Is there a solid source for this. Many will disagree but I didn't want Kushner on his cabinet ever. Those peace deals between middle east countries that hate each other for all eternity are very sus to me. What did he give up or promise?
Then maybe your submission title could include the fact that this information is from some rando on twitter, rather than presenting it here as truth? That would certainly be more forthcoming.
It does not at all editorialize a title to clarify that the claim is being made by someone who has no established connection to the truth.
"Your skepticism is your own responsibility" is a huge part of what's wrong with how people consume information these days, because they are fed garbage with the truth buried in the comments and they don't bother to question it.
The purpose of a conspiracy forum is to find the truth, and you are deliberately obscuring it. You can do better.
I assure you I will not apologize for suggesting that someone not pass off baseless conjecture as fact.
But yes, you can enjoy a moment of smug self-satisfaction if this one bombshell from a random twitter account with no apparent connection to the truth turns out to be accurate. For every 50,000 twitter comments like this, you'll maybe get one that turns out true. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Is there a solid source for this. Many will disagree but I didn't want Kushner on his cabinet ever. Those peace deals between middle east countries that hate each other for all eternity are very sus to me. What did he give up or promise?
$$$ and weapons for "peace".
TBH no solid source yet. I'd say if Trump threw Kush out it will be over him stopping Trump joining GAB, lol. the straw that broke the donkey's back?
Cool story "PunisherPatriot". Tell me more about your intimate knowledge of Rudy Giuliani.
Look, i don't know if this is true, since no source is given. It says "today at 8pm" which could mean yesterday... who the fuck knows/
Don't ask me for sauce. you're too fat anyways. Get some excercise.
Then maybe your submission title could include the fact that this information is from some rando on twitter, rather than presenting it here as truth? That would certainly be more forthcoming.
Dude, you're on a conspiracy site. Come on, maan!
I favor non editorialized titles. My comment explained there was no primary source. Your skepticism is your own responscibility.
It does not at all editorialize a title to clarify that the claim is being made by someone who has no established connection to the truth.
"Your skepticism is your own responsibility" is a huge part of what's wrong with how people consume information these days, because they are fed garbage with the truth buried in the comments and they don't bother to question it.
The purpose of a conspiracy forum is to find the truth, and you are deliberately obscuring it. You can do better.
If this turns out to be true, I want an apology for this high and mighty bullshit comment.
I assure you I will not apologize for suggesting that someone not pass off baseless conjecture as fact.
But yes, you can enjoy a moment of smug self-satisfaction if this one bombshell from a random twitter account with no apparent connection to the truth turns out to be accurate. For every 50,000 twitter comments like this, you'll maybe get one that turns out true. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.