Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿

I am a real person, lets discuss, agree to disagree and agree to agree.
Gob bless you & your love ones.

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@NewRightPoast What is wrong with that exactly?

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@DougAMacgregor President Trump’s war with Iran is the definition of “when you think you’re Superman and then reality catches up with you.”

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@paleochristcon You kinda contribute to that online sphere yourself, you know. Remember when you completely lost your shit debating that Charlie girl, for instance? 😂

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@KingOffX_ Well, at least you can’t accuse her of being inconsistent. 😂

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@TheMilkBarTV You actually wrote that, proofread it… and still posted it? 😭 Apparently telling people they’re smart enough to think for themselves is now “manipulation.”🤦🏼‍♀️

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@TheLaurenChen I was about to ask how any of this is our business… then I remembered AOC posted herself giving herself an injection, so apparently she invited us into the conversation. 😂 Oversharing + overjudging = social media.

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@ksorbs @CraiMur58922 Agreed. Please list all the decent, available men here so we can pick one. Thank you.

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@irinamanna114k Have you officially run out of things to attack Candace for? 😂 We’ve now reached the “her followers look possessed” stage. This obsession is getting creatively desperate.

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@CalebWachter @paleochristcon Well that is your opinion sir.

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@paleochristcon You wanted fame, Andrew. People looking into your background comes with it. Inconvenient? Sure. Creepy? Not necessarily. Be careful what you wish for. 🤷‍♀️

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

You’re reading guilt into completely normal litigation strategy. Asking a court to dismiss a case on jurisdictional or procedural grounds does not mean “I know I’ll lose if this reaches trial,” any more than the Macrons opposing dismissal means “we know we’ll win.” Both sides are doing exactly what you would expect their lawyers to do. If the case survives dismissal, then the evidence can actually be tested. Until then, turning procedural motions into proof of who is right is just storytelling.

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

That wasn’t the concern raised by the post. Candace does. Her investigative style is unconventional and very public. You may dislike her method, but that says nothing about whether the evidence she presents is valid. And reducing what she is doing to simply “criticizing people” is a very shallow analysis of what is actually happening.
A fair criticism would be that she sometimes presents her hypotheses too much like conclusions, which makes those conclusions weak when they haven’t yet been supported by sufficiently strong evidence. But many of the inconsistencies she points to are much harder to dismiss because they are based on documented facts. You can disagree with the conclusions she draws from them, but that doesn’t make the underlying inconsistencies disappear. And the fact that she hasn’t yet produced conclusive evidence for her broader hypothesis doesn’t mean she won’t produce stronger evidence later. That remains an open question.

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@TheModerateCase That is not true. Simply not true.

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

She is basically saying: “Candace, you accuse Britta of obsessive harassment, but you repeatedly investigate and criticize Erika/TPUSA, so you’re a hypocrite.” That’s a weak argument. Investigating people relevant to the story you’re covering is not automatically equivalent to personally targeting and harassing someone. You have to compare the actual behavior, not just how often someone’s name is mentioned.

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

The possibility that she simply didn’t know who he was and had better things to do than debate a man with a fraction of her audience never occurred to you? She literally said she didn’t know him. And apparently her “little toadies” didn’t find him interesting enough to debate either. But sure, let’s call it “ducking him for months.” 🤦🏾‍♀️

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

The sarcasm is funny, but it actually makes a point. Candace started with a hypothesis and specific claims, and she has remained remarkably consistent. Episode after episode, she has produced more receipts supporting those same claims: the rooftop footage and tactical gear, the conflicting claims about her relationship with Charlie despite their messages and his public statements, and the inconsistencies surrounding the car, CPR, the hospital records, etc.
You can absolutely argue about what those receipts ultimately prove. But the pattern is clear: her claims have remained consistent while the evidence supporting them has increased. Meanwhile, many of the people calling her a liar or a lunatic provide little evidence contradicting her claims or supporting their own accusations against her.
So ironically, you’re probably right: the next episode will likely bring more receipts. 😂

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@chelle_talky @DefiyantlyFree Nice reverse UNO 😂😂😂😂

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@RealCandaceO Could it simply be that Erika is afraid for her own life and her children’s after what happened to Charlie? If she genuinely feels threatened, that could explain some of the decisions and behavior people find so difficult to understand. Just asking💁🏿

[Humanityneedspeace🙏🏿 @KaneArabe]

@EvanMahoney_ Who lied to you about your capabilities? 🤭😂