How is Candace Owen a better journalist than 99% of traditional media

[Anonymous]

Look. I love Candace. Listen to her regularly.

She is not a journalist. Now granted, journalists today are so pathetically corrupt that she probably has the same standards as a modern journalist. But let's be real. Yesterday she commanded us, again, to homeschool our kids because all american schools are Marxist training grounds. Does this sound a bit hyperbolic to you? It should. There are some schools that are absolutely run as Marxist indoctrination sites, but many are not. She paints with a broad brush. Be as discerning listening to her as you would to CNN or the New York Times.

[Anonymous]

It might be just me, but I have trouble watching her videos. The way she speaks makes my head hurt in trying to follow and understand her logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It might be just me, but I have trouble watching her videos. The way she speaks makes my head hurt in trying to follow and understand her logic.

If you don't listen to her regularly, she can be hard to follow because there is so much backstory that you need from previous episodes. It's like a novel.

[Anonymous]

She's not a journalist. She's a talking head who has become very irrational and unreasonable. Please learn the difference. Also try reading some actual news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look. I love Candace. Listen to her regularly.

She is not a journalist. Now granted, journalists today are so pathetically corrupt that she probably has the same standards as a modern journalist. But let's be real. Yesterday she commanded us, again, to homeschool our kids because all american schools are Marxist training grounds. Does this sound a bit hyperbolic to you? It should. There are some schools that are absolutely run as Marxist indoctrination sites, but many are not. She paints with a broad brush. Be as discerning listening to her as you would to CNN or the New York Times.

Um...

I am pretty down on CNN and the NYT, too, but anyone who is less discerning with CO than with them is not using any critical thinking skills.

[Anonymous]

Personally I take the FBI at it's word.

Epstien committed suicide and there is no Epstien List of rich powerful people who slept with underage women.

So I take the FBI at its word and for releasing parts of the full footage not the whole footage for no apparent reason. I trust the experts here.

[Anonymous]

This is Sandy Hook and 9/11 level of insane conspiracy theory spinning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At least she is exposing all the flaws in the government's presentation of what happened to Charlie Kirk.

I don't see this happening anywhere else on mainstream media. She is just asking the same questions any sane citizen should be asking.

Ugh. The “just asking questions” is the excuse du jour of every blathering idiot with a microphone or keyboard.

No, it is not sane or intelligent to wildly speculate and propose absurd conspiracy theories under the guise of “just asking questions”.

The sane and intelligent thing to do is to limit oneself to known facts, gather and assess additional facts as they become available, then make a determination once you have sufficient facts of sufficient credibility to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look. I love Candace. Listen to her regularly.

She is not a journalist. Now granted, journalists today are so pathetically corrupt that she probably has the same standards as a modern journalist. But let's be real. Yesterday she commanded us, again, to homeschool our kids because all american schools are Marxist training grounds. Does this sound a bit hyperbolic to you? It should. There are some schools that are absolutely run as Marxist indoctrination sites, but many are not. She paints with a broad brush. Be as discerning listening to her as you would to CNN or the New York Times.

Um...

I am pretty down on CNN and the NYT, too, but anyone who is less discerning with CO than with them is not using any critical thinking skills.

It's amazing that you can both bold part of my post, and then proceed to misquote it. Let's aim for basic reading comprehension before lecturing people about critical thinking.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:Owens is a little crazy and probably shouldn't be trusted. She claimed in a recent video that Kirk was killed because the folks at Jezebel paid someone on Etsy to put a hex on him. Keep in mind that she is currently being sued by the Macrons because of her repeated claims that Brigitte is transgender.

She is good at spinning a story and generating clicks, but it is exceedingly premature to be nominating her for any prizes.

I think you are responding to a joke post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even a broken clock is right twice a day

+1

[Anonymous]

😂😂😂😂😂

Thanks for the deep belly laugh OP. Best Troll post on DCUM right now. We needed it with all the horrifying financial and political news.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well why doesn't the FBI just dispell all the rumors? All the supposed "consipiracy" theories by Candace Owens? They have the footage of the shooter setting up and being mounted on the roof and dissambleing the weapon? Why not release it all? Why release the footage of him just running away?


Oh right because the same FBI that said there is no "Epstien List" a few weeks ago is less trusted than Candace Owens. That's how bad things are.

Actually, the FBI should not release evidence before a trial because that would prejudice potential jurors and possibly leading to acquittal of the suspect.

But where is Kathryn Nester? Shouldn't she be all over the mediasphere defending her client? Shouldn't she be out front and center and not allowing other people to control the narrative?