RGLAG85 said:

---

RangerRick9211 said:

---

RGLAG85 said:

---

RangerRick9211 said:

---

RGLAG85 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

RGLAG85 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Helicopter Ben said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Lol no. Saying that someone is MAGA or supports MAGA is an opinion. So the FCC rules don't apply here, even as much as Carr and F16 would want them to. In this instance, it was a very stupid opinion and ABC did what they felt appropriate. Carr got way, way over his skis, and Cruz and others were right to call him out on it.

---

By that logic, nothing can be objectively true or false. There's a mountain of evidence that he was exactly the opposite of MAGA…but hey that's just like, your opinion man.

---

There are things that are objectively verifiable as fact or opinion. Person A struck Person B with a bat is a verifiable fact statement. How do you prove someone is MAGA or not? There could be people with diametrically opposite beliefs on some issues, but they may both consider themselves MAGA. So how do you say someone is MAGA or not as a statement of fact? It's like saying someone is a Democrat, and someone is a registered democrat. The latter isn't verifiable, but the second is.

All that said, I'm in 100% agreement with you on everything else. Abolish the FCC.

---

You need to find a good conditioner.

So, do you think the CK assassin was a leftist or MAGA?

---

What you or I believe is irrelevant. That's all opinion. The over-arching point is that the government (Brendan Carr as head of the FCC), should not be weighing in while wearing their hat as government unless there's some obvious case where they should. In this case, there isn't.

---

You didn't answer my question. Do you think CK assassin was MAGA or leftist? Were not talking about the idiotic statement by the FCC chairman. Nice two step though.

---

You're not replying to me, but you are on the 1A thread discussing the idiotic statement by the FCC Chairman.

We are talking about that.

---

No, the poster I replied to said whether the killer was MAGA or leftist was objective, not factual. It's is and was factual, and anyone with a functioning brain knew it by Saturday.

---

Yes, from a late night host. Reality check, they aren't breaking this news. It's fodder, but it's their right.

This is not even central to the core argument.

---

And right now the fcc chair and Trump are just idiotic rhetoric, or should I say objective. What ABC and the affiliates did is factual. But, but..... the poster i was responding to was claiming that the fact the killer was leftist was objective, not factual. At the time of the Monday broadcast, it was factual. That justifies what ABC did.

---

You're still missing the point.

Objective, factual, justified, are not the business of the Fed.

It has no bearing on this topic.

The left is not in power at the moment, and SHOULD not have control of any govt agency.

Its disturbing how many people DO agree with her statements. I have been pleasantly surprised at the number who aren't, but anything more than 0% should terrify you..

RangerRick9211 said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

RangerRick9211 said:

---

Helicopter Ben said:

---

Ok I'll admit I got a few details wrong. ABC operates on a public broadcasting license. The FCC has rules for these licenses including disseminating false information. There is no way Kimmel didn't know what he said was false. Based on that along with numerous other examples, I believe it is obvious kimmels show was in violation of those rules. Maybe they weren't being enforced until now that everyone is fed up with the vile and blatantly false rhetoric coming from the left.

Now, if you want to have a discussion about deregulation, I'm all ears. The govt sticks its nose in WAY too many things. But according to the rules on the books, Carr was well within his authority to suggest what he did. I don't like it one bit, but is there any doubt the left would have used this same authority if the shoe was on the other foot? My prescription for this "both sides do it" is the same that it always has been. Reduce the power of government and this all goes away.

---

Politely, no.

The government has no business in regulating fact or fiction. I cited the "News" section of the FCC rule book to give you a leg to stand on. We haven't even started on if Kimmel is "reporting news." He is, uh, was a late night host. That's not news.

No one here should be cheering for this. You weren't during Covid and this is no different. Feds don't get to bully our speech.

---

the government doesnt have business in regulating what is broadcast on public domain? ABC, NBC, and CBS are public domain. The signal comes through on publicly owned spectra not cable.

This isnt anywhere close to Covid in nature. Don't make jump to conclusion.

---

Yes. Correct. Yup.

If you follow your logic through it's tyrannical. When the Dems are in charge you're cool with them having business in regulating your publicly owned spectra? Insane take, dude. It's entirely subject to who's in charge. You're cool with the Covid censorship if you're cool with this.

---

im tracking your point

Ragoo said:

---

RangerRick9211 said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

RangerRick9211 said:

---

Helicopter Ben said:

---

Ok I'll admit I got a few details wrong. ABC operates on a public broadcasting license. The FCC has rules for these licenses including disseminating false information. There is no way Kimmel didn't know what he said was false. Based on that along with numerous other examples, I believe it is obvious kimmels show was in violation of those rules. Maybe they weren't being enforced until now that everyone is fed up with the vile and blatantly false rhetoric coming from the left.

Now, if you want to have a discussion about deregulation, I'm all ears. The govt sticks its nose in WAY too many things. But according to the rules on the books, Carr was well within his authority to suggest what he did. I don't like it one bit, but is there any doubt the left would have used this same authority if the shoe was on the other foot? My prescription for this "both sides do it" is the same that it always has been. Reduce the power of government and this all goes away.

---

Politely, no.

The government has no business in regulating fact or fiction. I cited the "News" section of the FCC rule book to give you a leg to stand on. We haven't even started on if Kimmel is "reporting news." He is, uh, was a late night host. That's not news.

No one here should be cheering for this. You weren't during Covid and this is no different. Feds don't get to bully our speech.

---

the government doesnt have business in regulating what is broadcast on public domain? ABC, NBC, and CBS are public domain. The signal comes through on publicly owned spectra not cable.

This isnt anywhere close to Covid in nature. Don't make jump to conclusion.

---

Yes. Correct. Yup.

If you follow your logic through it's tyrannical. When the Dems are in charge you're cool with them having business in regulating your publicly owned spectra? Insane take, dude. It's entirely subject to who's in charge. You're cool with the Covid censorship if you're cool with this.

---

im tracking your point

---

This is a good discussion and I can appreciate both sides.

Whoever is in power should be enforcing the rules already on the books.

I disagree that government influenced this decision in any meaningful way. If anything it allowed business cause to do something the business wanted to do from a business perspective.

But for arguments sake let's give full weight to the comment, - ensuring businesses follow the regulations and standards to operate in publicly owned spaces is what they should be doing. It actually isn't controversial at all. It is only controversial because the left led the censorship charge - deplatforming Trump and political opponents, colluding with social media to stop "misinformation" etc. It is their hyper awareness and sensitivity that this will be "Revenge" that is even raising this topic.

But Kimmel was losing audience in a media space that has been dying due to the rise of podcast models. Take the government conspiracy brain off this was obviously a business decision. Combine that with comments that directly violate existing standards of broadcast responsibility and it is the necessary and right outcome.

aggiedata said:

---

Something to think about

Literally no one in left wing media cared about this or criticized it. They openly celebrated it and acted like the Biden administration should have done more of it. https://t.co/cUajL1u8pL

— Ian Miller (@ianmSC) September 19, 2025

---

Only issue I have with this video is Zuckerberg is lying his ass off to try and appear like a victim, when in fact he volunteered to censor and even created the algorithms to do it. He got exposed to what he was doing and then tried to play the victim to try and save face.

oh no said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

The left wants to censor speech. The right wants to censor speech.

---

---

Exactly

When has the Right censored free speech?

RGLAG85 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

RGLAG85 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Helicopter Ben said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Lol no. Saying that someone is MAGA or supports MAGA is an opinion. So the FCC rules don't apply here, even as much as Carr and F16 would want them to. In this instance, it was a very stupid opinion and ABC did what they felt appropriate. Carr got way, way over his skis, and Cruz and others were right to call him out on it.

---

By that logic, nothing can be objectively true or false. There's a mountain of evidence that he was exactly the opposite of MAGA…but hey that's just like, your opinion man.

---

There are things that are objectively verifiable as fact or opinion. Person A struck Person B with a bat is a verifiable fact statement. How do you prove someone is MAGA or not? There could be people with diametrically opposite beliefs on some issues, but they may both consider themselves MAGA. So how do you say someone is MAGA or not as a statement of fact? It's like saying someone is a Democrat, and someone is a registered democrat. The latter isn't verifiable, but the second is.

All that said, I'm in 100% agreement with you on everything else. Abolish the FCC.

---

You need to find a good conditioner.

So, do you think the CK assassin was a leftist or MAGA?

---

What you or I believe is irrelevant. That's all opinion. The over-arching point is that the government (Brendan Carr as head of the FCC), should not be weighing in while wearing their hat as government unless there's some obvious case where they should. In this case, there isn't.

---

You didn't answer my question. Do you think CK assassin was MAGA or leftist? Were not talking about the idiotic statement by the FCC chairman. Nice two step though. By the way, that came after Kimmel was let go. The affiliates had already taken care of that.

---

I don't believe he was MAGA. But what you or I or Brendan Carr believe he was or wasn't is an opinion. You can't define what being MAGA is, and neither can anyone, because what you believe makes someone MAGA can be very different from what someone else thinks. That makes it an opinion, and the FCC doesn't get to step in based on that.

ETA: fixed a typo.

Decay said:

---

You can't define MAGA, but you can attach it to the shooter?

You're a terrible liar.

---

Quoting this because I think he actually made a typo trying to say "I don't believe the shooter is MAGA"

So in fairness, great, that's step one.

But my point still stands. Defining MAGA in this context is comically easy because the shooter is very clearly NOT. Playing word games and slippery sloping something that didn't even happen shows your intent.

Wait, you know the shooter was MAGA but you don't know what defines MAGA?

Wait are idiots really arguing the shooter was Maga!?

Not really. It in fact appears to have been a whole trans cult cabal. But some of the usual sources in the left talking heads are trying to `counter-narrative' the obvious. The whole trans thing is on the Bidenites.

Kimmel was. He got fired because he is a has been with ratings in the crapper

ABC took the easy off ramp when he opened the door for them with his moronic comments and refusal to apologize.

Queso1 said:

---

The left wants to censor speech. The right wants to censor speech. People on the right decried cancel culture and yet here they are cancelling away. You know who you are.

I have always voted conservative because I saw it as the best option to avoid authoritarianism. I dismissed people saying the right was authoritarian. But, after the last few days and Bondi's statement, I really don't know anymore. To hear a conservative AG spew **** about hate speech sent a chill up my spine. Sure I despise the left and what they say, but they have the right to say it.

I'm sure many will reply with "are you concerned?" and the standard braindead mocking replies. Others will engage in ad hominem attacks. People will say that private companies have the right to censor - sure they do…and I'd probably have bought that argument until I heard what Bondi said. I've been outspoken about the leftists, but if you support this stuff, **** YOU TOO.

If you support this, you are no better than the leftists that quelled free speech the last decade.

I feel like a dog without a home.

---

87 starred this.

That's a lot of socks.

Ag_of_08 said:

---

The left is not in power at the moment, and SHOULD not have control of any govt agency.

---

Right. But the left is the entire bureaucracy. Millions and millions of them across the country. As you know. Our government is infested with them and they're filling up our courtrooms with their RESISTANCE.

As you know.

There is nothing leftists won't lie about. They'll stand straight in your face and lie.

FireAg said:

---

Wait, you know the shooter was MAGA but you don't know what defines MAGA?

---

It's an opinion, and I fixed my typo. It's opinion based on disclosed facts. How anyone defines MAGA may be different. And if there isn't an iron-clad way to define it, it can't be a fact. It's no different than saying someone is conservative or liberal. And the only reason it matters is the FCC has some regulation regarding factual news reporting. Nevermind the fact the Kimmel's show wasn't news to begin with.

HTownAg98 said:

---

RGLAG85 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

RGLAG85 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Helicopter Ben said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Lol no. Saying that someone is MAGA or supports MAGA is an opinion. So the FCC rules don't apply here, even as much as Carr and F16 would want them to. In this instance, it was a very stupid opinion and ABC did what they felt appropriate. Carr got way, way over his skis, and Cruz and others were right to call him out on it.

---

By that logic, nothing can be objectively true or false. There's a mountain of evidence that he was exactly the opposite of MAGA…but hey that's just like, your opinion man.

---

There are things that are objectively verifiable as fact or opinion. Person A struck Person B with a bat is a verifiable fact statement. How do you prove someone is MAGA or not? There could be people with diametrically opposite beliefs on some issues, but they may both consider themselves MAGA. So how do you say someone is MAGA or not as a statement of fact? It's like saying someone is a Democrat, and someone is a registered democrat. The latter isn't verifiable, but the second is.

All that said, I'm in 100% agreement with you on everything else. Abolish the FCC.

---

You need to find a good conditioner.

So, do you think the CK assassin was a leftist or MAGA?

---

What you or I believe is irrelevant. That's all opinion. The over-arching point is that the government (Brendan Carr as head of the FCC), should not be weighing in while wearing their hat as government unless there's some obvious case where they should. In this case, there isn't.

---

You didn't answer my question. Do you think CK assassin was MAGA or leftist? Were not talking about the idiotic statement by the FCC chairman. Nice two step though. By the way, that came after Kimmel was let go. The affiliates had already taken care of that.

---

I don't believe he was MAGA. But what you or I or Brendan Carr believe he was or wasn't is an opinion. You can't define what being MAGA is, and neither can anyone, because what you believe makes someone MAGA can be very different from what someone else thinks. That makes it an opinion, and the FCC doesn't get to step in based on that.

ETA: fixed a typo.

---

The FCC had nothing to do with this result. The timing of the statements tell you that.

Just opportunistic rhetoric from them.

Kimmel made his bed and decided to keep lying in it when given the opportunity to clean it up.

End of story.

“This is government censorship! This is fascism!”

Also

“We can bring Kimmel back whenever we want and the government didn’t stop us at all” https://t.co/imEsdFzvAW

— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) September 20, 2025

HTownAg98 said:

---

FireAg said:

---

Wait, you know the shooter was MAGA but you don't know what defines MAGA?

---

It's an opinion, and I fixed my typo. It's opinion based on disclosed facts. How anyone defines MAGA may be different. And if there isn't an iron-clad way to define it, it can't be a fact. It's no different than saying someone is conservative or liberal. And the only reason it matters is the FCC has some regulation regarding factual news reporting. Nevermind the fact the Kimmel's show wasn't news to begin with.

---

So the FCC had no legal leg to stand on and ABC fired Kimmel notwithstanding that fact? Perhaps you should contact ABC and educate their legal department.

You're making the conservative argument and don't even realize it.

Democrats don't want any oversight or accountability. They want unfettered access to say whatever they want, no mattter how wrong or inflammatory. And sadly, that's what they have grown accustomed to during the past 12 years.

At the same time, they want to censor any speech they do not like.

Should the FCC interfere with free speech. No. But they do have the responsibility of oversight of the public airwaves, and Kimmel gave them good reason to question what he was doing. He lied. Period. But the left wants to conflate that oversight with the free market speaking loudly and causing both the affiliates and the network to cancel the show and gaslight the public about what really happened.

They can cry all they want to about free speech, but after the last decade I don't give a rat's rear end. Kimmel was toxic, had been losing audience for a decade, wasn't funny, and walked right into what he deservedly got. It isn't a threat to free speech. It was the public speaking loudly and telling the netork that they are no longer buying what Kimmel and his ilk are selling. Good riddance. America is better off without Kimmel and his late night propaganda.

Like the dating to the second term of Obama in the first paragraph.

Carr shouldn't be saying anything about this, period. Ted Cruz said it much better than I can.

Quote:

---

"I think it is unbelievably dangerous for government to put itself in the position of saying we're going to decide what speech we like and what we don't, and we're going to threaten to take you off air if we don't like what you're saying," Cruz said on his podcast, "Verdict with Ted Cruz."
"I like Brendan Carr. He's a good guy, he's the chairman of the FCC. I work closely with him, but what he said there is dangerous as hell," Cruz said.
"It might feel good right now to threaten Jimmy Kimmel, yeah, but when it is used to silence every conservative in America, we will regret it," Cruz said.

---

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna232496

Logos Stick said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

FireAg said:

---

Wait, you know the shooter was MAGA but you don't know what defines MAGA?

---

It's an opinion, and I fixed my typo. It's opinion based on disclosed facts. How anyone defines MAGA may be different. And if there isn't an iron-clad way to define it, it can't be a fact. It's no different than saying someone is conservative or liberal. And the only reason it matters is the FCC has some regulation regarding factual news reporting. Nevermind the fact the Kimmel's show wasn't news to begin with.

---

So the FCC had no legal leg to stand on and ABC fired Kimmel notwithstanding that fact? Perhaps you should contact ABC and educate their legal department.

You're making the conservative argument and don't even realize it.

---

Maybe because I think ABC was well within their right to fire someone. But the FCC should stay out of it. The FCC shouldn't even be agreeing with ABC in this instance.

Science Denier said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

The left wants to censor speech. The right wants to censor speech. People on the right decried cancel culture and yet here they are cancelling away. You know who you are.

I have always voted conservative because I saw it as the best option to avoid authoritarianism. I dismissed people saying the right was authoritarian. But, after the last few days and Bondi's statement, I really don't know anymore. To hear a conservative AG spew **** about hate speech sent a chill up my spine. Sure I despise the left and what they say, but they have the right to say it.

I'm sure many will reply with "are you concerned?" and the standard braindead mocking replies. Others will engage in ad hominem attacks. People will say that private companies have the right to censor - sure they do…and I'd probably have bought that argument until I heard what Bondi said. I've been outspoken about the leftists, but if you support this stuff, **** YOU TOO.

If you support this, you are no better than the leftists that quelled free speech the last decade.

I feel like a dog without a home.

---

87 starred this.

That's a lot of socks.

---

In fairness, it is only 40 socks and 47 posters that only read the first line.

HTownAg98 said:

---

FireAg said:

---

Wait, you know the shooter was MAGA but you don't know what defines MAGA?

---

It's an opinion, and I fixed my typo. It's opinion based on disclosed facts. How anyone defines MAGA may be different. And if there isn't an iron-clad way to define it, it can't be a fact. It's no different than saying someone is conservative or liberal. And the only reason it matters is the FCC has some regulation regarding factual news reporting. Nevermind the fact the Kimmel's show wasn't news to begin with.

---

Please show me where the FCC issued a directive, email, text, or even a phone call to ABC and forced ABC to pull Kimmel…

I'll hang up and listen…

Pam Bondi is going after Hate Speech whether you like it or not.

Burpelson said:

---

Pam Bondi is going after Hate Speech whether you like it or not.

---

She will attack it will all the tenacity that she has gone after everything else.

FireAg said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

FireAg said:

---

Wait, you know the shooter was MAGA but you don't know what defines MAGA?

---

It's an opinion, and I fixed my typo. It's opinion based on disclosed facts. How anyone defines MAGA may be different. And if there isn't an iron-clad way to define it, it can't be a fact. It's no different than saying someone is conservative or liberal. And the only reason it matters is the FCC has some regulation regarding factual news reporting. Nevermind the fact the Kimmel's show wasn't news to begin with.

---

Please show me where the FCC issued a directive, email, text, or even a phone call to ABC and forced ABC to pull Kimmel…

I'll hang up and listen…

---

Where did I say they did? You're just trying to put words in my mouth. But if you don't think this is problematic going forward, then I don't know what to say.

Quote:

---

"Look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way," he said to podcaster Benny Johnson on Wednesday. "These companies can find ways to change conduct, to take action on Kimmel or, you know, there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead."

---

Cruz was right to call him out for acting like a mafioso thug.

In your opinion it's a problem…

I can respect that…

Legally speaking, however, no violation of 1A rights has actually taken place…