4 ms·
I did prove it, and all you can manage is to question (and not even question it, really) the source. Weak, weak. And if you assert it's not a coverup, then show
by Cupertino95014 4y ago
I did prove it, and all you can manage is to question (and not even question it, really) the source. Weak, weak. And if you assert it's not a coverup, then show us how they covered it. That isn't too much to ask.
You are demanding I prove a negative: that it was deliberately covered up. No, you need to show how it was NOT covered up. That only takes a reference or two.
As is your second paragraph: to only say "other disinformation looks like this, so we're just going to go with that and ignore it, instead of digging deeper into it" is what a press outlet that's in the tank does. It's not what an objective outlet does.
- wpietri 4y ago> You are demanding I prove a negative: that it was deliberately covered up. That is actually a positive. You're saying people did particular things. That's a positive assertion. Asking me to show that there was no conspiracy is the request to prove a negative. Which you are correct to think impossible.
- Cupertino95014 4y agoSophistry. As I said elsewhere: you need to prove that it wasn't covered up, by pointing out the actual coverage. I believe it should all be on the Internet.
- jjulius 4y agoI think both of you need to go find something more productive to do.