Republican - “We want to hunt Democrats!”
Democrat - “WTF?!”
Republican - “Why are Democrats so violent in their rhetoric? This is why bad things happen.”
Republican - “We want to hunt Democrats!”
Democrat - “WTF?!”
Republican - “Why are Democrats so violent in their rhetoric? This is why bad things happen.”
I can't stop thinking about the uptick in lynchings in the South.
in various forms, many murders of AA are likely gone undereported, or very little convictions, probably also doesnt hit the news at all, to not disturb the narrative of the south. we also know msms in general dont allow POC crimes to air more than few days to weeks at the most.
I think it's like that Zimmerman case. It hits the news every now and then, but it's really a strange fluke when it does.
Remember how most of the black male BLM leaders involved with the George Floyd protests in Minneapolis died in macabre and unexplained ways within a year or so after?
Thanks to modern surveillance that they built they were easier to identify. That is the whole point behind all that surveillance. For all we know the number of serial killers didn't drop since the 90s but have chugged along as normal, but they no longer care since it is a passé topic and their surveillance ignores it.
This is why people like Matt Walsh's videos defending lynching are not free speech. They are calls to action to murder absolutely anyone they do not like to terrorize the rest. If someone like Matt took a bullet to the head like Charlie Kirk, whoever did it should be able to plead self-defense. Even if they broke into his house and shot him while he was sleeping.
Basically he is calling for people to do far worse than that and prison is a mercy for him.
She's trying to highlight the shocking nature of his remarks, but really his base's reaction is just "duh". They're past civil discussion.
remember, these are the "pro-life", "all lives", "Christians"
Why can't those DEMONRAT TRAITORS tone down Their Rhethoric?
-Free Thinking Alpha Republicans!
he doesn't "know" the history, he's still part of it. he's a klansman and should be treated as such.
Sherman shouldn't have stopped. And when the next time comes, and it looks like it could, then whoever the new Sherman is really, really shouldn't stop.
Exactly. They said he would have created hundreds of southern martyrs and bolstered their guerrilla resolve... Good. He should have fucked them as hard as humanly possible and beyond.
If the south had moved up north far enough they would have razed Philadelphia and New York City to the ground and made the massacres national holidays.
I have also said, on more than one occasion, that Sherman didn't go far enough.
top 100 comments