This isnt my position as I have already pointed out. My position is, I dont accept your interpretation of events. I do not hold the opposite view, that is, I do not currently hold the position that "trump was being completely peaceful the whole time and didnt incite anything" That wasn't the point. The point was that I'm not using "not intellectually curious" to mean "disagreeing with my position". I offered a hypothetical wherein you disagree with me, but I wouldn't call you not intellectually curious, to that point. I wasn't trying to comment on what your position actually is. But ok. Ok. But thats not enough to convince me. So it looks like we're pivoting back to the main point now? Cool. In that case, I'll ask, what would convince you that Trump was inciting an insurrection? And that doesnt make me not intellectually rigorous. I never said that it does. See my last reply. |