Selective notice is selective. I could post evidence, but you'll refuse to see that too, since it messes with your arbitrary framed narrative.
Please. I'd LOVE to see evidence! I mean, right after it happenned, I could easily see it happenning. Whether it continues to happen months or years down the road, couldn't say.
You're continuing to stall on the actual cause of death.
Are you arguing the cop WAS NOT killed?
If someone was proven to have killed hte officer (and yeah video tape evidence and charges against an individual certainly could suggest, you know, SOMETHING is brewing), do you support a jail sentence as harsh as the BLM protesting cop killers?
Well that's just intellectually lazy.
But you're not explaining the alleged "metaphor," nor the application. My teachers would have held me accountable to that. You know, real teachers.
I apologize. I'm used to teaching junior high behaviour and learning disabled kids. I honestly assumed you would have picked up on it. But here you go:
My neighbour: Trump's legal team
trespassing coyotes: election fraud
courts on hearing the case: courts not hearing the case.
I admit this is more time than I would have spent with my class but I'm hoping to really clarify it so we could, perhaps, leave this sidebar.
Is it "LARPing," or a terrorist training camp? Why can't you commit to anything here? A fat guy running around in the woods wearing a robe & wizard hat does not a terrorist training camp make.
It's both; frankly, I'm a bit distressed you don't realize people can be "more than one thing". These hard revolutionaries think they are revolutionaries (ie. terrorists but obviously they would NEVER call themselves that...they "amurican Heroes"). Clearly the 6th showed that they truely are only LARPers. See, just because someone is TERRIBLE at what they do, doesn't mean they aren't that thing.
A fat guy running around in the woods, making plans to kidnap governors and senators in a tactical gear DOES a terrorist camp make.
Almost by way of definition.
What, you moving the goalposts? I think you're better than that.
No. But since I'm a simple man; could you tell me where the goalposts started and where I moved them to? That'll help me understand your position a bit better.
The problem with accusing someone of making a strawman fallacy is that the one accusing it must (a.) state their actual position, and (b.) deconstruct the false one, or at the very least state the misrepresentation.
But you're not doing that.
My original point:
Trump needed Russia's help to win the election. BUT that doesn't mean that he worked with them. It just means that he needed their help.
Your strawman: Your argument is that Russia colluded.
No. Try again.
Is Trump "literally Hitler?" <-- Heard it 24/7 nonstop for four years straight. Nothing odd about this.
Who are you listening to? What are you watching?
And lastly, do you honestly expect me to believe that?
As IF a Trump supporter is going to watch mainstream media more than for a few minutes a day. Forget it. Second, it wasn't on 24/7. What I think may have happenned is you found a cool Ben Shapiro video where he found the 4 times a news anchor said "Trump is literally Hitler" with ominous music and poor lighting.