Logic

1. You can say "Antifa Tyler" all you want, but that doesn't make it true. I know 6th grade name calling is your favorite president's forte, but that doesn't mean its a viable strategy. 2. The fact that you're totally on board with all of the stuff shown in that Tweet kind of says it all. To recap: BEFORE anyone had been apprehended, before any killer or any motivation was proven one way or the other, the entire right wing establishment mobilized with bloodthirsty tweets, quotes, and interviews talking about declaring war on the entire left. There are tweets up there talking about rounding up leftists, bombing cities, ALL OUT WAR, etc....and no one had yet been apprehended. They IMMEDIATELY decided to use Kirk's murder as an opportunity to whip up panic and stoke the flames of divisiveness, to the extent that many are/were encouraging actual violent retribution against leftists. If you support THAT, well...it tells me all I need to know about you. And it's not the least bit surprising. Party of law and order, my ass.

Totally cool, totally sane de-escalation and normal behavior from the right displayed below. Most of this came before anyone was even apprehended, mind you. Talk about “dangerous and violent rhetoric”!

I wonder what suddenly compelled Fuentes to say this NOW. Huh.

You're being willfully and repeatedly obtuse, not to mention changing your original question to me. By all means, go on pretending that only the left takes glee in political violence, ignoring all evidence to the contrary (some of which I provided), and painting with an absurdly large brush by lumping all leftists in together as "gleefully celebrating" Kirk's death, when that is very clearly far from the truth. If you can't be intellectually honest, then I have no interest in conversing with you.

I posted a thread from Adam Cochran a while back that went into it. Because one of his 10 slides was inaccurate (the voter registration one), the rest was dismissed out of hand. In short, they both appear to be just as likely (and, I'd argue, more so) to be related to well known Groyper/4chan tropes and memes than to any kind of leftist ideology.

As if what I posted isn't DIRECTLY relevant to the point you're trying to make. Sure seems like the left isn't "exclusively" gleeful at cold blooded murder when the sitting republican president's son is joking about the attempted murder of Paul Pelosi on Twitter. Remind me, is Donald Trump Jr a leftist?

Sure. The right would never make light of political violence.

It matters only insofar as there are a ton of republican politicians pinning this on the radical left, including our president. If we all agree that "it's gotta stop", and the "it" in question is political violence, then the president going on TV and blaming "the radical left" for Kirk's shooting BEFORE ANYONE WAS EVEN APPREHENDED" doesn't seem like the best move, does it? It doesn't scream "de-escalation and lowering tensions", does it? So I agree that a sick person is a sick person regardless of his political or ideological affiliation. But if repbulicans are gonna go on TV and make frothy-mouthed claims about the evil left, then well...yes, it does seem to be important to ascertain whether that's even true.

The cope on THE LEFT is insane? When mounting evidence seems to indicate that he was part of an extremist far RIGHT movement? Sure, Jan.

Coming from someone who just posted from Libs of TikTok. Get real, man. Nothing I could possibly post -- including a question asked of a large language model belonging to Elon Musk himself -- will dissuade you of what you've already decided: that the big, bad, radical left is to blame. Groypers can come right out and say "this guy looks like one of ours", and we can see pictures of the shooter himself dressing up as a Groyper meme for Halloween, and you'll still dismiss it and blame democrats. Your mind is made up. That's fine. To each their own.

Anything you must do to ignore the reality that this language is also spoken by far right extremists, who are also dangerous and capable of violence.

The fact that the shooter apparently considered himself a member of a far right extremist group who openly expressed their disdain for Charlie Kirk and encouraged their followers to go to his events to confront and discredit him for not being nationalist and conservative enough, to the extent that this campaign become known as "The Groyper Wars" seems.....relevant, no? But ya know...any chance to blame the democrats I guess.

Again: This ignores the mounting evidence that Robinson was a Groyper, and that it was the extremist rhetoric of that movement that was to blame, not democrats. I get that many on the right view this as a great opportunity to pin this tragedy on the "radical left" and rile up its base to think that big, bad antifa was beyond this. Unfortunately for that narrative, Robinson appears more likely to have been a far right extremist than a leftist of any sort.

I don't disagree with most of what you're saying. The problem is that the toothpaste is already out of the tube. They already jumped as fast as they could to label Robinson a member of the "radical left", and now Fox News and Newsmax are gonna run with that narrative for days on end, and millions of Americans are going to (or already do) believe it. I don't blame law enforcement agencies OR the media (for the most part) for being ill-equipped to understand or contextualize this stuff. I DO blame politicians who jumped at the chance to use this as an opportunity to vilify the left. Jumping at the first chance to tell the whole country that the left is to blame BEFORE ANYONE WAS EVEN APPREHENDED appears to have been, ya know....not great!

Thanks. Yeah, I pointed that out in my original posting. That that was a factual inaccuracy. I don't think it invalidates the rest of Cochran's thread, and I think the 18 tweet thread about Groypers that I posted adds further context. Nevertheless, Robinson at this moment appears more likely to be a far right extremist than a leftist of any stripe. Regardless, he appears to have been mentally unwell and steeped in hateful online culture and rhetoric.

Well, that's what I mean about nuance and about things not fitting into our traditional "left vs right" narrative. As I understand it, lots of Groyper talk IS anti modern conservativism and anti-republicanism....but only because they seem to feel that those ideologies aren't far right ENOUGH. Aren't extreme ENOUGH. So while he may have been anti-republican, it also appears that he was a far right extremist.

If you've truly taken the time to understand what the Groyper War movement is, and if you accept what seems to be mounting evidence that Robinson was a Groyper... ..and if after that you're STILL calling him a leftist, well then...I'm sorry, but I think you ought to re-read the Groyper stuff and make a better effort to understand what it is and what it means. I grant that it's nuanced stuff, and there are layers to it, and it doesn't fit a lot of our traditional narratives of what "right" and "left" even mean, and that a lot of us (myself included) are still learning what it all means, but... Robinson does not appear to be a leftist. He appears to be an adherent of a fringe, extremist movement born in the underbelly of the far right.

The Groypers themselves are claiming this guy as their own on 4chan. There are pictures of him going as a Groyper meme for Halloween. Every available piece of evidence paints this guy as a terminally online, far right Groyper War guy. The "he was a leftist!" narrative was fun for a minute, but it doesn't hold water.

It is.

I know the media and local law enforcement bodies are not well equipped to understand this type of nuance, but....Robinson sure looks more like a Groyper than a leftist. I highly recommend reading through both of these threads (of note, slide 9 in the first thread states a factual inaccuracy, but it doesn't invalidate the rest of it). The second thread (about Groypers) is quite informative, for those who don't know what they're all about. Realistically, I know most of you won't read either of them because your opinions are already formed, but...just thought I'd offer something to counter the frothy-mouthed, leftist blaming ragegasm happening in here right now.

Coming off, apparently, his best camp as a pro, and that big game week 1......this really stinks. A foot injury, in particular, for a guy that relies on first step quickness and explosiveness to succeed. *****. I'm not gonna doom and gloom about it, but there's no sugar coating the fact that it sucks, both for the player and for the team.