22 Dec 2023 12:55 pm
It should be obvious why I persist in it. I'm giving you the open opportunity to paint this in the worst way you can think of - and I'm doing that because the answer to your 'what's your sources?' weasel question - irrespective of what that answer is - doesn't affect my argument one iota. You're persisting in drilling me for this trivial data so you can have your safe-zone moment of ridiculing my sources.
Here's the problem: it's a cheap-*** argumentation tactic because of course, all sources can be ridiculed and everyone is capable of carrying out ridicule. The real problem for you is, I've actually now provided what I'm pretty certain is the truth.. It's far from being the first time I've watched such channels broadcasting hearings and legal proceedings etc live - as it's live, it doesn't matter who it's broadcast through
None of this is relevant to anything because we know the Jan 6th Committee was as partisan as it could possibly be. And we have seen the intense animus directed at Trump ever since he came to political prominence. And what do you know, the hearing found everything to be true that they wanted to be true. To call it low-quality data is being incredibly, and undeservedly generous
No, I'm not raking through history to 'provide links'. If you can't directly dispute a point, then question your own links.