Hope this is allowed! I've browsed on this site for a while, even had another username where I engaged in some fairly civil debates with other users before I was banned due to not being a Q follower.
Interested in having a friendly discussion with anyone who's up for it!
A bit about me:
I'm a mechanical engineer working in product marketing I live in a major city, Chicago, and have pretty much only voted democrat I am a homeowner I have followed conspiracies for a while based solely on my own curiosity, and by and large found that a lot of the major ones (pizzagate, Q) don't make a ton of sense, but I'm not here to argue that. I think we're just gonna have different opinions on it.
All said, happy to have a casual AMA! Not interested in flamebaiting or arguing
LOL The prosecutor has absolutely NOTHING to do with the facts I have provided to you.
No but it has everything to do with our conversation that had taken place earlier
Then prove your point with facts and data. All you're doing is saying "but what about..." without actually providing any supporting material.
I have given you link after link after link, which you are avoiding looking at. Why is that?
If you don't give me any information to discuss, then we can't have a discussion.
The previous links you provided were irrelevant to anything.
The Prosecutor has nothing to do with what I'm talking about and you can't get past that. Why?
In the last links I provided, show me how the Prosecutor has anything to do with that??
The Prosecutor isn't relevant to the discussion. Get unstuck from that.
From your other comment: "still avoiding answering."
Because you aren't providing me anything to answer?? You're not constructing an argument. You're not providing facts / data / proof. You are failing 100% at any sort of debate of anything.
I have given you proof after proof after proof and your "argument" is "but what about..." And if you knew anything about Argument and Rhetoric (which is painfully apparent that you have zero knowledge into this) you would know that that is not an argument at all.
In fact, we started our thread with you saying "but what about Trump" and I had to stop you there.... and here you are doing it again. You cannot unhook yourself from the Prosecutor. Why??
Previously in this thread, you mentioned the damning fact about Biden threatening to withhold funds unless the prosecutor who was investigating Burisma was fired, and “son of a bitch,” they fired him
I’m telling you, and waiting for you to acknowledge, the fact that the timeline here is not exactly how you appear to see it. But it appears that you haven’t done your research on this critical fact
Your staunch refusal to actually provide links / data / facts / information while putting the entire onus of discussion on me is, frankly, unfair.
I told you that that was a jumping off point for the rest of my research. I didn't rely on it in any of my arguments. I found the statement out of character for what someone as VP would say. It got my "spidey senses" tingling. And then from there I conducted the rest of my research... The status of the Prosecutor has absolutely nothing to do with my argument. Not a single thing. I mean, my goodness, if I were to give you a list of 4 things and ask you to pick the one that doesn't belong, I'm not so sure you could do it.
You have contributed exactly ZERO to our discussion. You cannot let the Prosecutor go. You are stuck on an element with ZERO relevance to my argument. ZERO. Why is that so hard to understand? Do I need to express that in a different language??
The Prosecutor has NOTHING TO DO WITH MY ARGUMENT OF THE BIDENS BEING DIRTY.
My argument has to do with the corruption of the Bidens. What on earth does the Prosecutor have to do with that? Not a damn thing. I'm talking about the BIDENS.