Originally posted by Ivich
View Post
You shouldn't judge me ONLY by what I am forced to reply, to protect myself from that person. I said much more on the topic.
This over use on this forum of the word 'proof' is a distraction.
Nine-tenths of historical study is based on conjectures brought about by the examination of a preponderance of circumstances, repeated behaviors, and outcomes.
What proof can exist except Johnson saying it out loud and then we look at that and realize we must doubt it as well.
When the only "insight" one can muster is a literal restatement of some quote, that is not historical evaluation, and opens the door for the reader to be duped.
E. e. Did Donald Trump try to unravel the American republic for his own gain?
If we try to answer that question with mere facts (which are often referred to as evidence on this forum) is it going to get us to the truth. I doubt it.
I never made a statement that he did or didn't believe he fight was going to happen I tried to exam both sides.
I thought you would see that; I knew I would get attacked by the History-Lite people, but I expected you to see what I was trying to do.
Comment