Your original point is a straw man fallacy, and thus deserves no response. Get your facts straight before you give us any more of this vitriolic attitude please.
If you could stop being a prick for 10 seconds you might notice that I already did respond to your original point.
How can your expect anyone to take your argument seriously when you mix up the wife of a murder victim with the mother of a murderer and then respond by being a defensive asshole when corrected?
Removed by mod
She’s the husband of someone killed who was in the crowd…
I see where you’re coming from, but you got a lot of facts wrong in your comment.
Removed by mod
Your original point is a straw man fallacy, and thus deserves no response. Get your facts straight before you give us any more of this vitriolic attitude please.
If you could stop being a prick for 10 seconds you might notice that I already did respond to your original point.
How can your expect anyone to take your argument seriously when you mix up the wife of a murder victim with the mother of a murderer and then respond by being a defensive asshole when corrected?
It’s entirely possible that one day someone on the internet might say something like, “oops, I got that wrong, my bad” but today is not that day.
Better to just act like a brat.
This was the rallygoer, not the shooter. There were two deaths at that event.
Removed by mod
You are accusing the widow of a rallygoer who shielded his family from harm of having a would-be assassin son. You have your facts mixed up.