It is absolutely absurd that people treat the testimony of a murderer (who, if he has any shred of rational self-preservation in him, is thinking ahead to his trial) about his motives as the *most* credible source as opposed to the *least* credible source
-
-
Even if he were earnestly trying to tell the truth about his motives he wouldn't be a credible source -- which of us actually is, even on our best days when we didn't kill anyone? -- but why the fuck would you think he was talking in good faith
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.