Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
O lord . . . if you don't see "debunking" the Hunter laptop story as Russian disinformation (when they knew it wasn't) in order to discredit and dismiss it is not suppression of speech, then why bother giving you any more examples--the examples, which you can find, even on google, of such suppression exposed in the Twitter files are numerous, but, very apparently, you will believe what you want to believe. Do your own research and believe what you want to believe.
|
Do you believe the Hunter Biden laptop is going to provide what exactly because the information on that laptop is so corrupted in the chain of custody. You can’t trust anything that’s on that, but that won’t stop you from believing it.
to say that you're OK with government oversight and control of the flow of information that can be delivered to the public. That would be unconstitutional, and rather frightening.
What’s frightening is you believe that it’s actually unconstitutional for the government to control the flow of information apparently, you’ve never heard of national security, top-secret information the Manhattan project I guess in your opinion does it all need to be fed to the public? As it happens
And, like I said, the Hunter, Biden laptop story was covered by many many different news agencies, someone suggesting to take something with a grain of salt, does not equal suppression
And I’m still confused by the hunter laptop story get your goat more than what happen on January 6 maybe you can explain why one is worse than the other
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device