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:
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.
Why don't you are the fact that i gave you link to AJ's deposition? And why AJ kept dodging the question whether SH was fake?
Too scared to actually deal with facts?
I took two years of law before deciding to change coarse/course due to seeing how corrupt the courts were 45 years ago. Did you know that a deposition is not discovery? Why do you attempt to conflate the two? Intentionally or you don't know the law? The discovery (in a REAL case) would have immediately tanked the case. Do you know why? Why not?
Do you pick arguments with OG polymaths by mistake or just like to take punishment? You're embarrassing yourself. I already told you to move on, but triggered, you keep coming back like a dog to its own vomit. Frens in truth stick to discussing actual facts. Fact is, AJ is a LARP on Stratfor's payroll (was) and there was no discovery phase for reasons that you have to admit escape you. Move on, this bordering on harassment as you keep making false 'points'.