Nothing is more annoying or more obvious of a strategy than to demand a debate without a focused topic. Your gripe across multiple platforms is that people are “spinning conspiracy theories” about the Charlie Kirk assassination. Your repeat position is that the official federal storyline makes perfect sense, and the evidence is “overwhelming” that Tyler Robinson did it. If you prove capable of overwhelming the public with evidence that Tyler Robinson did this, then you would simultaneously prove your position that any and all conspiracies or alternative theories are misguided, wrong, and in some cases plain evil. But if you cannot sufficiently convince the audience that the case against Tyler Robinson is “crystal clear” then you prove that alternative theories are not just warranted, but necessary.
As I have already stipulated there is no time limit, but I am going to ask that we keep the conversation focused by at first dedicating our time to debating the actual case and the evidence you have repeatedly described as overwhelming. Once that has been debated, you are free to introduce and to question me about any of all of my alternative theories, and/or my opinion of Erika, etc. to your heart’s content. Again, there is no time limit. This structure guarantees a focused discussion which audiences can follow while also guaranteeing the time to ask any and every question pertaining to my “conspiracy theories”.
I have just DMed you so we can set up the time and square away any other minutia.
Mike