Am I getting this right - you think anything presented without proof is necessarily a lie - It’s not possible for something to be true if it’s not presented with proof?
So if I say - I am 35 years old - that’s a lie, I cannot be 35 because I am not offering any proof, I must be some other age. If I go and get my birth certificate, it then becomes true? If I say my todger had frostbite, that’s a lie unless you see what, photos? What about if I say that a courtier told me the Queen Mother had died, that must be a lie without a recording of the phone call.
Regardless of whether posters on here are offering proof, regardless of whether they have ever in their lives told a lie themselves, we know for sure that Meghan and Harry are liars. They have both lied in court for a start. How does that compare to offering an opinion on a chat forum without providing proof - both the same?