[hitchwolf]

Most of you are jumping to irrational conclusions again, like you have for most of this story.

It is indeed a common tactic for a lawyer to tell their client to walk a statement such as the one the mother made back. I am almost positive that is what is occurring here. She’s going to have to give a deposition under oath that she thought her son was insane based on the statements she provided ABC. Of course her lawyer would tell her to attempt to change the initial version.

Although ABC is a scumbag organization, I doubt they twisted her words in this case.

Sheesh, not everything is a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy. Being paranoid about literally everything in the world is no good for your health.

[MinuteGal]

I agree with your assessment. Not matter WHAT she was alluding to in her initial statement to ABC, there's no doubt that the public defenders have swooped down on her and told her to "clarify" the statement as it can be construed as harmful to her son....and also to clear it up if and when she ever goes under oath.

The mother has an "agenda" (a natural instinct to protect her son), ABC has an agenda (a natural MSM instinct to destroy the conservative movement), the public defenders have an agenda (to protect their client).......leaving only the agenda of the perp which is as yet unknown.

Leni