What I find as the most convincing evidence that Karen is not thinking clearly is that in her video she says that she hired a security firm, and that Ernest with the firm told her that her life was in danger. That part I suspect is true. But, then she goes on to say that "she has a feeling" it is Malone who is responsible, without provid…
What I find as the most convincing evidence that Karen is not thinking clearly is that in her video she says that she hired a security firm, and that Ernest with the firm told her that her life was in danger. That part I suspect is true. But, then she goes on to say that "she has a feeling" it is Malone who is responsible, without providing any evidence to support that. She never says that the security firm pointed the finger at Malone. She seems to have come up with this theory simply based on a "feeling", which is not good enough in my opinion to be publicly accusing someone of trying to kill you. Nevertheless, if I missed some evidence she provided to support her theory that Malone is the one who is responsible for putting her life in danger then please let me know.
https://gettr.com/streaming/p2nnc6713be Ears up at 12:30 and his former relationship with the 3 letter agencies also comes up later in reference to an interview given . As I see it she appeals to Malone as a man of influence in these circles, not so much as the entity necessarily who is giving any orders.
What you're describingiscalled "emotional reasoning" and although it's considered fallacious and a cognitive distortion common in mental illness in most parts of the world it has been accepted as evidence in US legal proceedings. In other countries it would nit be allowed in evidence or thrown out. Clearly it's good enough evidence for most of the commenters here.
What I find as the most convincing evidence that Karen is not thinking clearly is that in her video she says that she hired a security firm, and that Ernest with the firm told her that her life was in danger. That part I suspect is true. But, then she goes on to say that "she has a feeling" it is Malone who is responsible, without providing any evidence to support that. She never says that the security firm pointed the finger at Malone. She seems to have come up with this theory simply based on a "feeling", which is not good enough in my opinion to be publicly accusing someone of trying to kill you. Nevertheless, if I missed some evidence she provided to support her theory that Malone is the one who is responsible for putting her life in danger then please let me know.
https://gettr.com/streaming/p2nnc6713be Ears up at 12:30 and his former relationship with the 3 letter agencies also comes up later in reference to an interview given . As I see it she appeals to Malone as a man of influence in these circles, not so much as the entity necessarily who is giving any orders.
What you're describingiscalled "emotional reasoning" and although it's considered fallacious and a cognitive distortion common in mental illness in most parts of the world it has been accepted as evidence in US legal proceedings. In other countries it would nit be allowed in evidence or thrown out. Clearly it's good enough evidence for most of the commenters here.