Says Van Jones about the message Charlie Kirk sent him on September 9th, which he didn't open until the next day, after Kirk had died.
Jones appears broken up about it — on camera, on CNN, interfacing with Anderson Cooper. If it's political theater, it's good political theater. If Van Jones is experiencing a true change of heart, I hope he is one of millions:
JONES: "Everybody knows we were not friends, okay? At all. But you praise the good when it’s time to memorialize somebody and what he did. And I didn’t even know it was good. He was not for censorship. He was not for civil war. He was not for violence. He was for dialogue, open debate and dialogue. Even with me. Even with me."
COOPER: "Would you have gone on his show?"
JONES: No. Look, I would have probably tried to get him on your show. I mean, I wasn’t trying to build his platform, but I would have called and we would have talked, and we would have started the process of trying to figure this stuff out. And I think what happens is people get so worked up, Anderson, seeing us go at it, they think this was, “Go ahead and kill somebody,” or, “Go out and talk about civil war. Go out and silence people or cancel people or fire people or censor people about Charlie Kirk, Mr. Debate. I did not agree with him on literally almost anything. But we were words not weapons guys. We were words, not weapons, guys. And we were getting into a position where we could get some real debate going, whether it’s going to be on CNN or on his show. That wasn’t worked out, but I would have taken him up. I wanted to beat Charlie Kirk in a debate. I didn’t want somebody to shoot him. That’s how we do it in America.
And the idea that now people on both sides are justifying murders and calling for further civil wars—we’ve got to calm this down, Anderson. We need to calm this down. We need to lower the temperature. Yes, we disagree. But like he said, we can disagree agreeably. His last words to me: 'Let’s disagree agreeably.'"
ADDED: Why did Jones say "This guy is reaching out to his mortal enemy"? There's no basis for attributing murderous hate to Kirk. If you want a lower temperature, maybe lay off this kind of hyperbole. Jones makes it seem as though Kirk were backing down from some earlier hotheadedness, but I think Kirk kept to civil discourse the whole time.
Posts
71 comments:
Who on the right is justifying murders?
Kirk in that attempt to converse got to Van. Van was wrong about the black insane murderer of the Ukrainian girl. He did say I got the white girl. So it made Van try to be decent rather than critical.
Van Jones would never debate Charlie.
Ann, have you read the days-old Ta Na Hesi Coates piece in Vanity Fair? (remember TNC? You have a link set up you've plugged him so much here...) You should. Charlie is not well like in the black community that has heard of him, for good reason... "You are on one side, I am on the other... Are we divided? Always one against the other..."
You know Scot Adams harbors racist fears/hate in his heart as well, right? I thought our tenured Madison law professor was a liberal on those types of equality social issues...
Meade changed everything. Hoosiers don't have eyes to see it, but law professors should have read enough to see reality clearly in her country... Choose carefully, ms anne. Maybe read up and educate yourself before your canonize young Mr. Charlie?
Van Jones knows that he is stuck in a box canyon.
If we are all allowed to freely talk the left is finished. Nobody wants their racist DEI socialist crap.
The only way the Left succeeds is through the sanctioned DEI/Antifa violence. Brown shirts and the terror of violence have always been a necessary ingredient to leftist seizure of power.
He was not for civil war. He was not for violence.
He was for dialogue, open debate and dialogue..
and THAT, is Why they murdered him.
Kirk opposed Diversity (i.e. color judgment, class bigotry). He observed the insidious, cancerous infiltration of DEIsm (i.e. institutional, systemic Diversity) that Critical Diversity Theory informs us required strict scrutiny to discern character amidst its progress under liberal license and Democratic leverage.
That said, diversity of individuals, minority of one. Men and women are equal in rights and complementary in Nature. #HateLovesAbortion
Who on the right is justifying murders?
--------
Anybody who throws fuel on the racial woes
in this country, or supports sending billions in weapons
to Israel while our own people's health and shelter needs go unmet. People are dying, in unjust ways, even if it's not filmed for your personal masochistic viewing.
CHarlie Kirk didn't have a mortal enemy. But there is good chance Van Jones doesn't know what a mortal enemy is.
he is a smarter zampolit than most on CNN, certainly abby phillips or even jeffrey toobin, but I do not ignore his function
“I would have taken him up.”
Easy to say now, and I don’t believe it. If he really would have, then he should reach out now to find another sparring partner like Megyn Kelly or Steven Miller. There are quite a few to choose from.
Somebody who wants to kill you is also your 'mortal enemy'. It doesn't necessarily indicate that you have a reciprocal intention to kill them.
if words are violence, then of course there are mortal enemies,
"now people on both sides are justifying murders" Like Duty, I call BS. Bothsidesism is phony prog deflection. But if not "civil war," what should we call the bullets flying (or intended to be flying) from the left toward people on the right? So far, "the right" has not exacted an eye for an eye. Kirk himself endured the continual taunting and threats. Lefty speakers faced nothing of the sort. Lefty online figures blithely approved the Kirk killing, assuming, of course, that the violence would only go one way. What's the right to do--debate some more?
Of course, Jones has to throw in some "bothsideism" remark.
what does mortal enemy mean?
"a very serious and dangerous enemy, danger, threat, etc.."
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/mortal-enemy-danger-threat-etc#google_vignette
Charlie was a danger.. a threat.. someone that You MUST KILL
to the left, Charlie's words were violence, and justified his Murder,
because the left had NO RESPONSE to Charlie's words
like 'cycle of violence' that trope that allows one to ignore responsibility,
Van Jones has no moral authoritay of any kind, as he is a leftist authoritarian in total opposition to our constitutional order. He waited long enough to see which way the politcal winds were blowing after the Kirk murder and is now trying to gain political capital by seeming like a reasonable human being. He is not. To hell with him, and to hell with his ideology of totalitarian leftist control over everyone else.
tommyesq said...
It is all they have left.
If we were half as authoritarian as they constantly bleat they would all be dead or in jail at this point.
The one where Van Jones confirms he and his ilk are less than mediocre garbage people. Van Jones wouldn’t go on Charlie Kirk’s show because after the show, the guy with the high school education would have filleted him with argument and thought. By the way, I barely noticed Charlie Cook was alive. I didn’t watch the videos and the main exposure I had was catching him on the radio when I’m in Palm Springs, which ya gotta admit was kinda rich. Seemed like he had a good thing going business wise, but I thought nothing of him till I saw the results of the 2024 elections. Fuck Van Jones, he doesn’t mean one nice word in that video.
Don't worry, it's Van Jones. He'll run back to the party line soon and start casing all sorts of aspersions on Charlie Kirk. That's why I can't stand Jones. Every now and again he says something reasonable and sensible, but then he must get a call from his controller and bam! He quadruples done on what ever crap the other party hacks are spewing out.
40 trillion dollar in debt because Medicare is underfunded, Medicaid is unfunded under the Obamacares umbrella that sustains progressive prices and health care.
Weapons sold to Israel to defeat Hamas, as proxies of Iran, that waged war on Israel and people in Gaza.
Shelter of Americans who were displaced by illegal aliens in sanctuary states and excessive immigration that forces progressive prices and availability.
DEIsm (i.e. institutional, systemic Diversity) policies where Diversity is color judgment, class bigotry.
We need to end insourcing and outsourcing through labor and environmental arbitrage in green (i.e. naive) and Green Deals.
We need to stop exploiting Americans and stop stoking prejudice and bigotry.
We need to stop performing human rites for social, clinical, criminal, political, and climate progress, a wicked solution to abort the "burden" of evidence in order to keep women affordable, available, reusable, and taxable.
Baby Lives Matter (BLM)
I think "mortal enemy" refers to Mr. Kirk's position on affirmative action. Mr. Kirk prefers a meritocracy where intellectual ability is prioritized over race and gender. Even though Black people are less than 1% of top test takers in the US and 1/3 black men have a felony, they are vastly over represented in government jobs, HR and academia due to affirmative action. Without affirmative action, the Black middle class disappears.
Oh yeah, “mortal enemies”? Well that settles that. Now I know.
I love the delusion that Van Jones going on Charlie Kirk's show would be "building up" Kirk's show, rather than the reverse. Kirk going on Anderson Cooper's show would have had significantly more positive effect on Coopers ratings than Van Jones going on Kirk's show.
Does Van Jones realize that he called Charlie Kirk a Mortal Enemy just days after Kirk was shot and killed?
Do you think he understands just what he is confirming and exactly what his statement infers?
How can someone who wants to debate with you be a mortal enemy?
Now we know. This is why the left will always be a fundamentally violent movement.
In a leftists own words.
yes this yale law grad, and baby marxist would never lower himself to debate Charlie,
The crying left just can't understand why we don't believe anything they spew anymore.. Van included.
Ben Scallan 🇮🇪
@Ben_Scallan
Flashback to Jimmy Kimmel laughing about Donald Trump being banned from all social media platforms, and joking about conservative apps being taken offline:
"All over the internet, [conservatives] are screaming about being silenced. They won't be silent about being silenced."
https://x.com/Ben_Scallan/status/1969399657869582717
No discrimination of sexual orientation (e.g. pedophilia, grooming, sadomasochism, etc)? Our demos-cracy are overwhelmingly "bitter clingers."
Political congruence ("=")? #NoJudgment #NoLabels Why the queer preference? The albinophobic symbols and rhetoric? The social distancing of homosexuals and bisexuals from simulants in the transgender spectrum by Choice (i.e. selective, opportunistic).
Civil unions for all consenting adults: couples, couplets, etc.
yes that violin gets smaller and smaller, CNN seems to platform everything but the truth, Scott Jennings just get some things in edgewise,
The leftwing group that killed Charlie is the democratic party and its cultists.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJENP0Rr8p0
All's fair in lust and abortion? The majority in our Republic disagree with the Democratic doctrine.
Remember Van Jones is a founding member of 9/11 Truthers. Sure, he was forced to walk it back. Only becuase he was forced.
Everyone is correctly pouncing on Van Jones' use of the term "mortal enemy". It is very revealing because it's clear which party(ies) sees the other as mortal enemy. By his very actions Charlie Kirk never saw those he came in to TALK TO as mortal enemies. It was like Bambi coming in to a lodge full of hunters to debate why they wanted to kill him. Clearly, the hunting side doesn't want to debate.
Kirk did not consider people who disagreed or misunderstood him to be his "mortal enemy", thus his preference and policy to debate, to communicate in lieu of aborting a "burden" for relief.
its a tell, like in a card game,
Van Jones did his best to be civil, is spite of the infelicitous terminology. I believe his distress was sincere and I give him credit for such.
I had seen a few brief Charlie Kirk videos before his death. Kirk seemed decent and good humored, but there were other things on You Tube. His murder changed all that. Transubstantiation is going a bit far, but Charlie Kirk is no longer a talking head. I've watched several of his videos at length. His life is now framed by his murder, and the courteous way he responded to his interlocutors seems saintly........Something like that happened with JFK and MLK, except their private lives, unlike Charlie's, weren't all that saintly.......The propaganda of the deed. Not since Gavrilo Princip killed Archduke Ferdinand has there been a more I'll conceived political murder.
I guess one could credit him for that, but I won't
CNN does not host debates. Especially not Anderson Cooper. Had CNN invited Van Jones and Charlie Kirk to "debate", it would have been a five minute spot. Or they would have invited four additional Democrats to gang up on Kirk and make it a sneer fest.
‘I guess one could credit him for that, but I won't’
It’s a beautiful day and there were no lefty signs at the marina, so I’m feeling generous…
If CNN and their ilk keeps it up, Van, it might come to pass that Charlie Kirk becomes your immortal enemy.
Scott Jennings spoke at one if John Hinderaker's events. He said Van Jones was a good man. This fits. Over-dramatizing Charlie's sense of the nature of their differences can be forgiven if he's able to glimpse Charlie as a decent person.
Mortal enemy. I suppose most people don't mean that literally, but there's reason to believe that many in the trans and anti-fa communities are dead serious and mean to do physical harm to their enemies.......I don't suppose Van Jones would describe such people as his "mortal enemies".
Whatever is bothering Jones today he will be over it by tomorrow. The left never changes.
Tens of thousands in Arizona lined up pre-dawn for the ‘unremarkable’ Charlie Kirk memorial service.
If Charlie hadn't been shot, Jones wouldn't have gone on the show with him. There's nothing for him to gain, and everything to low.
The Democrats are a Terrorist Organization.
They are bravely fighting the "Fascists"!
you and me.
If we are all allowed to freely talk the left is finished.
True facts. Any unmoderated forum on the internet always becomes right-wing. The Right is unquestionably in the majority.
Joe Biden assigned Nina Jankowicz to be the Democrats' censorship czarina for this very reason. The plan was to win the Presidency and Congress by vote fraud in 2024, suspend the filibuster so they could pack the Supreme Court with 13 more Ketanji Brown Jacksons, make the First Amendment a nullity with the approval of the puppet Supreme Court, and turn this country into a heavily censored left-wing gulag in the very same fashion as the UK is becoming.
We dodged a metaphorical bullet when we whipped the Democrats' asses last year. They lost their minds, and now they are firing real bullets. This will not end well for them.
Aa it turns out, "mortal enemy" was an accurate descriptor. We need to address the progress of exercising liberal license to entertain, celebrate, incite abortive ideation and affirmative action.
At least Van Jones can distinguish between guys and gals, so there is some place to start a conversation in good faith.
This is not the first time Jones has given me reason to believe he is an honest liberal and a worthy opponent. He has risen greatly in my estimation since we first heard of him in the Obama years. I don't expect him to follow David Horowitz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali from the far left to actual conservatism, but we'd all be better off if his influence could rein in the crazies in his party.
Democrat terrorists are the reason a funeral has to have steel barriers.
rgriff50 said...
Scott Jennings spoke at one if John Hinderaker's events. He said Van Jones was a good man. This fits. Over-dramatizing Charlie's sense of the nature of their differences can be forgiven if he's able to glimpse Charlie as a decent person.
This is wrong. Jennings is wrong.
People to the right of Mao are going to be attacked and killed until you people including Jennings understand just what the left and the ideology is.
I am going to link this again because this is the crux of the point. ShoeOnHead is to the left of Van Jones. An actual socialist.
But ShoeOnHead says: I would rather live with people who disagree with me than live with people who agree with me but kill those I disagree with.
Van Jones has not taken this step. Van Jones would rather we were dead than we have political power.
We are Mortal Enemies.
Van Jones is an asshole. (D) No sale.
... between gentlemen and masculinists, between ladies and feminists. The past, present, and progress of Diversity (i.e. class-disordered ideologies), DEIsm, should be revisited just long enough to abort it.
Anyone trying to call Kirk and Trump supporters any variation of racist or fascist is part of the problem.
They would rather we were dead than we have political power.
We don't need more acting. lies, excuses and bullshit from the corrupt democrat-soviet media.
They need to apologize.
Jones has some lucid moments. The “both sides” drivel is not among them.
Pointing out the lates left re-writing of history:
"I really wish people wouldn't do this.
The US military in WWII never used the term "antifascist," let alone "Antifa." You know who did? The Soviets.
The original Antifa (1930s) was a far-left Stalinist German group that helped bring the Nazis to power by sabotaging moderates."
A little surprised to hear that from Jennings. But everyone has their price. Has Jones retracted his false statements about Kirk regarding the murder of Iryna Zarutska?
Jones is employing "mortal enemy" as hyperbole, I think, so I wouldn't critique it otherwise.
On the substance, Jones would never "stoop" so low as to go on Kirk's show, show up at a Kirk debating session, or even invite him to CNN and I think everyone knows this. It is interesting that Jones thinks he would be "building up" Kirk's reputation by appearing with him- that is pure narcissism and completely back asswards.
jan valtin, aka albert krug, who was on the docks in hamburg 'in the night that fell behind' showed the method
We have seen the face of our “mortal enemies” by the thousands since Charlie’s death. They are speaking murder and the leftmediaswine are covering for them by peddling the “both sides” or “MAGA did it” bullshit. Lefties have a license to kill us from the Democrats and the mediaswine.
Yancey Ward said...
Jones is employing "mortal enemy" as hyperbole, I think, so I wouldn't critique it otherwise.
How can it be hyperbole?
Van Jones thinks he should take your stuff and give it to other people. This only happens under the threat of death. People who do not willingly give up their stuff are Mortal Enemies to the left. They kill you if you do not give them stuff.
When did this clip take place? Is it fair to say this might have been more helpful if we heard about it like the day of or after his assassination and not more than a week later, maybe to lower the temperature? Blaming both Jones and CNN if this was known sooner than whenever it aired…..
happened nine days after the assasination,
btw - Antifa - came from the Soviets.
Makes perfect sense.
as with the Brigatte Rote Armee, Action Directe and the Provos, also Euskadi
Forgive the vulgarity, but fuck Van Jones. He can't talk his way out of the culpability he shares with his fellow radicals who demonized conservatives to the point there were two assassination attempts on Trump and now Charlie Kirk is gone. Too little, too late. Everything changed on Sept 10.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.