You can argue with them but it doesn't do any good! They can't even keep track of their own claims. For example, here the Brothers Dumb have claimed Oswald didn't have a pistol at all but then sometimes they claim he did but they suggest it was not the same one in evidence later but then they claim even the "planted" pistol can't be connected to the Tippit murder. So why plant it if it doesn't link Oswald to the crime? But they still won't admit to being CTers while suggesting all this fakery of the evidence. Who and why all this evidence was being planted to frame Oswald is just left to our imagination. Round and round it goes down the rabbit hole. They are just playing the endless contrarians.
For example, here the Brothers Dumb have claimed Oswald didn't have a pistol at all If you childish name calling refers to me, your "example" is a pretty stupid and dishonest one, because I have never claimed Oswald didn't have a pistol at the Texas Theater.
they suggest it was not the same one in evidence later but then they claim even the "planted" pistol can't be connected to the Tippit murder. I'm not sure that you are even sure what it is you are claiming here, but it most certainly isn't the actual truth. I have stated that the revolver now in evidence as CE 143 was not presented to the evidence locker - as it should have been - when Oswald was brought into the station, despite the fact that the officer who allegedly carried it was in the same car as Oswald. Instead, that same officer produced a revolver to some officers at the DPD lunchroom some two hours later and claimed it was the revolver taken from Oswald. He then had those officers initial the revolver before it was given to the evidence locker. That's factual information showing a highly questionable chain of custody.
