koi Fish Dad

@andrewilliamsus That's crazy

Black people shouldn't vote. Every Black person should stay home for the 2026 elections. Jews have always used Black people and their emotions to sway votes that secure Jewish interests only. The best thing that Black people can do is vote for neither Republican nor Democrat in the upcoming election.

@JoshAnimator All he had to do was act like a normal adult and he wouldn't be in this situation

This is objectively political persecution. Chud is being forced to endure standards that NO ONE ELSE has to. This man is a turning point for the nation. Do you accept two tiered justice? Or not? This judge needs to be DISBARRED. This is one of the most obviously corrupt cases I have ever seen. It is open and shut self defense. There shouldn't be a trial. There shouldn't be a bond, there shouldn't even be charges. He should walk.

@OurOwnNation Be honest. The affidavit doesn't have to mention the points you're making. Absence doesn't prove innocence

What does Chuds (Dalton Eatherlys) arrest affidavit really say?

@Sneekin_bayou @clarkrramsey @TheBrancaShow Yup he blocked me because of my push back lol

Lawyers commenting about Chud The Builder (Dalton Eatherly) are misleading both sides about a variety of things. First, the government need only establish probable cause that the alleged crimes were committed at the charging phase. The government does NOT have to make out any case that Dalton said anything racist, nor do they have to allege that he was the aggressor. Their charging documents also don’t need to comment on who the aggressor was. Every true trial attorney, myself included, knows good and well that charging documents are not evidence, and are often not an accurate, much less a complete representation of the facts. I know because I routinely move to dismiss cases because there are misleading and sometimes outright lies in charging documents. I usually prevail in those fights. What the evidence actually is in Dalton’s case, no one on the internet really knows. The trial (if he chooses not to take a deal) will come down to the evidence, not the charging documents. What every self defense case comes down to is whether a jury believes that the defendant acted reasonably. In my experience, that’s often somewhat of a smell test. If the jury doesn’t like what the defendant did that led to the altercation and shooting, they’re likely to convict him. There are far more nuances to self defense law than people would like to believe. It simply isn’t as cut and dry as the catch phrases of “stand your ground,” “self defense”, or freedom of speech” largely because a jury will get to decide who the aggressor was, and if they decide it was Dalton, then Dalton is likely up a deep and muddy creek on his self defense claim. I’ve won many jury trials, I’ve defeated the government on everything from homicide to misdemeanor and felony assaults. I may know what I’m talking about.

@clarkrramsey Thanks for being straight up with this. I had a lawyer block me yesterday because I was pushing back with some of the points that your post addresses.

@Chimpnouts @1stAmendAbsolut The affidavit is clear to say that the fight didn't break out until the gun was reached for

@Jones3dogfaces @1stAmendAbsolut The affidavit obviously is not going to spell out all the flaws of fox actions. It’s the prosecution

I just had grok and Perplexity debate the Chud the builder case. I have premium plus grok and perplexity pro Here’s the clearer picture on the Chud shooting case after going back and forth with Perplexity on the law:Joshua Fox posted on Facebook back in January saying he was “hoping to run into the chud” and “I just wanna fight” for Twitch clout. Then on May 13 he drove an hour to the courthouse — even though he had zero court business there that day.That’s not random. That’s someone who went looking for the confrontation. Add in witnesses who say Fox approached Chud, confronted him over “chimp out” comments, threw the first punch, and kept attacking — and you have a very strong case that Fox was the initial aggressor.The arrest affidavit itself is surprisingly weak. It never claims Chud started the physical fight. It just says a verbal argument happened, Chud took a bladed stance and reached for his legal gun, then “a physical altercation ensued” and shots were fired. Chud even grazed himself during the scramble — exactly what you’d expect in a chaotic, close-quarters fight over the gun, not a calm execution. Yes, Chud’s own history of vile racist trolling and “series finale” talk is ugly and the prosecution will hammer it hard. But under Tennessee law, being a disgusting edgelord online doesn’t forfeit your right to self-defense if the other guy is the one who actually starts the violence. Bottom line:If the surveillance video at the May 26 preliminary hearing shows what the early reports and witnesses describe — Fox seeking the fight, punching first, and continuing the attack — then Chud has a legitimately strong self-defense case. Full acquittal on attempted murder and aggravated assault becomes the favored outcome.Reckless endangerment over the bystanders/ricochets is still possible, but in real Tennessee practice those charges usually fade when the jury sees the whole thing as one continuous, reasonable defensive response to an ongoing threat.This isn’t a slam-dunk for either side yet, but on the public record right now the self-defense argument is a lot stronger than most people think.We’ll know a lot more once the full video drops.

@therobbieharvey No, uh, uhhh🤣🤣

What are the “best” excuses you’ve seen for Chud The Builder?

@1stAmendAbsolut @Chimpnouts Not according to the affidavit. He took a stance, meaning he readied himself, reached into his pocket, facing joshua which is when the fight broke out.

@Jones3dogfaces @Chimpnouts And then walked away

@VOLT_LIBERTY @Chimpnouts Neither is being in a public place knowing someone will be there. There was no reason for him to walk over there fart face, other than to antagonize. According to the affidavit he wasn't walking away. It says he reached into his pocket before the fight broke out, simpleton

That’s not provoking anyone idiot. He’s allowed to walk up to people. It’s a fucking public area you baboon. Furthermore he only asked them if they liked his suit. Then he walked away when the guy started chimping out. He was followed not the other way around. Can you use your fucking pea sized brain one time! Literally just one time?

@MeanwhileInAR @Parag0n3r @ArchetypeTheory Lol good one. I've answered the question I'm just not posting a video for you. You clearly haven't watched any of his videos

@Jones3dogfaces @Parag0n3r @ArchetypeTheory It appears the rubber band in your brain is smoking since you can't answer the question

Evidence Exonerating "Chud the Builder" discovered: (by friend of family) Screenshots showing premeditation by Joshua Luvv to fight Dalton to launch his "twitch streaming." Joshua Fox / Joshua Luvv Facebook comments from Jan 10, 2026 (18 weeks before the Eatherly incident) Direct quotes from Fox's own account, in a thread with users "Kudo Menace" and "Bishop Reemo Yeezy": • Fox: "I been hopping to run into the chud mf but he don't be on this side of town. But outside of him ima call them a bitch and go about my day 😂😂😂" • Kudo Menace (responding): "chud just trolling us for a reaction. Don't let him bother you either. I don't think he's really racist anyway. Just click bait." • Fox: "trying to get some traction on my end so when I start my twitch I got a little fan base 😂😂😂" • Fox: "oh he don't bother me I just wanna fight 😂😂😂" • Bishop Reemo Yeezy: "on the internet correct. In person? Neutralizing the threat" (followed by a "NO PROBLEM…" meme image) What this establishes: • Fox publicly stated his intent to physically seek out "the chud" months before the incident • Even his own friend characterized the target as "just click bait" and "not really racist" • Fox's stated motivation was Twitch traction and a fan base, not a response to any actual harm • Fox explicitly said "I just wanna fight" • This is documented premeditation. The encounter at the Montgomery County Courthouse was not a chance escalation. It was the outcome Fox had been openly telling people he wanted.

@Parag0n3r @ArchetypeTheory I've watched a lot of Chud videos. I've seen it and I'm not your Google service dumb ass. The is even one where he threatens guys in a car who were legally carrying and says if the spin the block one more time he was gonna unload

@Parag0n3r @ArchetypeTheory The dead hamster in your brain is rotting, bitch

@AxeToGrind99 @jeffcharlesjr No matter that the black community couldn't come together on their own, churches, donations and other sources. And none of that matters. At that time Jewish people were much closer to blacks

@jeffcharlesjr No blk Panther ever worked a job to fund a feeding program, it was radical jewish donors

BREAKING: Matt Walsh Exposes Black Panthers Over 'DEI Breakfast Program' "Apparently, these blacks ran around feeding black kids in the '60s. What about all the hungry white kids?"

@Parag0n3r @ArchetypeTheory That prediction shit is lame. He's repeatedly said if people approach him after he goes about pissing then off he's gonna shoot them.

@Jones3dogfaces @ArchetypeTheory Chud never made an explicit 'theat' - he made a 'prediction'. The wording and implications are legally VERY different.

@cooIer_than_you @ArchetypeTheory Really? Chud says they were laughing and pointing at him so he went up to Fox. Just like he's doing in his live streams when he thinks he's being challenged

@Jones3dogfaces @ArchetypeTheory I'll answer for you even though the answer is right in front of your idiot face. No, it is not illegal for him to go there. What it does is help chuds self defense case. It proves this guy was looking to start this altercation.

@Wolf59540424 @fudreaper_ I'm not sure which is worse. Just an asshole out fucking with people or a racist

@fudreaper_ I like how they admit they understand he isn't even racist.

Like I said. Joshua Fox knew who Dalton was and he wanted a fight. He WANTED an altercation. This was an intentional, pre meditated attack. Now we have the proof right from the horses mouth. FREEEEEEEEEEE CHUD. FUCK A TRIAL. DROP THE CHARGES.

@fudreaper_ And that's a problem? Chud has consistently said he wants to kill a black person. He had someone come see him and he thought hehe could get away with it

@Garbomane @Cici_94Percent @TheBrancaShow @LegacyProgramVP Choosing to attack someone who is reaching for a gun could be self defense. My thought is he's going to do me bodily harm. You run toward a gun and away from a knife if you're being threatened

@Jones3dogfaces @Cici_94Percent @TheBrancaShow @LegacyProgramVP Choosing to attack someone with a gun because you see their gun isn't self defense

WHAT A GREAT DAY FOR DALTON EATHERLY! TLDR: The State's case against Eatherly appears to be utterly lacking in ANY LEGAL MERIT WHATEVER, based upon what appears to be the official Affidavit of Complaint just made public (attached). This in a case in which the State's BURDEN is proof of guilt, and disproof of self-defense, beyond ANY REASONABLE DOUBT. All of it: So, it appears the affidavit of complaint against Dalton "Chud the Builder" Eatherly has been made public, and the contents will ABSOLUTELY SHOCK many of you. FIRST SHOCKER: THERE IS NOT A SINGLE WORD ABOUT DALTON HAVING UTTERED ANY RACIAL SLUR TOWARDS JOSHUA FOX WHATEVER, SO AS TO HAVE PROVOKED THE FIGHT AND THUS TO HAVE LOST THE LEGAL JUSTIFICATION OF SELF-DEFENSE. NOT. ONE. WORD. That was Dalton's biggest potential vulnerability on self-defense, and we can now be confident that we can put that concern to rest. But it gets even BETTER for Dalton. SECOND SHOCKER: Even if self-defense IS NOT EVEN CONSIDERED, the Affidavit of Complaint fails to present ANY evidence-based narrative that Dalton has committed ANY CRIME WHATEVER. (But, of course, self-defense WILL be raised, only further buttressing Dalton's legal position.) Specifically, there's literally not a SINGLE WORD in this Affidavit of Complaint that describes ANY criminal conduct whatever. I've embedded the Affidavit in my possession, but for purposes of succinctness, the relevant portions reads: "... Dalton Eatherly and Joshua Fox engaged in a verbal altercation in front of the Montgomery County Courthouse." This is not a crime, unless it's merely the misdemeanor of disorderly conduct, which would apply equally to both Eatherly AND Foxx. And in any case Eatherly has not been charged with disorderly conduct (nor Fox, of course). "During this verbal altercation, Mr. Eatherly turned his body in a bladed stance towards Mr. Fox ..." There's nothing unlawful about taking a defensive stance when dealing with an angry antagonist. Certainly Eatherly is not charged with the "crime" of "taking a bladed stance." "... and reached for his firearm located in his right jacket pocket." Again, there's nothing unlawful about reaching for a firearm in one's pocket in preparation for possible necessary self-defense. Note that Eatherly is not charged with the "crime" of "reaching for a firearm in located in his right jacket pocket." "Thereafter, a physical altercation ensued." Note the passive voice. The "altercation ensued." There's no claim that EATHERLY initiated the "altercation." Indeed, if anything, to the extent the affidavit has detailed Eatherly's conduct, the absence of any representation of his conduct to indicate that it was EATHERLY who initiated the altercation, we can only infer that it was instead FOX who initiated the altercation. This would, of course, make Eatherly the VICTIM of Fox's unlawful attack upon him. The next paragraph: "Mr. Eatherly discharged his firearm, striking Mr. Fox multiple times." There's nothing inherently unlawful about discharging a firearm and shooting someone multiple times. Thousands of shootings that fit this description occur every year, and qualify as perfectly lawful self-defense. Of course, now self-defense need actually be put on the table. Then there's a discussion of Fox being flown to a hospital, followed by: "In addition, at the time shots were fired, there were several innocent bystanders in the area. Surveillance video fo the incident shows a ricocheting projectile hitting nearby walls." Again, there is nothing inherently unlawful about firing shots that miss the intended target. Police involved in lawful shootings of suspects routinely miss about 70% of the shots fired. Those shots ALSO go flying about the neighborhood until they hit something. None of that is a crime, absent evidence of recklessness--and the affidavit provides no statement of recklessness. Indeed, not a word of recklessness. Note that if the shots were fired in lawful self-defense, as a matter of law they were not fired recklessly. I would also note that there's not a word in this affidavit that even contests, much less contradicts, even a single legal element of Dalton's anticipated claim of self-defense. Not Innocence, not Imminence, not Proportionality, not Avoidance, and Not Reasonableness. Not a single element. Not a word of it. If this were a civil case, I would argue that this complaint fails to state a cause of action. Indeed, it's hard to recall the last time I saw an Affidavit of Complaint so utterly lacking in legal substance whatever. At this point I have to say that I've never felt more positive about Dalton Eatherly's claim of self-defense, at least based upon the representations of this apparently official "Affidavit of Complaint." If these facts provided in this Affidavit of Complaint are all the State of Tennessee has on which to prosecute Dalton on the attempted murder, aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, and malicious firearms possession charges brought against him, I simply don't see any prospect to any reasonable degree of legal certainty of prosecutors securing a conviction on any of those charges beyond a reasonable doubt on the legal merits. HEY! IF YOU LIKE THIS KIND OF USE-OF-FORCE LEGAL ANALYSIS, and would like to know more about how to be HARD TO CONVICT if YOU are ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property against criminal predation, consider picking up a FREE copy of my best-selling plain-English book, "The Law of Self-Defense: Principles" (we only ask that you cover the S&H). lawofselfdefense.com/FREEBOOK @AmiriKing @ArchetypeTheory @JackPosobiec @DLoesch @Timcast @TheOfficerTatum @MyronGainesX @TateTheTalisman

@Garbomane @Cici_94Percent @TheBrancaShow @LegacyProgramVP I'm thinking it can be. I don't know that he's not gonna shoot