Free speech has been indicted. Read this section of the indictment:
(media.patriots.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (39)
sorted by:
it can be an opinion. it can be a bit vague. it is a very broad statement. it doesn't have to be fact.
but it is a clear statement and absolutely not word salad. we know exactly what he is trying to say, whether or not it is true or has any effect legally.
again, i'm not speaking about the quality. of course its awful. i am only correcting your misapplication of the term word salad. 'cause it ain't.
All the legal experts I cited all agree that Jack Smith's indictment is a poorly written and amateurish. This agrees with my assessment.
right. just not your misapplied term.
No, I stand by the "term" I used. For the past 3 or 4 responses I have explained this to you. If you don't like the term I used, you have the right to request further definition of it. This I did in the last several replies. It is not your definition I am using. Review Graham's Hierarchy of Argument, you'll find you are dwelling in the lower half. Arguing minutia and detracting from the overall point I made is not an engaging communique.
I'm not trying to engage you, or detract from your overall point.
but your terminology is indeed incorrect, as, once again, word salad is inherently unintelligible, and this man doesn't display schizophrasia.
the ability to form basic sentences is not the ability to construct a solid indictment, especially around a charge that is bullshit to begin with.
sorry for nitpicking, but you shouldn't accuse anyone of not making sense when they do. its a form of gaslighting, makes our side look bad, and doesn't help our cause. our side doesn't need that kind of intellectual dishonesty.