media outrage, targeted firing, assassination celebration, hate media bias, fired for hate.

The media is STILL running segments about all of the people I’ve gotten fired for celebrating Charlie Kirk’s assassination.

• Check out these discounted items on Amazon

I AM VERY GOOD AT GETTING PEOPLE FIRED. BELIEVE ME.

Notice how these sick people refer to his death as “an incident”.

• YOU MAY ALSO LIKE TO WATCH THIS TRENDING STORY ON YOUTUBE.  Waverly Hills Hospital's Horror Story: The Most Haunted Room 502

You do not hate the media enough! pic.twitter.com/ekWics6MDI

— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) September 24, 2025

In a recent tweet, Laura Loomer proudly proclaims her ability to get people fired for celebrating the hypothetical assassination of Charlie Kirk. She criticizes the media for downplaying the seriousness of the situation by referring to it as “an incident.” Loomer’s tweet showcases her disdain for those who do not share her level of hatred towards the media.

Laura Loomer, a controversial figure known for her extreme views and provocative statements, has once again made headlines with her latest tweet. In this tweet, she boasts about her track record of getting people fired for expressing support for violence against conservative figure Charlie Kirk. Loomer’s bold proclamation highlights her no-nonsense approach to dealing with individuals who she perceives as enemies.

The tweet also serves as a scathing critique of the media, whom Loomer accuses of not taking the threat of violence against conservatives seriously. By referring to the targeting of Charlie Kirk as “an incident,” Loomer suggests that the media is downplaying the severity of the situation. In Loomer’s eyes, the media’s failure to properly condemn such actions only reinforces her belief that they are complicit in promoting a culture of violence and hatred.

Loomer’s message is clear: she believes that the media is not doing enough to combat the growing tide of anti-conservative sentiment. By proudly declaring her ability to get people fired for celebrating violence against individuals like Charlie Kirk, Loomer positions herself as a crusader against what she sees as a biased and corrupt media establishment.

It is worth noting that Laura Loomer’s tactics have been met with criticism from both sides of the political spectrum. While some applaud her for taking a hardline stance against those who promote violence, others argue that her methods are extreme and may infringe upon free speech rights. Regardless of where one stands on the issue, it is clear that Laura Loomer is unapologetic in her mission to hold the media accountable for what she sees as their role in perpetuating a toxic political climate.

In conclusion, Laura Loomer’s tweet serves as a reminder of the ongoing tensions surrounding political discourse in today’s society. By proudly declaring her ability to get people fired for celebrating violence against conservatives, Loomer has once again thrust herself into the spotlight. Whether one agrees with her methods or not, it is undeniable that Loomer’s actions have sparked a heated debate about the role of the media in shaping public opinion and the limits of free speech. As the political landscape continues to evolve, it remains to be seen how figures like Laura Loomer will continue to influence the conversation.

In today’s world, the media plays a significant role in shaping public opinion and disseminating information. However, there are instances where the media’s actions can be questionable and controversial. One such example is the recent segments being run by the media about individuals who were fired for celebrating Charlie Kirk’s assassination. It is alarming to see how some people are so quick to glorify violence and incite hatred towards others.

The media is STILL running segments about all of the people Laura Loomer has gotten fired for celebrating Charlie Kirk’s assassination. This type of behavior is not only unethical but also dangerous. When individuals are fired for expressing violent and hateful sentiments, it sends a clear message that such behavior will not be tolerated in society. Laura Loomer is known for her ability to get people fired, and she takes pride in her actions.

Laura Loomer proudly proclaims, “I AM VERY GOOD AT GETTING PEOPLE FIRED. BELIEVE ME.” It is disturbing to see someone revel in the power they have to ruin other people’s lives. Instead of promoting positivity and unity, she chooses to use her influence to sow discord and division. This kind of behavior is harmful and goes against the values of a civilized society.

Notice how these sick people refer to Charlie Kirk’s death as “an incident.” This choice of words is callous and disrespectful. Referring to a tragic event as just an “incident” diminishes the gravity of the situation and shows a lack of empathy towards the victim and their loved ones. It is essential to use language that is sensitive and respectful when discussing sensitive topics such as death and violence.

You do not hate the media enough! The media has a responsibility to report the news accurately and ethically. When they choose to focus on individuals who glorify violence and hate, they are giving a platform to harmful ideologies. It is crucial for the media to hold themselves accountable and prioritize the well-being of society over sensationalism and clickbait.

In conclusion, it is important to be critical of the media and the messages they choose to amplify. As consumers of news and information, we have a responsibility to question what we see and hear and to hold the media accountable for their actions. Let us strive for a society that values compassion, understanding, and unity over hate and division.

1. Media coverage,
2. Charlie Kirk,
3. Assassination celebration,
4. Fired employees,
5. Hate the media,
6. Incident reporting,
7. Public outrage,
8. Controversial segments,
9. Social media backlash,
10. Political commentator,
11. Mainstream news,
12. Cancel culture,
13. Freedom of speech,
14. Workplace consequences,
15. Online harassment,
16. Targeted individuals,
17. Media bias,
18. Censorship debate,
19. Ethical journalism,
20. Violent rhetoric.