[camel_Snake]

> Paraphrased, Kimmel said that the killer was a republican.

He literally didn't though? Why does this mistake keep being made. Kimmel made 0 assertions about the shooter. He did make assertions about the President and his conduct, however.

[ajross]

He... sorta did: "We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them [...]"

The sentence is convoluted but clearly implies that "this kid" was "one of the MAGA gang".

Is that what Kimmel meant? No, his point was that they (the MAGA gang) were exploiting the tragedy to "score political points". But it's not what he said, really. So arguments over meaning can at least happen in good faith. If someone says they're offended, I think it's not unreasonable to clarify and offer an apology.

...but not obviously to be sacrificed at an altar to the FCC commisioner.

[soperj]

Regardless of whether he was one of the MAGA gang, they are trying to characterize him as anything but one of them. No one really knows at this point, but that hasn't stopped the characterization.

[Jcowell]

> The sentence is convoluted but clearly implies that "this kid" was "one of the MAGA gang".

What? This is crazy “find the authors purpose” gymnastics. The quote does nothing to imply that the kids is Maga or not. It does however directly commentates on “Maga gang”’s actions to try to paint him as anyone other than someone who could be MAGA. Thats the entire point of what was said