>>8918961

It has to be controversial in a way that compels people to research/learn for themselves. Do you really think he could directly say or do anything that his detractors would not immediately pounce on and call 'political', 'lies', or just plain stupid ol' Drumph ?

He provokes - he asks dumb questions. Go find an old episode of Columbo and you'll begin to understand. He makes some people think, and he makes other people out themselves.

He cant possibly make this any more obvious - not even if he picked up the phone and called you up directly to explain it. Think, anon. Think.

>>8919003

Says….you? You're barely in control of your own bowels, much less what happens anywhere in the world other than your little pea brain

>>8919105

>>8919105

Or you could just fuck off back to the hole where you belong. Whatever

>>8919120

He uses many strategies. The day of that presser he was in deliberate bumbler mode. It's so obvious by now that I automatically judge anyone who misses it as stupid. It makes it really easy to see who gives a shit and who doesnt. Did we see anyone on MSM do any legitimate research before they started running their pie holes about this story? I sure didnt. But anons were all over it

>>8919163

To be honest, I just dont think they're smart enough to figure it out. Even if they did, have you seen them? Either there isnt one with the balls to report honestly, or the only thing they care about is money.

But even the so-called independent journalists wont go at it head-on. It's too bad, because the one who finally does is going to be proven correct and will reap the rewards of being the one who figured it all out.

It will have to be someone big though, and they'll have to break from their network - imagine if Chris Cuomo did it. Anderson Cooper. It would be so epic.

But that's just a pipe dream. It's hard to fit anything new in your brain when you're too busy being the smartest person in the room