Re: No, the FBI did *NOT* confirm there was no insurrection on Jan. 6

On 2024-03-18, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

Declaring "no need for nuance" tends to indicate
inability to nuance more than some objective absence of
the possibility of nuance to/in a topic.

>
Like so many shills for Trump, your words make no sense
when they're not blatant lies.

How you derived shilling for Trump from my riff on nuance screams
derangement syndrome.

Said another way, I'm not wont to pretend to not see just
because a blind person tells me there's nothing to see.

>
There are none so blind as those unwilling to see.

Not when that which might allegedly be seen is confined to another's
mind.

I don't doubt that "there is no question" in a mind
incapable of entertaining questions.

>
He has his opinion, you have yours.  Need some tissue?

That someone who can imagine needing tissue were they in another's
position says/establishes nothing about the latter's needs.

In much the same way as Iberra's rape and murder of that
Georgia woman is an allegation.

Never heard of Iberra.

He, too, is innocent until proven guilty.

Of course.

That said, I'm suddenly thinking the word 'is' goes too far in
that sentence. "He, too, should be considered innocent until proven
guilty" is probably more accurate.

--
oldernow
xyz001 at nym.hush.com