For those still unaware of who Fox News Bret Baier Really Is… Ask yourself this question… WHY Would he have Reposted This ?? MSM FAKE NEWS REPORTER !!🤨🤨
(media.greatawakening.win)
🗣️ DISCUSSION 💬
OP is obsessed with "ooh, this reporter is fake, that reporter is not fake"
Made sense about 7 or 8 years ago, but surely we (you?) are far beyond that now? Q indicated a few very interesting journos, but beyond that, surely we ALL know that the MSM including Faux is not what they appear on the surface.
Baier doesn't need to be a 'white hat' or anything like that for this interview to have an impact. Do you think Harris's controllers would agree to her doing an interview with Tucker or something?????
This interview was not for you, or autists, or Q folks. It was for the normie rank and file. 100% appropriate to have an MSM journo (if that's your definition of a fake journo) do this.
Focusing on the interviewer journalist instead of the impact of the interview is like driving from NY to LA and being obsessed about oh, loook, I got some wear on my tires.
Or like saying "hey, everyone! Did you know that the Vatican is corrupt????" This is GAW, not Facebook.
Think big picture. Who Baier is is such a minute (tiny) issue I don't see either why this post was made, or even stickied.
<end rant>
“””OP is obsessed with "ooh, this reporter is fake, that reporter is not fake"… “”” I send a lot of people to this sight that are recently awakened… They don’t know the plethora of Facts you claim to… I’m not here to share info with folks that already know, or Preach to the Choir… Sure Sorry you don’t see it that way…
OK. Thanks OP. I thought the posting is a pretty weak one, considering the overall board. Especially since the retweeting itself is fairly innocuous, as a good number of commentators pointed out.
That said, it's valid to point out that not everyone here is on the same page or has the same experience. So maybe that part of my criticism is less appropriate.
But while I have you engaged, could you explain why you always post images and never (ever, as far as I know) including links to your source. I'm assuming there is some reason there.
For example, you could have easily posted the link tot eh actual retweet, making it very easy for others to go directly to source and investigate or take a further look at what you are posting/asserting. Posting the link itself might take a few extra seconds on your part, but it would means saving lots of seconds for all the people reading the post. I'm wondering why you don't do that. Again, I assume you have some reason.