If someone had tried to shoot a left-wing leader, do you think the left would be tying itself up in knots with increasingly complex and unlikely theories, examining every image, every video and every bit of evidence with microscopic detail, endlessly muddying the waters and constantly trying to one-up each other with just how next-level their (((noticing))) is, in a desperate, self-aggrandizing effort to prove they're the smartest retard on the internet?
Of course not, because the left knows how to claim a victory when one is handed to them.
We have the perfect narrative to run with here. A kid who's been saturated since the age of 12 with anti-Trump, anti-conservative, anti-MAGA propaganda tried to kill the legitimate President of the United States and the entire media and political establishment is complicit. We should be hammering these points home with crystal clarity to anyone who will listen. Especially here, on a forum that emerged from a movement whose core mission was exposing the corruption, dishonesty, hyperbole, slander and divisiveness of the establishment media, there is no reason to be bending over backwards in order to undermine that narrative.
Stop trying to confuse the issue. You're not smarter than everyone else. You have nothing to prove here beyond your ability to cut the legs out from under your own side just as our moral victory becomes so unassailable that even the mainstream media is falling in line behind our talking points.
Everyone engaging in this stupid behavior is handing a weapon to the enemy. Cut it out.
If someone had tried to shoot a left-wing leader, do you think the left would be tying itself up in knots with increasingly complex and unlikely theories, examining every image, every video and every bit of evidence with microscopic detail...
No, because they're retarded...and like to win.
But, seriously...I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Why I personally suspect a (potential) second shooter may exist is because I don't think Crooks could have made the shot if, if, the reporting is accurate that he was confronted right before firing. The official story is that he was left up there for like half an hour, then a cop checked on him, he takes his scope off his target to aim at the officer, realizes he's blown, adrenaline spikes, his time frame is now a couple seconds, and yet he reacquires his target and nearly gets a headshot. Assuming that report is correct, I don't believe some random schlub can make that shot, under those circumstances. And that's currently the official story we're supposed to believe.
I was all onboard the "Crooks is the lone shooter" (but may have been allowed access) theory, up until this shit with the officer on the roof. After that, I'm suspecting a potential second sniper.
That's not me trying to "one-up" anyone, or in any attempt at "self-aggrandizement," that's me legitimately trying to make the current reported facts fit the events as they unfolded. I don't believe Crooks could have made the shot, if the current version of events is correct.
The current version of events simply doesn't seem to make sense, if Crooks was truly a lone wolf. If the cop is lying to save face, sure. If Crooks was drugged to the gills and had little to no adrenal reaction to the officer confronting him, maybe.
But all that seems less likely than that perhaps someone else was involved.
Again, not trying to be a "conspiracy theorist," or anything. Just trying to make sense of things.
Perhaps Crooks was a lone wolf. That's certainly possible.
Especially here, on a forum that emerged from a movement whose core mission was exposing the corruption, dishonesty, hyperbole, slander and divisiveness of the establishment media, there is no reason to be bending over backwards in order to undermine that narrative.
It's not an undermining of the narrative. If we truly care about confronting the corruption, I truly believe that does involve determining the truth. I don't want to run with a lie, just because it's convenient. Confronting the corrupting has to involve speaking the truth.
Look, someone tried to kill Trump, 100%. We can absolutely run with that, while also looking at the evidence and trying to figure out exactly who that person or entity may have been. Both can be true. This was an attempted assassination on Trump; we can go with that, because it's true. Crooks tried to kill Trump, that's also almost certainly true. But there's more going on, too, I'm convinced.
You're not smarter than everyone else.
Not everyone, no. But I'm significantly smarter than your average retard. And, yes, I acknowledge this is what your average retard would say.
...even the mainstream media is falling in line behind our talking points.
The mainstream media is fucking retarded. And were also brutally attacking Biden for weeks prior to this event. I'm not going to start believing the media, just because it's convenient to my side.
Are we really supposed to believe some retarded twenty year old loser pretty much nailed a headshot on the presidential frontrunner of the USA, under extremely stressful circumstances? That might be the most ridiculous thing yet.
Obviously something deeper happened on July 13th than just one lone wolf retard. I'm not disputing that. But you've completely missed my point.
It. Doesn't. Matter.
He's not dead. We won. Regardless of whether this was a deep-state hit or just a kid with a gun, we have what we need to press home our narrative advantage. This happened because media hysteria created an environment where it was inevitable. At least for now, there is no reason to waste time confusing ourselves when we should be piledriving them all into the dirt with that reality.
The only conspiracies worth chasing are the obvious ones, like why was the roof open with no eyes on it, why were warning ignored, especially when the guy had been acting suspicious for well over an hour?
Still seems like some people from the inside helped, but the water tower stuff seems pointless when there are so many other obvious loose ends they left.
I'm getting sick of this shit.
If someone had tried to shoot a left-wing leader, do you think the left would be tying itself up in knots with increasingly complex and unlikely theories, examining every image, every video and every bit of evidence with microscopic detail, endlessly muddying the waters and constantly trying to one-up each other with just how next-level their (((noticing))) is, in a desperate, self-aggrandizing effort to prove they're the smartest retard on the internet?
Of course not, because the left knows how to claim a victory when one is handed to them.
We have the perfect narrative to run with here. A kid who's been saturated since the age of 12 with anti-Trump, anti-conservative, anti-MAGA propaganda tried to kill the legitimate President of the United States and the entire media and political establishment is complicit. We should be hammering these points home with crystal clarity to anyone who will listen. Especially here, on a forum that emerged from a movement whose core mission was exposing the corruption, dishonesty, hyperbole, slander and divisiveness of the establishment media, there is no reason to be bending over backwards in order to undermine that narrative.
Stop trying to confuse the issue. You're not smarter than everyone else. You have nothing to prove here beyond your ability to cut the legs out from under your own side just as our moral victory becomes so unassailable that even the mainstream media is falling in line behind our talking points.
Everyone engaging in this stupid behavior is handing a weapon to the enemy. Cut it out.
No, because they're retarded...and like to win.
But, seriously...I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Why I personally suspect a (potential) second shooter may exist is because I don't think Crooks could have made the shot if, if, the reporting is accurate that he was confronted right before firing. The official story is that he was left up there for like half an hour, then a cop checked on him, he takes his scope off his target to aim at the officer, realizes he's blown, adrenaline spikes, his time frame is now a couple seconds, and yet he reacquires his target and nearly gets a headshot. Assuming that report is correct, I don't believe some random schlub can make that shot, under those circumstances. And that's currently the official story we're supposed to believe.
I was all onboard the "Crooks is the lone shooter" (but may have been allowed access) theory, up until this shit with the officer on the roof. After that, I'm suspecting a potential second sniper.
That's not me trying to "one-up" anyone, or in any attempt at "self-aggrandizement," that's me legitimately trying to make the current reported facts fit the events as they unfolded. I don't believe Crooks could have made the shot, if the current version of events is correct.
The current version of events simply doesn't seem to make sense, if Crooks was truly a lone wolf. If the cop is lying to save face, sure. If Crooks was drugged to the gills and had little to no adrenal reaction to the officer confronting him, maybe.
But all that seems less likely than that perhaps someone else was involved.
Again, not trying to be a "conspiracy theorist," or anything. Just trying to make sense of things.
Perhaps Crooks was a lone wolf. That's certainly possible.
It's not an undermining of the narrative. If we truly care about confronting the corruption, I truly believe that does involve determining the truth. I don't want to run with a lie, just because it's convenient. Confronting the corrupting has to involve speaking the truth.
Look, someone tried to kill Trump, 100%. We can absolutely run with that, while also looking at the evidence and trying to figure out exactly who that person or entity may have been. Both can be true. This was an attempted assassination on Trump; we can go with that, because it's true. Crooks tried to kill Trump, that's also almost certainly true. But there's more going on, too, I'm convinced.
Not everyone, no. But I'm significantly smarter than your average retard. And, yes, I acknowledge this is what your average retard would say.
The mainstream media is fucking retarded. And were also brutally attacking Biden for weeks prior to this event. I'm not going to start believing the media, just because it's convenient to my side.
Are we really supposed to believe some retarded twenty year old loser pretty much nailed a headshot on the presidential frontrunner of the USA, under extremely stressful circumstances? That might be the most ridiculous thing yet.
Obviously something deeper happened on July 13th than just one lone wolf retard. I'm not disputing that. But you've completely missed my point.
It. Doesn't. Matter.
He's not dead. We won. Regardless of whether this was a deep-state hit or just a kid with a gun, we have what we need to press home our narrative advantage. This happened because media hysteria created an environment where it was inevitable. At least for now, there is no reason to waste time confusing ourselves when we should be piledriving them all into the dirt with that reality.
Not nearly -- did get a headshot. The head just happened to move at the last instant, potentially even after the shot had already been fired.
Would a trained sniper have missed? What if they deliberately missed to get Trump supporters to think a miracle happened?
It could be some kind of 3D Chess trap they're laying.
I agree. I'm not opposed to digging into it more just in case, but it needs to be strong evidence and not schizo shit.
You can also see how they take advantage of the schizo right with that Iranian angle they threw out there, too.
The only conspiracies worth chasing are the obvious ones, like why was the roof open with no eyes on it, why were warning ignored, especially when the guy had been acting suspicious for well over an hour?
Still seems like some people from the inside helped, but the water tower stuff seems pointless when there are so many other obvious loose ends they left.