By Laurie XXXXX
SAN DIEGO — The suppression of free speech in the United States has been escalating. Given the cancellation of the Stephen Colbert show, the suspension of Jimmy Kimmel’s show, and Trump and Pam Bondi’s vow to “target the radical left” for promoting political violence, I have redacted my original column about the Charlie Kirk assassination and the Administration’s response to it to avoid being arrested by the DOJ or being sued by Donald Trump.
Charlie Kirk, a XXXXX-XXXX XXXXXXXXX, was killed by a XXXX shooter. Feeling that Kirk was a brother from another mother, Trump blamed the radical left and pledged to prosecute its proponents. He added that XXXX-XXXX extremists only use violence to fight crime.
Was that what the 1/6 XXXXXXXXXX were doing when they XXXXXX the XXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXXX it and XXXXXXX the XXXXXXX Police? Did they want to demonstrate that the XXXXXXX Police were XXXXXXXX of defending Congress and needed to be replaced by the XXXXX Boys and XXXX Keepers? In any case, they must of have been innocent of any crimes since Trump XXXXXXXX them.
Was David DePape fighting crime when he XXXXXXX Paul Pelosi with a XXXXXX? The XXXXXX wasn’t so serious as illustrated by Trump insinuating it was not XXXXXXXX motivated and labeling Nancy Pelosi an “XXXXXX.”
Was the XXXXXXXX of Minnesota legislator Melissa Hortman and her husband simply protesting his support for XXXXXXXX rights. Trump did not consider the crime XXXXXXXXXX motivated by XXXXX-XXXX radicalism. Unlike the XXXXXX of Charlie Kirk, it did not merit XXXXX to be flown at XXXX-XXXX. If it were a serious case of XXXXX-XXXX violence, Trump wondered, then why didn’t Governor XXXX contact him and ask for the XXXX to be flown at XXXX-XXXX.
If ever there were proof that XXXXXXX is blind but only in the XXXXX eye, it is in Trump and Pam Bondi’s XXXXXXXX to Charlie Kirk assassination.
*
Laurie XXXXX prefers to remain anonymous, fearing retribution. This is also why his photo is not being posted with this column.
This is what Jimmy Kimmel said, ““We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel began. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.” He wasn’t celebrating Kirk’s death and he wasn’t blaming a MAGA supporter for killing Kirk only that MAGA denied initial reports that the killer might have been influenced by MAGA because he was raised in a conservative republican home. Nasty, insensitive, or extreme are not mentioned in the First Amendment. Even Pam Bondi’s definition of hate speech as inciting or threatening violence doesn’t describe Kimmel’s comments.
Regardless of where you stand on the political spectrum, some basic truths need to be acknowledged. If you’re going to express opinions that are nasty, insensitive or extreme, then you don’t have standing to play the victim if other people who are offended respond in the same way.
But you published this hate-filled article.
I tend to agree with your point. But, were you equally outraged, when conservative voices and thoughts were censored for the past five years?
Did you speak out in protest?
Probably not…
If liberals get back into power and again censor, deplatform , threaten and cancel conservative voices, will you be outraged?
Probably not…