As I pointed out, post #3 said this decision was based on PR.
***Here is what is said in post #3, and it does NOT say the decision was BASED on PR.
I have a feeling that the SCOTUS is gunshy about getting involved in another election since the 2000 debacle. This is simply a P.R. move.
That’s the post you said did not make the claim that the Supreme Court was corrupt.
***Again I say it. So your continued arguing for that case is a jump in logic which is not supported by the evidence, and your reasoning is fallacious.
Are you seriously attempting to argue that saying a decision was a PR move is not the same as saying it was based on PR?
***Yes.
I’m tempted to think you’re a troll trying to make Freepers look stupid.
***I have the same temptation towards you, so I’m pinging lj to add you to the CertifiGate Troll List. Maybe if you stop using classic fallacies you’ll redeem yourself. Or maybe if you take a critical thinking class. But jumping straight to insults with such little logic behind your position reveals your troll-like weakness.