Alan Zweibel

So you believe that Jews are a race? But if they are, then it's Carlson who played that card. It's not like he doesn't have a history.

Because it's unlikely that they see some event or hear of something about to happen and decide to go there? Because there is no such thing as the internet?

Please, he talks about a cabal of hummus eaters who plot Jesus' destruction, He sure wasn't talking about the Romans. Of course, if you are ignorant of the text of the Christian bible, you can be excused for your inability to connect the dots.

Who is they? Members of an organization? In fact, I've tried and failed to find any estimates from law enforcelment of how many people there are who subscribe in some way to the smorgasbord of beliefs that constitute antifa.

As has been noted, they are people who subscribe to varying beliefs. There is no formal organization Anyone can declare themselves to be antifa. Since when does a smorgasbord of beliefs become a terrorist organization? There is no overarching organization.

This time for the death of Jesus. At the memorial for Charlie Kirk he likened Charlie Kirk to Jesus. Not kidding. He really did. “Jesus shows up and he starts talking about the people in power and he starts doing the worst thing you can do, which is tell the truth,” Carlson began. “And they hate it and they just go bonkers. And they become obsessed with making him stop.” The former Fox News host said he can “picture the scene in a lamp-lit room with a bunch of guys sitting around eating hummus thinking about, ‘What do we do about this guy telling the truth about us. We must make him stop talking!'” https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5515788-tucker-carlson-antisemitism-charlie-kirk-eulogy/ Not the first time Carlson has shared his anti-semitic sentiments.

You keep on making assertions and you keep on not offering evidence. Frothing much?

I don't know, I'm going to go out on a limb here and posit the existence of something called the internet. They see on the news that someone is demonstrating and join the frey. I know. That is so farfetched.

He just throws this nonsense out there to get a rise out of whoever he targets.

It doesn't mean that they do either. The evidence offered so far seems to indicate otherwise. Maybe you're confusing antifa with the boogeymen.

See what I mean?

Don't waste time on him. This is what he does. He puts in a nickel's worth of comment and he expects $100 in return.

Another due process fanatic.

But it's a matter of hearsay on both sides. At which point we need to invoke probability do decide the issue.

I'm going to take your assertion very literally. And even so, here are a couple of people who directly countered what she claimed. And, of course, if you want to find people who challenge general denials, there are a whole lot more. People who called out Leavitt Ken Dilanian (MSNBC) After Leavitt said there was no evidence, Dilanian responded on X (formerly Twitter): “That was not part of their statement when we first went to them on Saturday. Multiple people familiar with the case say he did accept the money, as does an internal government document reviewed by MSNBC.” https://newrepublic.com/post/200757/karoline-leavitt-donald-trump-border-czar-tom-homan?utm_source=chatgpt.com Carol Leonnig (MSNBC journalist) She directly countered the White House’s denial by pointing to internal documents. According to The Guardian, Leonnig said: “White House spokesperson says that Homan never took $50,000; we reviewed internal document saying Homan

No one? Really?

The Times indicates that the recording was audio, while MSNBC‘s version of the evidence suggests that video footage exists. https://www.commondreams.org/news/tom-homan-50000-cash

I believe it's an audio tape.

It's called a "movement" not an organization. It has no leadership, no membership rolls, on centralization at all. Basically, if some like minded people want to call themselves Antifa, then they're Antifa. And since some use nonviolent direct action, how would that qualify them to be called "terrorists"?

Trump may be "formally designating" Antifa as a terrorist organization, but that designation has no basis in law. It's as legally significant as nominating someone to be his BFF. There are no federal laws that delineate a category of crimes as domestic terrorism or perpetrators as domestic terrorists.

This topic is about wikipedias alleged slants on 2 murdered people. It's not about the nationality of a member of aseannow.com. Maybe you should start a thread about Chomper Higgott in the appropriate forum. Good luck with that.

It's one thing when a private organization bans free speech and quite another when the government does it. The former practice does not violate the First Amendment, whereas the latter does. This doesn't mean that I endorse private censorship, but it's not a violation of the law.

Are you aware that Chomper Higgott is not actually a member of the government and is no more responsible for it's actions than you were for those of the Biden Administration? Or is OK to hold you responsible for what the Biden administration did?

Do you understand that Derek Chauvin, a police office, was convicted of the murder of George Floyd? And are you seriously asserting that that Charlie Kirk wasn't a rightwing figure? That, in fact, that's what his whole shtick was about? Let's wait until the pope beatifies him before treating him like an apolitical saint. And if anybody's doing editorializing, it's you, calling George Floyd a left wing hero. He's not commemorated for heroism. And given that the opening paragraph also mentions the $20 alleged theft, it's bizarre to claim that Wikipedia was painting him as a hero..

Not only did Mueller's report contradict what you claim, but also the report issued by the Senate Committee which was headed by Republicans.