| | |
But you have artfully dodged the question
I did dodge the question. I just didn't have the energy to follow you down another garden path.
It's exhausting to expend so much energy trying to get you to recognize simple things like the fact that an investigator cannot produce testimony from people who are constrained from testifying or the conceptual difference between an investigation and a trial. I spent much of the day yesterday on what would have been two easy transactions with any ten year old.
If I couldn't gain purchase on such simple matters of logic and comprehension, why would I engage another round on an irrelevant, whataboutist, and bogus hypothetical that you have constructed from what you somehow believe to be critically relevant fact?
I didn't have any more energy yesterday nor do I have it today.
As I have told you many times before, I do not post to you to persuade you of anything, to change your mind, to convert you from or to anything. I operate at a sub-argument level, challenging your thinking, not your positions. My hope is that a light bulb will come on and you can recognize for yourself where your positioning goes astray. As many times as I have told you this, you continue to treat my posts to you as just so much partisan campaigning. I find the engagement interesting, occasionally and for a while, that is. Not at the moment. |
|
