I am not sure what you are arguing now, given the whataboutery you used and I was calling out was concerning other presidents committing crimes and thus Trump shouldn’t be held accountable.Oh, so moving the goalposts now?
Which is it? Can I cite other people whilst encompassing the subject matter or not?
Just so there are no mixed messages. You're very similar to other posters who act like this to suit your needs.
*couldn't give..
Blind spots like that are worth bans by themselves.
I am not sure what you are arguing now, given the whataboutery you used and I was calling out was concerning other presidents committing crimes and thus Trump shouldn’t be held accountable.
So are you “moving the goal posts” or are you simply in a different stadium altogether?
Don’t be obtuse, you know what you were insinuating with your posts, and you know it was veiled personal abuse directed at another user.So, when I say a person doesn't have the intellect to instigate a personal attack I'd feel affronted by... it becomes close to a 'personal attack' on that person??
Oh, that's hilarious...
Again, you implied it via the original whataboutery, otherwise why even bring up what other presidents have done (if it is has no relation to what the current president is doing)?Where did I say he shouldn't be held accountable?
Quote me or admit you're talking shit.
Don’t be obtuse, you know what you were insinuating with your posts, and you know it was veiled personal abuse directed at another user.
You’re now just trying to get away with it and hijack the thread arguing with me.
Again, you implied it via the original whataboutery, otherwise why even bring up what other presidents have done (if it is has no relation to what the current president is doing)?
You’re trying to distract from talking shit by saying others “misinterpreted” what you were saying.
Which is what you often do.
Fella, you've accused me of two things that aren't true simply because you chose to think in a particular fashion.
I have disputed your assertion of my posts and have asked you to quote me, you know, like I quoted you.
Unless you can't...?
Again, someone has “misinterpreted” what you have said because they “chose to think in a particular fashion.”Again, not reading what I said, but interpreting what you want to perceive.
"Implied" is YOUR reading using feeling, not fact.
There are people that say 'facts don't care about your feelings', dude.
That’s quite amusing I have to say.So, when I say a person doesn't have the intellect to instigate a personal attack I'd feel affronted by... it becomes close to a 'personal attack' on that person??
Oh, that's hilarious...
Again, someone has “misinterpreted” what you have said because they “chose to think in a particular fashion.”
Or we just read what you said, interpreted it in the fashion a rational person would, and called you out on it being whataboutery.
What’s the point in continuing to argue if you are just going to claim I can’t fully understand what you said, regardless of how I refute what you’ve said?
That’s quite amusing I have to say.
Saying I haven’t the intelligence to instigate a personal attack.
Are you saying thick people can’t be abusive?
Great display of your intellect there.
I have put up, you just won’t acknowledge that I have.If you don't want to argue with me, don't reply.
I am going to defend my position when accused of something that isn't true from my own point of view as I'm the one who wrote it.
I've asked you to put up or shut up and you still haven't.
Says quite a lot, really.
I have put up, you just won’t acknowledge that I have.
Or shut up about not acknowledging it.
But it is time this ended, as it now has little to do with the topic of thread.
I dunno.
Are you a thick person wanting to be abusive?
Just so we can get it straight before I'm accused of riding close to the CoC...
Mate, stop. You’re doing yourself no favours acting a petulant child.I'll say you done neither(no quotes yet again), but if you're happy telling yourself you have, I'm cool with that.
There's only one person in this discussion who wants to be abusive and it isn't me.I dunno.
Are you a thick person wanting to be abusive?
Just so we can get it straight before I'm accused of riding close to the CoC...
There's only one person in this discussion who wants to be abusive and it isn't me.
I'm clearly not intelligent enough.
He’ll have more than a chance based on all of the work he is doing to subvert the election.had a horrible feeling this may happen closer to the election
problem is so much stuff he does is quickly forgotten in today’s social media age where it’s one outrage to the next.
If the dust settles then he has a chance
Mate, stop. You’re doing yourself no favours acting a petulant child.
It does certainly feel that way.Anyway, all I can see in this thread is Seb arguing with himself so probably time we moved on.
There's only one person in this discussion who wants to be abusive and it isn't me.
I'm clearly not intelligent enough.