Chrissy1979

It’s well known Kirk and Fuentes were publicly fighting so, yeah, it makes sense.

Right. You’ll just pretend it’s all a lie and you’re being tricked by the much smarter leftists. Like usual.

You guys are going to lose your minds when you find out it’s a MAGA civil war. Cope! https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/global-trends/us-news-after-charlie-kirks-fatal-shooting-spotlight-falls-on-nick-fuentes-and-the-groyper-movement-all-you-need-to-know/amp_articleshow/123867388.cms

Now you’re “dishonestly chopping” the part that indicates the speculation is that he is a groyper. Nonetheless, you guys have been speculating with extreme conviction that he is a leftist based on absolutely nothing. I’m speculating he was more far-right than Kirk based on reports he stated exactly that to police. So who’s the dishonest one?

Again, it said there was speculation he is a groyper because of reports he told police Kirk wasn’t conservative enough. My quote indicated there are reports he told police he said Kirk wasn’t conservative enough. I’m sorry your reading comprehension can’t work through that.

The claim that he is a groyper was the speculation, and I left out that whole part…though he probably is.

That doesn’t negate the claim he apparently told police Kirk isn’t conservative enough though, does it?

“Tyler apparently told police that he admired Nick Fuentes and did not like Charlie Kirk because he was not conservative enough.” https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/a-maga-groyper-charlie-kirk-shooter-tyler-robinsons-political-leaning-unclear-nick-fuentes-reacts-to-pure-evil/amp_articleshow/123870131.cms

Do when you realize the shooter was a groyper who thought Kirk wasn’t far-right enough, are you guys going to want to crack down on the alt-right?

Obviously they need to crack down on white male gun nuts from MAGA families.

Because he came from a MAGA family and was wearing MAGA fashions and was practising his second amendment rights, as MAGA types always like to do. Now that we’ve established your claims that you posted any proof was another lie, why did you say Trump’s child rape victim recanted her story? Was it because of your loyalty to Trump or to paedophiles in general?

You can’t because you lied, and now all you can do is babble because you were caught lying to defend against a charge of paedophilia. Busted. 😆

No, you didn’t post anything. You’re just trying to cover for your lie again. Again, if you could, you would.

If she did, you would be thrilled to prove it. You can’t because she didn’t, and therefore you continue to lie to cover for paedophilia.

Oh, right. You were the one saying he had written pro-trans rhetoric. Don’t worry. That’s still not as bad as when you lied and said the 13-year-old who accused Trump of rape had recanted her story when she never did. That was about as low as you could get.

So not only was he a Republican, his bullet casings said nothing about “trans ideology.”

Turns out the shooter is a registered Republican. Why am I not surprised?

Hmmmm...

But it was fine when you did the same thing for the Minnesota shooting?

Because if you wanted to create a false flag, the easiest thing to do would be to plant pro-trans rhetoric at the crime scene. You guys are being played so you stop talking about Epstein, which is making certain people very nervous.

There’s a picture of the suspect wearing a shirt with a picture of a gun on the U.S. flag. Looks pretty MAGA to me.

It was obviously a pro-gun nut. Just look at his T shirt.

Wow. They didn’t even worry that would make it too obvious?

You don’t even know who shot him.

Or Kirk wouldn’t shut up about the Epstein files, and MAGA needed a galvanizing event to declare war and suspend the elections.