Deplorable Neanderthal

Definitely not a bot 🤖

[Keith Woods @KeithWoodsYT]

Since posting this, Candace has done a couple of hundred monetised and ad-supported podcasts pushing virtually every conspiracy around her friend's death, put purported evidence for her theories behind a paywall, and is now charging $300,000 to allow someone to debate her on it.

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@RealCandaceO Lmao, need some time to find a way to spin this eh? 😂🫵🤡

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@ATL_Buckeye @TheMilkBarTV No, we’re still not retarded, but thanks for asking Wade.

[Sarah Fields @SarahisCensored]

🚨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.

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@LisaNIRL @RealCandaceO @thevivafrei @Villgecrazylady It was not edited. It was a security cam that records in wide angle. The picture the woke right idiots are sharing is an AI enhanced version to “correct” the distortion of the wide angle lense. Pretty simple.

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@naptownnicey @RealCandaceO @thevivafrei @Villgecrazylady Correct. It was AI

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@Red_Pill_US @RealCandaceO lol whatever you say you retarded woke bitch 👍

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@lmtobias You literally have to be brain dead to think this.

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@Teach4Truth @abbythelibb_ “Go Max!”

Literally the rallying cry of the mentally retarded at this point. 🤣

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@JuicyBack178726 @dbongino Great point. Btw, you dropped this

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@ElleRen7 lol bitch shut the fuck up 🤣

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@stelzner_n1150 🤣🤣🤣🫵🤡

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@Madhava_Setty @NJBeisner Then why not shut up and wait for the trial instead of actively working to prove him innocent?

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@brandisiciliani We literally saw him or at least someone do it dumbass.

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@itsbrockmccain @BlakeSNeff You Candace cucks are so pathetic it’s hilarious.

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@OwenBenjamin You freaks should be forcefully placed in a mental institution. Permanently.

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@IGraceAshford Oh how awful!! 🫵🤡

[Andrew Kolvet @AndrewKolvet]

Candace Owens accusing anyone else of being a fame whore is absolutely hilarious 😂

Firstly, @RealCandaceO, it is you who have been on a wild pursuit of fame your entire life (remember those awkward cameos as a dancer in those rap videos?) You are the one who saw Charlie as your ticket to more of it by profiting off of his murder. You've been willing to slander countless people to achieve it, including your "friend's" widow and his organization. Erika was a wife and a mother, largely behind the scenes, before Charlie was killed. What were you doing at the time? Oh that's right. You were already chasing more and more fame.

Secondly, we never received a request for comment on this article from Daily Mail. The entire description throughout is bizarre, and they’ve already had to make drastic retractions, including that their anonymous source was a member of the Kirk Family. That completely undermines the entire premise of the story!

Thirdly, the shirts sold during the memorial were not "kicked back into the LLC." That's a malicious lie.

And lastly, you and Charlie were not friends when he was killed, but we’ve already gone over that.

How much money have you made since 9/10, Candace? How many T-shirts have you sold? How much in merch do you clear every month?

[Deplorable Neanderthal @Bot_28492664938]

@scrambled75 @misfitpatriot You didn’t see the blood gushing from his neck? Consider yourself lucky.