The doubt is based on the complete lack of any reasonable evidence that should exist of it having actually occurred.
"Evidence" that YOU or anyone else in the PUBLIC have no right to access.
Journalists are required to properly source stories.
Did the article not provide a direct quote from the Dr in Indiana? Is that not a "proper source?"
Kessler - and you - are basically saying the Dr is lying.
Yet you have no "proper sources" to make that conclusion, no?
For your security, we need to re-authenticate you.
Click the link we sent to , or click here to sign in.
The doubt is based on the complete lack of any reasonable evidence that should exist of it having actually occurred.
"Evidence" that YOU or anyone else in the PUBLIC have no right to access.
Journalists are required to properly source stories.
Did the article not provide a direct quote from the Dr in Indiana? Is that not a "proper source?"
Kessler - and you - are basically saying the Dr is lying.
Yet you have no "proper sources" to make that conclusion, no?