LETTER TO THE EDITOR, Reita Isaacs, Liberal
Anyone ever get caught up in a shock-and-awe situation where you wait a few days before you respond and still something tells you to “wait?”
I had settled down with my coffee and started my observations about Charlie Kirk’s assassination when I got that nudge to stop. After several failed attempts to make rational conclusions, I deleted everything. Many days have gone by with new audios, interviews, and videos being released, and tonight I watched the two newest that confirmed my decision — Tyler Robinson was not the assassin. Yup, you heard me right.
This was well organized to be completed on Charlie’s scheduled appearance in an open forum. Who decided where he would be seated? He had made the comment ANTIFA would there and they’d have to be careful. With all his private security and those of the college, no one thought to check perfect sniper positions?
I spent hours watching and rewatching all the videos posted and it took a few slowly released ones to see everything was wrong. Tyler deliberately made sure videos were recorded with him in the staircase with distinct traceable attire, head turned slightly aside, hands empty on the guard rails.
The neighborhood video shows him walking with a limp (possible long rifle) down his right pant leg, and a black skinny backpack toward the college. Next video shows him running fast behind houses to get away. Then his dad recognizes him, convinces him to turn himself in (not before he had ice cream at 6:28 p.m.), at which time he probably posted the phony text to his lover. Lover boy asked him if he really “did it”? Tyler says he did, but never said what, in exact words, he did. Still hasn’t spoken or admitted to law enforcement.
Back to video seeing Tyler sprinting across rooftop before crowd-reaction. He throws backpack over and to the side of the rooftop, then leaps over, grabs this soft black object, and runs away to the street where cameras show him meandering, empty handed, across the road while waiting for traffic.
Now somewhere in this magical timeframe, he was able to find a wooded area close, but not too close, disregard a long rifle, scatter three shells and a casing with specific messages scrawled across them and the butt, find a white towel and wrap a screwdriver.
Absolutely amazing.
One gun expert in the crowd said it sounded almost like it was from the close crowd itself.
Like a rerun from Trump’s time in Pennsylvania. Did you notice that one of the body guards was the same one that was with Trump? It was rumored he was on loan for this.
This particular player had been frequently checking his watch, gave some type of signal at the same time a man dressed in white in the crowd also gave a signal. A coincidence the shot was fired immediately? Same sequence as before; Charlie reached up, security grabbed him, carried him off, literally threw him in the vehicle, and got him to the trauma unit where doctors were waiting. This doctor wrote a statement verifying there was no exit wound, therefore, he was not shot with a 30.6 rifle because there would have been nothing left. The doctor said a bullet that size would kill a moose.
Back to the seen of the crime. Within a few minutes after Charlie was carried away, a man claiming he was with the staff, grabbed the chair, moved it over , and removed all the video, put it in a case and left. No one securing the crime scene? Hours later, the entire area was disassembled, grated up, and all new surface applied.
I know this is long, but one last thing. Charlie’s chair was placed in front of a trap door leading to the college irrigation system. One quick opening by the actual assassinator, shot fired, door down, mission accomplished.
Where’s the missing 10 minute video?
I’ll finish part 2 of this next time.
See you.
EDITOR’S NOTE — The Leader & Times provides a forum for local letters. The opinions provided are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views of the L&T or its staff. All letters that comply with the policies provided elsewhere on this page are welcome regardless of who may or may not agree with the author.
Totally irresponsible for the paper to publish this woman's garbage. Earl wants people to take his community cheerleading seriously then he turns around and prints this woman. Watch what they do not what they say -- we're watching you, EARL!
"See you?"
Lord I hope not. I avoid people like you. Really, Rita, you need to shut the hell up.
I see crazy Reita's articles now come with a disclaimer. Nice try. We know you support this type of garbage.
How does this help take down the temperature on political violence? It doesn't. Earl, you are a sick bastard who should be ashamed of himself. You want division. You want drama. You're an ass.
While I admit I rarely visit the Leader & Times website it's only because I rarely find the time. Today was an exception.
I typically avoid reading the comment threads. I certainly hope Mrs. Isaacs and Mr. Watt do, too.
The author has every right to voice her opinion. Her words aren't divisive political rhetoric. In fact, they aren't even partisan. She is questioning what she saw, there's nothing wrong with that. I actually enjoyed this piece.
The notion that Mr. Watt is somehow promoting a certain kind of politics is ridiculous. Though he and I don't see eye to eye on very many things, Mr. Watt has been kind enough to publish my views. He does not censor.