> What is your evidence that she didn't have evidence? That is extremely easy to answer: She never presented any. Which is the entire point of everything I hav

> What is your evidence that she didn't have evidence? That is extremely easy to answer: She never presented any. Which is the entire point of everything I have said. > I would be skeptical of anything they publish related to a contested narrative because they have shown repeated bias. What's wrong with that? Nothing. It's the exact reason to not believe this journalist. As I have repeatedly pointed out.