Of course my claims will be rejected.
Still it's happening.
A political attack on Fauci can happen without validating your claims about an engineered virus, vaccine failure, or hidden corruption.
I'v had the same conversation with 911.
No matter what I post, no matter what I say, people will get triggered until the news tells them what to think.
That's the world.
If the vaccines were a success, and if stories unfolding new wouldn't have unforled, he wouldn't be there.
I've had the same conversation with 911. No matter what I post, no matter what I say, people will get triggered until the news tells them what to think. That's the world. If the vaccines were a success, and if stories unfolding new wouldn't have unforled, he wouldn't be there.
You are treating disagreement as proof that everyone else is controlled by the news, which makes your position impossible to challenge. If people disagree now, they are “triggered”; if a related story appears later, you call it confirmation. That is circular. Fauci being summoned to a hostile political hearing does not prove the vaccines failed or that your explanation of COVID’s origin is correct. It only proves that politicians chose to investigate and attack him. A hearing is not evidence of guilt, especially when the people conducting it had already announced their conclusion. The vaccines can have reduced severe illness and death while still being imperfect, producing rare complications, and becoming the subject of later investigations. Those facts are not mutually exclusive. “He would not be there otherwise” assumes the hearing’s accusations are true merely because the hearing exists.
Yep. Should be the biggest story in the world. MSM doesn't want to cover it.
You’re using an ESPN clip to claim the mainstream media refused to cover it. The hearing was also reported by AP, The Wall Street Journal, Al Jazeera, and others. What you mean is that the coverage did not endorse your conclusion that invoking the Fifth proves guilt.
Yep. Should be the biggest story in the world. MSM doesn't want to cover it.
You’re using an ESPN clip to claim the mainstream media refused to cover it. The hearing was also reported by AP, The Wall Street Journal, Al Jazeera, and others. What you mean is that the coverage did not endorse your conclusion that invoking the Fifth proves guilt.
Correction. I said they don't want to, and on that note, they barely do.