No, you wont be goaded because youd be cooked. In all of the things ive mentioned, i have a stronger case than Rittenhouse. I have the constitution
Replies
You've already shown your lack of integrity with Rittenhouse & your refusal to accept facts. Under those conditions, I have no reason to enter into a second debate with you.
aug 30, 2025, 8:29 pm • 2 0 • view
What Constitution? He's obviously not in the USA; in no State of the Union will open carry 'get you shot'. It may cause the police to confront you and require compliance but it's not a shoot-on-sight 'provocation'.
aug 31, 2025, 7:39 am • 1 0 • view
Fof example as one of the arguments I listed, EO 14160 which is blatantly unconstitutional. This guy pretends to care about the letter of the law, yet Im assuming hes fine with this unconstitutional order.
sep 1, 2025, 12:56 am • 0 0 • view
EO 14160 doesn't exist.
sep 1, 2025, 1:07 am • 0 0 • view
sep 1, 2025, 8:28 pm • 1 0 • view
@entus.bsky.social ⬇️ I can dismiss proof just like you did with Rittenhouse. 😂
sep 1, 2025, 8:30 pm • 2 0 • view
I was referring to other arguments the guy wont address cause hell get cooked. Not referring to Rittenhouse.
sep 1, 2025, 12:46 am • 0 0 • view
I'll debate you on any subject as long as I can nullify any evidence that doesn't support my argument. Just like you did with Rittenhouse. Deal?
sep 1, 2025, 1:42 am • 2 0 • view
Thats not what happened.
sep 1, 2025, 8:12 pm • 0 0 • view
That's exactly what happened. Despite proof of the contrary, you still maintain that Rittenhouse crossed state lines with a firearm.
sep 1, 2025, 8:31 pm • 2 0 • view
Uh huh. Keep telling yourself that.
aug 30, 2025, 11:54 pm • 0 0 • view
The truth in this thread. The fact that you still believe that Kyle crossed state lines with a firearm is all the proof I need. That's a claim that the prosecution didn't even make. 😂
aug 30, 2025, 11:58 pm • 1 0 • view
aug 31, 2025, 4:32 am • 0 0 • view