Charlie Kirk assassinated at Utah campus event

Status
Not open for further replies.
New York Times

Kirk Shooting Suspect Held 'Leftist Ideology,' Utah Governor Says

Gov. Spencer Cox said the suspect had been "radicalized," and noted he had a romantic partner who is transitioning from male to female who is cooperating fully with investigators.

This should be a link to the full article:


Here is most of it

Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah on Sunday provided new information about the background and political leanings of the 22-year-old accused of killing Charlie Kirk, saying that the suspect had a "leftist ideology" and had also been in a romantic relationship with a partner who was in the process of transitioning from male to female.

Mr. Cox, speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," described the suspect, Tyler Robinson, as a "very normal young man" who appeared to have been "radicalized" some time after he dropped out of college and moved back to his hometown in southern Utah, where he had spent the past few years.

Mr. Cox did not go into specifics about Mr. Robinson's ideological views or offer a clear picture of them. Mr. Cox said Mr. Robinson had spent much of his time immersed in online gaming, message boards and parts of what the governor called the "deep, dark internet."

Mr. Cox, a Republican, did not detail a motive for the shooting of Mr. Kirk, a prominent conservative activist. The suspect's motive has become the subject of fevered debate as President Trump and some Republicans have blamed Democrats and the "radical left."
"The why behind this, again, we're all drawing lots of conclusions on how someone like this could be radicalized," Mr. Cox said. "And I think that those are important questions for us to ask and important questions for us to answer."

The governor said that Mr. Robinson had not been cooperating with the investigation and that investigators were gathering information from the suspect's friends and family.

Mr. Cox said the suspect's romantic partner did not have any advance knowledge about the shooting and was "shocked" by what happened. The authorities have indicated that the partner, whom they have identified as Mr. Robinson's roommate, has cooperated fully with the investigation and provided private messages that incriminated Mr. Robinson and helped lead to his arrest.

The Times is not identifying the suspect's partner in this article because the authorities have said he was not involved in the crime and is cooperating.

The new information about the suspect's romantic relationship is likely to raise further questions about his motive and ideology, which are a focus of the official investigation but also the subject of intense speculation on social media and even among public officials.
Mr. Cox said more information would be available on Tuesday, when the suspect is expected to be formally charged by local prosecutors. It was not yet clear if he had a lawyer.
 
I'm glad to hear the shooter's trans partner is cooperating with the investigation and hopefully helping in build the case. The shooter's partner seems like he was unaware about the shooter was planning this and it is a surprise to him.

New York Times

Kirk Shooting Suspect Held 'Leftist Ideology,' Utah Governor Says

Gov. Spencer Cox said the suspect had been "radicalized," and noted he had a romantic partner who is transitioning from male to female who is cooperating fully with investigators.

This should be a link to the full article:


Here is most of it

Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah on Sunday provided new information about the background and political leanings of the 22-year-old accused of killing Charlie Kirk, saying that the suspect had a "leftist ideology" and had also been in a romantic relationship with a partner who was in the process of transitioning from male to female.

Mr. Cox, speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," described the suspect, Tyler Robinson, as a "very normal young man" who appeared to have been "radicalized" some time after he dropped out of college and moved back to his hometown in southern Utah, where he had spent the past few years.

Mr. Cox did not go into specifics about Mr. Robinson's ideological views or offer a clear picture of them. Mr. Cox said Mr. Robinson had spent much of his time immersed in online gaming, message boards and parts of what the governor called the "deep, dark internet."

Mr. Cox, a Republican, did not detail a motive for the shooting of Mr. Kirk, a prominent conservative activist. The suspect's motive has become the subject of fevered debate as President Trump and some Republicans have blamed Democrats and the "radical left."
"The why behind this, again, we're all drawing lots of conclusions on how someone like this could be radicalized," Mr. Cox said. "And I think that those are important questions for us to ask and important questions for us to answer."

The governor said that Mr. Robinson had not been cooperating with the investigation and that investigators were gathering information from the suspect's friends and family.

Mr. Cox said the suspect's romantic partner did not have any advance knowledge about the shooting and was "shocked" by what happened. The authorities have indicated that the partner, whom they have identified as Mr. Robinson's roommate, has cooperated fully with the investigation and provided private messages that incriminated Mr. Robinson and helped lead to his arrest.

The Times is not identifying the suspect's partner in this article because the authorities have said he was not involved in the crime and is cooperating.

The new information about the suspect's romantic relationship is likely to raise further questions about his motive and ideology, which are a focus of the official investigation but also the subject of intense speculation on social media and even among public officials.
Mr. Cox said more information would be available on Tuesday, when the suspect is expected to be formally charged by local prosecutors. It was not yet clear if he had a lawyer.
 
Thousands of TPUSA startups are happening now, and memberships. 40k+ blacklist of people talking shit or celebrating what happened to Charlie in the works, reddit, bsky, and Ree doing damage control. Buckle in you guys, things are just getting started
 
Last edited:
In an ideal world I would not support doxxing but it is clear some people don't want reasonable debate so they deserve to get a taste of their own medicine.

People really have no idea how much this has galvanized people.
When people connect the details of their lives to their social media accounts they are doxxing themselves. They're the idiots telling folks where they live, work, and what groups they're affiliated with. It's their own stupidity that's ending their connections and careers, not people who are boosting the signal to their employers.

This event definitely galvanized people. Sane people don't want dangerous psychopaths who support cold blooded murder living and working in their communities. They need to be told in no uncertain terms that they are the bad guys.
 
wxpBcN565xjwehT1.jpeg
 
Good synopsis of the "prediction" tweets

 
Is not a government hit list for prosecution. If an employer doesnt want to do anything, they can just not look at it.

There are some dodgy entries to it already. But also plenty that make you say "hmmmmm", and this person is in charge of my children's education?
Doxing has never been about government prosecution, so I'm not sure why you think that makes it OK unless you're fine with the practice in general.
 

Political violence is such a vague term though. Yes, obviously, assassinations are political violence. But war is political violence. Police brutality is political violence. Guerilla warfare is political violence. Russia's invasion of Ukraine and Ukraine's defense is political violence. What's happening in Israel and Palestine is political violence. Civilian uprising against totalitarian government is political violence.

It's funny, because so many of these politicians who are emphatically stating that political violence is never acceptable have also almost certain supported wars, or drone strikes, etc.. etc.. etc..


(This shouldn't have to be said, but I'm of course completely against the assassination and I'm also against war. I'm just saying the term is quite vague and covers a ton of different things.)
 
Last edited:
I think we typically consider political violence justified in the absence of some form of representative government. The American revolution is celebrated after all.

I wonder if "Never" actually had some caveats attached to it in this case.
 
The Ukraine democracy protests were peaceful. It was the government that changed the tone by cracking down on them.
But fighting back against the government trying to stop your peaceful assembly would be political violence.
 
But fighting back against the government trying to stop your peaceful assembly would be political violence.
Lets say Elon Musk led a march of 1 million people in Washington to argue that the US government should be run as a corporation by him. Then US army snipers shoot him and 1000 of his followers. Would you consider it unjustifiable political violence if any of them fought back?
 
Last edited:
Lets say Elon Musk led a march of 1 million people in Washington to argue that the US government should be run as a corporation by him. Then US army snipers shoot him and 1000 of his followers. Would you consider it unjustifiable political violence if any of them fought back?
But that's not the question in the graphic.

Justified or unjustified doesn't fit in never.
 
Lets say Elon Musk led a march of 1 million people in Washington to argue that the US government should be run as a corporation by him. Then US army snipers shoot him and 1000 of his followers. Would you consider it unjustifiable political violence if any of them fought back?
That's what I mean. Without some kind of qualifier then obviously political violence is acceptable - hell the US was founded on political violence.
 
"Never" is a stupid word. If you vote for a government that breaks all their promises and sells the country to foreign powers, of course it's justified that people revolt and burn down the presidential house. The question should define what "political violence" means. Punching someone you don't like is never justified.
 
I'm glad to hear the shooter's trans partner is cooperating with the investigation and hopefully helping in build the case. The shooter's partner seems like he was unaware about the shooter was planning this and it is a surprise to him.
Yeah, sure... I don't buy that for a second. I wouldn't be surprised if he was the one pushing for it. I hope they investigate him fully.

I bet he's cooperating, shit just got real for him. He knows that if they get even a hint that he helped, he's cooked.
 
So yesterday I didnt get anything recommended regarding this topic on reddit. So I searched for the killers name and did see the news posted on some subs that he was living together with a transgender person. These topics did get downvoted to 0 pretty much everywhere outside of /conservative.

Today I open reddit and the first thing I see is this:



Look at the upvotes and look how people try to argue that bob vylan is not celebrating.
But somehow reddit seems to love celebrating violence.. I mean this is the stuff the guy was saying on stage:

"Rest in peace, Charlie Kirk, you piece of shit"
"If you talk shit, you will get banged"
"Any snipers in the room?"
"Fuck the fascists. Fuck the zionists. Get out there and fight them. Get out there and meet them on the street. Get out there and let them know that you do not stand with them."

Nothing but praise in the comment section for bob vylan. Police and FBI are sratching their head how the killer could get radicalized. But isnt this right in front of us nothing else than a bunch of radicals? It just needs one of these people thinking its worth murdering someone else.
 
It's funny, because so many of these politicians who are emphatically stating that political violence is never acceptable have also almost certain supported wars, or drone strikes, etc.. etc.. etc..

also those politicians are those who say that America needs the second amendment to fight against an oppressive government, should the moment come...
which would also be political violence.

so the support of political violence is essentially baked into the American constitution lol
 

"The feds have widened their investigation into the assassination of Charlie Kirk to probe whether pro-trans, online groups and others connected with Tyler Robinson knew in advance about the plan to kill the MAGA influencer, The Post has learned.

Law enforcement sources said that investigators are examining leftist groups both in Utah and online to figure out if they helped him with the shooting — or at least heard it was going to happen.

The probe includes groups in online gaming community Steam, as well as a pro-trans organization called Armed Queers SLC, which took down their Instagram after Kirk was killed, the source confirmed."
 

Almost every revolution involves some amount of violence. As a whole, the younger people are in America, the less money they have, the more likely they'll do worse than their parents, and the more angry they are about the situation. I'm not surprised to see younger people are more open to revolution than the retired boomer generation who isn't dealing with the same problems. The system isn't working for them, and it's getting worse from their perspective.

Not to mention you could probably take that poll in any of the last 5 decades and get the same result. Younger people are more inclined towards excitement seeking while older people tend to want safety and security.
 
Ya that political violence poll is more fear mongering garbage from cable news networks,

Baby boomers are retarded--Do they think what the colonists did to resist British tyranny was peaceful? Yet they 100% support that. So yes, you are retarded.
 
Last edited:
That's what I mean. Without some kind of qualifier then obviously political violence is acceptable - hell the US was founded on political violence.
For a question like this it does depend on what "political violence" looks like to the person being asked. But perhaps you live in a system where political violence is defined by the state and they define it so any public protest is political violence so they can use violence. Or more likely terrorism now because of the almost limitless power that gives them.
 
Trump himself gives Kirk a lot of credit for his win. I think the failed assassination attempt helped him, but I can't be certain it single handedly one the election. For the monumental event that it was, it didn't stick in the public consciousness for too long.

Regardless, none of that contradicts my point. Kirk was not an "everyman".
Thats how he started out. Making videos of having debates with people in public. Something anyone could do. Its easy for people to see themselves in his shoes. That's why he's seen as an "Everyman"
 
So yesterday I didnt get anything recommended regarding this topic on reddit. So I searched for the killers name and did see the news posted on some subs that he was living together with a transgender person. These topics did get downvoted to 0 pretty much everywhere outside of /conservative.

Today I open reddit and the first thing I see is this:



Look at the upvotes and look how people try to argue that bob vylan is not celebrating.
But somehow reddit seems to love celebrating violence.. I mean this is the stuff the guy was saying on stage:

"Rest in peace, Charlie Kirk, you piece of shit"
"If you talk shit, you will get banged"
"Any snipers in the room?"
"Fuck the fascists. Fuck the zionists. Get out there and fight them. Get out there and meet them on the street. Get out there and let them know that you do not stand with them."

Nothing but praise in the comment section for bob vylan. Police and FBI are sratching their head how the killer could get radicalized. But isnt this right in front of us nothing else than a bunch of radicals? It just needs one of these people thinking its worth murdering someone else.


Quickest stop gap here is to freeze all assets of anyone publishing extremist bullshit on these platforms. Whatever their alignment or affiliation. Just tie them up for years.

Twitch, Twitter, Bluesky just arent going to do anything.
 
A point my friends were discussing which we're not sure on- maybe there's an explanation but we've missed it

How did the gun end up assembled in the woods? The footage of him climbing off the roof, he has a bag, but surely not big enough for the rifle? Possible it was collapsed after the shot?

EDIT: looking at footage again and screenshots he does have the rifle when fleeing
 
Last edited:
Blaming video games is an old rerun for Fox News.
Ever since the guy was shown, people have had to start Olympic levels of mental gymnastics to somehow create this Antifa killer; the narrative has moved on. They could not sell the Trump shooter as well, so that died down fast too.

On Twitter the anti-vaxxers have moved to video games, others to the deep state (starting to show pictures of drones), and of course some blame the Jews again, because that has worked for almost 2000 years now. :messenger_dizzy:

Trump has already moved on; there is nothing to gain anymore, and after the Russian and Chinese bots and propagandists have done their thing too, everybody is going back to their bubble again.
 
This might be fucked up to say…

But shouldn't leftists be the most staunch supporters of 2a?

2a was designed to protect us from tyrannically governments.

Leftist logic is that Trump is a dictator.

Trump almost had his brains blown out on live television by a supposed lone gun man who was able to bypass secret service protection.

And now Charlie Kirk.

I obviously do not condone political violence in anyway, but clearly there is an argument to made for supporting the 2a if you truly think we elected a dictator.

just seems contradictory.
 
This might be fucked up to say…

But shouldn't leftists be the most staunch supporters of 2a?

2a was designed to protect us from tyrannically governments.

Leftist logic is that Trump is a dictator.

Trump almost had his brains blown out on live television by a supposed lone gun man who was able to bypass secret service protection.

And now Charlie Kirk.

I obviously do not condone political violence in anyway, but clearly there is an argument to made for supporting the 2a if you truly think we elected a dictator.

just seems contradictory.
does anyone really think your guns are going to help you against a tyrannical government? I feel like most people agree guns are mostly for personal/home protection at this point. Not sure what your guns are going to do when they drone strike ur house :<

it's gona be these things going door to door
giphy-6.gif


source.gif


50a9656938f6a9562c58347b713b352f.gif


god help us
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom