www.vice.com
So, the dude was one of thousands of crowdfund members and rented a house to a woman in a custody dispute.
You left out a bunch of stuff I mentioned. Downplay much?So, the dude was one of thousands of crowdfund members and rented a house to a woman in a custody dispute.
Overstate things much?
Grand jury finds insufficient evidence to charge ‘Sound of Freedom’ funder with accessory to child kidnapping
A Chesterfield man and investor in an anti-child trafficking movie that police accused of being an accessory to the kidnapping of two children is no longer facing the charge in the city of St. Louis.www.kmov.com
Deadline article has some good detail as well.
‘Sound Of Freedom’s Angel Studios Responds To Reports Of Pic Crowdfunder’s Arrest On Child Kidnapping; Accused’s Attorney Says Charges “Unfounded”
'Sound Of Freedom's Angel Studios Respond To Crowdfunder’s Kidnapping Arrestdeadline.com
“Marta is a landlord to a woman who was involved in a custody dispute with her aunt. Marta was allegedly providing living arrangements to said woman and her child, the former who is involved in rehabbing the rental property.”
Because you’re irrational on the topic and there’s no point in debating with you.
LOL
Nah. You’re making huge assumptions with next to nothing to back it up.
Yes, Slate and Vice are calm, reasonable sources. It would be no different from me positing something from Gateway Pundit.
Huh? Catch up Dan. You obviously have not kept up with the entire thread. Outside of the latest incident which more details are came out after that post, I have not said one thing not backed up.
I never called him that. Not once. Stop making crap up. It makes your argument weaker. This thread and my post you quoted was more than about that once incident. Again....you keep up. You also didn't specify which part of my post you were referencing. I was referencing the legal trouble itself. Go ahead point out where I called him a kidnapper. I will wait.
www.vice.com
Hey - it's the guy that cares about kids! Haven't heard a peep from you about torturing kids attempting to cross the border. I wonder why that is...
You are correct. He is called a child kidnapper in the article you quoted. I should have quoted that post rather than yours.I never called him that. Not once. Stop making crap up. It makes your argument weaker. This thread and my post you quoted was more than about that once incident. Again....you keep up. You also didn't specify which part of my post you were referencing. I was referencing the legal trouble itself. Go ahead point out where I called him a kidnapper. I will wait.
Oh and get out here with that source bait weaksauce argument. So, something doesn't count unless it's your approved sources. How many do you want about them not depicting the subject matter or the character correctly?
'Sound of Freedom' misleads audiences about the horrible reality of human trafficking
What moviegoers must know is that depictions of child trafficking in 'Sound of Freedom' are sensationalized, misleading and do more harm than good.www.usatoday.com
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Anti-Trafficking Group With Long History of False Claims Gets Its Hollywood Moment
Operation Underground Railroad has spent years making big, often unprovable claims about its paramilitary missions and role in rescuing trafficked kids. Now, a new hit movie may help solidify the myth.
You have no interest in any of the content of the piece, and only attack the sources. I wonder why that is.
Have you seen it?
You either fell for a clickbait title and didn't read the article or you are sensationalizing what was said. From the start of the article "arrested and charged with accessory to child kidnapping". That's not the same thing as calling him a kidnapper and insulating he actually kidnapped someone. I never assumed more or less than what he was charged for.
Yes - it’s literally the headline of the Newsweek piece.
Your point about the lack of detail is fair but it clearly didn't call him a kidnapper as you suggested and listed what the charge was. That's why I didn't comment on the specifics of the charge. My point was that the stuff surrounding the movie just gets worse.
Full detail and context seem incredibly important in this particular case, no? It's incredible that people would be looking for more digging in on this story, but only on certain details.
Most of the rhetoric that you post is on emotion and hyperbole, not facts.
