Will say the same thing I said about this story when it first emerged, and I actually believe his story: without names no one cares. He says he trusts his source. Good for him. Why should we? He says he doesn’t even know the names himself.
This is nothing until someone who knows more reveals more.
Will say the same thing I said about this story when it first emerged, and I actually believe his story: without names no one cares. He says he trusts his source. Good for him. Why should we? He says he doesn’t even know the names himself.
This is nothing until someone who knows more reveals more.
Exactly. Can't share this with others due to 'anonymous source'.
Exactly. Can't share this with others due to 'anonymous source'.
But those same dumbasses will believe an anonymous source from CNN...?
But those same dumbasses will believe an anonymous source from CNN...?
Yep. Such is the asymmetry of going against the narrative. Our info has to be flawless and well-sourced. Theirs can be based 9n speculatuon, rumors, and anonymous sources.
Yep. Such is the asymmetry of going against the narrative. Our info has to be flawless and well-sourced. Theirs can be based 9n speculatuon, rumors, and anonymous sources.
(post is archived)