Ilhan Omar tangles with CNN host in fiery interview, rips 'hateful' Charlie Kirk

[Valletta]

Ilhan Omar tangles with CNN host in fiery interview, rips 'hateful' Charlie Kirk

CNN's Kaitlan Collins confronted Rep. Ilhan Omar on a video she shared about Charlie Kirk on Friday, which the liberal lawmaker defended during a heated back and forth.

www.yahoo.com

Not surprising. The country is getting to know Omar.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Ilhan Omar tangles with CNN host in fiery interview, rips 'hateful' Charlie Kirk

CNN's Kaitlan Collins confronted Rep. Ilhan Omar on a video she shared about Charlie Kirk on Friday, which the liberal lawmaker defended during a heated back and forth.

www.yahoo.com

Not surprising. The country is getting to know Omar.

I wonder how many liberals are willing to sit down with an audience full of conservatives to have a conversation. To be honest, I cannot think of a single one who ever did what Charlie Kirk did, sit at a table and have everyone who disagreed with him get in front of the line for a civil dialog. Not one. Omar included. She would never in a million years stand to take questions from conservatives and have the audacity to challenge her beliefs.

 

[Bradskii]

I wonder how many liberals are willing to sit down with an audience full of conservatives to have a conversation. To be honest, I cannot think of a single one who ever did what Charlie Kirk did, sit at a table and have everyone who disagreed with him get in front of the line for a civil dialog. Not one.

You didn't even make the attempt to look.

And exactly the same format. And trust me, I strongly recommend that you don't watch it. Some of what you might describe as those on the right up for a civil discourse are an embarrassment to society.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

You didn't even make the attempt to look.

And exactly the same format. And trust me, I strongly recommend that you don't watch it. Some of what you might describe as those on the right up for a civil discourse are an embarrassment to society.

I am not upset at all. I am actually quite impressed. Now I understand why the left criticized Kirk for debating college idiots. Because it looks like Hassan was also debating a bunch of college idiots. I wished there were more examples. Too bad Kirk was shot because of it.

 

[Bradskii]

I am not upset at all. I am actually quite impressed. Now I understand why the left criticized Kirk for debating college idiots. Because it looks like Hassan was also debating a bunch of college idiots. I wished there were more examples. Too bad Kirk was shot because of it.

Bear in mind that I didn't link to it to promote it. It's the YouTube version of bear baiting. People like Destiny are useless at it because they just get angry. Hassan was good at it because he immediately realised what it was and poked his interlocutors with a stick to get them to show their true colours. Kirk was useless at it because he had only one style of debating. And if he wasn't in control then he fell apart.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Bear in mind that I didn't link to it to promote it. It's the YouTube version of bear baiting. People like Destiny are useless at it because they just get angry. Hassan was good at it because he immediately realised what it was and poked his interlocutors with a stick to get them to show their true colours. Kirk was useless at it because he had only one style of debating. And if he wasn't in control then he fell apart.

I dont know. Kirk often allowed his opponent to speak. But when timing it, the longest Hasan kept his mouth shut was about 8 seconds before interrupting. Hassan's strategy was to dominate the conversation and interjecting as frequently as possible to prevent the otherside from completing a thought before pulling the conversation into a different direction. Kirk would allow the other person to finish speaking, then respond to the statement. Usually, Kirk was the one interrupted by the other. But regardless, I think it is a good thing for conservatives and liberals to have discussions on these forums. I am sure many of the far right conservatives left the event feeling like the got a good kick in the pants. Which, in my opinion is good because it forces them to rethink their positions and adjust their arguments.

 

[Servus]

You didn't even make the attempt to look.

And exactly the same format. And trust me, I strongly recommend that you don't watch it. Some of what you might describe as those on the right up for a civil discourse are an embarrassment to society.

Not the same. More like a poor imitation of. It's produced by Jubilee Media which does casting calls for participants.

 

[Matt5]

You didn't even make the attempt to look.

And exactly the same format. And trust me, I strongly recommend that you don't watch it. Some of what you might describe as those on the right up for a civil discourse are an embarrassment to society.

Given that most people struggle to watch 3 minute videos, this one goes a little over.

I asked Grok AI to summarize:

Overview​

• Format and Setup: Mehdi Hasan, a progressive journalist and immigrant (British-American of Indian descent), debates 20 self-identified far-right conservatives in a Jubilee-style "Surrounded" video. Hasan presents four main claims, engaging participants one-on-one in timed rounds, with the group voting via red flags to "vote out" speakers. Discussions often veer into personal attacks, racism, and ideology, revealing deep divisions on crime, constitutionalism, immigration, and foreign policy.

Claim 1: Donald Trump is Pro-Crime and Pro-Criminal​

• Hasan argues Trump pardoned ~1,600 Jan. 6 participants (including ~600 charged with assaulting police, e.g., David Dempsey sentenced to 20 years for stomping officers, Daniel Rodriguez for tasing an officer causing a heart attack), plus non-Jan. 6 figures like Paul Walz (tax fraud) and 9 GOP congress members for financial crimes.
• Conservatives counter: Jan. 6 was a "special case" of peaceful protest against a "rigged" election; pardons don't equate to pro-crime policy; compare to Biden's Hunter Biden pardon or "soft-on-crime" progressive laws (e.g., California's reduced sex offender registration and three-strikes limits).
• Hasan highlights Trump's Epstein/Maxwell ties (e.g., calling Epstein a "great guy" who "likes young women," wishing Maxwell "well" during trial) and record-high 2020 murder rate under Trump.
• Exchanges reveal tribalism: One conservative admits pardons "probably shouldn't have happened" but defends as response to left's "lawlessness" (e.g., BLM protests); another calls Hasan "pro-crime" for supporting progressives.

Claim 2: Donald Trump is Defying the Constitution​

• Hasan cites violations of 1st (banning AP from White House events, suing/threatening media like MSNBC/CNN, imprisoning reporters), 4th (federal agents invading homes), 5th/14th (deporting U.S. citizens without due process, e.g., two American children deported), and potential 12th/22nd (third term, election interference).
• Conservatives respond variably: Some dismiss Constitution as outdated ("300-year-old document" irrelevant to modern threats); one Catholic nationalist supports amending it to ban pornography/blasphemy and favors autocracy under "Catholic teaching" or "benevolent leader" (e.g., kings, no more votes post-election).
• Notable fascist admission: Participant Connor openly identifies as fascist, supports Franco (claims he only killed "communists" and "terrorists," not women/children), refuses to condemn Nazi Holocaust (calls it "persecution"), and endorses Carl Schmitt's "friend-enemy" distinction for punishing opponents.
• Hasan refuses to debate self-avowed fascists/non-democrats, emphasizing free speech doesn't require platforming anti-equality views; conservatives accuse him of hypocrisy, demanding he debate all.

Claim 3: Immigrants Overall Are Good for America​

• Hasan, as an immigrant, cites stats: Immigrants 80% more entrepreneurial, pay more taxes than benefits, boost GDP by $9T over 10 years ($65K/household per CBO); higher assimilation rates than 100 years ago; historical precedents (Reagan's 1986 amnesty for 3M).
• Conservatives argue: Mass immigration depresses wages (e.g., H-1B visas in STEM causing layoffs, 0.5% wage drop per 10% influx per studies); cultural erosion ("great replacement," loss of white majority); personal animus (one tells Hasan "get the hell out," another says immigrants "hate everything we believe," citing Spanish interviews as "disrespect").
• Personal stories: Iranian-American participant supports strict vetting but agrees immigrants can be positive if vetted; DACA recipient (former undocumented) acknowledges law-breaking but sees greater good; Hasan notes irony (e.g., Catholics immigrated historically) and hypocrisy (one child of immigrants wants Hasan deported).
• Broader tensions: Debate exposes nativism (e.g., "Americans are people born here," excluding naturalized); Hasan calls out racism (e.g., "keep to your own" dating preferences); conservatives pivot to elites/Wall Street as root cause but blame immigrants for housing/jobs.

Claim 4: Donald Trump's Plan for Gaza Is Ethnic Cleansing​

• Hasan quotes Trump (e.g., "clean out Gaza Strip," "they're going to leave... we'll own it," no return for Palestinians) as matching UN definition (forced removal via violence/terror); ties to Israeli officials like Smotrich ("conquer, cleanse, annihilate"); notes 50K+ deaths, 80% Gaza under Israeli control, U.S. funding enables war crime (4th Geneva Convention/Rome Statute).
• Conservatives: Some agree it's "cleansing" but frame as re-education against "brainwashing" to hate Jews/Christians (blame Iran/Hamas for using civilians as shields, hiding in hospitals); others see religious battle (Jews vs. Muslims over Holy Land) or proxy for U.S. interests (lobbyists since Truman).
• Hasan rejects religious framing (conflict is colonial/land-based; many Palestinians Christian); questions child killings (17K children dead, e.g., snipers targeting kids); one conservative dodges blame for Israeli snipers, implying children "brainwashed" deserve it if "hellbent on killing."
• Agreements rare: One concedes ethnic cleansing but attributes to Israel lobby, not Trump personally; Hasan calls for ceasefire, Palestinian freedom/land return, cutting U.S. ties (end funding/military aid).

Post-Debate Reflections​

• Hasan: Disturbing openness about fascism/racism (e.g., white genocide, deporting citizens like him); disappointed in immigrant-child participant; views as normalization of authoritarianism.
• Conservatives: Mixed—some disheartened by extremes (e.g., autocracy calls "foreign"); others upset by Hasan's "cheap shots"/refusals to debate; one sees value in exposing views but regrets mean rhetoric; group outclassed by Hasan's professionalism.