The fact that a few of the court cases listed weren't the "final stop" does not invalidate all of the information on the website. It just means that some of the information on the website is apparently incomplete.
This is the (now standard) method that lefties use to "debunk" evidence: take a website with literally hundreds of pieces of evidence of your claim, debunk a few of the weaker claims (or in this case point out that some context is missing) and then dismiss the rest wholesale.
To illustrate why this is a fallacious way of proceeding, point out that you can't just dismiss everything WAPO or the NYT reports because some of their stories leave out key pieces of information. This is certainly the case with the Fulton County video, for example. They simply don't tell the whole story--does this mean that every statement made by these organizations is now a lie that can be dismissed?
The fact that a few of the court cases listed weren't the "final stop" does not invalidate all of the information on the website. It just means that some of the information on the website is apparently incomplete.
This is the (now standard) method that lefties use to "debunk" evidence: take a website with literally hundreds of pieces of evidence of your claim, debunk a few of the weaker claims (or in this case point out that some context is missing) and then dismiss the rest wholesale.
To illustrate why this is a fallacious way of proceeding, point out that you can't just dismiss everything WAPO or the NYT reports because some of their stories leave out key pieces of information. This is certainly the case with the Fulton County video, for example. They simply don't tell the whole story--does this mean that every statement made by these organizations is now a lie that can be dismissed?