-
You obviously didn't read it -_-
-
Because infowars.com is not a reliable source. If you could find it from a more reliable source, then I would read it.
-
Edited by DB5: 8/13/2015 11:11:53 PMHere you go. Minus the CIA/Mossad/Mission Impossible shit http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/jeb-bush-dogged-by-decades-of-questions-about-business-deals/2015/06/28/0138223c-edb7-11e4-8abc-d6aa3bad79dd_story.html It's a long read.
-
See, this is what I like to see as a source. Thank you.
-
"Not a reliable source" Because NBC said so, sure.
-
Edited by Vicex: 8/13/2015 11:13:22 PMNo, because it has no accountability and often has little more than conspiracy theories on it. The website is nothing more than clickbait.
-
False, but you wouldn't know that. Yes, people go around the country doing sting operations and freelance reporting everyday for clickbait even though they are barely funded
-
They don't deserve to be funded. The only time they post valid content is when they repost material from actual news organizations. None of their speculation is ever justified by reality. But never let the truth get in the way of a good conspiracy, right?
-
They don't do speculation
-
Their original content is mere speculation that they feed to their readers as incontrovertible facts.
-
Edited by Vicex: 8/13/2015 11:19:45 PM[quote]clickbait even though they are barely funded[/quote] What do you think clickbait is meant for? It's an incredibly biased source that plays for the attention of a target audience that is easily convinced of ideas with little evidence and have an agenda. Essentially, it's Fox news without the legitimacy and accountability... leaving just the personalities.
-
You're an idiot.
-
No. Do you even pay attention to what is on that site... or at least try to confirm the accuracy of the information? In the best articles, it's 3 parts truth for every 7 lie/opinion/general nonsense.
-
Wrong. I look at the site everyday and listen to the daily as nightly broadcasts. Everything they say can be confirmed easily.