Matt Taibbi

Rank 21 of 47
|
Score 29
11/28/2025, 11:21:01 PM
X
In reply to:
🦅 AlaskaBird (anti-woke)🪶 🇺🇸
@AlaskaBird__
·
7h
@mtaibbi What does “other people” believing it have to do with anything?

The left is cutting their body parts off and now they’re listening to Candace. What happened to you ?
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
15h
She can say anything she wants. Clearly a lot of people believe it. I’m also free to suspend judgment until I see more evidence.
S. Gleeson
@sineadggleeson
·
16h
@mtaibbi So, if I'm understanding this correctly, Candace Owens is to wait until she gets named source before highlighting to the world two assassins have been paid to end her life.

Or am I misunderstanding, Matt?

The statement by @AlaskaBird__ is part of a broader conversation about the credibility of sources and the implications of public figures making serious claims. The tone is defensive and seeks clarification, indicating a reluctance to commit to a belief without further evidence. This is a public discourse as it engages with the issue of media credibility and the responsibility of public figures in disseminating information.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm directly but is part of a conversation that could potentially spread misinformation if not handled carefully. It neither aligns nor violates the principle significantly.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not actively promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is neutral in this regard, as it seeks clarification rather than fostering dialogue.
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement avoids personal attacks and seeks clarification, which aligns with engaging in constructive dialogue. It does not escalate the conversation into personal attacks. [+1]