Note, I’m neither American, nor heavily in that scene. I’m merely signal boosting what I feel is important information countering lib propaganda.
Note, I’m neither American, nor heavily in that scene. I’m merely signal boosting what I feel is important information countering lib propaganda.
A single blurry still doesn’t pose a convincing argument that he was or wasn’t pointing the weapon towards the crowds.
I’ve not seen enough to conclude either way. So many contradicting things.
If you were wanting to assist with security, when someone obviously doing security addresses you then you’d try and comply, and explain your intent. But did the security actually address him? Or did he just run away from a gun pointed at him? Or did he have his gun pointed in the direction of the crowd while moving towards the crowd and ignoring security? Much of this doesn’t make sense.
We don’t go around making plausible reasons and then asking the victim to prove them wrong. Maybe the killers are lying to cover their ass?
Facts on the ground is: Arturo didn’t shoot anyone, had a right to carry, a bystander was killed by the “good guys” and Arturo was shot himself. Nothing in all of this proves that Arturo was a danger to anyone.
“Innocent until proven guilty” mfs when the accused is a leftist
The victim blaming with assumed narratives no less, is astounding.