As Twitchy recently reported, the president-elect of the prestigious Oxford Union debating society hasn’t apologized for celebrating the assassination of Turning Point Founder Charlie Kirk on social media. He’s merely said that his words — “CHARLIE KIRK GOT SHOT LET’S F**KING GO” — “were no less insensitive than his.” And this clown, who debated Kirk in May, is supposed to preside over the “last bastion of free speech.”
Someone else who was supposed to debate Kirk was streamer Hasan Piker, but since Kirk can no longer debate because he was assassinated, the New York Times has decided to publish what Piker “would have said” to Kirk. Maybe they can pull a Jim Acosta and have Piker debate an AI Charlie Kirk.
By the way, here’s Piker (language warning):
This is liberal podcaster Hasan Piker, who has 1.7 MILLION subscribers on YouTube.
THEY WANT YOU DEAD pic.twitter.com/44QO4oXuIX
— 🥷🦅Austin Petersen 🇺🇲🥋 (@AP4Liberty) September 12, 2025
Sure, let’s give this guy a guest essay.
wait wait wait. In the immediate aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the New York Times is giving column space to this guy to have an imaginary debate with Charlie’s ghost?https://t.co/CRILOIsLJb pic.twitter.com/smEAkwjjJW
— PoIiMath (@politicalmath) September 13, 2025
“I Was Supposed to Debate Charlie Kirk. Here’s What I Would Have Said.” Sick.
They love their one-sided debates.
— Suzanna Del Real (@TheMimi501) September 13, 2025
Jim Acosta has to be kicking himself for not thinking of it first.
— 🦋Joanna 🇬🇧 🇺🇲 🌵 (@OxfordJo70) September 13, 2025
Real classy move by shitlord Hasan.
— R4GN4R (@R4GN4R__) September 13, 2025
What he would have said.🤣🤣 pic.twitter.com/9nEQNaBkfS
— J9TX (@j9_atx) September 13, 2025
Not sure that should qualify as a “debate”.
— Vicki (@scvic_travels) September 13, 2025
The media makes new ways to hate them even more
— ray (@rayizdamngued) September 13, 2025
They have no shame.
— C Wagner (@SFCSWII) September 13, 2025
He still loses
— JohnnyBeeDawg (@JohnnyBeeDawg) September 13, 2025
That’s a given.
***