Wild Mother - the online alias of a woman called Desirée - lives in the mountains of Colorado, where she posts videos to 80,000 followers about holistic wellness and bringing up her little girl. She wants Donald Trump to win the presidential election.

About 70 miles north in the suburbs of Denver is Camille, a passionate supporter of racial and gender equality who lives with a gaggle of rescue dogs and has voted Democrat for the past 15 years.

The two women are poles apart politically - but they both believe assassination attempts against Mr Trump were staged.

Their views on the shooting in July and the apparent foiled plot earlier this month were shaped by different social media posts pushed to their feeds, they both say.

I travelled to Colorado - which became a hotbed of conspiracy theories about the 2020 election being stolen - for the BBC Radio 4 podcast Why Do You Hate Me? USA. I wanted to understand why these evidence-free staged assassination theories seemed to have spread so far across the political spectrum and the consequences for people like Camille and Wild Mother.


🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

84 points
*

Wild Mother - the online alias of a woman called Desirée - lives in the mountains of Colorado, where she posts videos to 80,000 followers about holistic wellness and bringing up her little girl. She wants Donald Trump to win the presidential election.

Bingo! That’s all my squares filled for Wackadoodle Bingo

  • Influencer
  • Holistic Wellness
  • free space
  • Disseminating personal info of offspring
  • Donald sycophant
permalink
report
reply
8 points

Can we add stupid ass hippie name to the list?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

A hippie name would be Moon or Dweezil. Desirée is a pretty normal name for folks in the boonies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Zappa was no hippy

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Maybe my concept for boonies named is too influenced by Irish-Scots and more archaic Anglo names.

permalink
report
parent
reply
68 points

Already sceptical that something did not add up, Camille turned to X for more answers.

sigh

permalink
report
reply
22 points

I have the same quote in my clipboard. Anyone turning to Twitter for answers deserves the answers they find.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Ok, but we’re trapped on the boat with them. What have we done to deserve them?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

We’ve failed to beat the stupid out of them. That’s what we get for being a nominally civilized society.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

What’s wrong, is that not how you “do research”?

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

“Hey, let’s talk to two people whose only qualifications are a shameless willingness to post whatever crazy shit enters their skulls about their conspiracy theories.”

“Should we also talk to ballistics experts and mental health professionals to get a sense of how reasonable it is to think that these plans were staged?”

“Too expensive, I’m already flying first class and staying in five star accommodations in Denver.”

permalink
report
reply
6 points
*

The article isn’t focused on questioning the expertise of ballistic experts or debating whether events were staged. Instead, it assumes that any reasonable reader isn’t a conspiracy theorist. Surely you know that?

The real focus is on the spread and impact of conspiracy theories. The headline highlights a specific example where individuals from two different political backgrounds and towns arrived at the same conspiratorial conclusion, despite receiving information from entirely different sources and completely different justifications.

If your aim is to understand how conspiracy theorists—an increasingly widespread group—come to adopt and believe these theories through their media consumption, then these individuals are entirely appropriate subjects for interviews.

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

I honestly wouldn’t put it past him to fake an assassination attempt to get attention.

permalink
report
reply
42 points

I wouldn’t either. What I would find doubtful is him trusting in the marksmanship of that rando kid that tried at his outdoor rally, to miss instead of accidentally tagging him.

The second guy just generally reeks of crazy dude.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

The part that gets me is how utterly unbelievable it is that the Secret Service did not secure a nearby roof with a clear line of site to where Trump would be speaking and then allowed a kid with a rifle to climb up there during the speech and they didn’t notice? Cops noticed. Audience members noticed. But the Secret Service didn’t? They just didn’t notice a huge gaping hole in their defenses while guarding a former president and current candidate? I know the saying is that you shouldn’t ascribe to malevolence what can be adequately explained by incompetence, but come on. Incompetence just cannot do this kind of heave lifting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I mean… the Secret Service hasn’t exactly been exuding competence these past few years…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

They frankly don’t have the manpower to secure every rooftop, that’s not a reasonable expectation. He was spotted earlier on the roof supposedly, but they can’t simply start shooting at every guy on a roof. A guy on a roof at a public gathering is not a confirmed threat.

Now if they saw his rifle because he had lifted it, instead of keeping it laid down, that would look suspicious to me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

He could have told someone to do it, and then completely forgot about the entire thing. He doesn’t need to be told the details.

But I think only him getting shot it the ear was fake. That’s a perfect spur of the moment thing to act like a victim.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

A really minor grazing could draw blood as seemed to happen at the first attempt, but heal within several days, which explains all the evidence I’ve seen.

Dramatically exaggerating a minor wound to maximize the benefit to him seems exactly what Trump would do in that situation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

That’s operating under the assumption that Trump was actually shot and it wasn’t just a blood pack. His ear looked perfectly normal a few days later.

Plus there’s the fact that he was spotted by security with his rifle like 20 minutes before he started shooting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Spotted earlier with a rangefinder, not a rifle. You also wouldn’t need a big chunk of your ear missing or something to make a little bit of blood splatter. A graze could do it, and could easily be covered up a day later by some makeup or his usual orange bodypaint.

The evidence just isn’t very convincing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

I don’t think Trump and his team are competent enough to do that in an untraceable way, without getting caught. That would require reaching out to a bunch of folks anonymously, KGB-style, and bringing them all along until one or two decide to just do the thing already.

I wonder who could pull that off?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

/conspiracy-hat

Putin is getting the mentally unstable to commit fake assisnation attempts on Trump.

/rational-hat

Trump has just made people that are prone to poor rational thinking and emotional outbursts ravenous for some sort of internal war to begin. His continued rileing of his base and supporters on fictional doomsdays approaching has finally gotten people that are on edge to finally toppled off that edge and commit their crimes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

He’s the type, but I also think of the reichstag fire. Fascists don’t need to fake attacks against them, they need to call the shot then continue escalating at a reasonable pace. Either they get attacked and can clamp down or they just walk their way into what they wanted.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Not even trump is dumb enough to order his ear to be shot with öive rounds.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

The assumption would be that Trump was never actually shot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

What kind of a bizzaro story is that. Two nutjob online influencers have an opinion.

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 9.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 213K

    Comments