In Hindsight please respond

In reply to SnoopDog

When Biden was president the Epstein files weren't released. Do you ever wonder why?

There are those who say the is incriminating evidence against Trump therein. Again why wasn't it released or even hinted by the Democratic party who had all the documented evidence?

The brouhaha regarding its released was because Trump campaigned fervently that it would be made public one he was president. Then came the political games.

Still I ask, why was he so adamant during the campaign if he knew he would be incriminated.

I totally and absolutely want its release

You think there will be more political capital to be gained by the left when it is released? I highly doubt

In reply to InHindsight



YOU HAVE NOT DIRECTLY ADDRESSED THE ISSUES I RAISED!!!!




Is that racist????
You can deflect or lie and say that you need proof that he said that. You can say it was AI and not him. you can obfuscate all you want.

When MLK is denounced by Charlie Kirk, do you agree?

When Clarence Thomas is said to be a better role model than MLK do you agree?
As a Conservative one can vehemently disagree with Trump and Kirk and many of their actions but it seems that many people are not conservative but worship at the foot of Trump and justify absolutely everything he says and does even when he does things that are 180 degrees from what he did and said previously.

In reply to InHindsight

I see you’ve prepared a statement for ICE guess you’re not that dunce after all you’ve realized when they’re done with the Hispanics we’re next right??? :twisted

Nevertheless does your family that reside in the U.S. share the same views as you???

Also you do realize being a visitor and a resident are two different things right???

In reply to InHindsight

Reasonable and thoughtful people are exposing the reality and consequences of Charlie Kirk’s egregious statements and behaviors, highlighting how his own words and actions ultimately backfired on him.

Kirk exercised his freedom to express his opinions, even as he often denied that same freedom to others. He established the Professor Watchlist, targeting educators he believed were biased against conservative perspectives, which resulted in some of those Professors receiving death threats.

At every opportunity he disparaged the LGBTQ community, once stating that God’s perfect law says gay people should be stoned to death.

He argued that the Civil Rights Act was “a huge mistake” and described Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. as “an awful person.”

Kirk ridiculed the 2023 attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul, even suggesting that his attacker should be bailed out of jail.

Ironically, he supported gun violence to protect his God-given rights, only to die from it.

You sow wind, you reap whirlwind.

In reply to InHindsight



Let me just say this:

Given the nature of the Dotard (a career con-artist, rapist, and convicted felon) and his previous and well documented relationship with Epstein - it is more probable than not that he buggered little children on Epstein's island and that is the reason he may NEVER release those files.

In reply to Dukes



You want me to admit Kirk as being racist otherwise I deflect, obfuscate or will claim AI. A beautiful attempt hedge me in.
I can respond to your statement from various angles that could be lengthy.

In short,
No it doesn't indicate racism. Quite simply, it a matter of context. I withhold from suggesting any for the reason that you twist or interpret my words in ways i don't intend. I will nudge your thinking rather

It is well known that Kirk and Trump are opposed DEI hire. And definitely yes this is insufficient evidence to boldly label any for racism.



You deflect unto the MLK files released from national archives on the directive of Donald Trump. The information suggests he wasn't the hero that history made him to be, but rather he lived a duplicitous life and had ulterior agenda. If true, This is disappointing. But MLK was the architect of his own legacy

I am guessing Trump as well is racist for divulging historical data that had been suppressed?

Do you claim it all to be untrue?

Told you, crickets or rubbish including lies

In reply to Dukes

I urge you to listen to today's "Piers Morgan Uncensored"

What are your opinions on the discussions

Here

In reply to InHindsight




"When I see Josh DaSilva, Stephen Camacho or Brendon Nash playing for the West Indies I wonder if the selectors are just trying to appease the rich white cricket boards".

Is that racist???

In reply to Dukes

I don't know where you're going with this.

I am certain that every country on this planet has racism.

In societies, like the US where poltics have strongly come to be hugely divided in terms of left and right, on both sides there is racism.

This is a people thing. So don't be naive to believe that leftists are not racist but conservatives are.

Many on the right that have been accused of racism are not. I suppose same can be said for thr other side. Personally I have no issues with gender or race. All my family members are celebrated and encouraged based on blood relations and love

What's your obsession with racism?

In reply to Dukes

Duksie watch this and tell me what you think

Here

No presidential medal nor promise of funeral attendance for David Rose?

In reply to InHindsight

I think most people have learnt to ignore your radicalization links for fear of becoming stupid like you. KEep posting them though if they make you feel happy. I for one will not click on a single one.

In reply to Cheeks

Yeah if you're human you'd be too ashamed.

Also I've come to understand that you like some here are a depraved human being


Aren't you embarrassed at the worldwide empathy and support his death has garnered?

Cowarding behind a pseudonym

In reply to InHindsight

*Timothy Benson*
On Indifference: Wallace, Kirk, and the Politics of Black Mourning

When George Wallace was shot in 1972, the segregationist governor who had once promised “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever” suddenly became a figure of pity. Paralyzed from the waist down, he spent the rest of his life in a wheelchair. Years later, he sought forgiveness from Black clergy, asking them to absolve him of the violence his words and policies had wrought. Many forgave him. Many more did not. But what struck me then — and still strikes me now — was how swiftly the nation wrapped Wallace’s broken body in compassion. He was suddenly a tragic figure, a man wounded by the same violence he had long encouraged. The cruelty of his career seemed almost forgotten in the flood of sympathy.

Yesterday, America has repeated that ritual. Charlie Kirk, dead at 31, was shot and killed at a Turning Point USA event in Utah. Within hours, the headlines framed him as a martyr of political violence, the networks broadcast his smile, and politicians from both sides of the aisle issued solemn appeals to “tone down the rhetoric.” His humanity was mass-mediated, replayed, broadcast, sanctified. But I could not help asking myself the same question that Baldwin might have asked: why is America so quick to humanize the men who dedicated their lives to denying the humanity of others?

For Charlie Kirk’s career was nothing if not an assault on Black dignity. He mocked Ketanji Brown Jackson as an affirmative action hire. He sneered that Black pilots could not be trusted to land planes. He trafficked daily in the idea that Black people are intellectually inferior, undeserving of equal place in American life. And his words did not simply linger in the ether. They prepared the ground for action. We have already seen over tens of thousands of Black women purged from the federal workforce — a bureaucratic purge justified by precisely the suspicion Kirk legitimized. This is not abstract. That is violence: the loss of income, of healthcare, of stability, of future.

When Kirk joked — “ironically,” he insisted — that school shootings might have to be necessary to preserve the Second Amendment, there were no calls for restraint. When he poured contempt on Black professionals, there were no bipartisan statements urging him to moderate. But the moment he fell to an assassin’s bullet, suddenly civility became sacred. Suddenly both parties discovered their appetite for lower temperatures and calmer words. I cannot help but hear the hypocrisy in that call. For in America, rhetoric is never “too hot” when it burns Black lives. It is only too hot when it burns a white man.

This is why I defend my indifference, and the indifference of so many Black people, to Kirk’s death. Not because I celebrate violence. Not because I wish to see anyone murdered. But because I refuse to lie. I refuse to pretend that the man who denied my humanity deserves my tears. Baldwin wrote often of the lie of American innocence: the nation’s need to see itself as good, even as it destroyed lives. What we are witnessing now is another performance of that lie. In death, Kirk is baptized as human, his cruelty suspended, his rhetoric dissolved into tragedy. But I remember his words, and I remember their consequences.

It is not indifference that should shock this country. What should shock it is the centuries of indifference to Black death. Where were the televised funerals for the children lynched in the South? Where were the bipartisan calls to moderate rhetoric after George Floyd was suffocated in the street, after Breonna Taylor was gunned down in her home, after Trayvon Martin was left in the grass? America asks Black people to perform empathy for their enemies, but never offers empathy in return. The white man’s death is always a tragedy. The Black man’s death is always a question.

George Wallace lived on, paralyzed but capable of seeking absolution. Charlie Kirk was cut down in his prime, with no chance for transformation. The nation mourns them both, but it has never mourned us. That is why my indifference is not cruelty. It is truth-telling. It is a refusal to perform the national lie that every white man, no matter how hostile, deserves my mourning.

I do not rejoice in Charlie Kirk’s death. But I will not mourn it. My indifference is the most honest response I have — and the most radical, in a nation that has the audacity to demand that Black people weep for their enemies while refusing to weep for them. My tears belong to my people. And I will not give them away.