You cannot refute these 100% true facts:
1) Dinesh said various disputed statements
2) Many people have evaluated those statements and showed that they are false or unproveable
3) Dinesh has not debated with these critics
4) Dinesh’s financiers said the film was going to be pulled for inaccuracies
If Dinesh had real proof, he would have debated the critics. His statements were easily disproven. And he used a Moscow map as if it were from Georgia. This is blatant lying.
No one cited 2000 Mules in their court briefs, because they know it is not a solid piece of work. Only amateurs with no legal background think it’s legit.
I cannot refute that. It is a fact that *KNOWN LIARS* "dispute" what Dinesh said.
It is an irrelevant piece of "truth" because it is proof of nothing.
2) Many people have evaluated those statements and showed that they are false or unproveable
Now that I *CAN* refute. "Showed" in this context means "proven." They have made assertions but these are not "proof." Therefor they have *NOT* shown that these are false. Or unproveable.
3) Dinesh has not debated with these critics
Why debate liars? Would you debate Abortion with the Democrat women's caucus? Also I don't know if he has or hasn't. Perhaps he has, but there are so many of them that we don't know who he debated and who he hasn't.
4) Dinesh’s financiers said the film was going to be pulled for inaccuracies
I have your word that they said that, (Which you get information from sources I consider liars) but even if they said that, it isn't necessarily true. The movie may be absolutely accurate, but they are just saying that to avoid legal troubles, like Fox News did with their billion dollar Election machine company lawsuit.
New York courts, remember? Liars who need to be just beaten and put in prison with the other criminals.
If Dinesh had real proof, he would have debated the critics.
Why? They are paid to claim what they claim. As Upton Sinclair noted:
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it."
Either paid whores or fanatic liars, debating them is pointless. They have no honesty or integrity.
And he used a Moscow map as if it were from Georgia.
I have no idea if that is true or not. Prove it. Post a photo of his usage of a Moscow map from the movie.
This is blatant lying.
Or just a mistake, *IF* it is even true.
No one cited 2000 Mules in their court briefs, because they know it is not a solid piece of work.
Well they aren't Democrats in a biased court system. Whenever Democrats prosecute people with cellphone data, such as they did constantly in the J6 trials, that was great "evidence" of their culpability, but the corrupt courts do not use the same standards for Republicans trying to use the same sort of evidence.
If the Democrats needed to use this sort of evidence, it would be fine in court. It is only not acceptable when Republicans want to use it.