I didn’t realize I would have to put Trumps name in every post so you wouldn’t forget the larger context of the posts.And? You read all this then chimed in as you claimed I did and started asking me questions about my opinions on **** which became the topic of OUR conversation, another topic. Women lie, ****, not reporting it, why they don't report it... come on, I am waiting on the subject of Trump in any of that after you ask me questions.
Given the number of times you’ve complained about context, I’m surprised you need to be reminded of the general topic being discussed.
My understanding is quite good. Let’s ask if anyone else forgot that the discussion of **** was reignited with the decision reached in the hearing where he was accused of ****.Will you claim you control the topic and it does not change unless you change it or allow it to be changed? Will you claim you don't comprehend a topic change or that your understanding of conversations is not as good as you boast? Or will you admit that you can't somehow talk about two or more topics at the same time? Not a multitasker Rob?
DID ANYONE ELSE THINK THAT THE ONGOING DISCUSSION OF **** AND JURY TRISLS REGARDING **** WAS NOT ABOUT TRUMP?
Actually, I called all of the “news” networks infotainment simply because they have to fill 24hours a day and generate income from advertising.I have a question for you though. You talk down your nose to everyone who talks news topics about Biden and his family and call it infotainment as if it is beneath you but you are all sorts of opinionated about this Trump case. Why is that?
When the report on non-news (and they all do), they are infotainment.
What “all sorts of” opinions have I expressed about the Trump hearing?
