What about those who considered it and ended up realizing it's bullshit anyway?
I looked up the sauce provided. That means I at least considered it, right?
The slide show has an article from The Hindustan Times by Shamik Banerjee. That article says, and I quote:
In fact, the allegations against Erika Kirk regarding her charity work in Romania appear to be wholly unverified claims circulating on social media, with no formal charges or investigations reported by credible sources like the US State Department or Romanian authorities.
The sauce they gave to prove their point actually disproves it.
So theres no dispute that she was involved with “Romanian Angels”
Im sorry but thats almost as weird as Laura Silsby-Gayler “accidentally” kidnapping “33” kids in Haiti, and then later getting hired by Alert Sense, the company behing Amber Alert
What about those who considered it and ended up realizing it's bullshit anyway?
I looked up the sauce provided. That means I at least considered it, right?
The slide show has an article from The Hindustan Times by Shamik Banerjee. That article says, and I quote:
The sauce they gave to prove their point actually disproves it.
So theres no dispute that she was involved with “Romanian Angels”
Im sorry but thats almost as weird as Laura Silsby-Gayler “accidentally” kidnapping “33” kids in Haiti, and then later getting hired by Alert Sense, the company behing Amber Alert
Make the case that Romanian Angels are involved with child trafficking. Provide sauce. Make more than a minimum effort.
Don't just act like it's something everyone knows. That's retarded, lazy and completely unpersuasive.
Romanian Angels
Just r/conspiracy
https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/search?q=Romanian+angels&restrict_sr=on
https://archive.is/JcT9Q
All /r/
https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/search?q=Romanian+angels&sort=relevance&t=all
https://archive.is/8Ehi1
I said make the case. You posted links.
I read the links. The links don't make the case.
https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1nnw5u5/erika_frantzve_kirk_involved_with_romanian_angels/
Two people met and, to you, that is evidence of child trafficking. Are you willing to apply that same logic to Trump and Epstein, because they met.
You're too gullible.
So...government authorities are automatically considered to be credible sources?
Well if they've been "wholly unverified" then you can stop thinking anon congrats!
If you're going to make a libelous accusation, the onus is on you to back it up with evidence.
The bar is higher when you're accusing someone who is supposedly on our team.
Clearly, I'm the only one who bothered looking up the sources. Who isn't thinking?