Robby Wells Addresses Sandy Hook Conspiracy Theories

After reading Facebook comments from 2016 Independent presidential candidate Robby Wells’ press secretary suggesting the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School was a false flag operation aimed to bring about gun control, I sought out Wells’ opinion on the matter.

I messaged Wells on Facebook, pointedly asking, “What are your thoughts on the gun control conspiracy theories surrounding the Sandy Hook massacre?”  He responded with the following:

Let me begin by saying that my thoughts and prayers go out to the families of the victims of Sandy Hook Elementary School. A thorough investigation should be conducted to determine every detail that surrounds this heinous crime. Even though our hearts are broken because of this senseless crime, we must push forward to make sure that something like the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting does not ever happen again. The evil actions that occurred in the theater in Colorado, the mall in Oregon, and the elementary school in Newtown, CT have one thing in common. Each of these settings were considered a “No Weapons Zone.” This infringes upon law abiding citizens Second Amendment rights. These types of environments are prime targets for psychopathic criminals. This must change by removing the infringements of bearing arms by law abiding citizens.

After advising Wells that I had asked because of his press secretary’s comments and that I wanted to know if he agreed with the view expressed, he wrote:

A full and thorough investigation should be done. In any tragic case, no stones should be left unturned. The families of the victims deserve answers.

Wells is the former head football coach for Savannah State University. He unsuccessfully ran for the 2012 presidential nominations of the Reform and Constitution parties, and announced his 2016 candidacy this past November.

40 thoughts on “Robby Wells Addresses Sandy Hook Conspiracy Theories

  1. Jill Pyeatt

    I don’t know what happened at Sandy Hook, but I’m pleased at how many people immediately started asking questions. I’ve never understood why some people in my party, the LP, who know we’re lied to in the media about many things, somehow totally believe all of these sad stories. The reality is there were many eyewitnesses at Sandy Hook, the theater in Colorado, and the recent mosque shooting who insist there were more than one shooter. The official news stories in all three cases dismiss the early reports and just say it was a “lone wolf”. Good, healthy skepticsm is how most of us should view all news reports at this time. The media just says what they’re told to say.

  2. Andy

    Jill Pyeatt said: “I’ve never understood why some people in my party, the LP, who know we’re lied to in the media about many things, somehow totally believe all of these sad stories. ”

    This is because the Libertarian Party is filled with naive cowards. Not everyone in the party is a naive coward, but a disturbing number do fit this description. They fall into one of two categories:

    1) They think that they know it all and that everyone in the government is stupid, and since they believe that everyone in the government is stupid, they do not think that it is possible that they government could carry out any “conspiracies” because they are too stupid.

    2) They are afraid of looking “kooky” to their non-libertarian friends, family, associates, and every other non-libertarian in general.

    My responses to these reasons are as follows:

    1) While there are stupid people in government, not everyone in government is stupid, particularly at the higher levels. These people are not stupid, they are evil. They know exactly what they are doing, and if anyone is stupid, it is the libertarians who think that everyone in government is stupid. If everyone in government is stupid and all libertarians are so much smarter, we’d have a libertarian society right now. There is a big difference between being stupid and being evil.

    2) Libertarianism is not the mainstream in politics, so even taking moderate libertarian stances on issues puts one outside. A lot of people already consider libertarians to be “kooky” for wanting to legalize marijuana, or wanting to get the government out of Social Security, or wanting to pull the US military out of other countries, or advocating for the right of people to keep and bear arms, or etc… It is a documented fact that the government that we live under has lied to us on many occasions, and it is also a documented fact that the government we live under has engaged in false flag terrorism. Libertarians of all people should know this. There is nothing “kooky” about pointing out the historical fact that governments have engaged in false flag attacks, and there is nothing “kooky” about questioning inconsistencies in official government stories.

    I don’t know if the Sandy Hook shooting incident was another false flag attack or not, but I do know that there are some inconsistencies/unanswered questions in the story, and I also know that there are plenty of people in the government who’d like to disarm the regular population and only allow the police, the military, and other agents of the state to have guns. So given the inconsistencies/unanswered questions, and given the gun control agenda, I certainly think that it is reasonable to raise the question that this may have been another false flag, and to further investigate the incident.

  3. Jed Siple

    If y’all want to investigate conspiracy theories that almost never turn out to be true, that’s fine. I’ll focus on real problems, not made up ones. Is there a possibility that Sandy Hook was a conspiracy? Possibly. But given the track record of 9/11 conspiracy theories, moon landing conspiracy theories, JFK shooting conspiracy theories, Area 51 conspiracy theories, Holocaust conspiracy theories, etc., I think I’m safe in calling B.S. and moving on with my life. There are REAL problems and REAL government injustices.

  4. Jill Pyeatt

    JS: “If y’all want to investigate conspiracy theories that almost never turn out to be true, that’s fine.”

    That’s your choice–fine. I’ll continue to view the news with healthy skepticsm and ask questions when there are some. I think it’s important for the liberty and anti-war activists to see the larger picture. Yes, I DO believe there is a New World Order, and I do believe there are evil people who are desperately trying to force it on us. I’ll also suggest, Jed, that you google “Gulf of Tonkin”.

  5. Andy

    “Area 51 conspiracy theories,”

    I don’t know if there are space aliens at Area 51, or if it is just top secret air craft that the government doesn’t want the general public to know about, but it appears that there is an underground military base at Area 51 and that the government does not want the general public to know what is there.

    Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura: Area 51

  6. Wes Wagner

    I think one of the large elephants in the room is the drugs that most these shooters are on or alleged to have been on, and that the media is unwilling to investigate or touch that with a 10 foot pole because pharma companies are one of their last bastions of paid advertising.

  7. paulie

    WW @9 Good point. Also, the politicians get a lot of their campaign contributions from big pharma, and the media use a lot of government news sources, as well as getting some of their funding and regulatory help in staying on top of upstart competition from government, and the whole thing functions as a revolving door for money, jobs, connections and influence.

    Some may see that as a conspiracy theory in itself, but I just see it as one hand washing the other.

  8. Andy

    “5 Jed Siple // Jan 7, 2013 at 12:11 pm

    If y’all want to investigate conspiracy theories that almost never turn out to be true, that’s fine. I’ll focus on real problems, not made up ones.”

    Jed is displaying a classic defense mechanism. Lump all conspiracy theories that are not put out by the government together, and pretend that there is no truth to any of them, and then plug his ears and say that anyone that questions official government stories (which are really just conspiracy theories that are put out by government officials) is wasting their time.

    People like Jed think that questioning official government approved conspiracy theories makes one look “kooky” and he doesn’t want his neighbors to look down on him, plus it is really scary to question government approved stories and it takes up a lot of time and requires a lot of work to do any research or to engage in any independent thought, so it is easier to just plug your ears and believe whatever conspiracy theories the government tells us to believe.

  9. Jill Pyeatt

    I think Wes’ suggestion that these violent episodes are caused by heavy-duty drugs imposed on these young people is an excellent possiblity. This is one of the reasons to ASK QUESTIONS. I keep hearing that Adam Lanza was “mentally ill’ and, aside from the fact that anyone who would be involved in killing anyone except in self-defense is mentally unwell, the only thing I hear about Adam is that he was “on the autism spectrum”. Autism is NOT a mental illness-it’s an organic brain disability. Truly autistic people would not have the mental capacity to commit such a deed, nor the physical dexterity.

  10. Wes Wagner

    Andy @8

    I have not seen that particular video. I also suspect Area 51 is probably mostly decommissioned because it is not secret enough and probably was a hotbed of experimental aircraft at one time and probably less so now.

    Historically speaking we know certain truths after the fact… such as our first “stealth bomber” was stolen from a German hanger and was an experimental prototype that was designed to bomb New York City.

    We probably had our first stealth planes a short period of time after that, but only felt it wise to show them to the public decades later. This would seem a reasonable policy during the “cold war”.

    Even if we had a “secret fleet” of experimental aircraft, we would not abandon our more conventional fleet because that is just great payola to the military industrial complex and there are lots of jobs and contracts etc etc etc all associated with it. (why build one when you can have two at twice the price?)

    In general though our government has been historically bad at keeping secrets. Whether it is the intentional non-treatment/infection of African-American men to observe the progress of late stage syphilis, or murdering citizens in the Bay Area by spraying it with what was thought to be a harmless bacteria in order to study the potential dispersion pattern of biological weapons, the truth has a nasty habit of leaking out.

    I tend to find more of the fringe conspiracy theories as lacking merit when they are investigated in depth — but there is a common thread among all these conspiracy theories that turned out to be true — they frequently were done in small teams in a silo and although they were “authorized” .. typically the people giving the authorization were not fully aware of what they were authorizing

    That means that the conspiracies are not vast sweeping multi-tower grand conspiracies… as many people like to try to play them up to be.

  11. Jed Siple


    Yes, Gulf of Tonkin was one that did turn out to be true, a genuine lie by our government to initiate war with Vietnam. That’s why I use the qualifier “almost”.

    I’m not afraid of being called kooky, hell I already am. It’s just after SO many conspiracy theories turn out to be B.S., I’ve learned to just ignore them and focus on what we know to be true.

  12. Jed Siple

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying don’t question. I have questions too about psychotropic drugs, and whether or not there was a second shooter like some eyewitnesses say. All I’m saying is when specific conspiracy theories pop up with little to no basis on fact: it was a false flag operation, etc.; I ignore that stuff. Until the facts I see definitively point in that direction, I ain’t jumping to any such conclusions.

  13. paulie

    The default should be to always be skeptical both of unofficial conspiracy theories as well as the official narrative.

  14. Wes Wagner

    p @16

    I might suggest adding “Rationally” skeptical — aka generally engaging in formal logic and the scientific method and trying to not allow irrational paranoia to cause leaps in logic.

  15. Deran

    Conspiracies are always a pleasing way to explain much more complicated and multilayered events and backgrounds. Of course the CIA has carried out several conspiracies against Leftwing governments back during the cold war. But let’s consider; Gukf of Tonkin, the coups against the Iranian PM in the 50s, the overthrow of Arbenz in Guatemala and the coup agaisnt Allende, and even Diem. All the large scale conspiracies are always exposed at some point.

    Obama has never been as anti-firearms ars the Right would like to think. It just seems lame to try and avoid actual existing issues by claiming some black ops.

    The pharma thing seems a worthy line of investigation, but equally valid is a serious look at the decline of public mental health services. Which I realize libertarian capitalists aren’t into, but still, if we are to be serious, even those possibilities that don’t fit the ideological parameters are still valid to look into.

  16. Deran

    I watched video on Facebook. The problem with it is that it is all either second hand accounts or eye witnesses, and eye witnesses are notoriously unreliable, especially during some sort of horrific fast happening event. people are in a panic.

    The fellow allegedly wearing camp trousers and taken from the woods, in a situation like this, the police are going to secure anyone who might be a suspect in such an event.

    The video would be more reliable if it then contained any actual investigative reporting on any of those allegations: Man in the woods, a priest, shooter in camo pants, shooter in all black. All this is second hand or single eyewitnesses. The zapruder film is somewhat more credible because it is a film, rather than the recollections of panicked people and second hand hearsay.

    mental health care is probably a more reliable avenue of investigation.

  17. Jill Pyeatt

    My default position is to be skeptical of everything. I’m an equal-opportunity doubter. I have no idea why I’m this way, and I know that I’m more cynical than most of political friends, but, somehow, I got here.

    I certainly hope I’m wrong, and the country isn’t really in as bad shape as it appears to me. I can say the same thing for the Libertarian Party.

  18. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    Successful conspiracies –

    1) JFK killing – Oswald cannot have fired all shots nor created killing wound.
    2) RFK killing – more bullets fired than capacity of Sirhans weapon, fatal shot fired from behind and close enough to leave powder burns on head when Sirhan never close than 5 feet and never behind RFK.
    3) AIDS – a bioweapon constructed for genocide against ( primarily ) non-white people, particularly blacks.
    4) 9/11 – 2 towers hit by planes – 3 towers go down. Small hole at Pentagon swallows big plane; engines and all. 2 towers burn and totally destroyed – never happened before.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman Constitution Party of California

  19. Jill Pyeatt

    My goodness, Don, another area we agree–thanks for your contribution to the discussion.

  20. Austin Battenberg

    Don, I am not familiar with the AIDS conspiracy theory. Can you please provide a link or two that shows what your talking about? Honestly this is the first I’ve heard about it.

  21. paulie

    The thing about conspiracy theories…they are interesting, but I don’t want to make them central to my focus whether they are true or not. For me the important thing is the policy, for example: regardless of whether the Muslims, the Israelis, or the CIA “did” 9/11 I still want the US to stop warmongering and abridging civil liberties in the name of the war on terror. Regardless of whether Oswald acted alone or was a patsy, I still want to curtail the military-industrial and espionage complexes. I oppose victim disarmament regardless of whether the Sandy Hook conspiracy theories are correct. And so on.

    I can’t think of one of these theories that would change my opinion of any policy stance if it turns out to be definitely true or false.

    So, with all these issue battles to fight, I just don’t have a lot of time and energy to figure out which ones are true or argue about it with other people.

  22. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    Austin – A father/son team named Scott wrote ” AIDS – the crime beyond belief. Alos check out ” The Strecker Report.” There are numerous other authors but I have forgotten their names at the moment.

    Bottom line – the aids virus did/could not occur naturally. It has components which could only be combined via a laboratory.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman Constitution Party of California

  23. Andy

    Paulie: “I can’t think of one of these theories that would change my opinion of any policy stance if it turns out to be definitely true or false.”

    This may be so with you, but a lot of the population assumes that the government tells the truth, and then they make decisions about what to support based on information given to them by the government. If the government provides them with false information, then they will make decisions about issues which they may not have made otherwise.

    Very few people take the time to analyze things from a philosophical basis, and very few people are consistently in philosophy.

    I think that it is important to scrutinize everything that the government tells us and to look for inconsistencies and to search for answers to unanswered questions.

  24. marzak

    I’ve heard the first thing to fighting a virus is to isolate and identify it, and that this has not been done with H.I.V., that it has not been isolated. Does anyone here know about that?

  25. marzak

    Wikipedia says H.I.V. was isolated in 1982 by two seperate labs, some other dr. says it never was and would drink a beaker of H.I.V. because it’s not the cause of AIDS.
    People at the theater of the “batman” shooting say there was someone else with him, why don’t the police follow that,which is true?Popular Mechanics says the WTC collapsed from the top slamming into each progressive section, others say this is impossible, yet another says it’s all a divertion from the auctual perpetrators and their money trail ,where is the truth?Who can one believe?Should I just start going to church and not worry because there is nothing I can do about it and have a silly sticker on my car?

  26. Jill Pyeatt

    The problem for me is that I’m convinced we’ve been lied to on a grand scale re: 9/11, and now that makes me of skeptical of everything the government say.

    I’ve heard some people say that a secret that big will be exposed some day, but haven’t we almost hit 50 years on JFK’s assassination? One can also argue that the 9/11 secret really hasn’t been kept because so many facts keep coming out, and eyetness reports continue to be reported, so the secret is seeping out all over.

  27. No Difference

    Maybe the LP could fight for arming children with guns so they dont have to wait for a teacher to respond to a shooter. You guys could be advocating for a K-12 program in gun ownership, proper manners for wearing a gun with a CCP, understanding which states require the most thorough background checks, and maybe even some nice looking clothes for those young dudes and dudettes.

    Everyone armed, no more problems. Who is going to fuck with a 5 or 10 year old with a lethal weapon? Yep, that? what I said.

  28. Andy

    “No Difference // Jan 9, 2013 at 3:49 am

    Maybe the LP could fight for arming children with guns so they dont have to wait for a teacher to respond to a shooter. You guys could be advocating for a K-12 program in gun ownership, proper manners for wearing a gun with a CCP, understanding which states require the most thorough background checks, and maybe even some nice looking clothes for those young dudes and dudettes.

    Everyone armed, no more problems. Who is going to fuck with a 5 or 10 year old with a lethal weapon? Yep, that? what I said.”

    This may sound like a radical concept to a lot of people, but at one time in this country’s history, it was not uncommon for kids to own and carry guns. And guess what? Back in those days school shootings were unheard of, as were any of the other problems of today associated with the issue.

    This was not just back in the 1700’s or 1800’s either, it was well into the 1900’s. Here is one example:

    My father was a kid back in the 1950’s. He grew up in a major metropolitan area which now has strict gun control laws (and a lot more crime than it used to have). When he was around 12 he rode his bicycle to a pawn shop, went inside and purchased a rifle and a box of ammunition, he then walked out of the pawn shop with it, put the box of ammunition in a basket that was on the front of the bicycle, and then placed the rifle across the handle bars of the bicycle and rode home with it.

    Can you imagine if a 12 year old did that today? Somebody would probably call the police and a SWAT team would show up. The 12 year old would be arrested and placed in some kind of juvenile detention center and placed on psychiatric drugs (which ironically, many of these individuals who have gone on shooting sprees have been on psychiatric drugs). The media would hype the story about how a 12 year old was riding down the street on a bicycle with a rifle and was about to go on a killing spree, but that a vigilant citizen called the authorities and the brave police officers rushed to the scene and apprehended the 12 year old would be killer, thus saving livings.

    What did my father do with the rifle? Did he take it to school and start blowing away classmates and teachers? No. Did he use it to blow away rival gang members? No. Did he use it to rob people at gun point? No. He used the rifle for hunting and target practice. It was really not considered to be a big deal back then.

    My how things have changed in this country, and certainly not for the better in this case.

  29. Andy

    If anything, school shootings are an argument against compulsory school attendance, and government run schools in general for that matter. It should be no wonder that there are students who are miserable by being forced to attend schools. Add in some psych drugs, and should we really be surprised when some of them get a hold of guns and then go on a rampage? I think not.

    If there were no laws mandating that kids attend school they could drop out. This may sound like a radical concept, but it’s not like these kids are really learning anything anyway. It would be better for everyone if they just dropped out of school, this way they would not be a problem for everyone at the school. Wouldn’t you rather have them drop out of school than show up with a gun and start blowing fellow students and teachers away?

    Dropping out of school does not necessarily mean the end of their education. They could home school. If not home schooling then private tutoring would be an option. They could also attend another school that maybe they would like more because maybe they’d get along better with the teachers and students at another school than the one where they dropped out. Perhaps they could enter the workforce, maybe even join a guild of some type and learn a trade or business. If government schools were abolished there’d be a lot more options for people, therefore there would be far fewer kids who are stuck in a school where they are miserable. I bet that there would be a lot less school shootings if government schools were abolished and we had a free market in education.

  30. Starchild

    Andy @4, and Paulie @26 – Very good points; I agree with both of you. Hopefully that’s not being self-contradictory. I don’t think it is.

  31. bryan warrick

    This and other mass shooting of late are so full of holes, only a blind, head in sand, sheeple. Will believe the MSM. Riddle me this sheep, watch “Robbie Parker’s laughing video”, lanza was on a psychotropic drug call “fanapt” majoR side effects included. And our (now you see him, now you don’t) second shooter. All suicide bomber types are sent out with a handler. Can’t have these that know so much about their respective organizations. Chickening out. Even in Colorado’s shooting, questions about 2nd person were brought up. Facts say we the people have been lied to all our lives. The rest of the world laugh are how blind Americans are to facts.

  32. Gerald Posner

    I’ve heard some people say that a secret that big will be exposed some day, but haven’t we almost hit 50 years on JFK’s assassination?


  33. paulie

    And another thread with old comment(s) removed. Emailed IPR writers about this…

    Just noticed that someone – I believe Peter Orvetti – is deleting a lot of old comments and possibly some articles. They are being permanently deleted, not trashed.

    I *think* Peter is only removing his own comments, but

    A) I want to make sure no one else’s comments are being deleted unless they asked.

    B) Curious as to why, if I may ask?

    C) It makes past conversations seems disjointed if you do that. If possible, instead of erasing the comments completely, please erase the text of the comments but leave the comment itself as “comment deleted by author.” That way at least it is more readily obvious that something used to be there; so that if someone says e.g. LOL or I agree or BS or whatever the response was it is more clear that they are responding to the comment you pulled and not the one before it or whatever.

    D) For 2008-2013 threads pulling the comments completely throws off comment number references. If we ever restore a theme that has comment numbers (keeping fingers crossed here) we would have more disjointed references in past conversations.

    E) Saturn suggested using the wayback machine if someone wants to see what used to be there. But to do that you have to know that something is missing, which may be apparent some but not all of the time. In some past threads it may look like someone was responding to a different comment than what they actually responded to. And not everyone reading necessarily knows about the wayback machine (

    F) So again for these reasons…if you pull old comments…if possible please only pull the text of the comment rather than the comment itself

    G) If you decide to pull old articles as well, please don’t delete them completely. You can change them to be visible only to IPR writers. That way we can at least rescue old comments that we ourselves may have made on those old threads, transfer them to different threads or whatever.

    H) If the issue is that you don’t want your name associated with an article you posted in the past, it’s possible for us to change the IPR author’s name on an article. Let us know and we can change the article author’s name rather than pulling the whole article and all the comments it received – this would be greatly preferable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *