Andrew Wilson is telling you to believe that last night he:
Obtained a copy of a receipt with a signature for a contactless transaction from Cowboys Smokehouse in Panguitch, Utah.
He then proved this was real by a screenshot of a text with no name or anything verifable that was allegedly written to @DiligentDenizen by one of the owners, and Andrew was given a copy...which he posted to disprove Diligent.
Nothing has been posted by the restaurant's official FB page since July 18th, when they said they would no longer comment due to the active investigation.
For proof, Andrew posts a screenshot of an X account he states is one of the owners, that changed it's name on X last night, including correcting a typo in the display name from "just a guy frim spry" to "just a guy from spry"
The account added "Utah, USA"
At the very time Andrew was getting a screenshot of the account, the restaurant owner decided to change his name, and created a typo in the process. He also added Utah, USA to the profile.
The "just a guy frim spry" account says "its not fake. It's all true" and showed "edit profile" at the top to show the posts from the locked account. Even though Andrew is friends with the account, he says he was sent the screenshot from the account owner, and that's why "edit profile" is showing at the top.
Andrew calls this positive evidence to refute Diligent, and throws out insults for anyone noticing all these anomalies and such.
If the tables were turned, would Andrew believe this, or say it is made up while chain smoking & calling everyone names ?
Why would @paleochristcon have access to “edit profile” of the steakhouse owner’s X account?
Boy - they are soooooo bad at this.
Excellent catch @ErinBWea
Charlie strongly disliked The New York Times as an institution and spent years publicly attacking its journalism. “Hate” is probably a fair description of the intensity of that criticism, even if he didn’t always use that exact word.
So guess who Erika sat down with for an interview just 7 days after he was assassinated?
The New York Times.
And now she writes special pieces for them—placed behind a paywall—and even gives them private viewings of Charlie’s videos?
Bit gross, if you ask me. 🤷♀️
The more I watch the Tyler Robinson case, the more I understand why people still argue about Lee Harvey Oswald 60+ years later.
Think about it.
Oswald was declared JFK’s assassin. The government said they had the rifle, prints, photographs, witnesses, his movements afterward and plenty of circumstantial evidence connecting him to the assassination.
Oswald denied it.
Then he was killed before he ever got a trial.
Decades later, people are STILL arguing over what actually happened.
Now look at Tyler Robinson.
Before a jury has heard the full case, people are already saying “100% him. No question. They have everything.”
Prosecutors say they have DNA, video, a rifle and incriminating messages. Those are serious allegations and I’m not pretending they don’t exist.
But Tyler pleaded NOT GUILTY.
I personally do NOT believe Tyler Robinson took that shot. That’s my opinion based on everything I’ve looked at so far, and I could be proven wrong.
But that’s exactly why we have trials.
Evidence should be authenticated, witnesses should testify under oath, the defense should get to cross-examine them, and a jury should hear BOTH sides before the public declares the case closed.
Imagine if everyone had stopped asking questions about JFK because authorities told them, “We got Oswald.”
Questioning whether the accused is actually the shooter isn’t defending murder.
It’s asking the state to prove that it has the right man, especially when it’s asking to execute him.
I refuse to apologize for that.
The jury didn't vote 11-1 to Lindsay Clancy was insane and therefore not criminally responsible for killing her kids.
They voted 11-1 that Lindsay Clancy didn't kill her kids.
they deliberated longer than they investigated the case.
all because they believed the word of the checked out husband when she couldn’t speak almost dead on the floor outside.
Patrick didn't want the 911 call to be played in court because it's the foundation of Lindsay's "confession", but it's only him talking for Lindsay and Lindsay only being able to grunt with a sliced throat, and broken spine while basically freezing to death.
Charlie Kirk criticized the left for years and years. Nothing happened.
Charlie Kirk criticized Islam for years and years. Nothing happened.
Charlie Kirk criticized Israel for a short period.
Charlie Kirk got assassinated.
That's the truth. And that will not change.
Patrick Clancy did it.
Can’t change my mind.
He wanted out.
Wasn’t expecting Lindsay to live.
Married her doppelgänger anyways.
If you’re innocent, why say I won’t testify unless my phone records are sealed??
Suspicious brother
@Rach4Patriarchy She did a whole segment early on how some ppl say one way and her British influenced house say it a diff way. This is so childish. She is classy and very smart. You should try that sometime.
I wish I could have left a comment but it wouldn't let me so. I'm glad someone dumbed it down for ppl! She has never told anyone but "PATRICK ", & HE SAID THAT, yet she was FKNG NON VERBAL WHEN THE AMBULANCE GOT THERE! Oh, Patrick how convenient for you! She didn't confess ppl!!!
1. You are 37 and I am 42. Stop pretending you are some youthful dame. We are roughly the same age.
2. I know you like to take this shot at me: “You are 50.” But the truth is you wear gallons of makeup and touch it up every few minutes. You are just a typical whatever-podcast girl. Fake hair, fake face (makeup), fake everything. You hide your age, but you aren’t a spring chicken, lady.
3. You are the creep. You operate based on petty revenge. Everybody you don’t like conspired to kill your “friend,” who also happened to fire you, lol. It’s insane and IT’S REALLY STUPID.
I am correct, and you will have to live with the fact that you will be remembered as the person who crusaded to get Charlie Kirk’s murderer acquitted before there was even a trial. You blamed his wife and closest friends for his murder and pushed to harass and destroy any person who dared question your bullshit. That WILL BE your legacy. We can add that to your doxxing website, multiple race-based con-job lawsuits, and your unholy alliance with left-wing operatives who adore you doing this by their own admission.
Who cares if I knew Charlie Kirk? Most of your “investigators” didn’t know Charlie Kirk. You have no secret knowledge.
Then the worst thing of all: You KNOW and Baron Coleman knows Robinson shot Kirk. You are engaged in online live-action role-play where you pretend to be an investigator, but you get the basic facts wrong, have uncovered no evidence anybody except Robinson engaged in wrongdoing, and nobody of any importance handling the case itself—including the defense—mentions or cites your work at all. None of them use it to prove any facts… none of them think you have a shred of credibility on either side.I will come out the other side of this thing pointing and laughing at all of you POD-LARPER detectives and will just say “I told you so,” not that anybody with a brain ever thought https://t.co/nkj1cOfHtL will defect to another nation to avoid being sued into oblivion, and I will kick my feet up and shake my head in disbelief that the Clancey crowd of SSRI wine moms followed you into the oblivion of your own making.
Like a typical woman you did this to yourself but will blame everybody around you. It's your own damned fault though Candace.
Take some accountability.