Debate on Evidence in Assassination Case

Watch Candace dismantle what Andrew Wilson calls

overwhelming evidence that Tyler Robinson assassinated

Charlie Kirk.

Has, if you wanna pull it up so we can see it.

Fantastic. Somebody said, "So give me the clear evidence right

here. I want you to provide it right here." All

I heard from the investigator was,

"We believe this to be Tyler Robinson." Is belief something you go as a fact?

You wrote, "The car pulling in..."

Mm-hmm

... that's a totally blurry image.

Um, Robinson getting out of it, you have no idea if that's T-

Tyler Robinson.

Mm-hmm.

The fact that he is seen four other times on camera, the fact being

just a, a standard white boy with brown hair

was seen, uh, getting-

Mm-hmm

... walking up staircase. The DNA on the roof,

we should discuss that,

and on the screwdriver that he left behind.

It's overwhelming, man.

As Candace reads off the list from Andrew Wilson's post,

you can see him becoming increasingly more uncomfortable.

Because after all, the footage of the car pulling in

was blurry,

and there's no clear identification of Tyler Robinson getting out of

it, or at all for that matter, as the images presented are so

unclear it's nearly impossible to tell whether it's actually Tyler

Robinson or just any other white male.

And when it comes to the screwdriver and the DNA on the roof, the

FBI only said Robinson was a possible contributor,

not a confirmed match. Andrew immediately realizes his

list of overwhelming evidence falls apart under the slightest

scrutiny, meaning Andrew needs a way out.

But here's the problem, he led with what he thought was his

strongest points. And the cherry on top, Andrew flatly

denied ever saying or listing these things in the first

place, which makes what he does next look like

he's running away from

his own denial.

Yeah, but that's not an exhaustive list.

Well, just so we're clear, you did tweet it.

But it's not an exhaustive... Well, you said-

Yeah, but just five seconds ago. You should concede

... you said I only said this one thing

and said that that was overwhelming,

actually.

That's not what I said.

It is. You can even pull your own clip.

Patrick, did I say that?

Andrew is now saying Candace said that he only said one

thing, while she claims she said there

were five things he considered

overwhelming evidence that Tyler Robinson was guilty.

Let's look back and see who's right.

One.

This never happened.

You, you... Can we get a fact check on that?

You can fa- yeah, fact check it.

Can we pull up his tweet where he goes over the four?

I didn't, it... I didn't say that's what convinced me.

When you, you actually didn't say it's what

convinced me.

Right.

But you said this is the evidence that you found to be overwhelming,

and you, you

named, I believe, actually five things. I think you said it was his car.

Uh, you said it was-

Well, there's multitudes of things that I find to be compelling evidence

... you just said you didn't say it, so we're gonna get a fact check on that.

You did.

Sure. Go ahead.

Um, you said the-

This is exactly what led up to the moment where they read Andrew's

post out loud. Now, will he concede or will he

run away?

Ca- can you, can you fact check if that was said or not?

I did not hear her say this. So the thing is funny here is, like,

we still aren't

getting to any of these inferences.

So these, this-

Why are, why are you pivoting?

So the... Well, I'm not.

But just say you were wrong.

I'm gonna-

It's cool to just say, "I was wrong." I just said-

I was sa- I'm not wrong. So back to the tweet,

the tweet aspect here, it was really

funny. That's not an exhaustive list of why I

find it overwhelming.

I didn't say it was exhaustive. I just said you said it.

And, and on top of... Well, no, you didn't.

You said that I only said this one thing, and then said based on that it's over.

Well, I didn't. You didn't mention that I mentioned the screwdriver, DNA,

all these

other things. You never mentioned any of that.

So, no, you're actually incorrect there.

But on top of-

You named, I believe, actually five things I-

... that, moving over to the actual evidence itself.

You, you... Are you, are you, uh-

Yes, I'm okay. Anyway, back to the evidence itself.

I wasn't asking if you're okay.

Yes, I'm fine.

Actually, I'm glad you're asserting that you're okay.

But back-

I wasn't, I wasn't worried about your health

... but back to this

... I'm just saying that I just said you tweeted this.

Mm-hmm.

You said, "No, I didn't." We got a fact check,

and now you're, like, just gonna

gaslight me and pretend that I said-

There's no gaslighting

... it wasn't exhaustiv- I never said that.

I just said you did say this.

There's zero gaslighting.

I didn't say you couldn't have said more.

Yeah.

But I would like to address the, what you said in that tweet.

I mean, this is your time. If this is how you wanna spend it interrogating my

position, you can do it that way.

At this point, instead of conceding he was wrong and that he did in

fact list those things as overwhelming evidence, he sacrifices his

credibility trying to protect his pride, resulting in him

losing both as he suddenly finds renewed interest in

other details of the case just to pivot away from this embarrassing

moment.

I'm just addressing what you s- asserted-

Mm-hmm

... on your Twitter was, like, the hard evidence

that convinced you it was

overwhelming. That's literally your debate claim.

No, that's not what you said.

That's not actually, in fact, what happened in that exchange.

I was here for it.

So were we, Andrew. So were we.