Originally Posted by Matter-eater Man
I sourced and linked the shooter being a registered republican and Trump supporter as well as a link to his whole manifesto. You provided a link via a partisan source that only references 1 paragraph of the 4 page manifesto. You also tried to pass off Attkisson and Logan as liberals, lol. I read Attkisson’s piece declaring Trump was going to win 2020 no matter who he was up against, lol. That’s a conservative writing with full on bias in play. And I see nothing she’s produced in over a decade that would make a conservative the least bit uncomfortable. Logan I never saw as either way tbh but obviously something happened and she’s doing stuff with the my pillow guy. Again I understand why you like bat shit crazy conservatives gone wild but why even try to polish these turds?

Attkisson's editorial about the the 2016 election is not at all partisan, she just talks about her instincts as a journalist for 3 decades, and what she saw in the opinions of dozens of people she came in contact with who discussed Trump, Hillary and the then-pending election. She doesn't in the editorial endorse Trump or wax enthusiastic about him, she just cites from many sources who she sees as the likely winner of the election. So again, you LIE when you say she is "right wing" or a partisan for Trump.

And again with Lara Logan, you cite nothing beyond your irrational opinion (to atttempt to discredit her) that she is a conservative. Again: She has spent OVER 30 YEARS reporting for the most liberal news agencies on earth. No one who was a conservative would endure that for 30 years.


You posted a link to an AP article that gave an opinionated false unsourced narrative that Crusius is a "white racist", that didn't source any ACTUAL PROOF that Patrick Crusius was "white supremacist" or "white racist", or even prove he is "white". Speculation only in that AP article, without ANY proof.
And as I said, I looked before you even posted that AP piece, viewing at least 20 other articles, some of which even had the headline of detailing Crusius' background, but NONE gave sourced facts, other than basically namecalling him "white supremacist" or "white racist".

What I linked about Patrick Crusius DID detail his manifesto, but where your AP liberal Newspeak article tried to bypass the thrust of what Patrick Crusius' motive was, while acknowledging Crusius targeted a majority of Mexicans (if I recall, 13 of the 20 he shot were Mexican) the article I posted doesn't just paint him as "white racist" to sell a false liberal narrative, it goes into the DEEPER REASON he targeted immigrants in El Paso (and again, not 100% or even close to it were Mexicans he targeted).

The link I posted goes into Crusius' ACTUAL self-declared envionmentalist motivation for the shooting, that you pretend doesn't exist so you can sell a false "white supremacist" narrative.

Dylan Roof (Charleston church shooter) was a white racist.
Frank James (the N Y City subway shooter) was a black racist.
Their own manifestos make that clear. Crusius' manifesto does NOT.

I've yet to see that you proved this Patrick Crusius kid was a racist. Crusius (in his manifesto) citing the political ramifications of immigration on the U.S. over coming decades is NOT the same thing as being a racist.
And Crusius himself said his ideas on the subject were formed long before Trump became a candidate in 2015, and Crusius HIMSELF made clear that Trump had nothing to do with forming Crusis' ideology on the subject.
This is CRYSTAL clear, and yet you still lyingly / slanderously push the false narrative that Trump motivat
ed Cruisus to do the El Paso shooting. He did NOT.

Crusius is mentally unbalanced, he has weird ideas that he acted on with a gun. But he is not a racist. And he was not motivated by Trump.

https://thenewamerican.com/us/crime/despite-leftist-media-claims-el-paso-shooter-is-one-of-them/