>>1815450

Sauce for that image? I seem to remember that it was suspicious in some way when it came up a while back.

>>1815475

Close-up looks shopped, knuckles are in focus, ring is out of focus.

>>1815551

SHOPPED

>>1815587

Again, that photo is 'shopped.

>>1815611

ok, you backed it up. That's stunning.

http://ktla.com/2018/03/19/black-caucus-lawmakers-want-austin-bombings-classified-as-ongoing-terrorist-attacks/

>>1815641

Yes, please check. Ring looks oddly out of focus on closeup. It's a Getty Image.

>>1815723

The onus is on those looking to spread this image to confirm its validity by looking at the video of the committee hearing.

>>1815751

That is my recollection as well. That's why I challenged it in the first place. We need a video screencap with that ring or it's bullshit.

>>1815782

Sorry, but "she might have another ring" doesn't validate that photo.

>>1815827

>>1815827

Because it is important that we get things right, and because that image has previously been discredited, the onus remains on you to confirm it with a video screencap. Until then, I urge restraint, it's probably fake.

At the risk of being divisive, why are Dem reps such rude assholes?