Davin News Server

From: NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.trump,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: Re: Jimmy Kimmel FAFO
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 06:57:08 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider

On Tue, 23 Sep 2025 09:59:37 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>On 2025-09-23 04:03, NoBody wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Sep 2025 15:48:49 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2025-09-21 07:34, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 20 Sep 2025 08:16:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2025-09-20 06:47, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Sep 2025 10:09:30 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2025-09-19 04:50, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 10:26:50 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2025-09-18 10:15, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> NEW YORK (AP) — ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show
>>>>>>>>>> indefinitely beginning Wednesday after comments that he made
>>>>>>>>>> about Charlie Kirk’s killing led a group of ABC-affiliated
>>>>>>>>>> stations to say it would not air the show and provoked some
>>>>>>>>>> ominous comments from a top federal regulator.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The veteran late-night comic, made several remarks about the
>>>>>>>>>> reaction to the conservative activist’s assassination last
>>>>>>>>>> week on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Monday and Tuesday nights,
>>>>>>>>>> including that “many in MAGA land are working very hard to
>>>>>>>>>> capitalize on the murder of Charlie Kirk.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ABC, which has aired Kimmel’s late-night show since 2003,
>>>>>>>>>> moved swiftly after Nexstar Communications Group said it
>>>>>>>>>> would pull the show starting Wednesday. Kimmel’s comments
>>>>>>>>>> about Kirk’s death “are offensive and insensitive at a
>>>>>>>>>> critical time in our national political discourse,” said
>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Alford, president of Nexstar’s broadcasting division.
>>>>>>>>>> Nexstar operates 23 ABC affiliates.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://apnews.com/article/jimmy-kimmel-show-suspended-
>>>>>>>>>> charlie-kirk-a2bfa904429c318fe52e7d3493c6883d
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> People have had enough.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "People"?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which "people" would those be?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Laughter!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you mean this "people":
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 'Earlier Wednesday, Brendan Carr, the chairman of the Federal
>>>>>>>>> Communications Commission, threatened ABC, Disney and Jimmy
>>>>>>>>> Kimmel over a Kimmel monologue that included comments about
>>>>>>>>> Charlie Kirk, ominously saying, "We can do this the easy way
>>>>>>>>> or the hard way."'
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Don't quote without a citation.  You already have no
>>>>>>>> credibility.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are you actually claiming I made that up?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/media/2025/09/17/fcc-
>>>>>>> threats-jimmy-kimmel/86206823007/>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is that enough, or are you now going to insist I produce the video
>>>>>>> of him saying it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No you idiot.  My words meant exactly what they said.  It's a shame
>>>>>> that I have to push you to properly attribute a quote.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your interest in getting citations seems oddly selective.
>>>>
>>>> Laughter!
>>>>
>>>> Any alleged quote that I see without a citation will get the same
>>>> question.
>>>>
>>>> You fraud.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have you condemned the murder of Charlie Kirk?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you consulted your dictionary to learn what "all" means?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You asked me a question about a specific person and I instantly
>>>>>> condemned it.  You won't do the same.  That says plenty about your
>>>>>> intentions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope. It says I don't need to state the obvious.
>>>>
>>>> And yet you demanded I answer a very similar question.
>>>
>>> Nope. I asked a DIFFERENT question.
>> 
>> Laughter!
>> 
>> You're rapidly becoming a complete waste of time.
>
>Because your pea-sized brain can't deal?
>

Laughter!

Thanks for proving me correct once again.

>> 
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You fraud.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you condemned the violation of the 1st Amendment by the FCC?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://edition.cnn.com/2025/09/18/media/brendan-carr-jimmy-
>>>>>>> kimmel-fcc-first-amendment>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cpvlje8v17wt>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The government took no legal action to remove Kimmel.  ACLU who is
>>>>>> on the wrong side of virtually every topic???
>>>>>>> Laughter!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Damn you're side is really flailing.  You're completely irrelevant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you condemned the killing of Charlie Kirk?
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you know what "all" means?
>>>>
>>>> Then why did you demand I answer a very similar question?
>>>>
>>>> You don't hold yourself to the same standards you hold others to.
>>>> Got it
>>>>
>>>> You fraud.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have you condemned the murder of Charlie Kirk?
>>>>
>>>> Run away.
>>>> You fraud
>>>
>>> Did you condemn the murder of Melissa Hortman at the time it happened?
>>>
>>> Have you ever once without prompting condemned ANY of the many targeted
>>> attacks committed by right-wing assailants?
>> 
>> Sorry but you don't get to demand I answer your questions whie running
>> from mine.
>
>Where am I "demanding" that?

Laughter!

Asking a question multiple times *is* a demand and before you go
"aha!" my question to you about Clarlie Clark is intended to be a
demand.  You won't directly respond to it directy  because you're a
fraud and a lib coward.

>
>> 
>> You fraud.
>> 
>> Have you condemned the murder of Charlie Kirk?
>
>I answered that I condemn all murders.
>
>Does Charlie Kirk not fall in the set of "all murders"?

It's a direct question that requires a direct answer.  Of course since
you're a hypocrite you demand direct answers but won't provide any.

Have you condemned the murder of Charlie Kirk?