I will believe it when I see it. I am beyond tired of the right talking big and then immediately capitulating. Starting with Trump and going all the way down to school board members. Nobody anywhere, anytime is willing to draw a line in the sand and say ENOUGH! It's all just performative.
If what we have been seeing is the "art of the deal" then count me right out. I don't see how figuratively letting a stranger fuck my wife in front of me is supposed to be a win because we compromised and he pinky promised that he wouldn't do anal with her.
The right needs to grow a god damned spine. And until I see it, anyone talking big like Sinclair and Nexstar can fuck right off until they walk the fucking walk for more than a month. Talk is cheap. Shut up and do something.
I think it's more an excuse as Jimmy ISN'T bringing in the numbers, so use this as a reason to ditch his show for one that can bring in more, like a live stream of a lake..
Which also works for me in spreading the message "leftists don't make you money, ANYTHING else does!"
People here were assuring me that it was a good thing for that FCC clown to brag that he would going to take Jimmy Kimmel down, and thus created a massive pro-free speech backlash.
Tony, you massive faggot, your claim about an FCC official "bragging" to take down Jimmy Kimmel is flat-out wrong, and here’s why.
Brendan Carr, an FCC commissioner, appeared on a YouTube podcast and noted that broadcast license holders have a duty to avoid distorting major news stories, which can be illegal under FCC rules (47 CFR § 73.1217). He suggested accountability, not a personal vendetta against Kimmel. No threats were made to ABC, and Carr later clarified at the 2025 Concordia Summit that he wasn’t targeting licenses—just flagging a potential complaint. Your "brag" narrative doesn’t hold up.
Compare this to 1994, when KPRC-TV in Houston dropped Late Night with Conan O'Brien due to abysmal ratings, lower than infomercials. No FCC involvement, just a business call by an affiliate. Similarly, Sinclair and Nexstar are preempting Kimmel’s show in 2025—not because of government pressure, but because advertisers are pulling out, forcing refunds and unsold ad slots. ABC suspended Kimmel briefly on September 17, 2025, to manage the fallout, not due to direct FCC action.
Your points unravel:
Enforcing FCC rules isn’t a free speech violation; it’s about public accountability.
Carr didn’t brag about “taking Kimmel down”—he discussed legal standards.
The “backlash” is overblown, driven by partisan spin, not evidence of censorship.
Network executives know the real issue: Kimmel’s comments tanked ad revenue, prompting preemption.
And here you are unable to recognize a manufactured moral panic as the Democrat Party and their loyalists within broadcast media download new instructions to their useful idiot NPCs.
I guess it is totally in character for massive faggot like you?
Brendan Carr, an FCC commissioner, appeared on a YouTube podcast and noted that broadcast license holders have a duty to avoid distorting major news stories, which can be illegal under FCC rules (47 CFR § 73.1217).
You were really hoping that no one would actually look up that regulation - even leaving aside whether it is constituionally permissible. Of course, no one on the American right ever checks anything, so you were correct about that.
Obviously, Jimmy Kimmel is not 'news'. Nor is it foreseeable that it will cause harm, nor did it in fact cause harm, nor was the non-existent harm immediate.
You guys are such cultists that you swtich sides on whether the federal government should be policing alleged 'misinformation' the moment you think you hold the whip hand. Which is understandable, an eye for an eye, but in this case very stupid.
No threats were made to ABC
We can do this the easy way or the hard way.
Not a threat? Get out of here.
And here you are unable to recognize a manufactured moral panic as the Democrat Party and their loyalists within broadcast media download new instructions to their useful idiot NPCs.
Let's assume that this is a 'manufactured moral panic' and that you are correct about everything.
How was it a good idea for that literal retard and jackass to go out screaming left and right in a way that enabled them to manufacture this moral panic? Now he's back, more popular than before, a free speech martyr, and Republicans are framed as censors. An own goal if ever there was one. And you're defending being stupid? It's like being in the Führerbunker in 1945 and claiming no mistakes were made.
Tony, your "Jimmy Kimmel is not news" deflection crumbles on contact with reality.
By the time Kimmel made his statements, the facts about Robinson's left-leaning politics were emerging and available to anyone consuming news seriously. Kimmel's production team has resources that dwarf most newsrooms; they knew better. The YouGov poll data proves exactly why this matters: 41% of Democrats incorrectly believed the shooter was Republican. Kimmel chose to reinforce that false narrative when accurate information was available to him.
This wasn't premature commentary; it was calculated disinformation disguised as entertainment.
Your "we can do this the easy way or the hard way" is actually a threat argument falls flat. That's textbook regulatory language signaling consequences for broadcast licensees. Carr was doing his job: preventing influential media figures from exploiting public confusion with deliberate falsehoods during major national events.
Your strategic argument is backwards. Preemptively surrendering to bad-faith "martyrdom" narratives guarantees the complete erosion of broadcast standards. The proper response to deliberate misinformation isn't to avoid accountability out of fear of political theater: it's to consistently enforce basic accuracy requirements regardless of partisan whining.
Kimmel had the facts, ignored them, and chose to spread disinformation that aligned with politically convenient public misconceptions. That's exactly when regulatory oversight should kick in.
Your Führerbunker comparison remains ridiculous hyperbole that undermines serious discussion of media accountability.
Why is it not surprising that your chief recommendation seems to be: "Just bend over and let the Left owned media have their way."
By the time Kimmel made his statements, the facts about Robinson's left-leaning politics were emerging and available to anyone consuming news seriously. Kimmel's production team has resources that dwarf most newsrooms; they knew better.
Yeah, duh. Of course they knew. They're liars.
And lying is legal. And he isn't news. But that wasn't even my point.
Your "we can do this the easy way or the hard way" is actually a threat argument falls flat. That's textbook regulatory language signaling consequences for broadcast licensees. Carr was doing his job: preventing influential media figures from exploiting public confusion with deliberate falsehoods during major national events.
LOL. I linked the actual whatever that was that you cited. It is nothing of the sort, and even if it were, that is obviously unconstitutional.
Your strategic argument is backwards. Preemptively surrendering to bad-faith "martyrdom" narratives guarantees the complete erosion of broadcast standards. The proper response to deliberate misinformation isn't to avoid accountability out of fear of political theater: it's to consistently enforce basic accuracy requirements regardless of partisan whining.
You cried when Biden "enforce[d] basic accuracy" standards (at least what he claimed) on Twitter. Now you want to become the tyrant.
As I said, my point isn't even that you're a hypocrite. I can understand that. It's that this is BLUNDERING. It's worse than a crime, it's a blunder. If you want to censor people, you need to shut up and not talk like a mob boss like that total retard.
Your Führerbunker comparison remains ridiculous hyperbole that undermines serious discussion of media accountability.
When this 'strategy', or whatever the hell that was, resulted in you getting your ass kicked so hard, you may want to consider if speaking like a mob boss and blundering about was the best way to go about. I don't know why you think this is controversial. Do you normally persist in paths that result in you getting your ass kicked this hard?
Why is it not surprising that your chief recommendation seems to be: "Just bend over and let the Left owned media have their way."
So now I'm a traitor for pointing out your failed strategy?
My recommendation is that if you want to censor, at least do it in a way that is smart and doesn't result in your getting your ass kicked. Don't go around and shout "HAHA, WE ARE EVIL AND WE'RE CENSORING". Instead, disguise it so that people can't pounce on it.
Tony, our major disagreement seems to be that you think that broadcast TV should be without standards or enforcement.
I disagree.
Twitter isn't governed by the FCC. It isn't broadcast over the airwaves.
A government monopoly is granted by broadcast licences, and that comes with conditions.
The enforcement of those conditions has been entirely absent for a long time. Lying over the airwaves, radio or TV should have consequences. This was as clear-cut as it gets.
This isn't Twitter. As unethical as that was, I don't think it was strictly prohibited by federal law.
Your argument is that the director of the FCC threatened to enforce the law? Well fuck him. How dare he do his job, amIrite?
This isn't censorship. If it was there would be actual consequences for discussing this on the Internet, which there are not.
The The left leaning media was going to try to spin this with a lie no matter what happened. They are mobilizing their useful idiots to try to neutralize any kind of enforcement.
The sick, sad joke is that private broadcast companies are reflecting public opinion and preemptively canceling the airing of this shitty, unpopular show, not the US government.
This isn't censorship. It would be fucking great if the FCC actually did it's fucking job and enforced the law. Do it impartially.
The lie that this is politically motivated censorship will die off, because it will lose steam or stop working. This is just like Russia Collision or any other lie that was a useful lever to pull.
If I were Trump I'd push to have laws passed to break up media ownership, but I am not.
It is fucking hilarious that you think that enforcing a very reasonable law is mustach twirling evil. How unexpected.
Tony, our major disagreement seems to be that you think that broadcast TV should be without standards or enforcement.
No, this is an 'is' and not an 'ought'. By the way, your position on the 'ought' changed about 8 months ago.
This isn't Twitter. As unethical as that was, I don't think it was strictly prohibited by federal law.
Of course it was. Not by criminal law, unfortunately, but it's an illegal government action based on the highest law.
This isn't censorship. If it was there would be actual consequences for discussing this on the Internet, which there are not.
Do you think something cannot be censorship unless there are consequences for discussing it on the internet? As long as you don't touch the internet (yet), it's not censorship? Of course, people like Don Bacon and other GOP Congressmen want to touch the internet as well...
The sick, sad joke is that private broadcast companies are reflecting public opinion and preemptively canceling the airing of this shitty, unpopular show, not the US government.
If that's the case, why would you even need to talk like a mob boss like the FCC guy? Why would you give your opponents ammunition to spin it as censorship and bring back an extremely unpopular, unfunny guy back, now as a martyr of censorship?
This isn't censorship. It would be fucking great if the FCC actually did it's fucking job and enforced the law. Do it impartially.
Who do you trust with the power to censor? You talk like Donald Trump is president for the rest of eternity.
If I were Trump I'd push to have laws passed to break up media ownership, but I am not.
That's actually great. It's not targeting any speech, and it would be an overall improvement that everyone can agree with. Or Democrats would have to admit that they love concentrations of power.
It is fucking hilarious that you think that enforcing a very reasonable law is mustach twirling evil. How unexpected.
I mean, you're not even willing to admit that it's extremely STUPID, the way they went about doing it.
Good idea? no but the pro-free speech backlash was entirely manufactured for the left to play victim.
The left revealed themselves to normies as ghouls incompatible with civilization. They were desperate to play victim.
The FCC "clown" was on a podcast saying ABC is breaking their licensing clause with Kimmel lying on air and an investigation needs to happen.
No investigation was started and no one reached ABC or Disney to take any action.
Disney asked Kimmel to apologize and he wanted to make things worse so they suspended him. Nowhere was a confirmation that ABC and Disney even considered the FCC in their decision.
The left manufactured the entire reaction to be this infringement on freedom of speech.
Good idea? no but the pro-free speech backlash was entirely manufactured for the left to play victim.
But they made it very easy for them. If you were intentionally trying to help the left, this would be the way. From a comedian outright lying about who committed a blatant murder to becoming a free speech martyr over it.
This was the MO of anti-Trump: Trump would do something questionable, but they'd go so overboard that it would go against them in the end.
The FCC "clown" was on a podcast saying ABC is breaking their licensing clause with Kimmel lying on air and an investigation needs to happen.
So if an investigation needs to happen, why would he prejudge that ABCis breaking the licensing clause. Why would he sound like a mob boss "we can do this the easy way or the hard way" (I can't believe I agree with Ted Cruz).
Disney asked Kimmel to apologize and he wanted to make things worse so they suspended him. Nowhere was a confirmation that ABC and Disney even considered the FCC in their decision.
If you, for a moment, imagine that this had happened under Biden, you'll see how this will be viewed by people who are not already committed to the right-wing narrative. Imagine for a moment government officials trying to get Twitter to censor people, saying that they're breaking the law (very dubious) and saying "we can do this the hard way or the easy way".
If you say "they did it so now we do it", that's OK. But if you're going to do it, can the right at least go about it in a way that's less stupid and self-defeating?
I agree, it was not great to give the left this on a silver platter but it was still just leftist being leftists and blowing it under proportion. You can argue that the rhetoric was bad but he took no action and we have no proof that ABC or Disney even knew about what he said or had any consequence on their decision.
On the last part, we already know that Google, Twitter and Facebook have been censoring conservatives for years on the behalf of the government. No one seems to care and there are no consequences.
Only thing that is certain is the left does not care about free speech and they are hypocrites. They do disgust me a bit how they made this a free speech issue when conservatives have been censored for years and in 2020 they celebrated how well they managed to censor the right.
I will believe it when I see it. I am beyond tired of the right talking big and then immediately capitulating. Starting with Trump and going all the way down to school board members. Nobody anywhere, anytime is willing to draw a line in the sand and say ENOUGH! It's all just performative.
If what we have been seeing is the "art of the deal" then count me right out. I don't see how figuratively letting a stranger fuck my wife in front of me is supposed to be a win because we compromised and he pinky promised that he wouldn't do anal with her.
The right needs to grow a god damned spine. And until I see it, anyone talking big like Sinclair and Nexstar can fuck right off until they walk the fucking walk for more than a month. Talk is cheap. Shut up and do something.
Apologies for the rant.
Didn't Sinclair pull a Charlie Kirk memorial over threats?
^ What it looks like when free speech is actually under attack
I think it's more an excuse as Jimmy ISN'T bringing in the numbers, so use this as a reason to ditch his show for one that can bring in more, like a live stream of a lake..
Which also works for me in spreading the message "leftists don't make you money, ANYTHING else does!"
Here is a white pill for you all - these two networks are their biggest broadcasters.
So even if Kimmel is back, he's gonna have even LOWER viewerships.
Free speech is dead
tranny's commit mor- BLAM
I don't think you can get to the '
People here were assuring me that it was a good thing for that FCC clown to brag that he would going to take Jimmy Kimmel down, and thus created a massive pro-free speech backlash.
Tony, you massive faggot, your claim about an FCC official "bragging" to take down Jimmy Kimmel is flat-out wrong, and here’s why.
Brendan Carr, an FCC commissioner, appeared on a YouTube podcast and noted that broadcast license holders have a duty to avoid distorting major news stories, which can be illegal under FCC rules (47 CFR § 73.1217). He suggested accountability, not a personal vendetta against Kimmel. No threats were made to ABC, and Carr later clarified at the 2025 Concordia Summit that he wasn’t targeting licenses—just flagging a potential complaint. Your "brag" narrative doesn’t hold up.
Compare this to 1994, when KPRC-TV in Houston dropped Late Night with Conan O'Brien due to abysmal ratings, lower than infomercials. No FCC involvement, just a business call by an affiliate. Similarly, Sinclair and Nexstar are preempting Kimmel’s show in 2025—not because of government pressure, but because advertisers are pulling out, forcing refunds and unsold ad slots. ABC suspended Kimmel briefly on September 17, 2025, to manage the fallout, not due to direct FCC action.
Your points unravel:
And here you are unable to recognize a manufactured moral panic as the Democrat Party and their loyalists within broadcast media download new instructions to their useful idiot NPCs.
I guess it is totally in character for massive faggot like you?
Jesus, what an annihilation lol
DemolitionsPanda living up to his name
See, this is why people think that you are 15.
You were really hoping that no one would actually look up that regulation - even leaving aside whether it is constituionally permissible. Of course, no one on the American right ever checks anything, so you were correct about that.
Obviously, Jimmy Kimmel is not 'news'. Nor is it foreseeable that it will cause harm, nor did it in fact cause harm, nor was the non-existent harm immediate.
You guys are such cultists that you swtich sides on whether the federal government should be policing alleged 'misinformation' the moment you think you hold the whip hand. Which is understandable, an eye for an eye, but in this case very stupid.
We can do this the easy way or the hard way.
Not a threat? Get out of here.
Let's assume that this is a 'manufactured moral panic' and that you are correct about everything.
How was it a good idea for that literal retard and jackass to go out screaming left and right in a way that enabled them to manufacture this moral panic? Now he's back, more popular than before, a free speech martyr, and Republicans are framed as censors. An own goal if ever there was one. And you're defending being stupid? It's like being in the Führerbunker in 1945 and claiming no mistakes were made.
Tony, your "Jimmy Kimmel is not news" deflection crumbles on contact with reality.
By the time Kimmel made his statements, the facts about Robinson's left-leaning politics were emerging and available to anyone consuming news seriously. Kimmel's production team has resources that dwarf most newsrooms; they knew better. The YouGov poll data proves exactly why this matters: 41% of Democrats incorrectly believed the shooter was Republican. Kimmel chose to reinforce that false narrative when accurate information was available to him. This wasn't premature commentary; it was calculated disinformation disguised as entertainment.
Your "we can do this the easy way or the hard way" is actually a threat argument falls flat. That's textbook regulatory language signaling consequences for broadcast licensees. Carr was doing his job: preventing influential media figures from exploiting public confusion with deliberate falsehoods during major national events.
Your strategic argument is backwards. Preemptively surrendering to bad-faith "martyrdom" narratives guarantees the complete erosion of broadcast standards. The proper response to deliberate misinformation isn't to avoid accountability out of fear of political theater: it's to consistently enforce basic accuracy requirements regardless of partisan whining.
Kimmel had the facts, ignored them, and chose to spread disinformation that aligned with politically convenient public misconceptions. That's exactly when regulatory oversight should kick in.
Your Führerbunker comparison remains ridiculous hyperbole that undermines serious discussion of media accountability.
Why is it not surprising that your chief recommendation seems to be: "Just bend over and let the Left owned media have their way."
Yeah, duh. Of course they knew. They're liars.
And lying is legal. And he isn't news. But that wasn't even my point.
LOL. I linked the actual whatever that was that you cited. It is nothing of the sort, and even if it were, that is obviously unconstitutional.
You cried when Biden "enforce[d] basic accuracy" standards (at least what he claimed) on Twitter. Now you want to become the tyrant.
As I said, my point isn't even that you're a hypocrite. I can understand that. It's that this is BLUNDERING. It's worse than a crime, it's a blunder. If you want to censor people, you need to shut up and not talk like a mob boss like that total retard.
When this 'strategy', or whatever the hell that was, resulted in you getting your ass kicked so hard, you may want to consider if speaking like a mob boss and blundering about was the best way to go about. I don't know why you think this is controversial. Do you normally persist in paths that result in you getting your ass kicked this hard?
So now I'm a traitor for pointing out your failed strategy?
My recommendation is that if you want to censor, at least do it in a way that is smart and doesn't result in your getting your ass kicked. Don't go around and shout "HAHA, WE ARE EVIL AND WE'RE CENSORING". Instead, disguise it so that people can't pounce on it.
Tony, our major disagreement seems to be that you think that broadcast TV should be without standards or enforcement.
I disagree.
Twitter isn't governed by the FCC. It isn't broadcast over the airwaves.
A government monopoly is granted by broadcast licences, and that comes with conditions.
The enforcement of those conditions has been entirely absent for a long time. Lying over the airwaves, radio or TV should have consequences. This was as clear-cut as it gets.
This isn't Twitter. As unethical as that was, I don't think it was strictly prohibited by federal law.
Your argument is that the director of the FCC threatened to enforce the law? Well fuck him. How dare he do his job, amIrite?
This isn't censorship. If it was there would be actual consequences for discussing this on the Internet, which there are not.
The The left leaning media was going to try to spin this with a lie no matter what happened. They are mobilizing their useful idiots to try to neutralize any kind of enforcement.
The sick, sad joke is that private broadcast companies are reflecting public opinion and preemptively canceling the airing of this shitty, unpopular show, not the US government.
This isn't censorship. It would be fucking great if the FCC actually did it's fucking job and enforced the law. Do it impartially.
The lie that this is politically motivated censorship will die off, because it will lose steam or stop working. This is just like Russia Collision or any other lie that was a useful lever to pull.
If I were Trump I'd push to have laws passed to break up media ownership, but I am not.
It is fucking hilarious that you think that enforcing a very reasonable law is mustach twirling evil. How unexpected.
No, this is an 'is' and not an 'ought'. By the way, your position on the 'ought' changed about 8 months ago.
Of course it was. Not by criminal law, unfortunately, but it's an illegal government action based on the highest law.
Do you think something cannot be censorship unless there are consequences for discussing it on the internet? As long as you don't touch the internet (yet), it's not censorship? Of course, people like Don Bacon and other GOP Congressmen want to touch the internet as well...
If that's the case, why would you even need to talk like a mob boss like the FCC guy? Why would you give your opponents ammunition to spin it as censorship and bring back an extremely unpopular, unfunny guy back, now as a martyr of censorship?
Who do you trust with the power to censor? You talk like Donald Trump is president for the rest of eternity.
That's actually great. It's not targeting any speech, and it would be an overall improvement that everyone can agree with. Or Democrats would have to admit that they love concentrations of power.
I mean, you're not even willing to admit that it's extremely STUPID, the way they went about doing it.
https://youtu.be/Aoam4Vtt3sw
Watch this.
Midnight' s Edge have been a reliable scooper for years.
This is what actually happened.
If you want to go on and believe every lie on TV, then knock yourself out, but you are better than that. Even if I am the only one who thinks so.
Good idea? no but the pro-free speech backlash was entirely manufactured for the left to play victim.
The left revealed themselves to normies as ghouls incompatible with civilization. They were desperate to play victim.
The FCC "clown" was on a podcast saying ABC is breaking their licensing clause with Kimmel lying on air and an investigation needs to happen.
No investigation was started and no one reached ABC or Disney to take any action.
Disney asked Kimmel to apologize and he wanted to make things worse so they suspended him. Nowhere was a confirmation that ABC and Disney even considered the FCC in their decision.
The left manufactured the entire reaction to be this infringement on freedom of speech.
But they made it very easy for them. If you were intentionally trying to help the left, this would be the way. From a comedian outright lying about who committed a blatant murder to becoming a free speech martyr over it.
This was the MO of anti-Trump: Trump would do something questionable, but they'd go so overboard that it would go against them in the end.
So if an investigation needs to happen, why would he prejudge that ABCis breaking the licensing clause. Why would he sound like a mob boss "we can do this the easy way or the hard way" (I can't believe I agree with Ted Cruz).
If you, for a moment, imagine that this had happened under Biden, you'll see how this will be viewed by people who are not already committed to the right-wing narrative. Imagine for a moment government officials trying to get Twitter to censor people, saying that they're breaking the law (very dubious) and saying "we can do this the hard way or the easy way".
If you say "they did it so now we do it", that's OK. But if you're going to do it, can the right at least go about it in a way that's less stupid and self-defeating?
I agree, it was not great to give the left this on a silver platter but it was still just leftist being leftists and blowing it under proportion. You can argue that the rhetoric was bad but he took no action and we have no proof that ABC or Disney even knew about what he said or had any consequence on their decision.
On the last part, we already know that Google, Twitter and Facebook have been censoring conservatives for years on the behalf of the government. No one seems to care and there are no consequences.
Only thing that is certain is the left does not care about free speech and they are hypocrites. They do disgust me a bit how they made this a free speech issue when conservatives have been censored for years and in 2020 they celebrated how well they managed to censor the right.