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.
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.