- Joined
- Dec 24, 2024
- Messages
- 7,671
- Reaction score
- 20,032
Yeah, was incredibly unlikely to begin with just logistically because it's a small gated community surrounded by water and marsh with 1 entrance, and it happened at 11:30 in the morning with a bunch of people in the house.
They just wanted a whataboutism and to scream "both sides" so badly because of the preposterous streak of left wing terrorism that they didn't care about any evidence, and just jumped on the least likely scenario and jumped first to arson, then that it was politically motivated, and that it was politically motivated by a Trump supporter over a decision that already got overturned by a higher court, when their first assumption that they kept piling onto wasn't even true.
I'm glad they all got out, and one of the grossest parts is that this story will completely vanish now that it not only isn't politically useful anymore, but makes them look worse for making so many baseless assumptions.
You're deranged.
So someone's house burns down during a period of acute political instability, this leads to perfectly logical questions about whether there was any intentionality, but if it proves it's just a coincidence and an accident all along you want the story covered round the clock or it's "gross"?
What the heck is going on in your head?
The story got covered, if there's nothing more to it, there's nothing more to cover. What are you expecting to happen and, more importantly, why?
Maybe take a step back from your crusade.