byronglimish wrote:
You already admitted that You have no interest in looking at something you claim is paranoia.
You like many domestic jihadists have no interest in hard facts, it ruins your buzz of delusion.
So like a hateful psychotic woman, you can get it the last word.
I will allow it.
True, I will not search for a needle in a haystack (actual evidence that the deep state theory is true) but if you would like to provide evidence that it truly exists, I will definitely read it.
Your reading comprehension seems quite lacking, I am not affiliated with ANY party much less these Democrats you and your ilk tries to lump me in with. Also you show your ignorance when you assume that Democrats are all "jihadists".
You further fail when you claim that I (and my crony Democrats since obviously I am a Democrat because you say I am) have no interest in facts. If you were to actually provide any instead of just paranoid delusions, we would consider the evidence for whatever it would be worth. You just don't provide any because you can't, you didn't base your paranoid delusion on facts, you based it on the fact that your media talking heads told you it was so so obviously it MUST be so. Can I let you in on something? They didn't base their theories on facts either, just speculation.
As for your last "point" another fail. You assume that I hate you, that I am a woman and that I am concerned about "getting the last word", all failures.
I have tried to let you maintain your delusions but when you try to force me to accept them, that is where I draw the line, I have no desire to delve deep into someone else's paranoid delusions.
Do you even have any clue the life of a conspiracy theory? Typically it starts off as a paranoid thought of personal, religious, partisan persecution, when challenged, those that hold onto these theories do their best to explain away the factual objections presented against their theory. As the theory encounters more factual objections, the theory MUST grow more and more complex to try to explain away the inconsistencies, the theory takes on more layers, more complexity and in such a case as a "deep state" theory, it MUST remain somewhat vague or it stands too much of a chance to be instantly shot down by taking out even one leg upon which it attempts to stand.
That is perhaps the leading reason that you CAN'T provide any facts to support your theory, those creating and altering it to stand against scrutiny have not provided any facts to support it to prevent it from crashing down around you and others as nobody can prove a negative. We can't disprove it to the true believers because they provide no facts for us to debunk.
P.S. An internet troll is typically the one making accusations that can't be proven and refuses to provide any facts to support their claims. Since I am willing to look over the evidence that you refuse to provide, who exactly would be the troll here?