Another shooting.

Texas this time by an anti-ice nut.

Maybe tonight Kimmel will say this nut is MAGA too and put the last nail to his employment.

Copycat, wrote "anti-ice" on bullets he left behind.

I typed it simply for you but you missed the point again.

Are you a "Charlie Kirk" of the left, here to continually argue/debate, hoping to switch us from right to left?

You're way off base, what he said is ok...its where he said it and how his employers also took it.

On broadcast tv For instance they....
cannot swear
Broadcast porn
Guts and gore.

Obviously his employers don't like lying about half the country. (MAGA)


But keep digging, everyone here knows your true intent in backing this anti gun advocate.

[/quote]


This is extreme ignorance or more likely unwillingness to ceed that Trump has overstepped his bounds (again)
You can't simply ignore the fact that Carr threatened Disney ( we can do this the easy way or the hard way) There was/is two big mergers that needed FCC approval to happen. A reasonable person can conclude that since
Kimmel was suspended after these comments that they played a role. But aside from that, Trump said he wants the FCC to investigate further when he learned Kimmel was coming back. That's pretty black and white. You'll all be crying in your cheerios when the next president uses theFCC to shut down conservative voices. Or maybe they'll be mature enough not to feel threatened by a comedian making a joke about them, we'll see. Now, the fact that some affiliates won't air Kimmel is fine, that is the free market making decisions that they feel will benefit their viewers best

And before you decide to come back with tds because that's all you have.... take a look at all the conservative voices that are saying the exact same thing I just did.

So, PA and BC, if Disney was soooo intimidated by Carr's comments, then why did they reverse their decision?

I thought you had to be somewhat funny to be considered a comedian?

From what I’ve seen, all he does is spew hate towards Trump and the right in general?

Just to be clear... whether Disney pulled Kimmel or proceeded as normal has no bearing on the level of unconstitutional gov interference. The words were spoken... that's the problem.
To answer your question... I can't read minds so I can't say for sure. But the fact that both sides of the aisle cried foul certainly gave Disney some assurance that any further interference by the FCC would be seen for what is was and put the government in a liable position to them. Essentially having republicans and democrats alike condemn Carrs words put him back on his heels. He's in an indefensible position. And I'm sure money played a role in that decision to some extent. Just my opinion however

So... we're saying that one board chairman, of a federal agency.... "speaking words" is...... unconstitutional?

Kimmel is using his platform to be a left wing operative...period.

Johnny Carson said it best...look it up

I saw what Carson said and he's spot on, so are you.

When the words are a threat that the federal government will interfere if the results aren't what they want... then yes. What would you call it? I think you said that you agreed the remarks were "concerning "?
To follow that up the POTUS said he would like the FCC to further investigate because he wasn't happy Kimmel was coming back. Are the arms of the federal government's job to make Trump look good and follow his directive or do their job in a constitutional fashion as the laws written by Congress allow? I think you know the answer....

kimmel spews his political crap because he has an audience of rabid liberals that eat it up. I actually think they believe the stuff he says. And after what happened to Charlie Kirk, we really don't need folks like Kimmel firing up the hate and violence we all know the left is capable of.

But, that's his right to do if he wants to.

It's also his bosses' rights to can him if they choose.

One of the reasons we got the sub prime mortgage crisis was Clinton wt al threatening banks with investigation if they didnt give home loans to people that had no business borrowing 20 bucks let alone 200,000.

The difference between that and the FCC was that there was established rules that Kimmel was violating. The banks were just threatened with investigation just to be a nuisance.

Exactly what both ya have, but I don't need that as an argument...it's an obversation.
Broadcast tv has always been censored, the point you overlooked,,,and threats have been made in the history of it when the FCC thinks what they broadcast is not good for the audience/nation....

Shows have producers and lawyers for a reason. I had 2 people comment on YouTube that Jimmy did not say what he said they even cut and pasted it in their reply now that’s real cult minds there.

JIMMY WHO?

If trump said anything that outrageous the left would have 180 degree position on how it should play out. Roseanne was the perfect example of free speech and its consequences but then that was different.

I would call it the Chair of the FCC speaking out of turn. You do realize that the Carr cannot do anything alone, and that the FCC is a bipartisan agency, by law, right? That in order for them to do anything, the board must vote on it? So no... I do not believe that one person that has no legal authority speaking out is unconstitutional.

IMO there are far more concerning things going on currently than this!

Here is one plan to increase revenue

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment...ld-announcement-following-141924625.html