They’re saying it’s a false flag. Everyone’s saying it.
JD (his chosen pronoun) Vance has been couchy with his replies.What a weird pronoun
Who gives a shit?
It makes no practical difference is Trump was shot, nearly shot, or caught shrapnel. It just seems like a weird thing to fight over.
(When it comes to conspiracy theories, I strictly follow Hitchens’ razor)
When certain parts of the official narrative are shown to be false or misleading, it’s easier to assume other aspect of the official narrative are also false or misleading . Its pretty important that all parts of a story are consistent either each other.
And this false flag bullshit is the same type of thing we criticize the right for.
Are you saying the assassination attempt is a false flag?
And it really doesn’t matter that the motive is unclear. I was curious and as Jon Stewart joked, hoping against hopes it was not a member of a minority group for conservatives to make life even more difficult for, but ultimately the only signals we have is a troubled kid doing something incredibly stupid and losing his life in the process
motive
I think the Las-Vegas concert shooter and this wannabe assassin are the vanguards in a coming trend where shooters conceal their motives and planning. Vexing a public thirsty for meaning is just one more way these malignant suicides can lash out.
It would make a big difference if the investigation ultimately reveals that the shooter wasn’t trying to hurt Trump.
I would honestly expect “aliens did it” to be a conclusion before that. You don’t fire a gun at a former president and kill a bystander because you weren’t trying to hurt anyone.
Oh yeah, guy comes to Trump rally to shoot at someone else. Use your head dude…
Can we take 3 minutes to simply review what happened? Republican hardcore enthusiast shows up to a Trump rally, takes up an obvious sniper position unimpeded by the Secret Service, and is allowed to shoot the teleprompter. Trump, who is fine and left without a scar, claims he is a martyr and “took a bullet” for America, expecting a surge for his campaign.
Those are the facts. The FBI themselves say they can’t corroborate Trump’s versions of the events and can’t explain the story from the angle of “shooter there to kill Trump.” Are we sure that the known facts point to “assassination attempt” as the only possible conclusion of what happened that day?
Is it too scary to consider the alternative, that the world is random, and people do things like try to assassinate people? Besides, nobody ever said he was a hardcore trump support. There is zero evidence to suggest he was.
The FBI communicated recently saying they reviewed the (registered Republican) shooter’s online logs and found a deep and disturbing history of political commentary on the side of hardcore anti-immigration. Those are the facts.
I’ll be happy to consider whatever actually happened that day. Let’s see an actual investigation explain to us what happened that day, instead of just taking the Trump’s campaign word for it. You might be contented with the first opinion and propaganda spins that came out from that day, but I want to see what the official investigators think happened, and so far it’s not looking consistent.
I have enough patience to wait for evidence and facts, and so far it’s very hard to explain the storyline as told by Trump’s campaign. The Secret Service say they can’t justify what happened, the FBI says the whole thing is fishy, the shooter is a Republican without a known motive, Trump wasn’t hurt. That’s what’s on the docket up to this point. I’ll give it another beat for the rest of the investigation to advance.
Operation Con-serve.
Where is the meme?
Help! I don’t know what to think of this without the mediabiasfactcheck.com bot!
