this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
3 points (100.0% liked)
US Authoritarianism
789 readers
649 users here now
Hello, I am researching American crimes against humanity. . This space so far has been most strongly for memes, and that's fine.
There's other groups and you are welcome to add to them. USAuthoritarianism Linktree
See Also, my website. USAuthoritarianism.com be advised at time of writing it is basically just a donate link
Cool People: [email protected]
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Please Ive heard this but I could never find a source for it.
It's hard to actually tell. There's a 69 year old Thomas Crooks in Pittsburgh who regularly donated to ACT BLUE.
ACT BLUE also does not accept donations from those under 18 due to legal liability issues.
On the other hand, the donation in question, on Jan 20 2021, had Thomas M Crooks' address. Or at least his zip code.
The age thing is what makes me think Snopes is wrong, and they have been known to lie before for things like Elon and his bullshit.
What things did they lie about? I am ignorant on this subject.
Huh. Well, I trust Snopes enough to retract that. For obvious reasons they don’t specify the address in question.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-shooter-donation/
You shouldn't trust Snopes at all anymore. They literally said that Trump never said "good people on both sides".
Which Trump bragged about in the debate a few days later.
I don't trust them at all, anymore
Okay - hit me with those links!
. . .
Link us up!
. . .
They are probably referring to this:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/
Yeah, a couple of problems with it though:
First, he DID say, after the “Jews will not replace us” march, and intentional murder of a counter-protestor that there were “very fine people on both sides.” So he DID say that. The statement that he did not say that is false. Note:
Secondly, Snopes has apparently incorporated the trump administration’s walk-back of that to say yeah he didn’t know they were all nazis.
While I disagree with that analysis, it is laid out plainly that that’s how they arrived at the true/false determination of what this demented sociopath meant.
Which is - imo wrong, but fair. Identifying an address that matches the address of alleged shooter is simply comparing two empirical values. So while I disagree with the ‘both sides’ analysis I think there’s room for them to claim it was false, unlike the donation address matching the shooter’s address.