@nosoup4knowles That is correct! Ask questions! When it doesn’t make sense, ASK! We won’t accept nonsense gaslighting. And bless your heart if you try to spew this nonsense.
@realkatrinaj@Rach4Patriarchy It’s actually comical how they are grasping to remain relevant. They have no real foundation or platform. They pretend to be debate experts but really they just spew a lot of hot air. Bless their dumb little hearts….
After 11 months of analyzing and researching various alternative theories, I was just called a "fedslopper" because I pointed out that roughly 7 minutes appear to be missing from the rooftop footage shown at the preliminary hearing.
All I said was that the suspect (or if you prefer - the patsy) would have had enough time to assemble the rifle or even change clothes - if that's what he was doing. IF.
Observing that a timeline could accommodate an action is not the same as claiming that action definitely happened.
No wonder people are starting to call this a cult. We should be able to examine evidence, question timelines, and change our minds when new information emerges - without attacking each other.
I am noticing a lot of people, especially black conservatives with @RealCandaceO derangement syndrome.
If you haven't met Candace and had a conversation with her...
If you haven't taken the time to find out how hard working, passionate, dedicated, and real she is...
Shut up
I just had a massive revelation watching @ShawnRyan762 on @TuckerCarlson:
The reason Con Inc and the establishment shillbots constantly “income shame” @RealCandaceO and other content creators is because Con Inc can’t control financially successful people.
When Tucker Carlson and Shawn Ryan became independently wealthy and no longer dependent on metrics or money, they became free enough to be honest at all times.
And honestly is the one thing Con Inc and the establishment cannot tolerate.
They want content creators at an income level where they cannot be free to be honest.
So they income shame anyone they see breaking free from that model.
As for releasing a prominent deceased person’s texts… hold on.
Churchill. Gandhi. Darwin. Jefferson.
In their day they were called letters. Today they are texts. The medium has changed; human correspondence has not.
Preserving and, where appropriate, publishing the correspondence of significant historical figures is one of the oldest traditions of scholarship.
The real crime against the deceased and humanity is not in preserving the historical record.
It is if those entrusted with protecting a person’s legacy were to distort, selectively present, or misrepresent that record to advance a preferred narrative.
@RealCandaceO