Yeah, you have no bias. Wait, what's this?
Originally Posted by
Empty_of_Clouds
The ex-President should now be under close watch, in my opinion. Partly to make sure the silverware doesn't go missing, but mainly to prevent him manipulating stuff to avoid getting his just desserts in the months after President-elect Biden's inauguration. Same goes for Bill Barr and a few other associates.
What exactly are his "just desserts". Actually, don't bother answering. You have anti-Trump bias.
The first part is just my opinion, nothing more and clearly stated. The rest is tongue in cheek. I guess you just didn't get it.
Originally Posted by
Empty_of_Clouds
I have no real interest in what people of either stripe 'believe', only in what has been presented as evidence. It is clear - with the caveat that this is based only on information that is in the public domain - that there has been no finding nor revealing of evidence of sufficient import to warrant any further investigation beyond the checks and measures that have already been applied. My conclusion is not biased along any party line and is not 'weighted' in any way other than being based on available data.
Well, then I don't know why you persist in involving yourself in what I post, because I am addressing precisely what people 'believe' - not what is fact. I highly doubt you have based your opinion on a thorough examination of the "information that is in the public domain". How many court decisions did you read? How many hearings did you watch? How many cites in the Navarro reports did you follow in order to investigate? How many affidavits have you scrutinized?
That's the biggest point a lot of you have missed. I've looked through a hell of a lot more of the "conspiracy" stuff than you have, and I'm not convinced or harping on it's veracity. I'm simply saying there's a whole lot of shit that would easily persuade someone prone to belief.
Deflection and projection. You have no clue about what I may or may not have read/seen or even the quantity. So your appeal to authority falls flat.
Originally Posted by
Empty_of_Clouds
Saying that I have 'no real skin in the game' is a trivialization of the effect of the US elections on future foreign policy, trade or otherwise, that impacts people on the global stage.
LOL. You self-important douchebag (sorry, I just threw that in so you could see what an insulting and belittling remark actually is).
Again, I guess you just don't get it. Two parts: it's insulting and belittling to presume to know what other people in the thread have read or understood. By asserting as much you are attempting to lower their position and raise yours above based on your say so. It's a less direct way of insulting others, but it is an insult nonetheless, and one that you have used extensively throughout this thread. The other part is that you seem to be a bit clueless regarding the impact of US policy-making on the rest of the planet. If you believe that what's happened in the US in the last 4 years and what's going to happen from now are of no consequence or concern to citizens of other nations, then you are seriously missing parts of the puzzle.
Seriously though, name 3 ways the riot at the Capitol or the last 48 hours rioting in Portland personally affected you. Sorry buddy, you have no skin in the game. If the U.S. goes to some full blown civil war and destroys the world's economy... ok, you'll have me then.
Bookmarks