So far, all we have is a reported "whistleblower's firsthand witness testimony", in the form of a voice recording and supposed transcript.
The X account says she and her lawyer met with the whistleblowers. It's a personal recording.
She is apparently "an American publicist and lobbyist who worked for celebrities including R. Kelly, Kanye West, and Regina King"
Given that she is a publicist working for celebrities, I'll take the 72 hour rule with this. It makes me suspicious.
Why on earth would she publish this so-called 'evidence' on the net, on X, rather than retain it for a counter-suit or court case?
Here are some articles on this person. It's hard to know if the Propaganda machine is attempting to smear her, or simply taking a good opportunity to use a dodgy and devious person to smear and associate her with Trump.
Either way, 72 hour rule on this "whistelblower Testimony". More facts and corroboration are required. Time will tell, but until there are more facts, I'm treating this as "Completely Uncorroborated".
Also, People Should Note: Does this play 100% in to your biases? Does that entice you to treat it as fact despite there being no other evidence, so far?
If true it's damning. But it also makes for great clicks. So, frogs should be cautious.
So far, all we have is a reported "whistleblower's firsthand witness testimony", in the form of a voice recording and supposed transcript.
The X account says she and her lawyer met with the whistleblowers. It's a personal recording.
She is apparently "an American publicist and lobbyist who worked for celebrities including R. Kelly, Kanye West, and Regina King"
Given that she is a publicist working for celebrities, I'll take the 72 hour rule with this. It makes me suspicious.
Why on earth would she publish this so-called 'evidence' on the net, on X, rather than retain it for a counter-suit or court case?
Here are some articles on this person. It's hard to know if the Propaganda machine is attempting to smear her, or simply taking a good opportunity to use a dodgy and devious person to smear and associate her with Trump.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66524905
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-trevian-kutti-georgia-indictment-election-fraud-ballot-suitcase-kanye-west-1849144
Either way, 72 hour rule on this "whistelblower Testimony". More facts and corroboration are required. Time will tell, but until there are more facts, I'm treating this as "Completely Uncorroborated".
Also, People Should Note: Does this play 100% in to your biases? Does that entice you to treat it as fact despite there being no other evidence, so far?
If true it's damning. But it also makes for great clicks. So, frogs should be cautious.
"You are the News Now. Handle With Care" Q
Understand. Thanks for doing to research. Will treat accordingly.