I see that you really need to have things spelled out for you.

Your predictability relates to your need to flout your credentials and supposed superior intelligence. It’s a trait peculiar to certain kinds of men on this forum. If you’re so smart, why not let your arguments speak for themselves?

Whether you support Trump or not is really irrelevant at the end of the day. People claim many things about themselves which may or may not be true. I never accept things at face value. It’s curious that you’re so hung up on what I think about you.

In this instance you are supporting him in the face of evidence which many believe shows he should have acted sooner. As I’ve already stated, you mentioned nothing about the legal definition of murder in your original defence of Trump but raised wider issues before trying claim this was your argument all along.

Most people reading this understand the authors point, which is that she wants Trump to be held accountable. If you want to get hung up on semantics while avoiding the real question of whether he should be then that’s up to you. You seem to have a very black and white way of thinking. You’ve stated already that Trump wouldn’t be convicted of murder of COVID victims in a court of law so reducing the debate to this issue looks a lot like an attempt to shut it down and discourage scrutiny of Trump (for whatever reason, which may be as petty as your need to be right).

BTW for someone so educated and intelligent your understanding of grief is very limited. It takes more than 6 months to recover from the death of a spouse after 3 decades together. The first 12 months are extremely difficult for many as they are still in the raw stages of grief.