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?
deleted by creator
I see where you’re coming from, but you got a lot of facts wrong in your comment.
deleted by creator
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.
She’s the husband of someone killed who was in the crowd…
This was the rallygoer, not the shooter. There were two deaths at that event.
deleted by creator
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.