I looked through some of their comments here, and I'm about 90% convinced that they're trying to make everyone here look like a bunch of ignorant and violent nut jobs.

I would not be surprised at all to find some reddit board that has screen grabs of their most extreme stances, and using it to cast us in a bad light.

Just some of their comments that seem problematic:

I'm not so sure. So much of the constitution is inherently tainted by immorality, secularism, demonocratocray, communism, or litreal Satanism, that it has to go. Why is the constitution a sacred cow? If Trump, or God, or Nation, or Guns were in conflict with it, I'd pick them

Exactly. Voting against Trump, or even simply not voting for Trump, is treason. Treason is a felony which removes the right to vote; therefore- The Only Legal Vote is a Trump Vote

In the future American Patriotic Republic, we will smash Communism by: Land will be recognised as sacred, and will be held by the We the People. Basic resources will be held in common and distributed to those of the We the People as they need them. Huge Communist corporations will be broken up and their assets given to the We the People

My church has formed a militia, we are patrolling the streets looking for animal eaters. It is the duty of every patriot to wage war against them. If you are able bodied, there is no excuse.

The UK has been communist for many centuries. Enough of this... replace it with the dictatorship of the We the People

Just about everyone involved in film, TV, or music over the past 70 years or so should be heading for the gallows... we've had enough of this persecution. And you can be damn sure that free speech will reign after that... every single bit of media thereafter will pass on Trump's teachings or face the consequences

This is a complete farce. Why are we going through the charade of voting again? Trump has already been made President by annointment... If the shooting war starts, the shooting war starts.... It probably has to be done by milita, and so be it... in many ways that's better.

That's just incorrect. If you win by terrorism, you win. You are right to have faith in the White Hats, but that is because whatever they do is right, because it is right, because they did it. It doesn't matter what they do or how to do it, the goal is to win at all costs. Is it legal right now to execute paeDoS in the streets? No! Should it be? Yes! Will it be? Yes! Do you see the contradiciton in what you're saying now? It is not a case of shortcuts, but handing out to the evildoers what they deserve. Which on this occasion just happens to be exploding cell phones 😆😂🤣😆😂🤣😆😂🤣!

And it just goes on and on, with some novella type posts full of stream of consciousness things.

So...yeah. I'm not sure which is worse. This person working so hard to cast us in the worst light possible...or this person being serious and goes on to do something horrible enough to draw public attention on themselves, and then possibly being linked to whatever it is they might do.

Either way, it's not good.

Edited to add more of their posts

No anti-Trump voting shall be allowed to vote in the coming National State which will be formed out of our New Idea. As a matter of fact, the idea of voting may not even exist in the New Government. The means of it’s coming into manifestation will determine whether or not such a process will be necessary, as the less procedures – perversely called “rights”- left over from demonocracy, the better. Voting is a process easily corrupted as witnessed in today’s “elections” of those belonging to the two hands with one mind behind them.

No anti-Trump voting shall be allowed to vote in the coming National State which will be formed out of our New Idea. As a matter of fact, the idea of voting may not even exist in the New Government. The means of it’s coming into manifestation will determine whether or not such a process will be necessary, as the less procedures – perversely called “rights”- left over from demonocracy, the better. Voting is a process easily corrupted as witnessed in today’s “elections” of those belonging to the two hands with one mind behind them.

Speed limits suppress our freedom. It doesn't make any different if they're "sensible" or not, they're still government imposed regulation like the COVID gag ragfaces. If I feel like going 100mph through a residential zone, that's MY RIGHT. I will not comply, and I haven't stopped speeding since I awoke in the 1990s.Also:I will not obey stop signs/traffic lights. I will not get a licence. I will not get insurance. I will not stay in my lane. I will not wear a seatbelt. I will not use my signals. I will not pay for gas (it's an illegal tax) I will not obey road closures I will overtake whenever I feel like it I will honk whenever I want I will brakecheck I will drink if I want to I will tailgate I will park where I like etc And the best bit is, since I didn't violate anyelses God given rights, none of my warrants are lawful :-D of course, I'm persecuted for it, but that's how you know you're right...

Of course not, I don't trust either. I'm talking about the only constitutional way to vote or count votes. Legally counting votes is demonstrably impossible (and has never worked) which is why we should move away from elections as a source of power

It'll never be enough evidence for these people... a single allegation of illegal voting should be enough to ban them from voting for life, or decerify a whole state...it's that serious

The wealthy elite profit from the communist global financial system. To destroy communism, root and branch, a class awareness must be developed, worldwide, and the elites liquidated, with their assets divided among We the People

Zuckerberg, like all billionaires, is a Communist.

Their account is only 20 days old.

That's such a liberal nonsense! Correlation litreally always implies causation (your post from 11 hours ago)

Correlation does not imply causation (your post from 5 minutes ago)

So...which is it?

Edited to add:

Or are you saying that you think my point was that correlation does not imply causation?

If that is what you're saying, then you've missed my point.

I am pointing out the word imply is important here. It does not mean "prove". It means "to strongly suggest the truth or existence of something."

I'm pointing out that people who are in favor of childhood vaccinations are just as able to apply causation/correlation arguments as we can.

Implying something is not proving that it is a fact.