I always say the same thing, I don’t trust anyone to get my news for me, I go to the gov sites, the medical journals, the indictments, etc. I don’t want anyone reading something and telling me what it says.
I get most of my information by chasing down leads from GA.win or T_D.win or Gab. Also CFP and Revolver. None of that would make any sense to a normie though.
So I do go to mainstream news sites, but usually only if I'm verifying something I saw here or on T_D.
I listen to the person who is supposed to be the authority in charge.
If they ask further, I say I listen to direct Tweets, unedited video, and direct written statements with official seals.
Most importantly, I tell them that if anyone is making money in their effort to tell you the news, they are not to be trusted, because they will only say what will make them the most money.
Really simple.
This place is just one of many of my sources, but it is where I go to see everything being tied together. You don't have to mention your aggregates, just the sources.
Stick with common sense and bedrock points and you can't go wrong. Example, Force negates any argument. For if you must use force it means that your argument is not worthy of debate. There are many examples.
I respond simply that I go directly to sources, for example if the subject is the fake vaccines government data works, VAERS data for instance.
I also try to always mention that I prefer to visit subjects from various angles and sources, so as to develop a sense of the entirety. If CNN claims 'something' then the source they use is the one I seek, not CNN. When they refuse to have a source well, we know what that means.
For another example of what I mean, Fauci used to claim daily that he was science, that he was certain of all the insane things he claimed and no one else understood him correctly. So in refutation of his media claims we merely reference his own emails where he is proven to be a self-confessed murderer, liar, fraudster, Monster.
Short answer- I tell them I seek the original sources and compile data then ponder it well.
I always say the same thing, I don’t trust anyone to get my news for me, I go to the gov sites, the medical journals, the indictments, etc. I don’t want anyone reading something and telling me what it says.
From various sources. It’s not about where you get your info, it’s about whether have any critical thinking skills. Most liberals don’t.
I bomb them with links I find daily from my sources...mostly stuff i find here
I get most of my information by chasing down leads from GA.win or T_D.win or Gab. Also CFP and Revolver. None of that would make any sense to a normie though.
So I do go to mainstream news sites, but usually only if I'm verifying something I saw here or on T_D.
Easy, just find out what has been censored. Only the truth must be censored. Lies are easy to disprove.
My sources change all the time because of censorship.
I usually say "Straight from the horse's mouth."
They listen to spin doctors.
I listen to the person who is supposed to be the authority in charge.
If they ask further, I say I listen to direct Tweets, unedited video, and direct written statements with official seals.
Most importantly, I tell them that if anyone is making money in their effort to tell you the news, they are not to be trusted, because they will only say what will make them the most money.
Really simple.
This place is just one of many of my sources, but it is where I go to see everything being tied together. You don't have to mention your aggregates, just the sources.
Primary sources.
Disparate sources on the right, left and middle including mainstream media (with the understanding that they are all liars) and alternative media.
Everywhere
"Haven't you heard? people are the news now, legacy media killed itself by becoming the enemy of people"
Stick with common sense and bedrock points and you can't go wrong. Example, Force negates any argument. For if you must use force it means that your argument is not worthy of debate. There are many examples.
Answer: I research diverse sources of opposing views. From this I am able to gather pearls of truth to formulate my information.
I respond simply that I go directly to sources, for example if the subject is the fake vaccines government data works, VAERS data for instance.
I also try to always mention that I prefer to visit subjects from various angles and sources, so as to develop a sense of the entirety. If CNN claims 'something' then the source they use is the one I seek, not CNN. When they refuse to have a source well, we know what that means.
For another example of what I mean, Fauci used to claim daily that he was science, that he was certain of all the insane things he claimed and no one else understood him correctly. So in refutation of his media claims we merely reference his own emails where he is proven to be a self-confessed murderer, liar, fraudster, Monster.
Short answer- I tell them I seek the original sources and compile data then ponder it well.
https://files.catbox.moe/lbvdz9.jpg