Candace Owens Getting Sued
(www.forbes.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (87)
sorted by:
Every post or article is an 'opinion' then isn't it? It's the facts used or ignored that determine the veracity, not opinions.
Yes and thats why its very important to read an article, then think about what facts are the article based on, and then verify the sources to confirm that the facts are real.
After that, whether you accept the opinions presented or not depends on your own critical thinking.
This is how we should approach research.
Think about what you said here carefully. Its possible for an article use true facts and yet use logical fallacies to create a false narrative. You always have to use your own critical thinking. No amount of "trust" in anyone or "confirmation bias" is a substitute for critical thinking
He got NO disclosure as anyone who paid attention to the Court TV greement agree.
You gave ZERO proof of discovery and don't seem to know how it works. Your assertion the contrary is false and all you bring to the table is denial and ignorance about the subject.
"Your next reply should be...." ROFL No discussion for YOU!
So how's your research on Court TV, now that I bring up the subject ....again. Ever hear of it? Judge Judy's in the new today. Why don't you report her latest 'decision' which is actually an arranged agreement posing as a legal proceeding.
Note that 'INFOwars' is changing lanes due to Stratfor money being pulled by DOGE. Glad to redpill you, even if it's against your will or ability to understand. Do the work.
You know why you keep repeating this without providing actual evidence?
Its not because you are trying to convince me (if that were the case you would actually engage in the disucssion)
Its because you are trying to keep reassuring yourself that your belief system is correct.
Good luck!
Platitudes are no substitute for evidence. Show me ONE piece of evidence requested by the defense in a discovery phase. It never ......went.....to....."trial".....it was decided .....by agreement. Note that INFOwars has changed lanes, and AJ like Tucker Carlson re-LARPS in a whittled down capacity. Stratfor got tagged by DOGE you can bet that, and I see that as the probable reason.
How's the research coming on Stratfor and AJ's connection?
No, there was no discovery phase. I keep saying it because had it happened,and it didn't....a real judge would have thrown the case out of court. But then that info would be classified to keep it secret. Made illegal two weeks before the incident by the weird coroner who made it a 'do-or-die' political issue on camera to keep such said records secret. Now isn't that a hoot? Who does that and why? You remember that....right? .......right? That same information would have tanked the state's case. No cross examination was ever conducted of 'family members' either, if you'd like to go ahead and add that to the list of things wrong with the Kangaroo proceeding.
I certainly don't need confirmation bias. You been doing this since the 60s like me, have you? I've been doing this too long to spend much time red-pilling the unwilling. I was looking for Q to materialize after the first day of the Cicada 3301 contest in 2012....for reasons.....how about you? I'm batting 1.000 which will happen when the ugly truth, not whimsey is your only dog. So I can tell you that there are plenty of surprises left for you. Your comments reveal both your attitude and the altitude of your view.
I can see your house from here. Move on.