(11-02-2023, 04:35 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: Even in the other thread, this is the closest you can get is this: "He's obviously an agent of some kind. Sure, I'm speculating, but none of this is outside of the pail,"

To any normal person, the admission that speculating is a clear signal that I'm not taking a dogmatic position on this opinion. A person using good faith would look at the broader context of the discussion and properly frame the discussion. You can't do that because you just "know." Maybe I just assume wrongly that you are capable of remembering my position from the previous thread we discussed about this. I believe he's an agent because of the myriad of other factors that go into this. It's not just blind conspiracy. I don't care if others don't believe it, but I think even a critic should be able to recognize that this is entirely within the government's capability and history and question it, which has been my consistent position.

Even still, look forward to your "proof."

Let me see if I can get this straight:

Nothing else to say about codefendants taking plea deals when they agree to flip on Trump, so you want to have a contest about who stated their opinion as fact more convincingly? 

That's brilliant. 

How about this - Let's just say I'm more guilty than you are so you can let it go and stop deflecting the [BLEEP] thread?

---