Pelosi's attacker a hero", but what he did was hoist Dems on their own petard for taking the attack on Pelosi so seriously after making it their policy to release violent offenders - whose only crime was attacking random, worthless civilians - back onto the streets.

Dem policy: "If you assault some random broad on the street, you're ok to go free, but don't attack someone that we care about, because that's different. We are important, so we are protected, and you people are not."

Once again: Dems support violence against their political opponents, 100%. The guy who shot Kirk feels like he is a hero in the eyes of at least one congressthem.

^ZERO EVIDENCE for your claims nor what AOC said IS FALSE. Do you even know how to post a link and quote? LMAO

[herbie]

Good for her.
Too bad media execs don't have as big balls as she does.

[Michael Hardner]

18 minutes ago, herbie said:

Good for her.
Too bad media execs don't have as big balls as she does.

I feel bad that he was killed. 

But it's weird for the government to threatened to persecute people who to disrespect him postmortem.

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

Good for her.
Too bad media execs don't have as big balls as she does.

For being a lying pig?

She didn't even stop slandering him after he was murdered.

Like I said: this is just another instance of leftists condoning/supporting abhorrent political violence. 

[robosmith]

16 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

For being a lying pig?

She didn't even stop slandering him after he was murdered.

Like I said: this is just another instance of leftists condoning/supporting abhorrent political violence. 

You're the one who is LYING. She said NOTHING about "condoning/supporting" violence.

You can't even prove what she said is FALSE.

[Legato]

13 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You're the one who is LYING. She said NOTHING about "condoning/supporting" violence.

You can't even prove what she said is FALSE.

So you're willing to believe a person who can eat an apple on the others side of a picket fence

[robosmith]

4 minutes ago, Legato said:

So you're willing to believe a person who can eat an apple on the others side of a picket fence

Prove it A-TROLL.

[User]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I feel bad that he was killed. 

But it's weird for the government to threatened to persecute people who to disrespect him postmortem.

Example? 

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, User said:

Example? 

The situation is hypothetical. I will say that it's being reported. It's happening, but I'm not saying that I believe that either.

What is clear is that there's a lack of trust, a lot of hypocrisy and finger pointing.

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, robosmith said:

You're the one who is LYING. She said NOTHING about "condoning/supporting" violence.

You can't even prove what she said is FALSE.

Shut up, loser. 

She literally refused to condemn Kirk's murderer in Congress. 

[User]

50 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

The situation is hypothetical. I will say that it's being reported. It's happening, but I'm not saying that I believe that either.

What is clear is that there's a lack of trust, a lot of hypocrisy and finger pointing.

You went from saying Hypothetical to saying it is reported to saying its happening... 

What exactly is happening -> Example?

 

[herbie]

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

For being a lying pig?

How's about the thousands of lying pigs that think Kimmel was punished over saying something about Charlie Kirk?
He barely said shit about him, absolutely nothing negative. He pointed out the Main Lying Pig was more interested in blabbing about his Ballroom than his own concern over the shooting. That's what made the nutless wonders at ABC react,

Go on and pretend otherwise,

[User]

31 minutes ago, herbie said:

How's about the thousands of lying pigs that think Kimmel was punished over saying something about Charlie Kirk?
He barely said shit about him, absolutely nothing negative. He pointed out the Main Lying Pig was more interested in blabbing about his Ballroom than his own concern over the shooting. That's what made the nutless wonders at ABC react,

Go on and pretend otherwise,

Well, lying about how MAGA is desperately trying to pin the shooting onto someone else other than him being a MAGA was about Charlie Kirk you fool. Since he was the one murdered. 

And according to reports, it was not only that he lied about that, it was that he was fully planning on doing it again and doubling down the following night too. 

 

[Legato]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

How's about the thousands of lying pigs that think Kimmel was punished over saying something about Charlie Kirk?
He barely said shit about him, absolutely nothing negative. He pointed out the Main Lying Pig was more interested in blabbing about his Ballroom than his own concern over the shooting. That's what made the nutless wonders at ABC react,

Go on and pretend otherwise,

Your concern for a washed up halfwit is commendable.

Now show us some concern for Kirks assassination.

I'll listen for an exploding head.

[herbie]

That'll be the day. I have zero opinion on your darling hero. If you insist non-glorification of a loudmouth is the same as supporting the violence and shootings you've made a definition of American culture, more fool you.
If you think the media kow-towing to the Diapered Dictator is acceptable, more fool doesn't come close to describing you.

Shame that this happened at this particular time. Great distraction from Epstein, Epstein, Epstein. As Dana Carvey used to say on SNL:

How CONVENIENT !

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Shut up, loser. 

She literally refused to condemn Kirk's murderer in Congress. 

What?! Literally? Lock her up! LMAO 

No ONE is REQUIRED TO DO THAT. Duh 

YOU'VE SAID NOTHING about Trump HONORING TRAITORS to the US who killed 300,000 US SOLDIERS. 

300,000 dead vs. 1 YOU CARE ABOUT. 🤮

Edited September 21, 2025 by robosmith

[Nationalist]

14 hours ago, herbie said:

Good for her.
Too bad media execs don't have as big balls as she does.

I hear AOC can take 2 big balls in her mouth.

[Barquentine]

13 hours ago, User said:

it was that he was fully planning on doing it again and doubling down the following night too.

So you want to get rid of people based on what you 'heard' they 'might' say?

[Barquentine]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

I hear AOC can take 2 big balls in her mouth

That's the level of debate we've come to expect from your side.

[Legato]

12 hours ago, herbie said:

That'll be the day. I have zero opinion on your darling hero. If you insist non-glorification of a loudmouth is the same as supporting the violence and shootings you've made a definition of American culture, more fool you.
If you think the media kow-towing to the Diapered Dictator is acceptable, more fool doesn't come close to describing you.

Shame that this happened at this particular time. Great distraction from Epstein, Epstein, Epstein. As Dana Carvey used to say on SNL:

How CONVENIENT !

Try to rise above your TDS, your low-life comments do not do you any favours.

Conspiracy much?

[User]

1 hour ago, Barquentine said:

So you want to get rid of people based on what you 'heard' they 'might' say?

What do you mean by I want to get rid of them? 

If you mean, that those involved in the network business have unique insights, connections, and understandings for the programming they are going to be putting on the air before they do so and thus made business decisions in the interest of what they found morally wrong and distasteful or outright lies, so they chose not to air it, then yeah. 

That is what responsible people do. 

 

[User]

1 hour ago, Barquentine said:

That's the level of debate we've come to expect from your side.

Yeah... you didn't waste much time shitting all over Kirk after he was murdered... but you threw in the "he didn't deserve to die" part in there as like a small afterthought. 

You have no problem throwing the mud around when it suits you on here. 

[Barquentine]

23 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Dems support violence against their political opponents, 100%.

https://www.salon.com/2025/09/20/right-wing-extremist-violence-is-more-frequent-and-more-deadly

Based on government and independent analyses, right-wing extremist violence has been responsible for the overwhelming majority of fatalities, amounting to approximately 75% to 80% of U.S. domestic terrorism deaths since 2001.

[User]

3 minutes ago, Barquentine said:

https://www.salon.com/2025/09/20/right-wing-extremist-violence-is-more-frequent-and-more-deadly

Based on government and independent analyses, right-wing extremist violence has been responsible for the overwhelming majority of fatalities, amounting to approximately 75% to 80% of U.S. domestic terrorism deaths since 2001.

Yes, you missed that big qualifier there, "domestic terrorism" or domestic violent extremism... these are all not measure of mere political violence. 

Hard to even take seriously any article that doesn't even mention Black Lives Matter related leftist violence either.