Seems like you are again trying to dance dance dance your way around things. In this case, what Rand Paul admitted to, what there is video of Rand Paul himself admitting to having done, and what Rand Paul has done again. Wash, rinse, repeat.The video is its own news source with employees and a physical location? Really? So what you are saying is any video out there is reputable and we all need to pay attention to them. Oh boy, things are gonna get strange!
Just fyi Rob, you have said, in this post, that the source is two different things.
#1 - The source is the video
#2 - HE is the source.
How can a person be both a video AND a source? You can't even keep your facts straight. Move on.
Stop the dance and admit that you screwed up in again defending someone when they actually did something and there is proof of it.
Or, explain how the source of the “lie” (Rand Paul himself) is wrong about what he claimed he did.
And I NEVER said “a video is a person”. That’s your fabrication.
However, a video can represent a person. Ever hear of video deposition? Ever hear of court cases by Zoom? Ever hear of a live performance being taped for broadcast?
Welcome to the age of technology.
Last edited:
