Fed Employees Social Media Monitored
Charlie Kirk
Federal agencies threaten, discipline employees for criticizing or mocking Charlie Kirk
The Trump administration is “tracking…very closely” social media posts suggesting Kirk should not be mourned, some agencies say.
Federal employees are facing warnings from agency leaders to refrain from criticizing or mocking Charlie Kirk, the conservative influencer who was assassinated this week.
In some cases, employees have already been disciplined. The Homeland Security Department has already taken action against at least three staffers: a Federal Emergency Management Agency employee was placed on administrative leave, Fox News reported, after he posted on Instagram that President Trump had ordered flags at half staff “for the literal racist homophobe misogynist.”
“This employee’s words are revolting and unconscionable,” a FEMA spokesperson said. “He was immediately placed on administrative leave. Celebrating the death of a fellow American is appalling, unacceptable and sickening.”
The U.S. Coast Guard said on Thursday one of its employees posted on their personal social media a note regarding Kirk that was “contrary to our core values” and vowed to “take appropriate action and hold the individual accountable.” The Secret Service also placed an employee on leave for saying anyone mourning Kirk should “delete” them because Kirk “spewed hate and racism,” according to The New York Post.
On Friday, Veterans Affairs Department Secretary Doug Collins warned employees against “justifying, celebrating or mocking” Kirk’s death. He said such comments would lead to more violence and anyone making them “will be dealt with accordingly.”
That followed the Defense Department issuing similar warnings: the Pentagon’s chief spokesperson Sean Parnell said, referring to the department by the administration’s preferred name, that it was “unacceptable for military personnel and Department of War civilians to celebrate or mock the assassination of a fellow American.” The department will have “zero tolerance” for such behavior. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth added the Pentagon was “tracking all these very closely” and would address any issues immediately.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ryan Nerney, Managing Partner at Tully Rinckey PLLC, a law firm that represents federal employees, said Supreme Court precedent has established that public employees face certain “protected speech” restrictions when speaking in their official capacities, engaged in conduct unbecoming federal workers or when they could incite violence.“Generally speaking, federal employees can be disciplined for personal comments if they are disruptive to the workplace, violate ethics rules, violate agency policies or are deemed ‘conduct unbecoming’ a federal employee, among other things.”
The blowback has been swift.
Marine officer fired from recruiting duty over Charlie Kirk social media post
“The Marine in question has been relieved of his recruiting duties and the matter is currently under investigation,” a Marine spokesperson said.
Jeff Schogol
Task & Purpose
USMC Recruiter
Great career move, Captain.
Category: None
This is a very dangerous game to be playing. Let’s don’t slip into a blatant censorship situation. I absolutely do not want the feds monitoring social media. If you’re putting it out there publicly, then FAFO. What I don’t want is the feds asking for your social media access. We saw enough backdoor censorship during COVID and the Biden administration. Let’s don’t repeat that mistake.
But conduct unbecoming.
See, I was in the camp that while I liked what Scheller was doing, I didn’t think he should have done. It seemed disrespectful to me and well above his rank place. Had he been say, in Congress that would have been right.
I, too, liked what Scheller was doing, he shouldn’t have had to go that route. And while I do understand “conduct unbecoming”, I also understand the right to privacy. If you air your dirty political laundry out in front of God and everybody, you accept the spanking that comes with it. Any other kind of communication that’s not open to the public, feds better get a warrant.
If it is on a work system or computer than there is no right to privacy. If you are at home, on your own connection, with your personal phone and you send a text message to Commissary with a high five over Charlie Kirk’s body than that is your sick business. Then if you post anonymously the sick lies that the shooter was a Trump supporter or some other brainless troll stuff, also your business.
Then we go “open to the public”. Just about everything on the Internet is open to the public. So I’m not sure where to go with that.
We’re pretty much in agreement. If you use any government system, voice, data, fax, internet, e mail, issued cell, you have no right to privacy and you agree to monitoring by using the system. Now, if the govvies want password access to my email, faceboook, whatever, it’s a hard no.
Reference:
Trump’s Pentagon picks have history of bucking chain of command
It is not actually a catch all.
And this absolutely does not meet the standard for conduct unbecoming.
Advocating or celebrating a politically motivated assassination is not conduct unbecoming? Surely you jest!
Now he is a clown. A sad clown to be sure, but a clown nonetheless.
Let’s put clown wig on him and he can pretend he is a law lord in Jolly Old England, since he claims he is an authority on all matters legal.
Now he thinks he is a JAG Off.
I concur.
(grin)
I’m virtually certain that the posts DoD (W?) is talking about are public postings by people who also establish nexus to their official positions in their social media accounts.
Someone wants to post something horrible with “U.S. Army” listed as their employer…well, I hope that the full insertable length of the dildo of consequences comes hard, fast, and unlubed.
Public postings, you’re fair game. You want the password to my facebook or any other forum that’s not necessarily accessible by just anyone, nope. And I don’t even use facebook.
We are in agreement!
Nobody’s asking for passwords. Not even in security investigations is anybody asking for passwords to private accounts.
It’s important to clarify the point because this is exactly the sort of mis/disinformation the left thrives on.
People are being held to account for their own words that they put on the internet for the whole world to see.
FAFO, indeed.
I see a lot of content being put out by AD service members on the daily that I would say DOES NOT promote good order and discipline. I’ve seen a few popped for their content, and now you add politically charged and incendiary comments to boost your presence is coming back to bite members in their asses…Oh, well shipmate that’s a you problem.
Absolutely concur. You toss your dick out there in public, you deserve it when it gets stomped flat.
This is a different case for three reasons:
Concur. I’m just not willing to condone any kind of witch hunt or Spanish Inquisition. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
A few years back, I was 1SG for a fairly large rear detachment. A whole lot of my troops were Facebook friends with the detachment commander. Our Monday morning started with him scrolling through his friends, looking to see what dumbassery they were up to. A gentle warning kept most of them out of UCMJ territory, but the majority of them never did figure out just how we knew so much.
This is blatantly unconstitutional.
But the Trump admin doesn’t give a shit about the constitution and is openly defying it.
And his MAGA zealot cult is on board with it.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-republican-says-people-celebrating-charlie-kirks-death-must-thrown-out-civil-society
Also, don’t pull some limp dick whataboutism about a previous bill or EO that was unconstitutional. Nearly every president oversteps.
But Trump has been flat ignoring it and openly advocating abandoning it. He doesn’t even think he is required to defend it.
Edit button mission. Can’t fix the typos. “Nearly every” not “nearly certainly” etc.
Guess you missed this one from Boomer’s.
That’s OK, as many of us don’t bother to read the garbage you post. So, we could care less about your lack of ability to spell or punctuate.
“Unconstitutional.”
I’ll bite, where in the Constitution does it require cause to fire a government employee?
He ain’t jailing them,… yet?
Not telling them they cant say negative things about Charlie Kirk. They are telling them that if you do this, there will be consequences
https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-1-9000-personal-use-of-social-media#:~:text=Some%20of%20the%20requirements%20for%20social%20media,engage%20in%20if%20their%20identities%20were%20known.
If you ever had a job outside of the Government you would know several companies require employees to tell them what social media sites they frequent. During the orientation at one company I was shown screen shots of several postings in which former employees had disclosed trade secrets. The company admitted they had an office in which employees surfed the web all day to see what employees were posting; it was what those employees were paid to do.
The company said if we didn’t like the rule we should quit now and save everyone the heartburn.
“…blatantly unconstitutional.”
Yeah, but how about the shit your D-rat Lords and Masters tried during the great covid hoax and mass psychological experimentation, HMMMMM? Yeah, snitch hotlines for those venturing outside, CA Cops swarming a lone Surfer on a beach, busts made for not wearing a fucking mask, …
French Laundy dinners, SotH getting a blowout, etc.
PI, that was “his side”! THAT was OK!
It different now!
Cmon, Man!
I would like to know what part of the Constitution is being blatantly defied.
The left made up the rules about cancel culture, and now that their little game is being played against them, they don’t like it.
You may now resume your regularly scheduled go fuck yourself.
😂😂😂😂😂
It’s not “cancel culture”, it’s “consequence culture”. You have the right to tell your mom to fuck off, but you shouldn’t be surprised when she smacks the taste right out of your mouth.
About that…
This is the government retaliating nitwit.
Hey, Twat…
Companies cutting out cancerous employees is NOT GOVERNMENT retaliation. Spoken like someone who’s done nothing but suckle the government teat, and no ZERO about running a business. These comments are affecting the bottom line of businesses, and the owners are doing what is absolutely necessary. Has anyone gone to jail for being in sufferable jack-wagon? No. Zip. Nada. Neun.
You never do tire of being wrong, do you?
Took you days to start commenting on this.. must have been too busy fapping now that your dreams of bloodshed on our soil was a reality, instead of relying on your Ham-Ass buddies overseas to do it.
Being wrong is what the Commieczar excels at, it’s who he is.
You’re right, he’s wrong! Again!!
As sick as it is to think about, I figure that he is one of those weird dudes that gets off by getting kicked in the junk!
I can only go by his relationship here!! But,,,,, right????
Here is special for your deaf ass ears.
https://x.com/RobertMSterling/status/1966974489553461366
Outfuckingstanding!
Or, in a meme, about Lars and his Antifa buddies:
Uh oh, somebody tell Lars:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-designates-anti-fascist-antifa-movement-terrorist-organization-2025-09-18/
There’s no “”whataboutisms”! The left set the playing field! See what I said above about “we agree today, maybe not tomorrow!”.
You were ok with it under Brandon, do t bitch now!
BTW, I WASN’T then and still ain’t now!
Also, BTW, you’re as classless as ever!
Bernath made better legal arguments than you.
I never herd of Mr. Kirk untill I was on the recliner listening to either Joe Paggs, or one of the other WFTL 850 AM radio hosts where he was a guest but I really didn’t pay attention to the talking while doing my recliner crossword puzzles. I still don’t know anything about the man so I won’t comment and will read what the other TAHers have to say. Just got back from my upper lip radiation zap and going onto the recliner for some crosswords and most likely a short nappy poo…
He was not someone that I actually followed. I was not brainwashed by the progressive mind virus. I watched some of the shorts that came across my youtube feed. Just so heartbreaking for his young kids and wife.
When you work for the federal government your rights are curtailed in exchange for the benefits. If you don’t follow the rules, expect to get booted.
I would say that if your pursuit of happiness is celebrating murder and calling for violence against people you don’t like than you are going to be unhappy. I mean you already are an unhappy sociopath but it will just get worse.
Are you saying Lars lacks empathy? Oh no!
“Grooming” is a type of empathy.
Looky here, Lars is now a terrorist. That eebil
Orange man says so!
https://twitchy.com/warren-squire/2025/09/15/joe-biden-antifa-is-an-idea-not-an-organization-dems-ran-cover-for-antifa-n2418998
They did attack those ICE facilities and murder Charlie Kirk. One might start to think they aren’t all that friendly.
pantifa / trantifa are without question terrorists… We’ve known that ever since the “summer of love”, and it’s only gotten worse..
I damned sure don’t want the government arming people who think it’s okay to shoot Americans they disagree with.
They need to be rooted out ASAP
EVERY American Citizen has freedom of speech while at the same time there is NO freedom from the consequences of what one says, especially in a public forum!
I liked Charlie Kirk! I like Trump, more often than not, i think that all three of us are on the same side of things mostly!
I don’t like “big brother” in anyone’s business!
We are on the same side today, maybe not tomorrow.
Google SMSgt Adam Antonioli out of Hurlburt Field….
Mike
USAF Retired
Link:
Hegseth Meant What He Said: Air Force SGT Facing Consequenses for Celebrating Charlie Kirk’s Death – Twitchy
The part about “and his chain of command” is the best part.. there’s NO way that someone in the chain didn’t know what he was posting, or if they did, they’re incompetent.
Big Chicken Dinners all around!
Have you ever noticed that when you ask those calling Charlie Kirk a racist to post a link of him saying racist things, they always respond with “There’s plenty out there, look for it yourself”?
If you can justify killing somebody for uttering (allegedly) racist comments, does that mean that anyone can be killed if there is an accusation that they said something racist? Al Sharpton has said plenty of racist statements. Louis Farrakhan has said racist statements for decades. Squad members? You bet they said racist statements. They blame all the ills of the world on white men. Waiting for them to get back to us on that.
You dumbfucks.
This is the government retaliating for speech.
Making it unconstitutional.
It is not merely being “fired” from your job. Or facing personal career consequences.
This is government enforcing consequences. Which is exactly what the 1st amendment is intended to prevent.
You all need to retake 7th grade civics.
So tell us, oh wise one. What would you have done, as a commissioned officer, if one of your Soldiers was to publicly celebrate the death of Charlie Kirk (if there was an actual liberal equivalent, I’d use them), causing divisiveness and loss of good order and discipline? Or, as a leader of government employees, your personnel doing the same? It’s not a trick question or baited trap. I really want to know.
Military service members have a first amendment right to freedom of speech.
There are more limits than a civilian has, but those limits are fairly narrow and intended to balance in favor of the rights of service members.
If he did it off duty and out of uniform, and he didn’t frame it as representing the opinion of the US government or the US Army he would not be violating the UCMJ.
You are allowed to have personal opinions that your fellow soldiers and even the administration doesn’t like.
Additionally, this order was DoD wide. So the order also threatened to violate the 1st Amendment rights of DoD civilians and potentially contractors.
You do not give up your constitutional rights as a DoD civilian or contractor.
As for your question:
Given the current environment I would ask an NCO to have a chat with him to make sure he understand the current environment and relevant rules and regulations.
It would be an informal developmental counseling. Not corrective. Since he didn’t violate any regulations or the UCMJ.
I would discuss the issue with the 1SG or CSM to see if I needed add something about social media to the command policies.
And I would set aside some training time for a class to make sure the members of unit understood the rules and regulations.
I sure as hell would not follow this bullshit unconstitutional Hegseth order and would not punish soldiers who violate the order
Though, to protect my soldiers, I would have to make sure they are aware of the order. Which would have a cooling effect anyway.
I would explain to them that; while I would not punish them for exercising their freedom is speech, it is possible that a viral incident would be taken out of my hands by a more senior commander.
If you want to do military then you have to do the same with Parker v Levy.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/417/733/
This would not fall under Parker vs Levy.
There are some limits on the speech of service members but the standard is to limit it to the minimum necessary.
Also, the Hegseth order also applies to DoD civilians. Which are not bound by Parker vs Levy.
See, you clearly didn’t have someone read it to you. You know how I know?
Yes, the first amendment still applies for service members. Article 134 also applies. Specifically, “Conduct prejudicial to good order and conduct”. How a service member conducts themselves in uniform or out, on duty or off, matters. I specifically stated “ causing divisiveness and loss of good order and discipline”. Your answer is to essentially tell your Soldier to tread lightly, be careful, don’t get caught. You see major, it doesn’t matter if the subject is Charlie Kirk, Joe Biden, hating Trump, or just bitching about the Army. Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline. It’s the act, not the reason for the act. And that violates no one’s constitutional rights.
You failed.
The whole thing was wrong. Need I say “again”? It is like a broken fuggin record around here.
It’s a pointless exercise, trying to educate him. He will never learn because he doesn’t want to know the truth. I think in the future I will just point out where he is factually wrong when needed and drop it at that, such as with the free speech thing.
It doesn’t matter if it is the fake Russian Dossier or believing the Kirk killer was a Trump supporter. He will always be wrong. It’s weird how liberals cling to the idea that everyone else has to conform to their crazy world views. It is remarkably consistent. I think even Charlie would have given up with Commissary, it is a lost cause.
Sheesh, I just went and read your post about the military free speech and it is all wrong.
Firstly courts generally favor the military, not the soldier.
There are lots of restrictions in UCMJ Articles 88, 92, 117 and 134. The limits aren’t at all narrow.
Anything that could be construed as bringing discredit upon the military or military leaders is banned. The commander has great latitude with that.
A commander can set a social media policy (like the president or SecWar) and anyone who breaks it is disobeying orders under Article 92. All AD commanders already have a social media policy. This can include limits on speech and specific limits on speech.
Provocative speech and gestures are also prohibited. Some states have this as law as well.
Whatever you do don’t ever give anyone legal advice. I know you were a failed probie LEO and I can see why.
But they are doing it in uniform, using official social media, and posting during working hours. Some are saying the POTUS/Commander-in-Chief needs to next. Take another Midol, and zip your neck hole.
Here is what you need to do.
Go down to the corner and find someone smarter than you. Shouldn’t take long. Have them read Connick v. Meyers to you. There are a lot of big words in it that you won’t understand. Then have them explain it to you. If you have any questions, after all that, then come back here with them. Don’t read it yourself and start posting like you know what you are talking about because you clearly don’t and you still won’t. This shouldn’t take more than a week or two.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/461/138/
You could save yourself a lot of embarrassment by starting every conversation with the precept that you have no idea what you are talking about.
Take you own fucking advice.
This precedent is not a blanket authority to restrict the freedom of speech of service members.
Ciristizing Kirk is no where near similar to the Parker Vs Levy case.
And Parker vs Levy does not apply to DoD civilians.
Jesus give me strength here.
READ IT.
CONNICK V MEYERS. Covers Civilians.
The actual link is provided. See, if you had just followed my instructions you wouldn’t have brought more disgrace on yourself. I’m trying to coach you into appearing less dumb.
You can’t just apply case law with substantially different facts and claim it means this order is constitutional.
That case involves disruption of the work place.
Not personal speech on social media that was not disruptive and is only an issue because the administration doesn’t like it. The administration chose to make it an issue. They chose to disrupt the work place.
You keep acting like the government has unrestrained authority to punish public employees and military members just because they don’t like what they have to say.
That is blatantly unconstitutional. Bootlicker.
You are such a fucking fraud.
I had to read your “freedom” and “small government” bullshit for years.
But you were always just a bootlicker. An authoritarian personality wearing the flag like a burka.
“That case involves disruption of the work place.”
You’re getting warmer… so close…
“I had to read your “freedom” and “small government” bullshit for years.”
No, you didn’t. You have the freedom to read, or not read. You chose to read. You have the freedom to agree, or not agree. So spare us that sanctimonious “had to read” speech.
You have no idea how case law works. Ask me how I know that.
CONNICK V Meyers is the SCOTUS decision upon which the 1A rights of public employees were determined.
If you think anything different applies, then prove it.
Try googling “landmark case” and “Connick V Meyers” together. I know you don’t know but Landmark cases lay the ground rules for certain things, such as in this case, the 1A rights of public employees.
That is why I told you to have someone explain it to you. Just trying to educate here.
If you state that “people like Charlie Kirk should be shot”, and your job involves the carrying of a weapon, is it not disruptive to the office, especially if there are people who have similar political beliefs to Kirk?
Let’s use a relevant example. Do you think a government employee, or even more specifically a military service member, should be allowed to state that “Muslims are all terrorists and need be killed before they Ft. Hood us again!” without consequence?
In both cases, I would say that such statements were different from mere opinions like “Kirk was an idiot and so was anyone who liked him” or “Islam is a totalitarian movement not worthy of being called a religion.”
Ok, I will bite and respond.
1A is towards the government allowing free speech. Not a lack of accountability from society. (I will also note this has been brought up about a dozen times and that horse is thoroughly beaten)
Now a more interesting point: why should people who are paid/represent the government be allowed to rally and celebrate the death of an American exercising his 1A rights? He was not forcing his views at the end of a knife or gun. He did not demand “re-education camps”. He used words! (I shiver to think of the hurt emotions that these can cause!)
A government employee, elected official, military member, hell a TRUSTED member of society (i.e. cops/doctors) should know better. They are supposed to represent “of the people”, or defend their rights, and in some cases provide life saving actions. These people should know better and be above gutter politics.
It’s OK to have an opinion, hey I have an asshole too, but maybe flaunting the opinion while basking in the death of a husband and father isn’t the smartest thing one could do in this day and age.
Such a terrible take.
If the government is enforcing accountability it is a violation of the 1A.
The 1A does not protect you from private citizens or companies but it does protect you from the government enforcing consequences.
One more time for the hard Of hearing….
NOT IF YOU ARE A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE
NOT IF YOU ARE A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE
NOT IF YOU ARE A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE
NOT IF YOU ARE A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE
NOT IF YOU ARE A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE
NOT IF YOU ARE A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE
oh and also
NOT IF YOU ARE A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE
Bullshit.
The government doesn’t have the right to punish government employees just because they don’t like what they have to say.
The 1A still protects federal employees unless what they say is disruptive to the workplace.
Private speech on their own time does not apply.
“The 1A still protects federal employees unless what they say is disruptive to the workplace.”
If private speech becomes disruptive…
Holy smokes he is stupid.
Ok, prove it. Cite a court case or something. Don’t be a moron and cite the constitution. We all know what that says. Not the part about not liking it, nobody cares about that. The parts about celebrating murder and spreading defamation lies.
Also you are wrong. They can restrict any speech that interferes with the operation of the government.
(Historically this is where you run away, so in case we don’t see you again for a while, bye).
This…
I am going to give you my absolute favorite line for following asinine instructions for the military:
Good Order and Discipline.
You should be more concerned with the fact you are OK with government employees celebrating his death and not about them being fired.
I will consider the idea of “government enforcing consequences”, but I ask in all seriousness and no snark: Define the Government violating this? Is it an unelected official? The Constitution is blurry on that and only speaks of the elected government. I would sincerely like to hear your take.
“If the government is enforcing accountability it is a violation of the 1A.”
Did you even read what you just wrote? Or are you truly that freaking stupid? ANY employer, INCLUDING the government has not only the right, but the responsibility to enforce accountability among it’s employees.. The fact that you can’t understand the need and requirement to hold your personnel accountable for their actions explains why you are a failure as an officer and as a human being..
Excellent points. However… that part about;
“maybe flaunting the opinion while basking in the death of a husband and father isn’t the smartest thing one could do in this day and age.”
Your average leftist would say that you are repressing their right to free speech by telling them that they should exercise a little respectful restraint. They all believe they are far superior to a man like Charlie Kirk, the feelings of his widow and children are meaningless, and their pain and sorrow is just the cost of doing business.
Hey, you can’t win every argument. Some people like to double down on stupid.
I guess it’s about the civility of it all for me. The Minnesota Representative who was murdered doesn’t deserve to be mocked, whatever her political affiliation. It was a gross act by a deranged individual.
Same goes with Charlie Kirk. It shouldn’t matter his political affiliation or ideals. It should be the fact he was murdered in front of his family and hundreds of eye witnesses.
Man, this past week feels like our country took a moral drop and it just feels weird. It is enough to make you cringe thinking there are people out there willing to celebrate a man’s murder instead of demand justice for it.
Yup. I never really realized the true depth of antisemitism in the US until after Hamas attacked Israel, nor did I truly understand the level of hate the left harbors. I’m very disappointed in a lot of my countrymen, and fear what’s next.
Fun fact… The Minnesota rep and Charlie Kirk were both shot by Leftist nuts– tell that to the Whataboutist folk. (Sorry, Lars, your side are the bad folk.)
EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.
But what about the Paul Pelosi attacker? When I think of Trump supporters my mind goes straight to Canadian, far left Green Party members, illegal aliens who over stayed their visa. Normally they are on meth and a strong advocate for public nudity living in San Francisco.
If that isn’t like a 98% correlation to Trump supporters I don’t know what is.
As The Commissar Turns…
Her world view and encyclopedic knowledge of Constitutional Law or what she just read on a Blue-Anon/Reddit post is not being fully implemented as she wishes…
There is a working “Hitlerian” theory on why it is the way it is. Seems completely legit in this case.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2025/09/14/scott_adams_why_did_people_think_they_could_cheer_charlie_kirk_murder_without_consequences.html
Well, with Leftists, it’s always okay when they do anything. You have a right to their opinion and, if you disagree, they feel butthurt and lash out.
What are you so upset about?
Rights are afforded by the government, and it decides what rights a person can enjoy.
Tim Kaine said so.
Ah, you sir, win the Internet for the day.
I can’t figure out how the Constitution has suddenly become important to people like Commissar…considering liberals like him have been circumventing and trashing it for decades.
IDK, but he ran off right on cue to the surprise of no one.
Once again, flappin’ his pie hole.
.
Where was the outcry?
Demoted master sergeant with white nationalist ties is now out of the Air Force
Active participation, including posting on the interwebs, is an actionable activity with repercussions.
I was outraged, that guy was a stupid tool.
Good riddance to bad rubbish…
Have someone read this to you, Lars. This is true censorship. The very thing you accuse the right of doing. I need to thank you for something. I never understood “projection” until I started interacting with you.
https://hotair.com/headlines/2025/09/16/biden-doj-official-condemns-free-speech-moves-after-kirk-murder-n3806838
Yes, if only we had the Department of Truth that Biden wanted to establish. Maybe we could do it now? I hear some office space has opened up at USAID HQs.
We could then put then put the new state run church in the Department of Education’s old digs. After Trump rose from the sea with the body of a bear, the liver spots of a leopard and the hair of a lion, the left called him a man of lawlessness and a man of sin. The Son of Perdition title can’t be too far behind. Only 42 more months of war against the saints of the left to go.
(It’s too bad the far left has no faith, they are really missing out)
As to the now former Marine Captain, he probably is not one of those “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it” type of military officers. Maybe his oath was “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States, except if I don’t approve what people say, then fuck them…”
So he gone and done it:
“I am pleased to inform our many U.S.A. Patriots that I am designating ANTIFA, A SICK, DANGEROUS, RADICAL LEFT DISASTER, AS A MAJOR TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.” — PotUS DJT
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115222459539841970