You can never be to sure homie, it's good that we have so many people involved digging for truth and asking questions. If you noticed CNN and all the media aren't realiable and are pushing their own narratives that the sheeple are eating up right now.

Amen!

Well your point is a little lost with the incoherent title. But I will say this, everything Ive seen so far points to legit.

The only evidence people are using is some interviews with underaged kids. My guess is that gun lobby is just using this to scare people into buying more guns. The industry has been struggling since Rs got in power, which of course is bad for business. Follow the money.

Where is your evidence showing it was:

a legit crazy person.

?

Thanks but Ive followed this sub long enough I’m not going to engage with you. Anyone else, I would have. Cheers

(not PLC)

Where is your evidence showing it was:

a legit crazy person.

?

You’re right. Unless someone shows me evidence that the NRA wasn’t behind this to get people to buy guns. It’s s false flag.

You're not answering the question...

Lol I also would like to know now

So....

lmao, just admit you are full of it already... Do I trigger you?

Honestly, not at all. I commend you for your popularity. You got a knack for getting a reaction.

I’m just here looking for different type of conversation/fact finding than you offer.

I’m just here looking for different type of conversation/fact finding than you offer.

lmao.

You are forgetting the evidence of a drill being done on the same day, the FBI knowing the suspect and doing nothing to prevent it, the suspect hearing demonic voices in his head telling him to commit the crime, conflicting eye witness accounts of multiple shooters, pushing an agenda, etc.

Ok, so your position is that fbi should investigate everything that is reported on the internet and preemptively lock someone up ahead of time based upon what they say?

Be careful if that slippery slope.

In fairness though, the FBI seemed to have messed this up. I think they had multiple notifications of suspicious behaviour from this guy, including notification that he actually said he was going to shoot up a school. Ignoring something so direct is negligent. The FBI should be held accountable. It would be one thing if they were too busy to investigate, but the notice wasn't event sent to the filed office for evaluation. Again, negligent.

I don’t know what world you want to live in where FBI has this power to judge opinions or words on internet as something that is criminal. I sure don’t. This isn’t political sub so I don’t want to get into it too much, but that’s pretty much unconstitutional.

He was a credible threat. Tbey went to MS to question the Youtuber who alerted them to his comment about wanting to be a professional school shooter, why didn't they at least question him as well? Then in January, someone who knew him alerted the FBI believing he was an imminent threat. The FBI had credible evidence from multiple sources that the kid was a threat and did nothing. They even admitted they were wrong and did not follow proper protocol. So yes, I believe the FBI should have taken action (it is their job, correct?) and at the very least he should have been interviewed and had a restraining order keeping him away from any school.

This wasn't about policing words or opinions. This was about the FBI being notified that this guy literally said "I want to be a school shooter". In the same manner as someone who threatens the president online gets investigated by the NSA, the FBI has an obligation to investigate threats of domestic terrorism to determine their credibility. Thats not infringing on anyone's rights, thats the FBI's job.

I respect that opinion, but just remember moving forward that standard could be interpreted depending on the person in charge. Just be carful as to what world you want to live in.

I think you need to admit that you comment was misdirected / incorrect. Your argument makes no sense. You're advocating that the FBI shouldn't act on tips where someone openly states or admits a desire to perpetrate a crime resulting in domestic terrorism, because freedom of speech? I want to live in a world where agencies responsible for investigating crimes investigate credible threats. This was exactly such a case with multiple parties notifying the same agency about different issues both pointing to likely violent outcomes. This is not about investigating someone because of views that are outside the norm. This is about investigating someone who is making direct threats.

Im pretty open about these events, and im slowly believing this was legit.

I don’t think there is a 1:1 relation between having crisis actors and it being fake. Crisis actors are just a tool to sell compelling stories and screen time (aka Ad time).

The issue I have is with people on this sub taking any piece of data, no matter how small, and taking huge leaps to prove its a grand conspiracy, vs deducing it from actual evidence. The hoggs interviews are a PERFECT example. Does the kid sound coached? Hell yes he does, and look at his own youtube background and all the people around him to coach him. Of course he wants to turn this into a self aggrandising platform to develop his brand. But that doesn't come close to making him.a planted agent or crisis actor. The leap from A to Z with nothing in between is ridiculous at best.

I can't agree with this more.

I don't think people think he's a legit crisis actor, but part of a propaganda machine, even if he is a student. He took a video while the shooting from a closet about gun control. Who the fuck does that. People just died and they are using it.

And he IS being fed lines. (.35 mark)

https://youtu.be/Q9jBKIv4O-E

The leap from A to Z with nothing in between is ridiculous at best.

Except "in-between" is the FACT that he is the son of a retired FBI agent. So not exactly "nothing". And actually, that is a very, very big something.

Really? Actually thats TOTALLY irrelevant. What on earth does that have to do with anything? He could be the son of a shoemaker and be just as likely to be an agent or crisis actor. You're literally grabbing at straws. You've started with a conclusion and are trying to tie any details to your desired narrative.

He could be the son of a shoemaker and be just as likely to be an agent or crisis actor.

That is how your mind processes that connection.

Well, I'm looking at it from the perspective of how does the father being retired from an agency make it more or less likely that his son is a crisis actor? It would be more likely that those perpetrating such an activity would want to ensure there is nothing that could trace anything back. Considering the kid even ANNOUNCES in an interview that he is the son of a retired FBI agent, its not like they are trying to keep this secret. So its more than how my mind works, I'm using facts and processing them.

Well, I'm looking at it from the perspective of how does the father being retired from an agency make it more or less likely that his son is a crisis actor?

Obviously you are not, because the answer to that question is a resounding YES.

Considering the kid even ANNOUNCES in an interview that he is the son of a retired FBI agent, its not like they are trying to keep this secret.

It would actually be more suspicious to NOT announce it and then for people to dig and expose it. And any three letter agency would obviously know that and consider it when creating their playbook. So again, your logic is completely wrong.

Yip with guns he shouldn't be able to get.