glhs837
Power with Control
Not asking you to "prove" anything. I'm simply pointing out you statement does not accurately reflect what what stated by those who are claimed to have refuted this.
Christ, what sort of pretzl are you twisting here?
- You referred to Trump saying worse.
- I pointed out that we have more sources, named ones, who were with him virtually all of that day.
The burden of proving he said those things falls on those who say he did. And they failed miserably. My statement accurately reflects verifiable facts.
- We have the correspondence backing up the known witnesses
- We have named witnesses.
Of course my statement doesn't accurately reflect the statements of the anonymous leakers. Nothing factual and verifiable does. I like my facts factual and verifiable. Evidently, your standards are a bit lower. I'm gonna give you a protip here. Read carefully, comprehend.
1. The number of anonymous sources you have means nothing. Because, and here's the tricky part, so I'll highlight it. You can make us as many of those as you want!!!!!!