Okay. We have established there are multiple pictures of Durham to choose from. If they "seem fake", the burden lies upon you to prove they are fake. They've always been there.
If that's not enough for you, here is the New York Times captioning a picture, from his swearing in back in 2018, in an article from this year.
The burden of proof is literally on you and your feelings, fren. May the odds be forever in your favor.
Multiple. Less than one handful. The burden of proof on me is just as big of a burden on you. I didn't claim the photos were fake. They just seem suspect. The same way every other MSM interview looks like green screen CGI garbage.
Durham is an elusive enigma. He's indicting now and these characters now have to show up in a specific location for court yet a photo or video of Durham hasn't been captured by anyone. Like the loch Ness monster.
Let me make this very easy for you then:
Okay. We have established there are multiple pictures of Durham to choose from. If they "seem fake", the burden lies upon you to prove they are fake. They've always been there.
If that's not enough for you, here is the New York Times captioning a picture, from his swearing in back in 2018, in an article from this year.
The burden of proof is literally on you and your feelings, fren. May the odds be forever in your favor.
Multiple. Less than one handful. The burden of proof on me is just as big of a burden on you. I didn't claim the photos were fake. They just seem suspect. The same way every other MSM interview looks like green screen CGI garbage.
Durham is an elusive enigma. He's indicting now and these characters now have to show up in a specific location for court yet a photo or video of Durham hasn't been captured by anyone. Like the loch Ness monster.
Okay. They seem real to me.
/discussion