Pinned Tweet
Won’t someone please “think of the children”? A logical fallacy and so much more. Snippets 👇 and following tweet. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin…
If the 7 charges is Candace's only gotcha then, Candace - Do you believe Tyler Robinson is guilty of murdering Charlie Kirk, but not guilty of aggravated murder?
If she says yes, then the distinction matters.
If no, then the whole victory lap is basically semantic theater.
For the conspiracy crazies after today's news it would have been much better if you said from the beginning that you'll would never believe anything. At least you'll would have been honest. God himself could come down and tell you'll TR did it and how. You'll would still grift!
🚨BREAKING: Tyler Robinson’s defense filing is out, submitted by his attorneys on August 11, 2026, following the preliminary hearing.
And the entire filing is absolutely ludicrous.
🚨I’m providing the entire filing in this thread …with my summary.
Tyler Robinson’s defense is essentially arguing that yes, Charlie Kirk was deliberately targeted, yes, one shot was fired directly at him, and yes, Robinson allegedly admitted, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I took it” - but somehow the State is reaching too far with the additional charges and aggravating factors.
Their argument against the “great risk of death” aggravator is almost absurdly simple: Robinson fired ONE shot. He intended to hit Charlie. He hit Charlie. Nobody else was hit. Therefore, according to the defense, he did not knowingly create a great risk of death to anyone else. Never mind that this happened at a crowded public event. Never mind that he was allegedly firing a high-powered rifle from a rooftop toward an area filled with people. The defense argues that because the bullet traveled downward, hit its intended target, and did not strike anyone else, prosecutors cannot establish the required risk to another person merely because people were nearby.
They even attack the significance of the shooting targets recovered from Robinson’s apartment. Their argument? The State supposedly cannot establish when those targets were shot, what firearm was used, or whether Robinson personally fired every shot. They similarly dismiss the screwdriver found on the roof, arguing that its existence doesn’t prove Robinson took the rifle apart or reassembled it.
Then we get to witness tampering.
Robinson told Lance Twiggs to “ask for a lawyer and stay silent” if police questioned him. The State charged Robinson with witness tampering based on the allegation that he was attempting to induce his roommate to withhold information. The defense says absolutely not. According to them, Robinson was merely giving Twiggs perfectly innocent constitutional advice. Their position is that because Robinson also allegedly said he intended to turn himself in and told Twiggs to be polite to police, this was altruistic advice - not an attempt to interfere with an investigation.
Then there are the children.
Children under 14 were at the event. The defense doesn’t dispute that. Instead, they argue that prosecutors cannot prove Robinson KNEW THEY WERE THERE. Their reasoning is that Robinson was approximately 400 feet away and allegedly spent only 35-44 seconds positioned on the rooftop before the shot. They literally distinguish this from shooting at an elementary school or daycare, where someone’s knowledge that children were present could reasonably be inferred. Because this happened on a college campus, they say the State cannot establish that Robinson knew children were in that crowd.
And then we arrive at perhaps the most ridiculous argument in the entire filing: political motivation.
Charlie Kirk was one of the most recognizable political activists in America. Robinson wrote, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I took it.” He also said, “I had enough of his hatred.”
But according to the defense, that’s still not enough.
Why? Because Robinson apparently didn’t provide prosecutors with a neat little itemized list explaining precisely which Charlie Kirk political position he hated.
That is essentially their argument.
Hey @DiligentDenizen how come you turned off replies, repost, and quotes? I thought you were for truth and transparency. I know it's difficult to keep grifting when you receive pushback, but don't run away so quickly. You literal fraud.
Replying to @DiligentDenizen
Good Lord man they didn't even fight that he did it. They literally said it was a bullet. They only fought to take the death penalty off the table. Anybody that still follows a word of what you say deserves what they get. You'll can't be this gullible and or stupid!
Hey @RealCandaceO, @baroncoleman, and the rest of the Scooby Doo Gang, maybe you shouldn't have held onto the "unedited video/photos" so long. It seems the defense team didn't get the message you'll had them. Or maybe they did and didn't care.
Well this doesn't bode well for one side of an upcoming debate. Somehow I get the feeling that a Conspiracy Queen will now back out.
🚨BREAKING: Tyler Robinson’s defense filing is out, submitted by his attorneys on August 11, 2026, following the preliminary hearing.
And the entire filing is absolutely ludicrous.
🚨I’m providing the entire filing in this thread …with my summary.
Tyler Robinson’s defense is essentially arguing that yes, Charlie Kirk was deliberately targeted, yes, one shot was fired directly at him, and yes, Robinson allegedly admitted, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I took it” - but somehow the State is reaching too far with the additional charges and aggravating factors.
Their argument against the “great risk of death” aggravator is almost absurdly simple: Robinson fired ONE shot. He intended to hit Charlie. He hit Charlie. Nobody else was hit. Therefore, according to the defense, he did not knowingly create a great risk of death to anyone else. Never mind that this happened at a crowded public event. Never mind that he was allegedly firing a high-powered rifle from a rooftop toward an area filled with people. The defense argues that because the bullet traveled downward, hit its intended target, and did not strike anyone else, prosecutors cannot establish the required risk to another person merely because people were nearby.
They even attack the significance of the shooting targets recovered from Robinson’s apartment. Their argument? The State supposedly cannot establish when those targets were shot, what firearm was used, or whether Robinson personally fired every shot. They similarly dismiss the screwdriver found on the roof, arguing that its existence doesn’t prove Robinson took the rifle apart or reassembled it.
Then we get to witness tampering.
Robinson told Lance Twiggs to “ask for a lawyer and stay silent” if police questioned him. The State charged Robinson with witness tampering based on the allegation that he was attempting to induce his roommate to withhold information. The defense says absolutely not. According to them, Robinson was merely giving Twiggs perfectly innocent constitutional advice. Their position is that because Robinson also allegedly said he intended to turn himself in and told Twiggs to be polite to police, this was altruistic advice - not an attempt to interfere with an investigation.
Then there are the children.
Children under 14 were at the event. The defense doesn’t dispute that. Instead, they argue that prosecutors cannot prove Robinson KNEW THEY WERE THERE. Their reasoning is that Robinson was approximately 400 feet away and allegedly spent only 35-44 seconds positioned on the rooftop before the shot. They literally distinguish this from shooting at an elementary school or daycare, where someone’s knowledge that children were present could reasonably be inferred. Because this happened on a college campus, they say the State cannot establish that Robinson knew children were in that crowd.
And then we arrive at perhaps the most ridiculous argument in the entire filing: political motivation.
Charlie Kirk was one of the most recognizable political activists in America. Robinson wrote, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I took it.” He also said, “I had enough of his hatred.”
But according to the defense, that’s still not enough.
Why? Because Robinson apparently didn’t provide prosecutors with a neat little itemized list explaining precisely which Charlie Kirk political position he hated.
That is essentially their argument.
This 👇
To the conspiracy theorists. This is addressed to you, not at you, because most of you are normal people with logical brains who got sold a story by professionals.
Now is the time to get off this ship.
@RealCandaceO and @baroncoleman put you on it, and today the man's own defense team sank it. Eleven months of certainties. A second shooter. A staged confession. A frame job. Not one of those claims survived contact with the filing his own lawyers wrote to save his life. They know every theory you were sold. They used none of them.
Owens and Coleman will ride this down to the waterline because the ship is the business. The episodes, the subscriptions, the daily certainty that never gets corrected. They monetized a murdered man and they will keep monetizing him as long as you stay aboard.
You don't owe them your seat.
The filing is public. Read it. Then get out while you can.
.@RealCandaceO and @baroncoleman are you sure all you did was decompress/uncompress the video? Slight problem with that theory, once compressed you can't return it to an original unedited video. Meaning your screen grabs have to be edited/manipulated. Share the full video!!!
If this is the true unedited video then @RealCandaceO should release said video instead of a screen grab. Show the full video if it exist that shows zero color change (white balance) and the adjusted lighting in the scene. I mean that would be the transparent thing to do, right?
Charlie was uniparty and a sellout - Baron Coleman
No coincidence why this low IQ fool and his ilk are trying to destroy Charlie's family, TPUSA, and legacy!
teapawt.net/i/status/2084681313118…
Replying to @baroncoleman
You know evidence overrides coincidence, right? Like this is evidence you never cared for Charlie, he was uniparty and a sellout. It's no coincidence you are now trying to destroy his legacy, TPUSA, and family!
teapawt.net/i/status/2084639897537…
Edward Hubert retweeted
THEO VON: “Was there anybody who was immune to COVID-19?”
DR. MCCULLOUGH: “There’s one adult group. You’re going to laugh.”
[Theo Von listens closely for the reveal]
DR. MCCULLOUGH: “Smokers… They got very mild cases. And they don’t get long COVID.”
THEO VON: “Why?”
MCCULLOUGH: “Because smokers maintain a level of nicotine in the bloodstream… Smoking blocks the spike protein. It’s amazing. I thought smokers were going to go down.”
THEO VON: “Do you think that’s a good idea [to use nicotine patches] on a regular basis?”
DR. MCCULLOUGH: “I think [it’s a good idea] if they have long COVID... Nicotine, don’t forget, is a nootropic. A nootropic is a drug that makes the brain function more effectively... It’s addictive, but it’s not harmful to the human body... Nicotine patches are perfectly safe.”
Edward Hubert retweeted
1. What would it take to convince healthcare leaders & policy makers that smoking cessation should be funded and delivered within lung cancer screening programmes?
thorax.bmj.com/content/early…
Edward Hubert retweeted
"In Victoria, the illegal tobacco and vape market is estimated by authorities to be worth more than $900 million a year, implying that there is a multi-billion-dollar national black market."
Without a paywall here:
archive.vn/4Asba
Edward Hubert retweeted
Based on the 2018 @CDCgov National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS), @US_FDA declared a "teen vaping epidemic."
The 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 CDC NYTS surveys show a 70% drop in teen use. It's now at a 10-year low.
cdc.gov/media/releases/2024/…
But @DrMakaryFDA disagrees?
Replying to @LanceChurchill @SecKennedy
"Ask the students."
Isn't that exactly what the anonymous NYTS survey has been doing ever since 1999 (e-cigarettes included since 2011)?
NYTS has asked ~300,000 students about their vaping.
Dr. Makary has asked a few to *guess* the prevalence going with their gut feeling. 🥴
Edward Hubert retweeted
YOUTH VAPING EPIDEMIC language is back in style thanks to @DrMakaryFDA
MAKARY: VAPING IS THE NEXT OPIOID CRISIS 🚨
“For years, the medical establishment downplayed opioids—until it was too late. Now they’re asleep again on vaping. CDC says 5% of kids use vapes... This is the next epidemic, and we’re ignoring it.” — Dr. @MartyMakary
MAKARY: VAPING IS THE NEXT OPIOID CRISIS
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
The FDA reported a new all time record low nicotine use under students
fda.gov/tobacco-produc…
fda.gov/news-events/pr…
Vaping under all students is down to 5.9% in 2024, from 7.7% in 2023
High school students 2024 - 7.8%, 2023 - 10%
Middle school 2024 - 3.5%, 2023 - 4.6%
cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/7…
cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/7…
The FDA and CDC work together on NYTS
fda.gov/tobacco-produc…
Edward Hubert retweeted
MAHA doesn’t include cigarette smokers or 20 million ex-cigarette smokers in America. #hoodwinked
Edward Hubert retweeted
"The illicit tobacco trade is extremely dangerous as evidenced by the fires we have seen here and interstate, and the Malinauskas government is doing everything it can to shut it down in South Australia."
Without a paywall here:
archive.vn/Lcu1z
#253 rd TOBACCO AND VAPE WAR FIREBOMBING 🔥🔥☄️🔥🔥🚒🧯
“A suburban supermarket targeted in an arson attack was under a closure order and has “previously been raided” by authorities, with police probing links to the illicit tobacco trade.”
adelaidenow.com.au/truecrime…
Edward Hubert retweeted
It's fun watching state legislators enact protectionist policies in order to give big tobacco a monopoly on vaping products in their states.
Is fun the word i'm looking for?
badgerherald.com/news/wiscon…


































