

The article has been updated to include that since the posting and my original comment.
The article has been updated to include that since the posting and my original comment.
No, I did. My point is that they’re passively skating around it in this case, but in the case of the Tesla incidences that I’m referencing they very actively come out with ‘terrorism’ first.
That sounds suspiciously like they’re avoiding calling it ‘an act of terrorism’… which is even more suspicious being that lighting a Tesla on fire or spray painting a Tesla dealership would immediately be called terrorism, but this hasn’t been. Hmmm.
Edit: the FBI has determined that it was an intentional act of terrorism at this point.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Has new information come out pointing to a Democrat, then?