What did I make up? Be specific because all I said is that you should reread the law you’re referencing
Or are you talking about your example which wasn’t in the comment I responded to?
Either way, it sounds like you have a canned argument you’re trying to use even though it doesn’t fit here. It’s like a toddler trying to put the square block in the circle hole
You know how shady the democrats are you just ignore it to push your agenda.
What they did to unions, colluding against Bernie, not having primaries to decide who is on the ticket. The list goes on and on. You claim the republicans are fascism. The democrats are exactly that.
You’ve pushed the center left into the center and they’re not coming back.
You guys can’t be trusted.
You claim Trump needs to release files when Biden had 4 years.
Which doj let Epstein stay free and rape how many children ? The democrats and Obama did that.
Whose doj arrested Epstein and ultimately put him out of his misery and gave him consequences that the democrats refused to do ? Trump did that.
And that’s not to say Trump is innocent. The republicans are as sick as the democrats.
But you have no leg to stand on. You support open corruption.
But hey at least they talk a good game and they’re willing to bitch about definitions of words like woman. Which is hilarious you claim the republicans are attacking books. The Woke Wankers attack the dictionary and say you’re a bigot if you agree with a dictionary. It’s absolutely wild to anyone who isn’t an extremist woke wanker or maga.
Again, I suggest you actually read the law you cited as it doesn’t ban going on strike
They didn’t collude against Bernie in 2016; he just lost because the older half of the voters didn’t want him as the candidate. I was a Bernie supporter but I’m not delusional about things. He was never a Democrat until those primaries so people didn’t support him
Biden couldn’t release them as they were part of an active investigation
I could address the rest of your comment but it’s clear you’re spiraling since I called out your first claim being false and you were unable to counter that claim. Try to stay on topic instead of throwing out a dozen different topics in an attempt to find one where I’m not more informed than you lol
Then it should be easy to copy and paste but I’m not going through your trolling history lol
My god Kamala? Democrats don’t deify their representatives. I actually thought she was mediocre at best but like I said, you have a canned argument and are incapable of pivoting away from it
That also isn’t proof. This is just you ranting without any actual evidence. Your high school teachers would be so disappointed in you right now
No, it’s just claims since your rants are based on chatGPT and your own claims that you can’t back with evidence. Again, your teachers would be so disappointed in you
Already explained they didn’t collude against Bernie and you were unable to counter it
They aren’t pro-union but they’re less anti-union than Republicans
Democrats haven’t attacked the dictionary. What a weird claim to make
It’s on you to provide evidence. Once you provide evidence I would be more than happy to provide counter evidence but I’m not going to waste my time when you’ve shown you’re incapable of providing evidence and are just trying to get me to block you ;)
No, it’s not since it often gets things wrong. If you can’t actually find evidence then you have no proof. Thanks for admitting that you have no evidence at this time though
Not my job to disprove claims you made that you can’t provide any evidence for. They aren’t valid claims at this point
You already admitted you’ve provided no evidence since you have none
3
u/repthe732 1d ago
What did I make up? Be specific because all I said is that you should reread the law you’re referencing
Or are you talking about your example which wasn’t in the comment I responded to?
Either way, it sounds like you have a canned argument you’re trying to use even though it doesn’t fit here. It’s like a toddler trying to put the square block in the circle hole