I appreciate you engaging with specific points in the article; at least you read it and considered it. But you went on to make two factual assertions without supporting either of them. I would be open to the idea that the Washington Post fact-checker inflates its lie count for Trump. Hard to imagine anyone telling 15 lies a day in public for so long, even Trump. But you can’t just say that and expect it to be established without support. You questioned the quality of my sources without giving a single source of your own.
You phrased the point sarcastically, but it sounds like you’re saying you don’t believe Trump got foreign help to win in 2016. I’m not surprised you didn’t provide sources for that one. But the evidence is overwhelming. Here’s a timeline of just one aspect of the interference, the theft of John Podesta’s emails.
For the rest of it, you’re just dismissing what I said out of hand. Anybody can do that if they want to, but you haven’t done anything to weaken my argument. Nor to offer one that I can respond to.
I don’t write because I want to battle with conservatives. I have no loyalty to the Democrats, or to anyone who puts politics ahead of people. I’m writing to get at the truth. Anyone who shows me I’m wrong is doing me a favor, because it brings me closer to the truth. But you can’t do it without facts and arguments.