bUt WhAt AbOuT BiDeN?!?

She said the files were on her desk.
Try to pay attention, kid.

Also, thank you for confirming your belief that the Epstein Files are a hoax and consequently, likely unintentionally, that hand-picked-by-Dear-Leader Pam Bondi, as an subject operative of the current Executive Branch's leadership, is playing a central role in the perpetration of said hoax -especially considering the fish rots from the head down.

You, obviously, can’t read. Or, you don’t comprehend what you read. I said what I said, not what you said I said.

You said: "No… the hoax is the “list”."

-in response to which was lodged an inquiry of clarification: "So the Epstein List -that thing Pam Bondi said was on her desk for review- is a hoax?"

Rather than answer the question, make a hard statement concerning the very thing you previously had sufficient conviction to declare a hoax, you paraphrase parroted a portion of the question posed: "she said the files were on her desk" and then tried to create a false narrative of the opponent not paying attention, run a weak, obvious but-muh-age-based-authoritah marginalization gambit...

-which naturally was called out with an eye toward your previous self-alleged claims of being a "voracious reader" and the readily visible demonstration to the contrary vis-a-vis your evidenced failure to comprehend the difference between someone seeking clarification, solidification of a claim and someone not understanding the conversation followed by a spotlight walk-thru of the greater implications resultant your line of assertion.

And that brings things up to your latest attempt at projectionist ad hominem marginalization: "You, obviously, can’t read. Or, you don’t comprehend what you read." --which is both weak and patently absurd given the existence of the thread-- followed by "I said what I said, not what you said I said." Except, prior to posting this comment, I didn't say you said anything; I simply pointed *what you had done.* Seems to me a "voracious reader" would, at the very least, have developed the faculty to understand the difference between having words put in one's mouth and the reasonably deduced implications of the words they uttered of their own volition.

I mean... if you suddenly became acutely aware that you painted yourself into a corner, ventured dangerously close to heretically contradicting the ever-shifting Trump-cult dogma in this fart jar of a rightwing echo chamber, where the rest of the cult might see it, that's fine; I get it.

Counterpoint: you could nard up and own it, live up to the steel-spined ethos of unwavering integrity to which GOPers/rightwingers/conservatives purport to adhere, see it through and let the chips fall where they may. 😏

Your verbosity is exceeded only by your pomposity.

I mean... you already accused me of ignorance, comprehension shortfall and illiteracy so don't be shy, M.P. -lean into it. Which is it? Spell it out like you would for someone you truly believe possessing of those traits. You know... unless this sudden shift toward the laconic is a corroborative extension of the aforementioned speculated realization of, recoil from heretical proximity.

Go away, Modda.

"Go away, Modda."

That's quite the flatteringly erroneous assumption. 😊

Answer the question, M.P.: Is that "No, I won't nard up, show integrity and own my claim about the Epstein List being a hoax." or "No, I stand by my claim about the Epstein List being a hoax with all the implied Bondi facilitation and Dear Leader instigation intact -politics stream Trump-cultists, GOPers and rightwing nuts be damned."?

It’s not flattery… it’s a condemnation.
And I stand by my assertions. All of them.

"It’s not flattery… it’s a condemnation."

One man's condemnation is another man's compliment. Why not condemn me for not acting like Vlad Dracula while you're at it?

"And I stand by my assertions. All of them."

So that's an "I can't clarify which 'no' I mean without admitting to mindlessly running my mouth or putting myself in politics section's alt-right's/far-right's/Trump-cult's/rightwing nuts' cross-hairs" then?

No

Yeah, hand-crafted by Obama, no less. AND the same Epstein that Trump was an FBI informant on.

All a hoax.

Yes, like I said, they left out that guy's official statement after...