Jimmy Kimmel pulled from the air

[JimmySpeaks]

11 hours ago, fishbane said:

That isn't the order things have been reported to the public.  The order was FCC Chair's podcast appearance->Affiliates announce their decision->ABC suspends Kimmel.  Rolling Stone also reported of an emergency meeting with executives from Disney, ABC, and ABC affiliates where multiple executives felt Kimmel did not cross the line, but the threat of retaliation was a factor.

"In the hours leading up to the decision to pull Kimmel, two sources familiar with the matter say, senior executives at ABC, its owner Disney, and affiliates convened emergency meetings to figure out how to minimize the damage. Multiple execs felt that Kimmel had not actually said anything over the line, the two sources say, but the threat of Trump administration retaliation loomed.

'They were pissing themselves all day,' one ABC insider tells Rolling Stone."

So whether you or I think it's a threat or USA Today simply thinks it sounded like a threat, it is more important that executives at ABC, Disney, and its affiliates took it as a threat.

There is a good chance any FCC enforcement action against ABC/affiliates based on Jimmy Kimmel's comments would ultimately fail, as many of this administration's enforcement actions have, but it would still be costly and time consuming to fight.  Blocking Nexstar's pending merger wouldn't even be an enforcement action and could be more costly than any fine or contesting one.   The merger would make Nexstar the largest broadcast affiliate capable of reaching 80% of US households.  Nexstar wants the merger to go through and what happened is problematic whether the FCC chair's comments were seen as a threat to the deal or Nexstar took the action preemptively to try and ingratiate itself with the administration to grease the wheels and allow a merger that might not be in the public interest through.

What reporting to the public are you referencing because the article I read has it in the order I laid out 

[fishbane]

1 hour ago, JimmySpeaks said:

What reporting to the public are you referencing because the article I read has it in the order I laid out 

I am referring to the publication time of Benny Johnson’s podcast to Apple and the time of publication of all stories I could find reporting on an affiliate stating they were not going to air his show.  Those started to appear over an hour after the podcast was published.

The Hollywood Reporter article you linked to in this thread doesn’t give a relative timeline of the three events, but it does state the following

”The network’s action came just after Nexstar, one of the biggest owners of local TV stations in the country — including 28 ABC affiliates — said it will preempt the series for the immediate future. A source said that ABC had also heard from at least one other station group about the show, suggesting that an affiliate revolt may have played a role in the decision .”

That seems to state pretty clearly that Nexstar’s decision preceded ABC’s decision.  The article then continues

“The dramatic move follows Federal Communications Commission chair Brendan Carr threatening to take action against ABC affiliates in the wake of a Kimmel comment that many took as suggesting the Kirk shooting suspect was a MAGA Republican during his Monday monologue.”

That statement is a little unclear as far as setting the overall timeline.  The dramatic move followed Carr’s threat but was the dramatic move the affiliate’s decision or ABC’s?  If it’s Nexstar’s decision then that is the timeline I had said.  If it’s ABC’s decision then it’s possible that Nexstar’s decision came before Carr’s comments.  Fortunately they provide a link which takes us to an article they published earlier.  In that article they describe the events as follows,

“Kimmel’s comments about the Charlie Kirk shooting during Tuesday’s show drew condemnation from Federal Communications Commission chair Brendan Carr. That, in turn, prompted one group of ABC affiliates, owned by Nexstar Media Group, to declare they will not air Jimmy Kimmel Live! for the immediate future, which then led ABC to announce the show was being taken off the air ‘indefinitely.’ “

That seems pretty clear.  Kimmel’s comments>Carr’s condemnation>Nexstar’s declaration>ABC’s announcement.  That is the timeline I gave which you disagree with.  Which article was it that you read with an alternate timeline?

[El Luchador]

12 hours ago, fishbane said:

Fox Business is saying my exact point. "ABC braces for a financial hit as Kimmel removal shuts out these advertisers... With the show sidelined, advertisers may seek cheaper rates or placement elsewhere."

If ABC were worried about losing out on advertising $$ and viewers from the right then their actions over the past decade are pretty head-scratching.   If the market forces are to blame then which option would have a bigger negative financial consequences?  1) Leave the program on and risk a boycott from viewers on the right and loss of advertising $$ that comes along with this 2) Take it off the air seemingly capitulating to the Trump administration and risk a boycott from viewers on the left whilst collecting advertising $$ at the rate commanded by re-runs of Celebrity Family Feud.

Go with option 1 you are alienating people who aren't watching Kimmel's shows anyway.  Advertisers looking to reach those individuals specifically likely don't advertise on Jimmy Kimmel Live!  Go with option 2 and you alienate viewers that actually watch content you produce and take an even bigger hit from advertisers.  

It is entirely believable that ABC's preferred solution was an apology.  This might not overly alienate viewers of any political persuasion, allow them to maximize advertising money, and thus allow ABC to recoup the largest % of the money they have spent/committed to producing Kimmel's show.  A well crafted apology might also mollify the FCC and prevent any retribution from the Trump administration.  I think that last point was the main goal with the apology.  Losing MAGA viewers, losing advertising $$, and even alienating actual viewers of the network was not as important as Nexstar's merger and staving off FCC enforcement.

They will have to go a little backwards to correct the ship. But running it into the ground is a more expensive option. Not dealing with the problem isn't cheaper. The advertisers were already complaining. 

[Caveira]

 

[Caveira]

 

 

[scourge165]

On 9/19/2025 at 8:30 AM, Caveira said:

Comments on this ??

 

Thoughts on this? The whole video helps.

1-Republicans lost their SH7T over this and said she was trying to take away their 1st amendment rights. 

2-She was talking about violence. Calling for actual violence, ie, the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping, the firebombing of a Synagogue, etc.... 2019 was the worst year on record for hate crimes and politically motivated attacks since McVeigh in 1995. So inciting violence, not saying, "MAGA is desperately trying to characterize this kid.... as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points. She's talking about ACTUAL threats of Political Violence. 

3-She was running for VP, she was not in office and she very specifically said that wouldn't include taking any Social Media companies down.

So what she was NOT doing was;

-In the Oval office directing the FCC to take Kimmel off the air because he said

Quote

"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 and doing everything they can to score political points from it."

You'll note(but not respond to) the fact that he DOES NOT say that the shooter WAS MAGA, just that they are desperate to characterize him as anyone OTHER than one of them BEFORE THEY HAD ALL THE FACTS, and doing everything they can to score political points from it... which was... absolutely true. 

Similar to how they did with the Minnesota State Senators. Claiming the Democrats names an addresses he had(including Tammy Baldwin) was a list of people helping him. A truly absurd proposition. 

Now since YOU THINK he said he WAS MAGA, it'd be akin to going after the people on Social Media who said that Vance Boelter, the man who had a hit list of Democrat Politicians, was ACTUALLY "ordered to kill them because Tim Walz wanted to be a Senator and he left a letter behind at the scene."

What they're saying is so EASILY disprovable... namely because, why would Tim Walz want to become a STATE Senator? People are passing around this rumor while not understanding these were not the two US Senators from Minnesota. I don't know if you'd heard that, it's the type of thing Jimmy would say, but if you were not aware of this brand of stupid, now you are.

 

Other things she was NOT doing

2-She was also NOT making VERY clear threats like Pam Bondi;

Quote

"There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech, and there is no place — especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie — in our society... We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech....— and that’s across the aisle."

(you can look up the rest of the quote, but it's about finding you and arresting you.

3-She was NOT telling Reporters WHAT they could report on with regard to our GOVERNMENT;

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/20/pentagon-journalists-restrictions-pledge

Quote

Link to Pentagon Actions: The next day, the Pentagon's 17-page memo mandated reporters sign a pledge: "DoD information must be approved for public release by an appropriate authorizing official before it is released, even if it is unclassified." Failure could lead to "suspension or revocation of your building pass." Hegseth posted on X: “The ‘press’ does not run the Pentagon—the people do... Wear a badge and follow the rules—or go home.” Trump has not directly commented on the memo but retweeted Hegseth's post with: "Finally, common sense!"

THE PRESS IS THE PEOPLE... just as the GOVERNMENT "is of" the people. You CANNOT limit what the press can release EVEN IF IT'S CLASSIFIED. It's THEIR job to ensure it REMAINS classified. It is NOT the presses job to go and CHECK with the people they are supposed to be holding accountable to see if it's alright for them to write about them!!!!!

 

4-She did NOT threaten ANYONE who speaks "Negatively" against him(or her as it is) as Trump did;

Quote

 

Verbatim Quote

During a White House press gaggle on September 18, 2025, Trump said:

“They give me only bad publicity or press... I mean, they’re getting a license, I would think maybe their license should be taken away.”

 

 

 

5-She did NOT say "we're not done yet," after threatening ONE network. 

Quote

 

Carr stated:

"I do think that again, we are in the midst of a massive shift in dynamics in the media ecosystem for lots of reasons, again, including the permission structure that President Trump's election has provided... And I would simply say we're not done yet with seeing the consequences of that."

He reiterated a similar line later that day:

"We’re not done yet."

 

 

 

6-She was also NOT a "Partial" Author of Project 2025... which YOU for one said was "fake news," and a joke. Yet, here, one of the authors is... attacking free speech.

Quote

Broader Context: Carr is one of several Project 2025 contributors in Trump's 2025 administration (e.g., Tom Homan as Border Czar). Trump has distanced himself from the project, claiming no knowledge, but many appointees, including Carr (nominated FCC Chair in November 2024 and confirmed in 2025), echo its themes.

 I could also point out that Project 2025 is meant to shift control TO PRESIDENT TRUMP, including the entire DOJ under his direction(as you would see in a fascist state) as well as close agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.... which helps protect you against the Big Banks from... breaking a litany of laws, policies that are OVERWHELMINGLY popular and have saved American's hundreds of Billions of dollars. 

It ALSO aims to Eliminate the FBI, the Department of Education... basically to consolidate power under a conservative President, and fundamentally change the checks and balances in the Government. 

 

TRUMP.... back during the campaign when asked about it said;

Quote

"I know nothing about Project 2025," he posted on his social media platform, Truth Social. "I disagree with some of the things they're saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal."

Now I honestly little faith in your ability to have a discussion in good faith, but please prove me wrong here.

 

But to your question;

-HAD you posted the whole context of what Harris said when she ran for VICE PRESIDENT in 2019, you'd find she was talking about threatening people's lives.

I argued with someone on Twitter today about something Gavin Newsome's Press Office said.

I'll just provide the quote here as best as I can remember;

Quote

 

Kristin Noem is going to have a very bad day to day. 

You're welcome America. 

 

Now... I'm not sure if that's EXACTLY what was posted, but that's effectively it. 

-Things are going to be bad for Kriti Noem, you're welcome.

MY position was that sounded too much like a thinly veiled threat.

 

The point the people I was arguing with was.... that's EXACTLY what Trump has Tweeted about various Democrats and the whole "'Gavin Newsome's Press Office," is meant to be a half Parody Account, BUT, the explanation was that the State of California was going to be suing the Department of Homeland Security.

My position was, if you think that sounds like a threat when TRUMP says it, you shouldn't use it as "Satire," because you've said... THAT is an ominous post and it COULD infer that something violent would happen to her. 

 

What's most, it's NOT a "satirical" account if you're ACTUALLY posting about the Business of the Governor of California. 

-I say that to say this, I don't like that Harris used the terms "hate speech," and if she means inciting violence, THAN SAY THAT.

HOWEVER... she was the Vice President for 4 years. Biden was the President. 

 

They did NOT;

-Order the FCC to go after any of the ABC Affiliates for TALKING about something they didn't like(and NO, Kimmel DID-NOT-LIE... the Right, from the jump was saying, "He's not part of the right, he's part of the radical left," and they DID politicize the issue).

-Threaten the Broadcast license of anyone who was "very mean" to President Biden while he was in office. 

-FORCE REPORTERS TO SIGN AGREEMENTS that they wouldn't' report on what the Pentagon was doing WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL.

-Sue NUMEROUS Networks and then strongarm them into PAYING the President at the time so they wouldn't have mergers blocked or... risk losing their broadcast licenses. 

 

PLEASE tell me how you see that is fascism? That is literally the FIRST step of Facism. To start to control the airwaves. 

 

Finally, I didn't think highly of Harris in 2019. This was when she was trying to run to the left of Bernie and Warren because there was polling that showed(and actually still does show) that Bernie's policies are as popular as Trump's, particularly among low income American's.

The problem was, she was a poor facsimile of Bernie OR Warren as AT LEAST you know Bernie means what he says. You may vehemently disagree, but Bernie is one of the most authentic politicians we've ever had, even to his detriment. 

 

 

 

 

So you ask me what I think about what she's saying about political VIOLENCE in a Twitter clip you've cut up? Not much for ALL the reasons I listed above. She served four years in office and didn't violate anyone's FREE SPEECH, a TENENT of Democracy, of the Republican that we were given(if we could keep it). 

 

I think that this is Project 2025 doing EXACTLY what we said and you and people of your ilk mocked before the election because you didn't bother to read.

 

I also think it's terrifying because given the divide in this Country, I've heard people who think the "Hate speech," as you represented Harris referring to(but again, was actually about inciting violence) SHOULD be illegal. That you SHOULD go to Prison for saying the N word, for calling someone a F-word, for saying all manner of ugly, BUT LEGAL things. 

 

I believe the Klan should be able to hold a parade or a public protest or "display," as they tried to in 1977 when the NAACP FOUGHT for their right to do so because FREEDOM OF SPEECH is so essential to the fabric of this country... I believe it's worth dying for. 

I ALSO think you should be able to walk down the street chanting "F-Charlie Kirke....Piss on his Grave," and I don't remember what the small group of BLM was chanting that made National News, DESPITE how distasteful I find celebrating his death to be. 

 

And YOU should be just as against it if you care at all for this Country... but lets say you only care for HALF this Country. You realize, even if ALL the worst or best case scenarios come true and Project 2025 is able to enact their entire agenda and consolidate power under Trump, you STILL have the 2026 mid-terms that are ALMOST certainly going to swing the House back to the Democrats(just based on the history of the Mid-terms). 

So do YOU want to be at risk for LOSING your Freedom of Speech?

 

 

 

 

But ULTIMATELY what I think... ONE side is ACTUALLY DOING IT...and they're using Charlie Kirk as an excuse. They're using it to stop the Press from reporting on the Pentagon UNLESS the Pentagon approves. They're doing this HOPING you're not paying attention... and you're NOT.

 

 

And yes, this was a VERY long post because as much as you'd like to believe this fits neatly into an asinine "what about this" Tweet... well, I don't believe you're actually dumb enough to believe that. 

 

This is the FIRST act of any fascist Government. And it starts by dividing people. Incidentally, it's also antithetical to EVERYTHING Charlie Kirk stood for. Again, I didn't like him,  but you can read my post history, I think it's disgusting to say he got "Kirk'd" or make light of his death in any way. But his WHOLE thing was going to campuses and HAVING AN OPEN DIALOGUE. 

 

-Basically, I don't think much about something Kamala Harris said in a VERY different context that you didn't display that simply used the words "Hate speech," but was addressing violence. 

I DO know what Republicans and Conservatives thought about it THEN despite the context and... yet... you don't seem to care now.

 

-If nothing else, be better than little Jimmy. You KNOW this isn't about a private company firing an employee because it's too expensive to continue to air these late shows. I anticipate Myers and Fallon being let go in the next 12 months as well due to diminishing returns(if not increasing losses), though Jon Stewart will keep his job on Cable.

 

If there was ANY doubt, it should have been eliminated when they decided to... AGAIN force reporters to get PENTAGON APPROVAL before reporting on any stories or Pam Bondi/Trump's statements, the Project 2025 authors saying "we're not done yet," when it comes to getting shows taken off the air. 

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by scourge165

[scourge165]

18 hours ago, Caveira said:

 

 

Can I ask you something?

 

WHY do you think the people you follow on Twitter are ONLY showing you 19 seconds of a Hillary Clinton Clip when it took up an ENTIRE segment and they don't show you 

She's talking about FOREIGN AGENTS.

This was when the Kremlin was funneling MILLIONS of dollars for videos with VERY few views and everyone played dumb, NOT disclosing what Country they were working for and having Bennie Johnson and Tim Poole and others pushing Russian talking points. 

 

She's talking about Russian or Chinese Agents. 

AND AGAIN... the right LOST THEIR MINDS when she said even THIS. So there WAS a "peep" and 

 

This is something I tell my Kids and my Nephew and... I guess I need to explain to you. When people are ONLY telling you part of the story, you should be skeptical. 

 

It's also apparently THAT easy for Social Media influencers to... just make a fool of you and make you believe whatever it is they want you to believe... 19 seconds. Did you even make an attempt to seek out any context? Who she was talking about?

 

What would YOU think if... Hamas was using a bunch of useful idiots to spread propaganda online and lying about the information they're spreading(I'm guessing they are)?

Edited 10 hours ago by scourge165

[scourge165]

On 9/19/2025 at 2:10 PM, fishbane said:

And/or better leadership at the FCC.

You mean like... NOT one of the authors of project 2025?

The one who spoke about consolidating power under a conservative President, fundamentally changing Governance in the United States to...well, shift the balance of power to the executive?

 

Amazing how Trump NEVER heard of project 2025(though what he did her he thought was just terrible)... and yet, he hired so many members...

[1032004]

18 hours ago, Caveira said:

 

You fell for fake news.

[scourge165]

On 9/19/2025 at 7:59 PM, Caveira said:

@1032004 your boy destiny got demonetized 

Yeah, I just saw this. 

He was demonetized 4 years ago and posted it online... trolling people to make them think it'd happened over the Charlie Kirk thing.

And yet... Fox News Ran with it(and apparently whatever AF is)... and now... even when you google it, it says he was banned on Twitch and Demonetized on YouTube this past week... when he's really just MOCKING the right...

 

You guys do NOT get to talk about "fake news" any longer... LOL... Jesus his entire schtick is trying to get a reaction. He's made... 

He makes money on something called "Kick." He... apparently makes a lot of money. But he was NOT just banned. 

[scourge165]

7 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

You fell for fake news.

Yeah, just going through this, he's posted several things that are just... comically untrue. 

I mean, posting a couple of videos that are just long enough that people who are not at all curious don't look any further, that's what Twitter is there for.

It's there so the easily influenced can be led in whatever direction someone wants to lead them. 

But he's now posted two things... and in fairness, even Fox posted about the Destiny guy, but Tim Walz using the National Guard to keep people in their homes?

He didn't stop and think, "gee, that... that may not be true, I should check on that!"

 

This is actually Tim Walz calling the National Guard after the George Floyd stuff... which, incidentally, Trump praised him for and said he handled it very well(before he ran against him and then said he handled it terribly). 

 

 

I'm just annoyed I wrote out a long post to reply to him as... he'll probably just use the World's most reliable News Source..."The Guy he follows on Twitter says," to respond. 

 

 

[1032004]

38 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

Yeah, just going through this, he's posted several things that are just... comically untrue. 

I mean, posting a couple of videos that are just long enough that people who are not at all curious don't look any further, that's what Twitter is there for.

It's there so the easily influenced can be led in whatever direction someone wants to lead them. 

But he's now posted two things... and in fairness, even Fox posted about the Destiny guy, but Tim Walz using the National Guard to keep people in their homes?

He didn't stop and think, "gee, that... that may not be true, I should check on that!"

 

This is actually Tim Walz calling the National Guard after the George Floyd stuff... which, incidentally, Trump praised him for and said he handled it very well(before he ran against him and then said he handled it terribly). 

 

 

I'm just annoyed I wrote out a long post to reply to him as... he'll probably just use the World's most reliable News Source..."The Guy he follows on Twitter says," to respond. 

 

 

The funny part is he often says he doesn’t even know who the people are that he’s copying posts from.  Literally just posts stuff while doing no research about who’s posting it or to verify the information is accurate.  

Good catch on the Destiny thing btw.

[scourge165]

2 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

The funny part is he often says he doesn’t even know who the people are that he’s copying posts from.  Literally just posts stuff while doing no research about who’s posting it or to verify the information is accurate.  

Good catch on the Destiny thing btw.

I mean... the REALLY funny part is.. Fox NEWS did the same thing!

There's a reason their defense in Court has quite LITERALLY been "no reasonable person would take us seriously," and 

Quote

Fox argued that viewers should not interpret on-air statements as factual assertions.

 

Regarding the 2020 Election. And yet... people kept watching, so I guess they thought their FoxNews Online could just be... 'screw it, what's on Twitter?'

[Bigbrog]

Wow...this has got to be some sort of record for the longest and most posting in terms of number of words on these boards by one person

[Caveira]

20 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Wow...this has got to be some sort of record for the longest and most posting in terms of number of words on these boards by one person

I think someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed 

[El Luchador]

8 hours ago, scourge165 said:

Yeah, I just saw this. 

He was demonetized 4 years ago and posted it online... trolling people to make them think it'd happened over the Charlie Kirk thing.

And yet... Fox News Ran with it(and apparently whatever AF is)... and now... even when you google it, it says he was banned on Twitch and Demonetized on YouTube this past week... when he's really just MOCKING the right...

 

You guys do NOT get to talk about "fake news" any longer... LOL... Jesus his entire schtick is trying to get a reaction. He's made... 

He makes money on something called "Kick." He... apparently makes a lot of money. But he was NOT just banned. 

You call it trolling I call it lying.

[El Luchador]

7 hours ago, scourge165 said:

I mean... the REALLY funny part is.. Fox NEWS did the same thing!

There's a reason their defense in Court has quite LITERALLY been "no reasonable person would take us seriously," and 

 

Regarding the 2020 Election. And yet... people kept watching, so I guess they thought their FoxNews Online could just be... 'screw it, what's on Twitter?'

Context is everything. You are being dishonest to make a point that isn't true.  A true useful idiot. Remember Fox is the market place leader and there's a reason for that.

[Offthemat]