jj🇺🇸

All the large accounts that present themselves as truth-seeking journalists or commentators, then quote posts like this and act utterly baffled—“What the hell!?” “WTF!?” “What’s going on here???”—are frauds. It took me less than a minute to see what the court documents actually said and understand what they meant. They do not show that the bullet was not fired from the gun. They show only that the bullet was too fragmented to confidently link it to ANY gun. This is not uncommon, and DOES NOT mean the bullet didn’t come from Robinson’s gun. Of course the defense attorneys are going to spin this as evidence that Robinson is innocent. That is what defense attorneys do. They scrape together every possible fragment of doubt and present it as if it were fully exculpatory. It’s not. Defense lawyers are paid to downplay or ignore evidence pointing to guilt, exploit people’s cognitive biases, and make fallacious arguments sound persuasive. This information about the bullet doesn’t erode the case for Robinson’s guilt in any way. It is totally neutral on that front. And it in no way invalidate the mountain of positive and mutually corroborating lines of evidence we do have for Robinson’s guilt. You should expect more from the commentators you follow, and hold them accountable by refusing to give them your attention in the future. If they could not be bothered to spend even one minute checking the facts before spreading confusion to you and millions of others on X, they do not deserve your attention. They are nothing more than grifting engagement farmers.

All the large accounts that present themselves as truth-seeking journalists or commentators, then quote posts like this and act utterly baffled—“What the hell!?” “WTF!?” “What’s going on here???”—are frauds. It took me less than a minute to see what the court documents actually said and understand what they meant. They do not show that the bullet was not fired from the gun. They show only that the bullet was too fragmented to confidently link it to ANY gun. This is not uncommon, and DOES NOT mean the bullet didn’t come from Robinson’s gun. Of course the defense attorneys are going to spin this as evidence that Robinson is innocent. That is what defense attorneys do. They scrape together every possible fragment of doubt and present it as if it were fully exculpatory. It’s not. Defense lawyers are paid to downplay or ignore evidence pointing to guilt, exploit people’s cognitive biases, and make fallacious arguments sound persuasive. This information about the bullet doesn’t erode the case for Robinson’s guilt in any way. It is totally neutral on that front. And it in no way invalidate the mountain of positive and mutually corroborating lines of evidence we do have for Robinson’s guilt. You should expect more from the commentators you follow, and hold them accountable by refusing to give them your attention in the future. If they could not be bothered to spend even one minute checking the facts before spreading confusion to you and millions of others on X, they do not deserve your attention. They are nothing more than grifting engagement farmers.

🚨 BREAKING: Bullet used to kill Charlie Kirk did NOT match rifle allegedly used by suspect Tyler Robinson, new court filing claims -Daily Mail

BIG 🔴 Massive fire at Russia’s Ust-Luga oil terminal in Leningrad Oblast after Ukrainian strikes overnight. Second to largest Russian oil export hub.