@VeeranHolt@GavinNewsom "fallacy of 'claiming there are fallacies without a source'"?
That's not a thing.
Perhaps you should take your own advice about thinking?🤷♀️
@VeeranHolt@GavinNewsom But that’s the problem: they are not justifiable without sources. If you claim he censored free speech, for example, you ought to be able to point to a statue, executive order, selective enforcement of existing law, or SOMETHING to support your claim. This is basic argumentation.
@VeeranHolt@GavinNewsom That’s … not a source… that’s a vibe. That really does not make your position very solid if you cannot point to any evidence other than, “I think this is true.”
@RedGrapes497354@atensnut Really, sir? Was she a government employee while also a Twitter employee? IIR, the First Amendment deals with government censorship of private individuals. It says nothing about private companies refusing to use their resources to provide a platform for random people. For free.
@MattWalshBlog Also, in your following post, you make empirical claims that assume facts not in evidence. It is clear you never learned how to properly formulate an argument. You should sit down and let the adults do the talking.
@MattWalshBlog Sir, you are begging the question on so many levels. You have several claims that you just toss out like they are facts, when in truth they are conclusions for which you need to make an argument.