Candace Owens is deflecting attention from her husband's relationship with Andrew Tate as the Trump administration interferes in the Tate brothers' rape and human trafficking trial in Romania...
Hi Tommy, This is a really big story that involves the trafficking of minors, money laundering, the US President, an English toff and a fake conservative influencer and a massive scam to deceive the world. Don't tell me this is 'lowbrow tabloid stuff'. This is about as big a story as it gets and if you can't register its worth, that's on you. I'll continue to cover it as I see fit.
Aisling Those so called charges against the tates are all fake just because andrew tate was speaking out against the deep state and the covid lie I am no fanboy of the tates but that's just the truth of it your entitled to do what you want just don't send nonsense articles to me thank you
Well, you’re sorta choosing to read Aisling, Tommy 🤔. And I suppose if the truth be told we really don’t know the truth - about the Tates or anyone else for that matter. We can only go by what we’re told & try to make informed decisions & it seems that too many people are prepared to lie nowadays. Only God really knows the truth & the people themselves or anyone who’s had direct contact.
Have you watched any interviews of Tate or read any of his x posts? The way he speaks about women make the testimonies of ALL the women who say he trafficked and raped them, very believable.
Muckraking has always had a highly regarded place in journalism. Lets get beyond Did you read it in The Sun or The Times? stuff - and remind ourselves that, in that example, thy're both owned by the same bloke. Personally I'm glad to hear the truth from any journalist worthy of the name.
Your entitled to think what you want Denis quilligan so am I and I don't read any newspapers or look at any poxy news channels that lie all the time I have my own mind and always have had
OK, got it finally. a) Make Candace Owens the target when she's only passing along the solid research of Xavier Poussard & Natacha Rey here in France. b) Make it about transgender claims when Poussard/Owens are asking vital questions about the ROTHSCHILDS creating our leaders (cue, Obama). c) Go on the attack via, let's see, Andrew Tate (who gives a shit about him?!). Nice deflection. I now get how shill journalism works.
I'm not a fan of Candace Owens, she's obviously an install, but to say that her investigation into Brigitte Macron was shoddy is a blatant untruth. All the evidence she provided showed uniequivocally that Brigitte Macron is a man.
It was a nonsense investigation, so easy to pick apart if you're paying attention. No conclusion, no evidence, just mindless speculation and distraction tactics. She bamboozled her audience and by the end of it they were so confused they thought she had produced some evidence. She hadn't.
As I do appreciate this commentary, there is a much bigger picture to dissect. Questions: why is Candace not being sued for her remarks, yet, Bridgette Macron SUCCESSFULLY won a case against two women who made the exact same claims; why is Candace so hell-bent on defending Andrew and Harvey; why does she not address her husband trying to sell Ye a platform he would later be banned from: who is really protecting her and their lies from the media?
My first exposure to Owens was when she advertised for her SocialAutopsy database that was supposed to hold "cyber-bullies" accountable. Back when she was more aligned with the women at the center of Gamergate than any conservative sub-culture. Her pivot to conservative political commentator was so sudden that I wondered if it was the same person. Her marriage to George Farmer was surprising when I learned who he was.
Religious conservatives are generally quick to accept anyone who rejects the 'woke' and attends a church. Those with short memories or no knowledge of what she was doing eight years ago have no idea what Candace Owens is capable of. The Tate Brothers' earlier social media posts before going viral are very telling. These public figures may have a more in common than their followers believe.
I agree that religious conservatives (and you’d probably put me in that Dept) are too quick to trust anyone who claims to be a Christian & goes to church. Like Aisling said, ‘you shall know them by their fruits.’
You do your thing it's obvious you can't think for yourself nut don't think you can talk your nonsense to me your like a lot on here who nod thete head to everything aisling says and can't think for themselves
They are all dodgy for sure.
Who cares about this nonsense with all that's going on here this is lowbrow tabloid stuff very disappointed you seem obsessed with Candace aisling
Hi Tommy, This is a really big story that involves the trafficking of minors, money laundering, the US President, an English toff and a fake conservative influencer and a massive scam to deceive the world. Don't tell me this is 'lowbrow tabloid stuff'. This is about as big a story as it gets and if you can't register its worth, that's on you. I'll continue to cover it as I see fit.
Aisling Those so called charges against the tates are all fake just because andrew tate was speaking out against the deep state and the covid lie I am no fanboy of the tates but that's just the truth of it your entitled to do what you want just don't send nonsense articles to me thank you
Well, you’re sorta choosing to read Aisling, Tommy 🤔. And I suppose if the truth be told we really don’t know the truth - about the Tates or anyone else for that matter. We can only go by what we’re told & try to make informed decisions & it seems that too many people are prepared to lie nowadays. Only God really knows the truth & the people themselves or anyone who’s had direct contact.
Have you watched any interviews of Tate or read any of his x posts? The way he speaks about women make the testimonies of ALL the women who say he trafficked and raped them, very believable.
Tommy Lenehan hullo.
Muckraking has always had a highly regarded place in journalism. Lets get beyond Did you read it in The Sun or The Times? stuff - and remind ourselves that, in that example, thy're both owned by the same bloke. Personally I'm glad to hear the truth from any journalist worthy of the name.
Your entitled to think what you want Denis quilligan so am I and I don't read any newspapers or look at any poxy news channels that lie all the time I have my own mind and always have had
Yes we share an entitlement Tommy. Your open mind brings you to a point which many will find indistinguishable from poxy news channels.
Meanwhile I support Aisling when she writes: ' I'll continue to cover it as I see fit.'
There are a few people who seem to comment on here who seem obsessed with stopping Aisling talking about Candace, Tommy 🤔
OK, got it finally. a) Make Candace Owens the target when she's only passing along the solid research of Xavier Poussard & Natacha Rey here in France. b) Make it about transgender claims when Poussard/Owens are asking vital questions about the ROTHSCHILDS creating our leaders (cue, Obama). c) Go on the attack via, let's see, Andrew Tate (who gives a shit about him?!). Nice deflection. I now get how shill journalism works.
I'm not a fan of Candace Owens, she's obviously an install, but to say that her investigation into Brigitte Macron was shoddy is a blatant untruth. All the evidence she provided showed uniequivocally that Brigitte Macron is a man.
It was a nonsense investigation, so easy to pick apart if you're paying attention. No conclusion, no evidence, just mindless speculation and distraction tactics. She bamboozled her audience and by the end of it they were so confused they thought she had produced some evidence. She hadn't.
As I do appreciate this commentary, there is a much bigger picture to dissect. Questions: why is Candace not being sued for her remarks, yet, Bridgette Macron SUCCESSFULLY won a case against two women who made the exact same claims; why is Candace so hell-bent on defending Andrew and Harvey; why does she not address her husband trying to sell Ye a platform he would later be banned from: who is really protecting her and their lies from the media?
how many husbands describe their wives in a public interview as having 'came from nothing' and live to tell the tale.
https://open.substack.com/pub/foxyfox/p/macroni-baloney?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=3e01vt
An alternative take, from another substack account.
My first exposure to Owens was when she advertised for her SocialAutopsy database that was supposed to hold "cyber-bullies" accountable. Back when she was more aligned with the women at the center of Gamergate than any conservative sub-culture. Her pivot to conservative political commentator was so sudden that I wondered if it was the same person. Her marriage to George Farmer was surprising when I learned who he was.
Religious conservatives are generally quick to accept anyone who rejects the 'woke' and attends a church. Those with short memories or no knowledge of what she was doing eight years ago have no idea what Candace Owens is capable of. The Tate Brothers' earlier social media posts before going viral are very telling. These public figures may have a more in common than their followers believe.
I agree that religious conservatives (and you’d probably put me in that Dept) are too quick to trust anyone who claims to be a Christian & goes to church. Like Aisling said, ‘you shall know them by their fruits.’
You do your thing it's obvious you can't think for yourself nut don't think you can talk your nonsense to me your like a lot on here who nod thete head to everything aisling says and can't think for themselves