People can have room for more than one opinion at the same time

Apparently not.

“Why are people eager to litigate this incident?”

nobody stans […] abusers

Yes, that’s the motivation i’m pointing to.

I would actually really like for someone from Hasan’s followers to try to explain why this post is not factually solid

To what end? Honestly - setting aside the forensic analysis you’ve compiled for a second - what’s the point of spending so much time on litigating the details of this interaction?

Anyone who watches this person regularly aren’t going to judge his character on the one clip - that’s probably why you feel so frustrated by their ambivalence. Let alone the spurious conclusions you’re so eager to draw from it.

Which claim? That his dog wears a shock collar? That he used it during a stream? Or that (granting the two previous claims) this stands as evidence that he abuses his dog?

I’m far more interested in why some people are so eager to litigate a political commentator’s relationship with his dog when the bulk of his commentary is pointed at western-backed genocidal apartheid states.

I haven’t spent a single comment debunking anything in this story.

It also doesn’t make the conclusion of abuse any less spurious.

No, I mean the guy in this video.

You should know that this guy is a Palestinian genocide denier.