Uploaded August 2026 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
Patrick Bet-David pushes back on Candace Owens’ claim that there is a “0% chance” the accused shooter was responsible, arguing that such certainty requires stronger evidence. He points to the suspect’s family, reported statements surrounding the case, and other circumstances as reasons he remains unconvinced by the alternative theory. PBD’s position is straightforward: if new evidence proves otherwise, he is open to it—but speculation alone is not enough.
Patrick Bet-David pushes back on Candace Owens’ claim that there is a “0% chance” the accused shooter was responsible, arguing that such certainty requires stronger evidence. He points to the suspect’s family, reported statements surrounding the case, and other circumstances as reasons he remains unconvinced by the alternative theory. PBD’s position is straightforward: if new evidence proves otherwise, he is open to it—but speculation alone is not enough.
