One

@SpyroBandicoot3 So, you didn’t actually care about the truth behind all of the psychology? You just wanted to win by having me fold? Weird

@OnelsBack I had to switch back to my logic brain, I was in the sense that the person I was talking with is mistaken, so I wasn't trying to exchange information, I was trying to just get you to fold. So yeah, my bad

This is the definition of someone who is attracted to minors, but doesn’t want to admit it. “Borrowed” lots of money from predators and this is something they do. They’ll act like they’re scared to talk, publicise they don’t want to, and then they’re back within a month.

@ThxGodInotLib @parti_king No. More and more is not coming out to boost his claim. The claim has remained the same LOL

@parti_king If it does, it’s clearly all for show. More and more is coming out to boost his claim of self defense.

🚨 LEGAL UPDATE 🚨 chudthebuilder’s bond hearing is TODAY judge expected to decide whether the $1.25M bond will remain in place

@DVerheugd @AB_RAYN26 You do care You all cry about it every day

Women who go for breast reduction are so dumb...

@TheBrancaShow LOL dalton is fucked

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

@Clav0Updates “We in Miami gang” as an excuse to fuck a 15 year old is wild

Clavicular & Costa Kid caught 2 predators while using his girlfriend as a decoy 👀💀

@DrZayneLisWife @mvcciido_szn This is exactly why no one wants to hear about girls periods btw (you all make it weird)

@mvcciido_szn Can you suck my clots out for me please

the world doesn’t need to know you are on your period, we need to bring back shame

@SpyroBandicoot3 “They know where the strings are and how to squeeze people just right” quite literally my point that I’ve been trying to make this whole time

@OnelsBack Something that I think about sometimes is my confidence in surely being able to spot predators because they're usually really obvious, but the sad truth is that the most dangerous people are the smartest ones. They know where the strings are and how to squeeze people just right

@SpyroBandicoot3 Long story short False rejection + mystery + restriction = amplified desire. They sent those messages to RESTRICT, flagged their posts as too adult for MYSTERY, and false rejected discussion to create the feeling of one-sided intrigue.

@OnelsBack Again, that can very easily just be general kindness. Is me helping a child in pain calm down and then telling them that they're loved and appreciated predatory? Your accusation is possible, but not even close to the 100% cases, or even 50% of them

@SpyroBandicoot3 Hard boundary = blocking. Not conversations and saying “don’t look at my posts.” That is called the ‘forbidden fruit’, and it’s often used by smart manipulators. Also known as courting attention. “You shouldn’t have this” makes people what it.

@SpyroBandicoot3 There is a difference between a child who is hurt and a child in your dms on X. You can’t compare the two. Child in pain = crying in front of you. Restless. Child on X = drawn to certain crowds. Interacts with random adults.

@SpyroBandicoot3 @BlightedALTmen Every predator is a predator. It’s not a spectrum. If you like children you’re a predator. If you fantasise about children but never act on it you’re a predator. Some predators don’t make the move because of the fear of being caught, so they stick to their brain. Some don’t.

@OnelsBack @BlightedALTmen Okay, what I said is anxiety from being called a pedophile when that's a disgusting accusation to be handed to you when you're not one. Plus, it is impossible for you to know exactly how every single predator works. It's a spectrum, not a machine

@SpyroBandicoot3 I promise you they weren’t blocked after this interaction. Telling a minor who you’ve never spoken to in their life “they’re loved” on an ‘exiting’ message is the biggest red flag of them all. I can absolutely guarantee this is not the end of their conversations.

@OnelsBack You don't have much evidence that the alleged minor was or wasn't blocked after the confrontation. I agree that the messages they made, sort of can be used to manipulate, but more often than not, this is just being pleasant because you're a pleasant person.

@SpyroBandicoot3 @BlightedALTmen If the anxiety comes from my accusation that has 1.6k views then there is truth to what I’m saying I apologise, but you don’t understand the psychology behind when predators speak & avoid conversations. Predators publicising “they don’t like kids” before offending happens a lot

@OnelsBack @BlightedALTmen I half agree with you, but jumping right to accusing them of being a pedo is still a leap of logic IMO. There are several reasons they could've privated the account, avoiding harassment, anxiety from your accusation, preventing other minors from following, etc.

@SpyroBandicoot3 There is a reason @BlightedALTmen has made their account private are this post.

@OnelsBack Scapegoats are using someone or something to take the fall for you, this text thread is just general kindness and setting a boundary without being rude because of someone's age. And how the hell is this "opening the door to future conversation"?

@SpyroBandicoot3 Are you silly? The whole point is avoiding conversation. This person dragged out an explanation to allow a door for future contact to be opened. It’s how “smart” pedophiles work. They also publicly shared the conversation as a scapegoat. I’ve seen it first hand.

@OnelsBack So, telling a minor that your content isn't appropriate for them and being extremely mature about letting them know to be careful is, pedophilia? Yeah, unless you have more evidence than this outrageous claim, I'm gonna assume you're making a problem out of nothing buddy.

@Strawverri_soda After a lot of experience dealing with these people first hand. As mentioned, I’ve “borrowed” a lot of money from pedophiles. And based on my own built statistics, 1-in-4 men on social media are more than happy to talk a child sexually. And 1-in-8 will say no, but add me back.

@OnelsBack Literally how did you come to this conclusion???

@BlightedALTmen Btw 👇 x.com/onelsback/stat…

@PoasterSchitzo Do you know what currency converting is? $9 usd is $12 AUD Quite literally the price of a small meal at 90% of places

In Australia $15 MINIMUM