Your feedback is very important to me. 🎉 It is always rewarding to see my friends enjoying the program.

I am available and actively responding to all new investment requests. Send your request now and I will respond as soon as possible ✍

Your investing journey can be life-changing with the right guidance. Follow my tips and guidelines and watch your portfolio grow with confidence and peace of mind. Trust me, if you haven't invested yet, you're missing out.

Start investing today ✅️

https://t.me/DataRepublicanofficiaI

To those who say we shouldn't believe the "official narrative":

The evidence for who killed Charlie Kirk is overwhelming.

But you're right that something is wrong here. It's just not what Candace is selling you.

Seven "bridge-building" organizations assembled on a conference call within two hours of the shooting. They activated, because UVU was already their campus, and Charlie Kirk's death was the crisis they needed to advance a social credit scoring system, grow their membership, and unlock funding they'd been chasing for years.

That's the coordination you've been looking for, right here in this thread.

🧵🔥 THE MOVE: The Framework Candace Owens Uses to Train Her Audience to Ignore Evidence 🧵

Tyler Robinson left a handwritten confession note under his keyboard for his roommate. He sent a text first: "Drop what you are doing, look under my keyboard."

The response from Candace's audience: "Where's the metadata on those texts?”

The metadata exists. Search Warrant No. 3217131, Page 7: a warrant was obtained for Lance Twiggs' cellphone. The Statewide Information Analysis Center (SIAC) provided Apple ID information for both accounts on the device. FBI investigators reviewed the data. The warrant covers iMessages, FaceTime and call history, photographs, videos, location history, websites visited, email, and browsing history.

But that answer won't matter to anyone who asked. And the reason it won't matter is the whole point of this thread.

Here's how THE MOVE works:
- Candace finds something about the case that hasn't been publicly reported.
- She treats the absence of public reporting as the absence of investigation.
- She fills the gap with a theory.
- When the evidence eventually surfaces, she doesn't engage with it... she finds a new procedural question about the evidence itself.
- And that question does the same job the old one did: allows her audience to keep scrolling.

Below are six videos. One pattern. Once you see THE MOVE, you'll catch it every time she opens her mouth on this case.

As always, patience as I pull together the thread. 👇

Candace: "Does he even exist? I think it's a fair question. Is he just an AI app?"

THE MOVE: Surveillance photos aren't perfectly clear, ergo they're not Tyler Robinson.

REALITY: He walked up to the TPUSA table and talked to staff. Four visits on camera. DNA at 30 quintillion to 1. DNA on the rifle towel. Turned himself in by name with his parents. One blurry stairwell frame let her skip past all of it.

Thanks to @SKDoubleDub33 for working with audio and music on these videos.

For anyone in Candace's audience still reading:

You've been trained to treat "I have a question about this evidence" as equivalent to "this evidence has been debunked." Those aren't the same. A question about metadata doesn't cancel a handwritten confession.

Evidence accumulates. That's how analysis works. You start with a question, you gather data, and when the data answers the question, you update. Sometimes the answer isn't what you wanted. You update anyway. That's the price of being serious.

What Candace does is the opposite. Evidence arrives and gets replaced by a new question. The new question becomes a substitute to make the previous answer not count and gives fresh license to invent conspiracy theories.

"He wasn't there." DNA says he was. "OK but the DNA could be planted." By whom? "The feds." Where's the evidence of federal involvement? "Why won't they release the metadata?"

Every answer generates a new question. Every new question replaces the last answer. At no point in this sequence did anyone say: "That changes what I think.” Israel is always blamed, and Candace is always right.

"Fedslop" doesn't mean fake. It means: evidence I have been trained to not engage with. First you reject the evidence. Then you reject the question. Then you reject the people who read the evidence out loud. The last move when you have no more argument: calling people you disagree with Jews or Zionists so you can keep rejecting reality and clinging to that Israel killed Charlie.

Data-driven means the data can tell you you're wrong. If you’ve built a system where everything is just fresh opportunity to poke more holes, you're not doing analysis or critical thinking. You’re simply a fool professing oneself to be wise.

THREAD END.

Can anyone explain to me why that there were multiple comments talking about a splash in the lake behind a deer that I only brought up as a hypothetical?

Hello Mr. Dugin,

You blame Israel for Lindsey Graham's death before his body was cold.

No evidence cited. Just a Mossad conspiracy theory, hours after a senator's heart stopped.

Ten months ago, you said Charlie Kirk was killed by Ukraine. You compared him to your daughter. You called him a "warrior of word and spirit." You said "at least the orders were given by the same people."

Kirk: Ukraine did it. Graham: Mossad did it. Two different actors, two different motives, same country, ten months apart. You never address the contradiction because there's nothing to address. Blame is assigned by the victim's politics. Kirk was MAGA: blame MAGA's enemies. Graham was a neocon: blame Israel.

The common thread: whatever undermines America.

You have no undergraduate degree. You enrolled at the Moscow Aviation Institute and were expelled. Your sole advanced degree is a Candidate of Sciences from Rostov State University... a regional school, awarded at 38, with no documented academic pathway beneath it. But you're confident Mossad killed Lindsey Graham.

You lectured at the General Staff Academy from 1992 to 1995. No salary, no badge, no formal appointment... you walked in through Alexander Prokhanov's connection to General Rodionov during the year the Russian military lost its entire ideological framework overnight. As Gleb Pavlovsky said: "He made a huge impression on people who never read any books."

That's the most accurate description of your career anyone has ever written.

In 1997, you published Foundations of Geopolitics. You prescribed the dismemberment of China... support Tibetan independence, arm Uyghur separatism, create an independent Manchuria. China was "Russia's most dangerous geopolitical neighbor." Then China became Russia's most important ally. You accepted a Senior Fellow appointment at Fudan University, in the country whose fragmentation you designed. When Bannon pressed you on this in Rome in 2018, you went silent for over a minute. You've never publicly reconciled this. But you know who killed Lindsey Graham.

The "Putin's Brain" label was coined in Foreign Affairs in 2014 by Anton Barbashin and Hannah Thoburn. Thoburn worked at the Foreign Policy Initiative, the neocon think tank founded by Kristol, Kagan, and Senor as PNAC's successor. After Darya's death, Barbashin posted publicly: "Dugin was never Putin's brain. This was always a catch name." The co-author of the article that made you internationally famous called it clickbait. You've never corrected the label, because without it, you're not more than Substack.

You asked whether Candace Owens stopped World War III. You called Tucker Carlson "the number one journalist in the world." Every statement does the same thing: inflate your counterpart so the relationship with you seems proportionately significant. It's audience development with a philosophical accent.

And this is what all of it produced. A man with no degree, no Valdai invitation, no academic publisher, and no evidence... blaming Israel for a cardiac arrest before the body was cold.

The data says you are a small man made large by people who needed you to be large.

You blame Israel for Graham's death because that's what's left when you have no credentials, no evidence, and no access: the one accusation that never requires proof.

I had the honor of being the first person to read The Zizians. I could not put it down from the first page.

It is much more than a true crime book about transgender antifa. It is the story of a serial killing ring that went unpunished for years... and may still be ongoing.

The reason it went unpunished (and still is largely unpunished) is because solving it means indicting the institutions that let it happen. Judicial. Educational. News media. Big Tech. Activist networks. Effective altruism.

At every level, the system chose not to see what was in front of it... because seeing it meant seeing themselves.

Andy Ngo risked his life to uncover this story. Once he found it, he could not stop until it was told.

Preorder it.

When I gave @MrAndyNgo feedback on the book, I said it read like it was written by a man so haunted by the horrors he discovered, he could not stop until it was all investigated and written. And Andy said - this is exactly what it is.

Zizians aren’t crazy. That’s one of the most disturbing takeaways I had from the book. They are 140+ IQ folks who represented the logical endpoint of a secular morality.