I challenge nothing, and your thoughts come from your inference, not my implication.
I simply ask, if you want it to be an accepted fact that Jimmy Carter met with and made deals with Kluckers, and therefore we should make future decisions regarding our feelings about and knowledge of Carter with that as an accepted fact, then where is at least some element of proof of the “fact?”
When one makes an accusation such as this, against an American President, one should never do so without proof to back it up. When accusations are made, without proof, it diminishes the believeablity of any of one’s other statements.
Personally, I can easily see Jimmah as a Klucker, but I’d need proof before I made such an accusation, as anyone should.
Old legal saw: “When one makes an accusation that one cannot prove in court, they are then often asked to.”
You seemed to do so in post # 56.
I think you said you’re a lawyer, which I appreciate very much for a few reasons. One is I tend to like lawyers. I know that might sound strange, but I do. Especially if they’re smart and honest.
You’re right, there’s a reason facts should be established in a conversation like this.