He is calling Candace "crazy with her crazy conspiracy theories". This is exactly the language The View uses to attack people vocal against public gaslighting.
So if I call someone crazy for believing something I'm automatically an Israel shill and The View kind of guy? I haven't heard what Andrew's take is and how he argumented himself but people can disagree and go after one another without being paid shills. I agree with Candace's take on Bridgette Macron but I wouldn't call anyone who called her crazy then an asset doing damage control.
Then you don't understand Andrew is all. This is very out of character for him. He doesn't talk about a subject without being extremely informed. There is nothing about the Kirk assassination that makes sense from TPUsa or the FBI if you've followed all the details. He also tends to only attack people by providing logical inconsistencies in their own arguments. He wasn't addressing any of Candace's claims (which are really mostly details unveiled by others) in detail.
So if I call someone crazy for believing something I'm automatically an Israel shill and The View kind of guy? I haven't heard what Andrew's take is and how he argumented himself but people can disagree and go after one another without being paid shills. I agree with Candace's take on Bridgette Macron but I wouldn't call anyone who called her crazy then an asset doing damage control.
Then you don't understand Andrew is all. This is very out of character for him. He doesn't talk about a subject without being extremely informed. There is nothing about the Kirk assassination that makes sense from TPUsa or the FBI if you've followed all the details. He also tends to only attack people by providing logical inconsistencies in their own arguments. He wasn't addressing any of Candace's claims (which are really mostly details unveiled by others) in detail.