Either you are not reading my response or you are not reading my response.
Or a 3rd choice is you don't understand my response.
A 4th choice is that you are trolling me.
None of those bode well for your end of the "argument" (or "rant" which seems more appropriate from what words you have typed).
Or you could stick your head in a koi pond and breathe goldfish effluent. I'm not sure the result would be much different on your end of the conversation.
Guano? Probably.
I am not. I am assuming you were not there. Even if you were, I would assume you would not know.
Book 'em Danno.
OK. Don't remember discussing any of them. Not sure I want to start discussing them now. They are not my president.
Damn. Broken clock, twice a day, you nailed it.
Why judge me against others?
I have seen that in my short time here. As a newcomer, I looked at their posting history basics (# of posts, join date) and simply assumed they already knew your MO. They handle things a bit differently than I; I would have just ignored you.
Too funny, "newcomer"...
Somehow you missed the most obvious 5th choice, [which to those knowledgable would have been the first ] as aptly described in my previous replies, being that yours is an obliviously stupid supposition... and why you are spending so much time defending such a laughably ludicrous stab in the dark is, well, rather takes it from simply laugable to the hilarious.
You know as well as I do, if you have anything at all going on up there, that the letter from Kim was read and understood. Case closed.
Ummmm, in debate, those of us who actually do it here don't gainfully argue by advising others to stick their head in the various ponds that they themselves seemingly frequent, much less advise to start sniffing filth to which they themselves are apparently addicted. Are you a "koi pond" pusher are ya, pimping goldfish ****, are ya? It is on par with leftist thinking, so go ahead, cut a line of the **** using Occam's razor... then take a sniff, eh?
Naughty naughty.
This next is just additional inconsequential blather that most certainly is not debate. Reaching way down deep for those profoundly lame answers are ya?
Now, wow, completely backing off your claim that Trump doesn't read, then forward to your lame "character and past actions" claims... cannot support any of those, so I would agree, dropping them like a hot rock is your best bet. Got it.
Listen, I address lefties here on site all the time, a reply post of mine is not simply to you, its a shot across the bow of all lefties... even if they label themselves independents, moderates, etc... especially those who want to ridicule the president for made up ****, like yours, and then go on to be representative of that which they say they despise.
In this case, those who hate to read.
Yano? No, of course not, you've easily proven that you are horribly challenged that way.
Hey, after getting their butts kicked every time, if it were me I would probably start ignoring me also. And I hope ya do, you have provided no intellectual stimulation, none, just another all too common waste of my time. Some initially show so much promise... then they start typing their replies. Such tripe as yourself express here.
Ah, such is life. Still in search of a worthy opponent from the other side... next... step right up...