Looks like someone took some shots at prez candidate Donald Trump at a rally in PA. From the videos I’ve seen, it looks like he did get grazed.

  • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    4 months ago

    What I find sad is that either option is equally plausible. That’s how low we have sunk.

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      It isn’t though. There is maybe a 0.01% chance that this was a false flag.

      I know what’s happening is hard to swallow, and the ramifications are deeply troubling, but try not to succumb to baseless conspiracy theories.

      There’s plenty of motive. An attendee was killed. The shooter was killed by Secret Service. There’s not really a reason to think this didn’t actually happen, except for cognitive dissonance.

      • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        0.01% chance based on what?

        I think being unsure either way makes perfect sense. You gotta admit it doesn’t really line up with Trump’s character to be posing for the cameras if he’s actually being shot at. Though tou’re not wrong to say, that that isn’t proof of anything. It’s subjective feeling.

        But, I think saying it’s entirely unlikely this was orchestrated isn’t right either.

        • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Well, a conspiracy requires evidence, and without evidence there’s no reason to treat the conspiracy theory as credible.

          Saying 0% would be unrealistic because there’s always a chance, but if you actually believe that this is a 50/50 toss-up, you’re just delusional and desperate to feel some sense of enlightenment like every other conspiracy theorist moron in the world.

          Given that there is precisely zero evidence of what you are claiming, I’ll estimate as close to zero as I can without pretending it’s impossible.

          But make no mistake, you are deliberately spreading disinformation.

          • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’m not claiming anything. It’s just really, really early after the event.

            My choice of words was not ideal, and I apologize for that.

            I’m just saying being unsure of what happened isn’t crazy so soon after the event.

            You’re out here saying what is and is not likely based on your own feelings about what you feel is true.

            It’s simply too early to say anything definitive about what level of conspiracy existed (in the traditional sense, of more than one person, conspiring).

            I am not saying this was staged. I’m saying you’re jumping the gun, to say so confidently it wasn’t.

        • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Your point is that you think you’re allowed to spread misinformation if that misinformation sounds like it maybe could be true. This is the rationale of every conspiracy theorist ever. You’re not making an intellectually honest point here.

          If your point is that you’re a dishonest person who cares more about narrative than facts, point received.