this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2025
609 points (94.7% liked)
People Twitter
10404 readers
241 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major celebrity, figure or any politician. You can replace the addres of .x.com to xcancel.com in the address. https://web.archive.org/save is an option. Archive.is is no longer recommended because they remove/alter content.
- If a tweet (or similar) makes a statement of fact, either mark it as "satire" in the body or provide the original source link backing up the statement (see rule 6)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
seems like this wasnt even an accurate report
https://bsky.app/profile/thelincoln.bsky.social/post/3lyl5ljm2h22m
My shocked Pikachu face is shocked at this shocking shock.
but WSJ ran with it.
Can you believe, once upon a tine long long ago The Wall Street Journal actually had integrity in journalism.
Now it's a billionaire's plaything.
Honestly, been alive for forty plus years now and no, they've never had integrity in journalism.
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/charlie-kirk-shot/card/pdymd1sXXMSlVRhpvR4b
It sounds like a bulletin was indeed circulated, and it sounds like the WSJ is being pretty candid about the law enforcement response:
https://www.wsj.com/us-news/charlie-kirk-shooting-manhunt-e7f3eae4
The WSJ is not going to have first hand access to the evidence, so they have to report (transparently!) what they're told by credible sources. In this case, it sounds like law enforcement
supposed to be credible
is not. It's a pretty tricky thing to report on.
Wall Street Murdoch not wrong! Clicks go up!