Bone - Re: ElvisL1ves' Warning in Elections

[Bone]

@Shodan

He wasn’t accusing me, directly, of lying, at least no more so than the standard-issue “Republicans are liars” that is more or less OK as part of the “you can accuse groups of lying but not posters”.

I start from the proposition that “alternative facts” is equivalent to lies. Performing a substitution like this provides clarity by which to interpret the posts. In the warning, I quoted two separate posts from Elvis. In post #26, you (Shodan) offered your view on potential origins of partisan hatred, one of which mentions the defict, to which Elvis responded to as follows:

@ElvisL1ves

Etc. You’re providing evidence of the results, not the causes.

That includes following the traditional RW alternative-facts approach that pretends Clinton didn’t produce budget surpluses. Just for one example.

Paraphrased:
*‘Shodan, you are doing something, and that something that you are doing includes lying [following the traditional RW alternative-facts approach] in your example about deficts.’ *
In post #32, you (Shodan) expanded on your explanation about deficits, explaining your view of the flaw in the argument you were responding to. Elvis replies:

@ElvisL1ves

All of that, including the Fed chairman cautioning against “irrational exuberance”, stemmed from the 1993 Budget Act, didn’t it? Now tell us how many Republicans voted for it. Here, I’ll save you the trouble: 0.

Alternative facts, your people call them.

Paraphrased:
*Shodan, your explanation misses some nuance.

Your people would call this lying.*

I see these combined as an accusation of lying which is prohibited.