Again: this list is from the “Latham v. The 1953 Trust" case that was opened August 31, 2020, and dismissed Sep 25, 2020 - it was a failed lawsuit against Epstein's estate from LAST YEAR. This list it NOT from the current Ghislaine case...
We've all been fooled more than once. Usually it doesn't take much to verify something, and every time I was burned was when I failed to do that.
That's one thing I like about a site like this. You can ask a question or float a topic to find out more about it. Or learn from other people's responses.
I don't even know who most of them are. Over the last 4 years I've watch and dismissed a couple dozen who were linked in various places as having the "hot take" on Q or what's coming soon. Most of the time now, it's like 'oh, that guy'.
Why is it that they all feel the need to waste 20 minutes covering 20 seconds of information on the same topic? Very few, like IPOT, actually go in depth and do any real research on the subject. If nothing else, give us a little history to put things into context.
5.55 Million subscribers. Puts out unvetted, unresearched story for all 5.55 Million to see. It took me TWO MINUTES when I first saw this report, to confirm that this report was unrelated to Maxwell's present case. If Crowder is unable to spend TWO MINUTES to verify what he's spreading to millions of people, he's not worth following.
I guess you never learned what "be careful who you follow" meant?
We're not talking "theory." We're talking about sourced information. I could be wrong saying that this country will be saved - but it is sheer negligence or mal-intent if I put out a fake Trump statement to back up my point.
In the end, our adversary is the "great deceiver". None of us in the GAW community should be surprised to find that many are fooled. We shouldn't be surprised to find, as individuals and as a community, that we may still be fooled by some things to this day. I say, hold any narrative you are presented with loosely no matter who offers it. And yet, I trust (and verify) the plan and I enjoy the show.
Again: this list is from the “Latham v. The 1953 Trust" case that was opened August 31, 2020, and dismissed Sep 25, 2020 - it was a failed lawsuit against Epstein's estate from LAST YEAR. This list it NOT from the current Ghislaine case...
Discernment is crucial.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuqpXHhM2nc
We've all been fooled more than once. Usually it doesn't take much to verify something, and every time I was burned was when I failed to do that.
That's one thing I like about a site like this. You can ask a question or float a topic to find out more about it. Or learn from other people's responses.
Curious enough though people on that list are falling and the details of the case give you a glimpse into how powerful their network is.
If you watch the Crowder video, he clearly states that this list is from a previously dismissed court case. Mind changed, oh gullible one?
This is why I do not care about Crowder, or most mainstream "conservative" personalities.
Whether or not they are stupid or compromised, I still disregard all.
I don't even know who most of them are. Over the last 4 years I've watch and dismissed a couple dozen who were linked in various places as having the "hot take" on Q or what's coming soon. Most of the time now, it's like 'oh, that guy'.
Why is it that they all feel the need to waste 20 minutes covering 20 seconds of information on the same topic? Very few, like IPOT, actually go in depth and do any real research on the subject. If nothing else, give us a little history to put things into context.
So no one can ever make a mistake? You've never made a mistake?
The show isn't back on until Monday, when he'll most likely issue a correction... you know, the way he usually handles errors.
5.55 Million subscribers. Puts out unvetted, unresearched story for all 5.55 Million to see. It took me TWO MINUTES when I first saw this report, to confirm that this report was unrelated to Maxwell's present case. If Crowder is unable to spend TWO MINUTES to verify what he's spreading to millions of people, he's not worth following.
I guess you never learned what "be careful who you follow" meant?
We're not talking "theory." We're talking about sourced information. I could be wrong saying that this country will be saved - but it is sheer negligence or mal-intent if I put out a fake Trump statement to back up my point.
So that's a yes, you never make a mistake. Got it!
Don't put words in my mouth, pussy.
Ol, Internet Tough Guy Who Is Perfect and Flawless.
I am imperfect, but thank you for using yourself as a basis of comparison to demonstrate the opposite. Now seethe elsewhere, vicious Crowder cunt.
In the end, our adversary is the "great deceiver". None of us in the GAW community should be surprised to find that many are fooled. We shouldn't be surprised to find, as individuals and as a community, that we may still be fooled by some things to this day. I say, hold any narrative you are presented with loosely no matter who offers it. And yet, I trust (and verify) the plan and I enjoy the show.
a failed lawsuits does NOT mean they weren't involved, that's just idiotic thinking.
ty for some the courts are never bought off