> It is a theory with no evidence supporting it other than that coincidence, not a refuted or a false theory.
Key elements of it were false, though. The conspiracy theory largely focused on his “assassination” by being shot in the head, when in reality he was shot twice in the back. There was also physical evidence of an altercation, suggesting robbery. The idea that a trained assassin would first try to fistfight the target and then shoot is pretty absurd.
Later, the public found out that hackers tied to Russian intelligence hacked the DNC, which further refuted the conspiracy theory. There’s a lot out there that fundamentally contradicts the conspiracy theory.
Key elements of it were false, though. The conspiracy theory largely focused on his “assassination” by being shot in the head, when in reality he was shot twice in the back. There was also physical evidence of an altercation, suggesting robbery. The idea that a trained assassin would first try to fistfight the target and then shoot is pretty absurd.
Later, the public found out that hackers tied to Russian intelligence hacked the DNC, which further refuted the conspiracy theory. There’s a lot out there that fundamentally contradicts the conspiracy theory.