If you call me names, if you try and belittle my intelligence, it only exposes your own weakness to not be able to engage with the ideas and respond directly.
If anyone wants to actually show their intelligence I ask you to respond directly to the point below - if you don't, if you continue with these ad hominems all it does it continue to reinforce that you don't have the ability to.
You can see the problem you have which is that the only way to argue the shooter does not have left-wing ideologies is to:
1. Suggest the information BBC, CNN and others is inaccurate (which I agree we may find out that it IS inaccurate in time, so we need to be open to this), or if it does end up being true
2. Argue that someone who:
a) BBC: Said "Charlie Kirk is full of hate and spreads Hate"
b) BBC: uses left-wing symbolism (e.g. the anti-fascist lyrics on the bullet-casing)
c) BBC: has a transgender parter
d) CNN: colleague says the shooter does not like Trump or Kirk
e) [Alleged]: shoots someone in the neck who is critical of transgender issues
is more likely to be a 'right-wing conservative' than be ideologically left. I think you will find it very difficult to argue coherently, which is why you haven't attempted to this.
Let's assume points a, b, c, d, e are true. For the sake of argument, if we accept these are true how can you not see that it's almost impossible to make a conclusion that the shooter was ideologically right?
So far, only one person has actually attempted to respond to this, and they took the path of 1). However, unsuccessfully because they used the WSJ example of information that was retracted. This does not contradict the information reported by the BBC and CNN.
We have to call a spade a spade. This does not mean that left-wing ideology is inherently bad (on the contrary, I actually think it's generally GOOD until you all take it too far) or that trans people are to blame. Far from it, all it means is that the ideological motivations of the shooter were extreme left-wing. We need to recognise the problem and radicalisation that is taking place before we can solve it.
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.