Posted on 12/10/2025 8:50:08 AM PST by bluescape
Would some of you give me an opinion of Candice Owens? I know we have some loose cannons on the right. I feel like overall we have healthy disagreements that are based on honest differences compared to libs that line up perfectly for the strict purpose of power.
Steven Crowder had Nick Fuentes on and asked him straight questions about some controversies and the exchange was refreshing. Not a gotcha interview but an informative one.
Lots of decent conservative shows like Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Micheal Knowles invite other conservatives to discuss their issues so that they can argue openly and honestly. That helps me understand some of the BS from the left. Other folks I just haven't kept up with but I hear some strange quotes from them.
If they're crazy, fine. We can disagree on what's sane. We're not libs that twist and blur the truth for power..,Mostly. But we have some disappointing apples in our ranks and we should hold them accountable.
Is Candice Owens crazy dishonest or just a strange flip flopper?
Do you understand that everything Candy Owen’s is pushing and you are swallowing is “wild speculation “? That ignoring DNA and confessions to blame the French or Calvary Chapel is STUPID?
Do you believe the DNA evidence was faked? If so, why? Provide facts, not deflection.
Why would I give you evidence the DNA was faked?
If I had such evidence.
But I surely wouldn’t give it to you.
The best way to handle evidence like that is to arrange a dead man’s switch.
The dead man’s switch comes in various forms.
Some cause embarrassment. Others bring pain. Then there’s the kind that are devastating to the career.
Most commonly, the dead man’s switch results in prison time. Capitol punishment is also possible, as is death by other causes.
But the most severe consequences include complete devastation of the entire organization, with the no survivors among the top tier.
You are psychotic. I can’t help you. Feel free to live in your Robert Ludlum World.
Another point of curiosity about the assassins of Charlie Kirk.
Why couldn’t they have planned a lengthy investigation lasting a few months. Make the investigation last a while. When it’s wrapped up this quickly, like less than a week, it’s obviously staged as part of a coverup.
Do they not think of this at all?
Did Candace say “a military person was involved”? Or did she say “our military was involved”?
Investigations last until YOU CATCH THE KILLER! The FBI is continuing their investigation but they are not releasing any information on it because either 1 - they don’t want to warn the people they are investigating or 2 - they aren’t finding any conspiracy!
What is your problem? You think murders all need a minimum one year investigation? WHY?!
Outside of Candy’s twisted mind, there is no there there!
Investigations last until YOU CATCH THE KILLER!
But you want your lollipop now............................
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.