I think you seem to be focusing on my post history about election fraud. I firmly disagree with it, however this site (by virtue of the TD.W shills) has a tendency to post quite a bit of it. Nonetheless, I entered this community with an understanding — at the time supported by u/axolotl_peyotl — that I did not have to support Trump. Accordingly, you'll see me disagreeing with election fraud quite a bit in my post history. Every time I disagree, I provide plenty of citations and links to support my position, and I always try to respond to adverse comments. See, e.g., Equal Protection (explaining Equal Protection jurisprudence in response to a comment posing two possible interpretations). By the same token, I'll readily support right-aligned positions when they are valid. See, e.g., Impoundment Act (supporting POTUS' utilization of the Act insofar as rescinding funds).

Finally, I'll leave you with this. For this entire comment chain, I've asked you to discuss with me. Instead, you opted to call me a shill, clown, pathetic, and ineffective. You insisted you don't need any legal advice or interpretation from me. Moreover, you've launched a baseless claim that I'm a paid shill — despite me being here since the C.w's inception. On the other hand, you ironically have a traceable link to TD.W. You decry me for "deriding people who disagree" and not engaging in good faith discussion. Yet, you've done nothing but deride me in bad faith throughout this chain.