Here's a good up to date and condensed version for people that haven't followed much and want to get Candace's point of view without having to watch 40 hour long streams:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=PGc1XhAI8Fk
Starts at 20 minutes.
I think that people who are skeptical should give it a listen with an open mind.
I normally like Jimmy Dore. He can be a bit of a sperg and I don't agree with everything he says, but he's usually pretty neutral. I'm also sick of your huge posts telling us there is evidence of something more going on, so I decided, fine. I'll do what you said, I'll listen to this entire thing with an open mind.
Right off the bat, him and Candace are being misleading. They play a clip of Charlie talking about how you can't trust the government and how the JFK assassination doesn't make sense, it had to have more people involved. They also show tweets from Charlie talking about distrusting the government and question everything. They are both trying to prime the audience into seeing that what happened to Charlie is similar to what happened to JFK. That's BS considering that JFK was the most powerful man in the world with a ton of enemies (Both home and abroad) that had lots of reasons to want him dead. Charlie did not have that kind of power. Charlie had influence and was good at getting young people interested in politics, but before he was killed a lot of people didn't even know who he was (I sure didn't).
Their next evidence that Israel murdered Charlie is the text message he sent Candace saying that he won't be bullied by Jewish donors. Then they show a video of Erika saying that Charlie was not texting people, saying he was scared and that he was going to be murdered. She said she has Charlie's cell phone and there is nothing like that on there.
Jimmy then says that this is provably false because another friend claims that he texted Charlie and asked him to up his security detail. Charlie replies "I have, I know they want me dead." Jimmy and Candace use this as a "Gotcha!" against Erika and imply she's been caught in a lie.
Again, Jimmy and Candace are trying to lead the audience to feel a certain way by trying to make two separate things look like they are related. Erika said that Charlie was not scared he was about to be murdered or had any reason to think someone was out to get him. Jimmy and Candace respond to this by implying that a generic sounding text from Charlie is proof that he actually did think someone was out to get him. Charlie's response just sounded like a typical "I know there are crazies out there", not that he believed some shadow government was out to get him.
Candace and Jimmy go on to talk about how Charlie's security sucked and how he had the event outside even though security advised against it. Security was told that Charlie preferred to do it outside, so that's why he did it despite being advised not to. How does Jimmy and Candace not see the huge flaw in their argument here? If this was all set up to shoot Charlie, why would have security even bothered to advise him to have the event inside? What if Charlie had agreed with them and had it inside? That would have ruined their plan to kill him outside.
They bring up how Charlie's security didn't have drones scanning the roof. This is admittedly a huge fail. Cernovich is a bit of a cow but stated there were fights between security and campus police about using drones. Cernovich said this has happened to him as well when he has gone on speaking tours. I believe this is incompetence and someone should be held accountable for this, but I do not see this as proof that Charlie was being set up to be killed (Especially when they asked him to hold it inside but he declined).
Again Candace and Jimmy bring up another unrelated and totally different case and try to make it seem like it's the same as Charlie's. They bring up how Trump almost died by that freak in Butler and how that case is suspicious and there were too many security fails to be an accident. Charlie was not Trump. Trump is the most powerful leader in the WORLD that has multiple targets on him from inside the White House and abroad. It is suspicious how a lone soy redditor with zero online footprint somehow managed to get past the security of the most powerful man alive and nearly succeeded in killing him. We still don't know shit about this guy or why he was in contact with people a guy like him had no business being in contact with. Contrast that to Tyler Robinson, who had an online footprint and nothing about hims is surprising. He also went after a much easier target in a place with lax security. These two situations are not remotely the same.
Candace and Jimmy talk about the most "compelling" evidence that this whole thing was set up: the bullet wound. They show a video of some retired military SEAL guy who says that Charlie's head should have been blown off. They say we should listen to this guy because he's an expert. This is frustrating because other experts have also come out and explained why Charlie's head wasn't blown off. So if we should trust the experts, why does Jimmy and Candace trust this guy over the others? They offer no explanation as to why his expert opinion is more right than others. Candace then says something that I personally find extremely annoying. She says that there was no blood on Charlie's back. To her this is proof that the bullet/gun Tyler used is something different than what the FBI found. This dumb bitch is not an expert in how guns work nor does she know jack shit about wounds yet she talks like she's so sure! I am also not an expert. But I work in healthcare and can tell you that wounds don't always look like what you expect them to look like. That poor woman that was stabbed in the neck on the subway also didn't have blood spurting out everywhere like you'd think would happen on a jugular wound, yet she still died.
LMAO. Jimmy says he asked GROK to analyze the soundwaves and that Grok said it does not sound like a high caliber rifle. I cannot believe Jimmy would admit this. Ai is amazing but still awful and wrong frequently. I disregard anyone who uses ai as evidence since ai lies and gets stuff wrong all the time.
Candace says everyone she talked to that was there that day said the gun sounded like it was closer and on the left of Charlie, not the right. Nevermind how guns are always way louder than most people think, or how people confuse which direction sounds are coming from all the time. She also says she does not believe that the shot came from the roof, and that if someone did fire a rifle, it was just to hide the sound of a different gun. Wtf? WHY would anyone do this shit. Candace doesn't know shit about guns. Also, she was just saying how the security failed to secure the roof, why does this even matter if the shot didn't come from the roof? She also brings up how most of the people in the crowd were not students... no shit? It was a public event. Obviously Charlie fans from near by would show up. Holy shit.
Jimmy and Candace bring up how Tyler doesn't talk like a normal 22 year old. They don't mention how another YouTuber debunked this, showing old police cam footage where Tyler talked and he used words and phrases that he used in text message to his troon boyfriend. They completely disregard this. Then Candace says the narrative about Tyler being suicidal doesn't make sense, one minute he was, another he wasn't, says "You can't be both!" Hey Candace, you can be suicidal one minute and not the next. She also says that Tyler denied that he did it to his dad initially. How is this suspicious? No shit he would try to deny it at first. The idiot doesn't want to go to jail. Reality is setting in and he's trying to avoid it.
Candace says Tyler's boyscout leader is likely an undercover cop that works with sex crimes against children, and thinks he blackmailed several people to kill Charlie. Her proof is that crazy guy that initially threw his hands up in the crowd and shouted "I DID IT!" right after Charlie was shot. This guy later went to the hospital and told the nurses he was told to do that and promised he would get paid. Candace doesn't bother to explain how this guy is well known to be a weirdo and disruptor. And she doesn't bother to talk about how exactly him being there would have helped Tyler murder Charlie. Yes, that weirdo screaming "I DID IT!" or whatever slowed the initial search down, but that's it. Was he hired so Tyler could get more time to get away? If so, what good did that do? Tyler had no getaway plans. Despite having that extra time to get away and hide, he was chilling at home. Israel wasted their money hiring that guy.
Candace and Jimmy talk about how Charlie turned down a massive donation from some billionaire, and now that Charlie is gone, that guy succeeded in donating to TurningPoint USA. Essentially implying that this guy (and Israel) wanted to tap into Charlie's growing influence, but Charalie wasn't interested. If this guy wanted to donate to Charlie and use his growing influence for his own pet issues, why the hell would he have THE FACE OF TURNING POINT USA KILLED? And again, I find this to be another thing Candace and Jimmy keep doing. They act like because there were interal issues and disagreements in TPUSA, this is proof that someone in there wanted Charlie killed.
She says that TPUSA lost their minds when she brought up this guy because the donation was supposed to be secret. Which is dumb, considering there would be no way to hide a massive donation like that in a non-profit. Candace and Jimmy then talk about how there may be people in TPUSA that were keeping financial things from Charlie. What does this have to do with Tyler Robison killing Charlie? Again, these two contiue to present something as being related to Charlie's assisnation without elaborating as to how they are connected. How does Charlie having fake friends or internal company struggles lead to Israel somehow putting out a hit on Charlie?
They both talk about how lots of TPUSA employees are bad actors and lying about how close they were to Charlie. So what? There are bad people taking advantage of a situation to further their careers and make themselves look better by lying about how close they were to Charlie. People do that shit all of the time. That is not evidence of some conspiracy to have him killed.
Anyway, the show ends with them saying that there's nothing wrong with asking questions, fight the establishment, it's what Charlie would have wanted, blat blah blah. You're right, there isn't anything wrong with asking questions. But that's not what you idiots are doing. You're making assumptions and connections that aren't there. You're ignoring shit that people already debunked. You're connecting unrelated things to Charlie's murder.
Well, that's 2 hours of my life I'll never get back.
