@TheOfficerTatum Yeah, Brando. Your theory is much more “obvious.” Those texts from the 20s really sealed the deal for me too. Also, when someone is offered limited immunity to testify, they’re probably telling the truth.
@KingOffX_ I’m finding a common theme amongst those who post about “Candy cultists” - they seem to spend more time posting about her more than her followers do. It’s the market place, genius. She’s popular because she’s giving a voice to the majority of Americans. Check the polls.
@samsfamreacts What I find interesting is the last text from Charlie read like a plea - why reaffirm his loyalty to Trump there? To her? It’s a misplaced response, but still odd regardless whether it followed the prior thread or not.
If Laura is just some random commentator, then she’s responsible for her own words… But if she’s actually operating as an unofficial mouthpiece for the administration, then publicly targeting Muslims like this raises a much bigger First Amendment problem. The government doesn’t get to outsource religious hostility to influencers and pretend it’s just “free speech.”
@bren45000@RealCandaceO Matthew 7 doesn’t just have one verse. You quoted “you will know them by their fruits” but skipped right over “Judge not, that you be not judged.” The point wasn’t to use Scripture as a sword to declare who is and isn’t a Christian every time someone says something you dislike.
@LauraLoomer@tylerbowyer@AndrewKolvet@RCMaxw3ll If anything, these texts make him look worried enough about your opinion that he’s explaining his loyalty to Trump… That’s an odd dynamic to highlight, especially given everything that happened shortly afterward.