lol - you just completely contradicted yourself, but... will get there...
Therefore, just because it is true that mistakes happen, doesn't mean you've demonstrated that 1) there was a mistake here and 2) that the shoes are different.
i don't need too... the evidence speaks for itself:
Contradict myself? As I noted, most of the time mistakes DON'T happen. Did you miss that part? Hell, the biggest question the question the shoes are different folks don't have an answer for, is why the hell would anybody change shoes in the first place?
Me and tons of other conspiracy theorists looked into it and come to a different conclusion. If the evidence "spoke for itself" why did we come to a different conclusion? Anyone who says the evidence speaks for itself and then follows it up with commentary, well, it means the evidence doesn't speak for itself.
lol - you just completely contradicted yourself, but... will get there...
i don't need too... the evidence speaks for itself:
cop cam footage:
https://twitter.com/more_shower/status/1643752101158490114
security cam footage:
https://twitter.com/more_shower/status/1643751622022135810
...more to the point of my post, i was simply confronting the often used "debooonker" phrase "they are not that stupid".
here's noam chomskoy saying the same bullshit:
These are typical techniques used to dismiss mistakes.
correct
correct
Contradict myself? As I noted, most of the time mistakes DON'T happen. Did you miss that part? Hell, the biggest question the question the shoes are different folks don't have an answer for, is why the hell would anybody change shoes in the first place?
Me and tons of other conspiracy theorists looked into it and come to a different conclusion. If the evidence "spoke for itself" why did we come to a different conclusion? Anyone who says the evidence speaks for itself and then follows it up with commentary, well, it means the evidence doesn't speak for itself.