Anonymous #1 2w

You downvote me for that? Seriously?

-1

Anonymous #1 2w

LMFAOO are you crashing out for being repeatedly corrected on your bullshit?

8

Anonymous #2 2w

What is propagandizing about not wanting to be lied to by my gov?

-2

Anonymous #1 2w

your repeated attempts to ignore being corrected on the fundamental definition of the words you’re using, while simultaneously redefining said words

6

Anonymous #2 2w

Like do you not agree with me? You want to be lied to?

-2

Anonymous #2 2w

It’s a straw man argument, their whole basis is that I said confirmed and not most likely 💀 that’s not argument that’s just being a grammar nazi

-2

Anonymous #1 2w

see, propagandizing. no one disagreed on being not wanting to be lied to, we disagree on YOU lying to achieve an ideological goal.

6

Anonymous #1 2w

don’t bring up “nazi” in any meaning of the word, unless you’re ready to reflect on what and who you support.

7

Anonymous #2 2w

There’s no lying here though? An fbi official stated his findings and I agree with it?

-2

Anonymous #2 2w

And who said I support trump?

-2

Anonymous #2 2w

Is it wrong to question an official government narrative?

-2

Anonymous #1 2w

you specifically misrepresent their opinion, not “findings”. this is why I specifically gave you a lesson on semantics and the definition of “most likely”, to show you how it is not synonymous with “definitely” nor “confirmed” like you seem to believe it is. don’t act dumb. One of your arguments in the other post was “disagreeing with it because it’s Republican” or some other imbecilic shit along those lines.

3

Anonymous #2 2w

So again, your argument is relying upon semantics? I wouldn’t say that’s a very strong one

-1

Anonymous #1 2w

that’s why you RAN from your own post and are now trying to respark the convo in this one? Here’s the definition again, maybe you need to read it a couple times.

3

Anonymous #1 2w

my argument relies on you fundamentally lying.

6

Anonymous #1 2w

Like just give it the fuck up, and get a new day job.

6

Anonymous #2 2w

Again, so you admit that instead of being confirmed it’s the most likely cause?

-1

Anonymous #2 2w

What did I lie about?💀💀 that instead of it being confirmed it’s most likely instead? Your entire argument is purely semantics

0

Anonymous #1 2w

you’re genuinely an imbecile, I hope you recognize that. go ahead and cite any evidence, how about that? “Most likely” is just a bullshit opinion without evidence to back it, so why don’t you go ahead and find the actual scientific studies and research that confirms your claim.

2

Anonymous #2 2w

I would imagine the head official of our investigative body (during the Biden admin btw) reached his opinion with absolutely zero factual evidence. Sure bud. You’re arguing semantics here and your argument is bad

-1

Anonymous #2 2w

So let’s say I am wrong, and the Biden doj did lie about this. What else would they have lied about then since that admin so infallible according to you guys

-1

Anonymous #1 2w

i’m not going to talk with you any further until you can furnish a source to support your bullshit claims. I know you’re not able to do that, so whether you want to continue on your u hinged rant, or if you’re ready to acknowledge you’re wrong, the choice is entirely up to you.

5

Anonymous #2 2w

Sounds like you’re running away now. Either the admin wasn’t as infallible as you think or they were telling the truth with the knowledge they had.

-1

Anonymous #1 2w

Couldn’t find anything, huh?

5