How come you are more interested in demeaning gateway pundit than what happened?
That the people dressed as MAGA were coordinated with people dressed like ANTIFA is what is important. Using language implying those dressed as MAGA were cops detracts from what Occam's razor shows. ANTIFA had a few dressed like Trump supporters up front for the cameras to see, the news to have someone to blame, and provide cover for the rest of ANTIFA as they stormed the capital. Instead of explaining this they just have a headline and someone else's video as all caps "BREAKING NEWS STORY".
This leaves the reader having to infer what the story is, instead of reading the story as written. When the subject of the story is related to anything conspiracy, having to read between the lines to figure out what is said feeds into the sense of conspiracy the reader has, without actually saying anything. So the way they write stories are written is a form of manipulation. As if we aren't manipulated enough by the news as is.
How come you are more interested in demeaning gateway pundit than what happened?
***********************
How come you’re more interested in believing wild clickbait articles from the Weekly World News. It clearly states in the article they are unidentified individuals, but the title says they are trained plainclothes operatives.Explain that, genius.
Look, I clearly believe the feds, antifa, etc were involved. But the article doesn’t prove these particular people were.